Proposed legislation change: Prohibit the use of lead shot for the purpose of all hunting in British Columbia

Brother found a dead eagle in his back field took it in died of rat poisoning so piss off on the lead crap, shooting 2 boxes throughout the timber at grouse is not endangering the wildlife .We have other concerns in this province .
 
Wonder how many raptor and scavenger deaths are from avian bird flu in the last few yrs, about at least the same chance of that, as of being shot with lead shot? Maybe a higher chance? It's around all year, would think it gets to all the bird flocks that contact the waterfowl eventually, carcasses with lead in them aren't.
 
Big Bad said:
Yes, lead is prohibited over water because water fowl will take it up in their crops and die from lead poisoning but there's no such reason to ban it over land. Except that is to end all upland hunting and recreational shooting. Mind you, lead is banned in the 'condor zone' that is California, hunters seem to get by... but only until they don't, no doubt.
Click to expand...
In Manitoba when they first introduced the lead shot ban it was only for the heavier hunted waterfowl areas on or near water. Then they banned it for all waterfowl right across the board. So I can go out in a field and shoot a thousand rounds of lead shot at clays for instance and that is fine but as soon as I fire a shot at a goose over the same field I am breaking the law.
Also the Nature Conservancy owned areas in Manitoba allow hunting by permission but all lead ammo is banned period including centre fire big game ammo.
 
I grew up on a farm on the Alberta prairies and spent to many fall days shooting ducks and geese. Being a curious younger hunter at the time I cut open hundred of crops of both ducks and geese to see what they were feeding on. Not once did I ever see a single lead pellet in any of the crops so not really sure where the data came from where even the use of lead for waterfowl is a problem let a lone upland birds.
 
I think the key point is that hunters have an opportunity to provide their input on this proposal. The lead ban is still at the proposal stage and public feedback does factor in decisions around changes to BC Hunting Regs. We have until February 13, 2026 to respond (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/sports-culture/recreation/fishing-hunting/ahte/hunting-trapping), and it is quick and easy to do so. You can just vote 'no' if you don't want to add comments. A loud response by a critical mass of BC Hunters is needed to defeat this ill-conceived proposal.

Another member has already provided some excellent reasons in a separate chat why a lead ban for all hunting makes little sense
(https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/for...t-complete-ban-pending-respond-today.2558516/). Here are a couple more:
  • Imposing a complete province-wide lead shot ban for hunting in BC would be nearly unprecedented in North America. California is the only state/province with such a ban, and it was imposed specifically to protect California Condor in response to a ruling under the Endangered Species Act.
  • BC is proposing a solution to a problem without providing any solid evidence that the problem exists, especially not at the province-wide scale that this proposed ban implies. Broad-scope management decisions like this need to be supported by scientific research and management studies, not just anecdotal observations. This work hasn't been done in BC, but the issue has been studied extensively in other North American jurisdictions going back to the 1990s when lead shot was banned for waterfowl hunting. Based on the results of these studies, none of these jurisdictions elected to impose a blanket ban on lead shot for hunting non-waterfowl species.
  • If tangible benefits to reducing the use lead shot for hunting upland birds and small mammals were to be demonstrated at some point in the future, incentives rather than a outright legal ban would be a better, more cost-effective approach to achieving high levels of compliance. A voluntary/incentive approach is currently being pursued or considered by a number of US states. The amount spent on renewable resource management in BC has steadily decreased since 1986. Actually enforcing a lead ban would be very expensive, and would take away limited resources from other conservation and enforcement activities that have proven benefits.
 
I think the key point is that hunters have an opportunity to provide their input on this proposal. The lead ban is still at the proposal stage and public feedback does factor in decisions around changes to BC Hunting Regs. We have until February 13, 2026 to respond (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/sports-culture/recreation/fishing-hunting/ahte/hunting-trapping), and it is quick and easy to do so. You can just vote 'no' if you don't want to add comments. A loud response by a critical mass of BC Hunters is needed to defeat this ill-conceived proposal.

Another member has already provided some excellent reasons in a separate chat why a lead ban for all hunting makes little sense
(https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/for...t-complete-ban-pending-respond-today.2558516/). Here are a couple more:
  • Imposing a complete province-wide lead shot ban for hunting in BC would be nearly unprecedented in North America. California is the only state/province with such a ban, and it was imposed specifically to protect California Condor in response to a ruling under the Endangered Species Act.
  • BC is proposing a solution to a problem without providing any solid evidence that the problem exists, especially not at the province-wide scale that this proposed ban implies. Broad-scope management decisions like this need to be supported by scientific research and management studies, not just anecdotal observations. This work hasn't been done in BC, but the issue has been studied extensively in other North American jurisdictions going back to the 1990s when lead shot was banned for waterfowl hunting. Based on the results of these studies, none of these jurisdictions elected to impose a blanket ban on lead shot for hunting non-waterfowl species.
  • If tangible benefits to reducing the use lead shot for hunting upland birds and small mammals were to be demonstrated at some point in the future, incentives rather than a outright legal ban would be a better, more cost-effective approach to achieving high levels of compliance. A voluntary/incentive approach is currently being pursued or considered by a number of US states. The amount spent on renewable resource management in BC has steadily decreased since 1986. Actually enforcing a lead ban would be very expensive, and would take away limited resources from other conservation and enforcement activities that have proven benefits.
 
This is just a step towards banning lead in all hunting cartridges, next step will be single projectiles from centre fire rifles. Next time you are at your LGS, ask how much of the rifle ammo on their shelves are lead free… also for us reloaders, the cost to buy monolithic copper bullets is quite high, especially for someone like me that has 2000+ lead core bullets in my inventory.
 
CaribooBC said:
This is just a step towards banning lead in all hunting cartridges, next step will be single projectiles from centre fire rifles. Next time you are at your LGS, ask how much of the rifle ammo on their shelves are lead free… also for us reloaders, the cost to buy monolithic copper bullets is quite high, especially for someone like me that has 2000+ lead core bullets in my inventory.
Click to expand...
At our LGS the staff wouldn’t be able to say, they most likely wouldn’t know what monolithic bullet means 🤔🙄😂!!
 
In theory, I'm not against this proposal. Less lead in the environment is better than more lead. We've removed lead from gasoline and paint among other things.

But in practicality, I strongly oppose it... The very limited availability of non-lead alternatives.. and the outrageous cost of such options IF they can be found, is just too much. Modern 12, 20 and 10 gauge guns could *probably* still be used (I've been able to find 12 gauge steel #7 in recent years - sometimes), but this would almost completely scrap the use of .410, 28 and 16 gauge for small game hunting. Non-lead options are not available.

And it's probably a slippery slope... ban lead shot, then single projectiles will be next. And the copper alternatives are even LESS available for the wide variety of calibres used for hunting. I DO have some copper rounds for my .30-06 and will use them when I hunt big game, but that's my choice.
 
hawk-i said:
I grew up on a farm on the Alberta prairies and spent to many fall days shooting ducks and geese. Being a curious younger hunter at the time I cut open hundred of crops of both ducks and geese to see what they were feeding on. Not once did I ever see a single lead pellet in any of the crops so not really sure where the data came from where even the use of lead for waterfowl is a problem let a lone upland birds.
Click to expand...
Do-gooders with a No-Hunting Agenda!.......:(
 
Hunters For BC

Meeting to Discuss Proposed Hunting Regulation Changes

We would like to welcome all interested hunters to discuss the 2026-28 Proposed Hunting Regulation Changes. Review all proposals here.

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 5TH

6:30 PM PST ZOOM

We've created a list of some of the top concerns - please select the ones most important to you, or add more in the comments section.

Feedback Form: https://huntersforbc.ca/member-information/feedback-for-2026-28-hunting-trapping-regulations/

Zoom Meeting Link: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/88499565728

https://api.neonemails.com/emails/content/RwNBMYQh10wilTpUHc5tOgVI4nQyi9zXj0gkj5mOQqU=
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom