- Location
- Saskatchewan
Lead does no harm at all, ever. Just as long as you wear a tinfoil hat to keep out those thoughts that are different than the ideas that are already in your head ;-)
The Consequences of Lead Ammo
- Thread starter BigUglyMan
- Start date
Topic also covered on 'The Hunter Conservationist Podcast':
https://thehunterconservationist.com/podcast/episode-38-the-north-american-non-lead-partnership-with-leland-brown-and-chris-parish/
They had some of the top researchers on there who favour the voluntary approach.
Take-aways:
1. Only evidentiary impact has been with California Condors & waterfowl. These issues were solved long ago through mandatory & voluntary means.
2. If you shoot with lead, it gets into your food but not enough that it is considered dangerous levels per standard toxicology practices. It is simply noted that there is no safe level of lead.
3. Other animals are getting lead from gophers, gut piles, etc. but impact not well understood or benign.
My thoughts:
1. Hunting with lead is not an outsized environmental impact compared to what we do with cars, industries, consumption, etc. The idea that hunters are destroying habitat & populations by using lead in some applications is a lie.
2. Lead bans are coming. This is somewhat well intentioned and somewhat a straight attack on our hunting culture.
3. For myself, I am starting to look closer at non-lead options. I'm currently looking for a higher powered rifle to complement my M96 6.5x55. My selection of that rifle is being done assuming copper projectiles. This is what that anti's don't get - not going to stop us from hunting, just means we'll have to go out and buy more rifles & shotguns (proliferation?). I likely will go to non-toxic projectiles for hunting large game for all except the Lee Enfield.
Further understanding:
I once saw something on lead from I believe CSSA (?) on lead. It noted that lead quickly oxidizes in the environment & is inert wrt getting into water supply. Anti's seem to grab on the weight of lead used every year. It sounds ridiculous in the context of the weight of the Canadian surface rock.
https://thehunterconservationist.com/podcast/episode-38-the-north-american-non-lead-partnership-with-leland-brown-and-chris-parish/
They had some of the top researchers on there who favour the voluntary approach.
Take-aways:
1. Only evidentiary impact has been with California Condors & waterfowl. These issues were solved long ago through mandatory & voluntary means.
2. If you shoot with lead, it gets into your food but not enough that it is considered dangerous levels per standard toxicology practices. It is simply noted that there is no safe level of lead.
3. Other animals are getting lead from gophers, gut piles, etc. but impact not well understood or benign.
My thoughts:
1. Hunting with lead is not an outsized environmental impact compared to what we do with cars, industries, consumption, etc. The idea that hunters are destroying habitat & populations by using lead in some applications is a lie.
2. Lead bans are coming. This is somewhat well intentioned and somewhat a straight attack on our hunting culture.
3. For myself, I am starting to look closer at non-lead options. I'm currently looking for a higher powered rifle to complement my M96 6.5x55. My selection of that rifle is being done assuming copper projectiles. This is what that anti's don't get - not going to stop us from hunting, just means we'll have to go out and buy more rifles & shotguns (proliferation?). I likely will go to non-toxic projectiles for hunting large game for all except the Lee Enfield.
Further understanding:
I once saw something on lead from I believe CSSA (?) on lead. It noted that lead quickly oxidizes in the environment & is inert wrt getting into water supply. Anti's seem to grab on the weight of lead used every year. It sounds ridiculous in the context of the weight of the Canadian surface rock.
- Location
- Saskatchewan
Give the man a break...English is not medvedqc's first language. It actually makes perfect sense if you read it carefully.
Let me paraphrase: Penetration of lead shrapnel goes further and deeper than one would normally assume. There is hunting association in France called the National Blood Tracking Association. (They are responsible for tracking wounded game and often have to finish off wounded wild boar in close quarters with tracking dogs). In their study, lead shrapnel sometimes exited the body of the animal. The issue is the potential of dogs being wounded by bullet fragments. Copper bullets also had this issue when shooting animals at short distance.
I hope Medvedqc I am not overstepping common courtesy by replying on your behalf?
I hope he understands now.
Thank you for doing this, shows that some on this forum are civilized and don’t buy into the crap others are talking about! English sun my first language and sometimes things get lost in translations!! I understood Medvedqc and like I said I saw a documentary on the matter a while back!! I also happen to know Medvedqc personally and the guy knows what his talking about and doesn’t bull####!!
nowarningshot
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Compared to lead contamination from industry and automotive exhaust. Yes Virginia, gasoline is lower lead, not "unleaded".
Lead contamination studies are simply Trojan horse arguments for gun control. Make the cost of.ammunition a barrier to firearms ownership.
Lead contamination studies are simply Trojan horse arguments for gun control. Make the cost of.ammunition a barrier to firearms ownership.
Last edited:
thank you guys. i just have to remember some that in fact english is my fourth languages so yes i can make some mystakes ...
thank you powdermaker i did not feel bad about your translation.
anyway enjoy the lovely sunday.
^^^ This right here.
I don't care what anybody else shoots out of their guns as long as they're not telling me what I can shoot out of mine.
I think the best approach is to provide the grown adults that we are with facts on lead issues. Let hunters make their own decisions.
It depends on what aspects of performance you want. Some people use solid copper bullets. If their reason is they want to avoid using lead solid copper certainly performs well in that respect. But I think solid copper bullets are also used when the desired performance is that the bullet stays in one piece.
if the bullet stays in one piece even in copper is an interesting question what real copper is doing to humane or wildlife is not to be taken very lightly.
Copper, like lead, can have harmful effects on humans, I'd be curious to see a comparison of both in equal quantities. The thing with copper Vs lead is bullet mass retention, it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to know that copper bullets maintain most of their weight which in turn reduces copper contamination.
Lead bullet have been used since firearms exist. Thats all that was used prior to the 1900.
Meat was good then - and is good, now.
You will find a geek that will prove that lying on your couch will kill you along with anything we use - drink or eat.
The lead bullet story is just that - a story for more restrictions.
I shoot lead in many caliber - 300 pounds a year - I hunt with lead bullets -and will continue to do so.
Very tired of all those people that make anything we do - dangerous.
As far as I am concern - they can go in the boonies...
most of the copper bullet remain in one piece not all.
The big difference is that we went from black powder to smokeless powders which propel projectiles at high velocities. Those fast moving projectiles lose a lot more mass when impacting a target than a slow moving projectile. Therein lies the difference with then and now. This lead contamination ends up in carcasses and gut piles and are affecting fragile species such as raptors.
At the end of the day, I believe the hunting community needs to raise awareness within its ranks. It's Okay to talk about this sort of stuff to raise awareness and let hunters make their own decisions. Lead contamination of certain species is a science backed issue; this needs to be brought to the attention of hunters so they can make educated decisions. The same way we talk about internal combustion engine or smoking; the facts are out there, let adults be adults.
Which is what I have said in my post. Again, weight/mass retention is easy to judge and shows that lead projectiles lose a lot more lead upon impact. This lead has to go somewhere and it normally ends in the carcass and gut pile which gets eaten by predators such as raptors...
I just set my phazer to stun and then club what ever I want to eat. If I don't want to eat it, I let it wake up and run away! Oh brother! What's next? The burnt powder residue that is on the back of the bullet is carcinogenic? Give me a break!
Ya dun gartzs tuh lern one mawr..................
Body needs iron'n such.
Wee bit oh led can't be bad.
Maybe'ard awn tuh ivory though.
Man, I can'ear Rickeee cuss'in frum'ear....................
