grassylawn wrote: »

Is the only reason that people are opposed to this that their guns will become obsolete?

I'd be pretty wary of lead contamination in food personally. Wouldn't eat game. I understand the lead exposure levels are significant if you do regularly eat it.

Didn't even occur to me that there would be level of environmental and possibly water contamination as well.

Steel shot isn't as humane as lead shot in that it loses it kinetic energy quicker, leading to wounded and lost birds. The first review in a shooting magazine of steel shot i read about 20 years ago, the reviewer was so disgusted at the amount of wounded birds, he threw the remaining rounds into the lake.

There was a survey involving blood testing of people in Germany done, people who ate game regularly and people who didn't. The lead levels in the blood was the same.

My grandmothers house had lead piping, she lived until she was 90 and was very mentally alert and agile until a few weeks before she died. My father worked with lead for years, it didn't interfere with his health either.

Its the modern complete over reaction we get now, Hazmat suits and oxygen fed face masks because someone found a fishing weight in the bottom of an old box in the attic. Its lead, not polonium or plutonium.

The steel shot is eiither coated with zinc (which is toxic) or oiled. Both to stop rusting. So can you eat game after oily shot is dragged through it ?

Thanks for giving me a more rounded idea of the issue.

I did a bit of research and the consensus doesn't seem to agree with it being innocuous.

Use of lead ammunition in wetlands has an impact on bird populations there:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3672933/

Lead exposure at firing ranges poses a health risk to people there:
https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-017-0246-0

Lead in game causes significant exposure in people who eat it regularly:
https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(16)30021-3/pdf


I have no idea if steel alternatives are better.

Not being judgmental here, just linking what I found when I read up about it... I enjoyed visiting a firing range in the USA a few years ago. The issue of lead in game only came to my attention after I saw a warning about it on some game I bought from Aldi. So no agenda here basically.

Is the only reason that people are opposed to this that their guns will become obsolete?

Thanks for giving me a more rounded idea of the issue.

I did a bit of research and the consensus doesn't seem to agree with it being innocuous.

"grassylawn" - Like you, I don't hunt, nor do I own a shotgun so I don't have "skin in the game" from that point of view. I only shoot targets with my rifle - but I'm still against this lead ban.

Don't forget, this lead shot ammunition ban affects more than game shooting or hunting. Anyone that shoots targets with a shotgun is also affected. Clay pigeon shooting for example will be affected and some people who shoot clays are only interested in that, they don't hunt at all but just love the sport. And lead due to it's density and relative softness performs better ballistically than steel and is kinder to steel in barrels.

Steel is less dense than lead, therefore for a given weight of projectile the steel one will be larger than the lead one. If launched at the same speed the larger steel one will have more drag due to it's size and slow down faster. For a given size, a steel projectile will be lighter. If launched at the same speed the steel one will be slowed down faster by the air than the lead one due to being lighter.

These points affect how things flying in the air, at varying distance and under environmental conditions will be hit and suitably disabled, be that a humane kill of a bird or the effective destruction of a clay pigeon.

Another point of note is the term "wetlands". Ask anyone what "wetlands" means to them and they'll conjure up an image of a marshy type scene, maybe an estuarine environment or an area dappled with lakes occupied by ducks, swans, geese, wading birds etc. That's what I think most people's common sense take on "wetlands" is - maybe I'm wrong but I don't think for the most part I am. The lead ban near wetlands from this new EU ECHA law basically considers "wetlands" to be land that is wet, it only has to have standing water on it. So somewhere that is not a "wetland" can become a "wetland" if it were to rain and form puddles on the ground.

Imagine this just for the sake of taking the concept into the realm of the ridiculous. Imagine Ireland had a desert in the midlands. Bone dry, arid and dusty. Some people decide to set up a clay pigeon shoot, use lead ammo and legally operate away. One person takes out their canteen to quell their thirst from the heat and accidentally spills it on the ground and forms a puddle. Now they can no longer legally shoot there. They have to either (a) wait until the puddle dries up or (b) take all their equipment a minimum of 100 metres away from that spot before they can legally shoot again.

Let's imagine scenarion (b) above happens. Everyone begins to move all their gear 100 metres away so they can legally shoot the clays again with lead ammo. During the move the Gards turn up and ask to have a look at the cartridges. They discover that they contain lead shot and it's within 100 metres of the canteen puddle. Even though everyone there was in the process of moving all their gear beyond 100 metres of the "wetland", in other words, the "bit of land that's wet", there's a presumption that they are guilty under this new law. The Gards don't have to prove the people were shooting on wetlands, they are presumed guilty. The shooters have to prove that they are innocent and prove that they were not going to shoot within 100 metres of the "wetland". The "innocent until proven guilty" system that we normally use has been reversed.

The aforemantioned scenario is just my take on it, I could be wrong but I think for the most part I have the gist of it. Please anyone correct me where I'm wrong.

So why am I against the ban since I don't have a shotgun or hunt? Well the shotgunners I my club are addicted to it, they live for a Sunday when they can shoot clays and if the notion takes me I may wish to join them and the lead ammo currently in use is the best we have. From a price point of view and for its effectiveness.

The lead shot over wetlands really is just the tip of the iceberg though. The next thing that is coming down the line - and this is not my guess, this IS coming - is the total ban on all lead in ammunition for civilian use. And this has noting to do with lead in game birds or venison being ingested because it will also affect people who don't hunt but merely target shoot. Lead bullets caught in the sand/clay berm at target ranges doesn't get into the environment at all really, it's just trapped in the sand. And with a bit of effort it can be sieved, sorted and recycled. The lead shot ban is the start of a process to remove effective ammunition from civilians. Our guns are not being removed, but they're effectively being made useless by banning suitable and affordable ammunition under the auspices of a "green" agenda. And all politicians and the EU have to be seen to be going "green" so they won't go against it. The military are probably the biggest user of ammunition an they remain unaffected. Why? Because this is about removing firearms from civilians in the long run.

This lead shot ban will have a serious affect on Olympic clay shooting because of the "wetlands" part of the law. And should the total ban on all lead ammunition come into effect down the line, even Olympic target rifle shooting and air guns will be knackered in the EU.

"grassylawn" - Here's a couple of links to read from the ISSF that look after target rifle shooting and clay pigeon shooting, from FACE which are hunting-centric and others:

https://www.issf-sports.org/getfile.aspx?inst=439&pane=1&mod=docf&iist=101&file=Presentation%20ECHA_compressed.pdf

https://www.all4shooters.com/en/shooting/law/Ban-of-lead-in-ammunition-the-position-of-ISSF/

https://www.leadinammunition.com/faq/#faq-3

https://www.face.eu/2020/11/envi-vote-on-leadshot-2-2/

Lastly -

I enjoyed visiting a firing range in the USA a few years ago.

So there's no reason you won't enjoy it here also. Why not look into local clubs and ranges and get in touch, pay one a visit, have a go. I guarantee you you'll be met by a bunch of very nice, enthusiastic people only too happy to show you what it's all about and shoot a club gun. Shooting tiny groups or knocking over steel chickens can be very addictive!

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

grassylawn wrote: »

The warning on the ALDI game is simply there as a cover your ass from litigation. Same as Mc Donalds have to put HOT BEVERAGE on their coffee cups, and Japan has to put Caution! Sharp edge on knives it sells.

Because most modern adults are not adults, but oversized toddlers that whinge their way to a lawyer if they cut their pinky or get a gob full of hot tea. Its the infantilization of modern society :rolleyes:

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Oh and just for you clay pigeon and .22 rifle hunters who think this doesn't affect them ...IT DOES!
Lead shot cant now be used within the "200-meter "buffer zone of the wetland" IE that puddle that forms at the bottom of the field where you have the clay range. Or the 90% of which in Ireland's clay ranges are in now areas that could be declared "wetlands".

Ditto you won't be shooting any bunnies out on Farmer Brown's field because of that instant forming "wetland" after a heavy downpour of rain.,as your .22 ammo is lead isn't it?:(

As for that shower of MEPs that voted against this. I suggest some serious letters and emails to them stating that their action on this has reflected on their parties who put them in Europe, and their party members in your area need not bother calling in any local, national, or EU election again and need not bother looking for your votes.

Yup, democracy my hairy white arse. If a lead ban comes in i'm done, the youngest gun i have is at least 50 years old, my shotgun was made at the latest in 1910. I refuse to deact them or other sorts of butchering. This is nothing to do with the environment, its gun-control done by the back door. :mad:

Watch an SI being brought in so fast your head would spin Grizz, before any stockpiling can be done. Also watch out for the little extras attached, they always squeeze a few in.

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Better get started then...But no need to panic utterly too..How will this be enforced and checked in reality on the ground? Who will enforce this? Can it be enforced effectively too? What powers will there be to "stop and search" by whatever body, and on private property? TBH ,i doubt we will be that important a problem with COVID still being a plague until I estimate 2024. Sure they can "ban lead shot in Ireland" but what about stocks of shells still out there?Are we going to have NPWS and AGS in their waders coming out to blinds on an estuary at 5AM thru the mud to check with a magnet each and every shotgun shell?

You can make laws, but you have to be able to enforce them as well.
There is still 2 years run in time on this and up to then lead is still available and there will be a lot of ructions between then and now and if we get the lead out and our sht together, we could come out of this a lot better than we think.

They cant enforce anything here and they know that, so chances are that they'll run for an all out ban.

Even if 1 million birds due from load poisoning from the guardian article I read today ( imho that's bull) that is nothing compared to what cats kill each year so why in all that is Holy is there not a cat ban if this is indeed to protect the environment?

The Rifleman wrote: »

If the UK escapes without implementing this I imagine the old smuggling routes will be a thing again between us the the north.

All their shooting orgs, including the turncoat BASC, have signed up to ban lead for game shooting with 5 years.

badaj0z wrote: »

I found the figures below with simple Google searches. They are both from the UK and from publications that support the lead ban in shooting. Look closely. You will soon note that the figures show that cats kill 270 times as many birds than are killed by lead shot. It is time to look at banning cats. Share this on all the social media you can to see if it has any impact.

https://www.birdguides.com/news/uk-shooting-industry-set-to-fight-eu-lead-ammunition-ban/#:~:text=Birds%20often%20mistake%20tiny%20shot,and%20the%20wider%20public%20alike.


The decision comes despite the well-known negative impacts of lead poisoning in both humans and wildlife. More than 6,000 tonnes of lead ammunition are fired over the UK countryside every year in areas where birds feed, and are left behind strewn on the ground. Birds often mistake tiny shot pellets for grit or seeds, and ingest them. Up to 100,000 waterbirds in the UK die every year through ingesting poisonous lead shot. Dead and dying birds are usually taken quickly by predators – making their deaths unseen and 'invisible' to shooters and the wider public alike.

https://www.rspb.org.uk/birds-and-wildlife/advice/gardening-for-wildlife/animal-deterrents/cats-and-garden-birds/are-cats-causing-bird-declines/#:~:text=an%20important%20habitat-,The%20statistics,known%20to%20have%20been%20caught.

The most recent figures of how many creatures are killed by cats are from the Mammal Society. They estimate that cats in the UK catch up to 100 million prey items over spring and summer, of which 27 million are birds.
This is the number of prey items which were known to have been caught. We don't know how many more the cats caught, but didn't bring home, or how many escaped but subsequently died.
The most frequently caught birds, according to the Mammal Society, are probably:
• house sparrows
• blue tits
• blackbirds
• starlings

YES ! I like a wally spend a good few bob every winter feeding the song birds, nyjer seed, sunflower seeds, suet balls etc, i love seeing them around the place. The other day i was watching the birds on the tree outside and a bloody cat appears and was going for them, it got told off and no mistake. It should be law to have a bell on a cat.

Not to mention Wind turbines. In the greater scheme of things, shooting accounts for sfa of the bird numbers killed. Especially considering the amount of birds released, conservation work done, habitat upkeep, predators controlled. Just more evidence this ban is about gun control and nothing to do with pollution.

ace86 wrote: »

Well if they leave Europe they don’t really have to follow any directive from there regardless of a deal or not I should think.The shooting organisations might have signed up for it but that could all change post brexit if they want to stay going and get money for themselves.

Nope, it seems to be about big driven shoots and game dealers not wanting to sell game, most of which goes abroad, with lead in it. That is where the money is and the basc and other shooting orgs are not going to bite the hand that feeds. Ordinary shooters can get stuffed it appears.

tudderone wrote: »

"Europe bans lead shot"


" No assessment of the impacts of this law on clay shooting was conducted.”


https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/magazine/europe-bans-lead-shot

TYPICAL!!!!:rolleyes::rolleyes: What is it about the English mentality that seems to be one of total indifference until they get blindsided with the bloody obvious,clear and present danger that anyone else can see?
They seem to do it from everything from world wars to this kind of a situation.
Strange race altogether.

ASFIK,they do have to keep some previous EU legislation up to a certain date on their books.
Moot point anyway in this case.As the EU would simply prohibit ammo from being imported from the UK if it contains lead.:(

tudderone wrote: »

A worrying apect is the presumption of guilt if you were to be found to be within 100 meters of wetland and had lead cartridges on you. Wouldn't this be illegal ?

It's certainly goes against all natural justice, and our presumption of innocence.

GooseB wrote: »

How many people here wrote to the MEP's about this prior to the voting taking place? What did people actively do? I sent a letter to all our MEP's except the Greens because they are beyond useless.

I received a reply from one of them last Friday, after the final voting had finished. I won't say who it was as I consider this private correspondence (regardless if it was copied/pasted to everyone or not).



I don't understand the last words "should it become law". This has been voted on and surely it should have said "when it becomes law"?

Anyway, I thanked them for being the only one to have the decency to reply and tried to put my case forward for the upcoming bans on all civilian lead ammo and the problems it would cause.

So what did anyone else receive back in reply?

I emailed them and got zip. Apart from the greens, as like you i deem them to be the enemy.

tudderone wrote: »

A worrying apect is the presumption of guilt if you were to be found to be within 100 meters of wetland and had lead cartridges on you. Wouldn't this be illegal ?

Yes it is!! But apparently now "All are innocent until proven guilty, except gunowners,as they are guilty anyway!" This is the pertinent point Scallan et al have been trying to raise that this flies in the face of natural justice and EU law itself. So now the only way to smash this is to make a test case of this and get arrested under this new legislation to show the gross error of this AFAICS:(

Got replies from EU MEPS via FUN, but nothing from Irish MEP's.Pity Marian Harkin quit Brussels. She was a good person to have in our corner.

richiedel123 wrote: »

Got 3 replies to be fair. One good reply one bad reply and one big debate that ended up in a bit of to and Froing but I knew my point would never have been listened to so I was really wasting my breath. But I tried so there wasn't much more I could do.
To be honest I don't think many meps would have even properly read it. Just seen lead = bad so decided they would vote for it. I watched the agenda for the plenary where it was voted and they had a full agenda of proposals to be voted on. I think the lead ban would have been bottom of their list to worry about

Yes I sent off the mail but I put all the MEP’s on it but only 2 replied to me one was low and behold the party against shooting but I feel fellows tried there best but as a shooting community we’d nearly have to start supporting or funding candidates in government and Europe on our behalf as the anti’s are gaining ground left right a e centre.

Have a look here:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058137505

So steel drops like a stone and has much less penetration.

Talking to a lad on another forum, who is a gunsmith. He was telling me if the lead ban comes in, that the small bores shotguns are history, by small bore he means the .410 and 28 bore. They can't throw enough steel shot to be worth a curse on either clays or game. :mad: