Date: 3/3/17 10:39 pm From: bill . <billwx...> Subject: Re: Lead
As usual your points are spot on! It disturbs me that this law was changed and the direction environmental protection seems to be going at the federal level. That said, whatever the laws on the books, there will always be some who will break them. There are others who will try to do the right thing whether the law requires it or not. I'd like to believe there are more of the latter. I'd also like to think most waterfowl hunters are aware of lead poisoning and would, at the very least, like their sport to remain viable. For those not aware of the dangers, maybe a little one-on-one education of hunting friends and neighbors would go farther than arguing politics.
enid garfield ok
From: The Birds of Arkansas Discussion List <ARBIRD-L...> on behalf of Herschel Raney <herschel.raney...>
Sent: Friday, March 3, 2017 9:12 PM
Subject: [ARBIRD-L] Lead
People seem to be getting lost in the politics here. This is a bird group. And lead poisoning is a proven risk to many birds. Swans, Ducks, Geese. Hawks and Eagles. This was not just a Senator, but the new Secretary of the Interior. So it is an in-your-face-act to just reverse the lead laws for use specifically in NWRs. NWRs are a precious and separate resource from all the other lands that we are preserving or destroying. It is a statement.
I just went on Gunbroker. I am a registered user of Gunbroker. I have purchased ammo there. I have purchased guns there. I own guns. I have shot ducks, geese, quail, turkeys, Ruffed Grouse in my lifetime. And once I understood the risks I would only ever use steel shot in aquatic hunting zones. It just makes ecologic sense. No political motives involved. Unless your problem is that you just donít like anyone telling you that you have to do something. But the cost difference? About 15 to 20 cents per shotgun shell.
So for the privilege of hunting on a NWR I would have to pay about that much per shell to avoid adding my lead load to the water sources. It is not about anything else.
No one needs to discuss Trump or the Interior Secretary or conservatism. If you appreciate birdlife and you are a hunter. It does not make sense to not choose ammo other than lead. For duck hunting especially, the costs to go and do it anyway are impressive: boats, dogs, guns, waders, camo, decoys. If you fired your gun twenty times on a fine duck hunt. Then the extra cost is 4 dollars to not use lead.
People pay that much for a coffee before the hunt. I donít hate this horseman from Montana. I donít know him. But his reversal does not make ecologic or economic sense. Whatever side of the political discussion I am on.