More 'ammunition' against lead..

[ChrisPackham]

Lead poisons '100,000 birds annually'

About 100,000 wetland birds are killed every year from poisoning by discarded lead ammunition, say scientists.
Disclaimer: The BBC is not responsible for the content of this email, and anything written in this email does not necessarily reflect the BBC's views or opinions. Please note that neither the email address nor name of the sender have been verified.

 

[Ian Lawrence]

It must be difficult to walk across a "Wetland" without stopming on dead birds? And spent lead shot is the cause of every death?

Another sensational headline that will be taken in by the ignorant as being fact. The damage is done now. You will never see another message saying they got the figures wrong, or in fact, made them up!.Who makes this claim anyway? And what are our Associations doing to counter this sort of propaganda?

It would be nice to see the proof of where this figure came from. And exactly 100,000 birds? Have you ever seen a dead one just lying about? (Unless you shot it yourself) No, me neither!

Anyway, lead shot is banned over Wetlands so it can't possibly be that can it?  :yell:

 

[ChrisPackham]

Your independent, tax payer funded, Beeb at work... I wonder if this was written by Chris Packham?  As you say there would be piles of birds all over the place.  Annoying that game dealers are still finding lead shot wildfowl though, looks like the few are going to @@@@ it up for everyone else, as usual..

I agree the counter arguments will fade into the background now, I can't see lead surviving a ban, someone needs to come up with a bio wad for steel....

 

[jwpzx9r]

I would not say it poisons the birds more like kills them! Just yet another sensational headline . There will be a ban on lead shot for hunting brought about by the anti's but I really don't see why this headline should actually indicate the need for a ban on lead shot use in clay targets shooting... but hey lets ban its use anyway. Lets get to the point though the main thrust of the whole exercise is the eventual banning of shotgun ownership and thus a ban on hunting with guns and why not ban clay target shooting too... after all only toffs do that right?

 

[shortlegs]

Is everyone signing the lead shot petition ???? that Matt has kindly put a link to on the shootclay home page as its the apathy of shooters that allows the anti's and government to push ahead with mis guided policy ! ( comment over tin hat on )

BASC statement below 



BASC Head Office, Marford Mill, Rossett, Wrexham, LL12 0HL
Tel: 01244 573 030





[SIZE=1pt]

[/SIZE]






Lead update – November 2015

The Government has confirmed it is considering the report submitted by the remaining members of the Lead Ammunition Group and will respond in due course.

BASC, like all other shooting organisations, had always insisted that the LAG process should be coherent, consistent, clear and unbiased.  BASC’s policy on lead ammunition articulates that insistence - “No sound evidence, no change.” 

http://basc.org.uk/lead/basc-statement-on-lead-shot/http://mandrillapp.com/track/click/...FmNmI2Y2E2MDJlMzE0MDY5Y2U4MDJjNjhjOWZcIl19In0

[SIZE=11pt]Most politicians, regulators, organisations and scientists now agree that good policy must be evidence-based and evidence-driven.[/SIZE]  Without sound evidence we can find ourselves with bad policies based on misunderstanding at best and unbridled prejudice at worst. 

Even before the LAG was established, risk assessment and regulation had already been applied to the areas the group was asked to look at. And, in 2012 the Food Standards Agency conducted its own assessment of lead-shot game meat and produced advice and guidance along the lines of those for oily fish and tuna.

BASC has seen nothing to justify extending existing regulations covering lead ammunition.  Recent decisions in Norway and Austria on lead ammunition and a new study by Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) support that view.

BASC has worked hard to make sure prejudice and bias doesn’t win the day on lead shot.  We will continue to work with our sister organisations on this important issue and will continue to insist on sound evidence and proper process.  We will not let our guard drop.




[SIZE=1pt]

[/SIZE]

 

[shortlegs]

Second statement just released by BASC  



[SIZE=1pt]

[/SIZE]





BASC Head Office, Marford Mill, Rossett, Wrexham, LL12 0HL
Tel: 01244 573 030





[SIZE=1pt]

[/SIZE]





BASC STATEMENT ON  ATTACKS ON LEAD AMMUNITION

In response to reports on the alleged risks presented by the Oxford Lead Symposium and reported by the BBC this morning, BASC has issued the following statement, which has been sent to all national media.

The risks to wildlife and human health from lead ammunition alleged by speakers at the Oxford Lead Symposium, neither of whom have medical expertise, have been exaggerated and distorted by quoting selectively from research, according to the British Association for Shooting and Conservation.

Estimates from the Oxford Lead Symposium that between 50,000 and 100,000 waterfowl could be affected are so wide as to represent little more than guesswork and the report itself says that “more precise estimates cannot readily be made.”  They are based on extrapolation and are not supported by hard evidence. Despite the worst estimates of bird mortality, there is no evidence of an impact at a population scale.

The effects on human health are similarly distorted and the research appears to take no account of recent Swedish data that shows how properly processing game meat eliminates any contamination. The Food Standards Authority has already issued guidance on game meat consumption – similar to that for tuna and swordfish - to significantly reduce any risk.

BASC chairman Alan Jarrett said:

“The presence of a risk alone is no justification for a ban. Risks can be managed and reduced by taking the appropriate actions. BASC has seen nothing to justify extending existing regulations covering lead ammunition. Policymakers should be guided by reliable science, robust evidence and the principles of better regulation; none of these are present in the reports from the Oxford lead symposium. BASC will continue to work with its sister organisations on this important issue and will continue to insist on sound evidence and proper process. We will not let our guard drop.”






 

 

[Michael]

Is everyone signing the lead shot petition ???? that Matt has kindly put a link to on the shootclay home page as its the apathy of shooters that allows the anti's and government to push ahead with mis guided policy ! ( comment over tin hat on )

BASC statement below 



BASC Head Office, Marford Mill, Rossett, Wrexham, LL12 0HL
Tel: 01244 573 030





[SIZE=1pt]

[/SIZE]






Lead update – November 2015

The Government has confirmed it is considering the report submitted by the remaining members of the Lead Ammunition Group and will respond in due course.

BASC, like all other shooting organisations, had always insisted that the LAG process should be coherent, consistent, clear and unbiased.  BASC’s policy on lead ammunition articulates that insistence - “No sound evidence, no change.” 

http://basc.org.uk/lead/basc-statement-on-lead-shot/http://mandrillapp.com/track/click/...FmNmI2Y2E2MDJlMzE0MDY5Y2U4MDJjNjhjOWZcIl19In0

[SIZE=11pt]Most politicians, regulators, organisations and scientists now agree that good policy must be evidence-based and evidence-driven.[/SIZE]  Without sound evidence we can find ourselves with bad policies based on misunderstanding at best and unbridled prejudice at worst. 

Even before the LAG was established, risk assessment and regulation had already been applied to the areas the group was asked to look at. And, in 2012 the Food Standards Agency conducted its own assessment of lead-shot game meat and produced advice and guidance along the lines of those for oily fish and tuna.

BASC has seen nothing to justify extending existing regulations covering lead ammunition.  Recent decisions in Norway and Austria on lead ammunition and a new study by Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) support that view.

BASC has worked hard to make sure prejudice and bias doesn’t win the day on lead shot.  We will continue to work with our sister organisations on this important issue and will continue to insist on sound evidence and proper process.  We will not let our guard drop.




[SIZE=1pt]

[/SIZE]

 

cant see this link, would gladly sign it however

 

[shortlegs]

Hi Mike 

If you go to the shootclay home page not the forum its on the top right hand side a green square box saying keep all lead ammunition sign the petition click the government link which takes you to the petition . hope this helps 

Here you go Mike hope the link works 

Important stuff here - please take  a few minutes to sign this petition regarding Lead Ammunition. 


Petition: Keep all lead ammunition.

petition.parliament.uk

Lead ammunition has been used for hunting and shooting since the first guns were manufactured over three centuries ago. Never has there been a recorded death through lead ingestion

 

[Michael]

Thanks Shortlegs, i will go in and sign it.

 

[westley]

I would not say it poisons the birds more like kills them! Just yet another sensational headline . There will be a ban on lead shot for hunting brought about by the anti's but I really don't see why this headline should actually indicate the need for a ban on lead shot use in clay targets shooting... but hey lets ban its use anyway. Lets get to the point though the main thrust of the whole exercise is the eventual banning of shotgun ownership and thus a ban on hunting with guns and why not ban clay target shooting too... after all only toffs do that right?

Yes, but unfortunately it does not disintegrate after breaking or missing the clay target !

 

[jwpzx9r]

Yes, but unfortunately it does not disintegrate after breaking or missing the clay target !

Most trap grounds  are not set over water courses or marsh lands in the fallout area so I don't see the problem with lead shot for target shooting.

 

[Salopian]

Could I ask all of you to go online and make an official complaint to the BBC about their biased and factually inaccurate reporting on this subject , using grossly misleading figures and unsubstantiated and scientifically unsound data?????

Also could ALL BASC members kindly ask BASC to get off their comfy rearends and use the Media Centre to engage the BBC in serious pro-active debate , rather than pussy footing around being re-active to this bunkum from the WWT & BBC & RSPB.

BASC need to build bridges with the membership after employing Judas Swift to stab us in the back.

 

[westley]

Most trap grounds  are not set over water courses or marsh lands in the fallout area so I don't see the problem with lead shot for target shooting.

I do not believe any shooter, with the possible exception of John Swift, can see a problem with lead shot and the points raised against it have certainly NEVER been proved. But I am afraid that is NOT the issue, ban lead and a large percentage of game shooters will throw the towel in and THAT is the real hidden agenda !  Just have a look at English gun prices, only those by top makers are holding their price.  

 

[jwpzx9r]

Yes it is a sad truth that the anti's have the whip hand.. at least when the reds are in power. I think a free vote on it in the house may be for a ban but if the whip is use then the good old toffs will win the day. I don't know what would happen down here or in Italy or Spain for example... just ignore the government and buy lead ammunition on the black market? The UK is a total minnow when it comes to target shooting compared to Italy, Spain and France... almost insignificant in terms of numbers perusing the sport... all the more to be proud of producing so many great shooters in all disciplines and long may it continue to do so. I worked in science so I know just how statisticians can make something quite ambiguous look totally outstanding ... unfortunately they gullible fall for it nearly every time... simple minded people respect scientists far too much.

edit

 Wen I say simple minded I don't mean anything bad I mean that people who perhaps do not under stand the statistics or subject fully are minded to agree with people who claim to know about the subject and believe that they have no hidden agenda. IF 100k wetland birds went awol each year then there would be none left because wet land shooting has not increased that much over the years . So one must conclude that the effect is cumulative and we are actually paying for years of shooting that went on in years gone by... there could be some truth in that but it would be very difficult to prove ... but then what about acidic rain !?? Anybody hear much about BSE these days??? Nah the scientists have made their living out of that one and moved on no grants for that sh*t these days.. smart money was in bird flu and SARS but even that is a no goer now some money but where is the big dosh... how much did the UK pay for doses of H5N1 flu vaccine that were never used £1 or £2 Billion laughable now but when a scientist tells you some sh*t you believe them.

 

[shortlegs]

Interesting reading on numbers !



[SIZE=1pt]

[/SIZE]





BASC Head Office, Marford Mill, Rossett, Wrexham, LL12 0HL
Tel: 01244 573 030





[SIZE=1pt]

[/SIZE]





DO NUMBERS ADD UP FOR BAN ON CATS?

 

BASC’s scientific advisor Dr Matt Ellis has questioned whether the RSPB will be calling for a ban on cats anytime soon.

Dr Ellis posed the question in his blog which can be read at www.basc.org.uk/bascblog. Dr Ellis makes reference to the belated publication of papers which were presented at the 2014 Oxford Lead Symposium and include claims that up to 100,000 wildfowl die each year in the UK due to lead poisoning.

In actual fact, estimates posited that between 50,000 and 100,000 waterfowl could be affected and the report itself says that “more precise estimates cannot readily be made.”

The estimates themselves are based on extrapolation and are not supported by hard evidence. And, despite the worst estimate, there is no evidence of an impact at a population scale.

Dr Ellis says the claims made him think about context and whether lack of context is another symptom of the ‘White Hat Bias’ that is an ever present threat to evidence-driven policy making.

With this is mind, he took a look at the RSPB’s website, which addresses the question of whether cats are causing declines in the bird population.

To put the alleged bird deaths into perspective, the RSPB’s website says that 55 million birds are caught by the UK’s cats every year. So Dr Ellis ponders whether the RSPB will call for a ban on cats.

Dr Ellis said: “I’m not suggesting for one moment that cats should be banned, but perhaps on reading this some campaigners will be.

“This is not an attack on cat ownership. Cats carry out pest control by managing populations of mice and rats. They also make excellent pets. However, this should make people think about whether there is just a touch of hypocrisy here.

“Estimates from the Oxford Lead Symposium suggest that up to 100,000 waterfowl could be affected by lead poisoning and as a consequence there are calls for it to be phased out; the RSPB quotes figures which say cats are responsible for catching 55 million birds a year and hardly bats an eyelid.”

Meanwhile, BASC has discovered the owner of Oxford Lead Symposium’s official website is hiding their true identity behind a wall of secrecy. The website has been registered anonymously in Arizona, America. BASC will keep members informed of further developments.





[SIZE=1pt]

[/SIZE]

 

[Salopian]

Perhaps the BASC Media Department would like to represent one of their members (Me) and ask the BBC for a reply to my complaint of two weeks ago?

Or are they just happy to report on Trumpted up sensationalism.

 

[shortlegs]

Well here's their latest offering Peter  its the only one we've had from any of our official shooting bodies not that I'm defending BASC as the CPSA seems to be very quiet on this issue too ! 








BASC Head Office, Marford Mill, Rossett, Wrexham, LL12 0HL
Tel: 01244 573 030





[SIZE=1pt]

[/SIZE]





Answering the attack on lead ammunition – a brief for BASC members

 

 

BASC believe that all policy should be based on robust evidence and conform to the principles of better regulation (Policy and the policy process should be proportionate, accountable, consistent, transparent, targeted). BASC policy on lead ammunition is “no sound evidence no change”.

A group of activists, some of which are anti-shooting, have been campaigning for years for a ban on the use of lead ammunition. We believe that they have stretched the evidence to suit their argument. We also believe that in interpreting evidence they regard as conclusive they fail to take account of important factors which affect interpretation.

Others who campaign for a ban are convinced that shooters will never obey the law on the use of lead ammunition or that people are incapable of processing meat to minimise risk.

The activists base their argument on three main points:

• There is no need to use lead ammunition because non lead alternatives are available.
• Lead ammunition poisons wildlife
• Lead shot game can damage the health of humans.

BASC believes that these activists fail to acknowledge that risks from lead can be managed and that a ban is unnecessary.

To assist members who may be asked about the current debate we have prepared the following Q&A.

Q: Why do you need to use lead ammunition?
A: Lead ammunition is ballistically superior to every other material. Shooters aim to achieve a humane clean kill. While clean kills can be achieved with non-lead alternatives most shooters wish to use ammunition which performs better ballistically where the law allows. Effective substitutes for lead are not available for the smaller rifle calibres used for pest control and smaller species.

Q: What about the risks to waterfowl and other birds
A: Government has already acted to address the risks to waterfowl. There is existing legislation in place to protect waterfowl in the form of the lead shot regulations. These regulations are targeted and proportionate to the risk posed. Government should focus on enforcing the existing regulations rather than exploring additional burdensome and disproportionate legislation. All shooters should comply with the law. There is no evidence of population level impacts. Policies on wildlife are based on the effect on populations rather than on individuals. There is no evidence of any impacts of lead ammunition on individuals affecting species at the population level. To put this in context the WWT estimate that 50,000 to 100,000 waterfowl die from ingesting lead shot. The RSPB estimates that cats kill 55 million birds.

Q: What about risks to human health?
A: The Food Standards Agency has produced guidance for frequent consumers of game. In 2012 the FSA produced robust, proportionate advice for frequent consumers of game to help reduce the potential risk from lead ammunition. This advice is consistent with existing FSA advice for a range of foods including tuna and oily fish. There is no evidence to indicate that this advice is not effective.
Effective game meat handling can significantly reduce the risk. The Swedish National Food Agency has found that removing damaged tissue from small game, and damaged tissue and an additional 10cm of undamaged meat in large game effectively eliminates the potential risk from lead ammunition. Our research shows that the most frequent consumers of game already do this.





[SIZE=1pt]

[/SIZE]













[SIZE=1pt]

[/SIZE]




 






 

 

[Salopian]

It is a little too late for BASC to issue such statements after employing a Chief Executive  who has done irrepairable damage to the shooting community with his ill founded personal beliefs. I have been a BASC Honorary Education Officer for more than thirty years and bitterly opposed John Swift's and John Harradine's stance on Lead shot alternatives , they did, and still do promote soft iron (steel ) as a viable alternative to Lead . It is not in my opinion. It is currently retailing at a higher cost than some Lead cartridges, BASC mentioned twenty years ago that they would accept economic alternatives, dearer is not economic!. They gave none or very little thought to the fine English guns and historic heirlooms that would become instantly unusable with steel shot.

I am sorry but I am of the opinion that BASC are now doing too little too late. The recent outburst by the BBC as not been robustly challenged , whilst being shown and proven to be outrageous sensationalist lies based on false claims and poor science. 

As for the CPSA , why work when you can get paid for doing very little for a membership that couldn't care less apart from their personal classification?

Countryside Alliance only care about Hunting in reality .

The Press only care about free shooting with free cartridges through free guns on test , free food and free accommodation. Why let the truth get in the way of a good lie?

( Please note:- No Pets, relatives , furniture or belongings were harmed during this vitriolic rant. It's pouring down with rain yet again , and I so wanted to go shooting Lead cartridges at Clays .)

 

[shortlegs]

I don't think it a rant as you say , as what you have stated is pretty much hit the nail on the head and I totally agree with you Salopian to many shooters are complacent until its to late ( Tin hat on )