Last July Nicola urged us all to make contact with our local MEP's regarding possible ban on lead shot. I received this email from Vicky Waters earlier this week updating current position -
Dear Countryside Campaigner,
Last year you wrote to me regarding your concerns about any potential ban on lead shot in the EU. Please excuse this mass email but I thought you may appreciate an update. I continue to believe that an outright ban by the EU on the use of lead shot would be inappropriate, unnecessary and have potentially very damaging consequences on our rural environment.
At this time there is no proposal for an EU ban on the table. There is an investigation taking place regarding a possible restriction; this investigation has involved a formal consultation and many members of hunting organisations from across Europe have submitted evidence to that consultation. I am told that the conclusions from the consultation will be made public in the summer. I am still very hopeful that a full ban on use of lead shot outside wetland areas will not be proposed by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) and I am working with my colleague Julie Girling MEP for the West Country who monitors the ECHA closely. Any proposal from ECHA cannot become law if enough MEPs object.
Last week I attended a seminar and debate in the European Parliament organised by the Parliament's Intergroup on Sustainable Hunting. It was not particularly well attended by Members from across Europe although there was at least one MEP present from France, Spain, Denmark and Italy. Many others did send assistants.
There were three expert speakers:
Professor Javier Perez Trujillo, an expert in Materials Science from the University of Madrid
Mario Ge, Secretary General of the Association of European Manufacturers of Sporting Ammunition (AFEMS)
Angus Middleton, Secretary General of FACE, the European Association for Hunting and Conservation
Mario Ge used the slogan "Lead in Ammo is not the Devil" to explain that changing ammunition types is not a simple issue. For example, there is no other well known material for use in ammunition which has a comparable performance. We were told that there are many different manufacturers but that it is difficult to come up with innovative new materials as ballistic properties, price and weapon safety are substantial issues. Furthermore many hunters do not like to change from one ammunition manufacturer to another - let alone to different materials - as performance can differ even when using the same materials. He pointed out that lead is also used in many other areas (batteries, glass, ceramics) and that the European Food Safety Authority has not reported worrying dangers from lead from ammunition.
Angus Middleton's presentation was praised for being extremely well-balanced and helpful. He pointed out that whilst everyone agrees that lead is highly toxic this is also a highly complex issue. FACE supports the phase out of lead shot in Wetland areas, due to its impact on waterfowl, but is not so concerned regarding its impact on other birds (for example lead shot is known to have been fatal to white tailed eagles but the population of this species is growing strongly). On the issue of Food Safety, he quoted many reports from the European Food Safety Agency concluding that often it is not the food with the highest lead levels which has the greatest impact but rather food which is consumed more. A recent Norwegian survey of hunter families showed that whilst many had high levels of lead in their blood none of these were considered so high to be harmful. Angus also discussed the use of non-lead alternatives and the impact on firearms. Again a change from lead could have substantial safety issues. For example using steel shot safely requires the hunter to open the weapon's choke, but many Eastern European hunters use Russian-style weapons with a fixed choke. MEPs were urged to think about the complexity of this issue and not to rush into any decisions.
Professor Perez Trujillo gave feedback from research he has been conducting into new materials. His research team have patented over 10,000 potential new alternative materials and are focusing on 25 of these, in particular one which he described of "higher density" and one of a "medium density". His tests related to the use of these materials as shot rather than bullets. They have demonstrated the ability to achieve ballistic performances very similar to that of lead, with scatter properties if anything better than lead. The cartridges can be the same sizes as those for lead. He also claimed that the new materials should not cause barrel damage to weapons and do not appear to have potentially toxic environmental consequences. They have also done some field tests on live game (partridges and rabbits). This is still early stage development but Professor Trujillo estimates that the price of the new material would be "more than lead but less than other alternatives".
In the comments from the audience after the meeting, a spokesperson for BASC made very positive comments about the research into new material alternatives. A further spokesman for Birdlife re-emphasised that lead is a highly toxic substance and that this should not be forgotten in the debate ahead. I mentioned the very many emails that I have received from across the East of England and how, in our part of the UK, sportsmen and women appear to be supportive of the restriction on lead use over wetlands but have great concern about the impact of any potential extension of this restriction. I also pointed out that it was vital that any alternative material needs to be absolutely safe to use in existing weapons.
In recent months I have received numerous emails from game and clay pigeon shooters across the East of England. Many of you have also emphasised your commitment to conservation, to biodiversity and to the rural environment. I believe that if an alternative to lead were available, with similar properties and at an affordable price then, I suspect, many of you would use it through choice. A ban is not needed.
To conclude, at present there are no formal proposals for a further ban on lead shot. I am still hopeful that the current consultation will not result in a proposal for any outright ban, especially in non-wetlands, but I am working with like-minded colleagues and experts to make sure that we are well armed with good arguments and evidence for any potential debates ahead.
Wishing you a happy New Year,
Vicky Ford MEP
Dear Countryside Campaigner,
Last year you wrote to me regarding your concerns about any potential ban on lead shot in the EU. Please excuse this mass email but I thought you may appreciate an update. I continue to believe that an outright ban by the EU on the use of lead shot would be inappropriate, unnecessary and have potentially very damaging consequences on our rural environment.
At this time there is no proposal for an EU ban on the table. There is an investigation taking place regarding a possible restriction; this investigation has involved a formal consultation and many members of hunting organisations from across Europe have submitted evidence to that consultation. I am told that the conclusions from the consultation will be made public in the summer. I am still very hopeful that a full ban on use of lead shot outside wetland areas will not be proposed by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) and I am working with my colleague Julie Girling MEP for the West Country who monitors the ECHA closely. Any proposal from ECHA cannot become law if enough MEPs object.
Last week I attended a seminar and debate in the European Parliament organised by the Parliament's Intergroup on Sustainable Hunting. It was not particularly well attended by Members from across Europe although there was at least one MEP present from France, Spain, Denmark and Italy. Many others did send assistants.
There were three expert speakers:
Professor Javier Perez Trujillo, an expert in Materials Science from the University of Madrid
Mario Ge, Secretary General of the Association of European Manufacturers of Sporting Ammunition (AFEMS)
Angus Middleton, Secretary General of FACE, the European Association for Hunting and Conservation
Mario Ge used the slogan "Lead in Ammo is not the Devil" to explain that changing ammunition types is not a simple issue. For example, there is no other well known material for use in ammunition which has a comparable performance. We were told that there are many different manufacturers but that it is difficult to come up with innovative new materials as ballistic properties, price and weapon safety are substantial issues. Furthermore many hunters do not like to change from one ammunition manufacturer to another - let alone to different materials - as performance can differ even when using the same materials. He pointed out that lead is also used in many other areas (batteries, glass, ceramics) and that the European Food Safety Authority has not reported worrying dangers from lead from ammunition.
Angus Middleton's presentation was praised for being extremely well-balanced and helpful. He pointed out that whilst everyone agrees that lead is highly toxic this is also a highly complex issue. FACE supports the phase out of lead shot in Wetland areas, due to its impact on waterfowl, but is not so concerned regarding its impact on other birds (for example lead shot is known to have been fatal to white tailed eagles but the population of this species is growing strongly). On the issue of Food Safety, he quoted many reports from the European Food Safety Agency concluding that often it is not the food with the highest lead levels which has the greatest impact but rather food which is consumed more. A recent Norwegian survey of hunter families showed that whilst many had high levels of lead in their blood none of these were considered so high to be harmful. Angus also discussed the use of non-lead alternatives and the impact on firearms. Again a change from lead could have substantial safety issues. For example using steel shot safely requires the hunter to open the weapon's choke, but many Eastern European hunters use Russian-style weapons with a fixed choke. MEPs were urged to think about the complexity of this issue and not to rush into any decisions.
Professor Perez Trujillo gave feedback from research he has been conducting into new materials. His research team have patented over 10,000 potential new alternative materials and are focusing on 25 of these, in particular one which he described of "higher density" and one of a "medium density". His tests related to the use of these materials as shot rather than bullets. They have demonstrated the ability to achieve ballistic performances very similar to that of lead, with scatter properties if anything better than lead. The cartridges can be the same sizes as those for lead. He also claimed that the new materials should not cause barrel damage to weapons and do not appear to have potentially toxic environmental consequences. They have also done some field tests on live game (partridges and rabbits). This is still early stage development but Professor Trujillo estimates that the price of the new material would be "more than lead but less than other alternatives".
In the comments from the audience after the meeting, a spokesperson for BASC made very positive comments about the research into new material alternatives. A further spokesman for Birdlife re-emphasised that lead is a highly toxic substance and that this should not be forgotten in the debate ahead. I mentioned the very many emails that I have received from across the East of England and how, in our part of the UK, sportsmen and women appear to be supportive of the restriction on lead use over wetlands but have great concern about the impact of any potential extension of this restriction. I also pointed out that it was vital that any alternative material needs to be absolutely safe to use in existing weapons.
In recent months I have received numerous emails from game and clay pigeon shooters across the East of England. Many of you have also emphasised your commitment to conservation, to biodiversity and to the rural environment. I believe that if an alternative to lead were available, with similar properties and at an affordable price then, I suspect, many of you would use it through choice. A ban is not needed.
To conclude, at present there are no formal proposals for a further ban on lead shot. I am still hopeful that the current consultation will not result in a proposal for any outright ban, especially in non-wetlands, but I am working with like-minded colleagues and experts to make sure that we are well armed with good arguments and evidence for any potential debates ahead.
Wishing you a happy New Year,
Vicky Ford MEP
