I've recently read a few articles on the EU lead shot ban for hunting in wetlands. We've had that here during the Obama administration but was overturned by the Trump administration. I'm not sure of the current status here.
There are noises in Europe about the total ban of lead projectiles in firearms. Is this paranoia, or is it a real possibility?
Thanks ,
Gerry
Ban
Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, David Levene, Spencer, Richard H
Re: Ban
RBS is correct in that the ban on hunting waterfowl with lead shot
is still in place in the United States. You really have to read both Executive Orders to realize the limited scope of the Obama administration initial order and the limited scope of the Trump administration reversal.
is still in place in the United States. You really have to read both Executive Orders to realize the limited scope of the Obama administration initial order and the limited scope of the Trump administration reversal.
-
analretentive
- Posts: 66
- Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2019 2:53 pm
Re: Ban
I did not know that anyone still breathing was unaware of the lead shot ban for waterfowl. I still have nearly two cases of shotshells in my basement that I don't know what to do with.
The Obama admins effort was a toe in the door to ban all lead projectiles. The Trump admin reversed it. I don't know if that legislation is right or wrong, but those are both facts.
That has nothing to do with my question, and I did not seek to promote a political agenda one way or another. I am sure we are all aware that lead is harmful to the environment, and our personal health. I was wondering how far our European friends feel that type legislation might be carried in the EU.
Thanks again,
Gerry
The Obama admins effort was a toe in the door to ban all lead projectiles. The Trump admin reversed it. I don't know if that legislation is right or wrong, but those are both facts.
That has nothing to do with my question, and I did not seek to promote a political agenda one way or another. I am sure we are all aware that lead is harmful to the environment, and our personal health. I was wondering how far our European friends feel that type legislation might be carried in the EU.
Thanks again,
Gerry
Re: Ban
Some information, straight from the source of the proposed EU ban,
“ In simple terms, ECHA’s proposal is the following:
1. Lead sold and used in hunting, sports shooting and other outdoor shooting:
ban on the sale and use of lead gunshot (with a five-year transition period). As current Olympic rules specify the use of lead ammunition for certain disciplines, ECHA also considered an optional derogation for use of lead gunshot for sports shooting only under strict conditions, i.e. when releases to the environment are minimised.
ban on the use of lead in bullets and other projectiles (small calibre: five-year; large calibre: 18-month transition periods). Derogations for continued use if releases to the environment are minimised, i.e. when sports shooting ranges are equipped with bullet traps.
2. Lead sold and used in fishing:
ban on the sale and use of lead sinkers and lures (with transition periods depending on weight: ≤ 50 g three years; > 50 g five years)
immediate ban on the use of lead sinkers when the sinker is deliberately dropped to water (lead drop off techniques).
Military uses of lead ammunition, along with other non-civilian uses of lead ammunition such as by police, security and customs forces, are outside of the scope of the investigation. Indoor uses of lead ammunition are also excluded.”
Source:
https://echa.europa.eu/-/towards-sustai ... n-lead-use
Derogation is the partial suppression of a law.
(I should add, this does not appear to be a ban on sport. In fact, there are specific accommodations being made for sport.)
“ In simple terms, ECHA’s proposal is the following:
1. Lead sold and used in hunting, sports shooting and other outdoor shooting:
ban on the sale and use of lead gunshot (with a five-year transition period). As current Olympic rules specify the use of lead ammunition for certain disciplines, ECHA also considered an optional derogation for use of lead gunshot for sports shooting only under strict conditions, i.e. when releases to the environment are minimised.
ban on the use of lead in bullets and other projectiles (small calibre: five-year; large calibre: 18-month transition periods). Derogations for continued use if releases to the environment are minimised, i.e. when sports shooting ranges are equipped with bullet traps.
2. Lead sold and used in fishing:
ban on the sale and use of lead sinkers and lures (with transition periods depending on weight: ≤ 50 g three years; > 50 g five years)
immediate ban on the use of lead sinkers when the sinker is deliberately dropped to water (lead drop off techniques).
Military uses of lead ammunition, along with other non-civilian uses of lead ammunition such as by police, security and customs forces, are outside of the scope of the investigation. Indoor uses of lead ammunition are also excluded.”
Source:
https://echa.europa.eu/-/towards-sustai ... n-lead-use
Derogation is the partial suppression of a law.
(I should add, this does not appear to be a ban on sport. In fact, there are specific accommodations being made for sport.)
Last edited by m1963 on Tue Mar 29, 2022 10:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Ban
Quite simply, heavy metal poisoning is real. The uncontrolled release of raw lead into the environment is a dying practice. Face it, deal with it and adjust. I was, and still am, a competitive shooter in many disciplines including highpower rifle, Bullseye pistol, USPSA/IPSC, 10m air pistol, smallbore rifle. As a society, we have gotten rid of, or gotten better control of, many pollutants like cadmium plating, CFCs (I have Universal Subpart F certification, so don't get me started on that fiasco), asbestos, etc. We learn, we adapt. Lead can be safely used in projectiles as long as it can be contained and reclaimed.
Re: Ban
I would like to hear how much lead is transmitted into the soil, or water in the case of Lake Erie just off Camp Perry, if left unmolested after impact. It has been asserted to me in the past by the operator of a large outdoor range that he was told by a regulator (from which agency I forget) that the lead in his impact berm was not an issue unless he tried to dig it out/reclaim it.
Re: Ban
I do not know the rules about Camp Perry, as it is a federal facility.
Ohio has a hands off approach to outdoor ranges, as long as they are in operation. Once shut down, though, the lead must be mitigated. There is some information at this link-
https://ohioepa.custhelp.com/app/answer ... ting-range
The EPA published a manual in 2005, about the subject-
https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files ... pa_bmp.pdf
Ohio has a hands off approach to outdoor ranges, as long as they are in operation. Once shut down, though, the lead must be mitigated. There is some information at this link-
https://ohioepa.custhelp.com/app/answer ... ting-range
The EPA published a manual in 2005, about the subject-
https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files ... pa_bmp.pdf
Re: Ban
I have no problem with the ban on lead for hunting, shotgun or rifle. Of course, I don't hunt anymore, but if I did ... there are a couple boxes of factory 'copper' -06 ammo on the shelf just in case.
Competition shooting is another matter, and one that's easily addressed.
I pulled up a guide a few years back about lead shot laying on the ground and oxidizing. Easy treatment for that particular issue to keep it out of runoff water. Same goes for ranges with backstops. A couple of the ranges I've personally 'enhanced' with resources regularly mine the backstops. No doubt expensive to do, probably a minus in the ledger, but the tons of 'brass' they collect probably make up for it.
But what comes out the muzzle isn't so simple. Microscopic amounts, but it adds up eventually. No lead primers have a bad rep' so far, but then again look at the evolution of paints and other finishing materials to 'water base' after the bans on the old stuff went in. Took awhile ...
Competition shooting is another matter, and one that's easily addressed.
I pulled up a guide a few years back about lead shot laying on the ground and oxidizing. Easy treatment for that particular issue to keep it out of runoff water. Same goes for ranges with backstops. A couple of the ranges I've personally 'enhanced' with resources regularly mine the backstops. No doubt expensive to do, probably a minus in the ledger, but the tons of 'brass' they collect probably make up for it.
But what comes out the muzzle isn't so simple. Microscopic amounts, but it adds up eventually. No lead primers have a bad rep' so far, but then again look at the evolution of paints and other finishing materials to 'water base' after the bans on the old stuff went in. Took awhile ...
Re: Ban
California has had a complete ban on lead ammunition for hunting for the past 3 years (well, 3 years in July, anyway.)
A recent report (within the last 6 months) has linked raptor deaths to lead poisoning, and called for a ban on lead hunting ammunition.
Does anybody know if you can double-ban lead bullets?
A recent report (within the last 6 months) has linked raptor deaths to lead poisoning, and called for a ban on lead hunting ammunition.
Does anybody know if you can double-ban lead bullets?
Re: Ban
The National Small-bore Rifle Association of the UK put together a paper to submit to a Government call for submissions on the issue of banning lead ammunition. It makes for very interesting reading:
https://www.nsra.co.uk/index.php/news/a ... 5pdGlvbiJd
As far as I can tell, this Government call closed on 22 October 2021. I have not been able to track down the outcome but the NSRA's conclusions were:
Overall Conclusions
From the perspective of small-bore and air rifle target shooting it can be seen that the move to lead-free
ammunition would have the following impacts:
The inaccuracy of lead-free ammunition and its ballistic inefficiency would turn competitive shooting into a
matter of chance rather than skill, both for small-bore and air rifle shooting disciplines.
The result would be that competitors would leave the sport as skill development would not be possible.
Subsequent loss of talent and training opportunities for Commonwealth, Olympic and Paralympic events.
The contraction of the sport as a whole would mean that older and disabled people would lose access to a
sport they can truly engage with - this includes blind people.
Schools, scouts and other uniformed groups would lose an activity that is truly accessible to everyone
irrespective of age, gender, ability/disability or physical strength.
As small-bore and particularly airgun shooting is relatively cheap, the use of more expensive lead-free
products would disadvantage many people who currently access sport cheaply.
The change would have a disproportionately high impact on sport for people who do not (or cannot) engage
with other dynamic sports. This includes disabled people and older participants.
The increased noise would force many clubs to close and for those that remain open, the environmental
impact would be high for those in the surrounding area.
The positive overall change in environmental impact would be negligible as the lead recovery and recycling
rates are very high.
Previous investigations by the UK Govt had concluded that the health risks from lead ammunition did not pose a sufficient health risk to change existing protocols.
Hopefully such calls for change are dead in the water.
Bob
https://www.nsra.co.uk/index.php/news/a ... 5pdGlvbiJd
As far as I can tell, this Government call closed on 22 October 2021. I have not been able to track down the outcome but the NSRA's conclusions were:
Overall Conclusions
From the perspective of small-bore and air rifle target shooting it can be seen that the move to lead-free
ammunition would have the following impacts:
The inaccuracy of lead-free ammunition and its ballistic inefficiency would turn competitive shooting into a
matter of chance rather than skill, both for small-bore and air rifle shooting disciplines.
The result would be that competitors would leave the sport as skill development would not be possible.
Subsequent loss of talent and training opportunities for Commonwealth, Olympic and Paralympic events.
The contraction of the sport as a whole would mean that older and disabled people would lose access to a
sport they can truly engage with - this includes blind people.
Schools, scouts and other uniformed groups would lose an activity that is truly accessible to everyone
irrespective of age, gender, ability/disability or physical strength.
As small-bore and particularly airgun shooting is relatively cheap, the use of more expensive lead-free
products would disadvantage many people who currently access sport cheaply.
The change would have a disproportionately high impact on sport for people who do not (or cannot) engage
with other dynamic sports. This includes disabled people and older participants.
The increased noise would force many clubs to close and for those that remain open, the environmental
impact would be high for those in the surrounding area.
The positive overall change in environmental impact would be negligible as the lead recovery and recycling
rates are very high.
Previous investigations by the UK Govt had concluded that the health risks from lead ammunition did not pose a sufficient health risk to change existing protocols.
Hopefully such calls for change are dead in the water.
Bob
