Lead ammo ban sought from EPA threatens gun owners, game agencies, say critics
Source: http://www.examiner.com
Published: Aug. 04, 2010
On Tuesday, a coalition of environmental groups petitioned with the Environmental Protection Agency asking that lead-based sporting ammunition and fishing tackle be banned.
What that could ultimately mean to Evergreen State gun owners, hunters and anglers is not only much higher ammunition prices, but a dramatic loss of revenue for the Department of Fish & Wildlife, because declining ammunition and tackle sales translates to a decline in federal excise tax revenues, which in turn will result in a decline in federal monies apportioned to this and other states through the Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson federal wildlife and fisheries restoration programs. That money is administered by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.
Almost immediately, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) threw down the gauntlet.
“There is simply no scientific evidence that the use of traditional ammunition is having an adverse impact on wildlife populations that would require restricting or banning the use of traditional ammunition beyond current limitations, such as the scientifically based restriction on waterfowl hunting,” said NSSF President Steve Sanetti.
The National Rifle Association has an on-line “Q & A” about lead at its NRA Hunters Rights web page.
This is a very real threat. It has touched off furious discussions on at least three popular hunting and gun rights forums, TheHighRoad.org, NorthwestFirearms.com and Hunting-Washington.com.
What is at stake? A ban would outlaw the use of lead in every hunting cartridge and shotshell, period. That means anything from .17-caliber on up, including the .22-caliber rimfires owned by tens of millions of Americans for recreation, competition, hunting and even personal protection.
Hunters have eaten venison taken with lead bullets for hundreds of years. Yet there is not one documented case of lead poisoning from eating deer meat. Doctors are required to report all cases of lead poisoning to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), yet according to CDC public health advisor Kimball Credle, no cases have ever been traced to wild game meat.—NRA Hunters Rights
Granted, bullet makers including Oregon’s Nosler, Inc., Idaho’s Speer and Nebraska’s Hornady Manufacturing have all developed so-called “green” bullets, and the Utah-based Barnes Bullets, which produces projectiles made from copper, has been at the front end of the curve for years. Non-toxic shot became required for waterfowl hunters a generation ago, and in recent years, many states have adopted regulations banning the use of lead shot for upland birds and small game.
This anti-lead coalition consists of the American Bird Conservancy (ABC), the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), the Association of Avian Veterinarians and an ostensibly “grassroots hunters’ group” calling itself “Project Gutpile. A visit to the Project Gutpile blog shows no entries since 2008.
A visit to the ABC website reveals that in 476 AD, the Roman Empire collapsed and that a “major contributing factor” was the use of lead in water pipes, cosmetics, pottery and food. That might come as a surprise to all of those foolish historians who thought barbarian invasions and the rise of Christianity had something to do with Rome’s fall. Maybe when the Visigoths sacked the place in 410 AD, all they found were sick Centurions.
Down in Arizona, the PEER group has, as its southwest region director, a Democrat state representative, Daniel Patterson. He reportedly recently criticized the Arizona Game and Fish Department for being “hostile” to “non-game” wildlife. In a story published by the Arizona Republic, PEER reportedly doesn’t even like the agency’s name. Patterson wanted to change the name of the agency earlier this year to Arizona Wildlife Conservation Service.
Hunting and fishing licenses generate almost all of the department's revenue. The department receives no money from the general fund, an arrangement similar to that in most other states.
Ask Evergreen State hunters how well the change in agency focus has worked for them since the Washington Department of Game became the Department of Fish and Wildlife.
In what must qualify as one of the dumber observations attributed to a lawmaker Rep. Patterson was quoted by the newspaper that “I think the agency (Arizona Game & Fish) forgets its role. Everything that isn’t hunting and fishing is just ‘non-game,’ stuff they can’t sell licenses for.” Patterson indicated to this column (see below) that "the paper got it wrong and tried to play up a conflict."
======================================================
UPDATE: Almost as a testament to the speed of the Internet, within minutes of this column’s posting, Rep. Patterson called this reporter from Tucson to “clear the record.”
Describing himself as a devoted hunter and Second Amendment advocate, Patterson said he had no involvement in PEER’s decision to join in the petition. He is the state’s southwest area director of the group, and “that decision came out of our office in Washington (D.C.).” He seemed a bit surprised by the effort.
Patterson said there is a voluntary program for hunters to use non-toxic ammunition in parts of Arizona – such as the Kaibab Plateau – where California condors might be present. He hunts wild turkeys up there, with steel shot, he said.
“I’m not sure what the motivation is for pushing this (ban petition) forward,” he stated. “There could be some issues with lead toxicity in gut piles…but generally my view would be that you want to deal with that in a place-by-place situation.”
He believes wildlife management decisions should be based on scientific research “and regional details.”
Patterson insisted that the attempt to change the name of the Game and Fish Department was to “broaden the appeal” of what the agency does to a wider audience.
“Maybe people don’t understand what our mission is, which is all wildlife,” he stressed.
This column suggested that Rep. Patterson explore what has occurred in the Evergreen State since the transition within the Game Department to become the Wildlife Department, and how many hunters now feel alienated. That change, as many Washington sportsmen will recall, was largely for the same reasons; to "broaden the appeal" of wildlife management to a broader audience.
Having been drawn for a whitetail tag during this fall’s hunting season, Patterson said fishing and hunting is important, and he would like to see more youngsters get involved.
Patterson also now understands the broader implications of changing the name, and perhaps the public perception of the mission, of the Game and Fish Department. He is not favorable to attempts to merge the agency with another state natural resources agency, acknowledging that there would be attempts to raid the Game and Fish dedicated fund budget.
And on a personal note: Patterson seems like a stand-up guy whose message may have been misinterpreted. This column wished him good luck on his whitetail deer hunt.
======================================================
The newspaper noted correctly that hunting and fishing license sales generate “almost all of the department’s revenue.” This may come as a shock to some people, but an agency that does not pay attention to its primary constituents is derelict. Not addressing the interests of the people who “pay the freight” is a good way to discourage them and end up with budget deficits. This results in declining revenue, which bureaucrats typically think can be boosted by raising license and tag fees, which results in further revenue declines as hunters and anglers simply go somewhere else. Montana and Idaho are loaded with non-resident Washington hunters in the fall, and they contribute millions of dollars to those states’ economy.
Helping to demonstrate the validity of Sanetti’s statement are recent statistics from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) showing from 1981 to 2006 the number of breeding pairs of bald eagles in the United States increased 724 percent. And much like the bald eagle, raptor populations throughout the United States are soaring.
Also fueling concerns over the CBD petition is the likely ramification a ban on traditional ammunition would have on wildlife conservation. The federal excise tax that manufacturers pay on the sale of the ammunition (11 percent) is a primary source of wildlife conservation funding and the financial backbone of the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. The bald eagle’s recovery, considered to be a truly great conservation success story, was made possible and funded by hunters using traditional ammunition – the very ammunition organizations like the CBD are now demonizing.—NSSF statement
This column does not entertain conspiracy theories, but it would be negligent to ignore the fact that many people who dislike guns also dislike hunting, and many advocates of gun control have suggested that instead of attacking firearms, the focus should be on eliminating ammunition. The anti-hunting Humane Society of the United States, notes the NRA on its Hunter’s Rights page, “has called for a total ban on lead ammunition, and they are the most radical anti-hunting group in the country. A ban on lead ammunition would force hunters to buy alternatives (such as copper) which tend to be much harder to find, and ultimately cause some people to actually drop out of hunting.”
The NRA strongly opposed a 2009 measure to authorize Washington’s Fish & Wildlife Commission to ban the use of lead shot for hunting anywhere in the state it deemed necessary.
This campaign against lead-component ammunition highlights a survey in North Dakota two years ago that found some slight elevation in lead levels in blood samples taken from more than 730 volunteers. However, officials said there was “nothing conclusive” about the preliminary results of that study, according to the Bismarck Tribune at the time.
Lead levels from those in the study ranged from none to 9.82 micrograms per deciliter.
Levels of 25 micrograms per deciliter in adults and 10 in children are considered elevated.—Bismarck Tribune
NSSF vice president and general counsel Larry Keane told this column on Tuesday that calling for a ban has no scientifically sound basis.
“Needlessly restricting or banning traditional ammunition absent sound science will hurt wildlife conservation efforts as fewer hunters take to the field,” Keane said in a prepared statement. “Hunters and their ammunition have done more for wildlife than the CBD ever will. And the CBD’s scientifically baseless petition and endless lawsuits against state and federal wildlife managers certainly do not serve the wildlife that the organization claims to protect.”
Reader Comments
0 Comments on Lead ammo ban sought from EPA threatens gun owners, game agencies, say critics
