North American Non Lead Partnership Opinions

OXN939

WKR
Joined
Jun 28, 2018
Messages
1,790
Location
VA
Anyone have any experience with this initiative? They seem to have a pretty reasonable approach to things- i.e., voluntary rather than forced implementation of lead free ammo- but I figured I'd canvass the audience before rendering judgement. I especially like Arizona's implementation of the concept. Seems like a really great way to spread a message that a lot of outdoorsmen find to be very logical. Thoughts?
 

Okhotnik

WKR
Joined
Dec 8, 2018
Messages
2,196
Location
N ID
As long as it's voluntary. Anti gun progressives in states like California are using the non lead ammo to push gun control. Its just another "common sense" gun control push.

How are you going to make cheap non lead .22 ammo by far the most used and popular caliber and the gateway for many to enter the shooting sports. If it becomes cost prohibitive people won't take up the shooting sports.
 
OP
OXN939

OXN939

WKR
Joined
Jun 28, 2018
Messages
1,790
Location
VA
What kills more wildlife, windmills built in migration corridors or lead contamination from lead infested carrion?

Agreed on this. The Non-Lead Partnership is completely voluntary and has nothing to do with government in any way, though.
 

Baddog

WKR
Joined
Feb 26, 2020
Messages
395
Once they get a few on board then it’ll be mandatory. The anti’s will do anything to make guns and hunting more expensive and harder to stay legal in hopes they drive the number of participants down far enough, they can then easily make it go away.
 
OP
OXN939

OXN939

WKR
Joined
Jun 28, 2018
Messages
1,790
Location
VA
They just wanna put the tip in, no big deal.

Once they get a few on board then it’ll be mandatory. The anti’s will do anything to make guns and hunting more expensive and harder to stay legal in hopes they drive the number of participants down far enough, they can then easily make it go away.

This is exactly why I started this thread; I'm very legitimately interested to know who "they" is. To reiterate, the Non-Lead Partnership I'm talking about is a completely voluntary initiative started by hunters for hunters to protect wildlife, and is not affiliated with any kind of government agency in any form. Wouldn't a case study of outdoorsmen proactively taking steps to protect wildlife like this make it really easy to argue that government involvement is unnecessary and heavy-handed? If someone can show me an example of an initiative like this leading to negative consequences for outdoorsmen, I'm all ears.
 

KurtR

WKR
Joined
Sep 11, 2015
Messages
3,534
Location
South Dakota
This is exactly why I started this thread; I'm very legitimately interested to know who "they" is. To reiterate, the Non-Lead Partnership I'm talking about is a completely voluntary initiative started by hunters for hunters to protect wildlife, and is not affiliated with any kind of government agency in any form. Wouldn't a case study of outdoorsmen proactively taking steps to protect wildlife like this make it really easy to argue that government involvement is unnecessary and heavy-handed? If someone can show me an example of an initiative like this leading to negative consequences for outdoorsmen, I'm all ears.

Are you really protecting wildlife or is it just a feel good thing. The study has alot of maybes and probablys. Now wind towers those things kill the shit out of birds and thats a fact they are laying dead at the base of it.
 

Baddog

WKR
Joined
Feb 26, 2020
Messages
395
I guess I’m a bit skeptical, if you want to spend your time, money and energy “helping” wildlife is this the area you’d but it in?
 
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
1,086
Location
Chico, California
it is a good approach. there is no doubt lead is some nasty crap. as hunters we should take pride in clean ethical kills. i have seen raptors dying of lead poisoning and it is not pretty. If there is something we (hunters) can do, (and there is)... to reduce the potential for indiscriminate killing of wildlife i think we should do everything possible to do that.
in my professional life i do a shit ton of endangered species consultations. when i do those consultations for projects if there is any potential for us to "harm" an endangered species we have to do a likely to adversely effect determination. I can see a scenario where hunting game animals would be held to those standards and if there was not a non toxic alternative it could spell trouble. If we as hunters get out in front of it...like we have done throughout the history of wildlife conservation, we could be saving ourselves some future trouble.

for most rounds the non lead alternative already exists commercially and it is not that difficult to make it work. there is even decent .22 ammo out... wouldnt want to plink with it but its not hard to switch over when we are hunting.
 
OP
OXN939

OXN939

WKR
Joined
Jun 28, 2018
Messages
1,790
Location
VA
Are you really protecting wildlife or is it just a feel good thing. The study has alot of maybes and probablys. Now wind towers those things kill the shit out of birds and thats a fact they are laying dead at the base of it.

Not one "maybe" or "probably" in this study. Blood lead levels clearly declined significantly in multiple species after the cessation of lead bullet use. And yes, lead in gut piles definitely kills lots of birds.

I guess I’m a bit skeptical, if you want to spend your time, money and energy “helping” wildlife is this the area you’d but it in?

Yes it is. As shown above, using copper monos instead of lead is clearly shown to keep a large amount of toxins out of the food chain. That and it keeps your family's blood lead levels from spiking to dangerous levels. This just seems like a really logical thing for the hunting community to get behind. I appreciate the input and civil discussion.
 
OP
OXN939

OXN939

WKR
Joined
Jun 28, 2018
Messages
1,790
Location
VA
If we as hunters get out in front of it...like we have done throughout the history of wildlife conservation, we could be saving ourselves some future trouble.

Pittman Robertson comes to mind. We all love to reference that when liberals challenge whether we've ever done anything for conservation, and PR is WAY more invasive than anything in this thread.

for most rounds the non lead alternative already exists commercially and it is not that difficult to make it work.

The only ballistic failures I've ever had on game were with lead core rounds. Even on shots that were only OK, every copper mono I've ever used has been terminally excellent.
 
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
1,086
Location
Chico, California
Pittman Robertson comes to mind. We all love to reference that when liberals challenge whether we've ever done anything for conservation, and PR is WAY more invasive than anything in this thread.



The only ballistic failures I've ever had on game were with lead core rounds. Even on shots that were only OK, every copper mono I've ever used has been terminally excellent.
yah the only problem i have had was with my 90 year old 250 savage that has a 14:1 twist barrel Just could not make anything more than a 70 grain bullet fly straight and i dont like shooting that small of a bullet for deer. so that gun is retired for hunting. i have a few extras.
 

Wapiti1

WKR
Joined
Sep 18, 2017
Messages
3,569
Location
Indiana
My concern is that it is one more thing to drive up the cost of entry to hunting at a time when that is the wrong direction to go. Real preservation and improvement of our hunting heritage depends on ready access and easy entry to the sport. 20 bucks a box for ammo is tenable. Is 40 bucks a box?

I've seen several ballistic failures with mono-metal bullets. Riveting on the shoulder bone, and failure to open. Hunt enough and you'll see head scratchers with every bullet.

If you did the same studies with bonded bullets, I would suspect they would be nearly as effective at removing lead fragmentation issues.

Jeremy
 
OP
OXN939

OXN939

WKR
Joined
Jun 28, 2018
Messages
1,790
Location
VA
My concern is that it is one more thing to drive up the cost of entry to hunting at a time when that is the wrong direction to go. Real preservation and improvement of our hunting heritage depends on ready access and easy entry to the sport. 20 bucks a box for ammo is tenable. Is 40 bucks a box?
Jeremy

Agreed that cost is a concern worthy of consideration. However, when you look at it relatively, the difference between the box of copper you reference and a standard box of cup-and-cores is less than 2% of the cost of a Montana combination elk/ deer license. Consider the entire cost of a trip, and you're talking fractions of a percent cost difference. Is that worth it to keep a large amount of toxic metals out of our wildlife's and our family's food chain? For me, the answer is "yes."

In reality, though, I don't see copper monos being any more expensive than quality lead ammunition. Right now on MidwayUSA, E Tips are actually cheaper than a box of partitions.

Screen Shot 2020-02-26 at 6.47.48 PM.png
 

KurtR

WKR
Joined
Sep 11, 2015
Messages
3,534
Location
South Dakota
Not one "maybe" or "probably" in this study. Blood lead levels clearly declined significantly in multiple species after the cessation of lead bullet use. And yes, lead in gut piles definitely kills lots of birds.



Yes it is. As shown above, using copper monos instead of lead is clearly shown to keep a large amount of toxins out of the food chain. That and it keeps your family's blood lead levels from spiking to dangerous levels. This just seems like a really logical thing for the hunting community to get behind. I appreciate the input and civil discussion.

So they watched those birds eat gut piles that hunters have left. Lead is found in lots of stuff. Then you talk cost of one box of bullets but what about a thousand and I have had two tsx just pencil through deer.
 

Wapiti1

WKR
Joined
Sep 18, 2017
Messages
3,569
Location
Indiana
It isn't a small cost for an ethical hunter that practices prior to the hunt. It is also not trivial for a local deer hunter in Indiana trying to keep things cheap for the kiddos. Copper is just going to be more expensive as are other alternatives.

As others have stated, it's great for those that feel it is that important. Dictating it is wrongheaded.

None of it matters anyway. Bernie will take all our fun stuff away along with our money but at least we'll all be equal waiting in line for bread and health care.

Jeremy
 
OP
OXN939

OXN939

WKR
Joined
Jun 28, 2018
Messages
1,790
Location
VA
So they watched those birds eat gut piles that hunters have left. Lead is found in lots of stuff.

Yes, but the referenced study specifically established a correlation between the cessation of use of lead ammo and the blood lead levels of raptors. The lead very obviously came from bullets.

Then you talk cost of one box of bullets but what about a thousand

As shown in the screenshot above, copper monos cost about the same as any decent hunting ammo.

I have had two tsx just pencil through deer.

They definitely need to be used correctly to work... As is the case with lead-core ammo. Everyone knows Core Lokts frequently experience jacket separation at high impact velocities.


Dictating it is wrongheaded.

Agreed, and exactly the point of this thread!
 
Top