Should we stop hunting with lead?

[WS6]

I am new to hunting (killed my first deer last year), and simply chose my ammo based on what works well on people. It worked well on my deer (RA556B), too. However, then I got into looking at lead contamination, as I know a bunch of environmentalists are trying to push lead out of hunting. Normally I am not a huge fan of listening to those types, but lead IS a cumulative toxin, and I was curious, so I did a bit of digging and looked for sources that weren't all concerned with Condor's and Gun Control, only. What I found was kindof concerning, actually. Here are the videos.

What is your take on this? Do you feel that TSX/GMX/E-Tip type ammo is THE way to go? Or do you feel that lead is just fine? Why?

Video 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZJXderphCM

Video 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4Wbj41j67A

Video 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdKlubTRkk8

[w squared]

I run either TSX or TTSX (depending on cartrdige) as my hunting load. No, they're not cheap...but they certainly do seem to anchor animals. I am willing to pay a few dollars extra to increase the probability of a humane harvest.




And the commentary out of California? When I compare that with the importance of a humane harvest, it's just background noise.

[HeruMew]

I have sent a couple reports to the DNR, as this topic came up recently in MN, and those reports found mixed data.

Lead WAS seeping into the ground, but NOT at a rate that is concerning or not naturally manageable.

It was also determined that the natural oxidization of lead bullets will actually "trap" most of the harmful lead in, and avoid most contamination.

I can see if I have the email I sent before about these reports. I DO NOT agree with "Lead Ammo Bans". If there is an issue, it's at ranges, and if that's the case, I would be more than willing to pay extra for a range membership knowing they have to clean the berms out every so often. But, the reality is, there is very little science of any kind to say, with strong evidence, that it is causing true environmental impacts.

I would say the cost of ammunition should be available to all hunters, and requiring ammunition that costs significantly more, could segregate those in lower-class/poverty scale from affording ammunition that could feed their families. A stretch? Maybe not so. Many of people still live off the land, and a box of field ammo for a couple bucks, is less than steel or copper ammo.

Beyond that, if someone can do an irrefutable study, I would conform if there is true environmental impact. I like meh fish. I like meh hunting. So I want to preserve that.

I won't, however, allow a group of any individuals (save for those ineligible to legally hunt or own firearms) to be segregated and hunting for food becomes an elitist issue that only those with decent bank can afford to hunt humanely.

Just my, politically fueled, bias/opinion.

I am not a closed minded fool, but I also haven't seen anything to tell otherwise that we are losing wildlife and nature to lead bullets/shot.

[WS6]

I have sent a couple reports to the DNR, as this topic came up recently in MN, and those reports found mixed data.

Lead WAS seeping into the ground, but NOT at a rate that is concerning or not naturally manageable.

It was also determined that the natural oxidization of lead bullets will actually "trap" most of the harmful lead in, and avoid most contamination.

I can see if I have the email I sent before about these reports. I DO NOT agree with "Lead Ammo Bans". If there is an issue, it's at ranges, and if that's the case, I would be more than willing to pay extra for a range membership knowing they have to clean the berms out every so often. But, the reality is, there is very little science of any kind to say, with strong evidence, that it is causing true environmental impacts.

I would say the cost of ammunition should be available to all hunters, and requiring ammunition that costs significantly more, could segregate those in lower-class/poverty scale from affording ammunition that could feed their families. A stretch? Maybe not so. Many of people still live off the land, and a box of field ammo for a couple bucks, is less than steel or copper ammo.

Beyond that, if someone can do an irrefutable study, I would conform if there is true environmental impact. I like meh fish. I like meh hunting. So I want to preserve that.

I won't, however, allow a group of any individuals (save for those ineligible to legally hunt or own firearms) to be segregated and hunting for food becomes an elitist issue that only those with decent bank can afford to hunt humanely.

Just my, politically fueled, bias/opinion.

I am not a closed minded fool, but I also haven't seen anything to tell otherwise that we are losing wildlife and nature to lead bullets/shot.

Did you watch the videos? It focused on hunter safety and not environmental concerns, and seemed rather thoroughly documented.

[HeruMew]

Did you watch the videos? It focused on hunter safety and not environmental concerns, and seemed rather thoroughly documented.

No, at work and limited to breaks or lunch.

Was focusing on the OP mention of environmentalist pushing:

However, then I got into looking at lead contamination, as I know a bunch of environmentalists are trying to push lead out of hunting. Normally I am not a huge fan of listening to those types, but lead IS a cumulative toxin, and I was curious, so I did a bit of digging and looked for sources that weren't all concerned with Condor's and Gun Control, only. What I found was kindof concerning, actually.

When I have a chance, I can certainly review the videos and such with more time. But, I was just responding to his text.

ETA:
So, I checked them out, on lunch now, and you are absolutely correct. Very thorough and indepth.

I see this was back in 2008, have we seen any other studies to compliment this one? Any blood toxicology reports of people receiving the packages of food, or anything like that?

While it is cumulative toxin, is it enough to register on us as humans? Lead can reach our systems in many ways. Nonetheless, thanks for sharing this, it has certainly opened my eyes to the potential impact on that way.

Knowing many people who still ingest meat gotten this way for 50+ years, I have to say that I'm a bit divided. But really would find it interesting if this is impacting cancer rates and such.

[MegademiC]

I'd me more concerned with lead salts from various sources. Metallic lead is not very reactive and not absorbed quickly.

Ill.check the videos when I get home.

Edit, as said, good videos. I bow hunt for deer, so looking at it as an outsider: I'm suprised by the amount of fragments, and I'm curious about the weight found in the meat (skimmed video so I may have missed it).

It also seems that some butchers remove it all while others dont.
Still say I wouldn't be worried about it... but that could change with more data /studies.

[J-Dub]

No. I'll keep using lead shot. If you're troubled by lead projectiles get rid of your microwave, cell phone, wifi, any processed food, gasoline, plastics, etc.

[tacticaldesire]

I highly doubt the amount of lead found in hunting ammunition is causing any environmental or health impact whatsoever. Unless you are directly ingesting the cartridge itself, you are probably fine.

[Leaveammoforme]

I highly doubt the amount of lead found in hunting ammunition is causing any environmental or health impact whatsoever. Unless you are directly ingesting the cartridge itself, you are probably fine.

That's what the videos are about. They x-ray'd processed venison and found lead. They x-ray'd condors, that were assumed to be feeding on gut piles, and found it in their digestive tracts.

I'm just as defensive as the next guy when it comes to "Ban lead ammo" discussions. However, this thread is discussing the unknown amount a hunter may be ingesting. The presenter of the videos was simply showing how an all copper projectile doesn't leave "pepper flake sized" lead particles in your meat.

I was actually surprised about the amount of lead in the vension taken with rifle rounds. But, honestly I'm more concerned about all the radio waves burning through me 24/7. Not to mention what will be discovered as harmful 20 years from now. We wore cotton all those years and never knew it was causing cancer?!