Lead Ban Proposed...Bullets, Shot and Fishing Tackle

[Ruger 13]

Several years some libs we're trying to make shooting ranges "Toxic waste dumps"…….go figure!

 

[stansdds]

Just another way to restrict and constrict ammo supplies to civilians. You can have the firearm, just can't get any ammo for it. As for the military and law enforcement, I'm sure there will be an exception for any government agency.

 

[Private Bailey]

In post 17, bushmaster1313 gives the link where the complete proposal can be read. This proposal's been on the table since June 9. You can comment on it until August 8. It's received almost 13,000 comments from the public. Why gripe about it here instead of going right to the source. They even tell you how and where to comment and complain. Comments on gun forums don't count. This is a proposed rule not a law. It's not a bill that's going to get voted on in the legislature. Your elected representatives probably don't even know this exists. Meaning complaints to them will fall on deaf ears. I don't see this as some anti-gun plot.

 

[max503]

Every technology has its downside. Sure, lead is bad for the environment. But so are airplanes, and cars, and the internet with its electromagnetic radiation. Medicines have their side effects. Harleys are loud. All things made by man for our comfort and enjoyment have their side effects.

I'll quit casting and shooting boolits when Nancy Pelosi quits vacationing in Italy.

 

[lkabug]

From my reading, it seems to only effect certain federal lands.

 

[max503]

In post 17, bushmaster1313 gives the link where the complete proposal can be read. This proposal's been on the table since June 9. You can comment on it until August 8. It's received almost 13,000 comments from the public. Why gripe about it here instead of going right to the source. They even tell you how and where to comment and complain. Comments on gun forums don't count. This is a proposed rule not a law. It's not a bill that's going to get voted on in the legislature. Your elected representatives probably don't even know this exists. Meaning complaints to them will fall on deaf ears. I don't see this as some anti-gun plot.

Thanks for the tip. I went there and said pretty much what I said here in my post with a few small edits. They ask for your name when you go there. I might have misspelled mine.

 

[Krogen]

Use this link to log your comments. The government doesn't make it easy to find the location. It requires some cut and past plus searching. Phooey on that. This link goes directly to the proposed rule. You'll still need to enter your name etc. and fiddle with a "captcha" thingy.

We only have until 8 August to comment on this. Time's a waste'n!

Regulations.gov

 

[2152hq]

The US Fish & Wildlife Service issued an 'Order' in 2017.
That order demanded that all lead 'gear' used on lands under the agency be replaced with non-toxic alternatives.
The order # is '2-hundred and something' simple enough. You can probably look it up.
The end date given in that order for compliance is yr 2022.

The lead gear included both ammunition projectiles and fishing sinkers.

Calif did it's own no-lead order in 2013, the much publicized 'The Condors are Dying' freak-out.

That 2017 F&W Service Order set up an arrangement where the Fed agency was to work with the State agencys involved in conservation/wildlife efforts to make the change come about.

Though the F&WS ruling does only effect Fed lands, you must remember their similar ruling in '91 (?) to ban the use of lead shot altogether for waterfowl hunting was put in place eveywhere in the USA. Not just Federal Lands.

That working relationship bew the State/Local Conservation/DNR agencys & the USF&WS on this lead shot and sinker ban can easily allow State and Local efforts to bleed into the program and the ban then extend to all areas of the State as well.
The latter JMO of course. But it's not hard to see the link especially when Fed Funding $$ are involved and favored candidates & issues as well.

 

[Rich Richardson]

Stare at a gnat and swallow a camel. In Missouri, residents of a town have been dying for decades due to the Feds having dumped nuclear waste in their town.

 

[GypsmJim]

Gov. has been nuts over lead for the last couple decades.
No more lead in wheel weights, for some time, now what in the world could the be hurting? Not a thing, but they are great material for casting.
They just keep moving closer to an out right ban on anything that goes bang!

Wheel weights are a BIG hazard and hurt everyone. They go around and around real fast and then the corpsuckles (molecules?, whatever) go flying in the air and then we breath the lead in our lungs.

And sometimes they fall off and if a goat eats one he'll die of lead poisoning.

I say outlaw lead and save a goat.

 

[2152hq]

Wheel weights are a BIG hazard and hurt everyone. ...

I understand that Sea Gulls swoop in and eat them up out of the gutters along the road thinking they are grey french fries.
Sad..

 

[John Patrick]

Seems like everybody is too busy screaming and pulling their hair out to notice the details of the proposed rule.

"The USFWS announced new proposed hunting and fishing opportunities for game species at 19 national wildlife refuges on approximately 54,000 acres nationwide. Slipped into that proposal, though, is a phased ban of traditional ammunition by 2026." The article further specifies the ban currently only applies to the newly opened lands, but does suggest strongly that it is likely to spread to other federal lands in time.
Here again, it's an article that echos a few others I've seen but is NOT primary source material. If someone would care to post a link to the pertinent sections of the rule, I'm sure we would all benefit from seeing what's actually on the table.

Obviously upsetting. But when I googled it it appears to be banning lead on federal lands.

Am I missing something?

Incrementalism is incrementalism, it needs to be ended.

 

[54ball]

I commented. This is what I wrote...

While I welcome increased hunting and fishing opportunities, I do not support a ban on lead projectiles for big game and upland game. I also do not support a ban against lead fishing tackle.
In some firearms lead is the only real option. This includes many traditional blackpower arms and traditional fixed choke shotguns. Also, we do not know what potential hazards exist in lead substitutes. What is known, is lead substitutes can be prohibitively expensive and can damage a firearm not designed for that projectile. The use of non-toxic steel on waterfowl has shown, reduced range and a change of accuracy. This can cause unnecessary suffering especially on upland and large game. The contamination (if any) from upland and big game hunting will be minimal. Banning lead projectiles on upland and big game hunting basically bans hunters or puts an undue burden upon them.
I oppose the ban on lead fishing tackle. The minimal amount of contamination from lost lead tackle is laughable. Lead tackle is lost accidently so it's minimal. Any fisherman knows that monofilament fishing line is a far greater threat to wildlife and the environment than lead weights ever have been. The Fish and Wildlife would not dare to ban "fishing line" as in truth, this bans fishing. Right now, there is no viable economic and functional alternative to monofilament line. Case in point, the same can be said for lead projectiles for upland and big game.

 

[GypsmJim]

Incrementalism is incrementalism, it needs to be ended.

I agree wholeheartedly. But it sure is wise to know what the facts are ahead of time.

The initial reaction was based on a misconception. Wrong info is worse than no info.

When writing to our politicians (we all do that quite frequently, right?) we need to have our facts straight so we know how to speak. Otherwise, the "servent" may think we don't know what we are talking about.

 

[54ball]

In post 17, bushmaster1313 gives the link where the complete proposal can be read. This proposal's been on the table since June 9. You can comment on it until August 8. It's received almost 13,000 comments from the public. Why gripe about it here instead of going right to the source. They even tell you how and where to comment and complain. Comments on gun forums don't count. This is a proposed rule not a law. It's not a bill that's going to get voted on in the legislature. Your elected representatives probably don't even know this exists. Meaning complaints to them will fall on deaf ears. I don't see this as some anti-gun plot.

I'll bite. Hopefully the sinker is non-toxic.

This is a proposed rule not a law.

When I broke a rule, I got my name written temporarily on the chalk board. I also could not play with my crayons for an hour.

Now when I broke a law....
I was detained by a law enforcement officer.

While I was detained, that law enforcement officer investigated and issued me with a citation based on that evidence.

Depending on the citation, I had the option of pleading guilty through the mail to a judge by paying a fine.

A fine is a forfeiture of my personal treasure.

Some citations require me to go before a judge in person.

My point is these are laws not rules. Even if they are "rules" they have the force of law, thus they are laws.

If these rules are violated then the state/ federal game warden can detain, seize property, and issue fines.
Depending on the charge, a loss of hunting/fishing rights, loss of personal treasure and even jail time could result.

These are proposed laws.

It's not a bill that's going to get voted on in the legislature.

Correct. This is being done by-poxy, meaning the Fish and Wildlife Service is acting as Congress.

Your elected representatives probably don't even know this exists. Meaning complaints to them will fall on deaf ears.

If complaints truly do fall on deaf ears, we have lost the Republic.
The Fish and Wildlife here is acting as Congress. They even say so.
We as citizens have the right to complain to our representatives in Congress about potential laws from the Fish and Wildlife service since the Fish and Wildlife is acting as Congress' representative here.

If the representatives truly have no say or no concern, this means the F&W and other branches of government are ruling by decree.

I don't see this as some anti-gun plot.

That's great for you and you are entitled to that opinion.

Personally though, I do see it as an anti-gun plot. It's a slippery slope. A lead ban is a defacto ammunition ban which is a gun ban. If not an anti-gun plot, it is at least an anti-gun threat.

In my state most of the public shooting ranges are on Federal Lands. Eventually this lead ban will include all federal lands. Eventually it may include all land...under another unelected branch....
The EPA...

 

[4896worker]

In California they started with lead bullet ban in the range of the California condor . The argument for it was the condor would feed on gut piles of shot deer etc. and injest the lead this was never proved but we still did it. Now it is a total ban on hunting with any lead bullets anywhere in the state even ares where condor have never lived .

Not only is cost a factor in hunting ammo but if you don't reload good luck in finding non lead ammo in anything but the most common caliber.
Want to hunt with .300 savage 30/40 krag etc. it is not going to happen unless you reload.

It is all about making hunting and gun ownership that much difficult .

 

[John Patrick]

In California they started with lead bullet ban in the range of the California condor . The argument for it was the condor would feed on gut piles of shot deer etc. and injest the lead this was never proved but we still did it. Now it is a total ban on hunting with any lead bullets anywhere in the state even ares where condor have never lived .

Not only is cost a factor in hunting ammo but if you don't reload good luck in finding non lead ammo in anything but the most common caliber.
Want to hunt with .300 savage 30/40 krag etc. it is not going to happen unless you reload.

It is all about making hunting and gun ownership that much difficult .

That's a great example of incrementalism, and it needs to be ended.

 

[GypsmJim]

In my state most of the public shooting ranges are on Federal Lands. Eventually this lead ban will include all federal lands. Eventually it may include all land...under another unelected branch....
The EPA...

I fish in my personal pond, located on a mountaintop 50 acres that I own. Also included are rifle and pistol ranges.

I reload and cast my own. Right now I have a lifetime supply (I'm an old fart). I also cast my own sinkers (Dad was a printer with unlimited lead supply and he was real thrifty)

If the law ever comes to pass, I promise to never again use lead sinkers or boolets. In 36 years there I have never seen a police officer or game warden, but if he ever shows up I'll be prepared to show him my plastic boolets and rock sinkers.

What, me worry?

In the mean time I'll vote and continue to call and write my politicians. That's the best I can do.

 

[steelslaver]

Obviously upsetting. But when I googled it it appears to be banning lead on federal lands.

Am I missing something?

Huge portions of most western stare are federal land. With lost of private land being leased by either guides or the well to do. Some of the very best hunting is on either BLM or National forest lands.

Can I see your ammo? Can I see your warrant?

 

[LostintheOzone]

The US Fish & Wildlife Service issued an 'Order' in 2017.
That order demanded that all lead 'gear' used on lands under the agency be replaced with non-toxic alternatives.
The order # is '2-hundred and something' simple enough. You can probably look it up.
The end date given in that order for compliance is yr 2022.

The lead gear included both ammunition projectiles and fishing sinkers.

Calif did it's own no-lead order in 2013, the much publicized 'The Condors are Dying' freak-out.

That 2017 F&W Service Order set up an arrangement where the Fed agency was to work with the State agencys involved in conservation/wildlife efforts to make the change come about.

Though the F&WS ruling does only effect Fed lands, you must remember their similar ruling in '91 (?) to ban the use of lead shot altogether for waterfowl hunting was put in place eveywhere in the USA. Not just Federal Lands.

That working relationship bew the State/Local Conservation/DNR agencys & the USF&WS on this lead shot and sinker ban can easily allow State and Local efforts to bleed into the program and the ban then extend to all areas of the State as well.
The latter JMO of course. But it's not hard to see the link especially when Fed Funding $$ are involved and favored candidates & issues as well.

The fed owns 12 million acres of land (28%) in my state. Restrictions on lead will affect a great many hunters. Probably why a lot of deer and elk hunters have moved to hunting with bows. Ever tried to track a deer or elk 1000 yds through heavy timber and brush?

Most of the well meaning individuals who write these policies don't hunt. If they did we wouldn't be where we are.