Ban on lead on Federal land

[CapnMac]

but the people advocating all kinds of bans can't be bothered with facts in the first place.

Which is a major issue. Department X fights tooth and nail to get 15.82 knives per cubic fork made the standard. In the very next legislative session, they will content for lower standards. Not on any rational basis of harm (measurable or not), but because they exist to win legislative battles.

The very old, under-the-radar bans on fishing equipment stem from studies showing that the amount of lead in waterfowl would require rather huge swathes of shot. Lead sinkers and lure weights then were included. The fishing products industry has been fighting that battle a long time. And it's largely lobbyist on lobbyist. The battles are on committee floors and with regulatory agencies.

It's easy to lose sight of these things in the greater "static" of it all. And also against an unwavering tide of incremental, by fiat only, "environmental" regulation changes. Like 6 years ago, when the then new PPG standards swept through the building industry. Painters needed special licenses, houses needed to be draped and sealed off like an Operating Room. The lead levels now mandated can only be measured in laboratories, not in the field--they are too close to background.

Sadly, this is not about guns. This is about "our" aristos wanting to keep we plebeians out of "their" national parks, their pristine lakes. Keep us from shooting, keep us from fishing, shoot keep regulating boat fuels, and so on.

 

[lemaymiami]

A quick note about lead used for fishing purposes.... As already noted there have been lead bans for waterfowling for some years now (and in freshwater, lead is a problem for ducks and related species...). In saltwater environments lead is stable and no amount of lead shot, lead sinkers or lead fishing lures has any effect at all... That hasn't stopped the enviros from trying on two occasions to get a "lead ban" on fishing gear. The fishing industry fought off both attempts at great cost since it had to be fought through the courts and by using lobbyists for political action.... Since I'm a fishing lure manufacturer in a small way (as well as a full time fishing guide and was a commercial fly tyer) I've followed the various battles closely (these took years to resolve on each occasion...). So far we've been successful but with folks like the ones in Washington who just lost power (goodbye Obama and company, thank heavens) as well as outfits like PETA, the Sierra Club, etc. we'll end up fighting the battle again some day....

The attempts at banning lead used in ammunition was entirely separate (although they tried to use enviro concerns to back up what was essentially an attempt at gun control (surprise, surprise...). Hope that wiser heads prevail now that we have a new administration.

 

[hq]

A quick note about lead used for fishing purposes.... As already noted there have been lead bans for waterfowling for some years now (and in freshwater, lead is a problem for ducks and related species...).

The most interesting detail is that metallic lead can only be dissolved into an absorbed compounds at very low pH, like found in stomach acids. Hence it has to be ingested first to have any meaningful effect. Lead shot ban was lobbied using bodies of water with hard, solid bottom with a very shallow layer of soil on top of it as an example, or should I say excuse. Whenever the shot falls on soft, deep lake bed mud, it'll sink through it fairly quickly and becomes inaccessible to feeding waterfowl. That describes the vast majority of lakes and shorelines around here very well, but it did little to stop environmentalists to lobby a similar ban into legislation.

In essence, nearly all "lead is bad!!!" -propaganda is just that. Propaganda. Riding the wave of real and fact-based tetraethyllead issue of leaded gasoline of the 70's. Not that having metallic lead in the environment was good either, of course. It's just largely meaningless. If it wasn't, power and cable companies would have been forced to dig up the hundreds of thousands of miles of lead insulation they used on their cables for decades and the points they have made are very valid in ammunition context as well.

 

[hso]

EPA's TSCA regulation already exempts ammunition and that exemption has survived several challenges.

There's also no chance that you'll see that order being moved one bit before it is killed.

 

[Dog Soldier]

Yes removing lead will save the human race. It is being used to control ammunition. They have banned the .22 rimfire in order to save the Raptors in many areas.
It is illegal to use lead sinkers in the Yellowstone Echo. The use of lead wheel weights are banned. No more lead battery plates. Obama closed our lead mines and smelters. Do you want to guess what the real agenda for banning lead is??

 

[icanthitabarn]

NO

 

[barnbwt]

The most interesting detail is that metallic lead can only be dissolved into an absorbed compounds at very low pH, like found in stomach acids. Hence it has to be ingested first to have any meaningful effect. Lead shot ban was lobbied using bodies of water with hard, solid bottom with a very shallow layer of soil on top of it as an example, or should I say excuse. Whenever the shot falls on soft, deep lake bed mud, it'll sink through it fairly quickly and becomes inaccessible to feeding waterfowl. That describes the vast majority of lakes and shorelines around here very well, but it did little to stop environmentalists to lobby a similar ban into legislation.

Yup, in order to form the water soluble lead salts actually responsible for poisoning, you need a fairly acidic solvent to dissolve it. That's what (allegedly) happened in Flint, when the town switched to a much more acidic body of water for its service, and old lead-bearing pipes that had been inert for many decades suddenly dissolved a layer of material into the water. Bodies of water in nature this acidic are already naturally polluted by whatever heavy metals & toxic substances happen to be near by (hot springs are notorious) and some lead shot would be a proverbial drop in the bucket on top of that. So the only other way for harmful lead pollution to accumulate in an area is for it to pass through the artificially acidic stomachs of animals --and there's no study imaginable that could honestly suggest they could contribute enough by volume to have a significant impact (or even a measurable impact) on anything.

At least the Californian lie involving Condors had even a trace of plausibility as far as the birds' diets heavily favoring corpses most likely to be felled by lead-bearing ammunition (granted, it loses that trace because they're talking about individual rifle bullets in a corpse vs. dozens of small bare-lead birdshot pellets). Frankly, the fact that all shooting ranges don't become Superfund sites like vintage lead smelting facilities should put the lie to a lot of the claims made about plumbum ex machina in the wilderness.

TCB

 

[Arizona_Mike]

NRA think this will be short lived (and it does not take effect for years in its current state).

Mike

 

[hq]

Frankly, the fact that all shooting ranges don't become Superfund sites like vintage lead smelting facilities should put the lie to a lot of the claims made about plumbum ex machina in the wilderness.

In addition to ingestion and low pH liquids, there's another set of circumstances where lead can be absorbed in hazardous quantities: lead vapor. The mad hatter clause, ie. the reason why it's highly advisable to cast bullets in a well ventilated room or outdoors. The environmental exposure to lead vapor in vicinity of a smelting facility due to extended timeframe and massive amounts of released vapor is very meaningful, whereas the metallic lead in shooting range backstops isn't about to vaporize by itself anytime soon.

 

[barnbwt]

Hatters were mercury poisoning, but same difference. Yeah, since we ditched leaded gas, the vapor is basically a non issue outside of some industries (aforementioned smelters)

 

[Walkalong]

All this reminds me of Soilent Green

 

[22-rimfire]

Cold hard fact is that metallic lead isn't absorbed into the soil in any meaningful (or often even measurable) degree in pH levels commonly occurring in liquids it comes in contact with in the nature. Just that plain and simple physical fact is enough to put an end to all this nonsense, but the people advocating all kinds of bans can't be bothered with facts in the first place.

Other than in highly acidic soils if I recall.

 

[hq]

Other than in highly acidic soils if I recall.

Very. The lowest pH levels in extremely acidic swamps have been just over 3, acid rain is typically (if acid rain can be considered typical anywhere) around 4. Soluble lead in water becomes an issue at below pH 2, which is on a logarithmic scale like pH is ten times more acidic than any swamp and a hundred times more acidic than acid rain. In a worst case scenario safety margin is still at least tenfold. Particulate lead can contaminate bodies of water at higher pH as well, but in context of metallic lead in ammunition, that doesn't occur in any meaningful scale.

 

[barnbwt]

So, other than the Cola swamps, not really an issue. And not an ingestion hazard for anything but some waterfowl species in specific scenarios (shallow mud layer above rock, where the pellets cannot since below the reach of duck lips)

I do love the idea a buzzard will devour an expanded hollowpoint under any circumstance, though; nothing yummier than a razor blade.

TCB

 

[Dog Soldier]

All of these are sound educated arguments. These lead bans are simply based in fear. The citizens who accept that lead is an emanate danger does not study the elements in any alloy.

 

[Zoogster]

I actually like public land and choose where I want to live partially on how much there is.
I don't live in Texas precisely because of its serious lack of public land, even though it otherwise has more of what I want. You basically have what you own in Texas, and the little public land that does exist is so small it is the last place I want to be with thousands of hunters many of them teaching children how to shoot certain times of year.

The Western United States is one of the last unspoiled large tracts of land in the world that can be enjoy precisely because so much of it is wild public land that cannot be developed.
I can go up to places with water sources far from any industry and accompanying pollution, and less fences that keep wildlife from roaming.
The further from roads the better, since most of the population is lazy and won't go more than a few miles from their car that is generally as far as the trash like food and drink containers go into the wilderness.


I am sorry to see this lead restriction, because it combines with the federal law against armor piercing handgun rounds (that covers many common rifle rounds) to prohibit most cost effective metals that are dense enough to be efficient projectiles.

Lead is cheap, anyone can shape or mold it with basic equipment at low temperatures, and it is a very dense efficient projectile which is also soft enough to keep barrel wear to a minimum. It can also easily fill extra bore space and create a tight gas seal.
Almost nothing else meets that criteria, and the people lose some of their self sufficiency when it is no longer an option.
It also effects calibers, what twist rate is ideal for a caliber, drops the max weight projectile you can fire, and makes shorter barrels even less efficient.

 

[Dog Soldier]

You are a man of my thinking. My place is surrounded by miles of Public Lands. I can hunt shoot and wander across the mountains, deserts and high plains.
It has allowed me to live in a free place as did my ancestors.

 

[Acera]

I am sorry to see this lead restriction, because it combines with the federal law against armor piercing handgun rounds (that covers many common rifle rounds) to prohibit most cost effective metals that are dense enough to be efficient projectiles.

Please explain this to me. I have seen no issues with common rifle rounds that have construction that would prohibit them from being pistol rounds regulated in any matter.



(Has anyone heard of a federal case, statement, regulation, finding or other binding regulation that bans the use of M855/SS109 rounds being fired from an AR pistol???)




.

 

[barnbwt]

Well, 7n6 ammo was banned due to a 'new' AK74 pistol, and before that steel core 9mm, and a ton of steel/iron core Tokarev & x39/x54r are import banned, and no cheap 5.7x28 fmj is possible due to AP regs.

 

[barnbwt]

You are a man of my thinking. My place is surrounded by miles of Public Lands. I can hunt shoot and wander across the mountains, deserts and high plains.
It has allowed me to live in a free place as did my ancestors.

You'll think that right up until a president designates that land a national monument and forbids all unauthorized access, to include usage of existing roads to your property crossing those lands. It is a total fuedalism/public commons arrangement at the mercy of a lord, and not the landholders/people.

A lot of folks simply think it is right because they get to use the land for free.

TCB

 

[Dog Soldier]

Well it has been Public Lands for the past 200 years. We have had land grabbers like Teddy Roosevelt and others. It is not likely all of the Public Lands will become monuments. If you do not live in Public Land states it is hard for you to understand. The Greater danger is private land owners like the Bundy Mafia.

 

[Jason_W]

Well it has been Public Lands for the past 200 years. We have had land grabbers like Teddy Roosevelt and others. It is not likely all of the Public Lands will become monuments. If you do not live in Public Land states it is hard for you to understand. The Greater danger is private land owners like the Bundy Mafia.

I'm similarly in favor of the existence of public land. It's the only way a lot of people are able to hunt at all and with the numbers of hunters declining nationwide as it is, I view it as necessary to prevent hunting from becoming a rare activity that only the very wealthy can afford, much like it is in Europe. What makes the American hunting tradition unique is that, here, it's always been an activity of the common man. The common man typically can't afford the hundreds of thousands of dollars or more required to buy a decent tract of hunting land or the thousands of dollars per year needed for a hunting lease. Public land is necessary to keep the sport from completely dying.

I agree that hunters (and even anglers and backpackers) need to be alert and watchful for decrees from on high that limit access to large areas of public land. Seems something worth lobbying for.

 

[Dog Soldier]

Jason so true. The real danger to the loss of Public Lands is wealthy land owners. They want the lands turned over to the states. They then buy it from the local political hacks. The Bundy Mafia blocked roads to hunters on Public Lands. They and others are land pirates.

 

[dwjwin50]

Lead is harmful when eaten or breathed. It's especially harmful to birds when they're blown out of the air by a 12 gauge.

 

[Walkalong]

The only issue with public lands is who controls them, which is why voting is such an important role. There are some politicians out there who would make "federal" lads off limits to anyone because they hate the thought of one blade of grass getting bent.

Buy yea, public lands where we can wander and enjoy nature are a great thing, and I envy those of you who have vast expanses to roam on. We have some small national forests here, but a large portion are planted pines. There are some pretty areas though. Won't catch me in there on a bet during hunting season.