USA: "EPA Award Group for Promoting Environmental Practices at 100 Shooting Ranges"
- Thread starter cuchulainn
- Start date
- Status
cuchulainn
Member
BlackArrow
Member
Geeze!
We take a naturally occuring compound out of the ground, shape it fire it back into the ground (where it came from) and it's bad?
Where do we put it so that it doesn't go back to where it came from?????? Maybe up some bureacrats a$$!
Want an award? I got your award right here!
We take a naturally occuring compound out of the ground, shape it fire it back into the ground (where it came from) and it's bad?
Where do we put it so that it doesn't go back to where it came from?????? Maybe up some bureacrats a$$! Want an award? I got your award right here!
Mike Irwin
Member
Careful, Blackarrow. Saying that lead in elemental form is "natural" really isn't the case.
It's the same with any "naturally" occurring compound.
Sure, it's part of nature, but in its refined form it's not really natural. Lead rarely, if ever, occurs in nature as an elemental metal. Mercury rarely occurs in nature as an elemental metal.
As they occur in nature, they're locked into compounds, normally fairly isolated, buried underground, dissipated throughout, and surrounded by, normally hundreds or even thousands of tons of per pound of refined elemental metal.
It's that fact, along with how we introduce these compounds BACK into nature, that is often the problem.
The berm at your average outdoor shooting range contains elemental metal in concentrations hundreds, thousands, or possibly even millions, of times higher than any that you'd ever find in nature.
Another example is salt. Occurrs in nature in enormous salt domes in fairly pure form, or in the ocean in highly dilute form. Extract it, refine it, and dump a few hundred pounds on a field, though, and what occurs in nature is now very much a pain in the butt.
It's the same with any "naturally" occurring compound.
Sure, it's part of nature, but in its refined form it's not really natural. Lead rarely, if ever, occurs in nature as an elemental metal. Mercury rarely occurs in nature as an elemental metal.
As they occur in nature, they're locked into compounds, normally fairly isolated, buried underground, dissipated throughout, and surrounded by, normally hundreds or even thousands of tons of per pound of refined elemental metal.
It's that fact, along with how we introduce these compounds BACK into nature, that is often the problem.
The berm at your average outdoor shooting range contains elemental metal in concentrations hundreds, thousands, or possibly even millions, of times higher than any that you'd ever find in nature.
Another example is salt. Occurrs in nature in enormous salt domes in fairly pure form, or in the ocean in highly dilute form. Extract it, refine it, and dump a few hundred pounds on a field, though, and what occurs in nature is now very much a pain in the butt.
The Reaper
Member
Here's what I know about this.
The EPA is looking for a way to not have to go to court every time someone wants to try shutting a range due to "safety" issues, i.e. lead contamination. They spend a tremendous amount of our tax dollars doing this type of work now.
So the IWLA signs up for the EPA's lead BMP (Best Management Practices). Once a range is certified as meeting the BMP then the EPA gives them a document that says they are meeting the EPA guidelines for lead. When some anti-range person tries to shut down the range using lead as a "concern", the range shows up with the EPA document, and the lead "concern" is gone.
The IWLA pledges to defend soil, air, woods, waters, and wildlife. So it is a natural step for them to sign on to the EPA BMP. They received a nice little plaque for being the first organization to sign on. Christie Whitman received a nice shooting vest and carved duck decoy.
My IWLA Chapter is working hard to meet the EPA BMP so that we can remove the lead issue from our anti-range neighbors. We are grandfathered for noise, so that will only leave "safety" as a method of closing us. We have no safety issues so long as shooters follow the rules. So without the lead issue, we should be good for awhile.
So in the long run I see the EPA BMP as a good thing for range operations, and for the EPA.
Mike hit it on the head about lead contamination. The concentration of lead on ranges is ridiculously high compared to how it occurs naturally.
The EPA is looking for a way to not have to go to court every time someone wants to try shutting a range due to "safety" issues, i.e. lead contamination. They spend a tremendous amount of our tax dollars doing this type of work now.
So the IWLA signs up for the EPA's lead BMP (Best Management Practices). Once a range is certified as meeting the BMP then the EPA gives them a document that says they are meeting the EPA guidelines for lead. When some anti-range person tries to shut down the range using lead as a "concern", the range shows up with the EPA document, and the lead "concern" is gone.
The IWLA pledges to defend soil, air, woods, waters, and wildlife. So it is a natural step for them to sign on to the EPA BMP. They received a nice little plaque for being the first organization to sign on. Christie Whitman received a nice shooting vest and carved duck decoy.
My IWLA Chapter is working hard to meet the EPA BMP so that we can remove the lead issue from our anti-range neighbors. We are grandfathered for noise, so that will only leave "safety" as a method of closing us. We have no safety issues so long as shooters follow the rules. So without the lead issue, we should be good for awhile.
So in the long run I see the EPA BMP as a good thing for range operations, and for the EPA.
Mike hit it on the head about lead contamination. The concentration of lead on ranges is ridiculously high compared to how it occurs naturally.
TheOtherOne
Member
I know you've all heard it before but I'm of the opinion that we are part of nature too. A beaver builds a dam and it's natural. A man builds a dam and it's natural! Case closed. I wish anyways
jimpeel
Member
Then why don't we convert abandoned lead mines into shooting ranges and restore the environment at these sites?
Mike Irwin
Member
Tell you what, Jim.
You can go to an abandoned mine site to shoot.
I'll stay the hell away from them.
I've read the Superfund reports for quite a few abandoned mines where a "hazardous" material was removed.
You'd think that would make the area safe, wouldn't you? I mean, all that nasty, nasty lead, cadmium, etc. is gone...
Do yourself a favor. Have all the kids you want BEFORE you head out to shoot...
You can go to an abandoned mine site to shoot.
I'll stay the hell away from them.
I've read the Superfund reports for quite a few abandoned mines where a "hazardous" material was removed.
You'd think that would make the area safe, wouldn't you? I mean, all that nasty, nasty lead, cadmium, etc. is gone...
Do yourself a favor. Have all the kids you want BEFORE you head out to shoot...
Zander
member
So what?
If there is an inherent danger to shooters from hundreds of pounds of inert metal deposited downrange, what is it exactly?
Should my DI's in basic have decided not to have children?
One of my business clients who wanted to build a range gave up in disgust because the EPA's arbitrary guidelines mandated outrageous costs. Recognize the efforts for what they are...yet another way to prohibit Americans from participating in one of the nation's biggest sports, target shooting.
Mike Irwin
Member
If lead WERE an inert metal, it wouldn't be a problem, Zander.
But lead isn't an inert metal.
And because of that it can easily leach into the soil and contaminate surface and ground water.
But lead isn't an inert metal.
And because of that it can easily leach into the soil and contaminate surface and ground water.
The Reaper
Member
The average shooter will not ingest enough lead for it to be harmful to them. Lead becomes a problem when it leaches into soils and migrates into water supplies. Rain runoff from a range can cause lead migration as can underground water sources such as natural springs. Acidic soils and acidic rain help lead oxidize and migrate quickly. Once in the groundwater then it can migrate based on flow and topography.
Another area where lead can be a problem is working on ranges. On outdoor ranges there is the dust from the berms. On indoor ranges it's typically just the clean-up in general. Again, the average shooter will not be involved in these activities.
I shoot regularly and I'm also a range officer. I spend time working on ranges and with the dirt and berms on ranges. I have my lead level checked whenever I have a blood test done. So far I am below 7 micrograms per decaliter. The report only tells me I'm below, not the actual reading.
Why are people concerned about lead?
In children the results of lead poisoning at the 10 microgram per decaliter are:
damage to the brain and nervous system
behavior and learning problems
slowed growth
hearing problems
headaches
impairment of vision and motor skills
In adults symptoms can be:
pregnancy difficulties (this is why it's recommended that pregnant women refrain from shooting)
reproductive problems
high blood pressure
digestive problems
neurological disorders
memory and concentration problems
muscle and joint pain
kidney dysfunction
In high quantities it can cause convulsions, coma, and death.
As a shooter you should always wash your hands and face after shooting and before eating or drinking. Airborne lead is heavy and is not moved far from the gun, even on a windy day. It settles on you the shooter and anything nearby. Another reason not to have food or drink around your shooting position. Again is it enough lead to be an issue, for most shooters no.
I would reiterate that pregnant women and women who are breast feeding should avoid shooting and that children under seven should not shoot regularly. These groups are most affected by small amounts of lead. The pregnant woman or breast feeding woman isn't affected, it is the baby that is affected.
Another area where lead can be a problem is working on ranges. On outdoor ranges there is the dust from the berms. On indoor ranges it's typically just the clean-up in general. Again, the average shooter will not be involved in these activities.
I shoot regularly and I'm also a range officer. I spend time working on ranges and with the dirt and berms on ranges. I have my lead level checked whenever I have a blood test done. So far I am below 7 micrograms per decaliter. The report only tells me I'm below, not the actual reading.
Why are people concerned about lead?
In children the results of lead poisoning at the 10 microgram per decaliter are:
damage to the brain and nervous system
behavior and learning problems
slowed growth
hearing problems
headaches
impairment of vision and motor skills
In adults symptoms can be:
pregnancy difficulties (this is why it's recommended that pregnant women refrain from shooting)
reproductive problems
high blood pressure
digestive problems
neurological disorders
memory and concentration problems
muscle and joint pain
kidney dysfunction
In high quantities it can cause convulsions, coma, and death.
As a shooter you should always wash your hands and face after shooting and before eating or drinking. Airborne lead is heavy and is not moved far from the gun, even on a windy day. It settles on you the shooter and anything nearby. Another reason not to have food or drink around your shooting position. Again is it enough lead to be an issue, for most shooters no.
I would reiterate that pregnant women and women who are breast feeding should avoid shooting and that children under seven should not shoot regularly. These groups are most affected by small amounts of lead. The pregnant woman or breast feeding woman isn't affected, it is the baby that is affected.
Zander
member
It isn't a completely inert metal...but then, neither is platinum.
We are talking about relative danger. The reason lead isn't a danger is that it reacts very quickly with oxygen and/or carbon dioxide to form protective layers. That's why I still dig up an occasional Minnie ball that was fired at least 138 years ago.
And given the amount of full-jacket or partial-jacket rounds fired at the typical range, the danger is lessened even more, as copper is more inert than lead.
There's a clear reason why the EPA wants to control lead on firing ranges, but it doesn't have anything to do with protecting health.
jimpeel
Member
Mike Irwin
The word for the day:
facetious
\Fa*ce"tious\, a. [Cf. F. fac['e]tieux. See Faceti[ae].] 1. Given to wit and good humor; merry; sportive; jocular; as, a facetious companion.
2. Characterized by wit and pleasantry; exciting laughter; as, a facetious story or reply. -- Fa*ce\"tious*ly, adv. -- Fa*ce\"tious*ness, n.
Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
The word for the day:
facetious
\Fa*ce"tious\, a. [Cf. F. fac['e]tieux. See Faceti[ae].] 1. Given to wit and good humor; merry; sportive; jocular; as, a facetious companion.
2. Characterized by wit and pleasantry; exciting laughter; as, a facetious story or reply. -- Fa*ce\"tious*ly, adv. -- Fa*ce\"tious*ness, n.
Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
Mike Irwin
Member
"There's a clear reason why the EPA wants to control lead on firing ranges, but it doesn't have anything to do with protecting health."
I suppose it's the same reason why EPA wants to control lead at smelting operations and lead at car battery recycling plants...
Ya know, not EVERYTHING done by the goverment is a covert way to get gunowners...
I suppose it's the same reason why EPA wants to control lead at smelting operations and lead at car battery recycling plants...
Ya know, not EVERYTHING done by the goverment is a covert way to get gunowners...
Mike Irwin
Member
Jim,
Great! You can copy and paste from a dictionary site.
How about mastering appliction of the smilies list?
Kinda hard to tell if someone is being brainy, or just brain dead, from the written word at times.
Great! You can copy and paste from a dictionary site.
How about mastering appliction of the smilies list?
Kinda hard to tell if someone is being brainy, or just brain dead, from the written word at times.
jimpeel
Member
Mike Irwin
I kinda figured that you'd kinda figure that I was kinda figuring that you'd kinda figure it out.
Guess I kinda got it wrong.
I kinda figured that you'd kinda figure that I was kinda figuring that you'd kinda figure it out.
Guess I kinda got it wrong.
rock jock
Member
Mike is right on with this issue. High concentrations of lead can be a serious health hazard. I have 12 years of consulting as an environmental engineer and I can tell you that the levels of lead in soil at a shooting range are typically far higher than that of most industrial sites. Fortunately, shooting ranges are usually located in remote areas, the area of affected soils is limited, and the elevated berms act as a "waste pile" rather than a surface impoundment, which helps in mitigating leachate production.
For those of you who don't think this is an issue, I challenge you to stick a shallow well in the uppermost groundwater zone located hydraulically downgradient of a shooting range and drink your tap water from there for about a year.
For those of you who don't think this is an issue, I challenge you to stick a shallow well in the uppermost groundwater zone located hydraulically downgradient of a shooting range and drink your tap water from there for about a year.
Zander
member
Sorry, you suppose wrong. Smelting operations, including those done on kitchen stoves to fill bullet and fishing-jig molds, involve the potential for harmful airborne concentrations of lead.
Do we deal with science or revert to the sort of heavy-handed regulation that is the hallmark of the bureaucrats who run EPA?
Ranges shouldn't be threatened with closure because the EPA is pandering the current-day equivalent of the 'Alar' scare.
- Status
