A Defra-funded study, involving BASC, WWT and the CLA, shows that most (344 out of 492, ie 70%) shot ducks bought from gamedealers, supermarkets and butchers are illegally shot with lead ammunition. This figure is similar to that found in 2002 in a study by WWT and the RSPB - there has been no real progress in the last eight years.
Quite shockingly, the survey of shooters indicated that most understood the law but nearly half (45%) admitted to breaking the law. At least this suggests that the 'honest' ones (the 45% who admit to acting illegally) are the best shots (if 70% of ducks have been shot illegally)!
The main reasons given for breaking the law are: small chance of being caught, don't believe that lead is a problem and lead-free ammunition is more expensive or more difficult to obtain than lead ammunition.
We await the reaction of shooting organisations and the shooting press with interest. Some shooting organisations have spent quite considerable time and effort communicating to their members on this issue - they must feel very let down.
We also await Defra's reaction. Minister of State Jim Paice is a keen shot and a former trustee of the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust. Defra has just withdrawn its secretarial support from the Lead Ammunition Group that it and the Food Standards Agency set up to look at issues surrounding the (legal) use of lead ammunition concerning human and wildlife health.
A love of the natural world demonstrates that a person is a cultured inhabitant of planet Earth.
Being the devils advocate of course all it may mean according to James Marchington who by the way advocates shooters to obey the law is that lead shot is very efficient at killing ducks.
Makes you wonder about all the lead shot that is lying on our uplands, our water catchment areas.
The bit i found interesting Mark was where you said one reason they used lead shot was because small chance of getting caught,just the same as poisoning B O P ,in the 1940s of course we used lead all the time because no one knew any better.
Good to see some consensus on this (on here at least). How much is the price difference between lead shot and the main alternatives? I suppose that illegal use of lead for wildfowling is likely to continue as long as it's legal and freely available for other uses. I really think we need to be moving away from the use of lead ammunition generally, not just in wetlands. There's no safe dose for lead consumption, and especially when a lot of it is ending up in the bodies of animals that are going to be eaten either by humans scavengers/predators.
I don't know if it would have a significant effect or not, but possibly a lead ban could also encourage the consumption of game meat by eliminating the fear of lead ingestion (quite apart from the actual danger of lead poisoning).
All you commentators are absolutely right. Lead is a nasty poison it is a neuro-toxin in other words it poisons the nervous system and it is cumulative within that system. It used to be an additive to petrol but was removed by law some years ago because of the poison risk. It is distressing to see a poor bird that is slowly being poisoned by it. I don't eat meat but if I did I would not contemplate eating a shot game bird. It is amazing to me that this type of shot is still around. We are nearly overwehelmed with health and safety regulations and food quality standards and yet this sort of thing still occurs. There is a big hole in the system somewhere. There should be substantial penalties for selling any meat (or fish) killed with lead shot or contaminated with lead, that would soon put a stop to the practice.
redkite