Hunting Groups Defend Toxic Lead Ammo

The Center for Biological Diversity, along with Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, the Association of Avian Veterinarians, the American Bird Conservancy, and Project Gutpile (a hunters' group) have hit the Environmental Protection Agency with a 100 page petition (pdf) calling on the agency to ban the use of lead in hunting ammunition and fishing tackle.

Lead is a key component in hunting and fishing; most hunting rounds use it, as do fishing weights. The problem with lead is that it's highly toxic, both to human beings and animals. According to the CBD, lead poisoning accounts for 10 million to 20 million animal deaths per year. In most cases, it's a result of scavenging animals ingesting lead pellets, or non-scavengers mistaking spent ammunition or fishing lures for food. And us two-legged types don't get a free pass either. The CBD cites a study alleging that 87 percent of game taken down by a lead round could have unsafe lead levels.

It's a big problem. Again, referencing the CBD, we're talking about somewhere in the neighborhood of 87,000 tons of lead being released into the environment each year between recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting ranges. By way of comparison, a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier, the largest ship in the U.S. Navy, weighs in at around 100,000 tons. So, this is not a miniscule amount of toxic metal we're talking about here.

Which species are really feeling the pain of lead poisoning? Well, bald eagles and golden eagles for starters, as well as trumpeter swans and, perhaps most troubling, the highly-endangered California condor. Overall, the coalition estimates that 75 or more wild bird species are affected by the use of lead in hunting and fishing.

Mainstream hunting "rights" groups, are predictably steamed, and to hear them talk, you'd think this coalition was seeking to ban hunting altogether. The National Shooting Sports Foundation, a front group for the firearms industry, wins the prize for most creative spin, with its allegation that, "Hunters and their ammunition have done more for wildlife than the CBD ever will." (They also refer to the coalition's petition as an "anti-hunting attack." Yawn.)

The NSSF would also like you to know that there's absolutely no scientific basis for the CBD's claims. They're right, assuming you're okay with discounting all of the peer-reviewed studies cited by CBD, not to mention the entire course of human history. (Some historians point to excessive lead use and the resulting health problems as a factor in the decline of the Roman Empire, for example.) Call me picky, but I'm going to side with the peer-reviewed guys in the lab coats on this one and call shenanigans on the NSSF. The fact is, there's plenty of scientific evidence out there, not to mention common sense, that tells us lead is bad.

Also working against the NSSF on this is the fact that California already has laws banning lead ammo. As far as I can tell, people are still hunting and fishing, even without lead. It also bears mentioning that lead ammo has been banned nationally in hunting waterfowl for well over a decade.

In the end, this about the firearms industry blowing their top over a fairly minor issue. It's not an assault on the 2nd Amendment, nor is it an attack on some vague semblance of "traditional hunting values." (If those traditions are so important, I wonder why more of them aren't out there toting a single-shot, smoothbore musket, circa 1780 or so, but I digress.) For the firearms industry, and their shills at the NSSF, it's not about lead, it's about paper — specifically the rectangular green kind with the pictures of dead presidents. You see, lead ammo is far cheaper to produce than, say, copper.

The EPA is well within its powers to ban the use of lead ammo and fishing tackle; over the years, they've banned the use of lead in paint and pipes, for example. They've got the precedent, let's hope they use it to ban lead in hunting and fishing.

Photo credit: David Clendenen, USFWS