When the establishment’s newspaper calls for change then it is clearly not just time, but probably long overdue. That is the case with the use of lead ammunition in the UK.
The Times opinion piece last week did not say anything new, it just said it in a different place, here are some quotes:
Shooting organisations and other countryside groups have largely defied attempts to regulate lead ammunition by playing on the suspicions of traditionalists that what opponents have in their sights is not lead, but shooting altogether. There is also an unfounded perception in some quarters that the health risks of lead shot are exaggerated.
Rural groups need to stop being so defensive. The arguments against lead ammunition are not part of some wider anti-shooting agenda, as they sometimes like to claim.The sheer number of different organisations, ranging from the Countryside Alliance to the Gun Trade Association, has not helped to bring about effective policy development in this area. Just as damaging is that successive governments have chosen to ignore the expert advice and lacked the political courage necessary to tackle the shooting lobby.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/shooters-must-give-up-lead-shot-for-the-environments-sake-36msdddpz?_ga=2.212722644.1944756645.1569047380-1293818369.1568000266
You can’t argue with much of that except to say that it is only ‘successive governments’ in the sense that the coalition government Tory-led Cameron government didn’t do anything except wait for the Lead Ammunition Group’s report, then David Cameron’s Tory-only government delayed commenting on that report for over a year until the day that Liz Truss scurried out of Defra, and then Theresa May’s Tory government didn’t do anything and now we must see whether Boris Johnson’s Tory government will act. So, be in no doubt, that the governments who have lacked the political courage to act have all been Conservative ones.
And the four dinosaurs of the shooting world, Ian Bell, Tim Bonner, Teresa Dent and Liam Bell, replied with a response that says nothing and merely makes them look slightly more foolish than they already are regarded by many of their own members and most of interested outsiders. Although their response says that ‘many would not fundamentally disagree’ with The Times they do not say whether they agree or disagree.
Evasion has become such an ingrained habit that when choosing to respond to a call for change the ‘leaders’ of shooting cannot actually address the issue but instead they attack the messenger. How often have we seen that on subjects as diverse as gamebird releases, raptor persecution, general licences and toxic ammunition being shot into food?
They can’t bring themselves to do what they should have done years and years ago, and that is to say ‘It’s a fair cop’. These dinosaurs fail to provide leadership to the shooting industry and are largely responsible for the mess that shooting is in.
[registration_form]
Provided my maths is correct and assuming the article is talking about the UK then I think the 6,000 tonnes is likely to be an overestimate as that would be around 200 million cartridges which is probably on the high side, also clay pigeon target shooting accounts for the majority of them, ask any cartridge manufacturer, and this takes place on a very small area of land designated for that purpose and you don’t eat clay pigeons. So as normal headline grabbing journalism.
John – your maths is probably incorrect but the author used the figure in the Lead Ammunition Report which is referenced so you can go back and check if you like. And he didn’t say that it all went into food did he? You can’t string a proper argument together but it’s difficult to know whether that is through lack of ability or deliberate intent to mislead.
maths looks good to me say 30gm average shot in a cartridge across all types and gauges then 1000/0.03*6000= 200 million cartridges.
I am sure if they had asked the UK cartridge manufactures and importers of foreign makes they could say exactly how many and what type they sell each year for game/crop protection and I bet it is a lot less than 6,000 tonnes but that would not make for such sensational journalism would it?
john – the journalism is not sensational – did you actually read it?
6000 tonnes is an estimate and you are correct that it includes shot used for clay pigeon shooting. I don’t think the LAG report suggests it is an exact figure and it is possible it is an over-estimate but so what? Are you suggesting that there is a right amount of lead to be distributing over the countryside?
Mark, the “establishment’s newspaper” is not calling for change. It’s a “Thunderer” piece – an opinion piece by a named individual. A lapse from your usual high standards. In a good cause, but I think you should leave spinning to others.
Bob – I see you are in one of your waspish moods. The reference was given so everyone can make their own minds up.
Thanks Mark.
I’ve thoroughly enjoyed watching chunks of the Supreme Court Live over the last few days so a bit of pedantry may have rubbed off. High hopes for next week! I do think, though, that as we are living in the age of lies, good people should take great care of the truth.
Calling for a ban on lead is not anti-shooting any more than the campaign against lead fishing weights was anti-fishing. But the way the industry has responded over the years has, I think, helped to harden attitudes against shooting and done it significant long term damage. The longer this goes on the more damage is being done. That feels like a very obvious statement to make but they just can’t seem to see it for themselves. It’s very odd.
I am in Spain Andalucia just at the moment watching the raptors migrate to Africa. It is here that one can see the overwhelming case for banning shooting and removing all guns from people when one sees many birds missing areas of feathers that have been shot out by shooters. That of course is only the tip of the iceberg.
What a very dreadful Government this is when only a year or two ago Liz Truss, then at Defra, refused to ban lead shot. They still are in this victorian, antediluvian mind and set still trying desperately to defend their nasty vested interests to the great cost of our wildlife and environment.
They are the proof of the saying that there’s none so blind as them as won’t see.
But quite right, Ian – the incompetent, aggressive handling of these issues by shooting has succeeded over lead and DGS in expanding quite specific issues, easily dealt with in the case of lead and far from impossible in the case of DGS into an increasing questioning of the whole of gamebird shooting, with the spotlight shifting to the impact of released Pheasants on wildlife and the environment.