Shotswitch – not much switching after 4 years

The annual examination of the claims made by the shooting industry over their good faith in removing lead shot from their hobby through voluntary means by 2025 are given their annual fact check – click here for paper just published.

But it is summed up perfectly by this graph:

Lead shot was found in 93% of Pheasant samples on sale for public consumption. What price this figure approaching 0% next year? Longer odds than me playing for England tomorrow against France in Paris, I’d say.

The authors estimate that at present rate of little progress the figure might be in the low 80%s next year.

The paper also shows that Waitrose have failed again to deliver on their promise of lead-free gamebirds. Not surprised.

You don’t have to be a cynic to be very sceptical about whether the shooting industry can be trusted – on anything really.

And you don’t have to be an unreconstructed Marxist to believe that the solution for things like this is not to swallow worthless promises but to legislate against bad things and, very importantly, ensure that monitoring of compliance with regulations is accompanied by strong sanctions (eg fines, custodial sentences, barring from further involvement in such areas) for those not complying.


2 Replies to “Shotswitch – not much switching after 4 years”

  1. It is almost comical the extent to which the voluntary approach is shown to be failing by that graph. This government probably doesn’t much care but let’s hope the next one can see that a voluntary approach to phasing out lead ammunition is a foolish pipe dream and that early legislation is needed.

  2. Can someone please explain to me how any civilised society can allow sentient living creatures[1] to be shot for the sole reason of pleasuring a particular[2] group of homo (in this case not very) sapiens?
    We know how few of the birds shot actually get eaten, so I don’t swallow (ha!) that as a reason.
    [1] Here I commend Jennifer Ackerman’s books.
    [2] How many of this group are a) non-male b) non-white cj non-wealthy and d) non-middle aged plus? Should I also add e) non-Tory?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.