doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Simon says, Oh, never mind…

Those "scientists" want us to believe that, because of the density of lead, it continually works it's way down into the bottom, regardless the soil type, to a depth that makes it eventually inaccessible to feeding waterfowl.


Amen.

More selective outrage and corrupted science...

Arghhh. I tried.
Here's some low-lights of the linked previous thread, which discusses the issue of where lead goes when deposited in water
https://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=627061&page=6

1. There is bad science...falsified "science" (which always gets exposed eventually)...and good science
2. Good science withstands critical review and repetition of studies over time
3. IMHO is it highly inappropriate, when we don't like a study, to declare that the researchers are corrupt and compromised. Concern about lead toxicity started in the 60s and was driven by professional wildlife biologists. The professionals I met in Kansas and Missouri were, IMHO, sincerely driven by the best science available (which we all understand changes over time) and, despite resistance from governmental, commercial, "greens", and private landowner interests, obviously with other agendas, tried to do what was best for fish & game, and IMHO were certainly NOT anti-hunting. In retrospect, certainly decisions made by "the management" often turned out to be mistakes.
4. Those of us who have been in academia understand:
a. Your future advancement depends on publishing
b. Your future advancement depends on receiving grants
c. Unless in the sound chamber of woke liberal arts, where your future advancement is in not rocking the boat with reality orientation, much of what you do is prove that other researchers were wrong.
5. So if we don't like a study, please critically analyze the study. Don't impugn the integrity of the professional wildlife biologists and researchers. If they are crooked, or wrong, it will eventually be exposed.

Cue the personal attacks, obligatory rant and locking the thread I'm sure Fauci and the evil FDA - AMA - Big Pharma triad can be worked in somehow

Aargh, such a corrupt and compromised comment, lol?

You touch on a point, then ignored it. Where do grants come from, and who do they go to. I believe it is important to note that most grants of this sort have political awarding policies, and are sought by gov agency political appointees, and academia administrators of a political bent.

I believe you have to address, due to your certainties, the conclusions and policies that result from your "good science" standards. Specifically, why do restrictions, penalties, and progressive goals not follow the science? Are the crooked and wrong eventually exposed, in the context of recreational shooters and sport hunters being outstanding financers and stewards of the environment and wildlife habitat?

Maybe address, why can't critical analysis impugn the integrity of professional wildlife biologists and researchers. I've seen a few of these team leaders, posted in some of the most beautiful and semiremote hunting areas in the US, with their sole career goal to tic of an assignment box, to get back to the DC area. I know it will never happen, but I've always openly wondered why our opening position is to oppose and demonize friends, instead of work with them. We all recognize, understand and use notox shot as we are forced to, maybe work on forcing the science to matter.

Absolutely the "science" suks. And not a single administration in the last 50 years has questioned it and set the record straight. No politician actually does anything more than pay lip service to the shooters to scam their vote.

Eagles are beyond common.

Until convinced otherwise, I’ll maintain that their recovery had NOTHING to do with a lead shot ban, but, tracks very closely with the banning of DDT. Which, should NOT have been banned to the extent it was. It is a very useful pesticide, and, has limited applications where there is certainly nothing better.

You guys all miss the point, every time this comes up. The end goal IS NOT that you will no longer have lead shot, or, bullets. It is that you will no longer be able to hunt, and at that point, will have no reason to own a firearm.

The powers that be are on a longer schedule than you in this endeavor. They are after your children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren. You, don’t matter.

Best,
Ted

To me its a lot like the ethics of handicapping in sports. The market hunters killed enough waterfowl and other birds to allow many rules to take effect. They got handicapped by bag limits, season lengths, and restrictions on equipment. Populations of canvasbacks and other birds recovered for benefit of sportsmen and other bird lovers. Then came smokeless powder, autoloading shotguns, outboard motors, lightweight boats, plastic decoys, shot cups, synthetic insulation, etc. It became easier and more comfortable to get birds in close and kill them at longer ranges. So I feel for ethical reasons alone the handicapping of hunters by the three-shell limit, establishment of zones, refuges and rest areas was justified for the continuation of sport hunting and acceptance by the public. Now that lead shot, lead-acid batteries, lead paint, etc. have been found to cause heath problems in humans and birds alike, I do not object to the conversion to non-toxic shot. If birds could shoot, it would be like moving them forward a few yards at the trap range.

Keith said - "I’m really sorry to see some say that lead ammunition bans are inevitable. The best way to have that happen is to simply give up the fight, or to vote for the anti-gun Democrats who are behind it."

While I agree with you, I think it is inevitable because we are simply outnumbered. We are having all sorts of things forced upon us that we don't agree with. Too many people vote with emotion rather than logic or vote over a single-issue rather than the bigger picture. Finally, so go the cities, so goes the State. Great example is New York. It doesn't matter what or how the North Country/Adirondacks or other rural areas think or vote. Voters in NYC and the large cities decide.

It is also inevitable because we have numerous outdoor and shooting "writers" pushing for it as well under the foolish belief that it is the "right thing to do" and will save our heritage/activities. In my opinion, it just gives the anti-hunting/shooting groups another little victory and they are off to the next ban.

We as sportsman should not give an inch on anything. They are constantly trying to ban hound hunting. Many hunters think "I don't hunt Bears or Coyotes with hounds, so it doesn't affect me."

You will feel very differently when they come after your Beagles, or even Retriever next, because they will never stop.

Back to the OP - I really enjoy the TGS videos on YouTube. Very well done and informative.

While I agree with most of your above post, OMW, I am not as ready to acquiesce as you seem to be. I do not think a total lead ban is inevitable. Not anymore than I think EVs are going to totally replace fossil fuel vehicles, or that heterosexual marriage is a thing of the past. Evil will not always win, though at times it may seem hopeless. History abounds with examples of smaller numbers defeating seemingly overwhelming odds. We must be sure our fight is righteous, and not just emotional. We will not win this fight with keyboard warriors alone, important as they may be. We can only win it by countering the false claims of the greenies every day in our secular lives, electing righteous people to public office, and praying to the Almighty for justice to prevail in our lifetimes. If complaining about it on a forum is the best we can do, then yes, stick a fork in us because we are done.

The only thing necessary for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing. Edmund Burke

This could be a reason some believe a lead ban is inevitable. We have friends here that insist it is inevitable, along with the sentiment that, they just shoot classic double guns and rifles, so there is no threat to their likes.

Compromise is heading towards....no one has banned hunting, there are plenty of estates for the holdouts. Shooters have numbers, but it's 9mm and 223 sales where the numbers are. Friends, not necessarily, enemies, not necessarily, allies, why not.