Originally Posted By: BrentD
None that I know of.

And what it has done for waterfowl in general and a few other species (e.g., bald eagles) is flatly undeniable.



Oh my. Actually that premise is completely deniable, or at least not nearly as relevant as you appear to think it is. The banning of DDT and laws passed in the 60's and 70's protecting bald eagles and their nesting areas were exponentially more impactful than anything having to do with a lead shot ban. And what else has the lead shot ban lead to...to use your term, an "undeniable" increase in the amount of wounded/lost game. Fewer hunters in the field which results in a loss of license income which is vital for protecting critical habitat, which probably has a far greater impact on the future of game populations than any theoretical population loss due to digesting lead shot.

The most disturbing thing about the whole lead shot issue is how many sportsmen are willing to stand by and let more environmental activists dictate the future of the sport, with false claims and pseudoscience. A total ban on lead shot would be the death of hunting in America. No young kids would ever be able to afford shells to hunt, let alone burn through a few boxes to practice with which is just as important as hunting. Hunting is increasingly expensive every year as it is, and has to compete with everything else that kids have today. You guys need to open your eyes and see what these lead shot bans really are trying to accomplish. If we have this many in our own ranks that are seemingly willing to go along with this, I'm afraid it is already too late.