Originally Posted By: L. Brown


Ted, re your contention about coyotes and wolves . . . makes sense that lead poisoning from scavenging dead animals should impact them. However, a coyote is a whole lot bigger than a duck or a goose, or even an eagle. And a wolf is a whole lot bigger than a coyote. So I'd expect they'd need to ingest more lead for them to get sick. And especially in the case of wolves, numbers are so low--and given the fact I never saw one, living in wolf country for 4 1/2 years--that while it might be happening to the occasional animal, it might also escape notice.


Larry, the fact that coyotes and wolves do not have crops means that particulate lead passes through them much faster and without being digested or assimilated - totally different situation in birds. So, eating some lead is not a concern for a mammal once in awhile, when in particulate form (as opposed to in lead paint for instance).

The focus needs to be on POPULATION LEVEL effects, not individual effects. We know, with out doubt, that a few lead pellets in the crop of an eagle or a condor will kill it. We also know that this happens to wild birds without question, and that the pellets come from ammunition, without question (isotope analyses among other things).

We know the same used to happen to ducks, without question.

But in one case that has significant population consequences, in the other, it does not. That is where we the hunters and shooters need to focus. Stick to the fighting battles where population level effects are minimal, concede where they are signficant. And with those concessions needs to be language that could allow the return of lead when the population problems are no longer an issue (ie, the species is fully recovered), AND they can sustain the lead risk. For some species, like condors, this may be very doable. For ducks, it will never be, because the population effects would immediately return. One could hope, reasonably, that condors will be more like eagles than like waterfowl.

Let's not sit around and fight about whether the sun goes around the earth of vice versa. These types of arguments are only good for breaking up the hunting community's otherwise unified voice and jeopardizing our credibility. Lots of gun folks, like lots of environmentalists (but far from all), or lots of feminists (but far from all), or members of any other group would rather fight for the sake of fighting than figure out how to solve problems. I'm only interested in solutions.

Brent

_________
BrentD, (Professor - just for Stan)

[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]