Tell me more about the proliferation of garbage in peer reviewed publications. What, in your opinion, is this garbage and which publications? I posted one above - neither you nor anyone else wanted to comment on that. Fine, but if you are claiming it is garbage - prove it.

So habitat is a greater problem for condors. What's your point? Habitat is probably a greater problem for upland birds than poaching - does that mean we would ignore poaching? Clearly, environmental lead can affect condors at a population level. Do we blow that off because habitat is "bigger"? And how do you really know it's bigger? What facts do you have to back that up? I don't disagree or agree with you on that. Show me.

Last, I don't have much problem with lead for upland game in most places and I continue to use it. Have I said otherwise?

If you attack science as false, and you have, it should be very easy to disprove it. If you don't like the way science is being applied in the form of laws then you have your ballot and the Great American Way. Sometimes, your way turns out not to be the Great American Way. That's the way it goes sometimes, if you are an American.

_________
BrentD, (Professor - just for Stan)
=>/

[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]