doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Bismuth No-Tox Out of Business?

Debate, Brent? I am not debating anything here. Re-read my post and you will (or perhaps you will not) see that I am stating my opinions. For the many years I have participated in this bulletin board, I don't recall ever seeing the notice that it was a scientific forum. It has science, opinions, politics, and other topics, so your advice to me to debate science and not politics, well, I will just leave my feelings on your advice without comment. I do want to thank you for the instruction on migratory vs. non-migratory birds and state vs. federal wildlife law enforcement. Gosh, after hunting for 50 years that little tid bit of information sure came as a surprise!!! By the way, aren't doves categorized as "migratory" birds and thus controlled by federal wildlife laws. Before you go to any great length to answer that one Brent, let me just say that I really already know the answer to the question. Incidentally, your rhetoric on migratory, non, and state/fed, etc. failed to address the question I posed. As has been stated earlier, the issue over non-toxic versus lead originated with and centered on "wetlands" didn't it - not the governing body to enforce the wildlife laws. Therefore, I ask it again. If I can shoot an upland bird with lead legally in a given location, why can I not shoot waterfowl flying over or walking around the area legally with the same lead shot. Does a dead bird know what did him in? Let me re-state my question in a different fashion rather than have you again educate me on the different law enforcement bodies. Does it make any sense for the situation I describe above to exist? I was already provided an answer from the game warden to whom I posed the same question. He said he agreed with my reasoning, but "that's just the way the law reads." That I understand. I am only offering my opinion on what I believe to be a ridiculous difference in wording of laws and regulations. And I still think the ammunition manufacturers are "preying" upon sportsmen who are victimized by this ruling. Well, everyone except the "writers" who get to shoot all the free high-priced ammunition they want to as long as they will praise its virtues in sporting publications. (Oh! I am also aware that upland birds hunted on federal lands require non-toxic shot. Just a little tid bit I have picked up in my years of involvement with hunting and the shooting sports) Thanks Brent.

So if "Science" demostrates ingestion of Lead is harmful, why not just ban all lead ?

Sorry Perry, I overestimated you.

My mistake.

Brent

Brent, I'm still looking for your science ol'chap?
...and please don't cite something from California!
Hair brain science and hair brained politics go hand in hand.
There's a science for every cause you know.
Banning lead shot was fuzzy science with a cause.
Lets clean-up the earth, give big business a pass and nail the poor duck hunter.
Thats it!

keep looking Lowell, you remember those threads I'm sure....

Brent

Brent: you should have some idea as to the title and time frame of your posts? I've spent a lot of time looking myself.

Here is one http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbt...=true#Post16871
Lowell, of course, is just doing his best Joe Brennan impersonation - he posted quite a few times on this particular thread. Disingenuiness is so unattractive.

There are other threads as well.

Brent

And, once you are done with that one article - take on the literature. Science does not draw conclusions from single publications. Here is a smattering for you to get started on. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=lead+waterfowl&hl=en&lr=&btnG=Search

Brent

You flatter yourself Brent. You don't know enough about me, who I am or what I do, to form any sort of educated estimate or even a wild guess. But, as to the mistake to which you admit - apology accepted. Keep up the good scientific work and/or research on lead shot though. Perhaps you can even save the California Condor - oh wait. That flawed research and outright lies regarding lead and their imminent extinction, I believe, was already exposed for the political ploy that it was. If it makes you happy to believe that all the furor over lead shot and waterfowl is pure science with no politics directed against the shooting sports, well, my "estimate" of you tells me that nothing will change your mind. Have a good day Brent.

By the way, since we have nothing but "numbers of deaths due to lead" from the scientific- and the anti-hunting community, has anyone ever actually seen pictoral evidence of this such as fields and wetlands strewn with dead ducks and geese with no puncture holes. Just a thought.

OK what have any of you waterfowl hunters done with the info regarding the situation with Bismuth No-Tox ceasing production? I went out and purchased both loaded shells and loose shoot that gives me between a 4 to 5 year supply for upcoming waterfowl seasons, the last order arriving by UPS tonight. I am hoping by the time I run out the company/patent rights will be sold and the shot will be readily available again.