BrentD,
You always defend the legislation that imposes the use of alternative shot.Do you have a reason for your stance?
I will probably go to my grave fighting for a reasoned, sensible,truthfull set of facts as to how toxic the ingestion of leadshot in waterfowl really is.
This may at first seem to the pro-nontox fraternity a stupid stance.BUT PLEASE SHOW ME factual statistics.Not many, hardly any, and probably you also Brent, have not actually seen a waterfowl that as died of lead ingestion.I do know that 'scientists' have force fed ducks in laboratories with lead shot to measure the effect of lead on the body tissues.Perhaps if they had carried out their research on the marsh, shooting and picking up their dead quarry we would accept their 'science' more readily.Is it scientific to maim a creature with ineffective loads that Lead would have despatched instantly?
No. It is crass stupidity that will sound the deathknell of waterfowling, along with the blithering idiots who blaze away at anything within 90 yards.
