Biden admin takes aim at hunters in latest regulation

[Chief TC]

NSSF Condemns USFWS Proposed Rule to Ban Traditional Ammunition on New Refuge Openings

WASHINGTON, D.C. — NSSF®, The Firearm Industry Trade Association, condemns the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Proposed Rule that would ban the use of traditional lead ammunition on 48 new distinct hunting opportunities across approximately 3,000 acres of National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs). This is another illustration of the Biden administration’s Department of the Interior (DOI) and USFWS kowtowing to anti-hunting activists by promulgating policies that lack sound scientific data.



“This is the latest example of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service creating rules that punish hunters, threaten conservation funding and advance special interests without sound scientific evidence that traditional lead ammunition cause is causing detrimental wildlife population impacts,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “This administration is ignoring its promise to ‘follow the science.’ In fact, it is ignoring the need for scientific evidence in order to advance an antigun and anti-hunting agenda. The need for Congress to pass the Protecting Access for Hunters and Anglers Act has never been more urgent.”



The USFWS announced three national wildlife refuges are proposing to expand opportunities for hunting. These refuges are Cahaba River National Wildlife Refuge in Alabama, Everglades Headwaters National Wildlife Refuge in Florida and Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge in Minnesota. The proposed rule, appearing in the Federal Register, includes proposals to phase out lead ammunition at eight national wildlife refuges. USFWS claims to follow the best available science yet offers no peer-reviewed site-specific scientific data to demonstrate traditional ammunition is causing detrimental wildlife population impacts.



NSSF urges Congress to quickly pass U.S. Rep. Robert Wittman’s Protecting Access for Hunters and Anglers Act, H.R. 615, which would ensure America’s number one resource of conservation funding remains in place and that hunters, recreational shooters and anglers throughout the nation can continue to enjoy America’s sporting heritage. Excise taxes paid by firearm and ammunition manufacturers have contributed over $16 billion since 1937, or $25 billion when adjusted for inflation, for wildlife and habitat conservation. It is the leading funding source for wildlife restoration. Over $1.6 billion was apportioned to the states for wildlife conservation projects last year, with $1.19 billion of that sourced to excise taxes paid by firearm and ammunition manufacturers. The bill passed the U.S. House Natural Resources Committee on a bipartisan vote earlier this week.



Rep. Wittman’s legislation, along with U.S. Sen. Steve Daines' (R-Mont.) companion legislation S. 1185 of the same name, would require the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture to provide site-specific peer-reviewed scientific data in cooperation with state agencies that demonstrates traditional lead ammunition or fishing tackle is causing detrimental wildlife population impacts before prohibiting their use by hunters and anglers.



The Final Rule published last year to similarly ban traditional ammunition and fishing tackle while opening hunting and fishing opportunities was part of “sue and settle” litigation between the Center for Biological Diversity and the USFWS and was implemented without scientific evidence or consultation of state agencies.



Requiring the use of alternative ammunition would put a significant cost barrier to participation in hunting and fishing on lands. Alternative ammunition is, on average, 25 percent more expensive than traditional lead ammunition and less available. That barrier would “price out” many hunters and anglers and decrease the excise tax funding paid by firearm and ammunition manufacturers they support.



NSSF urges all outdoorsmen and women to provide comments on the Proposed Rule voicing their concerns that this threat to conservation funding lacks any sound scientific data and only harms participation in hunting and fishing on public lands

If Keane is so confident that the USFWS is not using scientific data to make decisions, then he might want to elaborate what scientific data NSSF is using to refute this decision. All I read is an interest group VP making a claim unsupported by any facts. Keane's focus is mainly addressing the cost of alternative ammunition. The reality is the government science agencies have been studying impacts of all kinds of potential pollutants to eco-systems and lead is just one of them and yes, lead introduced into the environment can and does impact wildlife. There will always be a battle of the economy vs the environment. The economy wins 90% of the time. Keeping our wildlife refuges pristine is not a killer to the hunting economy. And I also say that hunters who care about conservation and the environment should feel a responsibility to leaving these areas the way they found them.

 

[jdsingleshot]

There is a certain way of thinking that says "if we think there is any possibility that the environment could be harmed, we must outlaw the practice that we think might do that. No evidence needed." That has soaked into the majority of policies in our world.

Just for the record, when I was a kid, maybe 65 years ago, I chewed the lead pipe clue from the board game of that name until it no longer resembled a pipe. Fishing, we always closed the lead split shot sinkers with our teeth. Good thing I wasn't a duck--it would have killed me. I have been very healthy and am pushing 75.

 

[Mk VII]

Europe is busy banning all lead in ammunition, and not just hunting either.

 

[LimaCharlie]

If you can't win the cases, you can bankrupt the pro-gun groups having to sue against every bogus regulation.

 

[Pudge]

Europe is busy banning all lead in ammunition, and not just hunting either.

Military as well?

 

[Mk VII]

No, the military will get an 'out' from it, (otherwise it wouldn't meet the NATO interoperability standards) and, curiously, the police as well.

 

[entropy]

No, the military will get an 'out' from it, (otherwise it wouldn't meet the NATO interoperability standards) and, curiously, the police as well.

So yeah, it's not about the environment.

 

[doubleh]

Also, as the chief executive Biden sets the policy. So even if he didn't dream this up, he apparently supports it because he hasn't squashed it.

Absolutely. They are like a mouse eating a huge chunk of cheese. A little bit here, a little bit there, until it's all gone. It has nothing to do with the environment. It's like the enviromentalists in southeastern NM blaming ranching and oil production for the decline in prairie chicken population which were doing fine and increasing in numbers until our many years long drouth arrived. No food means the birds have basically starved to death. There is also a bunch that is doing the same with the sand dunes lizard although the only study ever done on the little critter is that more are found where man is than where he isn't. Science is given little consideration in any of these things.

 

[tarosean]

I switched to all copper for hunting a while ago no infringement just a re zero of my scopes.

 

[CapnMac]

Note that the new edict is meant to only affect hunting and fishing on National Wildlife Refuges, which are only a fraction of "public lands" out there. And would have no effect on hunting on private lands.

One of the other issues is that this is adopting USEPA's position that >0% of [any bad thing] is equal to 100% risk of [other bad thing].

USEPA has, repeatedly, arbitrarily reduced "maximum exposure levels" by simple fiat, and not through any science at all. This was recently, as in less than 12 months ago, throttled by the SCOTUS case where EPA was castigated for hiding behind Chevron Deference.

Lead is a naturally occurring element found around the entire globe--there is no possible way to create 100% lead-free anything. Water is a universal solvent--chemically and molecularly--finding lead in water is not unusual. The water merely needs to flow over something with lead in it. Like quartz deposits, granites, limestones, etc. Blaming fishermen and hunters is just scapegoating a handy minority.

Plenty of lead in batteries, in discarded tires, all manner of human trash. But, easier to pick on hunters and fishermen..

 

[Bcwitt]

I'd have to read more about the proposals but the science does show that lead introduced into these environments can negatively impact the targeted species but also many other species in the environment connected with the target species. That being said, more studies need to be done but there are plenty that show it can be a problem short term and long term. There is a reason we don't use lead in a variety of products now. I think it is important to remember that humans are short sighted when it comes to the environment and don't have the capacity to think about repercussions down the road. Whether it is introduction of a plant or animal that should not be in that eco-system, or burying waste or letting fuel leak into the ground from old airfields, we have done and continue to do a lot of things that we think will be no big deal. We are proved very wrong many times. I use plenty of lead myself but I don't think keeping the USFW refuges free of lead is an attack on hunters/gun owners or is unreasonable.

Very poor science shows that. What is 200 grains of lead in a billion tones of forrest floor? Non sense.

 

[Larry in wyoming]

Very poor science shows that. What is 200 grains of lead in a billion tones of forrest floor? Non sense.

Biggest problem, besides just politics, seems to be lead fragments in the gut pile or lost game. The slug buried in the forest floor hasn't been mentioned. YET!

 

[Bcwitt]

Until the advent of bismuth and tungsten shot (both $$$$$, not that lead is much cheaper) more ducks were lost to crippling from steel shot than ever were to lead ingestion. This is because the regs were dumped on hunters before they had a chance to research how to best utilize steel shot. (Loosen chokes one level, better decoy spreads, better calling, etc.)
Yes, apex predators and carrion eaters were affected more, but to believe lead ( jacketed or not) rifle and handgun projectiles are enough if a threat to them is ludicrous.

You can empty a case of lead shot on small game on the very same ground & somehow thats not a problem.

 

[Bcwitt]

I believe science, I do not trust scientists.

 

[Larry in wyoming]

I dont know if science was ever "pure", but it seems to me that when they have to go begging for funding, the INTERPRETATION of the results might get skewed.

 

[JTHunter]

Like my wife………

Nice photos. In the foursome, the small bird the lady at the far left is holding isn't clearly visible. From the small size of the bird, I'm wondering if that is a kestrel?

 

[Dudedog]

Nice photos. In the foursome, the small bird the lady at the far left is holding isn't clearly visible. From the small size of the bird, I'm wondering if that is a kestrel?

(edit)Don't know if the lady is Walkalongs wife (opps far left probably no) but they CARE about the birds.
Braver than me LOL, I'd be afraid it would rip my face off......
Some of them have some serious talons......
OH wait a minute we need to ban birds with Black Talons

 

[hso]

This has started to wander far off topic and even within topic has started to have to be managed too much for inappropriate posts. Contact your elected officials and the NSSF to oppose the scope of this, but thank those members who have spoiled the discussion here for the thread closure.