Yes. Actually, you create new problems (for shooters), while trying to fix environmental "problems" that most likely did not exist in the first place.salopian said:Can I deduce that steel as more problems than lead shot?
When I saidastomb said:Deadpair, you are dead wrong on this one.
Getting lead shot out of the marshes was one of the best things that has been done. I have read the original published work by Dr. Frank Belrose and others and subsequent studies on lead posioning frequency in eastern Kansas. The problem of lead poisoning was real, widespread and a significant motality factor. 6% of ducks stopping at eastern Kansas duck clubs and a public marsh in the fall had lead pellets in their crops or gizzards. Many of these pellets were thought to have been picked up on site.
There is no need to bring up the crippling loss issue; it was shown to be a bogus issue in the mid 80s. We have had to use steel shot for almost 20 years now. it is time to give up these specious arguments and get over it.
I was talking about the point of view of a gun club that goes to steel just because "lead is toxic", and there is no true environmental need (shallow wetlands frequented by waterfowl, or highly basic or acidic water sources in the shot fall area) just hysteria or junk science.while trying to fix environmental "problems" that most likely did not exist in the first place.