A recent CNN news article which we posted on the MFGA Facebook page about lead poisoning of American Bald eagles in the USA generated considerable interest and one writer suggesting it is the work of the anti-gun lobby. It is true that in the USA and England in particular environmentalists have been pushing the no-lead position and this has been adopted by some anti-gun proponents. Such is not the case with the MFGA. In this blog, we will present objectively general information on lead ammunition in large game hunting. Part two will be more technical with links to some web sites and current science that the reader can explore.
We are jumping right into it….
Why A Voluntary Approach to Non-Toxic Ammunition in Hunting
Not a lead ban...
Let’s be straight and upfront, this blog post is not advocating a ban or prohibition in any way to the outright use of lead ammunition. Rather, we are asking government, academia, outfitters, fish and game clubs and individual hunters to work collectively to develop a “voluntary reduction program” in the use of lead ammunition to reduce impacts on non-target wildlife. New Brunswick has an opportunity to be a leader nationally in addressing the question (though we lag slightly behind Nova Scotia).
A Little History...
Lead has been classified under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act as a Toxic Substance and is regulated as such. Lead is a heavy metal that is known to have acute and sub-lethal impacts on various organisms, as well as bio-accumulation in the food chain. Even in very low quantities, lead is known to be toxic and can cause sub-lethal effects that are easily detectable. At high concentrations lead poisoning will result in visible physiological and neurological responses which can potentially lead to death.
Sources and releases of lead to the environment from human activities (industry, gasoline, paints, plumbing, waste management) have been highly regulated by Environment and Climate Change Canada.
The position taken by the MFGA via a motion and member vote was to support the concept of voluntary reduction in the use of lead ammunition in large game hunting. That position was based on presentations by the late Dr. Helene VanDonnick and scientific evidence she shared with the MFGA in 2015. Note we are talking hunting.
Nova Scotia also publishes in their hunting and fishing guide a two page advisory on lead ammunition, promoting, again a voluntary reduction in large game hunting. They are leading the Maritimes right now.
The National Fishing and Hunting Collaborative of which NB through the NBWF is an associate recognized toxic ammunition as a national priority and stated as a goal “Working with and encouraging industry to develop and market non-lead alternatives for fishing tackle and ammunition that compete with lead-based products in price, availability, and effectiveness.” All the provincial wildlife federations see this as an issue and all support responsible firearms ownership.
Neither the MFGA, the provincial DNRs, or the Wildlife Federations across Canada are using the discussion of lead in an attempt to control firearms ownership, but are taking the approach of doing what is right for the wildlife-based upon ethical hunting practices.
What happens with lead ammunition….?
Modern high velocity, lead and lead-core ammunition often fragments on impact with large game, sending very small shards and particles of lead into the meat and organs up to 18” from the visible bullet path thus rendering the meat unusable and unsafe for consumption. If this wastage is left in the field it then becomes available to non-targeted wildlife such as scavenging raptors. Lead fragments contained in “gut piles” are a documented source of lead to valued ecosystem components such as scavenging species (eagles, owls, and other birds of prey, etc). Scientific information exists for North America and Europe including neighbouring Nova Scotia and Maine.
In Maine (Bald eagles), Mierzykowski et al. ( 2013 ) found that 19 out of 127 (15 %) bald eagles collected dead in the state of Maine between the years 2001 and 2012 had liver lead concentrations indicative of clinical poisoning (>6 ppm wet weight). The highest lead concentrations were detected in the eagles collected during the winter and early spring months. Lead poisoning has been well documented in NS by the late Dr. Helene van Donnick.
Lead shot and ammunition has been banned nationally for waterfowl and snipe hunting and also from all Federal National Wildlife Areas since 1999 with a resultant decrease in lead body burden in waterfowl over the years. This was a North American population-wide issue. The current use of lead in large game hunting is not causing any population-level issues (other than the California Condor) but there is overwhelming evidence of impacts on individuals within populations on a hemispheric scale.
Here at home, our New Brunswick Department of Natural Resources and Energy Development (DNRED) has already developed an internal policy (similar to NS) to use non-toxic ammunition when dispatching injured or nuisance wildlife, thereby demonstrating awareness and a willingness to initiate some action. This action is commendable as a first step.
In a 2015 study in Quebec, Fachehoun et.al reported “The consumption of meat from cervids killed with lead ammunition may increase lead exposure and its associated health risks. It would be important to inform the population, particularly hunters, about this potential risk and promote the use of lead-free ammunition.”
So, what can be done...
There exist options to reduce potential lead exposure and releases through the use of alternative ammunition such as non-toxic ammunition (ex. copper) through voluntary actions by individual hunters making informed decisions. Any voluntary approach is, as a general approach, preferable to legislated or regulatory actions imposed by any level of Government.
A key element of ethical sports hunting is not just to respect the environment but also to represent the hunting/shooting community in an environmentally responsible and sustainable manner. The voluntary use of non-toxic ammunition whenever possible is a measure that we can easily undertake to show the non-hunting and non-shooting public that we take the stewardship of our natural resources seriously. It also meshes with the ecosystem-level concept of sustainable wildlife populations.
Sportsmen, and sportswomen, need to demonstrate that they are open to changing practices for the betterment of all people and animals that utilize the areas in which hunting occurs. It is also important that we make this effort a voluntary initiative rather than a purely legislated one.
Options to think about...
We need some leadership so why not look to DNRED to consider developing an incremental program in support of a voluntary reduction in the amount of lead used in hunting, and to promote the use of non-toxic alternatives. Implementing an incremental approach based on education and outreach will ultimately reduce the potential for human exposure and reduce the impact on forest ecosystems and non-targeted wildlife.
An incremental program could include, but not be limited to the following elements:
develop a module on non-toxic ammunition in provincial Hunter Education classes so that new hunters, especially youth, learn about the risks of lead and the options available for non-toxic ammunition; There is virtually no cost beyond developing presentation material.
include information in the Provincial Hunt and Trap Guide similar to what Nova Scotia currently includes in their guide. The costs would be minor and only require 2 additional pages in the Hunt Trap Guide;
developing and promoting hunter best practices such as those Included in the Nova Scotia Hunting guide book;
encouraging industry to make non-toxic ammunition more readily available and more economical. This is a challenge that likely requires national coordination possibly through both government and various stakeholder groups such as NBWF and OFAH, to name two;
conducting information sessions for hunter groups. This could involve departmental biologists and rangers making presentations to various fish and game clubs to encourage voluntary reductions, present information on risks and best practices and to talk about the performance of non-toxic ammunition;
providing information and promotion on the DNRED website. Again this is a relatively low- cost action.
I must stress again, that this is not an effort to prevent the use of lead but rather an effort to educate hunters so that they choose to use less toxic and equally effective choices for ammunition.
Lastly, anti-hunting and anti-gun lobbies are gaining a louder voice, and if we fail to address concerns over the toxicity of the ammunition we use they will have added additional fuel to erode the basis for the continuance of our hunting and firearms ownership privileges and traditions, Today’s youth are much more environmentally aware, and as they are introduced to hunting, the opportunity exists to educate them as to responsible ammunition selection.
Part Two will follow with some techie stuff….