lead ban

Speckmisser

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2001
Messages
12,900
Reaction score
26
Yupp... lead ban takes effect with the new license year. There's a meeting in Bodega Bay next weekend where they'll be discussing expanding the ban to rimfire, shotgun, and muzzleloader (as per the proposed regulations). If you thought it was too late to speak up and raise Cain, you were wrong... there's still time.

If you can't make it to Bodega Bay, you can still write to the CA Fish and Game Commission and make your argument. Details are available on the F&G Commission site... http://www.fgc.ca.gov

If you write (I should say, WHEN you write), please make an effort to be constructive. Let them know your thoughts on the ban, especially the impacts of banning lead rimfires and archaic calibers. If you have alternatives, state them. Remember, while you can argue with the ban in general, the condor issue is a dead horse... attack the rules where they are now, not where they were.
 

Cold1nhand

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
1,151
Reaction score
0
I have already written several congressmen, doing just that. Discussing the fact that how can you add to a law that hasn't even taken effect, therefore do not know if this will remeady the problem. I argued in favor of giving the current restrictions a couple years to see if it helps the condors health. If it does, then look at expanding. Never a good idea to find out if you can swim in the middle of the ocean, try the shallow end of a swimming pool. Perhaps we can put a petetion together on here to have someone present it at Bodega Bay???
 

boar slayer

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
358
Reaction score
13
i had talked with Craig stowers the contact listed for dfg today and he said thier is going to be a country wide meeting of fish and game to disscuss banning lead for hunting through out the united states due to the human health issues of consuming lead this is not going to stop this is the future nontoxic ammo its just that kalifornia had to put a birds health in the spot light to get this to pass through legislation they shure wouldnt do it to for the health of hunters lets face it lead is poison WE have to hope that one poison is not substituted for another like tungsten it causes cancer .
 

NorCal Cazadora

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Messages
103
Reaction score
1
I went to the last F&G meeting and here's what I was told by staff there:

1. The ban is a done deal. That was approved in December, and while you can comment on it, it's over. Theoretically they could overturn it, but it's highly, highly unlikely.

2. The current action is strictly about certifying which ammunition will be defined as meeting the lead ban. This matters because most "non-lead" ammo has at least a little lead in it, so they have to decide how much is OK under their new rules.

3. If the commission doesn't certify any ammo, then there won't be anything you can shoot there, so we really need them to certify something.

This week's meeting is Thursday and Friday - see details here) - but I understand they don't necessarily have to make the decision this week.
 

Val

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 25, 2003
Messages
1,317
Reaction score
4
The DF&G under Gov. Davis became a front for the lunatic fringe bleeding heart liberal "environmentalists". Our current Governor has done nothing to reintroduce science into the management of our fish and game.
 

Speckmisser

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2001
Messages
12,900
Reaction score
26
Just to clarify, the centerfire lead ban is a done deal. That was signed into law.

The inclusion of rimfire, shotgun slugs, and muzzleloader ammo is NOT a done deal, and these are a large part of the topic for this Thursday and Friday in Bodega Bay. As I understand it, everything outside of the original bill is still a "recommendation"... although it will be hard to overturn unless a compelling argument can be made.
 

WildlifeBranch

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 3, 2007
Messages
608
Reaction score
56
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NorCal Cazadora @ Apr 8 2008, 08:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
I went to the last F&G meeting and here's what I was told by staff there:

1. The ban is a done deal. That was approved in December, and while you can comment on it, it's over. Theoretically they could overturn it, but it's highly, highly unlikely.

2. The current action is strictly about certifying which ammunition will be defined as meeting the lead ban. This matters because most "non-lead" ammo has at least a little lead in it, so they have to decide how much is OK under their new rules.

3. If the commission doesn't certify any ammo, then there won't be anything you can shoot there, so we really need them to certify something.

This week's meeting is Thursday and Friday - see details here) - but I understand they don't necessarily have to make the decision this week.[/b]
Good post. I agree with what you have stated.

Speck, the .22 rimfire, slugs, and muzzleloader (as well as wildcat adaptations) were also adopted in December as needing to be "lead-free", it just is delayed in showing up in regulations because we had to respond to all public comments on the topic received, and address the changes that the Commission made at the December meeting.
 

bpnclark

Banned
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
902
Reaction score
10
This whole Lead Ban thing is a great idea. Lead bullets from deer hunter’s rifles were the reason that the Condor almost became extinct. This Lead Ban will definitely save more vultures. Maybe gun shots are also scaring the Condors. Maybe we should ban gun shots and load noises next.

Support the ban by hunting out of State.
 

Speckmisser

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2001
Messages
12,900
Reaction score
26
Eric, I'd imagine you're a lot more intimate with this than I am, so I hesitate to argue with you... but there is currently no effective date on the acceptance of the proposed regulatory changes. That means the language is still waiting to be finalized. If you can change one word, you can change every word.

I also agree with Holly's key points, particularly #3:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>
3. If the commission doesn't certify any ammo, then there won't be anything you can shoot there, so we really need them to certify something.[/b]
If they don't certify something, then they will certify nothing.

The Certification Process WILL determine that there is no lead-free alternative for rimfire ammunition. The minor exception, CCI's .22wmr bullets are not available and will likely not be widely available until fall or winter at best. Rimfire ammunition will be banned, at least until lead-free alternatives can be certified... and does anyone want to know how long that will take in this state? Reference the handgun safety certification requirements now in place, and the fact that many handgun manufacturers have simply stopped trying to sell guns in CA as a result. Ammunition will face the same hurdles. Where will the money for this certification come from? The industry will foot the bill, and hunters will pay it.

Whatever the current status of the regulation, if sportsmen shut up and take it now, then they may as well bend over for a rapid expansion of this legislation. It's not the condor anymore. If you folks have been keeping up with the news, the current uproar about lead particles in venison is spearheaded by the Peregrine Fund... the same Peregrine Fund that was so involved in the condor issue... and you can bet it will be leveraged to justify banning lead ammo all over CA and the rest of the US.

Bottom line... we need to fight for a sensible approach to mitigate the risks posed by lead ammunition. A phase-out with the cooperation of sportsmen and ammo manufacturers is the only logical way to get this done. The industry can adjust, but it will take time. Simply flipping the switch on lead ammo is unfair to both sportsmen and the hunting and shooting industry.

The lines are being drawn in CA, but you can believe this will impact the entire country. Just going out of state to hunt is NOT going to resolve the bigger issue.
 

snoopdogg

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 22, 2001
Messages
2,616
Reaction score
19
I received (as part of Hunter Safety Instructors updates) lists of lead free ammo from DFG. I'm not saying it was certified (because I glanced it over) but it was fairly lengthy and accompanied by a letter reminding of the ban effective dates.
 

NorCal Cazadora

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Messages
103
Reaction score
1
Speck, yes, theoretically the commission could change its mind, but reality is it won't. I say that not to discourage hunters who are upset from writing letters and attending meetings, but to help them understand that chances are slim to none that anyone can change what's already been done, that we have to focus on what's next. Having spent about 19 years attending government meetings for a living, I've watched a lot of ordinary citizens show up at meetings and be totally flabbergasted by how the process works. I am trying to arm hunters with information that keeps them from being taken by surprise. Being taken by surprise invariably makes you less effective.

What we can and should do is write letters, make phone calls, send emails and attend meetings to make clear we don't like how this was done and that we will fight hard if anyone tries in the future to ban any type of lead ammo for which there is no alternative. For goodness sake, just about every ban that ever happened (aside from narcotics) has come with a phase-out period that allows times for alternatives. That's what we need to be pushing for.
 

Speckmisser

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2001
Messages
12,900
Reaction score
26
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>
What we can and should do is write letters, make phone calls, send emails and attend meetings to make clear we don't like how this was done and that we will fight hard if anyone tries in the future to ban any type of lead ammo for which there is no alternative. For goodness sake, just about every ban that ever happened (aside from narcotics) has come with a phase-out period that allows times for alternatives. That's what we need to be pushing for.[/b]
That part, I'll agree with, as it's what I've been advocating all along. I don't even want to "undo" it, I only want to change it. That's reasonable and realistic.

The problem is, once people say "we've lost", then we have. The problem right now is that the sporting community has never bothered to gain a foothold in the legislative process... usually because they say, "well, it's too late to change it now." or, "we can't change it.... it's never been done."

It's hard to back down when you never stood up in the first place.

I'm not about busting my head against a brick wall, but the only lost cause is the one you give up on. The California lead ban is not unassailable. The opportunity to change it is valid and available.

The "Condor Zone" is not the end of this issue, rimfires or no rimfires. If the hunting and shooting community doesn't go after this thing hard, all-out, then we stand to lose a lot more than one tiny section of one single state. I can't say this enough, it's not just the "Condor Zone" and it's not just California.

So sure the end result should be a phased-approach to getting lead out of our environment. Lead bullets and primer components should go the way of leaded gasoline and paint. But the State can't be allowed to simply flip the switch and expect it to go away. And if they try, we shouldn't let them.

But really, when you look at the bigger picture, the lead ban is only a tiny piece anyway. What I'd like to see... what we HAVE to see... goes way beyond activating people against this one law. Certainly, we need to start somewhere, but the goal should be for sportsmen, on a grass-roots level, to become much more vocal and involved in the regulatory process. The only reason this happened in the first place is because we sat back and figured someone else (NRA, CRPA, etc.) would take care of it for us... or those like me let our naivete (in my case, a misguided trust that the F&GC would use common sense)... lull us into inaction.

No one else is going to do it for us, folks. Sure, we've got allies out there, but this thing is a pretty low priority on most of their agendas.

So let's start somewhere and take what we can get on this one. Then take the momentum and use it to take a little more control of the future of our sport.
 

loadsprayer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2004
Messages
86
Reaction score
0
Let's start with the basics to start the involvement process to help express our concerns, or to (fight back). Who do we address our letters too, and who do we call?

I mean, most of us(sportsman) are so damn busy with work and family, we do not even realize how much of a real threat this lead ban is. Most sportsman, hunters, rec shooters suspected it all the time, that this ban would evolve into something more than just to protect the Condor's.

1) Who will help us in the state of California to stop the switch from being turned on.
2) Who do we address our letters to.
3) Where do you find the info on local meetings to attend to voice our rights.
4) I am a NRA member and who is helping us. I have seen very little from the NRA opposing this ban. Does the NRA feel this is not much of a threat?

The $10,000 dollar question: Does anyone in Sacramento really care if sportsman have difficulty hunting Pigs, Deer, Elk, or whatever. Where do we go from here?

Thanks for anyone's feedback!
 

Speckmisser

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2001
Messages
12,900
Reaction score
26
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (loadsprayer @ Apr 9 2008, 02:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Let's start with the basics to start the involvement process to help express our concerns, or to (fight back). Who do we address our letters too, and who do we call?[/b]
Contact your state representatives and the CA Fish and Game Commission. The F&GC contact info is on the website: http://www.fgc.ca.gov

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>
I mean, most of us(sportsman) are so damn busy with work and family, we do not even realize how much of a real threat this lead ban is. Most sportsman, hunters, rec shooters suspected it all the time, that this ban would evolve into something more than just to protect the Condor's.

1) Who will help us in the state of California to stop the switch from being turned on.
NOBODY BUT US! - that's right, nobody else is going to help us with this. We need to help ourselves.
2) Who do we address our letters to.
See the comment above. The Fish and Game Commission is making the rules. You can also contact your representatives.
3) Where do you find the info on local meetings to attend to voice our rights.
FGC Website refrenced above. The NRA-ILA usually provides updates and press releases about gun issues, although they've had very little regarding the lead ban. They also provide grass-roots activism tips and activities that you can use. You can find their site at: http://www.nra-ile.org
4) I am a NRA member and who is helping us. I have seen very little from the NRA opposing this ban. Does the NRA feel this is not much of a threat?
This is not a huge deal to the NRA. The NRA-ILA has been involved at some levels, and as of the last time I spoke to Chris Cox, he told me that they were researching legal challenges to the law. They have much bigger fish to fry, like this AB2032, and the micro-stamping bill. We need to help ourselves on this one, and maybe if we can get enough momentum, groups like NRA and CRPA can provide support.

The $10,000 dollar question: Does anyone in Sacramento really care if sportsman have difficulty hunting Pigs, Deer, Elk, or whatever. Where do we go from here?[/b]
Not really. Why should they? Up to now, sportsmen have barely made a squeak. We're poorly represented politically, and seldom take time from our busy schedules to put some sweat equity into the sport we claim to love.

I don't mean this to come across as a harsh indictment of sportsmen, it's not intended that way, but I don't know how to put it any other way... the only way we're going to make a difference in Sacramento is to demonstrate that we are a cohesive and powerful group of voters. Donating $25 a year to NRA and attending a dinner once in a while, and then waiting for that organization to take care of us is not going to work. Sacramento already knows what to expect from the NRA, and with the exception of litigation, they don't really worry about them. The NRA, to Sacramento, is not the voter. You and I are. Every hunter and fisherman in this state should be. And there are enough of us that we could be a pretty powerful voice if we'd just get it together, push off some of our differences, and work together for our common cause.

At the very least, call and write...actively. Your representatives (senate and congress) should come to recognize your signature. Ask your reps to support the issues you want to support, thank them when they do, and chastise (constructively) when they don't.

At best, attend FGC and DFG meetings and speak up. Educate yourself and try to educate others. Organize locally and generate some interest in other sportsmen to do the same. In short, sportsmen need to become activists in much the same way that environmentalists and others have done.

How's that for a short answer?


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>
Thanks for anyone's feedback![/b]
 

NorCal Cazadora

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Messages
103
Reaction score
1
The NRA, COHA (California Outdoor Heritage Alliance) and the California Rifle and Pistol Association were all at the last F&G meeting in March. I wasn't there when the decision went down in December so I don't know if they were at the table then.

As for what's happening to us, lead ban proposals are popping up everywhere. I think it's no longer a question of if, but when and how. And when and how matter a lot. The rimfire ban here was done poorly - without warning and without alternatives in place. We can be at the table and have a hope of affecting the when and how, or we can give up and, quite frankly, bend over and let 'em do what they will. I personally am not up for that.

All that said, plenty of people kill plenty of waterfowl with lead shot, so I suspect we'll survive. But from what I understand, the lead ban for waterfowl was also done when there were either few or no alternatives, and not surprisingly, a serious decline in hunters' numbers followed.

I will go to these meetings whenever I can and I will speak up at strategic moments, and I will gather all the information I can get to help other hunters also fight effectively for their rights. And I do believe there's much we can do effectively now.
 

Latest Posts

Advertisement



Top Bottom