There is an article in the latest African Hunting Gazette about a study of lead levels in African vultures. Africa may go unleaded in the future.
Having lived and hunted in the "condor zone" of California all my life and never seen a condor, I wonder how much difference it made for them but there are lots of buzzards and we are now seeing eagles regularly so maybe it helps.
Going unleaded has never been much of a sacrifice IMHO but it might be a problem for some who shoot double guns.

lead does not seem to bother Texas buzzards!

The only trip I took to the dark continent with leaded bullets was the very first one I took. I have since switched to Barnes or CEB's.

Honestly how many shot animals are being eaten by vultures? In the grand scheme of death and dying, shot critters are minuscule. As dumb kids we ran around with lead pellets in our mouth for quick reload, on the regular. Some might argue but, I seem perfectly fine. Lead wheel weights on tires going 60mph are far more lethal.

Keep on giving the antis ideas and then we will have more of our rights taken away.It is sad that people who hunt and shoot guns buy this shit and encourage are enemies.

We have more eagles, ospreys, hawks and buzzards in Pennsylvania now than at any time in my 76 years. Nearly every town has a skeet/trap range near it, most simply covered with lead pellets. IMHO, lead bullets as a danger to birds and other game is a non-issue, except when the lead is fired at them .

It could be that a non-lead bullet company is sponsoring that magazine.That could explain that ridiculous article.

I follow a number of high volume prairie dog hunters on Youtube, they detonate an incredible number of small mammals on a regular basis and leave the remains for 'natures hoovers'. Many of these guys show pictures of eagles and hawks descending on the free lunch. Surely if those birds are flourishing because of the buffet laid on then lead cannot be harming birds that are actively targeting lead shot carrion.
Those animals are shot with bullets designed to fragment to extremely small particles, they must be dispersed in to the meat yet the birds flourish. Perhaps more trouble arises when a bird consumes a whole bullet of harder construction such as those used on larger game then break them down in their gizzard? Certainly it would be wrong to paint all shooting black with the same brush whilst there are obviously different sides to the story.

My understanding of this issue is that carrion feeding birds in general are extremely sensitive to lead poisoning. Something like single digit ppb (parts per billion) will kill these birds. I'm not shilling for any bullet manufacturer and like I stated in the OP, I've not seen any real difference here where lead bullets have been banned for 30 years. But it MAY be a factor and MAY make a difference so unless you are shooting an odd caliber or a rifle where monos might be a problem like a double, you may want to consider using lead free bullets on your next trip.
I've been using Barnes almost exclusively for about 30 years and don't feel handicapped in the least. Saeed can buy or make anything he wants and he uses monos. If you think that nothing works for you but a NP or Swift or Woodleigh, by all means use them, but you may not be able to use them at some point in the future. In the mean time, if switching to monos on your next safari saves a few buzzards and the bullets perform, whats the harm?

Went to South Africa in May with my wife. Hunted 10 days then went "on tour" for a week (Kruger and other points of interest). Spent a day and night at a predator/raptor rehab facility. According to them, the #1 problem for vultures, by far, was poachers poisoning them so that their presence would not alert the game rangers. No mention of lead whatsoever.
FWIW, there is talk in Texas about banning lead shot even for dove shooting. I have spoken with many qualified biologists that believe that the original lead ban for waterfowl was/is BS.

The last report I read was a study in California said even after 5 years no reduction in lead was found.

According to researchers working at or with the Donald Smith Laboratory, part of the University of California, Santa Cruz (UCSC), the purported justification for the passage of the 2008 lead ammunition ban, and for the proposed expanded ban (AB 711), is that lead poisoning is a major source of Condor mortalities. The claim is that Condors scavenge dead animals that were shot with lead-based ammunition by hunters. The theory is that the Condors ingest pieces of the lead bullets while eating the parts of the animal left behind by hunters.

But UCSC researchers now admit that “lead exposures continue” and Condor blood-levels have not dropped since the AB 821 ban went into effect in 2008 and has been ineffective in reducing exposure to lead. Despite a 99% compliance rate by hunters, the 5 year lead ammunition ban wirhin the condor corridor has failed to produce the measurable results that proponents of the bill claim would have resolved condor lead poisoning. Supporters of lead ammunition bans continue to ignore the many alternative sources of lead in the environment as the primary cause of lead poisoning in California condors, instead choosing to attack the use of traditional lead ammunition for hunting game. Despite these results, proponents of a lead ban have now put forth a pending state bill that would ban the use of lead ammunition throughout California.

Think about the probability

The animal must be shot and then not recovered or the the bullet must enter abdomen then a condor has to find the carrion before coyotes and other vultures.

The more likely source of lead or other metals poisoning comes from the propensity of the condor to eat from garbage dumps.

Below are the contents recovered from a condor chicks stomach obviously brought to it by parent. My understanding is the lead isotope in bullets is quite common in other metals.

I read that ridiculous waste of space article. I am very disappointed that the African Hunting Gazette would even print such goat plop propaganda. There are so many misconceptions in there. I can count on one hand the number of animals we have shot in the US, South America, Europe and Africa that the bullet did not exit. In every case that it did not, the bullets were recovered to see how they performed/expanded. In my limited experience, most hunters want to see the bullet and "autopsy" the kill. Our natural curiosity deprives the scavengers of this evil lead concoction. In the 400+ years of lead being put into animals, I would think many animals would be extinct if these newly enlightened geniuses were correct in their theories.


Just a harmless rant. Safe shooting and safe travels...………...LL

The U. C. Santa Cruz study group refused to release their raw data for peer review. There is absolutely no definitive evidence that hunter-generated lead sources are impacting condor health. The one case that can be cited is one where a rancher deliberately killed an animal, (a cow, I believe), and left it for condor food with the bullet inside. Having said that, the lead issue is a ship that has already sailed. In 1958, my parents painted my newborn brother's crib with lead-free paint. In the 1970s, lead was removed from gasoline. In the 1980s, lead was removed from printing inks. Leakage from lead water pipes is touted as the source for the high blood lead levels of inner-city children. Hundreds of bridges in the American Midwest and South are rusting away because the mitigation costs to strip the lead paint away and repaint them are so high. The American psyche is over-saturated with the unshakable belief that lead is a deadly poison in the environment. The truth is that billions of lead bullets from the American Civil War are still in the ground after 150 years, with NO evidence of lead contamination in the rivers or the people. None of that matters. As hunters, we cannot sway the misperceptions of the overwhelming majority. Personally, I have used lead-free bullets since 1993 due to personal choice. Cal Pappas, in his book on the .600NE,has already debunked, (subject to a few conditions),the myth that monometal bullets are not suitable for use in double rifles. There is little reason for us as American hunters to not embrace non-lead bullets. To those who live where such bullets or ammo are not available, then understanding and tolerance need apply. Our efforts should be focused on areas that we can win, or at least influence the decisions. Fighting against lead bans is the modern-day equivalent of tilting at windmills.

Ummm, when was the last time you saw a critter left in the field? With the rare exception of the wounded / lost animal, it doesn't happen in Africa!

Waste of time!

Besides, thinning the vultures a bit wouldn't exactly be a problem!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Dettorre:
Think about the probability

The animal must be shot and then not recovered or the the bullet must enter abdomen then a condor has to find the carrion before coyotes and other vultures.

The more likely source of lead or other metals poisoning comes from the propensity of the condor to eat from garbage dumps.

Below are the contents recovered from a condor chicks stomach obviously brought to it by parent. My understanding is the lead isotope in bullets is quite common in other metals.

Oh trust me....the vultures will likely find it first! They find everything...quickly!!!

I've never wanted to shoot an animal in Africa like I've wanted to shoot vultures who find the baits!

quote:

Originally posted by drj:
Went to South Africa in May with my wife. Hunted 10 days then went "on tour" for a week (Kruger and other points of interest). Spent a day and night at a predator/raptor rehab facility. According to them, the #1 problem for vultures, by far, was poachers poisoning them so that their presence would not alert the game rangers. No mention of lead whatsoever.
FWIW, there is talk in Texas about banning lead shot even for dove shooting. I have spoken with many qualified biologists that believe that the original lead ban for waterfowl was/is BS.

Would the rehab center have been Moholoholo? I toured that one in 2003. Very interesting place.

Have nt read the article, but the effects of lead poisoning are well known. That’s why lead is no longer used in household paints etc. In Europe there is a growing level of not allowing lead shot meat into the retail food chain. Most venison is sold and many dealers pay a premium for non lead shot meat.

We have been carrying out an extensive trial of some European non lead bullets on deer. And over several hundred deer they kill just as well and as quickly as traditional lead bullets. The exception is when impact velocities fall below c2,400 FPS. You also don’t get the fragmentation and meat damage you often get especially when you hit shoulder bones.

Personally I am of the view that modern non lead bullets work just as well, shoot very accurately, so why would nt I use them, as I don’t really want to eat lead impregnated meat.

Shotguns are a totally different matter. Impact velocities are low enough that lead pellets don’t vaporise, however latest generation steel cartridges are so much better than those from ten years ago.

Do you have a source for data that indicates how much lead I absorb from eating a steak from my last whitetail buck? I'm now 76 and have been eating deer and other animals killed with lead bullets and pellets since I was a gleam in someone's eye, and I don't think I have a single symptom of lead poisoning. There is a vast difference between a baby chewing on lead paint flakes and eating meat from an animal killed by a lead bullet. Until I see some hard data, I'm going to put this one into the class that includes other green baloney.

quote:

Originally posted by drj:

Went to South Africa in May with my wife. Hunted 10 days then went "on tour" for a week (Kruger and other points of interest). Spent a day and night at a predator/raptor rehab facility. According to them, the #1 problem for vultures, by far, was poachers poisoning them so that their presence would not alert the game rangers. No mention of lead whatsoever.
FWIW, there is talk in Texas about banning lead shot even for dove shooting. I have spoken with many qualified biologists that believe that the original lead ban for waterfowl was/is BS.

Poisoning is the reason for the massive loss of African Vultures. Poachers are intentionally killing them as circling Vultures give away the position of a dead animal. The environmentalist know this but are diverting the facts in a silly attempt to sway public opinion to achieve a goal. And their goal of course is to attack hunting.

Here are the facts - https://www.usnews.com/news/wo...vultures-with-poison

quote:

Originally posted by muttleysgone:

quote:

Originally posted by drj:

Would the rehab center have been Moholoholo? I toured that one in 2003. Very interesting place.

I took a nyala there with Claude Kleynhans in 2003. It was a bit weird walking around with a rifle with bus loads of school kids and tourists there. When we were packing the nyala to the truck Claude with his typical dry sense of humor said, "If anybody sees us just tell them we tranquilized it".

This is ridiculous. In Argentina the Caracara and eagles (Águilas) have multiplied DUE to hunting and, trust me, there’s a lot of lead ingested by them eating dead/dying dove.

My only concern is that I’m not sure they would know how to hunt on their own after generations have relied on dove hunting to eat.

That being said, there is a push for non toxic shot there.

Don’t forget lead sinkers. How many of them have you crunched on? Save the fish!! Save something Dam it!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Blacktailer:

quote:

Originally posted by muttleysgone:

quote:

Originally posted by drj:

Would the rehab center have been Moholoholo? I toured that one in 2003. Very interesting place.

I took a nyala there with Claude Kleynhans in 2003. It was a bit weird walking around with a rifle with bus loads of school kids and tourists there. When we were packing the nyala to the truck Claude with his typical dry sense of humor said, "If anybody sees us just tell them we tranquilized it".

If memory serves, the Moholoholo Rehab Center owned a huge ranch that bordered Kruger National Park. We hunted on that ranch.

I'm always amazed and amused when folks who have no factual knowledge other than their own observations dismiss scientific research.

I know this will inflame several who have posted here because I dare disagree with their opinion, but here goes.

There are more than a few studies that have been done on the detrimental effects of lead ingestion - whether in humans or in wildlife. If you don't understand that or you don't believe that - well it may be the residual effects from swallowing lead weights to prove your point...

I don't believe a lot of what I read, but if somebody presents the data from their research in a format that I can understand, then I can reach my own conclusions. Granted there have been cases of researchers who deliberately or unwittingly distorted the facts due to influence or bias - but I think most folks who publish in peer reviewed journals know they have to pass the "red-face" test, and make every effort to avoid being called out for bias.

If you have an interest, and if you are open minded enough to admit you aren't omniscient, I would invite you to do your own examination of scientific research on the subject.

You might want to look at Lead Exposure in Free-flying Turkey Vultures is Associated with Big Game Hunting in California, PLoS ONE 6(4): e15350. Not too detailed - and I do think they overstate their case in their conclusions - but it provides food for thought.

There is even something for those who partake in pasture poodle shooting (SERTs or Self Erecting Rifle Targets as a friend in Colorado DOW called them). Check out Recreational Shooting of Prairie Dogs: A portal for lead entering wildlife food chains. Journal of Wildlife Management 71:103-108.

These are only two examples - and probably not the best examples - of studies that are there for your reading enjoyment.

I live in Texas, so I'm used to hearing the opinions of folks who live where every male person over the age of 16 has God-given knowledge on how to coach football and manage white-tail deer encoded in their DNA. And I know several who have posted on here will dismiss this information as "biased propaganda paid for by Kalifornians" or "fake news paid for by Humane Society" in an automatic knee-jerk reaction - but I would encourage you to open your mind (NOT a la Timothy Leary) and inform your opinion before stating it.

Good Hunting (whether with lead or not)!

Acer

The Ballistic Biologist

Acer,

The problem with most of this research is bias... both cultural bias and confirmation bias.

The methodology is very suspect. Remember that lead is ubiquitous in our environment and that there has been little attempt to measure lead from shooting in populations. The condor research in California is a prime example of confirmation bias. They assumed it would make a huge difference as far as lead bullets. Banning them has had zero effect, and they didn’t look in to dusting behavior and the amount of lead due to the huge amounts of vaporized lead from motor vehicle exhaust.

Human research has been remarkably vague since the removal of organic lead compounds from paint. There is a certain amount of lead exposure due to industrial processes that is dangerous to people because it is nonmetallic lead... humans and most animals don’t have problems with metallic lead, but organic compound lead is highly toxic (where shooting has a lead impact for people is related to organic lead compounds in priming components.)

The duck tests done at Pautuxtent and follow on ones have been designed to confirm lead as a problem and generally have had large correction factors in them that are based on confirmation bias. Hell, if they had been right we should be literally wading in ducks and geese by banning lead shot. While numbers rebounded a bit after the ban, it probably had more to do with habitat restoration than any effect of the lead ban in hunting migratory waterfowl did. Yet, where is the talk about walking back that ban when it has been proven to have not had the impact that the scientific basis was “shown” to have?

Similarly, why is the move to double down on the California lead ban due to condors when it has been proven to have had no effect at all?

High lead levels do kill animals. No one argues that, but the correlation of shooting activity to bloodstream lead levels is VERY weak.

One side effect of zero tolerance is the dramatic increase in cost relating to shooting. That is cutting participation, which will reduce funding which will adversely impact habitat protection and restoration. I suspect banning lead will lead to more negative impact on all wildlife than a lead ban will save.

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:

Poisoning is the reason for the massive loss of African Vultures. Poachers are intentional killing them as circling Vultures give away the position of a dead animal. The environmentalist know this but are diverting the facts in a silly attempt to sway public opinion to achieve a goal. And their goal of course is to attack hunting.

Here are the facts - https://www.usnews.com/news/wo...vultures-with-poison

+1


Wonder how much lead I have accidentally ingested in a lifetime of eating birds and small game shot with a shotgun.

On second thought, that may explain some things.

I have long wondered about ducks ingesting lead as they feed. Lead is very heavy right? wouldn't it settle very quickly in the mud or sand at the bottom of lakes and rivers?

crbutler,

I appreciate your thoughtful response - and appreciate that you have done some homework rather than just saying I don't believe it so it can't be true!

I can't find it now, but recall reading a study several years ago about lead levels in vultures - and was amazed at the species ability to excrete lead rather than accumulating it to toxic levels. Perhaps bodies of other species have mechanisms to reduce the build-up as well.

I also appreciate that you address lead from motor vehicle exhaust in your post. I remember lots of folks complaining about how removing lead from gasoline was a ploy to reduce engine life for car manufacturers and increase profits from fuel sales. I'm sure that factored into the equation, but it seems like slowing down the rate of contamination from a harmful substance is a good thing overall - and I haven't heard any complaints about that in a while, so I can see how a move to "lead-free ammunition" could be normalized over time without excessive negative consequences impacting participation.

I don't have any complaint with using lead bullets or shotgun shells - and do it routinely. Unfortunately, where I work, we are mandated to use non-toxic ammunition where practical (meaning copper .22 bullets for dispatching hogs in traps, which I'm not too happy with). My comments were aimed at the posters who don't bother to look at the pros and cons of the question - and offer unsupported opinions.

In todays Montreal newspaper I read that there was some study done and they found too much caffeine in the St-Laurent river.There is a photo of a woman in scuba gear on the sand bank of a river..It went so far as saying that the caffeine came from energy drinks! What a huge load of shit.This french newspaper has been serving someones agenda and constantly attacking energy drinks and soda drinks.Of all the drugs that go into the river they found caffeine from energy drinks! IMO one motive behind this could be to push for a new tax on such drinks.

I rest my case...

I have been travelling around Namibia for the last two weeks, including in the likes of Etosha. I have seen precisely one vulture in the whole and only perhaps half a dozen eagles - Warburg, Martial and Veraux snake eagle.

Looking at game surveys there has been a big collapse in game numbers thanks to the drought for the last few years, but that doesn’t explain complete absence of vultures. Saw both lion and cheetah kills and would normally expect vultures to be there.

Argue the science all you want but with a half dozen manufacturers now making unleaded bullets and the TSX probably being the most recommended bullet by most PH's it doesn't seem like much of a sacrifice to go unleaded no matter what the justification.

quote:

Originally posted by Heym SR20:
I have been travelling around Namibia for the last two weeks, including in the likes of Etosha. I have seen precisely one vulture in the whole and only perhaps half a dozen eagles - Warburg, Martial and Veraux snake eagle.

Looking at game surveys there has been a big collapse in game numbers thanks to the drought for the last few years, but that doesn’t explain complete absence of vultures. Saw both lion and cheetah kills and would normally expect vultures to be there.

I saw the same thing a few weeks ago including in Etosha, and wonder where the “overpopulation” is that was mentioned above. Numbers were down in latest trips to Zim too.

According to Maria Diekmann of REST ( https://www.restnamibia.org ), the elephant poachers are poisoning their carcisss as the vultures give their illegal activity away.

Could it be vulture populations are down because wildlife populations are down?

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Could it be vulture populations are done because wildlife populations are down?

The Parsi population is dwindling and Sky burials are less fashionable.

Interestingly enough, I live 1/2 mile from the California Condor Reserve.. In the reserve all the time... Yet to see a Condor after 15yrs here.. As I understand, all the Native California Condors are penned up.. The ones that are flying around are Andean Condors which are a smaller sub species they are trying to get established so as not to lose funding for their nonsensical project.

RC

In the wilder areas I have been in, there have been a goodly number of scavenger birds, but as one gets closer to agriculture, they become less common.

I have seen lots of dead birds near a poisoned corpse that the locals laced with (I was told) cattle dip. We found a half full bag of arsenic ant poison one time (like 10#)

I honestly think that the decrease in scavengers is more due to deliberate "revenge" poisoning than lead.

Now, big game hunting, sure, going lead free is a minimal impact- but when you add in bird shooting (even with all our tech, no one has come up with a good and economical replacement for lead shot; and they have yet to come up with an adequate replacement for rimfire or airguns regardless of cost.

I would miss seeing vultures or other scavengers and shooting hyenas is a load of fun- I don't want them having low populations. Heck, most of my ammo over in Africa has been monometals- but it will have no impact if all safari hunters go lead free- that is not (numerically anyhow) a potential significant source of contamination.

quote:

I honestly think that the decrease in scavengers is more due to deliberate "revenge" poisoning than lead.

That is the honest truth as far as Africa is concerned, where the trend is the poisoning of carcasses as a form of retaliation.

Reread the article. While not an overt attack on Hunting or Hunting with lead bullets, the specter is there. On the first page the author lists 3-4 other causes of mortality caused directly (poisoning, Muti) and indirectly(power lines, turbines) by man. Yet, the article is written around Hunting with lead free bullets. Without turning off the spigot, bailing water with cups is pointless. It’s another feel good exercise in futility. Want hunters to take the article seriously? Address the absolute known causes of death. As in the purposeful killings. Active hunters love wildlife, want to see proliferation, give millions through donations, taxes, licensing and fees. More willing than a non hunter to be directly involved with conservation. Reality is Hunting is and has been under siege for a quite awhil now, and this less than proven, controversial lead mortality stinks. Especially in light of what’s taking the real toll on populations. My god the road kill in America is staggering, again lead wheel weights on speeding tires is far more lethal. Prove that lead bullets/shot toxicity is decreasing populations, I’m on board and probably most hunters(and don’t forget fishers). Keep pulling these feel good, looks good in headlines theories and ideas while the true slaughter rages with nary a word and you will never get the full support of those who truly fund conservation.