Posted on 03/02/2017 12:17:28 PM PST by jazusamo
no it doesn’t
the regulation applied to wildlife preserves where there can be no indiscriminate killing of wild life. Any wild life killing will be carefully discriminated
Oh no, will those nice animals get lead poisoning from mean hunters, now? /S Another win....Thank you, Sec. Zinks
While the mechanism for lead shot to kill waterfowl definitely exists, the instance of it and the effect on wild populations of waterbirds is hugely overblown.
This is the same as the DDT scare all over again, except instead of killing hundreds of millions of humans, it is causing increased costs to the hunting community, decreased interest in hunting (the desired goal of these feel good laws), and actual decrease in funds available to manage wildlife due to loss of the sales of hunting licenses and related gear.
The number one reason for the drastic loss of the numbers of waterfowl and wildlife is due to urban sprawl and loss of habitat. The huge flocks that used to populate the Eastern Flyway were not lost due to any kind of lead poisoning, it is due to loss of habitat, pure and simple.
Many hunters quit waterfowl hunting because the non toxic loads do not kill, they only wound and cripple, unless the bird is inside 20 yards (rarely happens), I am one that was forced to quit.
The leftists are only interested in eliminating hunting, not saving animals from unintentional lead poisoning.
It had to do with raptors eating lead pellets in dead or wounded waterfowl. Eagles and peregrine falcons. I doubt it’d be changed. Love to see it though.
Wait, the meat at stores didn’t harm any animals?? I guess the meat harmed soybeans, only!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.