AP file photo New rules on .22-caliber ammunition will apply only to areas where the endangered California condor roams, including the Big Sur area, above.
Posted on 12/10/2007 10:51:23 PM PST by neverdem
AP file photo New rules on .22-caliber ammunition will apply only to areas where the endangered California condor roams, including the Big Sur area, above.
SACRAMENTO — California hunting regulators Friday broadened a prohibition on lead bullets scheduled to take effect July 1, adding .22-caliber ammunition to the ban.
The new rules will apply only in those areas where the endangered California condor roams — generally, the coastal mountains from Monterey south to Ventura County and in the southern Sierra.
The action by the Fish and Game Commission follows enactment of a landmark law signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger this fall that bans the use of lead ammunition by deer hunters in the affected areas.
Lead poisoning is the leading cause of sickness and death among condors in the wild, and condor researchers say bullet fragments in the carcasses of fallen animals are the principal source of the poisoning.
Conservationists praised the regulations, adopted on a 3-1 vote.
"This is another victory for the California condor," said Graham Chisolm of Audubon California. "The commission took the right steps to ensure that the new law is implemented in a way that makes the most sense for both the condor and hunters."
"These regulations go above and beyond the scope of the law," said Pamela Flick, state program director for Defenders of Wildlife.
She noted that the law would have provided an exemption for .22-caliber ammunition, which is typically used to shoot non-game animals such as ground squirrels and black crows. Alternatives to lead ammunition for .22-caliber rifles is not yet commercially available.
Adrianna Shea, the commission's deputy executive director, said commissioners hope their action will spur manufacturers to produce nonlead alternatives. Copper bullets are already available for larger caliber rifles that are typically used for deer hunting.
She noted the dissenting vote of Commissioner Jim Kellogg was based solely on his objection to including .22-caliber ammunition in the ban.
Shea said the commission's action was independent from the law, and Friday's vote simply completed a regulatory process the commission initiated months ago.
The regulations also go one step beyond the law by banning not just the use but also the possession of lead ammunition in the affected areas. That distinction, she noted, will make it easier for wardens to enforce the ban.
Schwarzenegger in October signed AB 821 by Assemblyman Pedro Nava, D-Santa Barbara, over the objections of firearms manufacturers and gun-owner groups, including the National Rifle Association.
Incrementalism, people.
Once they get this law on the books, all it takes is an anti-gunner to claim that the condor “has roamed” on to some new area to extend the ban, and to extend the ban from .22s to any lead projectile.
I’m with you brother, we moved to Oregon in ‘90 from California mainly because of the anti-gun state government.
Oregon is a liberal state, that doesn’t mess with gun owners very much. We have concealed carry here, also.
Oh, it makes sense all right. There's nothing difficult to understand about "we're regulating you out of business."
Fortunately this is all they want - this will be the last restrictive law in California pointed at ammunition. (Stifled hysterical laughter in background.) Does anyone remember "gun control we can live with"? That one turned out to be the AWB.
One more reason not to live in California.
As for the Condors there is NO proof that their deaths are caused by bullets. Only a theory.
Perhaps, the “get out now” warning sounds good to Californians, but it looks like doom for the rest of the nation. Their liberal minds have been contaminated and are a plague on the rest of us. If they had been of sound mind, the socialists would be swimming in San Fran Bay not making the rest of us suffer.
California condors are dumber than rocks. You won’t believe how many of them kill themselves by drinking antifreeze, or landing on power lines, or (for all we know) flying straight into the ground. A geologist/paleontologist friend of mine says there is a reason they are nearly extinct, and the reason is obvious...
I forgot to mention (having lived in Kalifornia, including Ventura County, for too d@mn long) that the ‘dumber-than-a-bag-of-hammers’ endangered condors are actually smarter than your average Kalifornia voter...
So I’ll just switch to shooting them bastards with steel shot.
That’s a very rare photograph! I thought Chuck & Heiny spent most of their time together behind closed doors...
Sounds like a load of horse manure to me. A lead pellet would pass through the birds' digestive tracts in 6 hours or less.
I am not “parroting anything from anti-gunners”. It isn’t possible, I don’t know any. This is all undisputed fact and the information has been widely disseminated for well over a decade. News flash: Lead is toxic, it isn’t good for you. I learned this from the Law Enforcement officers, weapons experts and others I shoot with at the various ranges. That’s where I got it from, but if you need sources that are spreading this anti-gunner propaganda; You can start with Olin/Winchester, Remington, Federal, CCI, the DoD, US Army, The CDC, most police fraternities and private security firms, BlackwaterUSA, etc.
There are so many variables involved such as what you are shooting, handgun or rifle, What targets, (Steel target, etc.) inside or outside, is there proper ventilation. If you just hunt and shoot infrequently there should be no problem. I shoot a lot and that is how I answered the question that was asked me. When you think about the sheer number of rounds that go through just an average range in a day, well that’s a lot of lead. I am not being an alarmist, but I have seen a few ranges closed and many more have to close because of the expense. People do get sick and a lot of LEO’s who shoot an hour a week or more, have to get blood level tests. My main point was this will not hinder people from owning and firing weapons; All major manufacturers have a “clean round” available in most calibers and they are maybe a nickel or dime more per round. When the demand increases, the price will go down.
Yes, I was referring to the primer and meant to say 1/5 of the lead in the air was from the primer. When the primer detonates, it absolutely sends a cloud of molecular lead compounds into the air. Around a grain sounds about right for the lead styph crystals, but 20% of a grain in your bloodstream is enough for some to develop lead poisoning. You fire off a few thousand rounds a week and it starts to add up. I will agree that the .22 lead ammo ban is likely just anti-gunners trying to make it hard on gun owners because the .22 ammo is so cheap. I am not trying to be alarmist and personally I have never seen any problems for those just shooting when they hunt or occasional shooting. But, if you’re a range shooter it is good to be aware. Lead ammo or the clean ammo, I am fine with either, as long as I am shooting. I just take a few precautions shooting lead that I didn’t 5 years ago.
HAHA! I was watching an episode of the Beverly Hillbillies and some bird-brain was trying to "save the condors" even way back then. If these enviro-wackos have been making a concerted effort for 3 or 4 decades to save them; They would almost have to be dumb as rocks. Here, we call them buzzards, they are plentiful and I wouldn't describe them as smart. So these California buzzards must really be doorknobs.
Not true. I'm disputing it for one.
and the information has been widely disseminated for well over a decade
This is just about the right time frame for the stuff about lead poisoning of wetlands due to hunters causing the curtailment of lead shot in waterfowl hunting. The whole purpose was not to prevent lead in the sacred environment, but to curtail hunting (and hence gun ownership.) Wide dissemination of information doesn't mean that the information is true.
I am not “parroting anything from anti-gunners”. It isn’t possible, I don’t know any
I don't know upChuckie Schemer, Carolyn McCarthy, or Diane Feinstein, but I am aware of their positions. You don't have to know someone to either agree with or disagree with their positions.
learned this from the Law Enforcement officers, weapons experts and others I shoot with at the various ranges.
I wouldn't trust LEO's opinion's on anything except where to get the best donuts. Typically stuff like this originates in the virulently anti-gun, anti-freedom New England Journal of Medicine I was wondering if that's where you first found it.
All major manufacturers have a “clean round” available in most calibers and they are maybe a nickel or dime more per round. When the demand increases, the price will go down.
There are only three primer compounds that I know of lead azide (reacts with brass and copper to become more sensitive over time - however is frequently used in things like hand grenades where the primer cup is aluminum), lead styphnate (the most common one)and DDNP ( (a relative of TNT and Picric acid - I have read, although it was on the internet and not verified, that the long term storage of DDNP primed munitions is problematic with the primer decaying over time more so than the lead based primers) Considering that there was a push on by the antigunners several years ago to force all ammunition to have limited life primers so as to avoid citizens being able to "stockpile" it for their "arsenals" I can't help thinking that the current lead reduction push is just a way of softening up the populace for making primers that maintain their ability to fire on long term storage go away. (and BTW I fired off about 70 1946 BMG .50 rounds a couple of months ago without a single misfire - damn things were almost as old as I am)
Yes, I was referring to the primer and meant to say 1/5 of the lead in the air was from the primer.
That wasn't what you said. You said that 1/5 of the lead in a round ended up in the air and that's just not true. If you meant that 1/5 of the lead from the primer ended up in the air - I might go along with that. The lead products of primer ignition are molecular lead (vapor) and lead oxide. The lead vapor condenses to lead dust almost immediately and the lead oxide forms a dust also; both fall out of the air relatively quickly.
I have seen a few ranges closed and many more have to close because of the expense
Who was behind the health scare that closed the ranges I wonder. Was there REALLY a health risk or was it just some overblown EPA hype for something that really isn't a problem. I suspect that the so-called dangers of lead poisoning at ranges while theoretically possible are greatly exaggerated.
The medical profession, while not particularly concerned about the 140,000 deaths that occur annually due to medical malpractice, seems to have strong antigun opinions concerning the 28,000 deaths that occur annually due to gunshot (Half or more of which are suicides). I wouldn't put it as beyond possibility for a lot of lead poisoning "data" to be distorted so as to give the anti-gunners more propaganda to assault our second amendment rights.
People do get sick
Again I did a google search, and I found a lot of stuff on the so-called hazards (from government sources - Peoples' Democracy of MA for one), but I couldn't find any actual clinical lead poisoning cases for humans that could be traced to gun ranges. The closest I got was a paper that found elevated lead levels in some wild animals found near a shooting range in GA and some people who were found to have elevated lead levels in their blood in CA, but no symptoms of lead poisoning were mentioned.
but 20% of a grain in your bloodstream is enough for some to develop lead poisoning.
This doesn't compute. If 1/5 of the lead in a primer gets temporarily airborn, this doesn't mean that it gets into your blood. for this to happen you'd have to ingest or inhale 100% of the combustion products and then they would have to be 100% absorbed.
I think that while the possibility for lead poisoning from dust at ranges exists, the danger is being enormously exaggerated by the government and the biomedical hegemony as part of the drum roll for more anti-gun laws. If there is a danger to anyone at a range it would be to the range employees who are there all day and to the people who clean the range (probably should wear dust masks)
I love buzzards! I lived in a part of the country (until 2 months back) where they arrived every spring, cleaned up the roads AND the landscape (while roosting on the radio tower next to McDonald's at night, which was a great thing to watch ;>), and went south when the weather got cold (something they could do, unlike most of the rest of us!). Buzzards are absolutely magnificent birds! (Have you ever watched them taking off in the morning, when the air is cold?) But these Kalifornia versions must be (based on news articles) just as stone-cold-stupid as the voters out there...
I haven’t seen it lately, but my thanks go out to all of the gun nuts at FR that would post “BLOAT” in years past. Simply from the standpoint of increased ammo costs, it was sage advice.
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.