1
   

California Hunters Targeted Again

 
 
cjhsa
 
Reply Thu 5 May, 2005 02:29 pm
California hunters: Targeted again

Nava bill would impact have negative impact on California sport hunting

By Gary Roussan

Groups against hunting will go to just about any measure to stop hunting in California. The latest attempt to do that is a new bill (AB1002) introduced by Assemblyman Pedro Nava (D-Santa Barbara). The bill would outlaw the use of lead bullets and lead shot statewide.
The two issues that would outlaw lead ammunition for hunting in condor range (the condor is near extinction) and phase in the elimination of lead ammunition for all hunting throughout the state, were brought to the California Fish and Game Commission at its February meeting in San Diego.

The commission called for more research into actual impacts before making a recommendation and voted "no" on both counts.

The environmental groups that took the issue to the state Legislature are the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Center for Biological Diversity.

Their concern is that hunters who use lead bullets for hunting in the California condor range, which encompasses roughly the bottom one-third of the state, could be leaving gut piles from animals taken while hunting. If the condors feed on the gut piles, they could ingest lead from a bullet.

These concerns have already been addressed by organizations like the Safari Club International, the National Rifle Association, the National Shooting Sports Foundation and others, who are continuing to develop a voluntary program for hunters who live within the condor range. The program stresses hunter education and voluntary action to reduce lead that could get into condors and provides a reasonable alternative to bans on lead shot and bullets.

The program asks hunters to remove or bury all gut piles for all animals taken and to use nonlead ammunition when possible.

Workshops have been set up in Goleta and San Luis Obispo. This will increase the awareness of the issue and provide information on the voluntary actions hunters and ranchers can take to disrupt this exposure pathway.

Environmentalists don't seem to understand that eliminating lead bullets will do more harm than good in preserving California's wildlife. The skyrocketing cost of ammo that would result from manufacturers scrambling to develop an alternative bullet would drive people out of hunting, significantly reducing the sales of hunting licenses, tags and stamps whose revenues fuel the California Department of Fish and Game and state wildlife conservation efforts.

The sale of hunting ammunition would be greatly reduced, along with hunting gear and other related sporting goods, resulting in a reduction in federal Pittman-Robertson dollars our state receives for every dollar spent for these types of things. This would reduce the ability of the DFG to manage state wildlife areas, related hunting programs and other wildlife related activities.

Sound science again must lead in making decisions about our natural resources and that is what the Fish and Game Commission is designed to do. The Legislature created the Fish and Game Commission and granted it the authority to make these decisions several decades ago. Undermining its decisions and authority is not the right thing to do.

Hunters have always been the nation's true environmentalists, and they are willing to take steps to address concerns relating to possible lead poisoning by removing the problem of gut piles and carcasses of animals they take.

Environmentalists should stop and take time to understand that hunters are actually their strongest allies in wildlife conservation. But there is no doubt in my mind they will continue to try to eliminate hunting altogether, which could be the beginning of the end for California's wildlife resources and our hunting heritage.

All those who oppose AB1002 should immediately contact their representatives in the Assembly, or at the very least, direct their concerns to the bill's author, Assemblyman Pedro Nava, Capitol Building, No. 5144, Sacramento, CA 95814; phone (916) 319-2008; FAX (916) 319-2108, email, [email protected].
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,418 • Replies: 20
No top replies

 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 May, 2005 03:07 pm
Seems to me that the reduced amount of amunition sold would be made up by the "skyrocketing" amunition cost increases.

Seems like the NRA even admits that the ingestion of lead is not a good thing for the condors with their voluntary program educating hunters about the problem.

Using a different type of bullet and cleaning up after you kill things sounds like good manners and a reasonable compromise.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 May, 2005 03:22 pm
boomerang wrote:
Seems to me that the reduced amount of amunition sold would be made up by the "skyrocketing" amunition cost increases.

Seems like the NRA even admits that the ingestion of lead is not a good thing for the condors with their voluntary program educating hunters about the problem.

Using a different type of bullet and cleaning up after you kill things sounds like good manners and a reasonable compromise.


Steel shot is too light for to be effective and bismuth is horrifically expensive. There isn't any alternative at this time. Ask a waterfowler why they switched to that 10-gauge cannon, it's because the steel shot is too light for smaller gauges.
0 Replies
 
Acquiunk
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 May, 2005 03:34 pm
I have nothing against hunting, Connecticut is being over run with deer and we could use a few more guys out in the woods in the fall. But the more that is learned about lead in the environment the less useful it looks. What about something like a ceramic bullet, possibly bismuth doped? It's time to be inventive.
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 May, 2005 03:38 pm
I don't know much about hunting and next to nothing about amunition but it seems that this affects a very small portion of America and a portion that is the home to an endangered species.

Asking people who want to hunt there to use a more expensive bullet doesn't seem like a huge attack on hunting in general.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 May, 2005 03:39 pm
How does the density of ceramics compare to lead, though?

Lead shot on waterfowl is a real deal. Dumb ducks swallow the stuff and grind it to dust in their craws. A hazard from lead bullets (not shot) sounds like a nonissue, especially as nearly all hunting bullets are brass jacketed.
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 May, 2005 04:14 pm
boomerang wrote:
I don't know much about hunting and next to nothing about amunition but it seems that this affects a very small portion of America and a portion that is the home to an endangered species.

Asking people who want to hunt there to use a more expensive bullet doesn't seem like a huge attack on hunting in general.


Except that there is no alternative (more expensive or otherwise) available for lead in rifles and hanguns. Steel and Bismuth shot could be used in shotguns for bird, rabbit and squirrel hunting but that's about the extent of it's usefullness. Even in states where hunting is limited to shotguns only you have to use a lead slug or lead 00 buckshot for anything other than birds.

In effect the law would totally eliminate all hunting except duck and upland game (game birds, rabbits. etc..) hunting in the state of CA. Anyone that owns a rifle would find they can't use it at all. That seems fairly huge to me.

If the concern of these groups is truely to protect the concor then why not introduce legislation that would prohibit hunters from leaving gut piles? Make them haul the internals back hiome with them and dispose of them from there? The condors would be protected and there would be little impact on any hunter.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 May, 2005 04:16 pm
Hmm - there is a certain enchantment to the idea of hunters being targeted.

Is there a season?
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 May, 2005 04:22 pm
Oh I see.

I went back and reread. I thought the ban was only in the condor range, not in the entire state. So, yes, it is pretty big.

Hauling the guts out - is there any way they could monitor that?

Perhaps there needs to be a rush to develop a new bullet. Whoever does it stands to make mega-bucks.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 May, 2005 04:35 pm
dlowan wrote:
Hmm - there is a certain enchantment to the idea of hunters being targeted.

Is there a season?


Funny, I wondered about the title, too. A Freudian slip, perhaps...
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 May, 2005 04:38 pm
boomerang wrote:
Hauling the guts out - is there any way they could monitor that?


I don't know how CA works but in many other states if you go hunting and shoot something (turkey, deer, bear, etc..) you have to take it to a game check station and register your kill. If they have a similar situation I don't see why the check station couldn't check to see if they have the internals when you came in to register.
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 May, 2005 04:40 pm
Okay then. That seems like a reasonable compromise.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 May, 2005 04:46 pm
D'artagnan wrote:
dlowan wrote:
Hmm - there is a certain enchantment to the idea of hunters being targeted.

Is there a season?


Funny, I wondered about the title, too. A Freudian slip, perhaps...


Hardly, hunters are always in the cross hairs of antis. Especially the ones who don't understand our steward relationship with wildlife, and those who value animal life over human.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2005 12:30 am
dlowan wrote:
Hmm - there is a certain enchantment to the idea of hunters being targeted.

Is there a season?


The more I think about this post, the more I wonder why this poster is allowed to continue posting here.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2005 01:57 am
cjhsa wrote:
. . . and those who value animal life over human.


The implication here is that the very lives of the hunters are at stake. Those sorts of melodramatics don't help your cause when presenting it to thoughtful people as yet undecided in such matters.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2005 03:08 am
cjhsa wrote:
dlowan wrote:
Hmm - there is a certain enchantment to the idea of hunters being targeted.

Is there a season?


The more I think about this post, the more I wonder why this poster is allowed to continue posting here.


That is very distressing.

Never mind - if you keep practicing the thinking, sooner or later it won't hurt so much.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2005 03:31 am
We have tried to rid ourselves of the Wabbit in the past, however, as the Ozzians have gone to enormous lengths to rid themselves of their lapine plauge, and the Cunning Coney is proof against all of their machinations, it seems likely that we would be best advised to accept her presence, and to enjoy her wit--which i, for one, do enormously appreciate.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2005 09:07 am
Setanta wrote:
cjhsa wrote:
. . . and those who value animal life over human.


The implication here is that the very lives of the hunters are at stake. Those sorts of melodramatics don't help your cause when presenting it to thoughtful people as yet undecided in such matters.


I wasn't the one who implied it. I simply mentioned a group of antis who value animal life over human. Their presence here was confirmed by later posts.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2005 09:38 am
Lol - seek with a biased enough eye, and ye shall believe ye have found!!!
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2005 09:42 am
I seek with a hunters eye, and instinct, and I always identify my target.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » California Hunters Targeted Again
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 12/21/2024 at 08:43:19