Lead is found in eagles
MNmineiro
Center which includes reference to high amounts of lead found in
Eagles, hawks, etc.
http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/115062634.html?elr=KArksUUUoDEy3LGDiO7aiU
The article contains information from U MN Veterinary scientists and
conclusions from an MS thesis done in the past year. Personal
conversation with the vice-director of the Center indicates that
eagles found with high amounts of lead came from MN areas where rifles
are used in deer hunting. Also that the lead's chemical signature
matches that used in bullets.
The study is convincing that lead from bullets is killing eagles.
This lifelong hunterI hopes the MS study can soon have popular
publication so sports people can read it. The science seems to this Ph
D to be solid,and we all need to understand it.
email for the Raptor Center: <rap...@umn.edu>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Learn about rec.guns at http://www.recguns.net
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Franks
# Today's Minneapolis Start Tribune carries a story from the MN Raptor
# Center which includes reference to high amounts of lead found in
# Eagles, hawks, etc.
# http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/115062634.html?elr=KArksUUUoDEy3LGDiO7aiU
# The article contains information from U MN Veterinary scientists and
# conclusions from an MS thesis done in the past year. Personal
# conversation with the vice-director of the Center indicates that
# eagles found with high amounts of lead came from MN areas where rifles
# are used in deer hunting. Also that the lead's chemical signature
# matches that used in bullets.
# The study is convincing that lead from bullets is killing eagles.
# This lifelong hunterI hopes the MS study can soon have popular
# publication so sports people can read it. The science seems to this Ph
# D to be solid,and we all need to understand it.
# email for the Raptor Center:<rap...@umn.edu>
Seems unlikely that the lead poisoning is from bullets/big game. There
just isn't enough lost and dead game to support widespread poisoning.
Far more likely is shot from small game/bird. How many birds are
non-fatally shot and/or are never bagged?
Martin Eastburn
used.
One never knows where the Raptors came from and how old.
Lead occurs in nature all over the place and fish are another source.
Martin
Petey
#
#
# Far more likely is shot from small game/bird. How many birds are
# non-fatally shot and/or are never bagged?
Or maybe from aerial towers/bridges where raptors likely nest? Don't they
sometimes use lead-based paints on them? From a former bird owner, birds
have a fondness for chewing on flaking paint when bored (like sitting on a
nest the whole day).
nord...@yahoo.com
# # are used in deer hunting. Also that the lead's chemical signature
# # matches that used in bullets.
#
# Seems unlikely that the lead poisoning is from bullets/big game. There
# just isn't enough lost and dead game to support widespread poisoning.
We have no idea how many deer are shot and lost entirely every year
but there is much more shooting in northern Minnesota than is needed
to account for the deer that are killed and recovered. I suppose most
deer that run away when you shoot at them are not hit, but if only 1
in 10 are wounded when they take off then there are thousands of deer
that die unrecovered.
Unless a lead bullet retains 100% of its weight then the lost weight
has to be in the deer. Some of it may be in the meat we bring home.
The rest must be in the gut pile which we leave behind in the woods or
in deer camp.
# Far more likely is shot from small game/bird. How many birds are
# non-fatally shot and/or are never bagged?
I'm not sure that's better. The article points out that two pellets
of #6 lead shot is sufficient to poison a raptor.
We may not like it, but if these numbers are accurate then we hunters
have public relations "opportunity" on our hands. Most non-hunters
like eagles, hawks, and falcons more than they do deer hunters. We
need to get out ahead of this.
nord...@yahoo.com
# used.
In MN we have to use non-lead shot when hunting upland birds and small
game in waterfowl production areas, otherwise we are still free to use
lead.
# One never knows where the Raptors came from and how old.
# Lead occurs in nature all over the place and fish are another source.
The raptor center at the U of M is quite sophisticated. I'm inclined
to trust their science. Lead does occur all over the place in nature
but when the lead recovered during necropsy is made of the same alloy
as bird shot or the lead in jacketed rifle bullets it's time to
acknowledge that humans play a role in the problem.
Argent
Let us not forget about naturally occurring lead. There are lead
mines in the upper midwest, indicating it is in the natural
environment (like the water). Everyone acts as though we create lead
out of thin air.
Argent
As I recall, forensic scientists are running away from matching lead
signatures chemically, as it has been shown to be bogus science. So
it is questionable that they could match the lead in birds to
bullets. (I hit "send" too fast on my other post.)
Murff
# As I recall, forensic scientists are running away from matching lead
# signatures chemically, as it has been shown to be bogus science. So it
# is questionable that they could match the lead in birds to bullets. (I
# hit "send" too fast on my other post.)
#
It presumably has to be metallic lead, for there to be any assay
comparable to a given source. That is, lumps of lead that have been
ingested as opposed to lead in solution in the body.
The rationale for the ban here, on lead shot use on wildfowl was that
birds were picking up the shot for their crops - apparently it is just
about the right size. This then dissolved slowly and poisoned them. The
shot in those cases came from misses - the shot has to come down
somewhere and if it isn't removed from the field in a carcass, it stays
in the field.
There are a few observations that may be made about this:
- Birdshot is about the right size for birds looking for "stones" for
their crops, actively to select.
- Lead isn't very soluble, so it takes some time to have an effect. It
also lasts a very long time in the environment - where it hasn't been
stolen it is still used for weatherproofing roof corners and the like on
old buildings.
- In the vast majority of deer I've shot (and recovered), there is both
an entry and an exit wound and whilst there may be very small scraps of
metallic lead residue it isn't anything like the shot that birds select.
Also, any such residue is found only rarely.
- Hunting bullets are designed to expand in a controlled manner, inside
the target. They're not designed to explode or otherwise disintegrate. As
bullets recovered from safe backstops, after passing through wood and
earth, have been found as a largeish single mass, fully-penetrating
rounds seem to behave as designed.
- In those few occasions when I've recovered a bullet from a deer carcass
(typically because the round has hit something like the shoulder blade,
lost a lot of energy that way and spun off through the deer's body) the
remains of the bullet are still a largeish single mass - again a very
different size from that which birds would select actively. Again, the
bullets seem to behave as designed.
So whilst I don't have reason to dispute a man-made source of lead found
in Minnesotan raptors, I'm not necessarily convinced that deer hunters
are the most likely culprits. I'd look in the first instance at lead shot
persisting from before any mandatory use of non-toxic shotgun ammunition.
It may even be possible with very precise assays to identify what sort of
ammunition the lead came from.
Murff...
MNmineiro
I am a 70-year hunter and don't want to hear about the problem of lead
in raptors. As a scientist, I read and listen to the conclusions
referred to, and I think they know what they're talking about. I look
forward to early popular publication of their findings. Likely, more
studies will be needed, but the facts are pretty hard to argue with.
nord...@yahoo.com
# signatures chemically, as it has been shown to be bogus science. �So
# bullets.
Seems to me determining whether lead fragments found in birds are an
alloy of lead, tin, and antimony would be relatively straight forward
and certain. Summaries of the science suggest the raptors, waterfowl,
and game birds are ingesting lead that hunters and fisherman are
reintroducing to the environment.
http://www.cvm.umn.edu/raptor/news/healthtopics/leadpoisoning/home.html
http://www.nwhc.usgs.gov/publications/fact_sheets/pdfs/lead_poisoning_wild_birds_2009.pdf
http://www.peregrinefund.org/lead_conference/2008PbConf_Proceedings.htm
If you have other citations in the scientific literature I'd be very
interested in reading more. We need to be careful not to discred
evidence simply because we are uncomfortable with its implications.
That's the mark of denialism, not science.
GeoW
"The raptor center at the U of M is quite sophisticated. I'm inclined
to trust their science."
Trust, but verify!
;)
Wayne
<nord...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:iie94l$o2j$1...@news.albasani.net...
## My guess is it is upland birds - the lead shot that is or no longer
# # used.
#
# In MN we have to use non-lead shot when hunting upland birds and small
# game in waterfowl production areas, otherwise we are still free to use
# lead.
#
I have a suspicion that the intent is to ban all lead in all ammo. Banning
lead in hunting ammo is the first step.
Rubaiyat of Omar Bradley
# I'd look in the first instance at lead shot
# persisting from before any mandatory use of non-toxic shotgun ammunition.
That restriction applies primarily to areas where waterfowl hunting is
done. Since we are discussing lead ingestion by eagles rather than
waterfowl, the lead shot could be recently introduced, and coming from
some other area.
nord...@yahoo.com
# ## used.
# #
# # In MN we have to use non-lead shot when hunting upland birds and small
# # lead.
#
# I have a suspicion that the intent is to ban all lead in all ammo. Banning
Does that affect your interpretation of the science?
nord...@yahoo.com
# to trust their science."
#
# Trust, but verify!
Agreed. I have reason to trust them based on prior professional
interactions and the peer review process works pretty well on issues
that lend themselves to evaluation using the scientific method. I am
open to influence; the more credible the source the more influenced I
am likely to be. If there are citations in the scientific literature
that suggest the eagles are getting their lead from mines or in fish
that bioaccumulated it from contaminated lakes I'd be very interested
in reading about it.
MR
# # ## My guess is it is upland birds - the lead shot that is or no longer
# # ## used.
# # #
# # # In MN we have to use non-lead shot when hunting upland birds and
# small
# # # game in waterfowl production areas, otherwise we are still free to
# use
# # # lead.
# #
# # I have a suspicion that the intent is to ban all lead in all ammo.
# Banning
# # lead in hunting ammo is the first step.
#
# Does that affect your interpretation of the science?
If I may jump in here and mention that someone once said "there are no
coincidences in politics".
Hence: the anti-hunting/gun groups want to ban lead bullets etc......then
our national bird is found
with unusual lead levels.
Then, we can drill in the Gulf, bad oil leak...........now we cannot drill
in the Gulf.
Then there is the whole Global Warming/Climate change science........junk
science.
So, excuse me for being a skeptical old fart, but I don't trust any of the
so called science from experts, especially when there is an agenda
on the table.
Things are no always what they seem.
Keep it in the 10 ring,
MR
Doug White
# # ## My guess is it is upland birds - the lead shot that is or no
# longer # ## used.
# # #
# # # In MN we have to use non-lead shot when hunting upland birds and
# small # # game in waterfowl production areas, otherwise we are still
# free to use # # lead.
# #
# # I have a suspicion that the intent is to ban all lead in all ammo.
# Banning # lead in hunting ammo is the first step.
#
# Does that affect your interpretation of the science?
There is ton of junk "science" being published every day. Peer review
works great if the peers have the same political leanings the author
does. If you want to publish something contrary to the established
dogma, good luck. Now that science is both big business with jobs and
even careers in the balance, AND a political tool to push personal
agendas, a lot of garbage is getting published.
This is not a new problem. Anyone remember "polywater"? In that case, a
respected Russian scientist published a paper claiming to have found a
new form of water. In the rush to get research money and make names for
themselves, the scientific community fell all over itself setting up
conferences and publishing theories about what turned out to be
experimental contamination. Millions of dollars in grant money was
wasted on nonsense, and nobody paid any attention to the guys saying
something was fishy until it was way too late.
Back to the eagles: The only way they could match the alloy would be if
they had a solid sample. Claiming you can do it from blood is nonsense
because the solubility of the different metals would skew the results.
If they have a solid sample, they should know pretty quickly if it was
from shot or bullet fragments. There are literally tons of lead shot in
the environment, both from hunting and trap & skeet ranges. There are
plenty of hawks in my area, along with a dozen different clubs with
shotgun ranges. If the reserarchers had an axe to grind, all they would
have to do was trap birds around shooting clubs to make their point.
I'm sure the anti's will try to make a big fuss out of this. I suspect
the science is bullsh*t, at least as described. Hopefully soembody can
pick it apart before it gets too much traction.
Doug White
TonyW
# I'm sure the anti's will try to make a big fuss out of this. I suspect
# the science is bullsh*t, at least as described. Hopefully somebody can
# pick it apart before it gets too much traction.
I don't think I could agree more. The lefties have been trying to ban
hunting in this manor for as long as I can remember...
Tony
nord...@yahoo.com
# coincidences in politics".
# Hence: the anti-hunting/gun groups want to ban lead bullets etc......then
# our national bird is found
# with unusual lead levels.
# Then, we can drill in the Gulf, bad oil leak...........now we cannot drill
# in the Gulf.
# Then there is the whole Global Warming/Climate change science........junk
# science.
# So, excuse me for being a skeptical old fart, but I don't trust any of the
# so called science from experts, especially when there is an agenda
# on the table.
# Things are no always what they seem.
The neat thing about conspiracies is that they excuse us from taking
responsibility for our lives.
nord...@yahoo.com
# respected Russian scientist published a paper claiming to have found a
# new form of water. In the rush to get research money and make names for
# themselves, the scientific community fell all over itself setting up
# conferences and publishing theories about what turned out to be
# experimental contamination. Millions of dollars in grant money was
# wasted on nonsense, and nobody paid any attention to the guys saying
# something was fishy until it was way too late.
The reason a person has to Google the term polywater to find out what
you're talking about is because the scientific method and peer review
consigned it to the scrap heap forty years ago. It was "discovered" in
the late 60s and was dead as a door nail by the early 70s. The
scientific community did just fine and now polywater is given even
less thought than perpetual motion machines and cold fusion.
# Back to the eagles: The only way they could match the alloy would be if
# they had a solid sample. Claiming you can do it from blood is nonsense
# because the solubility of the different metals would skew the results.
# If they have a solid sample, they should know pretty quickly if it was
# from shot or bullet fragments.
You really should read a couple of the papers. The techniques
described would be quite interesting to a person like yourself with a
background in chemistry and an appreciation for wildlife, if only they
weren't discussing a problem you'd rather not deal with.
# I'm sure the anti's will try to make a big fuss out of this.
They probably will, which is why we hunters ought to figure out some
way to take a leadership role implementing the solution, just in case
you can't find anyone to repudiate the science.
# I suspect
# the science is bullsh*t, at least as described. Hopefully soembody can
# pick it apart before it gets too much traction.
Who will you trust to do that, and why?
Argent
were from a more neutral organization (I don't consider state run
Universities, the Federal government or Ecological organizations to be
neutral organizations anymore, sad to say). There appear to be
correlations, but without knowing how the studies were done, it is
virtually impossible to say if the results are valid or just
manipulation of data, either from malice or the blinders or "what
everyone knows is right".
After reading the Peregrine Fund document, I've learned that lead will
poison and / or kill us all (animals and humans alike), and we need to
ban it in all applications, including electrical solders. If it were
as poisonous as they are claiming, wouldn't we have noticed it more in
past when we used it in more applications (aside from kids in ghettos
eating white paint chips, which started the whole anti-lead
campaign)? By their own studies, only 3-5% of waterfowl were
suffering from lead poisoning before the ban on lead shot was passed.
Really, if they didn't have an issue to whip their members up about,
how would they get donations (not unlike the NRA, in that respect).
As far as identifying lead-tin-antimony alloys to bullets, those three
elements are usually found together in naturally occurring ores and
alloys.
Refreshing my knowledge of bald eagles, it appears they are primarily
fish hunters and will eat carrion. The article I read also stated
that they regurgitate indigestible substances after meals, which is
what I remember about owls as well. I would guess lead fragments are
indigestible and quickly get regurgitated.
But if someone truly believes these stories about lead, then they
should stop using lead ammo and lead in any application, immediately.
I just don't want a "top down solution" that bans something else
before proper independent research is done.
Bob Holtzman
# # If I may jump in here and mention that someone once said "there are no
# # coincidences in politics".
# # Hence: the anti-hunting/gun groups want to ban lead bullets etc......then
# # our national bird is found
# # with unusual lead levels.
# # Then, we can drill in the Gulf, bad oil leak...........now we cannot drill
# # in the Gulf.
# # Then there is the whole Global Warming/Climate change science........junk
# # science.
# # So, excuse me for being a skeptical old fart, but I don't trust any of the
# # so called science from experts, especially when there is an agenda
# # on the table.
# # Things are no always what they seem.
#
# The neat thing about conspiracies is that they excuse us from taking
# responsibility for our lives.
Funny how that works, isn't it? What I'm not sure of is why shooting
attracts a disproportionate number of these types.
--
Bob Holtzman
Gerald "Brick" Brickwood
You are kidding right? I just read the article cited in the startribune url
above and there isn't one word about any study by any either scientist or
PhD candidates in the entire article. And the only thing said about lead in
eagles is this:
"A steady stream of nearly 800 feathered patients a year flows into the
center for treatment of broken bones, eye and other head injuries, and lead
poisoning.
Eighty percent of the eagles seen at the center have lead in their
bloodstreams. More than 30 eagles a year are dying at the center from
consuming lead embedded in the flesh of deer, pheasants and other game
animals. Ingesting only two No. 6 lead BBs is enough to kill an eagle. Redig
and Ponder call on anglers and hunters to further reduce the use of lead in
their sports."
So where is the study? If it exists a URL leading to it would be most
helpful.
#
Gerald "Brick" Brickwood
Does anyone remember the attempt to ban lead bullets nationwide through the
EPA over the summer?
nord...@yahoo.com
# helpful.
#From the article http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/115062634.html?elr=KArksUUUoDEy3LGDiO7aiU
There is a link http://raptor.cvm.umn.edu/
But it's broken; it should be http://www.raptor.cvm.umn.edu/
#From there click on the lead poisoning link
http://www.raptor.cvm.umn.edu/news/healthtopics/leadpoisoning/home.html
Then click the USGS http://www.nwhc.usgs.gov/publications/fact_sheets/pdfs/lead_poisoning_wild_birds_2009.pdf
#From that sheet there are many links. One takes you to
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/hunting/lead/index.html
A paper there documents MN DNR's testing of different bullet types on
game animals http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/fish_wildlife/lead/bulletstudy/resources/publicsummary.pdf
Or click on the Peregrine Fund 2008 Lead Ammunition Conference
http://www.peregrinefund.org/lead_conference/
Then select proceedings http://www.peregrinefund.org/lead_conference/2008PbConf_Proceedings.htm
Read away. Some are abstracts, others are full text. Yes, a fella
has to work at it.
MNmineiro
I am sorry if I was not clear in my comments at the top of this
thread. There is an MS study giving part of the information which the
Raptor has in the newspaper article. The results of the MS study will
not go to any popular publication until after a paper has been
published in a scientific journal. That's the way scientific
information is handled. I reported a conversation with the
Administration of the Raptor Center.
The last five lines of my comments are mine, not those from the Raptor
Center.I hope this helps your confusion.
Argent
# I am sorry if I was not clear in my comments at the top of this
# thread. There is an MS study giving part of the information which the
# Raptor has in the newspaper article. The results of the MS study will
# not go to any popular publication until after a paper has been
# published in a scientific journal. �That's the way scientific
# information is handled. I reported a conversation with the
# Administration of the Raptor Center.
#
# The last five lines of my comments are mine, not those from the Raptor
# Center.I hope this helps your confusion.
According to the Minnesota DNR there were an estimated 2300 nesting
eagle pairs in Minnesota during 2007. http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/birds/eagles/history.html
That's 4600 birds, which does not include non-"nesting pair" birds.
What can quantitatively be said is that 30 of 4600 are dying of lead
poisoning, which is about 0.6% of the population. The Minnesota DNR
also mentions in the web article that the numbers of eagles are
increasing year to year, so there are probably many more than that by
now. While it is not a good thing that any creature is suffering from
lead poisoning, it doesn't appear like the substantial problem that
the OP's link would make it seem.
As far as all the birds that come through the raptor center testing
positive for lead in their bloodstreams, I believe I've read that
every person that has ever been tested has had lead in their
bloodstreams at some level, even non-shooters.
In regards to the articles on lead dispersion in game that is shot,
yes, the higher velocity rounds that do not totally encase the bullet
leave more lead fragments and contamination. And someone paid for
that study? What they neglected to do is test the deer or the sheep
for lead contamination before shooting them.
Now that we are all aware of the lead problem associated with
consuming shot wildlife, we can take steps as individuals to lower our
risk of lead poisoning. One of those is to take calcium, Vitamin D
and zinc supplements to prevent the uptake of lead.
Gerald "Brick" Brickwood
Consider the following with regard to lead contaminated game meat:
from: http://www.nssf.org/newsroom/factsheets/traditional-ammunition.cfm
A source friendly to shooting sports I admit, but if your google-fu is good,
you should be able to find the Iowa and CDC studies referenced here.
Consuming Game Harvested with Traditional Ammunition
For more than a century, hundreds of millions of Americans have safely
consumed game harvested using traditional hunting ammunition. Yet, in 2008,
when a dermatologist from North Dakota who is on the board of the Peregrine
Fund - a group whose stated mission it is to ban the use of traditional
ammunition for hunting - claimed to have collected from food pantries
packages of venison that contained fragments from lead bullets, many people
became concerned and some officials overreacted to the allegations made at
the time that this proved that consuming game harvested with traditional
ammunition posed a human health risk.
North Dakota failed to conduct its own study. Instead, they merely accepted
the lead-contaminated samples hand-picked by the dermatologist and submitted
those samples to a lab in Iowa for testing. Based on those test results,
North Dakota health officials ordered state food pantries to destroy all
donated venison and to stop accepting further donations. The Iowa lab
official in charge of the testing, Rick Kelly, was highly critical of North
Dakota, "I think North Dakota is drawing the wrong conclusions. We did what
they asked, but they did not take an arbitrary sample."
To put this issue in perspective, consider this statement from the Iowa
Department of Public Health (IDPH), a state agency that has tested the blood
lead level of Iowa residents for over 15 years: "IDPH maintains that if lead
in venison were a serious health risk, it would likely have surfaced within
extensive blood lead testing since 1992 with 500,000 youth under 6 and
25,000 adults having been screened." Iowa has never had a case of a hunter
having elevated lead levels caused by consuming harvested game.
CDC Results
A study from 2008 by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) on blood lead levels of North Dakota hunters confirmed that consuming
game harvested with traditional ammunition does not pose a human health
risk. Calls to ban or restrict the product by groups opposed to traditional
ammunition, like the Peregrine Fund, and anti-hunting groups, like the
Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), are scientifically unfounded and
nothing more than a scare tactic to advance their political agenda.
In looking more closely at the CDC study results, perhaps most telling is
the fact that the average lead level of the hunters tested was lower than
that of the average American. In other words, if you were to randomly pick
someone on the street, chances are they would have a higher blood lead level
than the hunters in this study.
Consider that the adult with the highest lead level (9.82 micrograms per
deciliter of blood) was still below the CDC-recommended threshold for that
of a child (10 micrograms per deciliter of blood) and well below the
CDC-recommended threshold for an adult (25 micrograms per deciliter of
blood). And, the CDC didn't even know whether that person had consumed any
harvested game. Consider, too, that the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) doesn't require removal of an employee from a job
involving lead exposure until that employee's blood lead level reaches 60
micrograms per deciliter of blood. Even the children tested by the CDC had
blood lead levels of less than half the national average for children and no
where near the CDC's
Gerald "Brick" Brickwood
Thank you for the clarification. I hope the study does get published as
soon a practical. I also hope it includes estimates of the eagle population
in the study area.
nord...@yahoo.com
# eagle pairs in Minnesota during 2007. http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/birds/eagles/history.html
# That's 4600 birds, which does not include non-"nesting pair" birds.
# What can quantitatively be said is that 30 of 4600 are dying of lead
# poisoning, which is about 0.6% of the population. The Minnesota DNR
# also mentions in the web article that the numbers of eagles are
# increasing year to year, so there are probably many more than that by
# now. While it is not a good thing that any creature is suffering from
# lead poisoning, it doesn't appear like the substantial problem that
# the OP's link would make it seem.
Not so fast. "Eighty percent of the eagles seen at the center have
lead in their bloodstreams. More than 30 eagles a year are dying at
the center from consuming lead embedded in the flesh of deer,
pheasants and other game animals." Using your math you might as
easily suggest that as many as 3680 eagles are suffering from chronic
lead exposure in MN. Better statisticians than you or me could
provide a more accurate estimate.
# As far as all the birds that come through the raptor center testing
# positive for lead in their bloodstreams, I believe I've read that
# every person that has ever been tested has had lead in their
# bloodstreams at some level, even non-shooters.
And I "believe" you're mistaken, at least until you can provide a
citation supporting your recollection. In the links I provided the MN
DNR and USGS offered summary data and several of the papers addressed
the difference between background lead levels and excursions
correlated to ingestion.
# In regards to the articles on lead dispersion in game that is shot,
# yes, the higher velocity rounds that do not totally encase the bullet
# leave more lead fragments and contamination. And someone paid for
# that study? What they neglected to do is test the deer or the sheep
# for lead contamination before shooting them.
And you suspect such pre-testing would have disclosed lead fragments
distributed along wound tracks that had not yet been created? If you
don't want to take time to read the study <http://
files.dnr.state.mn.us/fish_wildlife/lead/bulletstudy/resources/
publicsummary.pdf> you can view a narrated PowerPoint <http://
files.dnr.state.mn.us/fish_wildlife/lead/index.htm> It's quite good
and very hunter friendly.
# Now that we are all aware of the lead problem associated with
# consuming shot wildlife, we can take steps as individuals to lower our
# risk of lead poisoning. One of those is to take calcium, Vitamin D
# and zinc supplements to prevent the uptake of lead.
Too bad raptors, waterfowl, game birds, and non-game wildlife can't
take your supplements too. As for your table, ask your physician
whether attempting to reduce the uptake of lead is as effective as not
ingesting it in the first place.
Other things we can do - voluntarily - is pass on low percentage shots
that lead to unrecovered game, bury our gut piles or removed them from
the field, switch to non-lead bullets in high velocity rifles, and use
non-lead shot for all our shotgun hunting. Those of us who also fish
can use non-lead tackle. We can do this voluntarily and take credit
for being part of the solution, or you can fight a delaying action
using classic denialism tactics <http://www.skepticalscience.com/5-
characteristics-of-scientific-denialism.html> while the science and
public opinion continues to chip away at your position until we're all
subjected to regulation. Whose side are you on?
nord...@yahoo.com
# Whose side are you on?
I apologize for this statement. I should have said "Which side do you
want to be on."
Murff
shotgun ammunition used on flying quarry - has been under discussion in
Europe generally, and the UK in particular for some time. There are
already bans on the use of lead - details of implementation vary
according to legislature, but essentially it is illegal for waterbirds.
Those with a hunting interest world-wide should be able to compare notes
to be able to present a rational and consistent approach. The "antis"
certainly will compare notes, if nothing else.
So in the interests of that:
UK "Lead Ammunition Group" home page:
http://www.leadammunitiongroup.co.uk/
This group has government representation, and active representation of
shooting organisations. It is in a position to advise government action,
if any, and is reasonably likely to do so on the basis of scientific
analysis.
British Association for Shooting and Conservation (of which I'm a member,
to declare an interest) statement on lead ammunition:
http://www.basc.org.uk/en/about-basc/basc-policies/basc-policy-on-lead-
shot-and-other-sporting-ammunition.cfm
"FACE" is a European hunting lobby group (the acronym is French because
it seems that this is necessary to keep them happy): http://www.face.eu/
Make of these what you will. If we get things wrong, maybe you can learn
from those mistakes. Hopefully we'll get things right, and that can help,
too.
Murff...
Dillon Pyron
#
#As I recall, forensic scientists are running away from matching lead
#signatures chemically, as it has been shown to be bogus science. So
#it is questionable that they could match the lead in birds to
#bullets. (I hit "send" too fast on my other post.)
Yeah. Which "signature" do you match it with? I'm willing to bet
that every ammo maker has their own recipe. Or two or twenty.
MNmineiro
Not being directly connected with the U MN research, I can't say how
researchers connect the lead found in eagles' blood to the lead from
hunters' bullets. I suspect tthough, that the lead from bullets is
different enough from that from other possible sources: sinkers, etc.
I'm sure they're smart enough to figure out the problems.
Petey
# Thus spake Argent <sha...@mail.com> :
#
# #
# #As I recall, forensic scientists are running away from matching lead
# #signatures chemically, as it has been shown to be bogus science. So
# #it is questionable that they could match the lead in birds to
# #bullets. (I hit "send" too fast on my other post.)
#
# Yeah. Which "signature" do you match it with? I'm willing to bet
# that every ammo maker has their own recipe. Or two or twenty.
What's really going to be interesting is to see if any of the lead
substitutes (bismuth, etc.) fall under some kind of poisoning scrutiny in
the future, since after all, this supposedly isn't really about wildlife
conservation as much as it really is about eventually banning hunting.
Dillon Pyron
#
#Not being directly connected with the U MN research, I can't say how
#researchers connect the lead found in eagles' blood to the lead from
#hunters' bullets. I suspect tthough, that the lead from bullets is
#different enough from that from other possible sources: sinkers, etc.
#I'm sure they're smart enough to figure out the problems.
"Smart enough" <> "what do the people who paid for the research want
to see?"
Actually "SM" < "wdtpwpftrwts?" (wow, that's one TWA)
Dillon Pyron
#Dillon Pyron wrote:
#
## Thus spake Argent <sha...@mail.com> :
##
## #
## #As I recall, forensic scientists are running away from matching lead
## #signatures chemically, as it has been shown to be bogus science. So
## #it is questionable that they could match the lead in birds to
## #bullets. (I hit "send" too fast on my other post.)
##
## Yeah. Which "signature" do you match it with? I'm willing to bet
## that every ammo maker has their own recipe. Or two or twenty.
#
#What's really going to be interesting is to see if any of the lead
#substitutes (bismuth, etc.) fall under some kind of poisoning scrutiny in
#the future, since after all, this supposedly isn't really about wildlife
#conservation as much as it really is about eventually banning hunting.
To quote any number of TV tough guys (O'Neil from SG:1 or Gibbs from
NCIS come to mind) "ya think?"
ALL heavy metals are poisonous. Heck, plutonium is the most powerful
poison in the world. Yeah, 15 or so micrograms will kill you within a
couple of days from radiation poisoning, but 5 or 6 microgams will
kill you from heavy metal poisoning. Fast. It's just that it's
really, really hard to portion out 5 mikes versus 15. Or 250.
Steel is reasonably "safe" environmentally. Or so we think. But it
tears the crap out of barrels. How does it do for arrows?
Argent
#> lead in their bloodstreams. More than 30 eagles a year are dying at
#> the center from consuming lead embedded in the flesh of deer,
#> pheasants and other game animals." �Using your math you might as
#> easily suggest that as many as 3680 eagles are suffering from
chronic
#> lead exposure in MN. �Better statisticians than you or me could
#> provide a more accurate estimate.
Right, which is what is needed, not just "The sky is falling! Eagles
are dying from consuming lead in game animals!". The implication is
that hunters and fisherman are the sole source for the lead poisoning
and it is a major problem. You won't know until you run a set of
experiments with controls. Which would involve using raptors (of some
kind) as lab animals. Good luck with that.
#> # As far as all the birds that come through the raptor center
testing
#> # positive for lead in their bloodstreams, I believe I've read that
#> # every person that has ever been tested has had lead in their
#> # bloodstreams at some level, even non-shooters.
#>
#> And I "believe" you're mistaken, at least until you can provide a
#> citation supporting your recollection. �
Fine, after less than 30 seconds on the internet I found:
http://www.brighthub.com/science/medical/articles/75283.aspx
where it states "In the UK, the normal exposure range in the general
population is 0.2 to 1.2 �mol/l (4.1 to 24.9 �g/100 ml)...". Note
that the lower level of the range is not zero.
If you want a scientific study instead of a website:
Hu, H; Shih, R; Rothenberg, S; Schwartz, BS (2007). "The epidemiology
of lead toxicity in adults: measuring dose and consideration of other
methodologic issues.". Environmental health perspectives 115 (3): 455�
62.
I'm confident the US human exposure is similar. So to say that 80%
of the eagles at the center have lead in their bloodstream just means
they either don't check them all or their test isn't as sensitive as
what is used on humans.
#> In the links I provided the MN
#> DNR and USGS offered summary data and several of the papers
addressed
#> the difference between background lead levels and excursions
#> correlated to ingestion.
You are right, I read that link. Which again, implies that lead is
already present at a background level (the definition of background
level is what every subject in the population is normally exposed
to). If you go research lead on the internet, you find we have been
using it for 5000 years, it gets into the atmosphere from metal
smelting, burning coal and vulcanism, it is in the soil both naturally
and from air & water contamination and from pesticides, and is in the
water from air contamination, soil contamination and weathering of
naturally occurring minerals.
#> # In regards to the articles on lead dispersion in game that is
shot,
#> # yes, the higher velocity rounds that do not totally encase the
bullet
#> # leave more lead fragments and contamination. �And someone paid
for
#> # that study? �What they neglected to do is test the deer or the
sheep
#> # for lead contamination before shooting them.
#> And you suspect such pre-testing would have disclosed lead
fragments
#> distributed along wound tracks that had not yet been created? �If
you
#> don't want to take time to read the study <http://
#> files.dnr.state.mn.us/fish_wildlife/lead/bulletstudy/resources/
#> publicsummary.pdf> you can view a narrated PowerPoint <http://
#> files.dnr.state.mn.us/fish_wildlife/lead/index.htm> �It's quite
good
#> and very hunter friendly.
I read their study the first time you posted a link, and the only
useful thing I came away with was that washing shot game wounds only
spreads lead contamination. Their other conclusions are either
obvious (high velocity lead porjectiles leave more fragments than low
velocity ones - duh) or questionable (there is no distance from the
wound where there is no lead).
#> # Now that we are all aware of the lead problem associated with
#> # consuming shot wildlife, we can take steps as individuals to
lower our
#> # risk of lead poisoning. �One of those is to take calcium, Vitamin
D
#> # and zinc supplements to prevent the uptake of lead.
#> Too bad raptors, waterfowl, game birds, and non-game wildlife can't
#> take your supplements too. �As for your table,
table?
#> ask your physician
#> whether attempting to reduce the uptake of lead is as effective as
not
#> ingesting it in the first place.
If you reduce the uptake to the background level, then yes, it is as
effective. It might even lower your background lead levels. It has
for a shooting friend of mine who works around lead solder every day
and shoots when he isn't working. But that is just one case, not a
proper double blind study with controls. I agree with not eating lead
if you can reasonably avoid it.
#> Other things we can do - voluntarily - is pass on low percentage
shots
#> that lead to unrecovered game, bury our gut piles or removed them
from
#> the field,
I actually thought of this after I posted last.
#> switch to non-lead bullets in high velocity rifles, and use
#> non-lead shot for all our shotgun hunting. �
Has anyone done studies on how many game animals will be shot and lost
due to the non-lead projectiles lower SD and inferior expansion? Just
curious. Honestly.
Also, are all the lead substitutes safe if ingested by birds or
mammals? Because if you ban lead projectiles, that will be the next
target. The study you linked to mentions high levels of copper in the
kidneys of raptors as proof they were consuming jacketed rounds. Want
to bet that high levels of copper in the kidneys isn't good for them
either? How about bismuth? It is less toxic than most other heavy
metals, but stays in the human body days to years.
#> Those of us who also fish
#> can use non-lead tackle. �We can do this voluntarily and take
credit
#> for being part of the solution, or you can fight a delaying action
#> using classic denialism tactics <http://www.skepticalscience.com/5-
#> characteristics-of-scientific-denialism.html> while the science and
#> public opinion continues to chip away at your position until we're
all
#> subjected to regulation. �Whose side are you on?
I'm on the side of those who hunt, fish or shoot. I'm for those who
believe we, as individuals, have the freedom to make informed
choices. I'm against those who would use the power of state and
federal governments to push an extremist agenda by using questionable
science to sway politicians and regulators (sound familiar?).
nord...@yahoo.com
# testing
# #> # positive for lead in their bloodstreams, I believe I've read that
# #> # every person that has ever been tested has had lead in their
# #> # bloodstreams at some level, even non-shooters.
# #>
# #> And I "believe" you're mistaken, at least until you can provide a
#
# Fine, after less than 30 seconds on the internet I found:
#
# http://www.brighthub.com/science/medical/articles/75283.aspx
#
# where it states "In the UK, the normal exposure range in the general
# population is 0.2 to 1.2 mol/l (4.1 to 24.9 g/100 ml)...". Note
# that the lower level of the range is not zero.
Objection withdrawn. Thank you.
# #> In the links I provided the MN
# #> DNR and USGS offered summary data and several of the papers
# addressed
# #> the difference between background lead levels and excursions
# #> correlated to ingestion.
#
# You are right, I read that link. Which again, implies that lead is
# already present at a background level (the definition of background
# level is what every subject in the population is normally exposed
# to). If you go research lead on the internet, you find we have been
# using it for 5000 years, it gets into the atmosphere from metal
# smelting, burning coal and vulcanism, it is in the soil both naturally
# and from air & water contamination and from pesticides, and is in the
# water from air contamination, soil contamination and weathering of
# naturally occurring minerals.
Do we agree that the entire ecosystem is responsible for background
levels - about which we can do little, but that excursions appear to
be related to seasonal distribution of lead by hunters and fishermen?
# #> # In regards to the articles on lead dispersion in game that is
# shot,
# #> # yes, the higher velocity rounds that do not totally encase the
# bullet
# #> # leave more lead fragments and contamination. And someone paid
# for
# #> # that study? What they neglected to do is test the deer or the
# sheep
# #> # for lead contamination before shooting them.
#
# #> And you suspect such pre-testing would have disclosed lead
# fragments
# #> distributed along wound tracks that had not yet been created? If
# you
# #> don't want to take time to read the study <http://
# #> files.dnr.state.mn.us/fish_wildlife/lead/bulletstudy/resources/
# #> publicsummary.pdf> you can view a narrated PowerPoint <http://
# #> files.dnr.state.mn.us/fish_wildlife/lead/index.htm> It's quite
# good
# #> and very hunter friendly.
#
# I read their study the first time you posted a link, and the only
# useful thing I came away with was that washing shot game wounds only
# spreads lead contamination. Their other conclusions are either
# obvious (high velocity lead porjectiles leave more fragments than low
# velocity ones - duh) or questionable (there is no distance from the
# wound where there is no lead).
I'd be interested in seeing this study reproduced with a dry wiping of
the body cavity toward the wound path instead of the usual thorax to
abdomen gravity assist or rinse. It would be very interesting to see
how much lead is deposited in the gut piles too. If a recovered
bullet doesn't weigh as much as when it started the lead had to go
somewhere.
# #> # Now that we are all aware of the lead problem associated with
# #> # consuming shot wildlife, we can take steps as individuals to
# lower our
# #> # risk of lead poisoning. One of those is to take calcium, Vitamin
# D
# #> # and zinc supplements to prevent the uptake of lead.
#
# #> Too bad raptors, waterfowl, game birds, and non-game wildlife can't
# #> take your supplements too. As for your table,
#
# table?
Your dining room table...
# #> ask your physician
# #> whether attempting to reduce the uptake of lead is as effective as
# not
# #> ingesting it in the first place.
#
# If you reduce the uptake to the background level, then yes, it is as
# effective. It might even lower your background lead levels. It has
# for a shooting friend of mine who works around lead solder every day
# and shoots when he isn't working. But that is just one case, not a
# proper double blind study with controls. I agree with not eating lead
# if you can reasonably avoid it.
Do we can improve the safety of the game meat we serve our friends and
family by switching to un-leaded?
The supplements sound like they might help, especially to mitigate
background environmental lead exposure. Are you sure there's been no
testing of the hypothesis?
# #> Other things we can do - voluntarily - is pass on low percentage
# shots
# #> that lead to unrecovered game, bury our gut piles or removed them
# from
# #> the field,
#
# I actually thought of this after I posted last.
I'm glad we can agree on something productive.
# #> switch to non-lead bullets in high velocity rifles, and use
# #> non-lead shot for all our shotgun hunting.
#
# Has anyone done studies on how many game animals will be shot and lost
# due to the non-lead projectiles lower SD and inferior expansion? Just
# curious. Honestly.
I'm sure Barnes Bullets will be happy to help us there. Their
marketing has been throwing the cup and core bullet makers under the
bus for years now. As for lost birds, it seems the science is pretty
clear that iron ingestion is less likely to harm scavenging birds.
# Also, are all the lead substitutes safe if ingested by birds or
# mammals? Because if you ban lead projectiles, that will be the next
# target. The study you linked to mentions high levels of copper in the
# kidneys of raptors as proof they were consuming jacketed rounds. Want
# to bet that high levels of copper in the kidneys isn't good for them
# either?
An advantage of the monolithic expanding and fully encapsulated
bullets is that fewer to no undetectable fragments are left in the
carcass. They also account for a greater number of pass through shots
so that the bullet is sequestered in the hillside instead of concealed
inside a tasty chunk of meat.
# How about bismuth? It is less toxic than most other heavy
# metals, but stays in the human body days to years.
While poking around in the DBs I saw some studies in the literature
evaluating ingestion of bismuth and tungsten. Time will tell.
# #> Those of us who also fish
# #> can use non-lead tackle. We can do this voluntarily and take
# credit
# #> for being part of the solution, or you can fight a delaying action
# #> using classic denialism tactics <http://www.skepticalscience.com/5-
# #> characteristics-of-scientific-denialism.html> while the science and
# #> public opinion continues to chip away at your position until we're
# all
# #> subjected to regulation. Whose side are you on?
Again, I apologize for that statement. I should have said "Which side
do you want to be on."
# I'm on the side of those who hunt, fish or shoot. I'm for those who
# believe we, as individuals, have the freedom to make informed
# choices.
And I believe that we are at liberty to make informed choices so long
as our actions do not infringe on the rights of others - in this and
future generations - to enjoy hunting, fishing, and the shooting
sports.
# I'm against those who would use the power of state and
# federal governments to push an extremist agenda by using questionable
# science to sway politicians and regulators (sound familiar?).
Yes, it sounds like global warming denialism, a technique refined by
the very same people hired by the tobacco companies to cast doubt on
the science demonstrating that smoking is dangerous... But that is a
debate for another forum.
Thanks for this discussion.
nord...@yahoo.com
# # #bullets.
# #
# # Yeah. Which "signature" do you match it with? I'm willing to bet
# # that every ammo maker has their own recipe. Or two or twenty.
#
# What's really going to be interesting is to see if any of the lead
# substitutes (bismuth, etc.) fall under some kind of poisoning scrutiny in
# the future, since after all, this supposedly isn't really about wildlife
# conservation as much as it really is about eventually banning hunting.
Sez who?
nord...@yahoo.com
# #hunters' bullets. I suspect tthough, that the lead from bullets is
# #different enough from that from other possible sources: sinkers, etc.
# #I'm sure they're smart enough to figure out the problems.
#
# "Smart enough" <> "what do the people who paid for the research want
# to see?"
Do you distrust all science, or only the science that produces results
with which you disagree? If the science demonstrated that ingesting
lead fragments from deer carcasses made eagles smarter, faster,
prettier, and longer-lived would you still question who paid for the
research?
nord...@yahoo.com
# poison in the world. Yeah, 15 or so micrograms will kill you within a
# couple of days from radiation poisoning, but 5 or 6 microgams will
# kill you from heavy metal poisoning. Fast. It's just that it's
# really, really hard to portion out 5 mikes versus 15. Or 250.
Yep, I predict an unhappy future for plutonium birdshot manufacturer's
lobby.
Mark Crispin
# ALL heavy metals are poisonous. Heck, plutonium is the most powerful
# poison in the world. Yeah, 15 or so micrograms will kill you within a
# couple of days from radiation poisoning, but 5 or 6 microgams will
# kill you from heavy metal poisoning.
HUH??? Where did you get that?
A lethal dose of plutonium is more like 20 milligrams inhaled or 500
milligrams injested, and even that is subject to debate because people
have carried higher doses of plutonium in their body yet lived a normal
lifetime.
Chemically, plutonium is less toxic than caffeine, tobacco, many illegal
drugs, acetaminophen, some vitamins, pseudoephedrine, and lots of plants
and fungi (much less than 1mg of ricin or botulin will kill you). Its
chemical toxicity is about the same as lead.
Radiologically, radium is 200 times more radioactive than Pu-239, the most
common isotope. Pu-244, which occurs naturally, is only about 50 times
more radioactive than depleted uranium (U-238, which isn't very
radioactive at all).
Put another way, you would not die from holding a bit of visible plutonium
in your hand (not that I recommend it!). There are plenty of other
elements, including several non-radioactive ones, that will kill you if
you touch them; and plenty of radioactive elements that will kill you if
you get close enough to see a visible amount.
As far as we know, NOBODY has died from plutonium poisoning. People HAVE
been killed by plutonium (most notably at Nagasaki) but that was due to
the plutonium reaching criticality. These were deaths by explosion, heat,
X-rays, gamma rays, and neutrons; none of which are released by
sub-critical plutonium.
Plutonium is primarily an alpha emitter, meaning that the emitted
particles can not penetrate human skin (or for that matter a piece of
paper). Alpha emitters in your lungs are a bad thing. It's been
speculated that people can die of lung cancer from plutonium particles in
the lungs, based upon the proven lung cancer deaths caused by inhaled
polonium (from tobacco smoke) and radon. But it hasn't happend yet.
Let's put to rest this myth of "plutonium is the most powerful poison in
the world". It isn't by any measure. Its greatest hazard is that some
isotopes of plutonium are fissile.
-- Mark --
http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.
Kevin Snodgrass
# Do you distrust all science, or only the science that produces results
# with which you disagree? If the science demonstrated that ingesting
# lead fragments from deer carcasses made eagles smarter, faster,
# prettier, and longer-lived would you still question who paid for the
# research?
I distrust "science" that appears to have political motivations.
Vaccines causing autism and global warming are two recent examples of
political motivations disguised as "science".
This particular "science" sounds fishy to me. Humans have been eating
deer, pheasant, goose, duck, squirrel, rabbit and many other critters
killed with lead bullets or shot for hundreds of years. Some people get
a large amount of their yearly protein intake from these sources. They
don't have lead poisoning. Soldiers and sailors for hundreds of years
survived being shot by lead ball and bullets, they didn't get lead
poisoning even though the lead remained in their bodies. A close friend
of mine lived for 20+ years with at least 13 lead birdshot in his face,
he didn't get lead poisoning.
And if there is anything to this "science" from Minnesota then there
should be a large number of lead poisoned coyotes, badgers, raccoons,
skunks, crows, hawks, owls and any other carrion eaters common in central
Nebraska from all the prairie dogs that have been tenderized for their
eating pleasure. Not much lead in the bullets used, but since they
completely disintegrate on impact I'm sure there are lots of lead
particles within the meal. To the best of my knowledge, there have been
exactly zero reports of lead poisoned carrion eaters in central Nebraska.
Colon Powell
Dillon Pyron <dmp...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
# Thus spake MNmineiro <rfr...@gmail.com> :
#
# #
# #Not being directly connected with the U MN research, I can't say how
# #researchers connect the lead found in eagles' blood to the lead from
# #hunters' bullets. I suspect tthough, that the lead from bullets is
# #different enough from that from other possible sources: sinkers, etc.
# #I'm sure they're smart enough to figure out the problems.
#
# "Smart enough" <> "what do the people who paid for the research want
# to see?"
#
# Actually "SM" < "wdtpwpftrwts?" (wow, that's one TWA)
Minnesota has had lead mining operations since the 1800"s. Since lead
occurs naturally in the area, why would anyone be surprised to find
evidence of lead in the wildlife?
nord...@yahoo.com
# should be a large number of lead poisoned coyotes, badgers, raccoons,
# skunks, crows, hawks, owls and any other carrion eaters common in central
# Nebraska from all the prairie dogs that have been tenderized for their
# eating pleasure. Not much lead in the bullets used, but since they
# completely disintegrate on impact I'm sure there are lots of lead
# particles within the meal. To the best of my knowledge, there have been
# exactly zero reports of lead poisoned carrion eaters in central Nebraska.
Don't know about Nebraska, but a few minutes of Google-fu returned
these hits...
A GLOBAL UPDATE OF LEAD POISONING IN TERRESTRIAL BIRDS FROM AMMUNITION
SOURCES http://www.nps.gov/pinn/naturescience/upload/0108%20Pain.pdf
Recreational Shooting of Prairie Dogs: A Portal for Lead Entering
Wildlife Food Chains http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/get_the_lead_out/pdfs/Pauli_and_Buskirk_2007.pdf
Secondary lead poisoning in golden eagle and ferruginous hawk chicks
consuming shot black-tailed prairie dogs, Thunder Basin National
Grassland, Wyoming
http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/contaminants/papers/documents/R6720C05.pdf
LEAD INGESTION BY SCAVENGING MAMMALIAN CARNIVORES IN THE YELLOWSTONE
ECOSYSTEM http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/get_the_lead_out/pdfs/Rogers_et_al_2009.pdf
Bullet Fragments in Deer Remains: Implications for Lead Exposure in
Avian Scavengers http://www.peregrinefund.org/pdfs/ResearchLibrary/Hunt%20et%20al%202006.pdf
Bullet Fragmentation Study: Supplementary Data (interesting set of
radiographs of carcasses and gutpiles)
http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/wildlife/lead3.pdf
Lead and Wildlife (46 articles)
http://www.nps.gov/pinn/naturescience/leadwildlife.htm
nord...@yahoo.com
# occurs naturally in the area, why would anyone be surprised to find
# evidence of lead in the wildlife?
Other than the fact that eagles don't work in lead mines? Lead
concentrations above the environmental background level appear to
result from consuming fish, game birds, animal carcasses, and gutpiles
contaminated with lead used in fishing and hunting.
Dillon Pyron
## #Not being directly connected with the U MN research, I can't say how
## #researchers connect the lead found in eagles' blood to the lead from
## #hunters' bullets. I suspect tthough, that the lead from bullets is
## #different enough from that from other possible sources: sinkers, etc.
## #I'm sure they're smart enough to figure out the problems.
##
## "Smart enough" <> "what do the people who paid for the research want
## to see?"
#
#Do you distrust all science, or only the science that produces results
#with which you disagree? If the science demonstrated that ingesting
#lead fragments from deer carcasses made eagles smarter, faster,
#prettier, and longer-lived would you still question who paid for the
#research?
No, actually I distrust "science" that's conducted in search of
results that validate a preconceived opinion.