Scientists support reducing and eliminating lead based ammunion into the environment, citing dangers

[CreekDog]

http://escholarship.org/uc/item/6dq3h64x

Health Risks from Lead-Based Ammunition in the Environment
A Consensus Statement of Scientists
March 22, 2013

We, the undersigned, with scientific expertise in lead and environmental health, endorse the
overwhelming scientific evidence on the toxic effects of lead on human and wildlife health. In
light of this evidence, we support the reduction and eventual elimination of lead released to the
environment through the discharge of lead-based ammunition, in order to protect human and
environmental health.
1) Lead is one of the most well-studied of all anthropogenic toxins and there is overwhelming
scientific evidence that demonstrates:
a) Lead is toxic to multiple physiological systems in vertebrate organisms, including the
central and peripheral nervous, renal, cardiovascular, reproductive, immune, and
hematologic systems. Lead is also potentially carcinogenic; lead is officially recognized
as a carcinogen and reproductive toxin in California, and the International Agency for
Research on Cancer, the National Toxicology Program, and the US Environmental
Protection Agency have identified lead as likely to be carcinogenic to humans.
b) There is no level of lead exposure to children known to be without deleterious effects
(CDC, 2012). Exposure in childhood to even slightly elevated levels of lead produce
lasting neurological deficits in intelligence and behavior.
c) Lead is also known to be toxic across different vertebrate organisms, including
mammalian and avian species.
2) Lead-based ammunition is likely the greatest, largely unregulated source of lead knowingly
discharged into the environment in the United States. In contrast, other significant sources
of lead in the environment, such as leaded gasoline, lead-based paint, and lead-based
solder, are recognized as harmful and have been significantly reduced or eliminated over
the past 50 years.
a) Lead-based ammunition production is the second largest annual use of lead in the
United States, accounting for over 60,000 metric tons consumed in 2012, second only to
the consumption of lead in the manufacture of storage batteries (USGS, 2013).
b) The release of toxic lead into the environment via the discharge of lead-based
ammunition is largely unregulated. Other major categories of lead consumption, such as
leaded batteries and sheet lead/lead pipes, are regulated in their environmental
discharge/disposal.
3) The discharge of lead-based ammunition and accumulation of spent lead-based ammunition
in the environment poses significant health risks to humans and wildlife. The best available
scientific evidence demonstrates:
a) The discharge of lead-based ammunition substantially increases environmental lead
levels, especially in areas of concentrated shooting activity (USEPA ISA for Lead draft
report, 2012).
b) The discharge of lead-based ammunition is known to pose risks of elevated lead
exposure to gun users (NRC, 2012).
c) Lead-based bullets used to shoot wildlife can fragment into hundreds of small pieces,
with a large proportion being sufficiently small to be easily ingested by scavenging
animals or incorporated into processed meat for human consumption (Pauli and
Burkirk, 2007; Hunt et al., 2009; Knott et al.,

[byeya]

1. 20 - 30 years ago lead ammo was banned for duck hunting on Cape Hatteras and maybe

other locales. After some initial grumbling from the hunters, the ban on lead was accepted. Has this changed?
It was done once anyway and seemed to be working.

[Jenoch]

2. There has been a federal ban

on the use of lead shot while hunting migratory waterfowl in the U.S. since 1991.

[byeya]

3. Thank you! I was afraid my memory was a little fuzzy.

[CreekDog]

5. it's not enough...as scientists point out, so much use remains legal and it's a huge source

and needs to be dealt with.

[CreekDog]

4. that is a fairly specific and narrow restriction and leaves so much lead shot legal

and in the environment.

[Jenoch]

7. I was answering a specific question.

I was not making a claims contrary to your opinion.

[byeya]

6. No, I didn't mean to imply that the limited federal ban was enough. I wanted to let people

know that the situation had already been studied, a ban implemented, and it's worked well.

Lead is an insideous poison, especially to children, and needs to be removed from the environment.

Can the president, with his powers in Title V, ban the use of lead bullets on federal lands like the National Forests and
Bureau of Land Management lands? I don't think there's a basis for reasonable opposition to this. So let's see what
the unreasonable, and unreasoning, will come up with.