In a moment of clarity, the EPA doesn’t ban something. But wait, bigger craziness still looks to be on the horizon. See the end of the story.
==========================================
EPA PRESS RELEASE
Brendan Gilfillan giflfillan.brendan@epa.gov
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 27, 2010
EPA Denies Petition Calling for Lead Ammunition Ban
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today denied a petition calling for a ban on the production and distribution of lead hunting ammunition. EPA sent a letter to the petitioners explaining the rejection – that letter can be found here: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/chemtest/pubs/sect21.html
Steve Owens, EPA assistant administrator for the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, issued the following statement on the agency’s decision:
“EPA today denied a petition submitted by several outside groups for the agency to implement a ban on the production and distribution of lead hunting ammunition. EPA reached this decision because the agency does not have the legal authority to regulate this type of product under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) – nor is the agency seeking such authority.
“This petition, which was submitted to EPA at the beginning of this month, is one of hundreds of petitions submitted to EPA by outside groups each year. This petition was filed under TSCA, which requires the agency to review and respond within 90 days.
“EPA is taking action on many fronts to address major sources of lead in our society, such as eliminating childhood exposures to lead; however, EPA was not and is not considering taking action on whether the lead content in hunting ammunition poses an undue threat to wildlife.
“As there are no similar jurisdictional issues relating to the agency’s authority over fishing sinkers, EPA – as required by law – will continue formally reviewing a second part the petition related to lead fishing sinkers.
“Those wishing to comment specifically on the fishing tackle issue can do so by visiting http://www.regulations.gov . EPA will consider comments that are submitted by September 15.”
R286
h/t to WUWT reader Michael C. Roberts
Background:
Lead for Shot, Bullets, and Fishing Sinkers
// <![CDATA[// August 3, 2010 — The American Bird Conservancy, the Association of Avian Veterinarians, and a number of other groups submitted a petition (PDF) (2 pp. 92 kb, About PDF) and attachment (PDF) (100 pp. 901 kb, About PDF) to EPA under Section 21 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) asking EPA to “prohibit the manufacture, processing, and distribution in commerce of lead for shot, bullets, and fishing sinkers.” Section 21 of TSCA allows citizens to file petitions, such as this one, and requires EPA to respond to any petition within 90 days of receiving it. EPA has just begun its review of this citizens’ petition and has made no determination on the requested action. Read EPA’s letter acknowledging receipt of the petition (PDF). (1 p. 189 kb, About PDF). To send your comments to EPA about this petition, please visit www.regulations.gov and enter Docket ID# EPA-HQ-OPPT-2010-0681.
==============================
In other news:
The EPA is considering banning lead weights used to balance automobile tires:
http://www.greencarreports.com/blog/1021157_green-groups-ask-epa-to-ban-lead-wheel-weights
Thank the Sierra Club who unbelievably puts this in their press release: (PDF)
“1.6 million pounds of lead from wheel weights is left falling off of cars each year where anyone can find and possibly ingest it,” said Jeff Gearhart, Research Director for the Ecology Center.
Yeah, those people sitting by the side of the road looking for lead weights to eat is a real problem, yesssiree. Too late for California though, a ban is already in effect. Full disclosure: I’m a scofflaw. I have lead wheel weights on my car.
Next I think we should ban dirt. Really, it’s full of nasty stuff just sitting around where anyone can find and possibly ingest it.
From the CDC:
How dangerous is eating dirt? My mother was pretty certain about this—damn dangerous. Soils contaminated by industrial or human pollutants pose considerable threat to anyone who eats them. Reports abound of lead poisoning and other toxicities in children eating contaminated soils. Similarly, we do not have to look farther than the last refugee camp or the slums of Calcutta or Tijuana or Basra to find the dangers of soils contaminated with untreated human waste. But the inherent biologic danger of soil is difficult to assess. Soil unaffected by the pressures of overpopulation, industry, and agriculture may be vastly different from the soil most of us encounter routinely.
Yeah ban dirt, that’s the ticket.
Wally the Walrus – Australia has certainly not banned lead in bullets. The .22LR we fire at the local small bore club is all lead bullets.
On banning lead even more uselessly search for “lead free solder”. This disaster was imposed on the electronics industry world wide some years ago at vast expense despite no evidence that there was a problem. Solder now contains no lead even though the industry must have greatly reduced its use of lead when CRTs gave way to LCD screens (no leaded glass in LCDs but of course it isn’t a huge problem in leaded glass either as the lead is safely locked up in the glass) and surface mount components means much less lead to solder the parts to the circuit boards along with larger scale integration meaning even fewer components.
But no, the idiot EUroweenies in Brussels went and banned lead from electronics when it really is only a recycling/waste collection problem.
The bad effects of the ban? There is no good substitute. Solder is now tin and silver with maybe a few other minor components. The lead free solder is much less shock resistant than leaded solder. I’ve seen 5% the shock resistance. A good lead free joint looks just like a bad one – dull and grey. The solder melts at considerably higher temperature imposing greater thermal shock on components which may adversely impact reliability. Component leads are now pure tin plated, not lead -tin alloy plated. Pure tin grows “whiskers” causing shorts to adjacent leads again adversely impacting reliability.
The military, aviation , safety equipment in cars(ABS, ESC) and medical equipment was exempt (that alone tells you something) but the EU are now proposing to remove the exemption for all but the military.
The side effects? Less reliable equipment with a shorter useful life resulting in more electronic waste. Possible deaths due to critical safety equipment failures.
Yup, that’s a great environMENTAL policy.
One last thing – about 1% of the lead mined went into electronics. 80% was in lead acid batteries, 5% in ammunition, the rest in industrial uses. A tiny amount still goes into tetraethyl lead for use in 100LL avgas (that’s about to be banned also).
able says:
August 27, 2010 at 6:30 pm
I think the banning of lead has more to do with the consumption of shot by water fowl.
I’ve read were far more animals dye from lead poisoning then are ever killed by hunters.
That was justification when they banned lead shot for waterfowl hunting around here (along the Mississippi flyway) many years ago. Many species of ducks and geese dive to the bottom to rummage for food and the theory was that they were consuming spent shot and dying from lead poisoning. I gave up hunting when my father became too frail to go,which was quite a few years ago, so I don’t now what the current regs are, but AFAIK lead shot is still banned along the river and probably elsewhere.
How much lead oxy carbonate falls off corroded battery terminals. Probably alot.
Tom Harley [August 27, 2010 at 6:59 pm] says:
break out the depleted uranium shells…
Now that’s what I’m talkin’ about!
Then I just need to get this baby to spit ’em out:
http://www.456fis.org/GAU-8_AVENGER.htm
ShrNfr points out the real problem with lead shot. Waterfowl ingest small pebbles to help with digestion (think of them as miniature millstones.) When they ingest lead shot instead the lead is digested by stomach acid, and lead poisoning follows.
It’s no big deal for hunters. There are perfectly good alternatives.
I am afraid there is a case to answer using lead shot and lead fishing weights. Research here in the UK has shown that water birds, swans, ducks etc., do get jead poisoning from areas where wild duck shooting takes place, mainly wetlands. Fishing weights are also a problem, not the large sinkers but the small split shot used by many fisherman. Lead shot is ingested by the filter feeding birds and the shot lodges in the birds crops and lead poisoning follows. There are ways round the problem using other materials. These are mandatory in the UK but are also more expensive and the bismuth shot used for shooting is less effective than lead but at least the lead poisoning is less prevalent.
@Alleagra says: August 27, 2010 at 8:45 pm
“I don’t know whether the use of lead shot poses a significant risk to animal and human life in the long run. But is sneering at the possibility a sensible response?”
Hmmmm.
I suggest that sneering at a bunch of interfering Greenies who jump out of bed every morning just busting to think of something else to ban, (based usually on zero scientific evidence), is a pretty fair response.
It would actually be more sensible to rise up and slaughter the lot of them but I guess it would be considered a little inhumane.
UK’s already done some of this-
http://www.basc.org.uk//en/departments/game-and-gamekeeping/game-shooting/lead-and-nonlead-shot.cfm
DEFRA (the Department for Elimination of Farming and Rural Activities) is currently reviewing lead again at the behest of the RSPB. Initial meetings seem to show similar problems to global warming salesmanship-
http://www.leadammunitiongroup.co.uk/LAG%20-%20minutes%20-%206%20July%202010.html
Rumours that a push to use steel shot for all game shooting has been sponsored by the British Dental Assosciation are unproven.
What a swift transit is has been from the permissive society to the permit state.
WTF: August 27, 2010 at 5:42 pm
The EPA didn’t ban it because they didn’t have the authority. If they did…….
They pretty much got their way with the military. In 1994, an outfit called Glaser Safety Slug, Inc., developed an effective frangible bullet suitable for use in military rifles during SWAT hostage rescue situations involving storming buildings. It was still a high velocity round, but it’d break up before it penetrated a wall, theoretically eliminating injury for innocent folk on the opposite side of those walls.
It was made of polymers — no lead. In 1995, the EPA caught wind of the new “lead-free bullet” and issued a writ of compliance to the military, which required the use of frangible rounds during all marksmanship training by 2002. The intent was clearly stated — eliminating the hazard of wildlife wandering on the ranges inadvertently ingesting lead.
Wildlife is stupid that way, yanno — deer will risk being shot just for the chance to gulp down a couple of fresh 5.56mm bullets.
(/sarc font)
Long story short, rather than mix two types of rounds with different ballistic characteristics (it gets downright annoying when you’re continuously readjusting your battle-sights in combat), both the Army and Marine Corps dropped the standard NATO 5.56mm and 7.62mm in 2003 and went with the new, shiny, “Green Bullet.”
In a firefight, they work fine within the first 50% of the NATO rounds’ effective range, but beyond that, you might just as well be launching harsh language at the other team. In 2002, the Sergeant-Major of the Army announced in a PIO release that he’d seen Taliban dispatched at 1,000 meters by troops firing “Green Bullets” from the M-4 — it was the funniest thing any of us had heard in months. Even using NATO standard rounds, the M-4’s max effective range is less than 600 meters…
Alleagra comments, August 27, 2010 at 8:45 pm
“Yes, we know that and we also know why these foods are not normally dangerous when eaten. But check out the literature; you’d be pretty stupid to ingest lead, a very nasty accumulative poison, in any form.
I don’t know whether the use of lead shot poses a significant risk to animal and human life in the long run. But is sneering at the possibility a sensible response?”
Firstly, I would have thought that after two or three hundred years of hunting game using lead projectiles it is fairly obvious that there is no significant downside to that tradition.
Secondly, I strongly suspect that many/most people do not realise that common fruits and nuts contain quite deadly poisons.
Thirdly, I think it most unlikely that anyone would perceive lead balance weights, sinkers or bullets to be a potential food source.
But on a more fundamental level, I don’t consider it to be a role of democratic government to tell me that if I want to I cannot eat the potentially poisonous parts of say the rhubarb plant. Invoking the precautionary principle is all very well, but if our forefathers had accepted that nihilist doctrine we would all still be living in caves.
Best regards and thanks for expressing your thoughts Alleagra.
I heard of a French man who would find car parts anywhere an ingest them. He ate a bike once too, and was going to eat a Concorde.
If the lead weights are run over, turned into powder and blown around, yeah, it’s a major problem.
The ban on tetraethyl lead in gasoline reduced the amount of lead breathed in by enough people that it measurably raised our national IQ — much more for kids who lived within about a half-mile of a major road.
Lead is nasty stuff, in human bodies.
REPLY:
I see you left out the important part, selectively quoting, which is what you’ll probably do on that half baked humorless hatefest blog of yours so here’s the whole context.
And my response to this idiotic statement that you ignored:
This is an imagined problem. Lead powder isn’t a real threat. Ed, like gold, lead sinks to the bottom of most anything moving it, being air or water, it doesn’t remain airborne or suspended in water. Mass. Lead in gas was a real problem. People “ingesting” lead weights and even the supposed lead dust isn’t. – Anthony
It has long been recognised by responsible shooters that there is a specific problem with water fowl ( ducks geese etc) ingesting spent lead shot. The various jurisdictions in the UK have brought in regulations prohibiting the use of lead shot over wetlands, most recently last year here in Northern Ireland. There are various alterntives available ( bismuth, steel, tungsten), each with its own drawback compared to lead.
However we are still shooting, and we now can dine on lead free mallard!
Those who want to know more including, analysis of the shot types, would do worse than to browse the British Association for Shooting and Conservation website. http://www.basc.org.uk.
There is no evidence that other uses of lead ammunition causes any significant toxicity problem.
All kinds of wierd and crazy stuff have been put into shells for soldiers to use.
I’d prefer lead to some of this stuff.
Kevin says:
August 27, 2010 at 11:24 pm
“1.6 million pounds of lead from wheel weights is left falling off of cars each year where anyone can find and possibly ingest it,” said Jeff Gearhart, Research Director for the Ecology Center.”
I have to be honest with you guys. I was walking down the street the other day and saw a lead weight that had fallen off of a tire. My first thought was, ‘why don’t I ingest it?’
Put enough ketchup on it and you can eat anything.
Lead wheel weights are being phases out now. The replacements take up twice the space and are a pain to deal with.
Al Gore’s Holy Hologram says:
August 28, 2010 at 2:45 am
And I heard that the Concorde has 26 cargo bays, each designated by a letter of the alphabet…
…and the French guy went right for the S cargo compartment. 🙂
It looks like the morons in the federal government are seriously trying to create the type of situation John Ross warns about in the excellent book “Unintended Consequences”.
Anyone who’s into guns, shooting, civil rights, military history, or, hell, just wants a really good read – check it out!
I’d recommend buying it, since the author is amazing, but it seems to be out of print, with even used versions going for EIGHTY bucks (http://www.amazon.com/Unintended-Consequences-John-Ross/dp/1888118040)
So… for those of us not willing to pay $ 81 – $ 240 for a book, here’s a PDF (749 pages):
http://www.shtfinfo.com/shtffiles/books_and_reading/Unintended_Consequences.pdf
I have stopped randomly picking up and nibble on left over tire lead from the streets when it was pointed out that the brown flecks on the lead usually meant another kind of soil. Now I smell and taste it before I pick it up to nibble on it.
we could also ban stupidity, but the we would have to write-off Jeff Gearhart.
Larry Fields says:
August 27, 2010 at 10:45 pm
“Have you heard about the newest hunting regulation in California? You’re only allowed to shoot the male squirrels. :-)”
That must be quite alarming for the people of San Fran.
Mod, feel free to snip, but I thought it funny.
The conventional wisdom is that the conventional wisdom is often conventional stupidity.
“Everybody knows” that man made CO2 is going to end life on earth as we know it. It’s a proven fact and the debate is over.
“Everybody knows” that real butter is bad for you and the saturated fats and trans-fats in margarine are good for you. The debate is over.
“Everybody knows” that more waterfowl die from ingesting lead shot than from being harvested by hunters. The debate is over.
It MAY BE TRUE.
But…does anybody know of any “peer reviewed scholarly works” that support this hypothesis??
Befuddled in Texas
Steamboat Jack (Jon Jewett’s evil twin)
The problem with lead bullets is when hunters leave their kill in the field.
Other animals and birds feed on the carrion and die horrible deaths from lead poisoning.
I’m not a big fan of the EPA, but their is a problem with lead shot. I would like to see it addressed.
Mike Borgelt says:
August 28, 2010 at 12:21 am
Derryman says:
August 28, 2010 at 3:48 am
I don’t believe any of it. What are the odds of a duck ingesting a lead shot? For one thing, they are 5 times as dense as pebbles and sink deep into the mud. I raise all types of birds, and they prefer quartz, gravel, stones—hard stuff—not soft stuff. They need to grind their food up in the crop, and lead cannot function for this purpose! If the occasional lead shot is swallowed by a bird, so what? I doubt if much lead could mobilize from the dry (not acidic) crop. What could possibly be the prevalence of this urban myth? Another lie perpetrated by the ecofreaks, I reckon. As they said in the movie, “Show me the money”. Where’s the data on lead-in-crop prevalence, and lead poisoning in waterfowl, or was the data “modeled” or “simulated” or “extrapolated”?
Remember, Green is the new Red. Everything they have told you is bogus. Question everything. Demand proof.