Lead shot total ban, likely timescale five years.
https://www.hse.gov.uk/reach/restrictions/rr-aavi-0821.pdf
https://www.hse.gov.uk/reach/restrictions/rr-aavi-0821.pdf
I've been saying this for years yet BASC etc don't seem to listen. The grass roots of our sport is local fibre wad shoots. Registered targets are only a small percentage of the total clays shot (or they certainly are in the north).This could be the start of a downward spiral for the small fibre only sunday morning shoots. If the landowner does not want bio-wads on his land its game over. If on the other hand bio-wads are ok will club members want to pay the extra cost of the cartridges.The result will be the same, less shooters, shoot not viable so club closes.
Lets hope the manufacturers can come up with a solution
Don`t you think that was always the underlying plan.........I've been saying this for years yet BASC etc don't seem to listen. The grass roots of our sport is local fibre wad shoots. Registered targets are only a small percentage of the total clays shot (or they certainly are in the north).
When the ordinary working man discovers his £270 a thou fibre lead club loads are now a £440 eco steel loads, what's he going to do?
This could start a massive demise of our sport. BASC's current response is just to defend their appeasement and the CPSA haven't seen it as worth commenting on!
PM
To be fair to the CPSA, they can be excused this time of year as they're clearly distracted by their personal highlight of the year, the CPSA awards (p*ss up).I'm afraid the cpsa stance to throw game shooters under the bus and get in bed with hse to try and protect clay shooting was an abject failure and total misjudgement of the situation. This is probably why they are not commenting.
Basc . Their capitulation is what started this mess. And yep I get what your saying about half a million certificate holders. But when the bodies that should fight for us basically sold us down the river then maybe you can understand why many felt that it was a stitch up from the start and didn't bother.
The real loosers are folk who rely on shooting for their livelihood. And of the course the economy. 1000s of jobs and billions of pounds down the pan. Jobs and money that this country can ill afford. But as a back door to eliminating shooting, it's a great plan. And you don't have to compensate all the gun owners like you would if you just banned shooting.
This could be the start of a downward spiral for the small fibre only sunday morning shoots. If the landowner does not want bio-wads on his land its game over. If on the other hand bio-wads are ok will club members want to pay the extra cost of the cartridges.The result will be the same, less shooters, shoot not viable so club closes.
Lets hope the manufacturers can come up with a solution
I think maybe your post should say that lead sits in the environment. (Not lead shot)I feel that Olympic athletes v CPSA affiliated is simply down to numbers. Obviously nobody eats clay pigeons, but the lead shot sits in the environment and can affect wildlife. Personally (just my opinion) that’s a bigger issue, and cause for a ban, than lead shot in game birds.
Correct, lead is found naturally in the environment, but that isn’t the issue here. It’s whether the additional lead shot that is left after clay shooting matters. That was my point (as I’m sure you know).I think maybe your post should say that lead sits in the environment. (Not lead shot)
I.E it's a naturally occurring substance.
I’m not convinced this is a back door to eliminate shooting. But I’m as certain as I can be that if shooting/guns were banned, gun owners would not be compensated. There’s no legal requirement for that, and any moral obligation is purely a matter of opinion.I'm afraid the cpsa stance to throw game shooters under the bus and get in bed with hse to try and protect clay shooting was an abject failure and total misjudgement of the situation. This is probably why they are not commenting.
Basc . Their capitulation is what started this mess. And yep I get what your saying about half a million certificate holders. But when the bodies that should fight for us basically sold us down the river then maybe you can understand why many felt that it was a stitch up from the start and didn't bother.
The real loosers are folk who rely on shooting for their livelihood. And of the course the economy. 1000s of jobs and billions of pounds down the pan. Jobs and money that this country can ill afford. But as a back door to eliminating shooting, it's a great plan. And you don't have to compensate all the gun owners like you would if you just banned shooting.
Exactly the attitudes that got us to this.I’m not convinced this is a back door to eliminate shooting. But I’m as certain as I can be that if shooting/guns were banned, gun owners would not be compensated. There’s no legal requirement for that, and any moral obligation is purely a matter of opinion.
I just don’t see 1000s of jobs and billions of pounds lost. The manufacturers will supply a product to meet requirements, at a cost that people can afford (and are willing to pay) and keeps businesses running.
You’re wrong. It’s not ‘simples’ despite you thinking it. The government introduced the compensation for some handgun owners when it passed the 1997 firearms act. It is under no legal obligation to repeat that, or offer compensation to anything else that’s banned.Exactly the attitudes that got us to this.
If you own something and the government takes it off you they have to pay you . Simples. As they had to when handguns were banned..
Lead from clay grounds which falls in specific places is easily cleared with a machine and recycled to provide a tidy sum for said clay ground. The same cannot be said of lead occurring naturally..As has been stated its a stitch up. Shooting ban via the back door. Catch up.
Enter your email address to join: