Minnesota Lead Ban and High School Trap

[Markemp]

Hunting wise there are bismuth shot, tungsten/iron, tungsten polymer matrix, tungsten, copper, tin, and bronze all which have passed USFWS muster.

Lead then steel at commercial rates, although steel at bulk can be cheaper than lead; then bismuth; then copper (although I haven’t seen copper shot in years); bronze is used in some African bullet applications…; then tungsten iron (hevishot); matrix (used to be sold by federal and Kent, but I’m not sure if it still is); then tungsten (TSS). Theoretically gold would be an ideal choice except for cost.
Lead is variable- $35-50 per 25# - shipping, antimony content, and plating all change cost.
Steel is around $20/10#
Bismuth is like $100/7#
Hevishot is about $40/#
TSS is over $50/#.

The wads are about 5x more expensive between steel shot safe and lead wads.

Tungsten is very labor intensive to load.

How much more expensive is a box of steel vs a box of the other types of rounds? While I'm sure some shooters will load their own, I'm guessing the vast majority will use whatever is purchased by the team or their parents.

Another thing that has been bothering me about some of your replies regarding the dangers of lead. You only reply about how lethal it is, and never address the other negative effects of lead exposure. Since you seem to be some sort of medical expert, maybe you can spend a little time explaining the dangers of long term lead exposure from various sources (ingestion, inhalation, contact, etc).

I seem to recall copper shot back in the day. Felt like a bit of a fad. I bet it's pretty expensive these days though!

[Holland&Holland]

Hunting wise there are bismuth shot, tungsten/iron, tungsten polymer matrix, tungsten, copper, tin, and bronze all which have passed USFWS muster.

Lead then steel at commercial rates, although steel at bulk can be cheaper than lead; then bismuth; then copper (although I haven’t seen copper shot in years); bronze is used in some African bullet applications…; then tungsten iron (hevishot); matrix (used to be sold by federal and Kent, but I’m not sure if it still is); then tungsten (TSS). Theoretically gold would be an ideal choice except for cost.
Lead is variable- $35-50 per 25# - shipping, antimony content, and plating all change cost.
Steel is around $20/10#
Bismuth is like $100/7#
Hevishot is about $40/#
TSS is over $50/#.

The wads are about 5x more expensive between steel shot safe and lead wads.

Tungsten is very labor intensive to load.

How much more expensive is a box of steel vs a box of the other types of rounds? While I'm sure some shooters will load their own, I'm guessing the vast majority will use whatever is purchased by the team or their parents.

Another thing that has been bothering me about some of your replies regarding the dangers of lead. You only reply about how lethal it is, and never address the other negative effects of lead exposure. Since you seem to be some sort of medical expert, maybe you can spend a little time explaining the dangers of long term lead exposure from various sources (ingestion, inhalation, contact, etc).

I seem to recall copper shot back in the day. Felt like a bit of a fad. I bet it's pretty expensive these days though!

Say you know nothing about guns without saying you know nothing about guns and this would be your question.

The high school league doesn’t allow reloaded ammunition.

There is copper plated shot currently. It is still lead.

[Holland&Holland]

Steel target loads are currently about 2.5 -3 times the cost. IF the state made the HS league switch demand would quickly outstrip supply. You would be lucky to find it at that price point if you could get it at all.

[jdege]

Why not use steel shot?

Because it's not the lead in the shot that poses the health risk?

Elemental lead is chemically nearly inert. It's lead compounds that are dangerous, not lead the metal, and particularly organic lead compounds.

The lead paint that we used for so many years with such deleterious effects contained lead chromate, lead oxide, and lead carbonate. And these, also, are almost inert. But lead oxide disassociates when exposed to hydrochloric acid, which means it becomes toxic when eaten.

But as for ammunition, it's not the lead in the shot that is of concern, but the lead styphnate and lead azide in the primers. This ends up in the air and on the hands. This is why proper ventilation is so important at an indoor range, and why you should always wash your hands after shooting, especially before eating.

But banning lead shot? It's a proposal that indicates severe ignorance about what the actual problem is.

[Markemp]

But banning lead shot? It's a proposal that indicates severe ignorance about what the actual problem is.

Mr Strawser, what is the MNGOC's position on this bill?

Here is some interesting info. Non-lead primers are a thing too. Is this proposed law also requiring non-lead primers along with the steel shot?

https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP ... azards.pdf
https://epi.dph.ncdhhs.gov/oee/oii/docs ... tsheet.pdf

Recovering lead bullets from
traps and emptying bullet trays can release dust
into the air and contaminate hands. Handling spent
cartridges and cleaning firearms can do the same.

Lead dust and fumes emitted into the air are a
hazard. A building’s regular HVAC system may not
adequately remove airborne lead particles and these
particles can be inhaled. Lead dust can also settle on
food, water, cloths, shoes, nearby surfaces and even
travel to other rooms. You can ingest lead when you
touch a lead-contaminated surface, then eat, drink or
smoke. Lead dust is hard to see and can be tracked
out of the range area on shoes and clothing. This can
lead to contamination of your vehicle and home and
can expose members of your household.

Seems to me the dangers of lead can come from a variety of sources, so minimizing its use at the trap range is a smart idea. Opposing this seems more like the conclusion you would reach after long term lead exposure.

[Holland&Holland]

But banning lead shot? It's a proposal that indicates severe ignorance about what the actual problem is.

Mr Strawser, what is the MNGOC's position on this bill?

Here is some interesting info. Non-lead primers are a thing too. Is this proposed law also requiring non-lead primers along with the steel shot?

https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP ... azards.pdf
https://epi.dph.ncdhhs.gov/oee/oii/docs ... tsheet.pdf

Recovering lead bullets from
traps and emptying bullet trays can release dust
into the air and contaminate hands. Handling spent
cartridges and cleaning firearms can do the same.

Lead dust and fumes emitted into the air are a
hazard. A building’s regular HVAC system may not
adequately remove airborne lead particles and these
particles can be inhaled. Lead dust can also settle on
food, water, cloths, shoes, nearby surfaces and even
travel to other rooms. You can ingest lead when you
touch a lead-contaminated surface, then eat, drink or
smoke. Lead dust is hard to see and can be tracked
out of the range area on shoes and clothing. This can
lead to contamination of your vehicle and home and
can expose members of your household.

Seems to me the dangers of lead can come from a variety of sources, so minimizing its use at the trap range is a smart idea. Opposing this seems more like the conclusion you would reach after long term lead exposure.

It is clearly a conclusion you would reach when realizing that it is producing pro-gun youth and your goal is the end of gun ownership by anyone who opposes your views.

[crbutler]

Lead in trap range impact zones is periodically mined by companies who pay the range to do so.

The lead has value and is much more concentrated than ore is.

It’s simple economics.

The claim of environmental protection is really a canard made by busybodies who ware exemplifying the whole “NIMBY” complex.

Metallic lead is quite inert, and stable. Any change to something that would leach into groundwater is very low rate and will be hidden by the already existing lead deposits in the ground. It’s a naturally occurring element, and thus a 0 exposure is impossible until we get into space and can decide what we use to make the space ship. Undetectable is a different matter, but again as our technology advances we need to understand that zero exposure is impossible.

As to lead free priming, it exists, but it is relatively small in amount and has not been proven to be as reliable. You can get it at some indoor ranges. I have not seen lead free priming in shotshells, usually it’s in handgun ammo for indoor use.

Steel shot target shells are very expensive- most folks if they have to use them are actually using low end game loads. They don’t meet the official rules for the target games- and note that iron DOES rapidly convert into water soluble runoff. It’s toxic as well, just at much higher concentrations than lead is.

Supposedly you are a firearms enthusiast and here you are exposing some extremely limited knowledge about the most common sporting use firearms and the most commonly participated in recreational shooting game… yet you seem to think that adding regulation about something you are ignorant of is a good idea.

The whole lead ban for hunting and fishing is a great example of overreach. Originally the hunters went along with the folks claiming the science was that lead shot was causing large amounts of lead poisoning of waterfowl, and that by banning it we would see improvements in the environment and in waterfowl numbers.

Now we see folks claiming that the waterfowl ban shows the ban is doable and needs to be expanded… but they are absolutely unable to show any improvement caused by the lead ban for hunting over water- no reduction in lead in the water, no improvement in waterfowl numbers, no real impact on lead levels in people…

So why add yet another expensive regulation when your existing regulation didn’t make any impact?

From what I understand, the California condor lead issue is still caused by lead from gasoline that they get by dusting themselves in deserts.

Lead poisoning from ingested shot data came from nilo farms where they were using a testing range. Bird digestive physiology is very different than human/mamnalian and they can change metallic lead into a soluble compound in their gizzards. Put enough shot (iirc it was in the area of over a pound per square foot per year) and you found some lead poisoned birds. That was the data they based this on at the time.

The thought that the ulterior motive behind lead shot bans is to raise the cost of shooting and disencentivise participation comes from this fundamental disconnect between claim of goal and result of act.

Fundamentally the only places where lead use in shooting is high enough to consider it a potential problem is countered by the fact that it is economically viable to remove the deposition before that happens. Heck, I’ve mined my own personal property backstop for lead to remelt into bullet casting. It’s a non problem.

Unfortunately, folks like you buy into the chicken littles that want to do something to be seen doing something to get re-elected. You don’t see them demanding that Teslas be banned due to the large amount of lead batteries in them, do you?

[Markemp]

Interesting. What differences are there to human physiology with respect to iron vs lead toxicity, specifically for adolescents?

[jdege]

As to lead free priming, it exists, but it is relatively small in amount and has not been proven to be as reliable.

When the military was looking into lead-free primers, a couple of decades ago, the best they could find had a shelf-life of only a few years.

[daleamn]

Geez!!!
SOMEBODY show me a study where OUTDOOR TRAP SHOOTERS are getting lead poisoning.
Until then I'll assume this is just a gun grabber 'throw everything against the wall and see what sticks' bit of legislation.

[Markemp]

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-n ... -rcna19028

But wait, it's ok because it's only half of the country. And this is probably wrong, because people weren't drinking gasoline, right? It has to be swallowed to have a negative effect?

Exposure to leaded gasoline lowered the IQ of about half the population of the United States, a new study estimates.

The peer-reviewed study, published Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, focuses on people born before 1996 — the year the U.S. banned gas containing lead.

Overall, the researchers from Florida State University and Duke University found, childhood lead exposure cost America an estimated 824 million points, or 2.6 points per person on average.

Yah, lead isn't so bad.

[jdege]

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/lead-gasoline-blunted-iq-half-us-population-study-rcna19028

[...]

Yah, lead isn't so bad.

Tetraethyl lead is an organic compound, and is biologically active.

Metallic lead is not. And even lead salts, like were used in paints, are biologically active only in specific circumstances.

None of this is relevant to lead shot.

Lead is not always dangerous. The keel of my boat contains 4,000 pounds of lead, and it poses no danger to anybody.

[Lumpy]

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/lead-gasoline-blunted-iq-half-us-population-study-rcna19028

But wait, it's ok because it's only half of the country. And this is probably wrong, because people weren't drinking gasoline, right? It has to be swallowed to have a negative effect?
Yah, lead isn't so bad.

In the case of leaded gasoline, people were breathing in volatilized lead from auto exhaust. The lead exposure from lead shot hovers somewhere around zero.

[Lumpy]

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/lead-gasoline-blunted-iq-half-us-population-study-rcna19028

But wait, it's ok because it's only half of the country. And this is probably wrong, because people weren't drinking gasoline, right? It has to be swallowed to have a negative effect?
Yah, lead isn't so bad.

In the case of leaded gasoline, people were breathing in volatilized lead from auto exhaust. There's been concern about the possible exposure of scavengers and predators eating game and carcasses with lead shot, but for humans the lead exposure from lead shot hovers somewhere around zero.

[Holland&Holland]

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/lead-gasoline-blunted-iq-half-us-population-study-rcna19028

But wait, it's ok because it's only half of the country. And this is probably wrong, because people weren't drinking gasoline, right? It has to be swallowed to have a negative effect?

Exposure to leaded gasoline lowered the IQ of about half the population of the United States, a new study estimates.

The peer-reviewed study, published Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, focuses on people born before 1996 — the year the U.S. banned gas containing lead.

Overall, the researchers from Florida State University and Duke University found, childhood lead exposure cost America an estimated 824 million points, or 2.6 points per person on average.

Yah, lead isn't so bad.

How is this relevant? You do understand that there is no gasoline in shot shells correct?