Thread: Proposed banning of lead shot in sub gauge shotguns report from Southland

I'll leave you guys to your caveman ways I think. In the meantime as I've demonstrated what we're doing, why don't you ask what your own councils are doing about the decline, you know what we're doing, its better than sitting on the fence taking licence money and watching a decline. I look forward to seeing what you come back with as far as what they're doing

Originally Posted by Mike H

Yes it does Pointer. Because of that Southland put up a proposal for a national research program around mallards. We proposed to put up $100k each year for three years if matched by some other councils. Guess what, none did. We decided we needed to do it anyway and as we speak a national program(albeit short of funds) is underway. Lead is a problem and we all know that thats why we aren't going against the research we've proposed by making this change. Hopefully the research will find out some of the other issues. We're prepared to accept whatever the findings of it are.

How many years do you have left on the planet Mike H? I bet you have a few years on me. I can't help but feel, that my generation of shooters will have to come behind you and your friends adgendas and clean up this god awful circus

Originally Posted by Mike H

why don't you ask what your own councils are doing about the decline, you know what we're doing, its better than sitting on the fence taking licence money and watching a decline.

Have you asked what shooters in my area are doing? You probably don't care

Your between a rock and a hard place Mike. But good on ya for being here, weathering the storm sort of speak, seriously. You are never likely to change your mind on this issue and neither are most of us.
But you have too see that this forum and the other for that matter has only has a small % of people that are into the sport yet most of the people that have posted on the subject are upset at what is proposed by F&G ref sub-gauges.
Do you think its fair to say this small % people is a fair indication of the overall feeling towards the issue? Therefore making the claimed research of F&G southland around the issue a bit weak.
My only problem with F&G is on this issue. I know there are more serious reasons for waterfowl decline in some regions than any type of shot used.

I otherwise feel that F&G try to do whats best for the stakeholders. I have heard more about F&G West Coast in the last couple of years than I ever have since changing from the society. They are very active in our community and are even trying to get younger shooters into the sport by providing free clays, ammo and coaches at a couple gun clubs in our area. For some reason interest is low but they have to be commended for their efforts. I know one of the blokes personally and he is a keen hunter fisherman along with being a good bugger. I think he is the reason I am hearing so many good things lately about their efforts.

On the subject of steel performance compared to lead. Do you really think it is in everyones mind? Please dont dribble on about being better hunters and choosing your shots. Its old. Anyone can set up a reasonable spread and call ducks into 40 yrds.

Originally Posted by Mike H

Thats why we're taking measures now Pointer, we've seen the results in other areas of waiting too long. While it may not be popular its for the ducks that we're doing this. Like most regions we've been declining for 20 years (before steel shot).

FFS! All of a sudden too! What happened for the other 80 yrs when lead was used?

Originally Posted by R93

My only problem with F&G is on this issue. I know there are more serious reasons for waterfowl decline in some regions than any type of shot used.

Bingo. Address these issues Mike H if you want a place in history as a guy who did the right thing.

Originally Posted by Mike H

Sorry to KWB, its the other one, Tube

I haven't seen anyone from Southland have a go at us yet , just the usual suspects from other regions

And no I don't know that there is ample evidence to the contrary so would be delighted if you could share it please

The writing style of kotuku is nothing like that of kWB or Tube. But I must say that the majority of what KWB has said is quite valid.

1. You asked for submissions which by what you have posted you have ignored if they don't fit what you want.
2. The statistics that you posted show that the %of shooters using the sub gauges is really insignificant. We should now be looking at 5% of 7.5% of birds currently affected, if 12 gauge shooters are using steel and the sub gauges effect is analysed.
3. What is obvious is that you predetermined the outcome. This is not due process and quite frankly you should be ashamed of yourselves for not following due process.
4. If you want the people you are supposed to be representing to submit responses to back your view then you need to educate them and provide proof.
5. The change that you have made is against previous reassurances that have been given to hunters.

These points you have not addressed in the slightest.

Originally Posted by Mike H

Why will they stop? The performance in their minds of steel or the price of it?

No you don't get it do you
Licence, desiel./petrol, shot.etc
people see steel as not as effective, have to pay more, fishing licence costs 115$ , nah fuckit.
I have several people my age , even less, that have just basically given up
they can no longer afford it.

On the subject of steel R93 I can honestly say I have no problem with it. I use a wad wizard choke which I believe helps and am a reasonable shot I feel which helps also.

What isn't known amongst the people on either forum is that like several of my fellow councillors I have access to a 20 gauge(my wife's). I took it out on the Sunday of opening weekend last year and using 3" 1 1/8 ounce of lead fives didn't find it killed ducks any better than the Remington 3" 1 1/4 ounce of steel 3s I was using the day before.

I'm not sure what people think we're trying to do here? We are hunters like you who want to do more for the sport based on the facts put in front of us. So far for the last 6 months that this debate has gone on down here the only thing people keep raising is the wounding rate of steel. It is not an issue with me, the guys I hunt with or any of the other councillors.

Some of us on the council shoot ducks in paddocks with lead. We get a similar ratio of wounded ducks with that. It is not the be all and end all magic bullet. Some people have had such a bad experience from when the first cheap shitty loads of steel came into the country that they've forgotten we wounded ducks before that with lead IMO.

Originally Posted by crzyman

I cant believe your all arguing with another brain washed f&g muppet

And we are not arguing, we are having a free and frank discussion, sometimes.

Originally Posted by R93

FFS! All of a sudden too! What happened for the other 80 yrs when lead was used?

We have no idea because no one counted ducks like they do now. The counts only go back 20 years sorry.

Originally Posted by jakewire

No you don't get it do you
Licence, desiel./petrol, shot.etc
people see steel as not as effective, have to pay more, fishing licence costs 115$ , nah fuckit.
I have several people my age , even less, that have just basically given up
they can no longer afford it.

Thats pretty sad having to give up something you enjoy because of cost. I dont see it stopping either. There will be a lot more giving up.

Originally Posted by Mike H

I'm not sure what people think we're trying to do here? We are hunters like you who want to do more for the sport based on the facts put in front of us. So far for the last 6 months that this debate has gone on down here the only thing people keep raising is the wounding rate of steel. It is not an issue with me, the guys I hunt with or any of the other councillors

What are you trying to do here?

Remove a scientifically proven poison from duck habitat for the benefit of the duck. That is all.

Why do you think we're doing it?

I actually don't know why you are doing it. We have shot in greater volume with lead for the last century. Something tells me the declining numbers aren't lead related...