All Ammunition Is Bad, Or Something
BY Herschel Smith6 years, 7 months ago
Due to its ballistic properties, lead shot up to now has been regarded as the optimal ammunition for hunting waterfowl. But it came to criticism because lead poisoning was observed in ducks and sea eagles which had ingested the shot as a result of bottom feeding respectively with their prey.
Ammunition manufacturers now offer a range of alternative hunting shot containing iron, copper, zinc, tungsten, or bismuth as primary declared component. A team of researchers at the TU Munich led by Prof. Dr. Axel Goettlein and Prof. Dr. Jürgen Geist, however, has come to the conclusion that a number of the alternatives are even more toxic to water organisms than conventional lead shot.
As part of the study, shot made of each of the different materials were exposed to the identical conditions in water. These measurements demonstrated, that the quantity of metal ions released into the solution varies greatly. While shot made of tungsten, bismuth, and a coated lead shot released almost no metal ions into the solution, alarmingly high concentrations were measured for shot made of copper and zinc. The researchers found, that it was not always the declared main component of the shot which dominated ion release. Particularly striking was a sample of iron shot that released large quantities of zinc, which obviously came from a coating.
In an immobilization testfor the water flea Daphnia magna standardized according to DIN, their movement behaviour is used as an indicator for their vitality. As the study showed, even small quantities of copper and zinc consistently led to very high or complete immobilization of this model organism. In contrast, shot made of pure iron, bismuth, and tungsten did not impact the mobility of the water fleas. Nor did lead shot cause a significant impact on the mobility of the water fleas as compared to the control group.
The study concludes that, if lead shot should be banned for the reason of environmental protection, the current findings indicate that a prohibition on copper and zinc for manufacturing of shot should also be called for. Because widely different conditions concerning water quality in conjunction with the correspondingly adapted organisms occur in nature, additional studies are necessary in order to provide a sound basis for making decisions concerning alternatives to lead shot.
Water fleas.
So if they ban lead and you go to copper or something else, that’s just as bad according to these “researchers.” They don’t just want your lead ammunition, they want it all.
Because science.
And water fleas.
On May 20, 2018 at 10:39 pm, Ned said:
Oh, right. We should all believe this. Because, science. https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2017/02/09/how-the-reproducibility-crisis-in-academia-is-affecting-scientific-research/#512713fb3dad
On May 21, 2018 at 4:58 am, Roger J said:
I ran across a 1998 legal review article which advocates environmental lead laws as a tool to achieve the civilian disarmament which Congress had so far denied the Progs/Socialists/Communists. Fortunately, this article did not make much of a splash in the legislative pond except in California.
On May 21, 2018 at 7:25 am, Fred said:
The move to ban lead has nothing to do with the environment. The ease with which a mere civilian can use lead to make ammo is the problem. It’s not about the environment, or the guns, it’s about the control.
On May 21, 2018 at 11:18 am, Georgiaboy61 said:
Environmental contamination due to ammunition residues and by-products is miniscule, many orders of magnitude less of a factor than pollutants from automobiles, heavy trucks, aircraft and other combustion and industrial sources. Yet, we do not see calls for banning private ownership of automobiles, or calls for shutting down cell-phone manufacturing plants. This is just another backdoor gun-confiscation scheme. Track back to the funding for the study, and it is pretty sure the usual suspects will be involved in funding and initiating this thing.
On May 21, 2018 at 11:42 am, Pat Hines said:
“Water fleas”, I had to laugh out loud with this. As a man of science, Registered Nurse, and so forth, this “study” is absolute bunk.
On May 22, 2018 at 5:16 am, Doug said:
How does one “impact the mobility of the water fleas” with shot – drop one on them?