SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: DMaA who wrote (79824)10/22/2004 5:07:51 PM
From: Ish  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793974
 
<<I think getting rid of the lead shot was a good thing. That stuff is nasty.>>

It's ok for upland hunting and skeet and trap but it was a killer for waterfowl. I had a few meals with Dr. Frank Bellrose, they guy who figured out spent shot was killing ducks. He bought an x-ray machine, scoured the Illinois River bottoms looking for dead ducks. He x-rayed them in his basement looking for lead in the gizzards. The rays went through the ducks, bounced off the concrete walls and put him in critical condition for 3 months. He had a biology degree, not an x-ray degree. BTW, he's also the guy who developed the Wood Duck nests and took the Woodies from endangered to a two a day bird.



To: DMaA who wrote (79824)10/22/2004 5:35:12 PM
From: Captain Jack  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793974
 
Yes, lead has its drawbacks, but it still worked best as shot. In small ponds it could create havoc if ducks & geese were drawn to it. In 95% of the waters it had very little impact. In most it either sank into the mud or was silted over with the only effect in the treehuggres minds. If should have been banned only where it could be a problem not everywhere. Do you think kerry ate it as a youngster or did his mother give him paint chips to chew on?