PDA

View Full Version : URGENT!! NON LEAD BULLET SURVEY Get on this now! Deadline Jan 30!!!!!!!!



Asco
01-29-2017, 09:50 AM
EDIT: this is not good. I'm sorry I posted this I was trying to help preserve our heritage and the use of lead bullets. Please don't fill out the survey like I did. It is a big mess. Thank you for all who contributed and clarified the issue.
Apologies

Asco

ORIGINAL POST:

This is taken from the BCWF newsletter. It appears somebody wants to ban all lead bullets in BC. they appear to be giving hunters a chance to respond by giving recipients of the BCWF newsletter a couple weeks to fill out a survey. After that they will be able to say they consulted hunters and didn't hear anything....

i filleded it out and made my case for lead bullets for big and small game hunting. I left 6 bullets in the woods this year. Hardly an environmental concern compared to the habitat destruction from forestry, oil and gas, mining and dam building.

Im not against any of the aforementioned industries per se, but their environmental impact is millions of times worse than some hunters bullets left in the woods.








NEW HUNTING AND ANGLING SURVEYS
Environment and Climate Change Canada has launched hunting and angling surveys to gather information on current uses of lead ammunition and fishing sinkers and jigs in Canada. As lead is associated with risks to human health and the environment, the federal government wants to obtain accurate and up-to-date data so that science-based policy can be developed to address lead exposure.
The BCWF Recreational Sports Shooting Committee (https://bcwf.thankyou4caring.org/page.redir?target=https%3a%2f%2fbcwf.thankyou4cari ng.org%2fpage.redir%3ftarget%3dhttp%253a%252f%252f bcwf.net%252findex.php%252fcommittees%252ffirearms-and-recreational-shooting-sports%26srcid%3d21610%26srctid%3d1%26erid%3d50179 74%26trid%3d6bac0915-60dc-42b9-8917-a31f0e1b70b2&srcid=21794&srctid=1&erid=5057279&trid=d9ef1de2-3177-4ffd-b66c-cbd428e347c3) and the BCWF Fisheries Committee (https://bcwf.thankyou4caring.org/page.redir?target=https%3a%2f%2fbcwf.thankyou4cari ng.org%2fpage.redir%3ftarget%3dhttp%253a%252f%252f bcwf.net%252findex.php%252fcommittees%252ffisherie s%26srcid%3d21610%26srctid%3d1%26erid%3d5017974%26 trid%3d6bac0915-60dc-42b9-8917-a31f0e1b70b2&srcid=21794&srctid=1&erid=5057279&trid=d9ef1de2-3177-4ffd-b66c-cbd428e347c3) have reviewed the studies’ purpose and are recommending members should participate to make sure the perspectives of hunters and anglers are captured by the study.
Please take the surveys before (http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/x-apple-data-detectors://9)January 31, 2017 (http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/x-apple-data-detectors://9) to be eligible for the gift card draw.
Take the 8 question Survey for Hunters at:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Lead_Hunters (https://bcwf.thankyou4caring.org/page.redir?target=https%3a%2f%2fbcwf.thankyou4cari ng.org%2fpage.redir%3ftarget%3dhttps%253a%252f%252 fwww.surveymonkey.com%252fr%252fLead_Hunters%26src id%3d21610%26srctid%3d1%26erid%3d5017974%26trid%3d 6bac0915-60dc-42b9-8917-a31f0e1b70b2&srcid=21794&srctid=1&erid=5057279&trid=d9ef1de2-3177-4ffd-b66c-cbd428e347c3)
Take the 15 question Survey for Anglers at:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Lead_Anglers (https://bcwf.thankyou4caring.org/page.redir?target=https%3a%2f%2fbcwf.thankyou4cari ng.org%2fpage.redir%3ftarget%3dhttps%253a%252f%252 fwww.surveymonkey.com%252fr%252fLead_Anglers%26src id%3d21610%26srctid%3d1%26erid%3d5017974%26trid%3d 6bac0915-60dc-42b9-8917-a31f0e1b70b2&srcid=21794&srctid=1&erid=5057279&trid=d9ef1de2-3177-4ffd-b66c-cbd428e347c3)
Toxecology – Environmental Consulting Ltd. is gathering the required information on behalf of Environment and Climate Change Canada.

416
01-29-2017, 10:10 AM
both done..............

Ride Red
01-29-2017, 10:21 AM
Done.......

Asco
01-29-2017, 10:24 AM
The "prize" offered is a gift card to a book store. I like books, but you can't buy lead bullets at he book store. :(

35 Whelen
01-29-2017, 11:20 AM
Done and submitted.....sure hope this never makes it off the ground

tinhorse
01-29-2017, 11:21 AM
Done and done.

Knute
01-29-2017, 11:37 AM
Done and done.

TARCHER
01-29-2017, 11:58 AM
done and done. thanks for pointing this out. now my blood pressure is up though. this crap pisses me off. of all the things one could be worried about........

gmachine19
01-29-2017, 12:51 PM
both done.

HarryToolips
01-29-2017, 02:00 PM
Done....man just when I thought people couldn't come up with more moronic things to throw their time and resources at...the stupidification of North America continues..

northof49
01-29-2017, 02:17 PM
Done....added it under the Open Chat section before I noticed it here.

untilthelastbeat
01-29-2017, 02:32 PM
Done and done.

r106
01-29-2017, 02:34 PM
Done......

Steeleco
01-29-2017, 02:36 PM
Done too.........

Red_Mist
01-29-2017, 02:42 PM
done......

IronNoggin
01-29-2017, 04:35 PM
Done - Both that is

Slinky Pickle
01-29-2017, 04:40 PM
"How many bullets have you shot in the last 12 month" That one is going to be used against us. I don't think this group is really asking our opinion. They just want us to offer up information that will help them with their goal.

Just my $0.02

"No Choke"Lord Walsingham
01-29-2017, 04:49 PM
"How many bullets have you shot in the last 12 month" That one is going to be used against us. I don't think this group is really asking our opinion. They just want us to offer up information that will help them with their goal.

Just my $0.02

+1

This is nothing but another cheap, disgusting attack on our interests by antis. I had a quick look and it is totally biased. Did not answer as the language is bigoted and based on total BS!

Never help the devil - Do not fill this crap out.

scoutlt1
01-29-2017, 05:06 PM
Copy and Paste to Google.... "Environment and Climate Change Canada"....formerly known as "Environment Canada".

https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change.html

Brutal. Absolutely brutal!!

There will be no participation in a stupid survey such as this by me. Ever.

StoneHorse
01-29-2017, 05:22 PM
Done with survey. No input, they will draw their own conclusions. Can you imagine a federal firearm committee without any input from firearm owners?

Bonz
01-29-2017, 06:24 PM
this the same as the other post? same survey? im not buying it one bit
why didnt bcwf put it out for us to see if its current

Bonz
01-29-2017, 06:26 PM
the info on bcwf page is from 2004. someones scaming their web info for their own agenda survey is what i see

jassmine
01-29-2017, 06:37 PM
My concerns from the other post (I would be hesitant about filling this out):

i thought toxic led for fishing was already banned..for bc anyways, thought the gov knew that, since their the ones that banned it


I'm a little dubious about the survey.
First it's not recorded anywhere under contracts from the Federal government website.
It's nearly impossible to find information about this environmental consulting firm.
And it's also suspicious that the email to contact the head PM is just a generic email address.



It's also surprisingly identical to this similar survey (wording and incentive also quite similar):

http://www.vrca.bc.ca/page/enewsletter/ezlist_item_f5f28031-89d4-4d69-8a1e-ee3d503d5f38.aspx#.WI6RTFUrJEY

Bonz
01-29-2017, 06:41 PM
i aint touching it, if i see bcwf involved, and yet they arent the one posting. i call bogus scam to use against us. that bcwf page has dates from 2004 area..

Bonz
01-29-2017, 06:43 PM
time to pass this around so others dont get conned. to bad they cant be nailed for fraud if it is a scam.

BDL
01-29-2017, 06:46 PM
Both done.

Bonz
01-29-2017, 06:48 PM
Both done.

its a scam..this is old news. weight for fishing changed years ago. they dont use the toxic led for years now

Bonz
01-29-2017, 06:49 PM
ban led bullet. almost ban hunting wont it.
since when does the gov use surveymonkey for a survey. be the first time ever

Bunner
01-29-2017, 06:53 PM
ban led bullet. almost ban hunting wont it.
since when does the gov use surveymonkey for a survey. be the first time ever

ya no kidding

Bonz
01-29-2017, 06:55 PM
this is who it is


Environmental Consulting Ltd

Dr. Pamela Campbell (604) 899-3388; Email: Campbell_pm@telus.net.

Asco
01-29-2017, 07:11 PM
Ok so am I getting a bogus email from BCWF? This was on last weeks email they sent out to members.

I wrote a couple paragraphs explaining how non lead is inferior. Especially for long range hunting.

my hunting rounds this year shot in the woods: 2 centre fire , 6 rim fire, 4 shot shells.
i made the point that that's not a lot of lead compared to mining contamination etc.

those bullets got me a moose, a deer and 9 grouse ( one vaporized and couldnt be found )

Asco
01-29-2017, 07:25 PM
Ok so am I getting a bogus email from BCWF? This was on last weeks email they sent out to members.

I wrote a couple paragraphs explaining how non lead is inferior. Especially for long range hunting.

my hunting rounds this year shot in the woods: 2 centre fire , 6 rim fire, 4 shot shells.
i made the point that that's not a lot of lead compared to mining contamination etc.

those bullets got me a moose, a deer and 9 grouse ( one vaporized and couldnt be found )

Asco
01-29-2017, 07:27 PM
Ok I'm going to call the good doctor tomorrow. Will report back.

BCWF
01-29-2017, 07:33 PM
The post is from an email that was sent to our Members last week.

It is 100% real and your input is needed.

"No Choke"Lord Walsingham
01-29-2017, 07:44 PM
The post is from an email that was sent to our Members last week.

It is 100% real and your input is needed.Why does the BCWF continue to aid antis and support a defacto ban on Hunting via the distribution of evil nonsense such as this?

jassmine
01-29-2017, 07:56 PM
The post is from an email that was sent to our Members last week.

It is 100% real and your input is needed.

Can you tell us more about Pamela Campbell and her consulting business?
It seems to have very little real world footprint and some of her C.V. stuff doesn't seem to exist.

Was there ever an announcement by the Federal Government hiring this consulting firm for the survey?
They tend to do lots of things like this internally and not with surveymonkey.

Gateholio
01-29-2017, 08:18 PM
I assume this is connected to the initial questionnaire that they wanted answered about lead at ranges.

Asco
01-29-2017, 08:35 PM
Hey BCWF what can you tell us about the doctor and her business?
Is the collection of hunting data cloak and dagger stuff or transparent and on the public record?
did anyone at BCWF verify the legitimacy of these environments?

Also if this data is important to collect, why didn't BCWF post it on Hunting BC? Afraid of the response or
asleep at the switch?

I'm for conservation, fishing and hunting in BC, is BCWF? What exactly are BCWF's motives?
I showed up last year re the reallocation debacle and I pay my dues. Is BCWF on my side or or have they been compromised by antis?

Now that we can see BCWF is reading this,
Some answers and clarification would go a long way, thanks

Bonz
01-30-2017, 03:54 AM
why would anyone use surveymonkey that habnds out our info, do you even know who the other parties are they sell our info to?


"When SurveyMonkey receives personal information under the Privacy Shield and then transfers it to a third-party service provider acting as an agent on SurveyMonkey’s behalf"

Bonz
01-30-2017, 03:56 AM
Other data you intentionally share. We may collect your personal information or data if you submit it to us in other contexts. For example, if you provide us with a testimonial, or participate in a SurveyMonkey contest.

Bonz
01-30-2017, 04:04 AM
the information asked has anti hunt ammo written all over it. what a stupid survey, even if legit

why not do one that deffends us,oh, say like who suports grizzly hunting. to dissprove the bought survey the anti have from insight west, seems thats their biggest info to use on us the past few years. but well do one on led that may make us all be thrown under a bus...again.
i keep looking for reasons to suport with memberships..but...lol

Lionhill
01-31-2017, 01:32 PM
Hey BCWF

I think the question quoted here is a legitimate one. I have been waiting for a couple of days for a response.

If BCWF is supporting any restrictions on lead use, you will never see another cent of my money again.

LH


Hey BCWF what can you tell us about the doctor and her business?
Is the collection of hunting data cloak and dagger stuff or transparent and on the public record?
did anyone at BCWF verify the legitimacy of these environments?

Also if this data is important to collect, why didn't BCWF post it on Hunting BC? Afraid of the response or
asleep at the switch?

I'm for conservation, fishing and hunting in BC, is BCWF? What exactly are BCWF's motives?
I showed up last year re the reallocation debacle and I pay my dues. Is BCWF on my side or or have they been compromised by antis?

Now that we can see BCWF is reading this,
Some answers and clarification would go a long way, thanks

GoatGuy
01-31-2017, 02:24 PM
Your choices are this.

1) Do not participate, have environment Canada make something up (WAG= wild ass guess), then try to defend against what the agency proposes.
2) Take the high ground, participate, inform the results, and advocate afterwards.

Approaches in life:

Science based decision making
Decision based science making

Lionhill
01-31-2017, 02:57 PM
Environment Canada will make the decision that is politically expedient, and rarely based on "fact and science".

Shooting club's Boards are being approached with the same bullshit survey, to which are also being ignored.

So I ask again, where is the BCWF representation of protecting resident hunters (first)? Why is the BCWF promoting such a flawed and fractured survey that will have a damaging result for the community?


Your choices are this.

1) Do not participate, have environment Canada make something up (WAG= wild ass guess), then try to defend against what the agency proposes.
2) Take the high ground, participate, inform the results, and advocate afterwards.

Approaches in life:

Science based decision making
Decision based science making

GoatGuy
01-31-2017, 03:02 PM
Environment Canada will make the decision that is politically expedient, and rarely based on "fact and science".

Shooting club's Boards are being approached with the same bullshit survey, to which are also being ignored.

So I ask again, where is the BCWF representation of protecting resident hunters (first)? Why is the BCWF promoting such a flawed and fractured survey that will have a damaging result for the community?

My guess would be to inform science-based decision making.

Naturally, the choice is up to the individual. The option to participate or not participate is always there.

The individual should consider the ramifications of both strategies.

vortex hunter
01-31-2017, 04:12 PM
DONE ......did my stupid survey for then tree huggers

jassmine
01-31-2017, 05:38 PM
Your choices are this.

1) Do not participate, have environment Canada make something up (WAG= wild ass guess), then try to defend against what the agency proposes.
2) Take the high ground, participate, inform the results, and advocate afterwards.


So is this firm conducting the study(Toxecology) actually hired by the Federal Government to collect information, or was that a lie in the introduction of the survey?
Is this actually a BCWF survey?
Having someone answer the questions posted about the credentials and motive of the people hired (as well as the source of funding) would go a far way in showing transparency with the survey. These things are almost always clearly stated when questioned in legitimate surveys.

Rob Chipman
01-31-2017, 06:54 PM
I believe that it is a genuine federal government project, but that it doesn't have a ton of resources, hence the use of survey monkey (don't quote me - this is hearsay based on info from a member of the BCWF shooters committee. I imagine he was talking about the same survey but I could be wrong).

180grainer
01-31-2017, 07:39 PM
So is this firm conducting the study(Toxecology) actually hired by the Federal Government to collect information, or was that a lie in the introduction of the survey?
Is this actually a BCWF survey?
Having someone answer the questions posted about the credentials and motive of the people hired (as well as the source of funding) would go a far way in showing transparency with the survey. These things are almost always clearly stated when questioned in legitimate surveys.

Good for you. Who's doing it and who's paying them...........follow the money........

tigrr
01-31-2017, 09:02 PM
done just now.

5jackz
01-31-2017, 10:09 PM
Done .
Thanks for the info .

BCWF
01-31-2017, 10:33 PM
In response to some questions regarding the legitimacy of this survey, and why the BCWF is taking part- we have asked the chair of our recreational shooting sports committee to answer


The BCWF Recreational Sports Shooting Committee and the BCWF Fishing Committee (Ted Brookman Chairs) have concluded that the BCWF should support the collection of data by Environment Canada's (EC) consultants ToxEcology (confirmed with Environment Canada) for the following reasons:

1. The Saskatchewan Wild Life Federation and the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters are supporting/cooperating with the EC project and have distributed the Anglers and Hunter's surveys to their members.

2. It is consistent with the BCWF's postion that resource decisions should be made based on evidence and science.

3. If we are uncooperative, it will make it more difficult to criticize the data or the policy (if any) derived from it. We would be (partially) to blame for the poor data.

4. Lack of cooperation would hurt us in the "court of public opinion" if we need to challenge policy derived from this, e.g., what did we have to hide; if we didn't help we can't complain.

5. This study does not appear to be the result of the change in government (other than the new government has increased funding for science). All indications are this study was initiated by staff in EC in the normal course of their work.

6. We subsequently had a telephone meeting with the consultant conducting the study and she made changes to the range survey questionnaire in response to our recommendations.

We encourage clubs to complete the range survey and members to complete the anlger and hunter surveys for the reasons outlined above

Vic Skaarup
Director, BCWF
Chair, Recreational Sports Shooting Committee

Asco
01-31-2017, 11:19 PM
Thank you for your response, Vic

I must admit I am not an expert in conservation and I'm not politically savvy.
I do have a bachelor's degree from UBC in environmental chemistry.
I believe that lead ammo for big game hunting is the best most ethical ammunition
and I don't believe that the small number of lead bullets left in the field constitute an environmental hazard.

I can see EC putting some regulation on ranges, as they should, just like any place that handles potentially harmful products ie gas station, dry cleaner.

Does the BCWF have a position on lead bullets being used for hunting? Will the BCWF tell the surveyor what their position is and why they hold that position?

I realize the BCWF is apolitical, but I hope they aren't passive in situations where their members have a stake in issues such as this one.

Bonz
02-01-2017, 08:57 AM
do we not already have changes to our led used for fishing though?.

Bonz
02-01-2017, 09:00 AM
way i read this, someones looking or a way to blame us for creating toxic animals or environment. the last results by health canada in 2013 wasnt good enough to show its safe?

Environment and Climate Change Canada requires information on the uses of lead ammunition in Canada. Lead is associated with risks to human health and the environment. A State of the Science report published by Health Canada in 2013 indicated that there were no safe blood lead levels for neurotoxicity. There is a growing awareness that significant lead exposure can occur from eating game meat contaminated with lead ammunition fragments. In addition, there are concerns regarding potential for wildlife toxicity.

Bonz
02-01-2017, 09:01 AM
heres their last report by health canada thats mentioned in this

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/pubs/contaminants/dhhssrl-rpecscepsh/index-eng.php

Lionhill
02-01-2017, 12:53 PM
Here is the language from the original tender (https://buyandsell.gc.ca/procurement-data/tender-notice/PW-16-00743651) for Quebec version RFQ:

Bolded for emphasis.

Background
Lead is a naturally-occurring element found in rock and soil, yet widespread anthropogenic use has resulted in its ubiquitous presence in the environment. Lead is found in all environmental media in Canada, as well as in food and drinking water and is associated with risks to human health and the environment. Its health risks include developmental neurotoxicity, neurodegenerative, cardiovascular, renal and reproductive effects. Additionally, known environmental hazards include toxicity to birds, fish and crustaceans, benthic invertebrates, plants and earthworms. Lead is currently subject to numerous federal, provincial and industry risk management initiatives directed toward products such as cosmetics, natural health and therapeutic products, drinking water, gasoline, food, and tobacco. These initiatives are also directed at environmental media such as house dust, soil and air.
A State of the Science report published in 2013 by Health Canada indicated that there are no safe blood lead levels (BLLs) for neurotoxicity. In addition, lead levels are still widely detected in the Canadian population despite the decline of over 70% of BLLS due to domestic and international initiatives since the 1970s. A Risk Management Strategy for Lead (the Strategy) was consequently published in 2013 to scope out current and additional Government of Canada actions to further reduce Canadians’ exposure to lead. The Strategy contains clear objectives, performance expectations, and timelines. Amongst the objectives, Environment and Climate Change Canada committed to addressing lead releases from certain consumer products (i.e., wheel weights, ammunition, jigs/sinkers and construction sheeting).
Extensive information on use patterns for ammunition was last gathered in the 1990s. At the time, it was estimated that over 1,000 tons of lead were being released to land in Canada annually from the use of lead shot and bullets. Since then, the possession or use of lead shot while hunting most migratory birds has been prohibited in all areas in Canada with few exceptions. In addition, the number of non-lead products entering the market has increased.
The National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) provides a framework to gather information on the release of toxic substances such as lead from industrial, commercial and institutional facilities. Among releases of lead reported to the NPRI, approximately 140 tonnes of lead were released per year from ammunition used at Canadian Forces’ shooting ranges. However, the NPRI is not designed to gather release information from small and medium-sized facilities (i.e., outfitters, police and recreational shooting ranges), since facilities that use less than 50 kg of lead and have less than 20,000 employee-hours per year do not meet the reporting requirements. In addition, NPRI could not be used to capture non-facility-based use of lead ammunition, for example during hunting activities.
In order to fulfil its commitments under the Strategy for Lead, Environment and Climate Change Canada would like to update the information on current ammunition use from non-military activities.
Objectives
The study completed by the Contractor must achieve the following:


Provide a profile of the Canadian lead ammunition supply chain and their non-lead alternatives (excluding military activities).



Identify and describe existing lead ammunition products found on the Canadian market by category (e.g. hunting, indoor/outdoor shooting, target, trap/skeet shooting and sporting clay shooting) and determine their non-lead alternatives (excluding military applications).



Conduct a lifecycle analysis of lead used in ammunition in the Canadian market including quantities manufactured, imported, exported, sold, recovered and released in the environment. Also, provide projections based on for future trends, anticipated growth and market knowledge and intelligence.



Provide a comprehensive review of existing measures and management practices aiming to restrict the use of lead ammunition for recreational activities, prevent or minimize the releases of lead from ammunition, and promote the use of alternatives in Canada, the U.S., and other OECD countries. Analyze the pros and cons of the findings in a Canadian context.

Travel
One trip to Gatineau (Quebec) is required in order to present the results of the study.
The request for travel must be made to the Department Representative prior to the trip, and must be pre-approved in writing.
SCOPE of work
In order to assist Environment and Climate Change Canada in gathering information on the uses and releases of lead from ammunition and their non-lead alternatives from non-military activities, the Contractor must complete all tasks described below and provide the results and outcomes of this research to the Departmental Representative in the form of a written report and via an oral presentation.
This list of tasks is comprehensive, but not exhaustive. The Contractor is encouraged and expected to provide any additional information discovered during the contract period that is deemed relevant in fulfilling the objectives of this contract.
All the economic information must be provided in Canadian dollars. When monetary estimates are not available in Canadian dollars, foreign currency estimates must be converted and presented in Canadian dollars accompanied by an explanation of the exchange rates used.
All assumptions or extrapolations made by the Contractor must be supported by literature (e.g. scientific, academic, industry, or government reports). If no literary evidence is available, the Contractor must verify their assumptions or extrapolations with two (2) industry experts in the appropriate field and provide their contact information with transcripts of the correspondences. Also, the Contractor must explain how all the assumptions or extrapolations apply to the Canadian context.
The use of Canadian data should be prioritized over those from foreign sources. If no Canadian information is available, priority must be given to data sources from the U.S. and other OECD countries. When neither Canadian nor data from aforementioned countries are available, the Contractor must ensure that the information sources used are approved by the Departmental Representative and must provide a list of references. An explanation of the relevance of foreign data with respect to the Canadian market must be provided.
Task 1 – Profile of the Canadian ammunition supply chain (excluding military applications)
Develop a profile of the Canadian lead and non-lead ammunition supply chain (excluding military applications). This must include:


Manufacturers’ profile (e.g., revenue, number of establishments by company size, distribution by province, type of ammunition products and quantities manufactured);
Importers’ profile (e.g., revenue, number of establishments by company size, distribution by province, type of ammunition products and quantities imported);
Retailers’ profile (e.g., revenue, number of employees, distribution by province and company size, quantity of lead ammunition sold per year);
Non-traditional distribution such as online storefronts (e.g. revenue, number of employees, distribution by province, company size, quantity of lead ammunition sold per year);
Profile of facilities that allow the use of ammunition on their sites (e.g. recreational or police shooting ranges, outfitters). The profile must include an average number of users, types of activities occurring at facilities, types of ammunition products and quantities used, distribution by province, recycling activities, facility type (indoor or outdoor) and facility size (such as number of employees, square footage of range, maximum number of users at one time, average number of users);
Waste management profile which includes the collection and transportation to final treatment and recyclers (e.g. number of establishments, number of employees, distribution by province, amount of lead recycled/collected, intermediate recycling collector/transporters); and
Profile of key associations/interest groups which represent ammunition manufacturers, importers, retailers and users. This profile must include associations/interest groups name, purpose, mission, number of members and contact information.

Lionhill
02-01-2017, 12:54 PM
Task 2 – Review of lead and non-lead ammunition products in Canada (excluding military applications)
Identify and describe existing non-military lead ammunition products found on the Canadian market and non-lead alternatives for the following activities:


Hunting, which should include sub-activities for birds, small game and large game; and
Shooting, which should include sub-activities for indoor and outdoor shooting. The outdoor sub-activity should be further broken down to identify and describe the target shooting, trap/skeet shooting and sporting clay shooting activities.



A description of the activities and sub-activities should include the number of participants, the provincial distribution, annual expenditures (equipment (guns, ammunition), transportation), the type, size and amount of ammunition used, number of rounds discharged on average per year, source of ammunition.



A comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of lead and non-lead ammunition products for each activity and sub-activity (e.g. economic advantage, technical effectiveness, environmental safety).
Details on the market share of lead and non-lead ammunition products for each activity and sub-activity. Information from the past five (5) years (e.g. market trends, demand, product costs) must be described. Projections for the next ten (10) years must be determined using knowledge, market intelligence and market predictions (e.g. sales data, stakeholder statements, anticipated growth, and penetration into the market, upcoming regulations, trends and changes in user behaviour).


Task 3 – Lifecycle analysis of lead used in non-military ammunition in Canada (excluding military applications)


Develop a lifecycle analysis for lead used in ammunition, lead used for hunting, and lead used for shooting which must include, but is not limited to the following:


• Amount of lead used to manufacture ammunition annually in Canada;
• Amount of lead imported in ammunition annually and the countries of origin;
• Amount of lead exported in ammunition annually in Canada;
• Amount of lead sold and distributed annually in Canada;
• Estimated amount of lead released or lost into the environment annually;
• The breakdown should include the amount of lead released or lost from the following activities: private game hunting, outfitter hunting, private shooting ranges, law enforcement shooting ranges, non-registered shooting ranges.
• Estimated amount of lead recycled annually.
The amount of lead should be estimated (in kilograms) per year for the last five (5) years and forecasted over the next ten (10) years. Projections must be determined using knowledge, market intelligence and market predictions (e.g. trends, stakeholder statements, anticipated growth, upcoming regulations and changes in user behavior).


Task 4 –Comprehensive review of measures and management practices


Develop a comprehensive review of measures and management practices that aim to:


• Restrict the use of lead ammunition for recreational activities in Canada, the U.S. and other OECD countries at the federal, provincial/state and municipal level. This must include:
• A description of the existing restrictions, the year they came into force, subsequent proposed and/or enacted changes since the coming into force and the reason for the proposed and/or enacted changes.
• A description of initiated and/or abandoned measures that aimed to investigate the potential to restrict or phase-out lead ammunition for recreational activities, the outcome and in the case of an abandonment, provide the reason for the abandonment.
• Prevent or minimize the releases of lead in the environment from facilities that allow the use of lead ammunition on their sites (e.g. recreational or police shooting ranges, outfitters) in Canada, the U.S. and other OECD countries. This must include a description of :
• Control technology and management practices that prevent soil and air contamination/release;
• Cleaning and recycling procedures and techniques implemented; and
• Possible limits to the implementation of the findings from points a) and b) above in the Canadian context (e.g., cost, consumer acceptance, availability of technology).
• Promote the use of alternatives to lead in ammunition in Canada, the U.S. and other OECD countries.
• For the measures identified above, list the pros and cons and determine how the measure could be applied in a Canada-wide context.
Access and terms of use
Government of Canada (GC) tender notices and awards, solicitation documents and tender attachments are available free of charge and without registration onBuyandsell.gc.ca/tenders, the authoritative location for GC tenders.


You may have received this tender notice or award through a third-party distributor. The Government of Canada is not responsible for any tender notices and/or related documents and attachments not accessed directly through Buyandsell.gc.ca/tenders.


This Government of Canada tender notice or tender award carries an Open Government Licence - Canada that governs its use. Related solicitation documents and/or tender attachments are copyright protected. Please refer to the section about Commercial Reproduction in the Buyandsell.gc.ca Terms and Conditions for more information.

Lionhill
02-01-2017, 12:58 PM
Thank you for your response, Vic

I must admit I am not an expert in conservation and I'm not politically savvy.
I do have a bachelor's degree from UBC in environmental chemistry.
I believe that lead ammo for big game hunting is the best most ethical ammunition
and I don't believe that the small number of lead bullets left in the field constitute an environmental hazard.

I can see EC putting some regulation on ranges, as they should, just like any place that handles potentially harmful products ie gas station, dry cleaner.

Does the BCWF have a position on lead bullets being used for hunting? Will the BCWF tell the surveyor what their position is and why they hold that position?

I realize the BCWF is apolitical, but I hope they aren't passive in situations where their members have a stake in issues such as this one.

Before Obama left office, he secretly banned the use of lead bullets on Federal Public lands - and I have a sinking feeling that the Libs will try the same bullshit.


Published January 27, 2017
· The Wall Street Journal


In the waning hours of the Obama administration, the head of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service set in motion a plan to prohibit lead ammunition and fishing tackle from national wildlife refuges by 2022.

The Jan. 19 order, intended to protect birds from lead poisoning, presents the Trump Administration with an early opportunity to weigh in on gun policy. Gun-rights supporters have condemned the plan as a nakedly political act unsupported by science.

Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, called on the Senate to quickly confirm Rep. Ryan Zinke as secretary of the interior, so he can “reverse this government overreach.”

The Interior Department is the parent agency of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services.

“It is more important than ever that we have a secretary of the interior who respects the Second Amendment and will stand up for our rights,” Mr. Cox said in a statement​this week.​

Lionhill
02-01-2017, 01:04 PM
This from an organization that ACTUALLY represents hunters and sport shooters:

From CSSA:

Environment Canada (EC) has commissioned a company in Vancouver called "ToxEcology – Environmental Consulting Ltd" to gather data regarding lead ammunition.

This is the second time they have launched this initiative. The intent is to gather data to be used by EC to ban the sale of all lead ammunition in Canada, despite the mountains of scientific evidence that shows lead on shooting ranges is not a problem.

THIS IS SERIOUS. Fabricated evidence against the use of lead ammunition has already resulted in the closure of shooting ranges and lead ammunition use in some regions of the world. Most harshly, it affects shotgunners and indoor ranges, despite existing safeguards that work.

Make no mistake on where this is coming from: this is being spearheaded by anti-hunting and anti-firearm groups around the globe.

And in giving ToxEcology data, you are giving them the information they will torque and spin to justify a grave attack on our community. Need some proof? How about the letter sent from ToxEcology to all "Range Managers" in Canada? Ever see a listing of Range Managers? Nope, because there is no public listing. The confidential information comes from the government through the CFOs that regulate ranges.

As stated earlier, EC began this assault a few years ago and at that time, the Harper government recognized it for what it was - a thinly veiled anti-gun attack - and shut it down.

But it's back.

This "study" can only have one purpose: to ignore the vast data amassed that prove lead on ranges is of no concern and to fabricate evidence that will be used to make shooting more difficult and far more expensive.

Most American and Canadian manufacturers and distributors have soundly rejected cooperation with ToxEcology.

Say NO to this request

Asco
02-04-2017, 10:32 PM
That's not good.
Does BCWF come down on the side of the antis on this issue? It appears so...unless they have some clever confer measure up their sleeve... probably not. Crap. Now I feel like an idiot for starting this thread. I thought I was helping BCWF preserve our way of life, heritage, sport etc.

i am going to edit first post

Bonz
02-04-2017, 11:33 PM
i wouldnt feel stupid for posting at all, in fact opposite, wonder why they didnt share this news. knew it wouldnt go over to well with hunters?
and we already changed the led rules for fishing. so kind of a waste of funds to be involved in that one. wonder what this cost to add themselves to this

GoatGuy
02-06-2017, 06:00 AM
That's not good.
Does BCWF come down on the side of the antis on this issue? It appears so...unless they have some clever confer measure up their sleeve... probably not. Crap. Now I feel like an idiot for starting this thread. I thought I was helping BCWF preserve our way of life, heritage, sport etc.

i am going to edit first post

Science-based decision making.

Here some on lead management.

Standards and Best Practices for Lead Management

http://www.bcwf.net/files/ImplementationManual1_1.pdf

People can write things like "lead on ranges is not a problem" - it certainly doesn't make it true.

GoatGuy
02-06-2017, 06:13 AM
This from an organization that ACTUALLY represents hunters and sport shooters:

From CSSA:

Environment Canada (EC) has commissioned a company in Vancouver called "ToxEcology – Environmental Consulting Ltd" to gather data regarding lead ammunition.

This is the second time they have launched this initiative. The intent is to gather data to be used by EC to ban the sale of all lead ammunition in Canada, despite the mountains of scientific evidence that shows lead on shooting ranges is not a problem.

THIS IS SERIOUS. Fabricated evidence against the use of lead ammunition has already resulted in the closure of shooting ranges and lead ammunition use in some regions of the world. Most harshly, it affects shotgunners and indoor ranges, despite existing safeguards that work.

Make no mistake on where this is coming from: this is being spearheaded by anti-hunting and anti-firearm groups around the globe.

And in giving ToxEcology data, you are giving them the information they will torque and spin to justify a grave attack on our community. Need some proof? How about the letter sent from ToxEcology to all "Range Managers" in Canada? Ever see a listing of Range Managers? Nope, because there is no public listing. The confidential information comes from the government through the CFOs that regulate ranges.

As stated earlier, EC began this assault a few years ago and at that time, the Harper government recognized it for what it was - a thinly veiled anti-gun attack - and shut it down.

But it's back.

This "study" can only have one purpose: to ignore the vast data amassed that prove lead on ranges is of no concern and to fabricate evidence that will be used to make shooting more difficult and far more expensive.

Most American and Canadian manufacturers and distributors have soundly rejected cooperation with ToxEcology.

Say NO to this request


Hahaha, sounds like someone has been practicing alternative facts.

"Mountains of scientific evidence."

"Existing safeguards."

Adding you to a special list.

bonecolecter
02-06-2017, 06:44 AM
all the crap going on in the world and thay just got fined stupid sh.t to p..s peeps off?

Bonz
02-06-2017, 07:48 AM
couple years old

http://www.livescience.com/42117-green-bullets-hunting-non-lead-ammo.html

Lionhill
02-06-2017, 01:34 PM
Hahaha, sounds like someone has been practicing alternative facts.

"Mountains of scientific evidence."

"Existing safeguards."

Adding you to a special list.


Wow Jesse. So you're ignoring my comments based on what a gun organization has released? Information proving that this is simply an attack on gun owners to further curtail our sport?

BCWF is promoting a harmful and factually dangerous poll - don't shoot the messenger.

LH

Linksman313
02-06-2017, 02:40 PM
Done and Done, too bad I can't send in a video of ducks flying away wounded after taking a round of steel shot, I won't go as far as saying it never happened with lead but it sure did not happen that often as I'm sure some here will agree. Thanks for bringing this to light and posting.

DarekG
02-06-2017, 04:04 PM
Random question, does non-lead .22 ammo even exist?

Mulehahn
02-06-2017, 04:36 PM
Random question, does non-lead .22 ammo even exist?


Yes, Winchester and CCI make it. It retails for about $10USD/50 rounds (if you can find it). Whether people want to admit that us the goal. They have learned to never go after the whole but to cut off slices. When it us costing you almost 2.50 every time you load your old 10/22 you won't shoot as much. Busting clays will be a thingof the past. When there is no recreational plinking left then they will come after the big game. But also do not blame the BCWF for trying to have a say. It may be all we have.