Biden Announces Lead Ammo/Lure Ban Across Eight National Wildlife Refuges by 2026

[bucdoego]

The Biden administration announced Thursday that it is moving ahead with prohibitions on the type of equipment hunters are allowed to use on federal refuges, a move strongly opposed by sportsmen groups.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) released its 2023-2024 hunting and fishing rule — an annual plan laying out regulations for the upcoming hunting season — banning cost-effective lead ammunition and fishing tackle across eight national wildlife refuges by 2026. Such an action has been supported by eco groups, but opposed by hunters, who argue that it could serve as a backdoor attack on hunting broadly.

"This is the latest example of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service creating rules that punish hunters, threaten conservation funding and advance special interests without sound scientific evidence that traditional lead ammunition cause is causing detrimental wildlife population impacts," said Lawrence Keane, the senior vice president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

"This administration is ignoring its promise to ‘follow the science.’ In fact, it is ignoring the need for scientific evidence in order to advance an anti-gun and anti-hunting agenda," he continued.

Biden admin takes aim at hunters in latest regulation: 'Preventing Americans from hunting'

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced new prohibitions on lead ammunition and lead tackle usage across public refuges, a move hunting groups blasted.

www.foxnews.com

 

[AlaskaHunter]

For waterfowl hunting, the nation-wide the ban on lead shot has been an effective conservation tool in preventing
the premature death of thousands of waterfowl.

All my friends up here in Alaska have hunted exclusively with monolithic (lead-free) bullets for at least a decade.
We like the performance of monolithic bullets, especially with an exit hole likely for tracking bears.

I have no complaints about going lead-free.

 

[MThuntr]

banning cost-effective lead ammunition

I've pointed out this before and that generalization doesn't hold much water.

Currently MidwayUSA:
30-06 Hornady 180gr SST $42.99
30-06 Federal 180gr Barnes TSX 43.99
30-06 Barnes VortX 175gr LRX 40.99

As pointed out there's been a ban on lead for waterfowl for nearly 40 years so that's nothing new.

Yes finding non-lead fishing gear can be hard so that's something that could cost a person a lot of money.

I still use lead stuff so I'm not thrilled about a ban but it's not going to stop anyone when they haul in their $45k boat towed by a $85k truck shooting a $1k shotgun

 

[Ben Lamb]

The quotes are telling. It's the guns & ammo lobbyist, and the lobbyist for guys who shoot stuff in Africa.

I got no problem with leadfree on wildlife refuges. If going lead free is what's stopping you from hunting, cut back on some avocado toast and $5 lattes.

Or buy one less Yeti product a year.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

The quotes are telling. It's the guns & ammo lobbyist, and the lobbyist for guys who shoot stuff in Africa.

I got no problem with leadfree on wildlife refuges. If going lead free is what's stopping you from hunting, cut back on some avocado toast and $5 lattes.

Or buy one less Yeti product a year.

Leave my $400 cast iron out of this you commie

 

[Ben Lamb]

Leave my $400 cast iron out of this you commie

My lead pan is far more cost effective.

 

[Djfan]

I don't mind lead-free ammo. I do mind the government having success regulating ammo.

 

[jryoung]

Any clarity on why these 8 refuges were selected? The apparent link to the rule, isn't.....God forbid we could actually read it beyond article
.

 

[noharleyyet]

So, less a cut and more a scratch? Trust me, I'm from the gov...

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Any clarity on why these 8 refuges were selected? The apparent link to the rule, isn't.....God forbid we could actually read it beyond article
.

I know Great Thicket was just created, total speculation but my assumption is these particular ones were up for their management plan update. Can’t speak for the Virginia ones but most of NE refuge lands are either archery only or they already require non-toxic ammo, so this seems more like syncing up with regs for others than some new departure.

The refuge hunt I did a write up on 2 years ago was shotgun with non-toxic ammo only.

 

[406dn]

Leave my $400 cast iron out of this you commie

To be fair, that pan is lead free, hence the increased cost.

 

[SAJ-99]

I don't mind lead-free ammo. I do mind the government having success regulating ammo.

It's not like hunters would have taken the initiative.

 

[Beignet]

Article failed to mention that they gave advanced notice about their intentions to the public in last year's rule setting. They haven't even They just released the draft for the next rule setting but certain groups seem to see an opening to get people into a tizzy on Fox.

FWS's justification starts around comment 6 of last year's rule setting (linked below). Seems that these particular refuges were singled out because of the presence of specific species that are especially susceptible to lead poisoning. They used a NEPA and EPA Section 7 analysis to determine the need for going lead-free in these areas.

Also worth noting in the document that they respond to folks who wanted no hunting on NWR's that "The Service prioritizes facilitating wildlife-dependent recreational opportunities, including hunting and fishing, on Service land in compliance with applicable Service law and policy." Doesn't quite sound like a "war on hunting" to me.

*edited because the draft has indeed been released. Also linked below. Sure their justifications will be the same after comment period.

2022-2023 Station-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing Regulations

National Wildlife Refuge System; 2023-2024 Station-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing Regulations

 

[BrentD]

The quotes are telling. It's the guns & ammo lobbyist, and the lobbyist for guys who shoot stuff in Africa.

I got no problem with leadfree on wildlife refuges. If going lead free is what's stopping you from hunting, cut back on some avocado toast and $5 lattes.

Or buy one less Yeti product a year.

Depends on what you shoot of course. Shotguns are not a problem. Rifles are a completely other thing, however. The list of refuges are unknown to me, but sound like mostly waterfowling habitats.

 

[Ben Lamb]

To be fair, that pan is lead free, hence the increased cost.

Gluten free as well.

 

[Sheltowee]

I've pointed out this before and that generalization doesn't hold much water.

Currently MidwayUSA:
30-06 Hornady 180gr SST $42.99
30-06 Federal 180gr Barnes TSX 43.99
30-06 Barnes VortX 175gr LRX 40.99

As pointed out there's been a ban on lead for waterfowl for nearly 40 years so that's nothing new.

Yes finding non-lead fishing gear can be hard so that's something that could cost a person a lot of money.

I still use lead stuff so I'm not thrilled about a ban but it's not going to stop anyone when they haul in their $45k boat towed by a $85k truck shooting a $1k shotgun

How dare you bring logic, analysis and facts into this discussion?

 

[noharleyyet]

The quotes are telling. It's the guns & ammo lobbyist, and the lobbyist for guys who shoot stuff in Africa.

I got no problem with leadfree on wildlife refuges. If going lead free is what's stopping you from hunting, cut back on some avocado toast and $5 lattes.

Or buy one less Yeti product a year.

I shoot my Yetis with copper . . . oh, the irony.

 

[406dn]

I shoot my Yetis with copper . . . oh, the irony.

Now that is a definition of being well heeled.

 

[noharleyyet]

Now that is a definition of being well heeled.

Don't forget principled stupidity...

 

[DouglasR]

Did you know because of the clean air act you can’t even buy a puncture top can of r-134a anymore?
Bunch of schrader valve bs.
And because of that, you’ve gotta buy another $20 hose just to use it.
I swear.
We haven’t been in this bad of shape since stonemans cavalry tore up the tracks.