I feel...soiled.

[white eagle]

You will NEVER find a cast boolit from my guns in any animal. I don't care how big it is, there will be two holes. Condors die from eating liberals. End of story, they are poison.

wow looks as though ol Jim hit the nail on the head,again...
I do like the Barnes bullets and have used them to harvest game animals
but they are pricey however premium is always more.
casting is definitely a cost saver but I cast more for the control that I have
in manufacture and use
California is a unique place for sure I am just glad its way west of me

[RogerDat]

When you said "protect the environment........ not limited to cast boolits, but all bullets". Don't you mean all lead bullets for hunting? And is it in all areas or in certain designated areas? Not that I really think an intruder in the house would notice the difference between 12 gauge 00 in lead vs. steel.

While it is true that California has been an early adopter of some things, it is also true that being such a large market encourages innovation on the part of businesses. The California ban on hunting with lead bullets will probably encourage bullet manufactures to produce new ammo for that market.

It is also true that much of the country ignores what California does and goes their own way.

[OuchHot!]

I obviously cannot make my science understood here and see nothing to gain by trying. This sort of thing is what I do for a living and I have spent more than 40yrs honing these skills. The science did not stand up to even cursory examination. I am active in Oregon politics as it is important for me to try keep the preservationists (they are NOT conservationist) at least somewhat civil. Funny thing is there will be condors introduced into Oregon in less than two years (to my knowledge in areas we do not think that they ever occupied). Within five years of that there will be a lead ban. The Oregon population is blissfully unaware how advanced this program is.

[Bigslug]

W
While it is true that California has been an early adopter of some things, it is also true that being such a large market encourages innovation on the part of businesses. The California ban on hunting with lead bullets will probably encourage bullet manufactures to produce new ammo for that market.

It is also true that much of the country ignores what California does and goes their own way.

Ruger, S&W and others are in the process of telling California to "pound sand" with their handgun "safety" feature requirements and taking the state to court. Ruger was especially surprising, after going to great lengths for several years to produce lawyerized handguns. The industry, and the rest of the nation should follow that lead and do what they can to not only contain the disease to the left coast, but squeeze their legislature into behaving like a member of the United States of America should - rather than rolling as a quasi-socialist republic.

As to hunters becoming viewed as "anti conservation", it's easy to be seen that way when the "conservation" methods presented involve hiding an anti-gun and anti-hunting agenda behind highly questionable science, while drumming up sympathy for a creature that is a Pleistocene hold-over that would probably be having a hard time surviving in this current world of high tension lines, wind farms, and tidy agricultural carrion disposal even if toxic heavy metals did not exist. Condors flat out need charity to survive, and as such, aren't going to get any more of my sympathy than most other useless welfare recipients. I think seeing one would be cool, and don't wish them any personal ill will, but as long as they are a "poster bird" component in the machinery that wants to outlaw everything associated with my lifestyle (not the least of all ME), I have trouble seeing their ongoing existence as a good thing.

[45-70 Chevroner]

If anyone would like to get an eye opener on wind generators, you should watch the documentary " Wind Fall"

[olafhardt]

Speaking of lead in the environment the local bears have developed a taste for the lead acid batteries a lot of hunters use with deer stands. It seems that lead sulphate is sweet and has been used for sugar substitute. The bears are treating batteries as honey pots. This might put lots of lead in the bears flesh which is not passed out quickly. When the bear dies it becomes a large chunk of contaminated carrion. Maybe we should be careful about using those cameras and eating bear meat. In my previous life I cleaned up several large waste ponds contaminated with heavy metals. These ponds had lots of ducks that landed in your favorite marsh a few days later along with a few that fattened up on sewage equilization ponds. What do wild hogs eat? If you catch catfish with nasty stinking rotten stuff, what were they eating last week? This wonderful lake that we all go to that flooded worked out mercury mines it is a great swimming hole for the kids. I am 70 years old. I grew up on the property of an oil refinery where my father worked. I was disabled by chemical exposure in Vietnam. I am a graduate chemical engineer. I spent my career up to my neck in acids, alkalies, poisons, explosivies, toxic gasses etc. It has been interesting and a pretty good life. If you are worried that terrible things can happen, let me assure you they can. That doesn't mean they will. But if you just have to worry about all that stuff check out the preppers. Perhaps we should have a huge gathering to put up props to keep the sky from falling. One more thing if the worst happens you just might be able to handle it, I hope you do.

[BrentD]

That is not true. Not trying to be disagreeable, but that is just plain false.

And that's not the only untruth on this thread either.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Speaking of lead in the environment the local bears have developed a taste for the lead acid batteries a lot of hunters use with deer stands. It seems that lead sulphate is sweet and has been used for sugar substitute. The bears are treating batteries as honey pots. This might put lots of lead in the bears flesh which is not passed out quickly. When the bear dies it becomes a large chunk of contaminated carrion. Maybe we should be careful about using those cameras and eating bear meat. In my previous life I cleaned up several large waste ponds contaminated with heavy metals. These ponds had lots of ducks that landed in your favorite marsh a few days later along with a few that fattened up on sewage equilization ponds. What do wild hogs eat? If you catch catfish with nasty stinking rotten stuff, what were they eating last week? This wonderful lake that we all go to that flooded worked out mercury mines it is a great swimming hole for the kids. I am 70 years old. I grew up on the property of an oil refinery where my father worked. I was disabled by chemical exposure in Vietnam. I am a graduate chemical engineer. I spent my career up to my neck in acids, alkalies, poisons, explosivies, toxic gasses etc. It has been interesting and a pretty good life. If you are worried that terrible things can happen, let me assure you they can. That doesn't mean they will. But if you just have to worry about all that stuff check out the preppers. Perhaps we should have a huge gathering to put up props to keep the sky from falling. One more thing if the worst happens you just might be able to handle it, I hope you do.

You may well be right about all those things, except that we don't all use that swimming hole, and it shouldn't take a lot of common sense (or some official with a promising career in the signwriting department) to stop us doing so. But one neglected environmental hazard isn't a reason to neglect others.

I used to have a Labrador which would make horrible grimaces while eating gooseberries off the bush, because they were sour, but that is what Labradors do. I think, though, bears would only eat the lead sulphate from discharged batteries, or those from which the acid has leaked. That does argue an above-average level of human irresponsibility, and nothing at all argues condor irresponsibility. By the way, there were no birds in the Pleistocene.

I've just been rereading the memoirs which Harry Patch, the last British soldier to have served in the trenches of Flanders, dictated at the age of 108. He describes how in working as a plumber and sanitary engineer between the wars, he used to see men with their fingers turning blue from lead exposure, probably including himself, and he also worked a lot with asbestos paste. But they seemed to recover pretty well when they stopped, and he himself showed a conspicuous absence of mental impairment. I grew up among old men who had been where he had been, and although they heartily concurred that starting war is murder, would say things like "Aye, but we had guid times at Passchendaele", or "Ye wouldnae want tae be the man that missed it." None of that alters the fact that plenty of people didn't get away with either thing. Trying to avoid all we can seems to be the smart thing to do.

[BrentD]

No birds in the Pleistocene? When did that happen?

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Quite a while ago. What's a bird? Some say birds are dinosaurs. I should perhaps have said no birds at all resembling the condor. That seems pretty safe.

[BrentD]

No, that is not safe. Not at all. Study up.

[NavyVet1959]

By the way, there were no birds in the Pleistocene.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Pleistocene_birds

According to that, there were plenty of them.

[BrentD]

Just about everything is this thread is wrong...

[dondiego]

Just about everything is this thread is wrong...

Care to elaborate?

[BrentD]

Not really. But for one, condors do ingest lead ammunition and die. Of that, there is, unfortunately, little doubt.

[Blackwater]

Yet the question still remains: Should we drop all sorts of priorities just to placate those who wish to preserve a species that seems destined at some point in the not too distant future to die off anyway? The comments about power lines, etc. apply here. Wisdom always has and always will affect OUR survival, and THAT is the real question here that awaits our individual and collective judgment, as a nation and as a species ourselves. How we answer that question will affect our own survival eventually. And our answer SHOULD (clearly!) be based on facts AND on our value system, and how we weigh and use them.

It is always regretable when entire species go extinct, but at what point that regret gets to be a grandiose illusion depends on our will to answer the question with honesty and intellectuality, and NOT on our warm fuzzy feelings. This is not a common commodity today on either side of this and like issues. We're a provocative, touchy-feely lot, and that inhibits wisdom GREATLY. With computers, we understand pretty well the principle of "garbage in, garbage out," but when it comes to moral, ethical and practical matters, we seem to forget that, and just go with what we FEEL. This isn't the way to solve ANY problem or answer any question. It's just the way it is.

Do I wish to see the condors pass into extinction? Absolutely not! But do I think we should commit vast amounts of money we DON'T have and prohibit perfectly rational use of our other national and other resources? No, I don't. Balance is the key, and when we lose our balance in our thinking, we can't very well be surprised when we get all sorts of bad results from our lack of wisdom, like hunting being outlawed, etc., etc. It IS on the liberals' agenda. There can be no question at this point of that. Whether we follow their logic to OUR extinction is the one we really need to be thinking about. At that point, our transition from a once free nation to a totalitarian one will be virtually complete. No need for guns to hunt with? Then as was stated above, no need for them at all, since they're just intended for killing other people, which is a "crime" (in their minds) so we'll need to confiscate all firearms to reduce our "criminal population." If anyone can't see this, it's GOT to be because they simply don't WANT to. But then, that's not uncommon today either, so .... as Sonny and Cher said, "The Beat Goes On."

[TXGunNut]

I, for one, am quite weary of political correctness and questionable science. Hard to argue with the contention that condors are due to become instinct, seems to be one of the most reasonable ideas presented thus far. I'll never miss the condor and the thought of introducing them into another area or spending $250,000 to maintain one sounds silly to me.
Has anyone considered how many have survived by eating gut piles and unrecovered game? As pointed out earlier a proper bullet (or boolit) will not be in the animal if it does it's job correctly.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Yet the question still remains: Should we drop all sorts of priorities just to placate those who wish to preserve a species that seems destined at some point in the not too distant future to die off anyway? The comments about power lines, etc. apply here. Wisdom always has and always will affect OUR survival, and THAT is the real question here that awaits our individual and collective judgment, as a nation and as a species ourselves. How we answer that question will affect our own survival eventually. And our answer SHOULD (clearly!) be based on facts AND on our value system, and how we weigh and use them.

It is always regretable when entire species go extinct, but at what point that regret gets to be a grandiose illusion depends on our will to answer the question with honesty and intellectuality, and NOT on our warm fuzzy feelings. This is not a common commodity today on either side of this and like issues. We're a provocative, touchy-feely lot, and that inhibits wisdom GREATLY. With computers, we understand pretty well the principle of "garbage in, garbage out," but when it comes to moral, ethical and practical matters, we seem to forget that, and just go with what we FEEL. This isn't the way to solve ANY problem or answer any question. It's just the way it is.

Do I wish to see the condors pass into extinction? Absolutely not! But do I think we should commit vast amounts of money we DON'T have and prohibit perfectly rational use of our other national and other resources? No, I don't. Balance is the key, and when we lose our balance in our thinking, we can't very well be surprised when we get all sorts of bad results from our lack of wisdom, like hunting being outlawed, etc., etc. It IS on the liberals' agenda. There can be no question at this point of that. Whether we follow their logic to OUR extinction is the one we really need to be thinking about. At that point, our transition from a once free nation to a totalitarian one will be virtually complete. No need for guns to hunt with? Then as was stated above, no need for them at all, since they're just intended for killing other people, which is a "crime" (in their minds) so we'll need to confiscate all firearms to reduce our "criminal population." If anyone can't see this, it's GOT to be because they simply don't WANT to. But then, that's not uncommon today either, so .... as Sonny and Cher said, "The Beat Goes On."

How many sorts of priorities would not using lead-containing bullets require people to drop? Just one, it seems like. Animals not being given either eternal life or access to decent burial, it sounds like there is no evidence at all for anything but human intervention endangering the condor. Some conservation measures, like not having homes, airports, flight lines or the wind turbines they soar above, may involve sacrifices it is difficult to expect of people.

As has already been pointed out, the snowflake effect of bullets on x-rays has been well documented. Here is a web page which shows just how the flight patterns of Old World vultures, similar in habits to the condor, differ from those of most birds. I have seen those fifty miles from anywhere they could possibly be roosting. If you lie down in the open you will sometimes see a speck appear just low enough to satisfy its concern for your health.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/eart...s-handler.html

Unfortunately the condor, like President Nixon, has the sort of face which doesn't evoke sympathy in times of trouble. I think opinion would be quite different if we were talking swans. But all told, the sum of public opinion is that the fate of the condor justifies the sacrifice of lead bullets.

Attachment 139663

[NavyVet1959]

They evolved in the age of "megafauna". They are a meat eater (scavenger) and require a lot of (dead) meat to survive. With the megafauna removed, their days were numbered. Dead cattle serve as a substitute these days and I suspect any of the dead large sea mammal in the coastal areas that might wash ashore. Sometimes, you just reach an evolutionary dead end and you need to recognize it.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

They evolved in the age of "megafauna". They are a meat eater (scavenger) and require a lot of (dead) meat to survive. With the megafauna removed, their days were numbered. Dead cattle serve as a substitute these days and I suspect any of the dead large sea mammal in the coastal areas that might wash ashore. Sometimes, you just reach an evolutionary dead end and you need to recognize it.

That is ingenious, but a given environment supports a given amount of biomass, mega or bite-sized, and deserts support vultures. They know how to exploit undrafts, and unlike the albatross, which is not a very big eater, they fly only part of the 24 hours.