Lead shot ban (DFL introduced bills) opposed by MN State HS Clay Target League

BRITTMAN

BRITTMAN

Well-known member
Per MN State High School Clay Target League

The Minnesota State High School Clay Target League is one of Minnesota’s most popular high school sports. With over 12,000 middle and high school students participating on more than 400 teams, it is a top-ten participation sport and larger than Boy’s and Girl’s High School Hockey combined. The Minnesota College Athletic Conference and the USA College Clay Target League hosts more than 25 Minnesota colleges in clay target shooting sports. These three leagues are all managed by the USA Clay Target League – a 501(c3) non-profit organization.

Recently a number of Minnesota State Representatives, and one Senator, have introduced legislation to ban lead-based ammunition in the state. Their proposed legislation specifically identifies that "...the league must adopt league rules that prohibit using lead ammunition and require using nontoxic ammunition at all shooting sport practices, competitions, training, and other events."

“Youth clay target shooting sports in Minnesota is NOT a public health issue,” said John Nelson, President of the Eagan-based USA Clay Target League, the largest youth clay target shooting sports program in the country. “By specifically targeting youth shooting sports, it becomes clear that this is an attack on a school-approved activity that they don’t like. The idea that there are over 50,000 Minnesota students that have participated in the League since 2001 that have never had an accident, never had an injury, despite shooting a shotgun over 100 million times, goes contrary to their preferred narrative. “

The proposed legislation would result in 12,000+ Minnesota students and their families, hundreds of shooting ranges, and the State of Minnesota paying the price.
 
There's more to this bill than just what was posted above.

It also targets a lead ban for hunting on public land and fishing tackle that is a specific size or smaller.

It does not specifically target the MN HS Clay Target League either. They are simply a by-product of entity if this were to pass just like hunters or anglers.

Been brought up multiple times in the past and didn't come close to passing. As it stands now, it has no chance of passing again.
 
gimruis said:
There's more to this bill than just what was posted above.

It also targets a lead ban for hunting on public land and fishing tackle that is a specific size or smaller.

It does not specifically target the MN HS Clay Target League either. They are simply a by-product of entity if this were to pass just like hunters or anglers.

Been brought up multiple times in the past and didn't come close to passing. As it stands now, it has no chance of passing again.
Click to expand...
Yeah that seemed like a weird spin. Banning lead to hurt a youth shoot doesn't seem like it would be very effective or even something someone would want to do. Feels very "think of the children" spin on a much bigger topic.
 
LittleBigHorn22 said:
Yeah that seemed like a weird spin. Banning lead to hurt a youth shoot doesn't seem like it would be very effective or even something someone would want to do. Feels very "think of the children" spin on a much bigger topic.
Click to expand...

Let me be clear here. I am totally against a full lead ban in ammo and fishing tackle. This comes up every year in the MN legislature and its spun by someone on the web to target a specific demographic (like HS clay shooting leagues above). The reality is that it targets a lot more people or groups than just that. There's a heck of a lot more hunters and anglers in this state that would be affected by this than just a HS clay target team.

The reason in the past it has gone nowhere is because there's no viable reasonably-priced alternative at this time. Non-toxic shot and fishing tackle is already in short supply and very expensive. The industry simply isn't ready.

The reasons cited in the past have been because loons ingest small lead weights/sinkers/jigs off the bottom of the lake and eagles get lead poisoning when they pick away at gut piles of deer. Well now all of the sudden the reason is to target the HS Clay Leagues? I don't think so.
 
gimruis said:
Let me be clear here. I am totally against a full lead ban in ammo and fishing tackle. This comes up every year in the MN legislature and its spun by someone on the web to target a specific demographic (like HS clay shooting leagues above).
Click to expand...
Yeah I'm not for a full ban yet either. Although this is why I believe lead will be banned in my lifetime. It's constantly on the board. And while I know many will say that this is what everything is wrong with the world today. I personally think this is what progress does look like. Slow changes state by state that pushs industry to adapt and to not drop huge changes on everyone. The waterfowl ban sounded like a huge scramble. We can be more ready for the rest this time around.

I personally suggest anyone who does upland hunt, to test out some non-toxic options. It doesn't mean you need to start voting for lead bans or anything like that. At a minimum it means you'll be more ready if a ban effects you and you'll have time to find what works for you and won't have to buy things during a non-toxic shortage.
 
I guess it makes sense to me that if the future is lead free the place to start would be with new shooters, of course someone is going to piggyback something onto it and push it to far and kill it.
They could attack it from a different angle and require more frequent range cleanup and reclamation and make the sport more cost prohibitive.
 
A lead ban would also be phased in and after I read the full text of the bill as its proposed, there would also be a buyback program. People have thousands of dollars invested into lead fishing tackle and I can only imagine the buyback program associated with that.

No idea where the money would come from to fund that, which is another reason why I think its going nowhere.

As it stands now, the lead ban would only apply on public land. Private land would be exempt.
 
Personally I'm for a lead ammo ban. The largest negative you hear of from people about a lead ammo ban (other than people who think it's just one step closer to a full ban on guns. To that I say take your tin foil hat off) is the price.

If the whole "supply and demand" part of capitalism works as it's supposed to, having to buy more non-toxic ammunition will increase the demand, which should increase supply, in turn lowering the price.
 
I'll take the middle ground here. I have no problem hunting federal land without lead. But when I can use it I do. Ballistic superiority and price being the prime factors. I usually don't shoot a lot when upland hunting. Lead in shot form is inert compared to lead in paint or gas. Combating the over use of herbicides and pesticides would be a better use of tax money imo. Shooting clay targets with steel is a bummer. When it comes to fishing tackle I can't even begin to think how much lead I own.
 
Lead ammo is only a danger to waterfowl in areas of high shooting pressure and where the bottom of the marsh is hard enough that the pellets are accessible to the feeding birds.

Lead appears to have some danger to loons and eagles, but I am not sure I have seen any conclusive data that says it is widespread. Lead jigs ? Wouldn't the hook be of greater immanent danger ?
 
The argument of lead poisoning eagles may be true, but the bald eagle population in North America has literally never been higher. There are more of them now than at any point we've been keeping track. I see them on a daily basis. Head down to Wabasha in southeastern MN and you'll see them by the flocks. They're so numerous that they're like over grown crows.

The loon population has slowly been declining so there is some data behind that one. They ingest lead BBs, sinkers, jigs, etc off the bottom of the lake when they pick up grit for their gizzard. Their habitat has also been reduced, and many of their nests are over run with large waves from boats, primarily wake boats. I'd personally rather address their habitat loss and limit nest destruction from waves than ban lead, as I think it would have a greater benefit.
 
I’m always surprised that sportspeople are opposing to banning repeatedly spraying a toxin into the environment, by definition where fish and wildlife are found. The market has shown viable alternatives to toxin lead will be developed and brought to market for a reasonable price. Denial isn’t a good strategy.
 
Birdybird said:
The market has shown viable alternatives to toxin lead will be developed and brought to market for a reasonable price.
Click to expand...
I agree. What they could do is "phase" it out over time instead of just all of the sudden ban lead ammo and fishing tackle on "this date."

I don't think most people realize how much fishing tackle is lead based. Some people have thousands of lead based sinkers, jigs, weights, etc that they've accumulated for years. Telling them they can't use it on a hard deadline date would create a catastrophic problem in the fishing industry.

Honestly the fishing tackle thing is a bigger problem to me than the HS Clay League ammo. I'd bet that a whole lot more people are invested in their fishing tackle than high schoolers are shooting trap.

And if they're going to do a buyback program like the text of the bill says, good luck. That fund is going to have to be enormous and it will go bankrupt quickly.
 
Yes I think a phase out over time is best. Even a big group out west trying to eliminate lead rifle rounds admitted that if there was suddenly a ban the supply chain wouldn't be able to supply every hunter with non-lead ammo. On the fishing thing I don't know what the answer is. Perhaps work with manufacturers first to introduce more lead-free options. There's no way I'm giving up my lucky buzzbait!
 
I sincerely doubt that the portion of the bill banning lead shot for target shooting will make it out of committee.

I quit using nontoxic shot and bullets for my hunting several years ago.

It makes no sense to me to inject a known neurotoxin into the food when effective substitutes are readily available.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top