Some Research on Lead Shot in Pheasant

This "study" was done on 8 birds and appears to examine the entire carcass.
Right. And I'm not necessarily trying to debunk the study. I find it interesting. Until today, I'd never once considered lead fragments in the birds I shoot. Pellets obviously, but 39 little fragments?? Who knew?

But...I'm guessing the 8 birds they examined came from a driven shoot, so they were likely pen-reared birds. i.e.: flare nares. So they probably weren't the lean, strong-flying roosters I'm used to here in SD. More the slow, fat, "Uh oh, here come some guys with sticks. We should maybe think about flying away." type. Easy pickins. Then they fly by this line of shooters, all of whom graduated from the Churchill shooting school & shoot very expensive looking shotguns. Way better shots than I. Some could've even flown perfectly between pegs & been shot by 2 guns. Anyway, they just get absolutely pummeled! Given this information, 39 little lead fragments per carcass isn't that surprising. My pheasants probably have like 2 or 3 fragments, most likely all in the ass, which I don't eat anyway.😊

churchill.JPG
 
Don't they hang/age their uncleaned birds?? Maybe having the lead intact with meat and other matter while it ages allows extra time for lead to absorb? I clean my birds, pick shot and don't worry about lead. Kind of ironic if lead makes the hunter as sick as the prey.
 
This is a pretty good thread. I get it. And it does concern me. But what worries me more is, what happened to the crawdads, catalpa worms, and big bullfrogs? Half of my childhood memories are of seining crawdads and climbing those big trees for worms. You could hear those big frogs on almost any pond (if I hadn't already gigged them all). All three seem rare now. My personal opinion is that the risk of lead shot at least here, is a spec on a gnat's ass compared to farm chemicals and the track hoe! I'll jump on the nontoxic bandwagon when I personally start finding dead hawks and eagles not what I read in a study done in San Francisco or NY city... just saying..:)
 
I'll jump on the nontoxic bandwagon when I personally start finding dead hawks and eagles not what I read in a study done in San Francisco or NY city... just saying..:)

Can you provide any links to these studies that you have been reading on the mortality of hawks and eagles in San Francisco or New York City?
 
Last edited:
This is from the UK. Realize that pheasant is sold in markets.

I switched from lead shot to steel and bismuth several years ago. I see no reason to go back.

If I were to buy pheasant meat in a market setting I would not be thrilled with lead residue being in the meat… but personally harvested meat the choice was made when you grab a box of shells off the shelf. To each their own, thank god I live in a country where it’s a choice!
 
Wow, what a coincidence! In today's Minneapolis Star and Sickle newspaper, there was a big article on the back of the sports page about a gentleman who is attempting to lessen negative effects of lead ammunition on the environment. He is a hunter, but a big reason he got interested in ending lead ammo is due to eagles getting lead poisoning, in his area a lot of golden eagles (Montana). He talked about getting hunters to place trail cams on gut piles and watch all the creatures that scavenge. Raptors, mountain lions, wolves, etc. etc. Two interesting points, he was not pushing for an instantaneous lead ban because there isn't enough non-tox ammo to sell as replacement to lead so if lead was banned many would stop hunting. And near the end of the article he was asked about the consequences of using lead ammo on game and then consuming the meat, he said there's never been a study linking damage to humans from it.
 
This "study" was done on 8 birds and appears to examine the entire carcass.

Reading the article and looking at the the accompanying photographs, it looks like the lead was found in the edible portions of the pheasant carcasses.
 
Wow, what a coincidence! In today's Minneapolis Star and Sickle newspaper, there was a big article on the back of the sports page about a gentleman who is attempting to lessen negative effects of lead ammunition on the environment. He is a hunter, but a big reason he got interested in ending lead ammo is due to eagles getting lead poisoning, in his area a lot of golden eagles (Montana). He talked about getting hunters to place trail cams on gut piles and watch all the creatures that scavenge. Raptors, mountain lions, wolves, etc. etc. Two interesting points, he was not pushing for an instantaneous lead ban because there isn't enough non-tox ammo to sell as replacement to lead so if lead was banned many would stop hunting. And near the end of the article he was asked about the consequences of using lead ammo on game and then consuming the meat, he said there's never been a study linking damage to humans from it.

I read that article too. He has valid points, but until the supply/cost catches up, I don't see it happening on a large scale.

Of course I wouldn't want a bald eagle to suffer from lead poisoning. The argument for bald eagles is that their population has never been higher, ever. They are thriving in many parts of the country. Lead poisoning is not affecting their population as a whole, not even close.
 
Of course I wouldn't want a bald eagle to suffer from lead poisoning. The argument for bald eagles is that their population has never been higher, ever. They are thriving in many parts of the country. Lead poisoning is not affecting their population as a whole, not even close.

I do not think that any of us want eagles to suffer from lead poisoning. Data shows that nearly half of them do suffer from lead poisoning.

 
Are you kidding? Of course the nontoxics are more expensive, at least where I shop for them! It also depends on exactly what non toxics you're referring to. If I wanted to just wound game birds, I could use the low-cost WalMart Super X's and Federals. The 12 gauge Winchester Blindside 3" 1/38 oz. loads, which are decent loads that will kill birds, cost about $30 in my market, almost exactly twice what a good lead load costs. the TSS, Bismuth, Hevi-shot, etc. go up from there. For most hunters, the good nontoxics' cost is high and non-trivial. My son bought some 16 gauge Boss loads in #3 and #5 that I'll use this year but I'm glad he was paying for them and not me. All of this radical "change for the better" needs to stop at some point before a significant portion of the hunting "fraternity" is priced right out of the sport. But then again, that may have been the intention of some from the start.
 
Many premium lead loads are either nickel plated or copper plated. I mainly shoot nickel plated myself(B&P), it doesn't look like any lead in this study is plated just plain old cheap stuff. Steel shot is not a good alternative for pheasants IMO. Because this is a tower hunt I would suspect the outfit provides cheapest loads they can find to save on costs.
 
You mentioned cost. Are nontoxic shotshells really more costly than lead shotshells?
Probably very dependent on which nontoxic shot shell we're talking about here. Wolfchief went through it pretty well.

Here in MN, they want to ban the sale of all lead in fishing tackle too. IMO that would be an even bigger cost. People have tons of lead in their fishing tackle and it would take a long time to phase it out. The most common alternative to lead weights in fishing tackle is tungsten. Its about four times the cost.
 
A big question is how much of the cost is due to lack of demand. Kents are in the $18-25/box price range and you can get dove/quail for $12-15. Premium lead are easily $30 a box now as well. If you are comparing tungsten, then those perform better than lead while being non toxic. If more manufactures focused on non toxic, it should be able to bring the price down even more.

Not saying non toxic doesn't come with a price increase, but I think it's a lot less than some make it out to be.
 
I disagree, the reason non tox like bismuth or tss is so expensive is it is not a common material. If we are made to shoot that kind of material the cost will just for up. Less supply more demand. I would bet even steel would get higher. Just my opinion
 
Because this is a tower hunt I would suspect the outfit provides cheapest loads they can find to save on costs.
If the study is of a British driven pheasant shoot it’s nothing like a US tower shoot. In general nothing about a British shoot is cheap, including the ammunition.
 
Back
Top