Non-lead Ammunition Research Articles

Lead poisoning of raptors: state of the science and cross-discipline mitigation options for a global problem.

Lead poisoning is an important global conservation problem for many species of wildlife, especially raptors. Despite the increasing number of individual studies and regional reviews of lead poisoning of raptors, it has been over a decade since this information has been compiled into a comprehensive global review. Here, we summarize the state of knowledge of lead poisoning of raptors, we review developments in manufacturing of non-lead ammunition, the use of which can reduce the most pervasive source of lead these birds encounter, and we compile data on voluntary and regulatory mitigation options and their associated sociological context. We support our literature review with case studies of mitigation actions, largely provided by the conservation practitioners who study or manage these efforts. Our review illustrates the growing awareness and understanding of lead exposure of raptors, and it shows that the science underpinning this understanding has expanded considerably in recent years. We also show that the political and social appetite for managing lead ammunition appears to vary substantially across administrative regions, countries, and continents. Improved understanding of the drivers of this variation could support more effective mitigation of lead exposure of wildlife. This review also shows that mitigation strategies are likely to be most effective when they are outcome driven, consider behavioural theory, local cultures, and environmental conditions, effectively monitor participation, compliance, and levels of raptor exposure, and support both environmental and human health.

Integrating moral norms and stewardship identity into the theory of planned behavior to understand altruistic conservation behavior among hunters in southwestern Utah (USA)

ABSTRACT We integrate moral norms and stewardship identity into the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) to predict the use of non-lead ammunition in the California condor recovery zone of southwestern Utah. Data were collected from licensed hunters via an online survey. Structural equation models of the TPB without and with the moral norms and stewardship identity constructs were compared to evaluate the utility of integrating these constructs into the TPB. Moral norms did have a significant direct influence on hunters’ behavioral intentions. Both moral norms and stewardship identity had significant indirect influences on behavioral intentions via the core constructs of the TPB. The inclusion of moral norms and stewardship identity into the TPB marginally improved model fit and predictive power. Managers can emphasize a moral obligation to use non-lead ammunition and tap into hunters’ desire to steward the landscape and the hunting tradition in their communication and outreach efforts.

California condor poisoned by lead, not copper, when both are ingested: A case study

AbstractLead poisoning from feeding on carcasses shot with lead‐based ammunition is a well‐known threat to wildlife. Thus, nonlead (e.g., copper‐based) ammunition is promoted as a safe alternative. We present a unique situation of a male California condor (Gymnogyps californianus) discovered with both a lead fragment and a copper bullet in his digestive tract simultaneously. We show that ingestion of a copper bullet did not result in elevated blood copper concentrations, while ingestion of a lead fragment contributed to lead toxicity. Our findings can inform nonlead ammunition outreach efforts by demonstrating that ingestion of a copper‐based bullet did not result in the poisoning of a California condor.

Towards an evidence‐informed strategy for communicating lead ammunition risks

AbstractLead hunting ammunition is a key source of lead exposure for wildlife and humans who eat wild game. To improve the effectiveness of lead ammunition risk communication, and avoid unintended negative effects from poorly conceived messages, we examined how New York State hunter education instructors view the lead issue. We conducted in‐depth interviews with instructors from 5 New York State regions from September 2020 to February 2021, which generated qualitative data on instructors' knowledge, beliefs, and opinions. We classified instructors into 3 groups: (i) concerned advocates, (ii) resistant skeptics, or (iii) ambivalent educators. Concerned advocates had substantial, accurate knowledge of the lead issue, as judged by the investigators, and a strong desire to avoid lead ammunition. Resistant skeptics believed lead ammunition risks are insignificant, exaggerated, or already well‐managed, and strongly resisted using nonlead alternatives. Ambivalent educators self‐reported limited knowledge of the lead issue or its significance and a general ambivalence, or even apathy, towards switching to nonlead alternatives. Across groups, instructors made clear they were (i) concerned about the higher price and lower availability of nonlead ammunition, (ii) uncertain about the relative performance of lead versus nonlead ammunition, and (iii) strongly opposed to legislation and regulation. Instructors also strongly believed that education and effective communication offer the best path forward, although most admitted rarely discussing the toxic effects of lead ammunition in class. We recommend that state hunter education program managers update their curricula and instructor training courses to include a module on the wildlife and human health lead ammunition issue. We also recommend that state and federal regulators cooperate strategically on communicating and managing lead ammunition risks to better address the issue and avoid unintended, unwanted outcomes.

Promoting enforcement of non-lead hunting ammunition regulations and compliance in Europe and North America.

The direct regulation of lead ammunition in North America and Europe has been mainly for hunting in wetlands. Little support among hunters and the ammunition makers exists for further regulation despite suitable lead substitutes and much education about the known risks to wildlife and human health from ingested lead. In the absence of personnel to detect use of lead ammunition and enforce regulations, hunter compliance is low. Identification of non-lead ammunition using existing electronic technology and an international protocol on the identification of non-lead rifle bullets is proposed to aid enforcement. An explicit definition of the chemical composition of lead substitutes is required in European Union legislation together with a more enforceable distinction between 'possession during hunting' and 'ownership' of lead ammunition. A more transdisciplinary regulatory approach to transitioning to non-lead ammunition is advised. It comprises widespread public health advisories, setting a maximum allowable lead level in commercial game meats in EU legislation, and public communication that emphasizes the benefits of non-lead ammunition use to all categories of wildlife and the public perception of hunting, whether in North America or Europe.

California Condors, Source Credibility, and Wildlife Conservation Messaging

This article examines the role of source credibility in the sphere of wildlife conservation campaigns. Specifically, it explores how particular messengers can motivate hunters, ranchers, and wildlife managers in California, Utah, and Arizona to voluntarily adopt non-lead ammunition. I analyze two partner websites, each designed to provide the hunting community with accurate information about non-lead ammunition. I then identify key principles regarding source credibility that arose from semi-structured interviews with four individuals closely involved in North American vulture and raptor conservation: representatives of the Ventana Wildlife Society, the Institute for Wildlife Studies, The Peregrine Fund, and Pinnacles National Park. The conclusion identifies lessons about the role of source credibility in wildlife conservation campaigns and situates the findings in the context of existing research on environmental communication and education.

Increasing the Awareness of Health Risks from Lead-Contaminated Game Meat Among International and National Human Health Organizations

Lead bullets and gunshot frequently fragment on impact in game animals and the resulting lead particles are bioavailable. Dietary exposure to this lead source can present health risks to vulnerable groups including young children and frequent consumers such as hunters, subsistence indigenous communities, and recipients of game meat from food banks. Many of the frequent game meat consumers in the European Union (EU) are likely to be drawn from the 13.8 million people, including 1.1 million young children, belonging to hunters’ households. It is estimated that 10 million people are potentially at risk in the USA. National food and health advisories and regulatory considerations appear confined to Europe. Despite the European Commission requesting restrictions on lead ammunition, the World Health Organization (WHO), the Food and Agricultural Organization of the UN (FAO), the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and individual countries have not adequately recognized this lead source nor developed mitigation measures. In contrast, several agreements administered by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), have well-developed risk reduction strategies for lead ammunition exposure of wildlife. These agencies could play a leadership role, stimulating appropriate international accords and national regulatory changes requiring the use of non-lead ammunition. Establishing a maximum allowable level of lead in game meat under FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius and EU Regulation 1881/2006, and harmonizing inter-agency human and environmental health approaches would be an important start.

Promoting the Transition to Non-Lead Hunting Ammunition in the European Union Through Regulation and Policy Options

Regulation (EU) 2021/57, banning the use of lead gunshot in wetland hunting, and adoption of the proposed European Union (EU) restriction on lead ammunition use by civilians in other types of hunting and target shooting, would complete the transition to non-lead ammunition use in the EU and ensure major compliance among hunters and shooters. The transition is possible since non-lead substitutes for all types of shotgun and rifle ammunition are produced already by leading European manufacturers. To ensure ammunition non-toxicity, EU standards are needed for lead substitutes to accompany both existing and potential future lead ammunition restrictions. Meat from wild game birds and mammals is a large and important commodity in the EU. Setting a maximum lead level in all marketed game meats under Regulation (EC) 1881/2006, aided by mandatory food labelling, would add extra health protection to human consumers. This regulatory step would help ensure that all wild game destined for retail markets were taken with non-lead ammunition, would complement existing and proposed European Commission restrictions on lead hunting ammunition and aid monitoring and enforcement. Increased public awareness of the risks posed by lead from ammunition to the health of humans, wildlife, and the environment, and especially their associated externalized costs to society, would promote and facilitate the passage of regulation to protect human and environmental health from toxic lead ammunition.

Factors affecting staff support of a voluntary nonlead ammunition outreach program

Lead poisoning from ingestion of bullet fragments in gut piles and unretrieved deer carcasses continues to cause mortality in bald eagles. To address this issue, the Midwest region of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) initiated an outreach program during 2016–2018 encouraging hunters to voluntarily use nonlead ammunition while deer hunting on National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs). We conducted a survey to assess this program using seven factors that might influence USFWS staff support for the nonlead outreach program: innovativeness, lead exposure to bald eagles, availability of training and outreach materials, satisfaction with program implementation, importance of informational materials, and if they were a deer hunter. Multiple linear regression showed attitudes toward eagles’ lead risk and importance of informational materials had the strongest effect on program support, followed by an individual’s innovativeness. Although previous studies have focused on influencing hunters’ nonlead use, our findings show staff attitudes and perceptions about nonlead strongly affect program support and ultimately program outcomes.

Non-lead rifle ammunition: Danish hunters\u2019 attitudes

BackgroundLead particles from hunting rifle ammunition become embedded in the tissue of shot animals and pose a health risk to predators and scavengers that eat discarded offal or parts of non-retrieved carcasses of shot game animals, as well as to humans who consume game. Copper and copper–zinc alloys are the most widely used alternatives to leaded ammunition. In Denmark, there has been a growing awareness of the toxic environmental effects of lead ammunition and the Danish government, supported by the Danish Hunters’ Association, announced in November 2020 a forthcoming ban on the use of lead-based bullets for hunting purposes intended to take effect in 2023. The question that remains to be addressed is how the Danish hunting community perceives lead ammunition as a problem and non-lead alternatives as a solution, and whether the willingness to change demonstrated by the hunters’ representatives reflects the attitude of the individual hunters. We studied this in a survey targeting 6000 randomly selected Danish rifle hunters, mapping their knowledge and concerns regarding lead rifle ammunition as well as their use of lead and non-lead ammunition.ResultsWe found that approximately one-fifth of the use of rifle ammunition for hunting in Denmark in 2019 was non-lead. Hunters’ knowledge of and concern for the adverse impacts of lead ammunition and the opportunities to switch to non-lead alternatives were generally limited. However, some showed an open-minded attitude and we found that such knowledge and concern increased the likelihood of hunters deciding to use non-lead ammunition. Hunters mainly got their information from hunting organizations and colleagues and expressed a distinct lack of information and guidance on the topic from ministerial authorities responsible for hunting administration.ConclusionsSome hunters have already changed to use non-lead rifle ammunition completely or in part, and others show an open attitude to discussing the issue and receiving more information particularly from hunting authorities. Some hunters demonstrated a critical or negative attitude towards a change. Communication of the adverse impacts of leaded ammunition in terms of the risk of lead poisoning to wildlife and humans and the opportunities of switching to the existing efficient and safe alternatives is essential regardless of the formal approach and will be crucial for the effectiveness of the regulation announced by the Danish government.

Perspectives from natural resource professionals: Attitudes on lead ammunition risks and use of nonlead ammunition

Hunting is a popular activity but continued use of lead ammunition poses risks to wildlife and human health. To inform adoption of the voluntary use of nonlead ammunition, natural resource professionals were surveyed to understand their attitudes about threats to bald eagles, lead poisoning in bald eagles, human health risks from lead bullet fragments in venison, use of nonlead hunting ammunition, and socio-economic nonlead ammunition factors. Differences were examined by hunter status, ammunition type used, and intentions to use nonlead ammunition. Of participants surveyed, 61.0% were hunters and 39.0% nonhunters, with 59.5% of hunters using lead ammunition and 40.5% using nonlead. Concurrently, 68.5% of hunters reported likely intentions to continue using nonlead or convert to nonlead in the future, while 31.5% reported nonlead use was unlikely. Also, some hunters currently using nonlead ammunition indicated they would unlikely continue using nonlead (17.8%). Nonhunters agreed more strongly than hunters regarding general mortality threats to bald eagles. Additionally, nonhunters, hunters using nonlead, and likely nonlead users more strongly agreed about threats of lead exposure to eagles than their counterparts. Nonhunters and likely nonlead users also more strongly agreed than hunters and unlikely nonlead users about the human health risks of lead ammunition and about shooting characteristics of nonlead. Finally, nonhunters and nonlead users agreed more strongly than their counterparts about the socio-economic factors of using nonlead ammunition. Understanding natural resource professional hunters’ attitudes may help with audience segmentation when designing future nonlead outreach messages. Management implicationsAmong natural resource professionals, hunters are important in nonlead outreach programs, but results suggest nonhunters have greater understanding and awareness of the issues related to the effects of lead ammunition on the environment. Attitudes about lead poisoning and nonlead ammunition overlapped between hunters and nonhunters, suggesting the two groups are not mutually exclusive. A substantial proportion of nonlead hunters are likely to continue using it, but some indicated they might switch back to lead ammunition, suggesting a need to reinforce initial behavior. Hunters and nonhunters are both important target audiences for education and outreach programs.

Until It's a regulation It's not my fight: Complexities of a voluntary nonlead hunting ammunition program

Wildlife and human health are at risk of lead exposure from spent hunting ammunition. Lead exposure persists for bald eagles due to bullet fragments in game animal gut piles and unretrieved carcasses, and is also a human health risk when wild game is procured using lead ammunition. Programs encouraging the voluntary use of nonlead ammunition have become a popular approach mitigating these effects. This study explored attitudes and experiences of United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) staff implementing an outreach program encouraging deer hunters to voluntary use nonlead ammunition on 54 National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs) in the Upper Midwest, U.S. to understand factors affecting program implementation. We conducted 29 semi-structured interviews of USFWS staff along with 60 responses from an open-ended survey question. Twelve themes emerged from the data and were grouped into three broad categories: (1) challenges of dealing with complex issues, (2) importance of messengers and messages, and (3) resistance from staff. Challenges of dealing with complex issues included administrative restraint and uncertainty, scope and scale of program, human health not an agency responsibility, contextual political influences, and public-private collaborations. Importance of messengers and messages included the importance of experience, and salience of human health risk. Finally, resistance from staff included skepticism of the science and motives behind the program, competing priorities for refuge staff, differing perceptions of regulatory and voluntary approaches, cost and availability of nonlead ammunition, and disregard by some about lead ammunition and human health risks. Staff identified numerous challenges implementing the program, many of which were external factors beyond the control of the participants. Understanding the factors affecting program implementation may help guide future efforts encouraging the voluntary use of nonlead ammunition.

Regulations on lead ammunition adopted in Europe and evidence of compliance.

The transition to non-lead ammunition has been enforced by regulations on use and possession of lead shot and rifle bullets. Here we review the scientific and technical literature about this regulatory process in Europe and give some notes of its effectiveness to reduce this source of lead contamination in aquatic and terrestrial environments. Presently, lead shot use has been legally restricted in 23 European countries. Two, Denmark and The Netherlands, have a total ban of lead gunshot use in all types of habitats, 16 countries have a total ban in wetlands and/or for waterbird hunting, and 5 have a partial ban implemented only in some wetlands. The legal regulation of lead bullets is limited to some German regions. This review also highlights the need to know the level of compliance with the ban on lead ammunition and the subsequent benefits for the susceptible species and for game meat safety.

Availability and prices of non-lead gunshot cartridges in the European retail market

To analyse those factors that inhibit or facilitate the shift from lead to non-lead ammunition, it is important to evaluate the extent to which hunters can purchase suitable non-lead products. Based on an Internet search, we identified 22 European and 6 North American manufactures of non-lead shot cartridges distributed in 10 different countries. During the web search, we found non-lead shot cartridges available in retail stores with online sales of these products in 22 of 29 European countries. The most common non-lead shot type was steel shot, although bismuth, tungsten and copper were available in some countries. We conclude that non-lead shot cartridges are available to purchasers in most European countries, but in a limited variety. Availability of non-lead ammunition is not limited by production but by the demand at the national, regional, and local levels. Multiple manufacturers provide such ammunition, and their products may become available in any member state, regionally and locally, once the demand is established. The collective experience of Denmark, Canada, and the USA indicate that the demand for non-lead products will be stimulated by any intergovernmental initiatives to regulate lead ammunition for hunting and target shooting, especially when such initiatives are accomplished through well-enforced national regulation.

Comparison of lead levels in edible parts of red deer hunted with lead or non-lead ammunition

Game meat may contain elevated concentrations of lead especially if lead-containing ammunition is used for hunting. Then a health risk is possible for consumer groups with high game meat intake.The lead concentrations in three edible parts (marketable meat from the area close to the wound channel, saddle and haunch) of meat from red deer (Cervus elaphus) between animals hunted either with lead or non‑lead ammunition were compared. Furthermore, lead levels in game meat of lead-shot red deer were compared with those of lead-shot roe deer and lead-shot wild boar.Ninety red deer were shot and killed in the context of this study (64 with lead and 26 with non‑lead ammunition). Since the lead concentration for a number of the samples was below the limit of detection or the limit of quantification, statistical methods for left-censored data were applied.The median concentrations of lead in game meat did not differ significantly between lead shot and non‑lead shot animals. However, when we analyzed the more elevated lead concentrations, they were significantly higher in edible parts of animals shot with lead ammunition than non-lead ammunition. The highest concentrations were found in samples from edible meat from the area close to the wound channel (max 3442 mg Pb/kg), followed by the saddle (max 1.14 mg Pb/kg) and with the lowest levels in the haunch (max 0.09 mg Pb/kg). A comparison of game species revealed that the lead concentration in haunch and saddle of lead shot red deer was higher than in the corresponding samples of lead shot roe deer.Our results have shown that by the use of non-lead ammunition, a significant reduction of the lead concentration especially in edible parts near the wound channel is possible.

Rationale for the regulated transition to non-lead products in Canada: A policy discussion paper

Lead gunshot, rifle bullets, and fishing weights are still allowed in Canadian provincially-regulated hunting and fishing, despite the contribution to lead exposure in humans, wildlife, and the environment. Non-lead gunshot and fishing weights are required in Canada only for waterfowl hunting, and angling in national parks and national wildlife areas. Lead wheel weights are also allowed and comprise a majority of the Canadian market. Effective non-lead substitutes for these products exist, and are already required in various American and European jurisdictions. Several analyses commissioned by the Canadian government in 2018 identified the problems of lead exposure attributable to these four lead products. Lead is already listed under Schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) that authorizes the government to undertake measures to reduce exposure. CEPA could require, simultaneously, use of non-lead ammunition, fishing weights and wheel weights at the national level, following an appropriate phase-in period. The low provincial and territorial licence fees for hunting and fishing in Canada would offset any costs associated with use of lead substitutes. Costs for non-lead wheel weights would comprise a small percentage of the costs of new vehicles and new tire purchases. This regulatory initiative would complement other Canadian national bans on lead products. Because there is no safe threshold level for blood lead, use of non-lead products would benefit the health of humans, scavengers, upland game species, and fish-eating birds.

Lead content in wild game shot with lead or non-lead ammunition - Does "state of the art consumer health protection" require non-lead ammunition?

The toxicity of lead has been known for a long time, and no safe uptake level can be derived for humans. Consumers’ intake via food should therefore be kept as low as possible. Game meat can contain elevated levels of lead due to the use of lead ammunition for hunting. A risk assessment conducted in 2010 by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment including various consumption scenarios revealed a possible health risk for extreme consumers of game meat hunted with lead ammunition (i.e. hunters and members of hunters’ households). Babies, infants, children and women of childbearing age were identified as vulnerable group with regards to the developmental neurotoxicity of lead. It was noted, that a sound data base was required in order to refine the assessment. Therefore, the research project “Safety of game meat obtained through hunting” (LEMISI) has been conducted in Germany, with the aims of determining the concentrations of lead (as well as of copper and zinc) brought into the edible parts of game meat (roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) and wild boar (Sus scrofa)) due to using either lead or non-lead hunting ammunition, whilst concurrently taking geogenic (i.e. “background”) levels of lead into account. Compared to non-lead ammunition, lead ammunition significantly increased lead concentrations in the game meat. The use of both lead and non-lead ammunition deposited copper and zinc in the edible parts of game meat, and the concentrations were in the range of those detected regularly in meat of farm animals. For the average consumer of game meat in Germany the additional uptake of lead only makes a minor contribution to the average alimentary lead exposure. However, for consumers from hunters’ households the resulting uptake of lead–due to lead ammunition—can be several times higher than the average alimentary lead exposure. Non-lead bullets in combination with suitable game meat hygienic measures are therefore recommended in order to ensure “state of the art consumer health protection”.

Source identification of human exposure to lead in nine Cree Nations from Quebec, Canada (Eeyou Istchee territory)

While policies to decrease lead in the environment have been implemented to reduce human exposure to various lead sources, the use of lead ammunition to harvest wild game may continue to contribute significantly to human blood lead levels (BLLs). As part of a multi-community environment-and-health study, BLLs representing all age groups were evaluated in the nine Cree Nations located in the James and Hudson Bay regions of Quebec, Canada. Personal, market food, traditional food and 24-h recall questionnaires were administered. Predictor variables were assessed for various exposure sources, including diet and hunting practices. Elevated BLLs were observed in association with increased hunting status, use of firearms and leaded ammunition, and consumption of traditional foods. Significant differences were observed between all communities, age groups and sexes. Recommendations include educational campaigns that promote switching to non-lead ammunition and, if lead ammunition continues to be used, careful removal from tissues of pellets, bullet fragments and ammunition paths.

Chronic Lead Intoxication From Eating Wild-Harvested Game

BackgroundThe purpose of this article is to determine if conversion from eating wild game harvested with lead-based ammunition to nonlead-based ammunition results in lower blood lead levels. Supersonic injection of toxin-leeching frangible projectiles into food is intuitively bad. As much as 95% of the ~13.7 million hunters in the United States choose shrapnel-inducing lead bullets to kill game; in addition, not harvesting meat is an incarcerable crime. A lead ammunition ban on certain federal lands was recently rescinded and the National Rifle Association refutes any risk from eating lead bullet-harvested game. MethodsA patient subsisting solely on lead-shot meat was converted to non-lead ammunition and his blood lead level tracked. Concomitant with his conversion to nonlead ammunition, a controlled experiment was performed using the patient's bullets to determine his daily lead intake from lead-shot meat. ResultsWhile eating lead-shot meat, the patient was consuming 259.3 ± 235.6 µg of lead daily and his blood lead level was 74.7 µg/dL. Conversion to nonlead ammunition was associated with a reduced blood lead level. ConclusionsUnsafe blood lead levels can occur from eating game harvested with lead ammunition. Physicians should warn hunting patients of this potential risk and counsel them about the availability of nonlead ammunition alternatives.

Copper and zinc content in wild game shot with lead or non-lead ammunition - implications for consumer health protection.

The aim of this study was to examine the contamination of game meat with copper and zinc and establish whether the use of alternative (non-lead) ammunition can lead to higher or unsafe levels of copper and zinc in the meat of roe deer, wild boar and red deer. The research project “Safety of game meat obtained through hunting” (LEMISI) was conducted in Germany with the purpose of examining the entry of lead as well as copper and zinc into the meat of hunted game when using either lead or non-lead ammunition.The outcome of this study shows that the usage of both lead-based ammunition and alternative non-lead ammunition results in the entry of copper and zinc into the edible parts of the game. Using non-lead ammunition does not entail dangerously elevated levels of copper and zinc, so replacing lead ammunition with alternative ammunition does not introduce a further health problem with regard to these metals. The levels of copper and zinc in game meat found in this study are in the range found in previous studies of game. The content of copper and zinc in game meat is also comparable to those regularly detected in meat and its products from livestock (pig, cattle, sheep) for which the mean human consumption rate is much higher. From the viewpoint of consumer health protection, the use of non-lead ammunition does not pose an additional hazard through copper and zinc contamination. A health risk due to the presence of copper and zinc in game meat at typical levels of consumer exposure is unlikely for both types of ammunition.