Discussion of Hunting

Discussions about all issues like transmitters, ringing, hunting
Post Reply
User avatar
Flex
Registered user
Posts: 684
Joined: February 28th, 2011, 3:09 pm
Location: Germany, near Switzerland
Contact:

Re: Discussion of Hunting

Post by Flex »

How many years did we go with our cars with leaded petrol? Find vegetables, drinks, fruits are also traces of lead. We need from it distinguish between lead and lead salts...
from Wikipedia:
Also in various acids, lead by passivation is insoluble. So lead is resistant to sulphuric acid, hydrofluoric acid and hydrochloric acid, as with the anion of the acid-insoluble lead salts formed. Therefore, lead for special applications has a certain importance in the chemical engineering.

Lead is, however, soluble in nitric acid (Blei(II)-nitrat is soluble in water), hot concentrated sulphuric acid (formation of soluble Pb(HSO4)2-Komplexes), acetic acid (only for air access) and hot alkali.
the half live consists of arrangement, subordination and regulation
User avatar
Eden
Registered user
Posts: 815
Joined: August 8th, 2012, 3:14 pm
Location: near Northsea, Germany

Post by Eden »

Dr. Leivits, your explanations are interesting, but, finally, they don’t give an answer to my question : what is the subjective reason why hunters don’t accept lead-free ammunition.

One sentence however is revealing: Old habits are hard to change or as an old Estonian saying is "can't teach new tricks to an old bear". (In German, we say: was der Bauer nicht kennt, frisst er nicht)
Everybody is free to act this way, as long as he acts for himself and no other humans or animals are involved.
Once a person takes responsibility for other humans and for animals, this attitude is not acceptable and should have consequences.

If really ignorance should be the reason, why hunters refuse lead-free ammunition (and this would not argue for their intelligence), there is no other way than to change it by law, I.e. to forbid lead-ammunition.

I don’t know how the situation is in Estonia, but in Germany the lobby of hunters is very strong. It’s disgusting, but many persons who believe to be important, also believe to have to hunt. Maybe, because they are not successful enough in their job or in their love life, or because it’s a social event, but killing animals is easy and gives apparently satisfaction.

Anyway – it might possibly be a long way to achieve your aim – I wish you good luck!
One planet meets another. Planet 1 says to Planet 2, “Hey you look terrible”. Planet 2 says, “Yes I know. I have Homo Sapiens.” Planet 1 says, “Don’t worry. I had that too and it will soon disappear.
User avatar
Bea
Moderator
Posts: 27706
Joined: January 15th, 2011, 1:02 pm
Location: Bavaria, Germany

Post by Bea »

What about the costs?

Is lead-free munition more expensive than leaded one? Money is the reason for many things ....
Nature does nothing in vain (Aristoteles)
User avatar
Eden
Registered user
Posts: 815
Joined: August 8th, 2012, 3:14 pm
Location: near Northsea, Germany

Post by Eden »

Dr. Leivits wrote
Madis wrote: The only negative side compared to lead is the expense, as non toxic options are bit more costly but in countries, where lead has been banned, they have noticed that there is less ammunition spent on the same amount of killed animals, so the accuracy and efficiency has risen.
It would be interesting to know prices.
One planet meets another. Planet 1 says to Planet 2, “Hey you look terrible”. Planet 2 says, “Yes I know. I have Homo Sapiens.” Planet 1 says, “Don’t worry. I had that too and it will soon disappear.
User avatar
airras
Registered user
Posts: 10385
Joined: November 4th, 2012, 10:49 am
Location: girona(catalonian)spain

Post by airras »

we must also adapt to steel guns, and that costs money too
as you said Bea, Don Money ... :whistling:
User avatar
Flex
Registered user
Posts: 684
Joined: February 28th, 2011, 3:09 pm
Location: Germany, near Switzerland
Contact:

Post by Flex »

The price factor for lead-free ammunition is probably not the crucial point - rather the killing effect
In many hunting districts lead-free ammunition is already prescribed, even if their effect is not always satisfactory.

There are at the moment not really an alternative to lead shot, neither external ballistic aspects, nor target ballistic effect.

Fact is, that at least in Germany the Rottweil steel game is the best-selling soft iron shotshell achieved also a satisfactory coverage of the most runs.

Part coat floor have a significantly safer killing effect as such, which are made of solid brass or copper.

@airras,

insofar as it relates to the use of GR (steel/tungsten/wismut) shot, only ammunition with maximum 3.25 mm from maximum half-choke may be fired from these normal (old - without CIP characters) guns.

I am but no hunter and therefore have no homemade experience.
the half live consists of arrangement, subordination and regulation
Madis
Registered user
Posts: 25
Joined: July 3rd, 2012, 9:48 am

Post by Madis »

Flex wrote:The price factor for lead-free ammunition is probably not the crucial point - rather the killing effect
In many hunting districts lead-free ammunition is already prescribed, even if their effect is not always satisfactory.

There are at the moment not really an alternative to lead shot, neither external ballistic aspects, nor target ballistic effect.

Fact is, that at least in Germany the Rottweil steel game is the best-selling soft iron shotshell achieved also a satisfactory coverage of the most runs.

Part coat floor have a significantly safer killing effect as such, which are made of solid brass or copper.

@airras,

insofar as it relates to the use of GR (steel/tungsten/wismut) shot, only ammunition with maximum 3.25 mm from maximum half-choke may be fired from these normal (old - without CIP characters) guns.

I am but no hunter and therefore have no homemade experience.
Hello again,

Where are you taking the info that lead ballistic (inc. killing effect) is superior to alternatives? Please show me a scientific study what states it.
There is loads of studies and experience from hunters that they are equal!!! example copper expanding bullets are originally developed for big African game hunting and there you need ballistic power.

Some recent studies for non believers:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23186634
"This study demonstrates that lead-free bullets are equal to conventional hunting bullets in terms of killing effectiveness and thus equally meet the welfare requirements of killing wildlife as painlessly as possible. The widespread introduction and use of lead-free bullets should be encouraged as it prevents environmental contamination with a seriously toxic pollutant and contributes to the conservation of a wide variety of threatened or endangered raptors and other members of the guild of scavengers."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23186634
"There is no major difference in the retail price of equivalent lead-free and lead-core ammunition for most popular calibers. Lead-free ammunition has set bench-mark standards for accuracy, lethality, and safety. Given the demonstrated wide product availability, comparable prices, and the effectiveness of high-quality lead-free ammunition, it is possible to phase out the use of lead hunting ammunition world-wide, based on progressive policy and enforceable legislation."

OK, I admitt... I have been wrong on the price, as we can read from the last scientific article. There is no important difference!

But until hunters start to use their brains, we have to see wildlife die :(
Like today http://www.metsloom.ee/en/uudised-rus/1 ... -ohvriks-2

Cheers!
Madis
--
Madis Leivits, DVM
Expert-veterinary
Estonian Fund for Nature
Image
www.metsloom.ee
www.elfond.ee
User avatar
Eden
Registered user
Posts: 815
Joined: August 8th, 2012, 3:14 pm
Location: near Northsea, Germany

Post by Eden »

Madis wrote: But until hunters start to use their brains, we have to see wildlife die :(
Like today http://www.metsloom.ee/en/uudised-rus/1 ... -ohvriks-2
Somewhere I have read (analogously):
If everybody in our society would behave like the hunters do, we would still sit in dens, with skins of animals over the shoulder….
One planet meets another. Planet 1 says to Planet 2, “Hey you look terrible”. Planet 2 says, “Yes I know. I have Homo Sapiens.” Planet 1 says, “Don’t worry. I had that too and it will soon disappear.
Liis
Registered user
Posts: 1837
Joined: December 5th, 2008, 7:00 pm

Post by Liis »

Flex wrote:How many years did we go with our cars with leaded petrol? Find vegetables, drinks, fruits are also traces of lead. We need from it distinguish between lead and lead salts...

From Wikipedia:
"Also in various acids, lead by passivation is insoluble. So lead is resistant to sulphuric acid, hydrofluoric acid and hydrochloric acid, as with the anion of the acid-insoluble lead salts formed. Therefore, lead for special applications has a certain importance in the chemical engineering.

Lead is, however, soluble in nitric acid (Blei(II)-nitrat is soluble in water), hot concentrated sulphuric acid (formation of soluble Pb(HSO4)2-Komplexes), acetic acid (only for air access) and hot alkali. "
As to distinguishing between lead and lead salts: yes, but any piece of lead metal can potentially react to a lead salt (however, not the other way about, unless man & laboratory help, ie not lead salt to lead metal :mrgreen: ).
As for insoluble salts there are many qualifications to that property: for how long, in what environment, what is the definition - in a particular application - for "insolubility", etc., etc.
Most salts can (be made to) react into other more, or less, harmful salts.

What I am trying to say is that the chemical "life" of lead and its compounds - as of any other substance - is not a guaranteed status quo, but potentially changeable.
As for lead shot and alternatives: Not a hunter, but I believe at least some guns have to be modified for the alternatives. A once-only thing of course.

Very marginal remark: in the early years of lead alternatives the meat from birds (duck, I think) turned out to be unsellable because shot and shot fragments rusted and discoloured it ...

It might be that adverse effects from lead shot use rise again, due to more people trying hunting as a hobby, more "hunting events" being sold etc, where "hunters" are let out on selected wetland (and other) areas stocked with suitable prey; which with time means that some such areas will be very liberally indeed sprinkled with shot that miss the target, and shot fragments.

Lead would not be the chemical substance to scare me most; but spreading it really just for a pastime is unecessary, to put it mildly.

But since we - humans - have thrown our ecosystem(s) out of balance, we also do need hunters for a foreseeable future. Not the least to repair or at least balance what has been disturbed in order to get "more interesting hunting".
Madis
Registered user
Posts: 25
Joined: July 3rd, 2012, 9:48 am

Post by Madis »

Hello,
Sometimes its hard for people understand events, if they never have experienced or seen it. Most things what are happening in nature, we don't see, hear or experience. Therefore some issues regarding nature, wildlife, or ecosystem is guarded as important, as we don't see all of the animals who are suffering from the effects of lead. Mortality in wildlife is hard to asses, as we only see the tip of the iceberg. Studies, where scavenging efficiency have been measured, often it ends up with 100% (with 24h after laying the dead carcasses to a study area, only 20 % of carcass remains where found). Those studies have been performed with active searching in a specific location, and we don't go searching all the forests for dead wildlife, so its safe to say that we usually see under 1% of actual events what are going on in the nature, so one ore two dead animals may have been a bigger scale mortality event... therefore its important to investigate those

Another thing why lots of diseases inc. toxicoses are off radar is because they are not direct cause of death. Usually they weaken the organism so another organism, predator, can make the kill.

When we talk about lead ban in waterfowl hunting, it was not only the wildlife concern, also lead in environment, will contaminate it. For example, Craig et al. 1999 found while studying a shooting waters that lead levels where there 0,473 ppm (0,473 mg/l). The lead levels upstream from the shooting range where 100 x lower, see aga 0,0005 (0,0005 mg/l).

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention states that a Blood Lead Level of 0,05 ppm (0,05 mg/l) or above is a cause for concern, even doh the normal's are currently 0,2 ppm (0,2 mg/l). However, lead can impair development even at BLLs below 5 μg/dL. Adults that are exposed to lead can experience anemia, nervous system dysfunction, weakness, hypertension, kidney problems, decreased fertility and increased level of miscarriages, and low birth weight and premature deliveries. Children exposed to high levels of lead show similar symptoms, including anemia, kidney damage, colic, neurological impairment, and impaired vitamin D metabolism. Same things happen to our wild brothers, if i may call so.

The big deal with lead is that this issue, especially regarding hunting, can be prevented, using non toxic options, What have been proven to be with same efficiency as lead containing ammunition. A recent study (I haven't seen before any comparisons published in peer reviewed journals before) also showed that comparing the same quality ammo, there is no significant price difference, even some non toxic options are cheaper.

If i may talk about my self, I would like to be a lazy doctor (I think doctors should get paid if they can keep their patients healthy), I don't want that animals would get sick so i really want to do the changes, to keep wildlife healthy and safe. Lead ban in hunting will have a big positive health impact to wildlife, i'm sure of it! aswell I'm tired of getting sick and dead eagles with lead poisoning, when i know it can be prevented and there is no good treatment. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against hunting or hunters... just the lead what they use!

Check out a short video from UM colleagues
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyZLxobg5k0
--
Madis Leivits, DVM
Expert-veterinary
Estonian Fund for Nature
Image
www.metsloom.ee
www.elfond.ee
Liis
Registered user
Posts: 1837
Joined: December 5th, 2008, 7:00 pm

Post by Liis »

Meanwhile, some fresh statistics on hunting:
as of January 28th, 22 more lynxes and 24 more wolves may be shot in Estonia in the present hunting season, making a total legal allowance of 90 lynxes and 93 wolves this season.
(Estonian Hunters' Society, by way of Maaleht and Green Gate).
Protecting other wildlife or eliminating competitors?
User avatar
Eden
Registered user
Posts: 815
Joined: August 8th, 2012, 3:14 pm
Location: near Northsea, Germany

Post by Eden »

Liis wrote: Protecting other wildlife or eliminating competitors?
I would say the second….
What is actually the total population of wolves and lynxes in Estonia?
One planet meets another. Planet 1 says to Planet 2, “Hey you look terrible”. Planet 2 says, “Yes I know. I have Homo Sapiens.” Planet 1 says, “Don’t worry. I had that too and it will soon disappear.
Liis
Registered user
Posts: 1837
Joined: December 5th, 2008, 7:00 pm

Post by Liis »

Not an altogether easy question to answer briefly - actually it is not, anywhere, because the population of wild animals varies greatly in a year, from natural and and human-governed (hunting) causes!

About 200 - 250 wolves, about 600 - 700 lynxes in autumn, before the hunting season, one environmental authority source states as a target for Estonia 2012-2021.

A wolf population may vary widely ; annual cycle shown in a frontpage LK article, 3rd illustration, translation coming.

Much statistics from the Estonian environmental authorities - there is a great deal - is in terms of "pesakond", ie (viable) breeding or family group or for wolves, flock. Sensible, and useful, but takes some time to get used to and to recalculate to get some comparison idea about individuals.

Any wildlife specialists who would comment, please?
User avatar
Eden
Registered user
Posts: 815
Joined: August 8th, 2012, 3:14 pm
Location: near Northsea, Germany

Post by Eden »

Thank you, Liis, and 2 more questions:
is it correct that Estonia markets wolf hunting to tourists?
http://www.spiegel.de/reise/aktuell/est ... 23662.html
And is it correct that hunting of wolves is allowed all the year?
(Same source and http://www.ifaw.org/sites/default/files ... tus_de.pdf)
If you live in a country where wolf puppies are celebrated as a great pleasure, it’s hard to understand that wolves are killed…
One planet meets another. Planet 1 says to Planet 2, “Hey you look terrible”. Planet 2 says, “Yes I know. I have Homo Sapiens.” Planet 1 says, “Don’t worry. I had that too and it will soon disappear.
Liis
Registered user
Posts: 1837
Joined: December 5th, 2008, 7:00 pm

Post by Liis »

About marketing hunting: Yes.
All countries that have the slightest chance to sell hunting encourage people to do so. It generally attracts quite well-off tourists, so generates income and consequently has the state's blessing. I very much doubt that there are many, if any, countries to be found that out of idealistic reasons abstain, regrettably.
Wolves are, at the moment, comparable to any other game in Estonia.
The marketed wolf hunting must of course be within the stipulated animal allowance number and hunting time limits, and so, theoretically, could compete with own hunters.

Hunting period: limited; certainly not all year
All game hunting in Estonia - except wild boar - is time limited; for wolves November to February (I think; again - any hunting or game people around on the forum?).
Wild boar can be hunted the year round.
In extraordinary cases wolves may be shot out of the period with special permission.
User avatar
Eden
Registered user
Posts: 815
Joined: August 8th, 2012, 3:14 pm
Location: near Northsea, Germany

Post by Eden »

I even doubt that the initiators care about the state’s (Government? general public?) blessing for marketing hunting or need encouragement to do so.
Anyway, in my opinion it is perverse to go on such a hunting safari.
One planet meets another. Planet 1 says to Planet 2, “Hey you look terrible”. Planet 2 says, “Yes I know. I have Homo Sapiens.” Planet 1 says, “Don’t worry. I had that too and it will soon disappear.
Liis
Registered user
Posts: 1837
Joined: December 5th, 2008, 7:00 pm

Post by Liis »

[quote="Eden"]I even doubt that the initiators care about the state’s (Government? general public?) blessing for marketing hunting or need encouragement to do so.
------- quote]
No, most wouldn't. However, the government may stand on regulations, or encourage such enterprises out of hand (not specifically hunting I guess, but tourism and nature tourism in general)

All enterprises and exploitation is on a rather grand and technically fast and easy - transport etc - scale today. Not quite foreseen in laws, the nature, "adventure" and in general "exciting" tourist venues have created conflicts with both genuine nature conservation interests and local inhabitants. This is probably likely to be aggravated the more reachable and desirable out-of-the-way places become. Hunters let in just for a kill in a few days are not likely to enjoy, respect or even know of local "how to do it" traditions or sustainability.
As an example, Sweden has a very old tradition of "right-of-way" including much more than just passing private property. On occasions it has been very clearly overused by adventure and nature tourist entrepreneurs taking e g groups of many paddlers to - of course - beautiful spots over and over again. With "wild nature" campfires, overnight tents (hmmm about hygiene questions) and not much clearing up afterwards.
As for hunting, hunters are set down by helicopter on the northern, "inaccessible" fjells, to hunt "exotic" ptarmigan.
User avatar
Eden
Registered user
Posts: 815
Joined: August 8th, 2012, 3:14 pm
Location: near Northsea, Germany

Post by Eden »

I think the conclusion is that sensibility in handling nature got lost in many areas.

It’s an absurdity to go to a foreign country for a few days just for hunting purposes, not to care about the context in nature, to kill a few animals and to return as a little Hemingway to the office desk at home.

And it’s surely similar in nature tourism.

An example:
I was in Kenya on photo-safari the first time in the Seventies.
Our group with 6 people saw a lot and all kind of animals, there was no other bus the whole day, it was just silent, calm and peaceful, but also very exciting and there were breathtaking moments.
The ranger seemed to have all the time in the world, explained everything and it was a wonderful experience. I didn’t have the feeling to disturb animals.

The 2nd time I was there about 12 years later and our bus was in a long queue with other cars, the ranger had radio contact with his colleagues, and as soon as a group of lions, a cheetah, elephants etc. etc. was sighted, all cars drove high speed to that place. 5 minutes break to take pictures and the ranger, obviously in a hurry, drove to the next destination. Although most of the animals didn’t seem to care a lot about the people – they were used to it – I had the feeling to do something wrong. I never returned to Kenya.

It’s understandable that every country wants to make money with tourism, also with nature tourism.
It’s also understandable that many people want to experience wild nature.
Probably it’s a pious hope that this should be done respectfully and in accordance with nature.
One planet meets another. Planet 1 says to Planet 2, “Hey you look terrible”. Planet 2 says, “Yes I know. I have Homo Sapiens.” Planet 1 says, “Don’t worry. I had that too and it will soon disappear.
Liis
Registered user
Posts: 1837
Joined: December 5th, 2008, 7:00 pm

Post by Liis »

Meanwhile Sweden is reconstituting its wolf population, still after many years nicely illustrating the conclusions and observations from Wisconsin, US, referred on LK main page. Present wolf population is about 200. This year 16 can be shot, not, however, in an ordinary hunt, but specifically selected individuals, "for genetic reasons" (too much inbreeding).
The first was shot recently. A spontaneous applause broke out at a Center party (earlier agriculturally and rurally oriented) meeting.
On the other hand, hunters in at least one district have refused to join the hunt.
Why do so few worry and feel threatened by bears? Because they hibernate in winter? Because they look "friendly"? Teddy bears remembered?
User avatar
alice44
Registered user
Posts: 16489
Joined: April 8th, 2009, 8:59 pm
Location: Oregon, Western USA

Post by alice44 »

I think our folk tales have a powerful hold on us.

Maybe also bears are quiet while wolves sing. The howl of a wolf even the yip of a coyote seem to have real power.
Post Reply

Return to “Discussions”