Should meat hunters stop using lead ammunition?

[Unobtanium]

I am new to hunting (killed my first deer last year), and simply chose my ammo based on what works well on people. It worked well on my deer (RA556B), too. However, then I got into looking at lead contamination, as I know a bunch of environmentalists are trying to push lead out of hunting. Normally I am not a huge fan of listening to those types, but lead IS a cumulative toxin, and I was curious, so I did a bit of digging and looked for sources that weren't all concerned with Condor's and Gun Control, only. What I found was kindof concerning, actually. Here are the videos.

What is your take on this? Do you feel that TSX/GMX/E-Tip type ammo is THE way to go? Or do you feel that lead is just fine? Why?

Video 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZJXderphCM

Video 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4Wbj41j67A

Video 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdKlubTRkk8

[Hambo]

I'm at a loss as to how this is a major risk in large game. Let's say I shoot a lead core bullet from a .308 and it exits the deer. If we could recover what started out as a 150gr bullet the recovered weight will be slightly lighter (2-30% depending on bullet) so it left some lead or jacket material in the wound track. The majority of the meat never came in contact with the bullet, and if I don't try to save every scrap near the wound channel I think the risk is incredibly low.

Here's an article I found quickly that has retained bullet weights. http://www.rifleshootermag.com/ammo/...-loads-market/

[Wayne Dobbs]

The lead issue is complete bullshit. It's gun control in a costume.

[Nephrology]

I agree with Hambo. The health risk of using lead core bullets to harvest game for human consumption is approaching 0, for all the reasons mentioned above. Lead is more likely to be a significant health risk when it forms a dust that circulates in the air (like in poorly ventilated indoor shooting ranges) or when in liquid solution (Flint MI) or when lead deposits on your hands/arms/etc while you are shooting and it deposits on something you put in your mouth (open food brought to the range, your hands that you use to eat without washing them, etc).

Don't lose too much sleep over it; I promise you are getting more lead exposure from the above or other sources than you are from eating harvested game.

[Nephrology]

The lead issue is complete bullshit. It's gun control in a costume.

I don't know nearly enough about the issue of using lead shot near fresh water sources to comment intelligently, but I don't think it's totally unreasonable to believe that cumulative deposition of lead shot near a water table could introduce some lead into a water source for humans, animals, or both. However I have done no homework on the subject so I am not going to take sides on that one, one way or the other.

[Jim Watson]

I wouldn't worry about lead in game meat. The old notion of moderate velocity bullets letting you "eat right up to the bullet hole" seems unimportant today.

A colleague worked on a study of lead remediation on military smallarms ranges. He dug into berms at several ranges. He variously found bullets, bullet jackets, bullet cores, and no bullets. Soil conditions in the berms were that different. It would sure take a lot of hunting over a patch of woods to lay down that many bullets.

Elmer Keith's position on steel shot for waterfowl was that if everybody used No 3 lead shot like he did, it would sink through the pond mud and be out of reach of feeding geese.

[Hawk87]

I don't know nearly enough about the issue of using lead shot near fresh water sources to comment intelligently, but I don't think it's totally unreasonable to believe that cumulative deposition of lead shot near a water table could introduce some lead into a water source for humans, animals, or both. However I have done no homework on the subject so I am not going to take sides on that one, one way or the other.

This is one of the reasons that is cited for banning lead shot for waterfowl hunting. Other reasons are protecting birds of prey that eat injured waterfowl, and the fact that some waterfowl have been know to ingest lead pellets that are left on the bottom of wetlands. While they make a certian amount of sense, I don't claim to know how valid they are. However, those are the most commonly cited reasons. I know that the main push was protecting Perigrin falcons (who eat a lot of ducks) when they very endangered.

For big game, I don't see that being as much of a problem. I would think that part of it has to do with the amount of lead used compared to the size of the animal. A shotgun puts a lot more lead per pound of meat in a duck then a 308 does in a deer. I also think Hambo is on the right track with the fact that most of the meat on a large game animal never comes in contact with the lead.

So while I think it makes sense in the context of waterfowl, I really think it is a non-issue in regards to big game, and is likely just another route to gun control. The one that really makes me shake my head are the people that want to ban lead for target shooting on pubilc lands.

[Matt O]

The lead issue is complete bullshit. It's gun control in a costume.

This, right there. In bold, caps, and neon fucking lights.

[Lost River]

The below pic is from my dad and I quartering up my daughter's cow elk. I am pointing to the exit wound in the shoulder. The bullet entered directly behind the shoulder, through the chest cavity, and out the off side shoulder. Normally with higher velocity cartridges (which about any typical centerfire rifle cartridge qualifies as such) you will get what we simply call "bloodshot" meat. You can see a bit of it in the immediate vicinity, and at about 7 o'clock from the bullet hole.

I suppose the best way for me to explain this is that it is the meat that is in the immediate circumference of the path of the projectile. It is normally a much darker red color and often is the consistency of jello. I believe (but cannot say for sure) that it is the result of the temporary wound cavity, where the flesh has stretched beyond it's elastic limits.

I don't really know for sure, I am not a scientist or doctor, just a hunter, but the punchline is that the meat along this path is trashed. We simply cut this meat out and leave it as a free meal for all the other mountain critters.

With all that said, the odds of any lead from the projectile, not being contained within bloodshot meat is exceedingly small. The short answer is that the lead core in big game bullets being an environmental hazard is a non issue (in my observation/opinion). I would venture to guess that you do more damage to the environment driving your pickup to where you intend to hunt.

[Unobtanium]

What caused me concern was the physicians who XRayed meat processed by professional game processing centers and found that a very large portion of the packaged meat contained significant lead fragments, as well as the XRAY images showing meat rather far from the bullet-hold containing lead fragments.

I am not trying to start an argument or debate, I am simply new to hunting, and am doing it because:

1)I enjoy nature, conservation, etc.
2)It is a cheap source of food, and see #1
3)I am of the opinion that an animal which is free-range and not pumped full of drugs, hormones, etc. is a healthier source of meat for me than what I would buy in the store.

I do not want to negate or negatively impact #3 with projectile choice, even though I do like how Gold Dot's fly and perform from my rifle.