What you say kind of reminds me of a line of T.S. Eliot’s, Murder In The Cathedral - “Perhaps the last is the greatest treason to do the right thing for the wrong reason.” I hear what your saying though, I always figured the switch from lead to non-toxic shot was something of a stretch. I can only think the waterfowl they sampled, fed in reservoirs down in the states which had clean pristine bottoms so the birds could dip down and easily scoop up lead shot. It hard to image here where the bottoms of waterways are far from pristine, muddy, weed and algae covered, and silted over annually. Waterfowl finding shot to swallowed would be like a prospector digging for a gold nuggets in quick sand. For the most part on rivers and crick ways most shot ends up on the trees on the far shore. On larger bodies of water the shot end up in the middle of the body of water, whereas the puddle waterfowl feed near the shoreline, diving waterfowl again face few lakes with pristine bottoms, so you have to wonder how they scoop up lead shot that gets silted over. So there maybe good reasons to raise question about the finding and where they’ve been done. There is most likely more politics than reality and common scene to some of the decisionsQuote:
Originally Posted by Snowwalker
You stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
- Gun Nut .
