mangrumsNet

Breaking News!  The EPA has soundly dismissed the first part of the petition which would ban the use of lead in ammunition.  The second part, pertaining to fishing tackle, is still under review.  There is a link at the bottom where comments can be made specifically for that.  This huge victory is attributed mainly to the NRA, but I'm sure the calls and comments from regular folk didn't hurt.

EPA Denies Petition Calling for Lead Ammunition Ban

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today denied a petition calling for a ban on the production and distribution of lead hunting ammunition. EPA sent a letter to the petitioners explaining the rejection – that letter can be found here: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/chemtest/pubs/sect21.html

Steve Owens, EPA assistant administrator for the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, issued the following statement on the agency's decision:

"EPA today denied a petition submitted by several outside groups for the agency to implement a ban on the production and distribution of lead hunting ammunition. EPA reached this decision because the agency does not have the legal authority to regulate this type of product under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) – nor is the agency seeking such authority.

"This petition, which was submitted to EPA at the beginning of this month, is one of hundreds of petitions submitted to EPA by outside groups each year. This petition was filed under TSCA, which requires the agency to review and respond within 90 days.

"EPA is taking action on many fronts to address major sources of lead in our society, such as eliminating childhood exposures to lead; however, EPA was not and is not considering taking action on whether the lead content in hunting ammunition poses an undue threat to wildlife.

"As there are no similar jurisdictional issues relating to the agency's authority over fishing sinkers, EPA – as required by law – will continue formally reviewing a second part the petition related to lead fishing sinkers.

"Those wishing to comment specifically on the fishing tackle issue can do so by visiting http://www.regulations.gov. EPA will consider comments that are submitted by September 15."

---

This has come to me from many different sources, but I like the writeup at Gun Nuts Media, so you will see an exerpt from that below.  Since attempts to ban firearm ownership and use are starting to fall, those who would impose such bans are taking a different approach to their porblem.  Instead of banning the guns, they are banning the ammo, or trying to.  In the end, it accomplishes the same goal since a firearm without a projectile is just a well-engineered paperweight.

According to the NSSF, the EPA wants to ban all traditional lead core ammunition under the Toxic Substances Act.  Honestly, my first reaction to seeing this was “that has got to be a hoax, there is no way the EPA is that stupid”.  Sadly I was wrong.

Reaction has been predictable; it’s been pointed out that the EPA lacks the authority to do this, even though that probably won’t stop them.  Other have expressed the point that banning lead ammo is actually a really good way to get a bunch of people who are not invested in this fight to become suddenly and aggressively invested.  Lots and lots of people have commented on how this is the administrations way of taking a run at gun owners – which coincidentally is similar to line in a Chris Rock comedy bit where he proposed keeping guns legal but making each bullet cost $500 (or something along those lines, it’s been a while).  The point obviously is that a ban on traditional lead core ammo would devastate the shooting community.  Non-lead ammo such as mild steel is already illegal as it’s classified as armor piercing, and sintered copper/tin projectiles are prohibitively expensive for most shooters.

So what can we do about it?  Obviously, since the EPA restriction is open for public comment, click this link to submit a comment.  NSSF has recommended some talking points for said comment:

* There is no scientific evidence that the use of traditional ammunition is having an adverse impact on wildlife populations.

* Wildlife management is the proper jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the 50 state wildlife agencies.

* A 2008 study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on blood lead levels of North Dakota hunters confirmed that consuming game harvested with traditional ammunition does not pose a human health risk.

* A ban on traditional ammunition would have a negative impact on wildlife conservation. The federal excise tax that manufacturers pay on the sale of the ammunition (11 percent) is a primary source of wildlife conservation funding. The bald eagle’s recovery, considered to be a great conservation success story, was made possible and funded by hunters using traditional ammunition – the very ammunition organizations like the CBD are now demonizing.

* Recent statistics from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service show that from 1981 to 2006 the number of breeding pairs of bald eagles in the United States increased 724 percent. And much like the bald eagle, raptor populations throughout the United States are soaring.

Steps to take:

1. Submit comment online to the EPA.

2. Contact Lisa Jackson directly to voice your opposition to the ban:

Lisa P. Jackson
Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 564-4700
Fax: (202) 501-1450
Email: jackson.lisa@epa.gov

3. Contact your congressman and senators and urge them to stop the EPA from banning ammunition.