4
In 1983, Professor Richard Southwood chaired the Royal
Commission on Environmental Pollution’s report on Lead in the
Environment (RCEP 1983). This report resulted from concern
being progressively extended to the possible effects on humans
of lead at ever-decreasing blood concentrations, and the high
level of associated public debate. The report was seminal, and
most of its recommendations have been implemented by
successive governments.
Recommendations included that lead should be phased out of
petrol additives andprogressively reduced inpaint, that research
should continue into the effects of lead at low concentrations,
particularly on children, and that the anthropogenic dispersal of
lead and man’s exposure to it should be reduced further. These
have all now happened. Among other recommendations were
that urgent efforts should be made to develop alternatives
to lead shot and lead fishing weights (to protect wildlife from
unnecessary poisoning), and that as soon as these alternatives
are available, the Government should legislate to ban any
further use of lead shot and fishing weights in circumstances
where they are irretrievably dispersed in the environment. Lead
fishing weights were banned in 1986, and alternatives to lead
gunshot were developed some decades ago. However, only
limited regulations requiring the use of non-toxic shot have been
introduced in the UK, compliance with these remains poor (at
least in England)(Cromieet al. 2015), and thousands of tonnes of
lead shot continue to be deposited in the environment annually.
Thus, the use of lead ammunition is the remaining significant
source of unregulated dispersal of lead into our environment;
one that presents risks to the health of wildlife and humans
today, and one that builds an ever increasing toxic legacy.
Iwasdelighted tochair theOxfordLeadSymposiuminDecember
2014 and learn more about this important and topical issue.
It is notable that in addition to the extensive evidence reviewed
and presented at this symposium, some 60 experts from
both wildlife and human health disciplines have recently
signed consensus statements on the strength of the science
surrounding risks and impacts of lead from ammunition, and
the need to move to the use of non-toxic alternatives (Group
of Scientists 2013, 2014; Appendix 2). This level of scientific
agreement is impressive, although perhaps not surprising given
the long history of research into the subject.
Several international political imperatives exist for the UK
Government to move towards the use of non-toxic ammunition
(Stroud 2015). These include the African-Eurasian Migratory
Waterbirds Agreement, which required the use of non-toxic shot
in all wetlands by the year 2000 (AEWA 1999), and more recently
the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS)(UNEP-CMS 2014).
In November 2014 Contracting Parties to the CMS adopted a
resolution, the guidelines of which recommend the phase out
of all lead ammunition, in all habitats, within three years. Such
Multilateral Environmental Agreements are politically binding
to signatory countries, of which the UK is one, and give a clear
indication of the necessary direction of travel.
The Symposium heard that alternatives to lead ammunition are
technicallypossible,notprohibitivelycostly,andmanyarealready
available (Gremse and Reiger 2015,Thomas 2015). Alternatives to
lead shot are in use in parts or all of many countries; Denmark for
example required the use of non-toxic gunshot for all shooting
almost 20 years ago (Kanstrup 2015). Alternative bullet types
are already in use in some places, and others, such as California
State, are phasing in their use (Thomas 2015). Several major
landowners and managers in the UK have already taken steps to
phase out lead bullets on their landholdings.
The decisions to be made now are political. The organisations
represented at this symposium stressed that they are not
progressing an anti-shooting agenda, but rather advocating
that shooting sports must act in a sustainable way that does not
put wildlife and human health at risk, especially when such risks
are avoidable. Those with an interest in this topic may wish to
consider the analogies in the protracted debate surrounding
the removal of lead from petrol presented in the European
Environment Agency report ‘Late Lessons from Early Warnings’
(Needleman and Gee 2013).
Although estimates of numbers of birds killed by consuming
lead from ammunition in the UK cannot readily be made with
precision, at least tens and possibly hundreds of thousands of
birds are estimated to die annually from this cause; many more
suffer welfare impacts (Painet al. 2015). More recent information,
including that from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA
2010) and the agencies responsible for food safety of a number
of EU countries (including the UK)(Knutsen et al. 2015) have
already highlighted the risks that frequent game consumption
FOREWORD