Unleaded hunting: Are copper bullets and lead-based bullets equally effective for killing big game?

Lead poisoning of raptors: state of the science and cross-discipline mitigation options for a global problem

Lead poisoning is an important global conservation problem for many species of wildlife, especially raptors. Despite the increasing number of individual studies and regional reviews of lead poisoning of raptors, it has been over a decade since this information has been compiled into a comprehensive global review. Here, we summarize the state of knowledge of lead poisoning of raptors, we review developments in manufacturing of non-lead ammunition, the use of which can reduce the most pervasive source of lead these birds encounter, and we compile data on voluntary and regulatory mitigation options and their associated sociological context. We support our literature review with case studies of mitigation actions, largely provided by the conservation practitioners who study or manage these efforts. Our review illustrates the growing awareness and understanding of lead exposure of raptors, and it shows that the science underpinning this understanding has expanded considerably in recent years. We also show that the political and social appetite for managing lead ammunition appears to vary substantially across administrative regions, countries, and continents. Improved understanding of the drivers of this variation could support more effective mitigation of lead exposure of wildlife. This review also shows that mitigation strategies are likely to be most effective when they are outcome driven, consider behavioural theory, local cultures, and environmental conditions, effectively monitor participation, compliance, and levels of raptor exposure, and support both environmental and human health.

Weight retention and expansion of popular lead-based and lead-free hunting bullets

Hunting bullets are often comprised of a lead core covered with a copper alloy jacket. When the bullet collides with an animal, particles-sometimes millions-can shed from the projectile and embed in animal tissues. Those lead fragments can persist in game meat and remain in the discarded viscera that many wildlife species scavenge. Bullets often differ in design, so it is vital to assess their weight retention and expansion, which affects how much metal they deposit in tissue and how effectively they kill animals. We fired 12 types of hunting bullets into water to measure their weight retention and expansion at 91 m and 238 m (100 and 260 yards). Bullet constructions included copper, tin, bonded lead, partitioned lead, and cup-and-core lead. On average, copper bullets retained >98 % of their weight, whereas cup-and-core lead bullets retained <13-55 %, depending on the brand and shot distance. One brand of bonded lead bullet retained mass (≥96 %) nearly as well as copper bullets, while another brand retained much less (~71 %). Two types of copper bullets expanded similarly between test distances, while a third expanded less at 238 m. Cup-and-core lead bullets often experienced a separation between their copper alloy jacket and lead core. Our data emphasize that lead-based bullets of similar construction can drastically differ in weight retention and expansion.

Promoting enforcement of non-lead hunting ammunition regulations and compliance in Europe and North America

The direct regulation of lead ammunition in North America and Europe has been mainly for hunting in wetlands. Little support among hunters and the ammunition makers exists for further regulation despite suitable lead substitutes and much education about the known risks to wildlife and human health from ingested lead. In the absence of personnel to detect use of lead ammunition and enforce regulations, hunter compliance is low. Identification of non-lead ammunition using existing electronic technology and an international protocol on the identification of non-lead rifle bullets is proposed to aid enforcement. An explicit definition of the chemical composition of lead substitutes is required in European Union legislation together with a more enforceable distinction between 'possession during hunting' and 'ownership' of lead ammunition. A more transdisciplinary regulatory approach to transitioning to non-lead ammunition is advised. It comprises widespread public health advisories, setting a maximum allowable lead level in commercial game meats in EU legislation, and public communication that emphasizes the benefits of non-lead ammunition use to all categories of wildlife and the public perception of hunting, whether in North America or Europe.

A comparison of fragmenting lead-based and lead-free bullets for aerial shooting of wild pigs

In response to the health threats posed by toxic lead to humans, scavenging wildlife and the environment, there is currently a focus on transitioning from lead-based to lead-free bullets for shooting of wild animals. We compared efficiency metrics and terminal ballistic performance for lead-based and lead-free (non-lead) bullets for aerial shooting of wild pigs (Sus scrofa) in eastern Australia. Ballistic testing revealed that lead-based and lead-free bullets achieved similar performance in precision and muzzle kinetic energy (E0) levels (3337.2 J and 3345.7 J, respectively). An aerial shooting trial was conducted with wild pigs shot with one type of lead-based and one type of lead-free bullets under identical conditions. Observations were made from 859 shooting events (n = 430 and 429 respectively), with a sub-set of pigs examined via gross post-mortem (n = 100 and 108 respectively), and a further sub-set examined via radiography (n = 94 and 101 respectively). The mean number of bullets fired per pig killed did not differ greatly between lead-based and lead-free bullets respectively (4.09 vs 3.91), nor did the mean number of bullet wound tracts in each animal via post-mortem inspection (3.29 vs 2.98). However, radiography revealed a higher average number of fragments per animal (median >300 vs median = 55) and a broader distribution of fragments with lead-based bullets. Our results suggest that lead-based and lead-free bullets are similarly effective for aerial shooting of wild pigs, but that the bullet types behave differently, with lead-based bullets displaying a higher degree of fragmentation. These results suggest that aerial shooting may be a particularly important contributor to scavenging wildlife being exposed to lead and that investigation of lead-free bullets for this use should continue.

Animal welfare testing for shooting and darting free-ranging wildlife: a review and recommendations

Several important techniques for managing wildlife rely on ballistics (the behaviour of projectiles), including killing techniques (shooting) as well as capture and marking methods (darting). Because all ballistic techniques have the capacity to harm animals, animal welfare is an important consideration. Standardised testing approaches that have allowed refinement for other physical killing and capture methods (e.g. traps for mammals) have not been applied broadly to ballistic methods. At the same time, new technology is becoming available for shooting (e.g. subsonic and lead-free ammunition) and darting (e.g. dye-marker darts). We present several case studies demonstrating (a) how basic ballistic testing can be performed for novel firearms and/or projectiles, (b) the benefits of identifying methods producing undesirable results before operational use, and (c) the welfare risks associated with bypassing testing of a technique before broad-scale application. Following the approach that has been used internationally to test kill-traps, we suggest the following four-step testing process: (1) range and field testing to confirm accuracy and precision, the delivery of appropriate kinetic energy levels and projectile behaviour, (2) post-mortem assessment of ballistic injury in cadavers, (3) small-scale live animal pilot studies with predetermined threshold pass/fail levels, and (4) broad-scale use with reporting of the frequency of adverse animal welfare outcomes. We present this as a practical approach for maintaining and improving animal welfare standards when considering the use of ballistic technology for wildlife management.

Setting maximum levels for lead in game meat in EC regulations: An adjunct to replacement of lead ammunition

Each year, hunters from 12 of the 27 European Union (EU) countries and the UK shoot over 6 million large game mammals, 12 million rabbits and hares and over 80 million birds. They support an international game meat market worth over 1.1 thousand million Euros. Animals shot with lead ammunition frequently contain lead fragments in the carcass which contaminate meals made from game meat with concentrations of lead substantially above the maximum allowable level (ML) set by European Commission Regulation EC1881/2006 for meat from domesticated animals. This poses a health risk to frequent consumers of wild-shot game meat, with children and pregnant women being particularly vulnerable. Total replacement of lead rifle and shotgun ammunition with available non-toxic alternatives is needed for all hunting in EU nations to prevent exposure of humans and wildlife to ammunition-derived lead and to allow the depletion of the long-term environmental legacy of lead from spent ammunition. We propose that EC1881/2006 is amended to incorporate an ML for game meats as a supplementary measure to the replacement of lead ammunition. This would harmonise food safety standards for lead in meats traded across and imported into the EU.