TOXIC SHOCK
Thought we’d completely dealt with the threat of poisonous lead in our hunting ammunition? Think again
Advertisement
We all know hunters are, first and foremost, conservationists. In the early decades of the 20th century, after all, it was hunters who lobbied for more stringent harvest regulations to save numerous species, including antelope, elk and waterfowl, from catastrophic declines due to market hunting. In the century since, we’ve led countless more initiatives to conserve wildlife and wildlife habitat, willingly putting our time, energy and dollars to important use. We’ve also endorsed regulatory and behavioural changes whenever science has told us our wildlife are imperiled.
Advertisement
The threats seem to never end, however, and newly emerging information suggests we’re now facing yet another. And it’s a threat many of us thought we had already put behind us: lead.
THE SHOTSHELL SITUATION
Lead is a toxic natural element that’s long been known to cause serious health problems in humans, particularly developmental delays in children. It can be found in everything from batteries to water pipes to household dust, and prolonged contact can even be fatal. Wildlife are also not immune. Within both the hunting and scientific communities, the poisoning of birds as a result of ingesting lead pellets has been recognized for more than a century.
Advertisement
As recently as the 1980s, according to the Canadian Wildlife Service, it was estimated up to six million of the approximately 50 to 60 million ducks migrating from Canada every fall had ingested at least one spent lead shotgun pellet. An estimated 200,000 to 360,000 of those birds died, while several million suffered sub-lethal lead poisoning. South of the border, meanwhile, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service estimated that two to three per cent of the continental waterfowl population—more than one million ducks and geese—died annually of lead poisoning from ingesting spent shot.
In response, the U.S. and Canadian governments banned the use of lead shot for waterfowl hunting in the 1990s. The hunting community wasn’t happy with the legislation, in part because the replacement steel ammunition of the day performed poorly compared with lead. Over time, however, the ammunition industry invested in research and technology, making significant improvements. As a result, today’s waterfowlers have numerous non-toxic options, many of which outperform lead.
While it was controversial at the time, the banning of lead shot for waterfowling appears to have worked
While it was controversial at the time, the banning of lead shot for waterfowling appears to have worked—a study of black ducks in the eastern U.S., for example, revealed the percentage of ducks with toxic blood levels declined from 19 per cent in 1978 to just one per cent in 2017. At the same time, however, hunters are still permitted to use lead shot for upland game birds.
Although we seldom associate the harmful effects of spent lead shot with upland birds, research in New Brunswick, South Dakota, Utah and elsewhere has shown that some woodcock, pheasant and quail populations have elevated lead concentrations consistent with consuming lead pellets. In one study, scientists fed three groups of bobwhite quail with one, five and 10 pellets, respectively; the groups that were fed five or 10 pellets exhibited health declines within seven to 14 days. And a 2015 study in South Dakota showed that wild pheasants living in areas with artificially high hunting intensity—near release sites, for example—faced an elevated risk of lead exposure and poisoning.
Here in Canada, the way upland birds occupy their habitat, and the density of hunters, suggests most birds are unlikely to encounter spent lead shot, but the risk can’t be completely ignored. Far more worrisome is the potential harm to wildlife from lead-core rifle ammunition.
THE BULLET FACTOR
Recent studies from North America, Europe and Australia tell us that birds are also being poisoned by lead fragments from rifle ammunition after scavenging on the remains of hunter-shot animals. That includes the viscera and other discarded portions of animals cleaned in the field, as well as wounded and lost animals that eventually die.
Take bald eagles, for example, one of North America’s most iconic birds. Study after study from across Canada and the U.S. has warned they are accumulating toxic levels of lead in their blood, liver and/or bones, with overwhelming evidence pointing to lead ammunition as the major source.
In fact, an analysis in Canada of “found-dead” birds showed that up to 15 per cent of the bald and golden eagles examined had lead levels exceeding the toxic-risk threshold. Beyond bald and golden eagles, the birds most frequently harmed by lead include vultures and other raptors, as well as the corvid family, especially ravens and magpies.
An analysis in Canada of “found-dead” birds showed that up to 15% of eagles examined had lead levels exceeding the toxic-risk threshold
John Chételat, a research scientist with Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), has been studying lead exposure in scavenging birds across the country since 2018. He says the effects on birds that ingest lead include lethargy, muscle wastage, wing droop, diminished balance and coordination, increased susceptibility to diseases and parasites, poorer reproduction and, in some cases, death.
While Chételat notes that scientists know considerably less about the effects of lead exposure on furbearers, there’s no doubt they are also feeding on the carcasses of rifle-shot game. In a Saskatchewan study under the supervision of ECCC scientist Kirsty Gurney, a researcher set up a camera over the remains of white-tailed deer and found that magpies were the most common scavenger. Ravens, crows, bald eagles, great-horned owls and broad-winged hawks were also observed, along with coyotes, foxes, fishers, weasels, raccoons and even cougars. Similar studies have shown wolves and bears are also common scavengers of gut piles and discarded carcasses.
So, just how much lead contamination can be found in the carcass of a hunter-shot animal? Using sophisticated synchrotron X-ray technology, a 2022 study from the University of Saskatchewan demonstrated that thousands of tiny lead fragments, many smaller than 1/100 of a millimetre, can travel as far as 18 inches into the flesh beyond the obvious wound channel. That means there are also human ramifications to consider.
Several studies have revealed increased levels of lead in the blood of those who regularly consume wild meat
Although there are no known incidents of acute lead poisoning in humans due to eating game shot with lead-core ammunition, several studies have revealed increased levels of lead in the blood of those who regularly consume wild meat. If you’re concerned about unwittingly ingesting lead particles, the science suggests you should be trimming away a greater area around the wound channel than most of us typically do.
Another link between lead bullet fragments and scavenging birds and mammals is the vast number of ground squirrels and their relatives that are shot as agricultural pests, especially across the prairies. Invariably they’re left where they fall, with most hunters believing they’re actually doing the local hawks and owls a favour; it’s difficult to imagine how many such varmints are shot each year, and how many scavenging birds and mammals are affected as a result.
To be clear, the effect of lead ingestion varies between birds and mammals, as well as among species within each group. Several other factors, including sex and age, also influence how much lead is absorbed into the body and accumulated in tissues. Along with the amount of lead, the toxic effect is also influenced by the duration of exposure, the species’ sensitivity, and the overall health of the animal.
THE NON-TOXIC ALTERNATIVES
Lead has always been a good choice in hunting ammunition—it’s readily available, inexpensive, dense, and easily formed into a variety of shapes and sizes. It also possesses excellent ballistic properties, making it the standard for hunting bullets for well over a century.
The first lead-free rifle ammunition readily available to the hunting community was the Barnes X Bullet, introduced in 1989. It was created by Randy Brooks, the owner of Barnes Bullets, who was inspired during an Alaskan bear hunt to construct an all-copper bullet—without a jacket or lead core—that would provide more reliable and consistent terminal performance. Looking back, it’s interesting to note that Brooks didn’t develop this innovative bullet for its environmental or health-related benefits, but for its performance. I can’t imagine he had any idea at the time just how influential his idea would become.
Often referred to as “monolithic” or “monometal” bullets, inferring they’re made with a single material (copper), many of today’s offerings are actually constructed of a copper alloy, usually incorporating zinc. Whatever the case, they’re becoming increasingly popular in the marketplace.
At this year’s Shooting, Hunting and Outdoor Trade Show, for example, I checked out the latest offerings from the Kinetic Group, the parent company of Federal, Remington, CCI and HEVI-Shot, among other ammunition brands. Of the new products being promoted, one of just two new Federal big-game bullets was an all-copper shotgun slug, while Remington’s only new big-game offering was a cartridge featuring a copper alloy bullet. (Federal also introduced a new steel/bismuth shotshell for upland birds, while HEVI-Shot showcased its new all-steel upland loads.)
The direction the industry is taking is clear, and as a Kinetic Group spokesperson said, “We make many, many types of ammunition based on our customers’ needs and preferences. Market trends and demands show a growing need for various types of ammunition, and we’re delivering.”
THE NON-TOXIC DRAWBACKS
Initially, hunters did not embrace lead-free rifle ammunition. The earliest iterations suffered from inconsistent patterning, excessive barrel fouling, relatively poor accuracy, unreliable expansion, high prices and limited availability. Over time, however, many of those limitations have been overcome through continued research and development.
The inclusion of cannelures—horizontal grooves in the bullet—has eliminated the excessive fouling and pressure issues, for example, while concurrently improving accuracy and the ballistic coefficient (the measure of a bullet’s ability to overcome air resistance and maintain velocity for a flatter trajectory). While it’s fair to say that even the latest monolithic bullets aren’t as inherently accurate as lead-core bullets, the differences are minimal, and certainly not meaningful at typical shooting distances for game.
Although there’s still considerable uncertainty among hunters when it comes to penetration, the fact is monolithic bullets tend to penetrate deeper than lead-core bullets of the same weight and calibre. That makes them particularly effective on larger animals. It also allows hunters to select a lighter copper bullet and expect similar penetration, but with reduced recoil.
Monolithic bullets tend to penetrate deeper than lead-core bullets of the same weight and calibre
Another characteristic of monometal bullets is they’re tougher than lead-core bullets, typically retaining 100 per cent of their weight after impact. That makes them especially effective when you need to smash through bone to get to an animal’s vitals. If you only hit soft issue with a copper bullet, however, expect the animal to run farther than it would if similarly hit with a lead-core round; traditional cup-and-core bullets fragment considerably, creating a larger wound channel and more bleeding.
In my limited experience hunting with lead-free rifle ammunition—10 or so African animals ranging in size from springbok up to eland, and another three or four white-tailed deer—it performed well. I acknowledge this is a rather small sample size, however, so I reached out to fellow Outdoor Canada contributor T.J. Schwanky. He’s successfully taken more than 100 animals across North America and Africa using various monometal bullets, never losing one that was hit properly.
If lead-free bullets have an Achilles’ heel, it’s that their need for speed
If lead-free bullets have an Achilles’ heel, it’s that they have a need for speed; reliable expansion can be a problem with them when impact velocities fall below the 1,800 fps to 2,000 fps range. That makes monometals an unsuitable choice for hunters who expect to make shots at extended distances. Having said that, a typical 130-grain, .270 Win. bullet will travel in excess of 2,000 fps to beyond 500 yards, a distance at which only the most capable shooters should ever take an animal anyway.
As for the problem of limited availability of monometal bullets, that is waning over time. Granted, it helps if you live in a large centre with dedicated big-box hunting stores that can afford to carry large ammo inventories. I recently perused the shelves of my nearest Cabela’s, for example, and found a reasonable supply of lead-free bullets from a range of manufacturers, although not all calibres or bullet weights were represented; to be fair, that was in February, so there will likely be more options available leading into the fall hunting season.
If you hunt with a muzzleloader or a shotgun, meanwhile, or like to tackle the local vermin population with a rimfire rifle, the availability and variety of lead-free ammunition is more limited. But it’s out there if you are persistent in your search. As for the cost, we all know rifle ammunition of all flavours is getting expensive. Still, I found the monometal options to be on par, price-wise, with most premium brands and lines of lead-core ammunition.
THE LEAD-FREE FUTURE
As it stands, it appears Canada’s hunting community is gaining confidence in monolithics. In a 2018 membership survey, for example, the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters found that a full 20 per cent of respondents had purchased lead-free ammunition for applications other than waterfowling. Looking forward, we should expect that manufacturers will develop even better lead-free rifle bullets, just as they’ve done with non-toxic shotshells.
What I hope won’t happen, and what I don’t think is necessary, is the institution of regulations mandating the use of lead-free rifle ammunition in Canada. To date, California is the only North American jurisdiction to have banned all lead ammunition, and I’ve yet to hear anything suggesting other states or provinces are contemplating similar legislation.
None of us needs to be told that lead is bad for the environment and our health; that’s why most consumer products, including gasoline and paint, no longer contain lead, after all. And again, as hunters we’re the ultimate conservationists, and none of us wants to impart harm unnecessarily on wildlife of any description. So, as we learn more about the negative impacts of lead-core bullets on non-targeted wildlife, and as the performance and availability of monometals continue to improve, I’m confident we’ll see a steady, voluntary migration toward a lead-free future.
Hunting editor Ken Bailey is increasingly using lead-free ammunition for all hunting.
GETTING THE LEAD OUT
Virtually all of the major ammunition manufacturers now offer one or more factory-loaded, non-toxic rifle cartridge line for hunting. The lead-free options for muzzleloader bullets, shotgun slugs and rimfire rounds, meanwhile, are more limited, but growing with time. The following are among the most popular lead-free cartridge options now available for rifle hunters.
BARNES BULLETS • VOR-TX Rifle
FEDERAL • Premium Trophy Copper • Power-Shok Copper Rifle • Premium line with Barnes TSX bullets
HORNADY • Outfitter Ammunition • MonoFlex LEVERevolution • NTX Superformance Varmint
NORMA •ECOSTRIKE • EVOSTRIKE
NOSLER • Expansion Tip • Ballistic Tip Lead-Free Varmint
REMINGTON • Premier CuT
SAKO • Powerhead Blade
WEATHERBY • Select Plus, loaded with Barnes TTSX bullets
WINCHESTER • Copper Impact • Varmint LF • Varmint X Lead-Free