Clarifying lead laws
I would like to raise a serious issue with the ‘Goose-getters’ article (p48) that was published in the November issue of Sporting Shooter.
The first sentence of the introduction read: ‘Non-toxic loads are a legal requirement when shooting over wetlands,’ and many may think that this is the only time that non-toxic loads are required. It should have read: ‘Non-toxic loads are a legal requirement when shooting any wildfowl.’
The main problem that wildfowlers have is the inland shoots: shooting ducks flushed from ponds to make up the numbers on driven days. I have beaten on several of these and know for a fact that Guns have not been asked to use non-toxic loads, and the wording in your article does not help the matter.
Also, I am surprised that Gamebore did not get a mention as they do several loads of steel or tungsten. I use their Silver Steel fibre-wadded steel cartridge for inland duck, as the landowner does not want plastic wads left in the area.
Ralph Stimson, via email
The editor replies: You are, of course, correct that non-toxic loads are also a legal requirement when shooting wildfowl inland in England. We certainly didn’t intend to cause confusion.
When shooting duck on a driven day, non-toxic loads should be used