Firearms Industry Responds to Anti-hunting Attack on Traditional Ammunition

Firearms Industry Responds to Anti-hunting Attack on Traditional Ammunition
The loss of excise tax revenue would be a crushing blow to conservation efforts.

Bald Eagle Nestting
The bald eagle's recovery, considered to be a truly great conservation success story, was made possible and funded by hunters using traditional ammunition.
National Shooting Sports Foundation
National Shooting Sports Foundation

NEWTOWN, Conn --(AmmoLand.com)- The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for the firearms, ammunition, hunting and shooting sports industry, has announced its opposition to a petition filed today with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) seeking to ban the use of traditional ammunition, containing lead-core components, by America’s sportsmen and women.

The petition, filed by several agenda-driven groups including the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), erroneously claims that the use of traditional ammunition by hunters is inconsistent with the Toxic Substance Control Act of 1976.

The petition goes on to suggest that the use of traditional ammunition poses a danger to wildlife, in particular raptors such as bald eagles, that may feed on entrails or unrecovered game left in the field.

“There is simply no scientific evidence that the use of traditional ammunition is having an adverse impact on wildlife populations that would require restricting or banning the use of traditional ammunition beyond current limitations, such as the scientifically based restriction on waterfowl hunting,” said NSSF President Steve Sanetti.

Helping to demonstrate the validity of Sanetti’s statement are recent statistics from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) showing 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.

Also fueling concerns over the CBD petition is the likely ramification a ban on traditional ammunition would have 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 and the financial backbone of the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation.

The bald eagle’s recovery, considered to be a truly great conservation success story, was made possible and funded by hunters using traditional ammunition – the very ammunition organizations like the CBD are now demonizing.

“Needlessly restricting or banning traditional ammunition absent sound science will hurt wildlife conservation efforts as fewer hunters take to the field,” said NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel Lawrence G. Keane.

“Hunters and their ammunition have done more for wildlife than the CBD ever will. And the CBD’s scientifically baseless petition and endless lawsuits against state and federal wildlife managers certainly do not serve the wildlife that the organization claims to protect.”

About NSSF
The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the trade association for the firearms industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of more than 5,500 manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations and publishers. For more information, log on to www.nssf.org.

  • 3 thoughts on “Firearms Industry Responds to Anti-hunting Attack on Traditional Ammunition

    1. This release does not make sense. Since the petition only seeks to change ammo from lead to non-lead alternatives (steel, copper, alloy, etc.) how would the tax dollars from selling ammo be reduced? All that will happen is that the tax shifts to a different product. In fact, if non-lead bullets are more expensive (as is often claimed), the tax revenue would increase not decrease.

      I have already switched over my target practice and hunting to non-lead bullets. What is the big deal? I think its is terrible PR for hunting for us to insist on using toxic bullets when non-toxic alternative are available.

      Steve

    2. Lead, toxic,,, mmm maybeso, maybenotso,,, studies have been done both ways.. Lead is toxic when encountered at high velocities.. otherwise lead can remain in a live body for years and do no harm what so ever… same scare as Mercury and DDT. emotional response to a tactical situation.. cheers to all with brains in charge of emotional buckets.. DC. old sailor who has seen the stuff get deeper..

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>