NSSF Calls Foul On USFWS Director’s Parting Shot On Traditional Ammunition

Shotgun Shells
NSSF Calls Foul On USFWS Director’s Parting Shot On 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 industries, condemned the decision by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dan Ashe banning the use of traditional ammunition on Service lands in just five years.

The parting shot, Director’s Order 219, was issued on the final full day of President Obama’s administration. The last-minute action revives an effort the administration undertook eight years ago to ban the use of traditional ammunition.

“This directive is irresponsible and driven not out of sound science but unchecked politics,” said Lawrence Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel.

“The timing alone is suspect. This directive was published without dialogue with industry, sportsmen and conservationists. The next director should immediately rescind this, and instead create policy based upon scientific evidence of population impacts with regard to the use of traditional ammunition.”

The order requires several initiatives to go into effect immediately. Regional Directors are to work with state agencies to ban the use of traditional ammunition.

It also ends the use of traditional ammunition on Federal land, including National Parks, tribal lands and national wildlife refuges in order to mirror policies in states where traditional ammunition is already restricted. The order “expeditiously” bans traditional ammunition “when available information indicates” that lead is harmful to wildlife, without requirement of a scientific threshold on which to base that action.

It also requires creation of a timeline to restrict traditional ammunition for dove and upland bird hunting.


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 12,000 manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations and publishers. For more information, visit www.nssf.org.

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 6,000 manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations and publishers. For more information, log on to www.nssf.org.

13 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Charles Rogers
Charles Rogers
4 years ago

Most federal rules have to be published in the Federal Register to be effective; I have found no record of this happening. Perhaps this will be affected by Pres. Trump’s suspension of orders. Does anyone know whether or not 1. This Order must be published in the Federal Register, and 2. Whether it is affected by Pres. Trump’s Executive Order?

Larry Muhr
Larry Muhr
4 years ago

This is just Dirty Politics, plain and simple! The Liberals want to know why and how Trump won the election-because of underhanded tripe just like this. I’m so mad I could spit right now. I am a former Sierra Club member, note the word former, please. I pledge to down-talk any organization such is this, to anyone that will listen. It is obvious that we shooters need to stay united and support our sport.

Bill
Bill
4 years ago

Those a$$holes don’t give a tinker’s damn about the environment. It’s a move to make the process of hunting so onerous people will stop doing it on Federal land. You know what? I think we ought to have a constitutional amendment prohibiting the FedGov from owning more land than that upon which a Federal installation rests. If an Army base needs extra land upon which to train, that would be allowed. Likewise for bombing ranges. All of the millions of acres confiscated for national parks (and IMS Obozo just about doubled that acreage) would go to the states in which… Read more »

Bill
Bill
4 years ago

Well Robert, some of you should take it upon yourselves to read and educate yourselves. Here is a tip, there are several clues in the context of the piece.
Goodness, are you really that clueless? Im not a hunter and even I know what theyre talking about.

robert
robert
4 years ago

It would be rather nice if you clarified what you mean by “traditional ammunition”; otherwise, this article is meaningless to some of us.

Bob G
Bob G
4 years ago
Reply to  robert

The regulation is over the lead content in ammo, mostly shotgun in the case of bird hunting. If you hang around long enough you’ll find that some will answer your questions while others name-call. Some think this is a precursor to a total firearms ban on federal land, public-access or otherwise (at least, that’s how they act) without stopping to think this will be reviewed by other interests. Like many other last-minute regulations, it’s entirely possible this is an empty gesture by a parting department head; all of the new regulations will be reviewed by the new director, who will… Read more »

Jim S
Jim S
4 years ago
Reply to  Bob G

President Trump put a hold on the issuance of new regulations pending review. This is from Whitehouse.gov. There may be some relief on these last minute reg’s… “Subject to any exceptions the Director or Acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget (the “OMB Director”) allows for emergency situations or other urgent circumstances relating to health, safety, financial, or national security matters, or otherwise, send no regulation to the Office of the Federal Register (the “OFR”) until a department or agency head appointed or designated by the President after noon on January 20, 2017, reviews and approves the regulation.… Read more »

Chuck
Chuck
4 years ago

It’s funny how using massive amounts of explosives to literally fracture the earth into millions, possibly billions of tiny little pieces in order to extract oil from it cannot in any possible way be harmful to the environment yet the firing of individual pieces of lead smaller than a fingerjoint is incredibly harmful to the environment and the animals that depend on it.
Absolutely amazing how the oil industry with their fracking is doing no damage to the environment but hunters firing tiny little pieces of lead are unequivocally destroying the environment.
Absolutely amazing.

Bob G
Bob G
4 years ago
Reply to  Chuck

At the risk of inviting name-calling, which appears to be mandatory in these threads, you’re comparing grapes to coconuts; Oil extraction has to be approved via a process that does include environment issues, while hunting fowl on fed land is regulated differently. Oil production is an affectation regarding the national economy and seems to work on the general principle of “if you find it plan to get it.” Federal lands specifically set aside for species maintanence may be micro-managed to the benefit of those species simply because that’s the general reason the land was set aside. There’s no doubt that… Read more »

throwedoff
throwedoff
4 years ago
Reply to  Bob G

This is a totally anti-gun mandate. The ceramic ammo you reference is made for training/target practice on steel targets. It is frangible ammunition that is very hard but brittle. It shatters on impact with a steel plate negating the worries of ricochets. Copper ammunition has been in use for several years, but it is not available for all loads and calibers used in hunting and is not suitable for shotgun ammunition. Furthermore, copper is far less dense than lead requiring longer projectiles to achieve a desired weight for a given caliber. This limits it’s use to a limited range of… Read more »

Bob G
Bob G
4 years ago
Reply to  throwedoff

Maybe, but does anyone know if this director has been pushing anti-gun regulations throughout his tenure? Has he publicly made anti-gun statements? I’m asking because we in the gun community issue anti-gun labels when we hear about a regulation we disagree with. It’s possible this guy may be more environment-friendly than anti-gun. Anyone who’s been reading these Ammoland articles knows they aren’t neutral and are often one-sided in their information. I know they’re short articles but the author’s not under fire to warn the public of an immediate horror. He can include a line indicating if this director has been… Read more »

Tionico
Tionico
4 years ago
Reply to  Bob G

Bob G, yuor measured response is fine and dandy.. but this FedGov agency (illegal at its core, should not even exist) have a long history of being anti gun, anti access, and have a poor track record of actuall MANAGING the (illegal) FedGov lands under their domination. Most FedGov agencies manging public lands bow to the desires and influence of the enfvironmental groups Sierra Club (formery great organisation, but bady corruptd for decades now) being one of the worst. Earth First is another. These groups are determined to sequester as much land as possible and deny public access and use…..… Read more »

Bob G
Bob G
4 years ago
Reply to  Bob G

Tionico: You pretty much justify what I had warned about with extreme pro-gunners: you’re acting as if the sky is falling and that every regulation you don’t agree with or limits your ability to shoot up whatever you want must be written by Orwellion leftists. You behave as if everybody in government wants your guns. Any state run by a Dem governor or House has an agenda to make you defenseless. According to you, none of these fed agencies can be trusted to have managers that are doing what they think is best – they MUST have a political agenda… Read more »