Did you even read my post and link, or are you just trying to be antagonistic?

Not trying to be antagonistic. I just misconstrued your backhanded slap at the info I provided after checking out the link you provided, and the relevance of your last sentence. Sounds like we found some common ground on this issue.

I took issue with your statement only because I get tired of hearing people use the steel shot excuse to cover for bad shooting. Steel shot is an issue that I am having to address in my business, and I recently did some research into the issue that we are talking about.

For those that are not aware, a few years back the EPA asked shooting clubs across the country to submit a voluntary lead cleanup plan. There are more than 11,000 shooting facilities across the US and as of last February only 40 had submitted a plan. There is some talk that they will make it mandatory if the response does not increase, and if this happens the costs at shooting clubs will increase. Nobody wants to become a Superfund site. The alternative is to require steel shot. So for those that enjoy shooting sporting clays, trap and skeet, you will either pay more for ammo or pay more for a round of clays. It is inevitable.

I think the end of lead shot is a foregone conclusion. It is just a matter of time.

Are you saying that shooting steel will increase the membership costs at shooting clubs?

If I have to hire someone to develop an EPA acceptable plan for lead cleanup, pay additional costs to follow that plan, and put up with inspections and possible fines for non-compliance issues - then yes - you will be paying higher prices to cover those additional costs.

Or I can just require steel shot, and you can pay the additional costs to Academy.

Government regulation is a great thing - isn't it?

EDIT:

I misread your question. Continuing to shoot LEAD will eventually drive up your shooting club membership costs. Shooting steel will get a shooting club owner a pass from the EPA, but you will be required to purchase higher priced steel loads.


[This message has been edited by Stinky T (edited 3/23/2006 11:11a).]

[This message has been edited by Stinky T (edited 3/23/2006 11:15a).]

[This message has been edited by Stinky T (edited 3/23/2006 11:17a).]

Government regulation, in most instances, is a great thing.

If the EPA finds that lead shot is contaminating ground water, etc I gotta believe them.

Oh, I agree. It just seems like if you are truly concerned about lead contaminated ground water and soil around shooting clubs then the most responsible thing to do would be to eliminate lead shot at shooting clubs altogether - but the Feds aren't going to touch that with a 10 ft. pole. It would ease a lot of headaches for shooting clubs, but I am sure some group with a lot more money is helping ensure a future for lead shot.

But the move is happening. There are a number of smaller shooting facilities and large preserves that are going to all steel and that trend will continue.

quote:

---

This statement is true. But then you have to factor in that the birds that were dropping at 40 yds with lead shot are now unrecovered wounded birds with steel shot.

---

Ding Ding Ding!!!!
This is absolutely correct!

quote:

---

So for those that enjoy shooting sporting clays, trap and skeet, you will either pay more for ammo or pay more for a round of clays. It is inevitable.

---

No it's not! You just have to have your own throwers and a place to do it!

Oh boy. Somebody else decided to skip over the informative links on lead vs. steel.