View Full Version : CALL TO ACTION: CA Lead Ammo Ban

02-06-2007, 7:55 AM
NRA Members' Councils of California
http://www.nramemberscouncils.com/skin/mclogoclr2.gif (http://calnra.com)
CA Lead Ammo Ban Update and Call to Action
09:00 AM, 02/06/2007

02/06/2007 - The Monterey Herald reported on Saturday that the California Fish and Game Commission voted unanimously to consider amending the 2007-2010 Big Game Hunting regulations in California in regards to lead ammunition at their March 2, 2007 Meeting in Arcata.

Up for consideration will be either a statewide ban of lead ammunition for big game hunting, a prohibition of lead ammunition in the "A" Zone, D9, D10, and D11 (At least- No mention yet of the zones going into Kern and those western Sierra slope counties that are currently in the condor's range), and a proposal to offer up incentives to hunters in those zones to voluntarily use non-lead alternatives. As yet, the proposed regulations do not effect rimfire or shotgun game loads used for hunting small and upland game in those zones.

Link to story (http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/news/16614684.htm)

The California NRA Members' Councils have established ONE-CLICK service to help you contact CA Fish & Game officials. See:


02-06-2007, 12:56 PM
one click sent mike. come on guys time to hammer the DFG on this issue.

02-06-2007, 1:21 PM
Done with aplomb:D


02-06-2007, 1:43 PM
Done my duty...

02-06-2007, 2:09 PM
Who does the email go to?

Maybe i shouldn't have said some things. I hope they don't put a hold on my hunting "privledges"

02-06-2007, 2:44 PM
Email sent

02-06-2007, 5:24 PM
Jump on this, the only real way to look at this is as an attempt to limit hunting which limits the 'need' for firearms.

02-06-2007, 5:53 PM
Done, thanks

02-06-2007, 8:28 PM
Would this regulatory action also affect shotgun slugs? How about sabot shotgun slugs? Are we looking at the beginning of slug-gun hunting in cali?

02-06-2007, 8:45 PM
Hate to be an alarmist, but I don't like the sound of this.
If they can ban lead for hunting, its only a small step to a total ban, for our own good, of course, which will spell the end of the shooting sports.
For those close to the hearings in Arcata, I would think it be imperative to attend! I find it interesting that they have the hearings in the most leftist town in California. How about a ban of depleted uranium instead?
Good luck to us all!

California May Ban Lead For Big Game
Monterey Herald
Citing the diminishing condor population, the state Fish and Game Commission decided February 2 to consider banning or limiting lead bullets for big game hunting in California when it meets March 2 in Arcata,CA.

02-07-2007, 6:37 PM
Here is what I posted. Take a look at the article posted on the DFG website. The data does not support a ban.


Maybe I am missing something. I just read the entire 80+ page report on the California DFG web site, located at
Titled 'Assessment of Lead Contamination Sources Exposing California Condors' by UC Davis regarding hazards to the California Condor.

Buried in this report, on page 14,lists all the hazards to the condors identified to date. According to the report, more condors were killed by flying into power lines (total 8 condors), by predation by coyote & eagles (total 9 condors) than by lead poisoning (total 5 condors). This data is from 1992-2002. Not all lead comes from bullets, as the study admits, starting on page 67, section IV.B 'Other sources of lead in the California Condor Range.

So why take this unprecedented action against lead bullets without looking at the larger hazards? This smacks of using 'junk science' to further a anti-hunting and anti-firearm agenda.

Thank you for your time.

M. Sage
02-07-2007, 6:54 PM
I sent mine! Shoulda kept a copy but, eh.

I started off talking about condors, then thought "ahh, why dance to their tune, we know what this is about" and pointed out that this is about gun control, not about saving Condors.

I listed a few facts, like lead-free ammo not being available for a lot of calibers, lead-free being way more expensive, and some calibers having lead-free available but you have to load your own which compounds the expense and can be dangerous if someone isn't 100% clear on how to reload properly.

Dont Tread on Me
02-07-2007, 7:39 PM
e-mail sent.

Sprng 03'-A3
02-07-2007, 7:56 PM
Sent one also.

02-07-2007, 9:35 PM
This is what I sent.

I have been a hunter and protector of the wildlife for 35 years. I feel it is a disservice to all California license holders to ban lead ammo. It is right to protect the condors; it is right to try to do all that is possible to save the species. Having a ban on what is needed to conserve all other species is ludicrous. The cost of hunting is already sky high the development of ammunition for game is time consuming. If you change the way people have to do that it will do two things; 1) It will make criminals of people that do not have resources to comply with this controversial and unproven law. 2) It will take the sport of hunting away from people that are financially unable to keep up with the escalating costs of hunting.
We already have too many rules that are taking our sport away from us. Please have the sense to see we are the real conservers here and should not be neither penalized nor made to be victims every time a study says we should change everything were doing again.
Next week we will all be throwing rocks at deer because the bluing on our rifles causes wrinkles in barn owls.

02-07-2007, 9:53 PM
one-click e-mail sent

02-07-2007, 11:06 PM
I sent them a second letter, I sent one in December as well. I figure it couldn't hurt to send more than one.:)

Heres the first:


As a hunter here in California, I strongly oppose a ban on lead ammunition for big game hunters. Could the Condor deaths from lead have come from another source, for example fire retardants or pesticides? Considering that most hunters I know bury the gut piles that result from the taking of big game, I strongly suggest that further research is needed prior to enacting such legislation. To me It sounds a lot like a fallacy of causation. Any research into this subject conducted by the CBD should be considered suspect after the unethical debacle in Nogales, AZ. Another unbiased group/laboratory should be used to conduct/confirm such research. Should a limited ban be enacted within Condor Country, what guarantee will we have that it will be removed in the event that Condor deaths resulting from lead poisoning do not diminish; thereby showing that big game hunting wasn't the cause?
Most hunters I know are very conscience of the environment. None of us desire to commit actions that may have an adverse impact on our natural resources. We being firearms owners also know that once a freedom is restricted, it is seldom returned. Such a ban would make hunting cost prohibitive for many hunters. Also, there is no source of non-lead rimfire ammo for varmit hunting. Less hunting means less tags and fees. This could result it a direct fiscal impact on the DFG. Ironically, those same fees help pay for conservation programs. Please give due consideration and reject any Lead Ammo Ban until such a time as it is definitively proven that it is the sole cause of lead-related Condor/Raptor mortality.



And the second:

Greetings to the DFG,

I just wanted to voice my opposition to the lead ammo ban. Since I read the entire Assessment of Lead Contamination Sources Exposing California Condors(the report put out by UC Davis), I feel confident in stating that this is Junk Science at its finest.

First they say that the frequency and amount of lead in game and varmint carcasses and gut piles left in the field has not been studied, and is a major data gap for determining the source(s) and amount of lead exposing California Condors. Then they say that when all potential sources of lead in the environment are compared, carcasses of ground squirrels, coyotes, deer and wild pigs, and the gut piles appear to be the most likely sources of lead exposure to condors. both statements are on the same page, pg. 72. So, how can they make such an assertion after admitting that they have no empirical evidence? The whole report is rife with contradictions, yet the authors keep coming back to hunting as being the cuplrit with minimal evidence to support this claim. Last time I checked science was the study of empirical evidence. A fallacy of causation may be taking place here.

I see at least twice as many Condors dying from high tension wires, yet no one is proposing a ban on power lines. They even admit that direct observation of condors feeding on hunter-shot carrion are few, even with intense radio telemetry and visual surveillance. pg.5 They say that Condors are not more sensitive to lead intoxication than most species of birds, with the exception of the Turkey Vultures.pg. 4. If that is true, then where are all the dead bodies of the raptors and scavangers that also eat these exposed gut piles? Remember when they banned lead shot for waterfowl hunting because it was killing millions of birds? Well, when asked where all these dead bird carcasses were no one could produce them. This could be a similar case here.

Because of their admitted lack of data and considerable uncertainty in assessing potential lead exposure to condors, they would like you to follow a "Precautionary Principle". By recommending the elimination of potential lead sources. pg. 5. What that says to me is, "We're not sure where the lead is coming from, so until we figure it out we want to ban Ammo. because it might be a source." I know another term for this type of thinking, it is called putting the cart before the horse. Now I'm not naive enough to believe that gut piles are blameless. However, I reserve judgement until the facts are in. I think a better solution would be to crack down on hunters that don't bury their gut piles and/or the carcasses of varmits, coyotes, etc. All good hunters bury what they don't pack out. Should non-lead ammo become readily available in most major caliburs at a reasonable price, most hunters would switch voluntarily making a ban needless.

Five dead birds don't constitute a crisis. Also, what good will it do the birds in Arizona, Utah, and Baja? I think other alternatives should be considered before banning something that will cause a direct impact on hunting. Especially considering the financial impact a sudden drop in hunting licenses could have on conservation programs and DFG budgets. This is the second letter I have sent, I felt that a second was in order to stress the seriousness with which I view this issue. Thank you for your time.



02-08-2007, 7:46 AM
Thanks for the update, objection sent using one click!

02-08-2007, 11:28 AM
Metallic lead cannot "poison" anybody! Environmental lead comes from lead salts, not chunks of lead. All the old bullets in the world aren't going to "contaminate" anything.

M. Sage
02-08-2007, 5:07 PM
Metallic lead cannot "poison" anybody! Environmental lead comes from lead salts, not chunks of lead. All the old bullets in the world aren't going to "contaminate" anything.

+1. You hear of old vets walking around with bullets in them all their lives, but they never wind up with lead poisoning...

02-09-2007, 3:18 PM
well, I'm happy to say I did my part.

02-12-2007, 10:28 AM

02-12-2007, 10:32 AM
Sent mine. Next thing you know they will ban lead wheel weights.

02-15-2007, 5:58 PM

This one is a big sleeper people, not only can it get bigger without legislation it can be use as a springboard for other law and regs here and elsewhere.

Don't let this fade away.

02-22-2007, 12:25 PM

Creeping Incrementalism
02-22-2007, 8:55 PM
I wrote my letter tonight, and will stick it in the mailbox it at the post office near work tomorrow.

One point that I mentioned in the letter, one I haven't seen elsewhere, is I don't believe copper bullets are as effective as lead ones (leading to more wounded game running off), because copper bullets don't fragment, as lead ones tend to. You do get better penetration, but if you've ever looked at Fackler's wound ballistics diagrams, the kinetic energy of a high-velocity rifle bullet forms a large temporary cavity. On its own, it is just that--temporary. But combined with lead fragments, much of the temporary wound cavity turns permanent, and you get a massive wound, which in my opinion is more likely to drop an animal quickly, since it destroys an entire lung, for example, with the rest of the bullet still continuing on for a ways. A copper bullet will penetrate more, but it won't shred the heart/lungs area, which is the easiest way to drop your typical big-game animal quickly. Another way of looking at it is that a copper bullet wastes the energy of the temporary wound cavity. I 've heard hunters say that copper bullets work well, but I still don't think they work as well as lead (unless deep penetration is paramount), and are certainly less efficient for the same cartridge.

02-22-2007, 10:22 PM
Sent an email a few weeks ago, sent another one tonight.

02-23-2007, 5:39 AM
Latest at:


02-23-2007, 10:04 PM
I saw a pc on KNBC tonight around 6:00P or so about
the mammoth private property owner Tejon Ranch
banning lead bullets on their property. They had a
small news conference with one of the high ups of
the U.S Fish & Game there announcing this.

When the guy from the U.S.Fish & Game stood up
I heard him say that lead causes the deaths of
Condors and that the move by the monster Tejon
Ranch owners was the RIGHT MOVE !

This tells me that the U.S. Fish & Game here in
Ca has already decided that there's not going be
lead bullets allowed for hunting any longer ..

In case you've never heard of Tejon Ranch, it's the
largest privately owned land in the state. Covers
over 270,000 sq acres. They claim they are sensitive
to the environmental concerns lead bullets have on
the California Condor and that's why they are banning
lead bullets at their hunting club which they claim
has over 1,800 members..

These hypocrites then turn around and say the monster
land development they have planned won't affect the
Condors at all ! Every time man touches land he
brings some sort of damage to it. This lead bullet
ban is just another back-door approach to banning the
private ownership of firearms by law-abiding citizens.

I'm flat sick of it ! Look how big this Tejon Ranch is.
Their plans for a massive development of three parts
will damage the habitat of this area a 100 times worse
than any huting with lead bullets will ever do.


Boy you don't think there's some crooked money
running thru this deal ?

02-24-2007, 7:14 AM
This whole thing reeks of a conspiracy. My guess is the gun shop owners of Kern County want to make a killing on non-lead based bullets and kill Internet sales. No one out of state is going to give you a good deal on non-lead based bullets. You will have to buy all of that junk from a local shop who will charge outrageous prices.

Nevertheless, I still sent in my e-mail opposing it.

02-24-2007, 10:20 AM
Someone told me that if you can afford to hunt at Tejon Ranch you can afford several cases of 'non-lead' based bullets.

02-24-2007, 2:35 PM
I saw a Tejon Ranch article in the LA Times this morning stating the same.

Ya think it has anything to do with Tejon trying to build something like 20,000 or whatever homes up there? Right now they'd do anything to keep the enviro whackos off of them.

As far as hunting at Tejon being expensive, generally it is; but you can get in on their unguided management pig hunts for ~$400 for a weekend.

I've sent an email to F&G commmission and will try to get more to them.

02-26-2007, 12:33 AM

02-26-2007, 11:07 AM
More on the hypocrisy of the Tejon Ranch >


BY DAVID BURGER, Californian staff writer
e-mail: dburger@bakersfield.com | Friday, Feb 23 2007 10:25 PM

Last Updated: Friday, Feb 23 2007 10:31 PM
LOS ANGELES -- For the benefit of the endangered California Condor, Tejon Ranch officials announced Friday they soon will no longer allow lead ammunition on their 270,000 acres.

The move, announced at a press conference with Audubon California, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and other officials, doesn't affect many people - only about 1,800 hunters use the land annually.

But ranch President and Chief Executive Officer Bob Stine said the ranch -- the largest contiguous landowner in the state -- is the first entity in the state to voluntarily discontinue the use of the bullets that activists say are the biggest threat to condors.

Taking the lead on lead
Condors are especially susceptible to lead poisoning that results from the large birds scavenging the remains of carcasses and carrion from animals killed by lead bullets, said Jesse Grantham, condor recovery coordinator of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife service.It looks to me like the U.S Fish & Game has already
made up their minds regarding lead !

Stine reminded the audience that the ranch's mission is, "Preserving California's Legacy, Providing for California's Future," and added: "Part of that providing for the future is providing for the condor."

Now look at the bottom regarding the monster development.

The day also wasn't free of more controversy. The Center for Biological Diversity released a statement in the afternoon praising the switch to lead-free ammunition, but further criticized the ranch's nascent plan of urban development in part of the ranch.

"We applaud Tejon Ranch's decision to get the lead out for condors, and if the state's largest private landholder can go lead-free, then the rest of California should be able to follow suit," Jeff Miller with the center said in a statement. "Unfortunately, the urban-sprawl developments planned for Tejon Ranch are also a gun to the head of condor recovery efforts."

"Tejon's proposed 28,500-acre Tejon Mountain Village will devastate the heart of the condor's critical habitat," said center biologist Ileene Anderson.Tejon is in it for one reason and one reason only..

02-27-2007, 8:21 PM
Is this the only site that cares about this?!
Any other sites out there that realize the overall impact of this and the faulty logic?
No more 22s for hunting rabbits and varmints!
Steel for quail!
After the lead is banned, they will figure out that they can ban any projectiles by simply using any argument that suites them.

02-27-2007, 8:49 PM
My e-mail sent. Thanks taloft - I paraphrased some of your post - very well thought-out arguments. I don't even hunt anymore since I moved to Cali (used to hunt deer and pigs back in Oklahoma) but like others I see this as a back-door way to banning ammo for other uses.

03-26-2007, 4:37 PM
E-mail sent Mike. Let's get'em guys.

03-28-2007, 5:21 AM
You'll find the vote and reccommendations here. (http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/news/16850258.htm)

.......The commission voted unanimously at its Feb. 2 meeting in Monterey to serve notice of its intent to amend hunting regulations for 2007-2010 with an aim of eliminating lead bullets in the California condor range.

It did not take action on the issue at Friday's commission meeting in Arcata, postponing action on the lead bullet ban to its April 13 meeting in Bodega Bay............

.............The specific hunting areas proposed include most of those west of the Sierra Nevada -- areas A, D9, D10 and D11 on Fish and Game maps......

03-28-2007, 12:03 PM
Here's another follow up.

Last month, the California Department of Fish and Game staff recommended that hunting with lead bullets be banned everywhere in the California condor range, a vast area of about 20 counties that extends from the Bay Area to Los Angeles and takes in parts of the Tehachapi Mountains.It looks like the deck is stacked against lead for hunting.

03-30-2007, 3:13 AM
Catching up on my reading this morning, I ran across this alternate view of media reality from SCI and probably originating from Kathy Lynch.

"SCI continues to closely monitor the California Fish and Game Commission's consideration whether to ban lead ammunition in Condor range in California. At a hearing held on Friday, March 2, 2007, the Commission pulled the proposed lead ammunition ban out of its current consideration of mammal hunting regulations. The reason appeared to be request to the Department of Fish and Game for more information about the scientific information. SCI understands that the Commission will not vote on the lead ban at its April meeting, as originally suggested by the Commission. The Department has promised the infromation will be ready by the Commisssion's May meeting. Despite the delay, interested members of the public can still submit written comments (by April 6) on the proposed lead ban or testify at the meeting on April 12-13. The public can also comment on the draft environmental documents on the issue prepared by the California Fish and Game Department by April 9, 2007. For more infromantion see
http://www.fgc.ca.gov and

The first link was junk. The second is just the proposed rules for the hunting and trapping season.

Anecdotally, one condor "almost" died from lead poisoning. Two more "might" have died from lead poisoning. Ten condors actually died from run ins with electric transmission lines. The big proponents of the ban actually believe that hunters are poisoning themselves and their own families by eating lead-tainted wild pork and venison. I wonder how many pig or deer hunters in Zones, A, D9, D10, or D11 have had their blood monitored for lead levels and contributed to Fish and Game's conclusions. My guess would be.... none. There is apparently little or no real science behind any of this.

M. Sage
03-31-2007, 11:25 AM
Thanks for the update! I'm wondering if this has fizzled, if they're waiting to spring it on us as a surprise at a time of their choosing, or if they're just waiting for the bribes to roll in like the Legislature does.

The big proponents of the ban actually believe that hunters are poisoning themselves and their own families by eating lead-tainted wild pork and venison.

That's funny. I've eaten a lot of venison that was killed with lead buckshot, especially when I was a kid. I never had my lead level checked, but you'd expect some developmental problems, and neither my brother or I turned up with anything like that. I'd actually bet my IQ is higher than the people who believe my dad was poisoning our family with lead.

04-14-2007, 12:57 PM

DONOT CLICK on above address, just COPY/PASTE it.

The SacBee link dumps you to the subscribe page by default. You can avoid that by just coping and pasting the address in your browser.

Scarecrow Repair
04-14-2007, 1:57 PM

DONOT CLICK on above address, just COPY/PASTE it.

The SacBee link dumps you to the subscribe page by default.

The SacBee site uses javascript to send you to the register page. Disable javascript and the link works fine.

05-13-2007, 9:45 AM
At the California Fish and Game Commission April meeting, action was postponed on the lead issues until June.

On May 4, NRA reported AB821 could be sent to the floor for a vote any day.

On March 1, a comprehensive lead ban began in Missouri. Other states considering a lead ban include Washington, Arizona, Texas, Ilinois and Virginia.

On April 4, Time Magazine wrote that 13 condors have died of lead poisoning. Huh??? Their source is Paul Andreano of "Project Gutpile," an anti-lead environmental activist with apparently no advanced scientific claim to fame of his own, just his own website, blog, and opinions. Who is this guy?

His website is actively soliciting donations without stating any tax-exempt status.

07-12-2007, 8:53 AM
AB 821 moves to the Senate Appropriations Committee

I just sent this to the committee members.

As an analytical chemist with a background in public health, I understand the toxicity of lead. But after reading much of the scientific data summarized in the paper by the Wildlife Health Center on lead exposure in California Condors, I suggest to you it smacks of bad science.

Statistically, according to the data, a condor is much more likely to die from being poisoned by anti-freeze, caught and eaten by a predator, or by flying into a power line, and much less likely by consuming lead bullet fragments from a gut pile.

Scientifically, the conclusions in the paper recently presented by the Wildlife Health Center (WHC) may seem important at a glance by the untrained, but on closer scrutiny, were very short on real proof and lacked quality control. They appeared rather to be based on a personal bias. I point directly at the study by Carpenter, et. al., wherein lead BB's were force fed to captive turkey vultures at 1000 times any possible exposure by food consumption (ten lead BB's per day force fed to a bird for six months is ludicrous) - and still the scientists had a hard time killing the birds and proving lead toxicosis. This result casts grave doubt on their conclusions that condor mortality is a direct result of deer hunting in the condor range. It is much harder for me to discount these data as it was for the WHC. By their own admission, most condors die of "unknown" causes. I don't like lead and truly appreciate its toxicity - but after a close look at the data being proffered by the WHC, their conclusions are heavily qualified opinions, not hard science.

Economically, the legal analysis from your own illustrious body fails to include the effects of banning lead ammunition and lost sales on Pitman-Robertson funds. Based on the opinions of others who understand taxation better than I, I don't believe the Legislature's analysis accurately accounts for the lost economy. Both the wildlife refuge system and the Fish & Game will suffer from decreased funding.

Esthetically, the Audubon Society says these birds "transcend any cost-benefit analysis." As a taxpayer, I'm not so sure.

In reality, the millions of pounds of lead that spew into the air, soil, and water each year - the by-product of copper mining and smelting especially in the southwestern USA - are much more likely to be responsible for contaminating the condors, the food they eat, and their range, if indeed it has been proved they have elevated blood lead levels. Wouldn't my tax money be better spent pursuing those corporate polluters and protecting human health at the same time?? The amount of lead entering the environment from other marginal sources of contamination, copper jacketed lead hunting bullets, fishing sinkers, lead-acid batteries, and automobile wheel balance weights, is infinitesimal by comparison.

07-12-2007, 12:13 PM
Nice job! Lets hope they read it and aren't already biased.

07-13-2007, 5:09 AM
Outdoor News Service

LEAD-CONDOR GRANDSTANDING: The National Audubon Society held a
press conference on Wednesday this week in Sacramento to announce that
the science is settled on whether or not condors' elevated lead levels
and lead-related deaths are caused by ammunition: It is. Citing no new
science, but saying 44 leading scientists and advocates now agree, the
issue is apparently settled and lead big game ammunition should be
banned because they all agree it should be banned.
Ironically, a spokesman for the Tejon Ranch, which has agreed to
ban all lead ammunition on its property beginning in 2008, was present
to say this was the most significant step the 270,000-acre ranch
management could take to protect condors. Really? Developing a sizeable
portion of the ranch, which is all condor habitat, apparently won't have
a significant impact on the big birds. How could Audubon staff and
condor advocates could sit at the same table with the Tejon PR flack
without laughing out loud? It was all grandstanding all around.
Kelly Sorenson of the Ventana Wildlife Society did make an
interesting comment regarding data from Arizona that shows the voluntary
effort to shoot non-lead ammunition or to remove gutpiles from condors'
reach is working. There has been a measurable downward tick in blood
lead levels in Arizona condors, but major incidents with lead are on the
increase. This doesn't seem to square with the idea that hunter's bullet
lead is the only source of lead in condors' blood. But, I forgot, that
issue is settled now.

Commission will hear final testimony -- again -- on the proposal to ban
lead ammunition for big game hunting and predators within condor range
at its Friday meeting in Bridgeport. The Commission keeps taking more
final testimony when more legitimate questions are raised. Legislation
that would essentially do the same thing being considered by the FGC was
to be heard in the Senate appropriations committee Tuesday, but the AB
821 hearing was postponed. Do you doubt the lead ban will pass as soon
as the legislature and FGC staff gets the word that Audubon has
proclaimed all scientists agree lead should be banned?

08-07-2007, 11:54 AM
This letter was posted recently at the Fish and Game site, where they have apparently deferred to the Legislature and AB821

TITLE 14. Fish and Game Commission

Notice of Decision Not to Proceed

PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE 11347, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Fish and Game Commission, decided not to proceed with the proposed amendments to sections 353 and 475, Title 14, CCR, regarding mammal hunting-method of take regulations (Notice File No. Z-07-0206- 09, published February 16, 2007, in the California Notice Register 2007, No. 7-Z, page 299, and Continuation Notice File No. Z-07-0227-11, published March 9, 2007, in the California Notice Register 2007, No. 10Z, page 463), therefore, withdraws this proposed action for further consideration. The Commission may initiate at a later date, with notice as required by law, a new proposal to adopt regulations pertaining to the same or similar subject matter.


Jon K. Fischer
Deputy Executive Director

Dated: July 24, 2007

08-18-2007, 2:49 PM
looks like the condor is trying to check out.

08-19-2007, 2:50 PM

Good luck now.

I'll bet a hell of a lot of money that this is a DELIBERATE poisoning by the enviro and anti-gun freaks to push their agenda.

There is no such thing as a coincidence in politics.

EVERYTHING happens for a reason.

08-23-2007, 1:56 PM
California Fish & Game Commission Holding A Special Meeting Regarding Ammunition For Hunters!
Your Attendance Is Needed on Monday, August 27!

The California Fish & Game Commission is holding a special meeting, this Monday, August 27, to discuss authorized methods for hunting big game, along with the status of the California condors.

One of the topics listed on the agenda is the subject of non-lead bullets. The California legislature is currently considering Assembly Bill 821, that would ban the use of lead ammunition for hunting in various hunting zones in California that incorporate condor range. There is no proven data that lead ammunition is the cause of the decline of the California condors. It is important that California hunters and gun owners attend this meeting.

To view the agenda for this special meeting, please click here.

This meeting will be held:

Monday, August 27

Resources Building Auditorium

First Floor

1416 Ninth Street

Sacramento, CA 95814

08-23-2007, 8:28 PM
I wonder how the ethanol ban in alcohol

.....or the tobacco ban in cigarettes....

With the liberal elitist that think they are so much smarter than the great unwashed masses of blissfully ignorant and uneducated peasants wanting to protect us from our stupid selves...

and saying an ethanol ban in alcohol is not prohibition or meant to lead to prohibition....

or a tobacco ban in cigarettes is not an attempt to ban cigarettes.....

Is going now along with this lead ban in bullets.

If only they would mandate that these idiots provide an alternative and encourage the industry in developing and manufacturing such and codifying it in law having it be legal instead of screaming down the hall "we need to ban this, we need to ban this, a hunter may illegally shoot a condor and bring it home and feed his baby this condor meat which will cause lead poisoning and mean when he grows up with his brain damage would result in another redneck voter who votes anti-environment......we can't have that.....now can we....:D...."

We all hate the complainer that complains about everything rather than constructively engaging with better alternatives. The BAN...BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN....BA N....BAN..BAN...BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN... .BAN....BAN....BAN..BAN...BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN ....BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN..BAN...BAN....BAN.... BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN..BAN...BAN. ...BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN.. BAN...BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN....BA N....BAN..BAN...BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN... .BAN....BAN....BAN..BAN...BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN ....BAN....BAN....BAN....BAN..

Chant reminds me of our kids when they were two years old and did not know how to constructively engage us in dialogue with why or alternatives and could only come out with ....NO....NO....NO....NO....NO.......NO....NO....N O....NO....NO.......NO....NO....NO....NO....NO.... ...NO....NO....NO....NO....NO.......NO....NO....NO ....NO....NO.......NO....NO....NO....NO....NO..... ..NO....NO....NO....NO....NO.......NO....NO....NO. ...NO....NO.......NO....NO....NO....NO....NO...... .NO....NO....NO....NO....NO.......NO....NO....NO.. ..NO....NO.......NO....NO....NO....NO....NO....... NO....NO....NO....NO....NO.......NO....NO....NO... .NO....NO...

I fear there are allot of two year olds in Sacramento these days.:eek:

08-24-2007, 6:22 AM
It is sad that the bird died - but it died from the treatment.

08-24-2007, 8:16 AM
My buddy Pedro wrote an article in the local Rag and this is my reply, of course it wasn't printed. There are more Condors alive today then when I was a kid but their Reserve offers no food because the water no longer flows.

The Condor Game

Pedro Nava thinks to save the Condor lead-hunting ammunition must be banned. He is wrong. Back in the early 1960ís the North Fork of the Matilija Creek was known as the Condor Reserve. It was great habitat with plenty of water, predators and prey because Condors donít hunt; they scavenge off of the leftover prey left behind by the predators.

During this time, until now 25 (twenty-five) million humans migrated into California, with another 25 million projected in the next 40 (forty) years. Water diversion which started in the 1930ís to provide water for all the new housing being built was in full swing. Swimming holes were abundant when I was a kid. Some 15 feet deep, it was great fun to jump off the big rocks at Matilija and Rose Valley into the huge pools of cool water, water that only trickles today.

With the water diverted, the prey animals moved and the predators followed to look for better habitat. Now the Condor had to starve or steadily increase its range to scavenge for food. This caused the Condor to come closer and closer to human habitation and face power lines, strung up to provide power to the new growing cities, domestic poisons and chemicals used around the human cities also became a problem for the Condor and so it goes.

Human overpopulation of Southern California, a coastal desert, and habitat destruction due to water diversion is the problem. Stop the water diversion and the prey and predator animals will return to the Condor Reserve, the Condor will be a lot safer and in a safer range. Time to remove the Matilija Dam that has been blight since 1947. Time to restore the Matilija Ecosystem.

This year the Fish and Game Commission wrestled with this political football for many months finally washed their hands of it and threw it back to the politicians. This issue is purely political and not based on sound Wildlife Management.

I urge Mr. Nava to take a California Hunter Safety Course; the course is peppered with firearms safety and ethical hunting practices, which includes proper disposal of remains of harvested animals. California is training extremely ethical Hunters.

The Condor is threatened by the human overpopulation of California and I doubt that will change anytime soon, not lead ammunition, a political scapegoat.

08-24-2007, 11:17 AM
looks like the condor is trying to check out.

Actually not.

Here are the population numbers from years past: Source: http://elibrary.unm.edu/sora/Condor/files/issues/v087n01/p0001-p0013.pdf

1930-1940: 60
1968: 50-60
1978: 25-35
1983: 19-22

And today's count? 144 CA condors according to the news this morning. (Though I now see it's up to 300 in the above quote).

Don't believe the hype. CA Condors are on the rebound. The ammo ban is not about the birds.

08-27-2007, 8:38 PM

Anyone know what went down at this meeting?
I saw the end of a news item on abc about this, but I didn't get the outcome.

ETA: I saw the news story again. They said the fish and game commission is going to look at the issue again in October. I'm confused, I thought it was up to the legislature at this point...

Another biased news story btw. They gave a couple of seconds to a pro-gun guy, and the rest was all about the poor condors dying... The also called it a "battle between conservationists and hunters" - never mind that hunters are major contributors to conservation.

08-31-2007, 12:29 PM
The Fish and Game Commission has 5 issues they are addressing: (1) the impact of lead ammunition on condors, (2) the impact of a lead ammunition ban on hunters and the economy, (3) the availability and cost of non-lead ammunition for all types of hunting firearms, (4) any alternatives they should be considering, and (5) the extent of condor "range."

The Commissioners called a special meeting on August 27, 2007 to discuss only the lead/condor issue.

The Commissioners previously indicated that they would not plan on implementing any ban they adopt (if that is the outcome) until July 1, 2008.

More pointedly - AB 821 passed out of the Appropriations committee and has headed to the full Senate.

09-06-2007, 10:32 AM

09-06-2007, 4:37 PM
according to CALNRA legislative alerts it's on it's way to the governor. should we wait to contact him?

09-06-2007, 8:20 PM
I sent him this email (bad spelling and all)
governor ,
Please DO NOT sign the bill for AB821 which is a lead ammo ban in hunting areas where the cali condor lives. This is a thinly vieled anti hunting and anti-gun law that will raise the cost of sport shooting and hunting about 10X due to the cost of special ammo (non lead) that will be needed in these areas. 98% of all ammo is lead core for your information. The ideas of this bill sounds nice when bantered about at cocktail parties, but it is very unrealistic. The same effect could come from making hunters bury their "gut piles" from the hunted animals, thus denying the condors the lead possibly contained inside the foul mess!.. As an avid shooter and one of ten republicans in california (that's how it feels..) I beg you not to sign this bill. The studies done were all by anti hunting liberals with major agendas. Please show me the Oak that I slung weights with on main street with Eddie and the boys is sound of mind!. Imagine a proposed ban on eggwhite omletts at the firehouse on main street because the discarded egg yolks were possibly making the local racoons and other garbage scavengers overweight and raising their cholesterol levels to unsafe limits....or so a study by P.E.T.A. said. Despite the .50 cal ban, we still love you and support all you have done.
Thank you

09-12-2007, 2:12 PM
Keep it up! we're overloading their phone system! :D

09-12-2007, 6:08 PM
sent mine.

09-18-2007, 5:54 AM
This maybe a VERY GOOD sign that the lead ammo bill is headed for a veto!

This just came over from the "firearms-alert@yahoogroups.com" system for firearm related news and alerts.

Schwarzenegger Fires Fish and Game Commissioner, Expected to Veto
Legislation Protecting Condors From Lead
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA, Sep. 17 -/E-Wire/-- Within a week of proclaiming
that California Republicans need to "come back into the mainstream,"
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has undermined state
conservation efforts by firing one of his own state Fish and Game
Commissioners, at the bidding of the National Rifle Association and
far-right Republican legislators. The governor last week forced the
resignation of Commissioner Judd Hanna, a Republican and hunter whom he
appointed in February, for his stance on the protection of endangered
California condors from lead poisoning..................

Full article can be found here.

09-18-2007, 11:26 AM
Call 1-916-445-2841

1 For English
2 for Assembly Bills
0 for a Human
Tell them that you oppose AB 821 - lead ammunition ban.

They'll say something along the lines of "I'll make a note of that and pass it on - have a good day."

That's all you have to do. The more you do that, the more likely it is that this will be added to the automated phone tree.


09-18-2007, 12:44 PM
Call 1-916-445-2841

1 For English
2 for Assembly Bills
0 for a Human
Tell them that you oppose AB 821 - lead ammunition ban.

They'll say something along the lines of "I'll make a note of that and pass it on - have a good day."

That's all you have to do. The more you do that, the more likely it is that this will be added to the automated phone tree.


Let's get it on the quick meny so we can REALLY hit it! :D

09-25-2007, 8:43 AM
Appears the 'other' CA 'pro-gun' organizations think they're actually helping when in fact they fanned the flames.

09-30-2007, 2:12 AM
but like others I see this as a back-door way to banning ammo for other uses.

Yep, take a lesson from History.
Here in Santa Cruz a buncha' hippies got all upity about lead contaminating the soil at the public range. All it took was a few "studies" that found "elevated levels" of lead to outlaw lead bullets at the range turn it into an LEO exclusive range.
Yes that's right, they closed the range to the public because they couldn't trust us to use lead free bullets.

09-30-2007, 2:57 AM
BTW I sent my e-mail and made my phone call. =)