There’s a piece on CNN online today about so-called “green ammo” for hunters. It would appear that the lead in bullets poses a hazard — not just to those animals who get shot but also to scavenging animals, including California Condors, who eat the leavings of hunters. The lead also is present in the meat of animals who get killed and eaten. In one sampling, half of the deer meat donated to a food bank tested positive for lead.
The answer to this problem, at least for some, lies with non-lead bullets, with copper the metal of choice. Sidestepping for the moment the ethical issues embedded in hunting, I have to hop on my rhetorical hobby horse again and decry the term “green ammo.” It perpetuates the idea that hunting in its present form is either environmentally friendly or environmentally neutral. In my view, it is neither, regardless of one’s choice of bullet. Others, including the Hog Blog (whose author is a vocal proponent of non-lead bullets), disagree. More on the issue here.
Perhaps most remarkable, though, is the opposition to non-lead bullets led by — you guessed it — the NRA (as well as the National Shooting Sports Foundation). Apparently, advocating that hunters use bullets not made of lead is a thinly veiled attempt to take guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens. Who knew?
Filed under: Uncategorized Tagged: | animal ethics, animal suffering, animal welfare, copper bullets, environmental law, environmentalism, exotic animals, green ammo, green bullets, hunting, lead, lead poisoning, nra