When Ryan Zincke rode into office as Interior Secretary in 2017, one of the first things he did when he slid out of the saddle was revoking an Obama administration rule banning the use of lead ammunition and tackle for hunting on federal lands.

New U.S. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke on Thursday issued an order overturning an Obama administration ban on the controversial use of lead ammunition and fishing tackle used on federal lands and waters, in a nod to hunters and fishermen on his first day on the job.

Zinke, who was a first-term Montana Congressman and a former Navy SEAL, arrived for his first day at work at the Interior Department in Washington on a horse named Tonto escorted by mounted U.S. Park Police officers.

…President Barack Obama’s Fish and Wildlife Service had issued the lead ban on Jan. 19, one day before the inauguration of President Donald Trump, to protect birds and fish from lead poisoning. The move was met with sharp criticism from the National Rifle Association (NRA), which called it Obama’s “final assault on gun owners’ and sportsmen’s rights.”

It wasn’t just the NRA who were steamed about the last-minute move, but they make a convenient boogie man in anything to do with weapons.

So, what that meant was that lead bullets could be used once again to rifle or pistol hunt and lead sinkers, etc. for the anglers. The order had no effect on the decades-old and pretty successful national lead shot prohibition for waterfowl hunting, which went into full effect in 1991.

The ban on the use of lead shot for hunting waterfowl was phased-in starting with the 1987-88 hunting season. The ban became nationwide in 1991. Nontoxic shot regulations apply only to waterfowl, defined as the family Anatidae (ducks, geese, [including brant], and swans) and coots. Nontoxic shot is defined as any shot type that does not cause sickness and death when ingested by migratory birds.

As migratory waterfowl tend to gobble things up out of the wetlands muck and mud, and there can be dozens to hundreds of pellets in every load, it quickly made a quantifiable difference in the lead poisoning rate of ducks, geese, etc.

…About 10 years after the ban, scientists released a study about tests on thousands of ducks harvested by hunters in the Mississippi Flyway, an important migration route along the Mississippi River and tributaries. They estimated that the ban on lead shot reduced poisoning deaths of mallards by 64 percent and that overall ingestion of toxic pellets declined by 78 percent. According to the researchers, the ban prevented the deaths of about 1.4 million ducks by lead poisoning in 1997 alone.

The data is a good deal more nebulous with lead bullets and fishing geegaws – which, arguably, already impact the environment much less physically by their numbers.

…Towsley, meanwhile, considers no-lead laws and mandates “sadly misguided.” He prefers letting hunters decide which bullets to use. So does Keith Tidball, a professor at Cornell University’s Department of Natural Resources in New York. Tidball notes that government bans on DDT and lead shot for waterfowl hunting helped the state’s bald eagle population rise from one nesting pair in 1976 to 350 pairs in 2018.

“During all that time of record growth in eagle numbers, lead ammunition was, and still is, being used for hunting deer and small-game,” Tidball said.

One rifle shot is one lead bullet but one birdshot shotgun blast could be hundreds of pellets sinking to the waterway bottom for waterfowl to scoop up. Definitely an exposure to toxin difference. Even if you had to cut your sinker loose over a snag, I don’t see a fish snatching it up afterward and they certainly don’t bite them while you’re actively fishing. Likewise, there hasn’t been a mass lead poisoning event in the Indiana woods from all the squirrel hunters missing the occasional tree-scampering vermin with their .22s. I believe quite a few hunters nd processors already cut away the bloodshot meat to reduce lead exposure, as well.

Back in 2021, the Center for Biological Diversity, one of John Kerry’s favorite groups for policy consultations, filed a lawsuit over another Trump rule opening millions more federal acres to hunting and fishing. The horror, right? And instead of defending the rule and, ostensibly American pastimes, the Biden administration settled. I mean, rolled over like a beat dog to get its belly scratched and gave up whatever they could and then some for the environmental whacko scritches.

…Instead of defending the rule, the Biden administration asked the court to delay proceedings in the case in February 2022, and in November agreed to a settlement with the Center for Biological Diversity that stipulated the government would take wide-ranging steps to protect wildlife “harmed by expanded hunting and fishing” on national wildlife refuges.

Under the settlement, the FWS promised to expand lead ammunition prohibitions across various refuges beginning in 2026 as part of the 2023-2024 annual rule expected to be proposed in May. The 2022-2023 rule finalized in September had only banned lead ammunition throughout the Patoka National Wildlife Refuge in southern Indiana.

Then there’s the simple feeling many sportsmen have that it’s a huge overreach by a gun-hating government to outright ban the use of traditional equipment. No one is currently doing anything to dissuade them that this isn’t the case.

…”Since this administration’s been in, the numbers have shrunk every year to lower numbers. It’s really just kind of been masking tape over what’s really been bans,” [Benjamin] Cassidy continued. “We’ve seen millions of acres closed and we’ve seen lead bans being put in place.”

Cassidy noted that as recently as Friday morning, the Biden administration announced in federal filings its intention to prohibit recreational shooting on approximately 94,900 acres of lands managed by the Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service.

The announced plans have riled some senators up, too, and they are moving on legislation to block the anticipated regulations even before the official announcement in May.

U.S. Senators Jim Risch and Mike Crapo (both R-Idaho) joined Senator Steve Daines (R-Mont.) and 20 additional colleagues to introduce legislation to prohibit U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) from banning the use of traditional lead ammunition or tackle on public lands unless such action is supported by the best available science and state wildlife and fish agencies

“Hunters and anglers are some of Idaho’s greatest supporters of conservation,” said Risch. “Banning traditional lead ammunition and tackle on public lands would significantly limit sportsmen’s access to recreation and directly reduce critical conservation tools and state revenues. As an avid outdoorsman, I am proud to support Idaho’s long-held traditions and preserve Second Amendment rights for responsible, law-abiding sportsmen and women.”

Attempts to ban traditional lead ammo and tackle are activist driven nonsense with no scientific basis. Sportsmen have been feeding their families off the land since before WY was a state and do not need radical environmentalists telling them how to do it.https://t.co/4jjpjwyK3v

— Senator Cynthia Lummis (@SenLummis) April 23, 2023

Copper vs lead ammunition is still a hotly debated topic in the hunting community. too. While copper bullets have come a long way in development for lethality and are earning wide approval for game hunting, they are still expensive compared to a box of off-the-shelf traditional rounds.

…Several respondents also justified the higher prices of copper bullets, which typically range from $44 to $55 for a 20-round box. That’s roughly twice as expensive as bargain-priced “cup-and-core” copper-jacketed lead bullets, but it’s comparable to prices for premium bonded or partitioned lead-core jacketed bullets.

I saved the best, the absolutely most classic example of the overreach of the hysterical progressive-enviro-whacko crowd for last. When they get a mewling, enabling administration that greenlights their every fantasy, no outrageous demand is too over-the-top to say no to.

Without further ado may I present:

…Additionally, under the November settlement with the Center for Biological Diversity, the FWS agreed to respond to the group’s petition demanding a lead ammunition phaseout across all national wildlife refuges.

The settlement even required the agency to tell hunters to use bear spray when attacked by a grizzly bear instead of shooting the endangered animal.

Of course, Biden and Co. aren’t going to rescue Americans in Afghanistan or Sudan or wherever.

They just want you eaten – they’re not picky about how or where.

Next year they’ll be telling you to use harsh language in a loud, outside voice because bear spray could be an instrument of oppression.