105
INTRODUCTION
AsaContractingPartytotheAfrican-EurasianMigratoryWaterbirds
Agreement (AEWA), the UK has an obligation to phase out the
use of lead shot over wetlands (AEWA 1999, 2002, 2008) (with the
initial deadline for this being 2000). Consequently, restrictions on
the use of lead shot were introduced in England in 1999 (HMSO
1999, 2002a, 2003), Wales in 2002 (HMSO 2002b), Scotland in
2004 (HMSO 2004) and Northern Ireland in 2009 (HMSO 2009).
In England andWales, the Regulations make it illegal to use lead
shot for shootingwildfowl, coot Fulicaatra andmoorhen Gallinula
chloropus, and over certain listed wetlands (Sites of Special
Scientific Interest) and the foreshore. In Scotland and Northern
Ireland the use of lead is not permitted over any wetlands.
Despite this UK-wide legislation, lead poisoning from
ammunition sources remains a cause of significant mortality
and morbidity for primarily waterbirds and likely also terrestrial
gamebirds (which consume lead shot directly from the
environment) and raptors (which consume lead shot and bullet
fragments within prey and carrion) (Newth et al. 2012, Pain et al.
2015). Newth et al. (2012) detected elevated blood lead levels in
a third of live wildfowl tested in Britain. Additionally they found
no reduction in mortality from lead poisoning in the 11 year
period following introduction of legislation in England in 1999.
This ongoing problem is likely due to illegal use of lead gunshot
where waterbirds feed (partial restrictions having been shown,
within the UK and more widely, to be difficult to enforce (AEWA
2012)) and/or legal use of lead shot in terrestrial waterbird
feeding habitats (Newth et al. 2012). Recently deposited lead
gunshot is likely to be more readily available to waterbirds than
shot deposited historically which may become increasingly
inaccessible over time as it becomes incorporated into the
substrate (Anderson et al. 2000, Newth et al. 2012).
The issue of the risks from the toxic effects of lead from
ammunition sources (both gunshot and bullets) has prompted
much discussion from different stakeholder groups in the
UK and internationally, including the shooting1 and wildlife
conservation2 communities as well as public health bodies 3
and animal welfare organisations 4. A number of key findings
and developments related to lead in the last decade have been
critical to the discourse in the UK, including:
1 Those primarily involved in recreational but also subsistence shooting (including some pest control activities as part of this). 2 Those organisations whose sole remit
is wildlife conservation - a label to describe e.g. WWT and RSPB, accepting overlap with the conservation work of the shooting community. 3Those organisations or
bodies with responsibility for human health e.g. in relation to food safety such as the Food Standards Agency. 4Those organisations whose remit is animal welfare:
may include organisations who deal with treating sick wildlife and its rehabilitation. 5
6 One Health: the collaborative effort of multiple disciplines —working locally, nationally, and globally — to attain optimal health for people, animals and the
environment. 7 Lead Ammunition Group website
1. A greater understanding of the degree and extent of
fragmentation of lead ammunition within shot game to
which the human consumer is then inadvertently exposed
(e.g. Watson et al. 2009, Pain et al. 2010, BfR 2011, Iqbal et al.
2011);
2. Further to the 2008 Peregrine Fund conference, “Ingestion
of Lead from Spent Ammunition: Implications for Wildlife
and Humans”5 and its proceedings (Watson et al. 2009), the
subsequent increasing body of scientific reports of risks
posed by lead from ammunition to the health of humans
(e.g. EFSA 2010), wildlife and domestic animals (e.g. Payne et
al. 2013), and of wider environmental contamination i.e. lead
ammunition poses a cross-cutting One Health6 issue (e.g.
Johnson et al. 2014);
3. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)
funding the Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust (WWT) and the
British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC) to
undertake a study into compliance with existing regulations
in England (Cromie et al. 2010) as poor compliance had been
measured in 2002 (Cromie et al. 2002): the results indicating
continued poor compliance and suggesting that the law had
been ineffective in achieving its aim;
4. Defra and the Food Standards Agency (FSA) setting up the
Lead Ammunition Group7 in 2010 in response to concerns
about risks of lead ammunition to wild and domestic animal
health and human health: in the following five years the
group aimed to assess and address these risks and reported
to government with its findings in June 20157;
5. ‘A Scientific Opinion on Lead in Food’ by the European Food
Safety Authority (the European Union’s independent provider
of scientific advice on risks from food) (EFSA 2010): with
consequent food safety advice regarding game shot with
lead ammunition produced by the health/food agencies of
at least five European countries (BfR 2011, AESAN 2012, Food
Standards Agency 2012, VKM 2013, SNFA 2014);
6. As a Contracting Party to the UN-Convention on Migratory
Species, the UK adopting Resolution XI.15 (UNEP-CMS
2014a) in 2014 whose guidelines (UNEP-CMS 2014b) include
a 2017 deadline for the phase out of all lead ammunition in
both terrestrial and wetland habitats.
Sociological and political barriers to transition to non-toxic ammuntion: UK experience