More discussion on non-lead ammo - New York Times

Big Fin

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2000
Messages
16,529
Location
Bozeman, MT
I find it interesting how many hunting topics the New York Times has published in the last couple years. Some of them are helpful in sharing hunting insights to people who probably have never had any exposure to hunting, or if they have had any exposure, it is a good possibility that exposure did not reinforce a positive message about hunting.

This one is about non-lead ammo. I had Leland and Chris from the Non-lead Partnership on our podcast. If you listened to it, you know they do not want anything to do with requiring lead-free ammo via legislation, rather they are promoting voluntary use by hunters/shooters.

This piece follows an Oregon woman on her elk hunt with her father. They are hunting on a Nature Conservancy property that allows hunting and promotes use of non-lead ammo.

.......Revenue from hunting is vital to conservation programs, enforcement and research. Many wildlife officials are themselves proud hunters and do not want to contribute to the decline of this pastime, not to mention the practical role that hunting plays in conservation efforts like the one at the 33,000-acre Zumwalt Prairie Preserve, run by The Nature Conservancy in Wallowa County, Ore.

Working with state wildlife authorities, the conservancy grants access to roughly 250 hunters each year as part of an effort to control the number of elks, who overgraze the land, destroying much of the aspen and woody shrubs that birds, insects, and small animals need to survive. When hunters arrive, they are required to check in with the conservancy’s staff and if they show they are using non-lead ammunition, they are entered into a drawing for cash-card prizes. Slightly more than half of the hunters have switched to lead-free ammunition.
.......

NY Times article at this link - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/24/us/ammunition-lead-bullets-condors.html
 
A few images of a non-lead bullet recovered from Matthew's Wyoming bull last week. This was a Nosler E-Tip, 180 grain from a .300 Win Mag at 285 yards.

First shot was a complete pass through and not recovered. This one, a follow-up that was probably not necessary, was a broadside, passing through both shouler blades and coming to rest under the hide on the opposite side. This has been the common result on elk with these E-Tip bullets.

20181124_121045.jpg

20181124_115433.jpg
 
Good stuff BF.

Looks pretty much the same as all the Barnes bullets I have recovered too...all 2nd shots that came to rest under opposite hide.
The 2 AB's that I have found same way were more distorted & missing a petal.
I was wondering if the E-tips were working for you as well as the AB's had been BF?
I sure like the way the AB's work in my rifle
 
I just got some 180 gr e-tips, I am going to try them out in my new to me .300 wby. Your podcast about non lead bullets had lots of good information and I will try to use them on all new load developments.
 
Six animals this year with 180gr Nosler Etips and zero issues. One buck didn't know he was hit, so I put another in him, but otherwise superb performance.

I hope to see many more switch, mainly for what it can save raptors from (facloner here). Nearly all carry some lead in their bloodstream now.
 
Six animals this year with 180gr Nosler Etips and zero issues. One buck didn't know he was hit, so I put another in him, but otherwise superb performance.

I hope to see many more switch, mainly for what it can save raptors from (facloner here). Nearly all carry some lead in their bloodstream now.

How much damage to vital organs have you seen? I'm wondering if e tips don't retain too much weight, causing small wound channels. Looking to try them next year, just want to get some real input.
 
I loaded and shot E-Tips before Fin did. Before loaded ammo was available. They worked great. Accubonds do also. Shoot what shoots. mtmuley
 
How much damage to vital organs have you seen? I'm wondering if e tips don't retain too much weight, causing small wound channels. Looking to try them next year, just want to get some real input.

Wounds have been smaller than id like. but internal damage is massive. Blood trails have been short and oretty much unnecessary. All lung shots and the lungs were basically liquified.
 
Wounds have been smaller than id like. but internal damage is massive. Blood trails have been short and oretty much unnecessary. All lung shots and the lungs were basically liquified.

That was my experience with a 100gn TTSX out of a 25-06 on an antelope at 285y this fall. Pencil hole in, pencil hole out, animal made it two steps. By the time I walked over, there was a blood pool out the mouth as big as the animal. Both lungs appeared to be put through a blender. I am no expert on terminal tissue ballistics, but it appears a TTSX in the lungs of an antelope does the trick.
 
Nonlead ammo will take me entirely out of the game so far as rifle hunting goes. I imagine that might happen, but hopefully, not too soon.
 
I live where it was legislated and the whole situation blows!! Starting next year in comifornia we are legally required to use it for ALL hunting form ground squirrels and doves all the way up to sheep. And a major issue now is local availability, I can only imagine what it will be once the total ban takes effect. It's already compounded since we can't order ammunition online unless it's sent to an FFL and here soon we're also going to have to start getting a background check to buy ammunition so even more hoops to get through. As for the performance, I'll preface it by saying I've only used it here in California on smaller sized deer and found, through loosing a few, that light for caliber bullets at screaming velocities are best. One day I hope to try them on an elk here in California and will continue to use them where required, but there's a reason why when I go hunting out of state I use traditional ammunition
 
Last edited:
Nonlead ammo will take me entirely out of the game so far as rifle hunting goes. I imagine that might happen, but hopefully, not too soon.

Seriously? You're that attached to a piece of soft metal that you'll stop hunting without it?
 
Seriously? You're that attached to a piece of soft metal that you'll stop hunting without it?

I am that attached to rifles and powder that can't be adapted to nonlead ammo. I hunt a little differently than most folks here do. The last time I used even a copper jacketed bullet was nearly 30 yrs ago.
 
During muzzleloader season I killed an antelope using a copper projectile.

I agree that giving up hunting over lead is just silly, even for a "traditionalist". Hell, I don't know anybody that shoots lead arrows.
 
Call me silly, but you would be called something less desirable if you were shooting copper in one of these

Moose%20and%20Ballard%20A%20small.jpg
 
One size doesn't fit all. This topic shouldn't turn into who is right, who is wrong. I want to try e-tips next season, but pray that using solids never becomes a law, and would never consider myself better than someone just by the bullet they shoot. Now that's just silly.
 
Nonlead ammo will take me entirely out of the game so far as rifle hunting goes. I imagine that might happen, but hopefully, not too soon.

Why would that be the case? They make copper bullets every application imaginable.
 
Last edited:
I have used copper bullets for awhile now due to fear of possibly exposing my kids to lead.
They bullets themselves are very accurate in general and penetrate very well. They also do less damage if bone isnt hit, exits wounds can be small and if you dont hit bone they can run a bit longer on average.
However I am against any sort of lead ban. I still use a ton of lead and copper bullets on varmints.
 
Last edited:
GOHUNT Insider

Forum statistics

Threads
110,815
Messages
1,935,404
Members
34,888
Latest member
Jack the bear
Back
Top