Sportsmen and women across the United States are facing yet another misguided threat from the government, and it’s one we’ve all seen before: a proposal to ban lead ammunition.
In early June, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service announced its proposed 2022-2023 Hunt Fish Rule. The FWS’s annual rulemaking usually benefits hunters and anglers by opening new species, acres, and hours on National Wildlife Refuges. But this year’s proposal includes an entirely unwelcome aspect: the immediate restriction or phaseout of the use of lead ammunition on National Wildlife Refuges. The proposed rule comes amid a nationwide ammunition shortage and would have serious consequences on the ability to hunt on public lands, as well as the primary source of conservation funding in the U.S.
Anti-lead activists attempt to sell the narrative that alternatives to lead ammunition are “easily accessible to hunters” and “cheaper to buy.” This could not be further from the truth. In fact, manufacturing traditional lead-based ammunition has shown to be a much simpler process than using alternatives like copper and is far more cost-efficient.
In 2021, the Congressional Sportsmen Foundation conducted research into the price of lead ammunition versus nonlead ammunition in Maine amid a state legislature debate over a lead ammunition ban bill. The result, when sampling the ammunition calibers most popular among deer and bear hunters, was that “non-lead ammunition was, on average, 59% more expensive than lead options.” In addition, there are simply no viable nonlead alternatives for some calibers, most notably .22 ammunition used for hunting small game.
Traditional ammunition means that everyday hunters have one less major cost to worry about to enjoy the sport they love. Under the proposed rule, however, steep prices for nonlead forms of ammunition would be of concern and potentially a reason to stay home instead of going afield during the upcoming hunting seasons. The problem is even more acute during the current national ammunition shortage that is keeping many hunters from being able to buy even traditional ammunition.
Sportsmen deserve better from our government, especially during an inflation crisis.
What’s even more concerning about the proposal to ban lead ammunition would be its devastating impact on the significant funds generated from the Pittman-Robertson Act, also known as the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program. Since enacted, this law has allocated billions of hunter-paid tax dollars across all 50 states toward wildlife restoration, conservation, hunter education, and safety programs through an excise tax on firearms, ammunition, and archery equipment. In 2021, sportsmen and women generated a record $1.5 billion in conservation funding thanks to the Pittman-Robertson Act.
USFWS Director Martha Williams lauded “the remarkable conservation impact of the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program.” But that record funding will be put in jeopardy if hunters, anglers, and shooters are dissuaded by government policies that reduce their ability to participate in these activities.
If hunters can’t afford to hunt because of higher alternative ammunition costs, the Pittman-Robertson Act would become starved for funding, unable to allocate ample resources toward critical projects and hunting programs. Inexperienced hunters would also lose opportunities to participate in critical educational and safety programs.
Perhaps the greatest concern is the limited scientific support for this proposal. The USFWS cites no studies or data in the proposed rule, and even anti-lead activists can point to no studies that show the use of traditional ammunition causes population-level impacts on wildlife or the environment. There is simply no scientific support for an across-the-board ban on traditional ammunition — especially considering the consequences of shutting down hunter access to federal lands and forcing a significant decline in conservation funding.
The USFWS and anti-hunters must reconsider imposing a harsh ban on lead ammunition, which in the final analysis is a shortsighted attempt to shrink America’s hunting community. Sportsmen and women across the U.S. are critical to maintaining public lands and protecting wildlife, and we must defend their rights at all costs and reduce the unnecessary barriers to entry that they face each day.
Ben Cassidy is the executive vice president for international government and public affairs at Safari Club International.
