This is obvious because of the way it's being spun; obviously by those that haven't hunted a day in their lives. What is it? They say the lead left in animals killed by hunters would harm the scavengers. Get it? What hunter shoots an animal and leaves it lying around? The purpose of shooting game is to take it home and eat or stuff, not leave it lying in the woods. Anyone that knows about hunting knows this is true.
Strange extremist groups like Defenders of Wildlife, Audubon California, and the Humane Society of the United States are saying the lead allegedly left by hunters in dead animals or birds is a source of pollution. Can they get any more psycho than that?
Here's what one nut from the Defenders of Wildlife said: "There really is no question that lead ammo is a threat. To pass a bill in California would set the stage for this happening throughout the country, the way low-emissions vehicle standards changed the market nationwide."
You heard it straight from the mouth: there is no question lead ammo left in animals in California are a threat. It boggles the mind to see this type of stupid.
There are of course studies to confirm these assertions, from none other than University of California, Davis and the University of California, Santa Cruz, which has made unproven claims that these supposed poisonings are the highest during the hunting seasons. Of course the problem is still what has been already mentioned: hunters don't leave animals lying around in the woods after shooting them. Period!
So while there could be an occasional situation where, for example, a deer could be shot and die later because it couldn't be found by the hunter, how many of those actually happen, and how could they be considered a pollution threat?
It's ridiculous, and only people blinded by a fanatical agenda could even put forth an idea like this and think it is a serious one.
No comments:
Post a Comment