Primitive Archer
Main Discussion Area => Around the Campfire => Topic started by: Zuma on November 06, 2015, 08:13:06 pm
-
According to the folks that did the research--
they wanted to blame a large part of the implanted/
transplanted Condor deaths on lead poison.
This study was in the Grand Canyon area.
The thing that struck me peculiar was that they
blamed it on hunting losses, creatures that are
shot and not tracked or recovered. The Condors then
eat these creatures and the lead that they consume
brings about their demise.
I say BS. Any thoughts
Zuma
-
I tend to agree with you.
-
Scott van Arsdale from New York, knapper and eagle researcher for his career says this is a common cause of death for Eagles. Lead poisoning from ingesting lost animals from hunting. I too find that hard to believe. What is the percentage of animals that are lost fist and foremost and then what percentage of that are consumed by Eagles. He has said it is often the gut piles where there is a high percentage of the lead. How many gut piles in the open. I have never seen an eagle in the deep woods, where the majority of poles are. On the condor note how much hunting is there in the Grand Canyon? I am skeptical.
-
Uh NO.
How many pounds of lead are they reffering to per dead/lost animal?
I think the average bullet contains about 2-3 grams of lead.
-
Death by lead poisoning is usually what happens to a varmint that annoys me too much :)
-
If this nonsense is true how come you don't see dead buzzards lying all over the place, they are usually first to a kill.
-
All great replies.
It's hard to understand how they can quantify
their results and why they would go in that direction.
If I find some time I may snoop this subject.
Thanks Zuma
-
It's hard to understand how they can quantify
their results and why they would go in that direction.
I agree,its hard to understand how,but why,i understand fully.
-
I'm sure jw will chime in at some point and i know he is pro lead ban on bullets, but i have read several studies claiming most of the lead ingested was from lead paint chips, anyways there is not much we can do here in calif they banned lead entirely for hunting in the next few years, funny its still ok at the range
-
many years ago,i lived and worked on a remote ranch in Ca,It was the location,that the last wild native Condor was spotted in the State.They wanted to reintroduce the species there,but the owner refused to allow it.When i asked him why,he replied,if i allow it,they will put me out of business and end up owning this ranch.Since then,i have seen a Nature conservancy organization,do that very thing,on several privately owned lands and even on public lands.
-
I'm not buying it. Y a think about all the dead animals out there and the percentage that would have lead in them, now if they said Ford or Chevy residues was killing the condors I would believe it, Automobil road kills everywhere but condors must chose Hunters kill. Something stinks with this story and it isn't the road kills :o :( I might have been born at night , but not last night. Bob
-
Here are some sources that claim lead poisoning of birds. I just googled "raptor deaths due to lead poisoning." I didn't read all of them, but there are biologists doing autopsies. I am guessing some of them are right. Just because something doesn't seem likely doesn't mean it isn't happening. I would like to see condors and eagles continue to be a part of the environment. They are beautiful animals (in the air, of course).
1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game and Arizona Game and Fish Department
2 Tranel and Kimmel. 2009. Impacts of lead ammunition on wildlife, the environment, and human health—A literature review and implications for Minnesota. In Ingestion of Lead from Spent Ammunition: Implications for Wildlife and Humans. The Peregrine Fund.
3 Finkelstein et al. 2011. Lead Poisoning from Ingested Ammunition is Precluding Recovery of the Endangered California Condor.
Presentation at Society of Toxicology annual meeting, March 2011.
4 Sidor et al. Mortality of Common Loons in New England 1987 to 2000. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 2003. 39(2).
5 University of Minnesota Raptor Center.
6 Harmata and Restani. 1995. Environmental contaminants and cholinesterase in blood of vernal migrant bald and golden eagles in Montana. Intermountain Journal of Sciences 1(1):1-15.
7 Schulz et al. 2002. Spent-Shot Availability and Ingestion on Areas Managed for Mourning Doves. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30:112-120.
8 Schulz et al. 2006. Acute Lead Toxicosis in Mourning Doves. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:413-421.
9 D.J. Case & Associates. 2006. Non-Toxic Shot Regulation Inventory of the Untied States and Canada. Report to the Ad Hoc Mourning Dove and Lead Toxicosis Working Group. Final Report, August 2006.
10 Rogers et al. 2009. Lead ingestion by scavenging mammalian carnivores in the Yellowstone ecosystem. Extended abstract in Ingestion of Lead from Spent Ammunition: Implications for Wildlife and Humans. The Peregrine Fund.
11 Finkelstein et al. 2003. Lead poisoning of seabirds: Environmental risks from leaded paint at a decommissioned military base. Environmental Science and Technology, 37: 3256-3260.
12 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Lead Poisoning: A Historical Perspective.
13 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
14 Anderson et al. 2000. Ingestion of Lead and Non-Toxic Shotgun Pellets by Ducks in the Mississippi Flyway. Journal of Wildlife Management 64:848-857.
-
Thanks for all the input and links. It is good education imo.
My first problem is -- A Condor is a very big bird with a digestive system
like municipal waste treatment plant. A pellet or a .45 cal I would think
if ingested would fly through the birds guts like you know what through
a tin horn. Not much time in the body to poison.
Second-- The number of these birds is very small, as I would imagine
the numbers of dead animals not recovered from being shot is.
So the odds of the two even encountering each other seem very small.
Although I could see this as a minor problem in much smaller critters
that might find it difficult to pass the lead.
Condor re-introduction is a failing multi million dollar endeavor.
Much of that money keeps these folks in jobs like catching the Condors
yearly and giving them blood poisoning treatments to clean their blood.
BTW I can't find where a single lead fragment has ever been found inside
one of these Condors,
Zuma
-
Condors swallow small stones the aid grinding food in their crops. When a bullet gets in there it doesn't get out til it's ground to powder. Much more dangerous for birds than mammals.
-
Condors swallow small stones the aid grinding food in their crops. When a bullet gets in there it doesn't get out til it's ground to powder. Much more dangerous for birds than mammals.
That is interesting. Thanks DC. Do you have some info we could look at.
If so, you would think the scientists/bird docs would
find that lead in their crops when they do their anual evaluation of all the birds.
But they don't unless I am missing something.
They only find it in their blood??
Zuma
-
When I was looking at stuff I was sure I saw something about a .22 found in a condors crop but I can't find it now. Maybe I imagined it. I can't remember now what my search criteria was. There are so many sites pro and con and some pro masquerading as con and vice versa. I'll keep looking.
-
Found it! Let me check. Oh they sell t-shirts. Do a search on "ventana wildlife condors and lead" I haven't read the whole thing yet. It's just one bird, it doesn't prove anything except that one condor ate a bullet.
-
Good memory DC
Mods please remove the link if you see something commercial.
I don't but I would rather be safe than sorry.
I'm thinking a non profit org.
I found the link. It's about California Condors so
really not the same bird ppulation.
Nevertheless good info. Not to sure if the bullet
was in the stomach or crop. perhaps some of you
folks will know. Also there is a photo of the .22 bullet.
It looks totally intact, in other words I wonder if enough
of the lead could have been absorbed into the blood
stream to cause death??
I include a couple lines from the link I thought interesting.
California Condors and Lead Poisoning - Ventana Wildlife Society
www.ventanaws.org/species_condors_lead/ - (http://www.ventanaws.org/species_condors_lead/ -) Similar
Cause of death, through necropsy, was determined to be lead toxicosis. A radiograph showed multiple metal fragments and a bullet-shaped object in the digestive tract (Figure 2). The object was removed and determined to be a .22 caliber lead bullet (Figure 3).
Figure 3. .22 caliber lead bullet recovered from condor #318. Photo by Zeka Kuspa
We thank the many hunters who participated in our free non-lead ammunition program. We raised more than $50,000 in 2012 to support local hunters making the switch through this program, and we hope to raise more funds to continue in 2013. We greatly appreciate the 221 hunters who completed our online survey. For a summary report of the 2012 free non-lead ammunition program, including results of the survey, click here.
Zuma
-
I think I saw that show recently. Discovery channel I think? Anyway, one of the condors they released into the wild turned up dead because it ate a quarter (coin) that blocked its intestine. That says it all right there.
The idea that lead poisoning kills condors is one that sounds plausible and can get you a big grant so you can "study" the problem. If you spin it in a way that makes the problem a "subtle menace" and not an obvious problem (like human litter) then it attracts intellectual types and their money and agendas.
Just follow the money.
-
I thought we were talking about California Condors ??? ???
-
Yes Jack it is a high dollar industry but I think the
idea and attempts are somewhat noble.
I guess I question the notion of these creatures
supposedly being released back into the wild.
I just wonder if the world has just become to small
for the big Condor, big bears, elephants, big cats
etc. I see their survival in the wild as mostly wishful
thinking. I hope I am totally incorrect. I have seen
miraculous strides in turkeys,eagles,osprey,and all
the hawks and so many other birds since the ban of DDT.
A lot having to do with reintroduction too
DC it's in my first post. The Grand Canyon area.
But I really don't think it makes a great difference.
Perhaps a little different climate and population.
Other than that I might assume the programs and
problems are similar.
Zuma
-
(I know it's long, but I wanted to cover some ground)
If you take into account something like over 10,000 papers written on lead poisoning in raptors, less than 50 have disputed lead toxicity, and several of those were bought and paid for by organizations created to dispute the evidence...well, I dunno.
Some of the best evidence comes from the University of Minnesota Raptor Center's research. They deal with an average of something over 100 eagles annually, 75% have high levels of lead in their blood stream. These eagles begin showing up immediately after deer season opens up (bald eagles are just a well dressed vulture, as behavior goes) and continue until such time as ice out in the spring when they go back to fishing for a majority of their food.
The bloodwork regularly shows two of the four isotopes of lead. One isotope is the one found in leaded gasoline, and it is never found in the bloodwork. Second is a background isotope found naturally occurring in soils and, typically, is waters where glacial deposits left cinnabarite (a lead bearing ore), and this occurs in low levels. But the third and fourth isotopes are found in galena ores that are mined for lead smelting and is used in all kinds of industrial uses, including bullets. THAT is the one that shows up in high levels in sick birds.
Now, to narrow down possible sourcing of that lead in the bloodstream, they also began testing for copper and zinc. Why those two? Gilding metal, 95% copper, 5% zinc. That's the common jacket for dang near every modern bullet manufactured. Copper and zinc also shows up in the blood of lead poisoned raptors at the exact ratio of 95:5. This is what is known in science as a one to one correlation.
As for the vulture family, yes, they have the most amazing digestive system in the world! Turkey vultures can eat ANTHRAX INFECTED DEAD ANIMALS and digest the anthrax spores, rendering them harmless. That's pure ornery! They are also so fast in their digestion that they have to work extra hard to extract calcium before the food passes thru the digestive tract. Consequently, they are instinctually driven to swallow ANYTHING hard that they encounter while feasting on the bloated corpse of what they find. This instinct serves to drive them to eat any bone fragments they find, but also means they will grab up any bullet fragments.
Now, for bullet fragments. If you want a basic primer on what happens to a bullet after it strikes a body, follow this link: http://www.peregrinefund.org/subsites/conference-lead/PDF/0109%20Stroud.pdf
High speed bullets react differently than pre-smokeless powder rounds in that on impact the lead suffers more "ablation". The bullet mushrooms and exposes more surface area. This means more surface area of lead and tiny flakes of lead are freed up and remain behind in the tissue. As a sphere doubles in surface area, it triples in volume. That means the smaller the flake, the more surface area for a given mass. And it is the amount of surface area is what is the killer. A gram of lead as a solid piece is almost indigestible for a human as it will pass thru our digestive tract. A gram of lead dust is tens of thousands of times more digestible and will result in significantly higher levels of lead in the blood. When a bullet leaves behind what is now called a "lead snowstorm" of tiny fragments in the chest cavity, you leave an amount of lead behind that is extremely digestible and highly toxic.
Now, lead is known to be toxic. It is one of a very, very, very small number of elements on the periodic table that our bodies do not need in any amount. Many elements are toxic at higher levels, but are a necessary mineral at low levels. Lead is not only unnecessary, but causes irreparable damage at any level. Not only that, but it cannot be excreted from your system once it is absorbed. Not the liver, the kidneys, the lympatic system, nor the lungs, or any system designed to excrete wastes. Once your body, or the body of any animal from the largest mammals to the smallest bacteria, absorbs an atom of lead, it is there to stay. Permanently. Forever. Amen. Chelation therapy is necessary, a chemical that is more attracted to lead than calcium receptive molecules in your body is introduced and it binds to the lead. That chemical compound is then able to be excreted from your body, but it does not happen naturally. And any damage done by the lead in the meanwhile is often irreversible, so removing the lead from the organism doesn't really fix anything.
What does lead do? It absolutely wrecks nerves and the work nerves do. The brain is affected as well as the central nervous system and the peripheral nervous system. In humans, lead poisoning leads to impaired brain function, uncoordinated muscular reaction, fumbling stumbling uncoordination.
So you aren't as nimble doing a Texas two-step with your special lady and you step on her toes more than you did when you first met. She still loves you and you both laugh and go on with your merry lives. But if you are a condor, vulture, eagle, falcon, or hawk, your very life depends on lightning fast reaction speeds. Your coordination needs to be flawless because Nature tolerates nothing but perfection. Your very ability to fly requires amazing dexterity in your wings, control over each and every flight feather, your life depends on it. Shave off a few points and suddenly it takes more work to do the deed. A few days without food and now you are out of reserves, one single day of missed meals means you no longer have the strength to fly and you are dead. Predatory birds do not carry more than a few days extra calories because flight won't allow it.
Some of the best research has been done in Wyoming on the National Elk Refuge. They conducted years of research on eagles and ravens PRIOR to doing a ammunition exchange, giving hunters copper ammo for lead. Post exchange data shows a reduction in lead levels in these scavenger species commensurate with the ratio of lead to copper hunting. Again, direct one to one correlation.
My own experience has been positive. I went with Barnes TSX copper ammo for the .243, same gun I used to shoot 3" groups at 100 yards suddenly started shooting INCHERS!!! Ha! Maybe I am not such a bad shot after all, I just needed some seriously accurate ammo. To get close to the weight of lead, they have to make a copper bullet longer and consequently, a better ballistic coefficient. Deer I shoot tend to not wander far, not with their entire lung cavity turned into squishy jelly!
If you decide to not go with lead free ammo, consider burying the gutpile so that raptors don't scavenge on the remains. That's what I am doing with the deer I shoot with the ol' flintlock.
Here's what it looks like:
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=youtube+minnesota+raptor+center+bald+eagle+lead+poisoning&qpvt=youtube+minnesota+raptor+center+bald+eagle+lead+poisoning&FORM=VDRE#view=detail&mid=F85E91E0AC424060CE8BF85E91E0AC424060CE8B
I am available for discussion, but if you wanna troll, P.A. ain't the place. AND ARROWS AIN'T GOT ANY LEAD ANYWAY! MWAHAHAHAHA
-
Thanks, John for some facts and not a wooden spoon.
-
Thanks, John for some facts and not a wooden spoon.
Been told if I stir the pot, I gotta lick the spoon afterwards.
-
Jw
I hear what you are saying about the lead in the meat. Wasn't the lead shot ban on waterfowl instituted because the ducks were thought to be eating the expended shot when they fed in the marshes? What is the current thinking on the severity of that problem? Has the changeover had any quantifiable or documented benefits?
-
According to the folks that did the research--
they wanted to blame a large part of the implanted/
transplanted Condor deaths on lead poison.
This study was in the Grand Canyon area.
The thing that struck me peculiar was that they
blamed it on hunting losses, creatures that are
shot and not tracked or recovered. The Condors then
eat these creatures and the lead that they consume
brings about their demise.
I say BS. Any thoughts?
Zuma
Jw your reply was lengthy, yes but informative to those
that are interested in more than just the documentary
that aired recently. I high lighted what they said in the documentary.
What they didn't say was that the Condors may be getting
lead poisoning from the guts of recovered deer that get killed by
high velocity ammo. I also saw no mention of the guts in the links I read.
It would be cool if you have some pull to bring this to the attention of
those trying to solve these problems. Glad you brought it to our attention.
Kinda curious about your trolling comment??
Can you elaborate? Thanks
Zuma
-
I knew eventually Mr Halverson would show up on this thread, he and I already hashed this out once and I'll happily stay out of this one
-
Zuma;; as far as the Trolling comment,,,,, why do we want to go there? Why not stick to this Topic?
-
(http://i623.photobucket.com/albums/tt320/bubncheryl/Mobile%20Uploads/FB_IMG_1447035012076_zpswlzlzyrk.jpg) (http://s623.photobucket.com/user/bubncheryl/media/Mobile%20Uploads/FB_IMG_1447035012076_zpswlzlzyrk.jpg.html)
Just a reminder as to why they are working to ban lead
-
Zuma;; as far as the Trolling comment,,,,, why do we want to go there? Why not stick to this Topic?
I was thinking the exact darn thing ;)
Zuma
-
That's an amazing picture Bubby :) :) :) :)
-
Very informative, J.W. . As for the gut pile, how would the lead get there, unless the animal, in question was gut shot? I would think the gut pile would be fine, for the scavengers. The lungs, yeah, bury those, but unless the animal was gut shot, I don't see how lead would be there. As for ducks eating lead, the only ones, that would be likely to eat, lead, would be the diving ducks, and not the non diving, like Mallard, teal, canvas back, golden eye, etc.. They banned the helium balloons, near the oceans, or tried to ban them, as they claimed the sea turtles, were eating them, thinking they were jelly fish. They only found "ONE" that had a piece of balloon in it's stomach. The majority, of turtle deaths, other than nets, were plastic ice bags, that idiots, toss over board, or do not put in a container, so that they don't blow out, and dispose of them later. I like lead. Kinda hard to shoot solid copper, out of a muzzle loader, and the wear on rifles, is greater, as there is no give, as in a lead core, bullet. If they use a plastic sleeve, like the accelerator bullet Winchester brought out a long time ago, where, you could put a sleeve, on a .25 cal. and shoot it in a.30 caliber rifle, and have go at a much greater speed. OK. But I don't know if that is what the solid bullets are like or not. Personally, I really don't want to shoot solid copper out of my rifle. I would shoot the solid copper slug out of my shotgun, as it is encased in a plastic sleeve. I am doing Chelation now. The main ingredient, is mag sulfate, it is mixed with EDTA, and vitamin C. Cleans, out toxins, cleans out the arteries, and detoxifies in general. I know I have eaten a bit more than a few pieces of #7 and 8 bird shot. Hopefully, this I.V. therapy, will get the lead out also, as well as all the other toxins, I was exposed to from the Army, and the Fire Dept. But I wonder, how many Condors died from lead poisoning, by being shot. could the bullet in the crop, have been a result of some idiot shooting at it, as it soared above? Anyway, it is a subject that can be argued, back and forth, with facts,on both sides, and adlib, by either side, with an agenda. J.W. brings up good points, about the buzzards eating anything hard, in a carcass, and the Condor, is nothing but a big buzzard, with gay colors! Jack Crafty, brings up good points also. Money is a big factor in grants, for a study, of anything. There was a guy who used to come on Johnny Carson, and he would show some of the wasteful Government grants. One couple got a couple hundred grand, for an art grant. The flew a plane, over the waters, of some South American, beach, and tossed out rolls of colored paper strips, and filmed it, and called it art. The best one though, was a guy who got something, like 150 thousand dollars, to study social life, in a Peruvian uh.....house of kitties. So, I think it all comes down, to how you personally are affected, and your connections to one side or the other. As for re introducing a almost extinct species, I don't think they put enough thought into it, as to how well that animal is going to fare, in a much reduced area, that it once thrived in, as for food, and shelter, etc. The idiots that re introduced the wolves here, in Montana, and Wyoming, didn't think of the impact on the Moose, Elk, and deer populations. Especially, after the wolf population bred far past their biggest estimate of how many wolves there would be in a few years, and the wolves they introduced were Canadian, and some were hybrids. When you get a 250lb. wolf, that just isn't your normal wolf! Yeah, the Condor, deserves to at least get a chance to survive in a much changed world, but I just don't see there being that much lead available to be eaten by them, before something else gets the "lost" game. Just my opinion.
Wayne
-
Wayne,
I believe ducks pick up lead even if they are not divers because they do need grit in the gizzard to crush the seeds they are eating.They are picking it up as small gravel.
JW thanks for the informative post.
-
Zuma, I am surprised at the level of contempt you have for Science. How hard is it to switch from lead to another type of shot? Or sinker? As soon as I was made aware of the potential impact of lead in my fishing gear (Thanks JW) I switched. About the gut pile. Do the bullets you shoot not fragment on impact? How much of your bullet do you find in your animals when you shoot them? Do gut piles not include lung, liver, heart? Do you go over your gut pile with a metal detector to make sure that it is fragment free? Instead of denying things why not look into them?
-
Very informative, J.W. . As for the gut pile, how would the lead get there, unless the animal, in question was gut shot? I would think the gut pile would be fine, for the scavengers. The lungs, yeah, bury those, but unless the animal was gut shot, I don't see how lead would be there. As for ducks eating lead, the only ones, that would be likely to eat, lead, would be the diving ducks, and not the non diving, like Mallard, teal, canvas back, golden eye, etc.. They banned the helium balloons, near the oceans, or tried to ban them, as they claimed the sea turtles, were eating them, thinking they were jelly fish. They only found "ONE" that had a piece of balloon in it's stomach. The majority, of turtle deaths, other than nets, were plastic ice bags, that idiots, toss over board, or do not put in a container, so that they don't blow out, and dispose of them later. I like lead. Kinda hard to shoot solid copper, out of a muzzle loader, and the wear on rifles, is greater, as there is no give, as in a lead core, bullet. If they use a plastic sleeve, like the accelerator bullet Winchester brought out a long time ago, where, you could put a sleeve, on a .25 cal. and shoot it in a.30 caliber rifle, and have go at a much greater speed. OK. But I don't know if that is what the solid bullets are like or not. Personally, I really don't want to shoot solid copper out of my rifle. I would shoot the solid copper slug out of my shotgun, as it is encased in a plastic sleeve. I am doing Chelation now. The main ingredient, is mag sulfate, it is mixed with EDTA, and vitamin C. Cleans, out toxins, cleans out the arteries, and detoxifies in general. I know I have eaten a bit more than a few pieces of #7 and 8 bird shot. Hopefully, this I.V. therapy, will get the lead out also, as well as all the other toxins, I was exposed to from the Army, and the Fire Dept. But I wonder, how many Condors died from lead poisoning, by being shot. could the bullet in the crop, have been a result of some idiot shooting at it, as it soared above? Anyway, it is a subject that can be argued, back and forth, with facts,on both sides, and adlib, by either side, with an agenda. J.W. brings up good points, about the buzzards eating anything hard, in a carcass, and the Condor, is nothing but a big buzzard, with gay colors! Jack Crafty, brings up good points also. Money is a big factor in grants, for a study, of anything. There was a guy who used to come on Johnny Carson, and he would show some of the wasteful Government grants. One couple got a couple hundred grand, for an art grant. The flew a plane, over the waters, of some South American, beach, and tossed out rolls of colored paper strips, and filmed it, and called it art. The best one though, was a guy who got something, like 150 thousand dollars, to study social life, in a Peruvian uh.....house of kitties. So, I think it all comes down, to how you personally are affected, and your connections to one side or the other. As for re introducing a almost extinct species, I don't think they put enough thought into it, as to how well that animal is going to fare, in a much reduced area, that it once thrived in, as for food, and shelter, etc. The idiots that re introduced the wolves here, in Montana, and Wyoming, didn't think of the impact on the Moose, Elk, and deer populations. Especially, after the wolf population bred far past their biggest estimate of how many wolves there would be in a few years, and the wolves they introduced were Canadian, and some were hybrids. When you get a 250lb. wolf, that just isn't your normal wolf! Yeah, the Condor, deserves to at least get a chance to survive in a much changed world, but I just don't see there being that much lead available to be eaten by them, before something else gets the "lost" game. Just my opinion.
Wayne
Deer were once all but wiped out. Bison, elk, Pheasants, Grouse, Ducks, Geese. Why don't you rant about how useless it was to reintroduce them? Just because it doesn't help you directly doesn't mean it doesn't really help you. Heavy metals don't just go away. Kinda like DDT. Look up the effects of it. It is so persistent that it still shows up as the most detected pesticide in children today, some 40 years after it was banned.
-
I seen a show about this yrs ago. a biologist had a condor that was dead. they showed in Xray the lead deposited in its body from "eating deer shot with buck shot". This bird died of lead poisoning alright but it wasn't from eating it. it had pellets not buck shot all over its body (it was shot). I was just a kid and remember how stupid this guy must have been to get on tv and tell us this bird ate the lead, or he knew how stupid most ppl are when it comes to this stuff. Ed
-
The topic is about these birds not lead poisoning in general.
Eddie asked us to stay on it. thanks Zuma
Bare in mind this study was done in 2008 so if they are still complaining
about the mortality and poisoning it must be because they continue to
subject the poor birds to that fate. Or the documentry was way old?
Please tell me your take on it.
I included the conclusion. I read the paper in it's intireity
Effectiveness of Action to Reduce Exposure of Free-Ranging ... (http://Effectiveness of Action to Reduce Exposure of Free-Ranging ...)
to Effectiveness of Action to Reduce Exposure of Free-Ranging ...
Dec 24, 2008 ... Condors were routinely recaptured and treated to reduce their lead levels as ... We simulated the effect of ending the existing lead exposure ...
We used a previously published population model [8] to assess likely long-term trends in the numbers of condors in the absence of further releases and without chelation and other treatment of birds with elevated blood lead concentrations. According to this model, the condor population would tend to decline under present conditions unless natural adult mortality was at the lower end of the likely range or reproduction was at the “maximum conceivable” level (Table 5). Since the assumptions of the “maximum conceivable” scenario are extremely unlikely to apply to any real population of condors, this indicates that the Grand Canyon condor population is unlikely to be self-sustaining at current levels of exposure to lead.
-
http://wildlifecenter.org/sites/default/files/WCV-Position-on-Lead4.pdf (http://wildlifecenter.org/sites/default/files/WCV-Position-on-Lead4.pdf)
http://www.hsvma.org/lead_toxicity_in_wild_birds#.VkDhaberS70 (http://www.hsvma.org/lead_toxicity_in_wild_birds#.VkDhaberS70)
http://www.nwhc.usgs.gov/disease_information/lead_poisoning/ (http://www.nwhc.usgs.gov/disease_information/lead_poisoning/)
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDMQFjADahUKEwjVgOj494PJAhVV-GMKHViBDuI&url=http%3A%2F%2Faudubonportland.org%2Fwcc%2Fcurrentanimals%2Fjune6-2013&usg=AFQjCNEFU7zlznzTm8gSSNN1t-G_cOK-Jg&sig2=VZIvZTa35tne7vB4miY_5Q (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDMQFjADahUKEwjVgOj494PJAhVV-GMKHViBDuI&url=http%3A%2F%2Faudubonportland.org%2Fwcc%2Fcurrentanimals%2Fjune6-2013&usg=AFQjCNEFU7zlznzTm8gSSNN1t-G_cOK-Jg&sig2=VZIvZTa35tne7vB4miY_5Q)
-
Very informative, J.W. . As for the gut pile, how would the lead get there, unless the animal, in question was gut shot? I would think the gut pile would be fine, for the scavengers. The lungs, yeah, bury those, but unless the animal was gut shot, I don't see how lead would be there. As for ducks eating lead, the only ones, that would be likely to eat, lead, would be the diving ducks, and not the non diving, like Mallard, teal, canvas back, golden eye, etc.. They banned the helium balloons, near the oceans, or tried to ban them, as they claimed the sea turtles, were eating them, thinking they were jelly fish. They only found "ONE" that had a piece of balloon in it's stomach. The majority, of turtle deaths, other than nets, were plastic ice bags, that idiots, toss over board, or do not put in a container, so that they don't blow out, and dispose of them later. I like lead. Kinda hard to shoot solid copper, out of a muzzle loader, and the wear on rifles, is greater, as there is no give, as in a lead core, bullet. If they use a plastic sleeve, like the accelerator bullet Winchester brought out a long time ago, where, you could put a sleeve, on a .25 cal. and shoot it in a.30 caliber rifle, and have go at a much greater speed. OK. But I don't know if that is what the solid bullets are like or not. Personally, I really don't want to shoot solid copper out of my rifle. I would shoot the solid copper slug out of my shotgun, as it is encased in a plastic sleeve. I am doing Chelation now. The main ingredient, is mag sulfate, it is mixed with EDTA, and vitamin C. Cleans, out toxins, cleans out the arteries, and detoxifies in general. I know I have eaten a bit more than a few pieces of #7 and 8 bird shot. Hopefully, this I.V. therapy, will get the lead out also, as well as all the other toxins, I was exposed to from the Army, and the Fire Dept. But I wonder, how many Condors died from lead poisoning, by being shot. could the bullet in the crop, have been a result of some idiot shooting at it, as it soared above? Anyway, it is a subject that can be argued, back and forth, with facts,on both sides, and adlib, by either side, with an agenda. J.W. brings up good points, about the buzzards eating anything hard, in a carcass, and the Condor, is nothing but a big buzzard, with gay colors! Jack Crafty, brings up good points also. Money is a big factor in grants, for a study, of anything. There was a guy who used to come on Johnny Carson, and he would show some of the wasteful Government grants. One couple got a couple hundred grand, for an art grant. The flew a plane, over the waters, of some South American, beach, and tossed out rolls of colored paper strips, and filmed it, and called it art. The best one though, was a guy who got something, like 150 thousand dollars, to study social life, in a Peruvian uh.....house of kitties. So, I think it all comes down, to how you personally are affected, and your connections to one side or the other. As for re introducing a almost extinct species, I don't think they put enough thought into it, as to how well that animal is going to fare, in a much reduced area, that it once thrived in, as for food, and shelter, etc. The idiots that re introduced the wolves here, in Montana, and Wyoming, didn't think of the impact on the Moose, Elk, and deer populations. Especially, after the wolf population bred far past their biggest estimate of how many wolves there would be in a few years, and the wolves they introduced were Canadian, and some were hybrids. When you get a 250lb. wolf, that just isn't your normal wolf! Yeah, the Condor, deserves to at least get a chance to survive in a much changed world, but I just don't see there being that much lead available to be eaten by them, before something else gets the "lost" game. Just my opinion.
Wayne
Deer were once all but wiped out. Bison, elk, Pheasants, Grouse, Ducks, Geese. Why don't you rant about how useless it was to reintroduce them? Just because it doesn't help you directly doesn't mean it doesn't really help you. Heavy metals don't just go away. Kinda like DDT. Look up the effects of it. It is so persistent that it still shows up as the most detected pesticide in children today, some 40 years after it was banned.
I think you have misinterpreted my "RANT", it wasn't a rant, it was as stated my opinion. As for DDT, I am very aware, of it, and probably a little more informed on it than you realize. There is still lumps of it found in the Mississippi delta, bayous,and surrounding tributaries, and along the banks of the Mississippi River. The eagles, and Brown Pelicans, were almost wiped out because of it. As for reintroducing, buffalo, deer, elk, pheasant, etc., again, I said, if there is room, food, shelter, etc.. As for the Pheasant, it was introduced here in 1800's from China. It is not a native bird. Slow down, and just read, what I said, and don't jump to conclusions. Like I said, just my opinion. You have to take into the equation the pollution, like people tossing out harmful materials. As for the bullet fragments traveling into the guts, again, like I said, if they are gut shot, or near the gut, you may get some fragments. But I don't throw the heart, and liver in the gut pile, I take them home, and eat them. I trim up all around the wound channel, and that, and other non edible parts, are wrapped in a garbage bag, and buried. There is not going to be any fragments shooting throughout the body. I don't know what kind of bullets that you shoot, but mine go through, my Buddies, go through, and shot placement, is nowhere near the gut. Yes the bullet expands, and if it hits bone, will shatter, but not to the extent, it sends shrapnel, throughout the body. I just don't believe there is lead, copper jacket, etc. in the gut pile when a proper shot is made. We have lots of eagles, on gut piles out here, and they are all doing well. Lots of young ones too. Including, Bald, and Golden. As well as Ravens, and Magpies. While there is definitely evidence pointing to lead poisoning, I just, "in my OPINION" think there is too much being made about it. For what ever reason, noble, or financial. Again, my Opinion. ;) Now back to the original thread, I like Condors. But how many will their habitat support?
Wayne
-
How many will their habitat support? It is a fair question. It will support them until it can't, at which point the population will level off. That is the difference between scavengers and opportunistic eaters, like deer. How many areas have a nuisance population of deer? It really comes down to how bad you want to help. Kinda like the "Anti-Meat" crowd. How many of them have pets that get fed commercial pet food? Is killing animals to feed animals different than killing animals to feed yourself?
Back on track. How hard is it to stop using lead ammo? The only case I know of in Utah that causes issues is hunting with a .45 muzzle loader. If using a saboted bullet, it drops it from a .45 to a .32 caliber bullet, and then you can't hunt Elk with them. We already have to use steel or Tungsten shot for all waterfowl, or any upland game in a waterfowl management area. The next step is stop using it in our rifles for hunting. As stated before, I stopped using lead sinkers this year, The steel alternative is a bit bigger for the weight, but cost isn't much different.
I can all but guarantee that if there was an issue with Deer dying from lead poisoning, and a way to help was to stop using lead ammo, most of us here would stop at the blink of an eye.
-
Agreed! ;)
Wayne
-
The topic is about these birds not lead poisoning in general
Eddie asked us to stay on it. thanks Zuma
I can appreciate the need to stay on topic with condors. I had also assumed that the topic included where the blame was being placed...
from the opening post
The thing that struck me peculiar was that they
blamed it on....
my request to JW about the existence of studies to ascertain if the fought over changes created the effects that were desired, was not an attempt to troll or go off topic, but rather to see if the use of our tax money is being well spent.
As jack craftypoints out... follow the money.....
I know wildlife researchers and technicians that enjoy their work as much as we enjoy our time in the field, but they would not have that job if they were not doing it at the taxpayers expense. I doubt that many in that field of work would get much work, if they did not play their cards with the politically correct tax money spenders, and deliver cherry picked "results". The damnedest thing is those tax-payer funded "results" are used to beat up the taxpayers without accountability to the true value received by the resource.
-
The topic is about these birds not lead poisoning in general
Eddie asked us to stay on it. thanks Zuma
I can appreciate the need to stay on topic with condors. I had also assumed that the topic included where the blame was being placed...
from the opening post
The thing that struck me peculiar was that they
blamed it on....
my request to JW about the existence of studies to ascertain if the fought over changes created the effects that were desired, was not an attempt to troll or go off topic, but rather to see if the use of our tax money is being well spent.
As jack craftypoints out... follow the money.....
I know wildlife researchers and technicians that enjoy their work as much as we enjoy our time in the field, but they would not have that job if they were not doing it at the taxpayers expense. I doubt that many in that field of work would get much work, if they did not play their cards with the politically correct tax money spenders, and deliver cherry picked "results". The damnedest thing is those tax-payer funded "results" are used to beat up the taxpayers without accountability to the true value received by the resource.
Denying Science isn't very becoming. If you can prove that they are dying due to something else please post info to support your claim, otherwise it is just words.
-
Jojo-
Denying Science isn't very becoming
seems to be getting close to name calling. You have missed my point entirely.
I am questioning whether it was really good science in the first place that we see so often.
Would you like to see some examples of "less than well spent" tax dollars, when it comes to wildlife studies?
-
I can't find it again but while working on my Masters in Education I came across a paper published by a physician that essentially stated women shouldn't attend higher education before they have babies because the blood flow to the brain would harm their reproductive organs.
I guess its a good thing some people questioned the "science" used by the physician.
Am I the only one here that is suspicious of 99% of what I read? - especially when the results of research allow the government to place more restrictions on me and give more power to the government.
Rant complete.
Patrick
-
Willie, as previously stated, science based discussion works by you providing information proving your stance. Saying it isn't true because someone in the past has provided inaccurate information is silly. I can also provide lots of information about botched studies, that doesn't mean all studies are incorrect. There are flaws in studies, they are often times brought to light by further studies. This is not just an issue that is impacting Condors, but waterfowl as well as raptors.
-
Jojo-
Not saying that anything is not true, just saying that you can "prove" anything with unlimited resources, The question is.... does that "proof" always mean that the recommendations of those that sponsor the research must be taken? The guy that documents the lead poisioning would not be my first choice to set overall policy. Some types of accommodations are much more effective than others, for tax payers, stakeholders and the resource it's self.
-
Jojo-
Not saying that anything is not true, just saying that you can "prove" anything with unlimited resources, The question is.... does that "proof" always mean that the recommendations of those that sponsor the research must be taken? The guy that documents the lead poisioning would not be my first choice to set overall policy. Some types of accommodations are much more effective than others, for tax payers, stakeholders and the resource it's self.
So why the change to the use of Steel shot for waterfowl, in two countries? More false information? If it were up to the birds themselves, they WOULD be gone. It is only because man stepped in that there are any left. Kinda like wolves, and Bison.
-
It is only because man stepped in that there are any left.
you must mean that "effective policies were enforced". I would venture the opinion that if man had never stepped in in the first place, the ducks would be much better off, but we cannot do much about that, it's water over the dam.
.
I am not sure if you are speaking "in general" about duck management, or that you have some evidence that the steel shot rule actually made a difference.
-
Jojo-
So why the change to the use of Steel shot for waterfowl, in two countries? More false information? If it were up to the birds themselves, they WOULD be gone. It is only because man stepped in that there are any left. Kinda like wolves, and Bison.
I hate to interrupt this off topic conversation but I must.
To many of my threads have been canceled by moderators
for this reason. My threads, that I guess, I failed to stop
the hijacking in. So this is at least my third attempt.
Stay on topic.
thanks Zuma
Ps no quacking creatuers etc,
It's CONDORS
-
Very informative, J.W. . As for the gut pile, how would the lead get there, unless the animal, in question was gut shot? I would think the gut pile would be fine, for the scavengers. The lungs, yeah, bury those, but unless the animal was gut shot, I don't see how lead would be there. As for ducks eating lead, the only ones, that would be likely to eat, lead, would be the diving ducks, and not the non diving, like Mallard, teal, canvas back, golden eye, etc..
Kinda hard to shoot solid copper, out of a muzzle loader, and the wear on rifles, is greater, as there is no give, as in a lead core, bullet.
Personally, I really don't want to shoot solid copper out of my rifle.
Yeah, the Condor, deserves to at least get a chance to survive in a much changed world, but I just don't see there being that much lead available to be eaten by them, before something else gets the "lost" game. Just my opinion.
Wayne
I have yet to see someone separately pile the contents of the gut cavity and the pneumo-thoracic cavity, even though in mammals they are two separate chambers. So, we use the generic term gutpile for the "innards". Whether it is a gutshot deer or one hit in the boiler room. High resolution digital x-rays are showing that the lead fragments are traveling further than anticipated and can appear in the liver, stomach, etc in some shots. When I come to bury the gutpile, I am not going to pick and choose, it's all going in together. Once my bullet/roundball stops moving, I do not want it killing anymore.
Per conversation with representatives at Barnes, a solid copper round does not cause any more wear to a steel barrel than a jacketed bullet.
If you don't want to shoot copper, don't. But then please consider burying the gutpile. Or (ew) bagging it up and bringing it out! >:D
I am questioning whether it was really good science in the first place that we see so often.
In science, publish or die. When you publish a paper, it goes into a journal or other publication that then is distributed to other people in your field. You publish what you intend to research, the methodology for your research, then the details of what you learned from the research, and your conclusion. It's wide open, you gotta support your claims. And the way you "make your bones" in science is to disprove someone else's research or else publish findings that no one can bust. And it is bloody cut-throat. If these thousands and thousands of papers published were weak, they would have been cut to ribbons, and not by just someone saying they disagree. That does not cut it. To bust someone's work, you have to point out step by step where they went wrong and how their conclusion is flawed. That's why they call it "peer reviewed". Kinda like when we post pics of the bows at full draw. Anyone can run a plank thru a bandsaw, slap a snakeskin on it, and call it a bow....until you draw it, hehehe!
Hoping this is not taken as a seed to veer off into politics, but someone is gonna bring it up, so I will. There are those that will make claims that this is all a thinly veiled attempt to ban all ammunition as a backdoor way to eliminate guns.
To that I answer, yes, the anti-hunting extremists are certainly doing that. However, WE HUNTERS are the original conservationists. WE lobbied Washington DC for taxes on our activities in order to fund conservation efforts. WE lobbied for national parks, wildlife refuges, limited seasons, limits on how many of a species we could take and what species we could take, and so on. Without the waterfowl conservation stamp, the once believed extinct giant Canada goose would have not had the funding to take a couple dozen breeding pairs held by private citizens to a reintroduction success story without compare!
This world is not the same as when Teddy Roosevelt shot hundreds of big game animals in a few weeks on a killing spree across Wyoming when he learned his wife and mother died the same day. Nor is it the same as when he came to his senses and saw a sea of carcasses in his wake and realized the unlimited west was a myth. We don't have the miles and miles of prairie dog towns and fat sage grouse here in the Dakotas and Montana that fed the bald eagles in winters past. As their populations recovered, we think they replaced those normal feeding strategies with their Ace in the hole...scavenging. And the record high populations of the whitetail deer we now have and the number of deer hunters, this is a new situation altogether. So, what do we as conservationists do? We learn from the past. We learned we can hunt AND conserve.
-
Here is a problem I am having trouble with. If these lead bullets are shattering and creating a snowfall of lead particles through the meat, why are there not more people with lead poisoning. I eat a lot of deer meat and don't have any lead issues.
-
Here is a problem I am having trouble with. If these lead bullets are shattering and creating a snowfall of lead particles through the meat, why are there not more people with lead poisoning. I eat a lot of dear meat and don't have any lead issues.
An adult bald eagle weighs 7-8 lbs down in the lower 48. Two #6 lead pellets in the crop are more than enough to kill the bird. You weigh how much? So you are dealing with economies of scale. Plus, mammals process it radically different than birds. Typically a bird dies from starvation, not the lead (unless it ingests a fairly big dose all at once). When their central nervous system is effected, they cannot fly effectively and hunting failures begin to take a toll. Imagine the difference between driving one of those little smart cars drunk versus flying an F-16 drunk.
As for lead in your system, have you been tested? Studies in North Dakota comparing hunters versus nonhunters indicate hunters have a significantly higher level of lead in the blood, tissue, and bone. Here's an older article on the subject from 2009: https://www.allaboutbirds.org/get-the-lead-out-the-poisoning-threat-from-tainted-hunting-carcasses/
It comes down to your personal choice when you decide to put it on your plate. The scavenging raptor didn't get that choice.
-
Is lead poisonous?
-
JW
when you speak highly of the peer review process, aren't you implying that transparency is the best way to prevent bias?
I presume that the non-profit you represent obtains work funded by the taxpayer? Would it not be prudent to disclose your possible conflict of interest when presenting your views and citing findings? There have been questions about the effectiveness of the peer review process in other well funded areas of research that I shall leave unnamed in this thread, perhaps for these very reasons.
I understand that you identify with and are proud of your affiliation with sportsmen, and I would even go so far as to say that you and I would enjoy a day in the field as fellow hunters and sportsmen, even if we have never met in person, but If push comes to shove with a government contract administrator that supports anti hunting measures, would you sacrifice your non-profit for the good of the sportsman?
-
First of all Pat B I apologize.
I am a weak human, forgive me.
No matter the science, the recent retoric, the egotistical
posturing and a multitude of membership understanding/ missunderstandings
IMO is just a load of crap.
What the Hel% about the poor innocent birds that are subject
to a life of pure experimental torture. For the love of a puppy
can't any one of you see what the folks in charge of the birds are doing?
They are sending them back out to eat/ absorb more lead, just to get a
freaken pay check.
Agree or dissagre if you have a heart let it beat in the direction of the innocent
Condors of the Grand Canyon that do gooders are killing.
Go Condors
Sadly spoken Zuma
-
The reply is......yes to humans and other animals. These are not difficult concepts. Now figuring out how to keep humans from wiping out things like condors when it is preventable now that is a challenge that this post demonstrates. Children eating lead...bad idea. Now how do we prevent this? Stop producing lead paint so kids don't eat it. Dang that was easy. Now are there other way kids aquire lead...yep. Just handle some lead and now eat a sandwich. Ok so this reduces lead in children. Wow that was easy. For condors apply same concepts and what do you think will happen? That's right, you got it....reduce contact reduces contamination. Well that wasn't so hard after all.
-
The reply is......yes to humans and other animals. These are not difficult concepts. Now figuring out how to keep humans from wiping out things like condors when it is preventable now that is a challenge that this post demonstrates. Children eating lead...bad idea. Now how do we prevent this? Stop producing lead paint so kids don't eat it. Dang that was easy. Now are there other way kids aquire lead...yep. Just handle some lead and now eat a sandwich. Ok so this reduces lead in children. Wow that was easy. For condors apply same concepts and what do you think will happen? That's right, you got it....reduce contact reduces contamination. Well that wasn't so hard after all.
Correct me if I am wrong iowa. As I understand it you and I have had a very
reasonable relationship on these boards. Complimentary in our thinking about
difficult issues like Abo vs the rest of flintknapping.
So I would like to also be on the same page with you here.
Do you think you would send your child into a world that the experts
say is full of enough lead to kill your child/ Condor??
If you find this whimsical, what would you say if you were the Condor?
-
Zuma- have you considered the possibility that the condor may be worth more as a poster child of "what once was", than what it is now, to those behind the efforts to "save" it?
-
JW
when you speak highly of the peer review process, aren't you implying that transparency is the best way to prevent bias?
I presume that the non-profit you represent obtains work funded by the taxpayer? Would it not be prudent to disclose your possible conflict of interest when presenting your views and citing findings? There have been questions about the effectiveness of the peer review process in other well funded areas of research that I shall leave unnamed in this thread, perhaps for these very reasons.
I understand that you identify with and are proud of your affiliation with sportsmen, and I would even go so far as to say that you and I would enjoy a day in the field as fellow hunters and sportsmen, even if we have never met in person, but If push comes to shove with a government contract administrator that supports anti hunting measures, would you sacrifice your non-profit for the good of the sportsman?
Willie i think this statement was uncalled for and borders on a personal attack
-
Bubby-
While I may not agree with all of JW's views, and I would think less of him, were he to agree with all of mine, I have the up most respect for JW, as he always has been a gentleman in his words to others as far as I know. I assure you that I have no ill intent, and will leave it at that, until he has a chance to respond, should he choose.
-
The reply is......yes to humans and other animals. These are not difficult concepts. Now figuring out how to keep humans from wiping out things like condors when it is preventable now that is a challenge that this post demonstrates. Children eating lead...bad idea. Now how do we prevent this? Stop producing lead paint so kids don't eat it. Dang that was easy. Now are there other way kids aquire lead...yep. Just handle some lead and now eat a sandwich. Ok so this reduces lead in children. Wow that was easy. For condors apply same concepts and what do you think will happen? That's right, you got it....reduce contact reduces contamination. Well that wasn't so hard after all.
Correct me if I am wrong iowa. As I understand it you and I have had a very
reasonable relationship on these boards. Complimentary in our thinking about
difficult issues like Abo vs the rest of flintknapping.
So I would like to also be on the same page with you here.
Do you think you would send your child into a world that the experts
say is full of enough lead to kill your child/ Condor??
If you find this whimsical, what would you say if you were the Condor?
I see you are asking questions about releasing birds into a toxic environment. Is your stand now that the environment is toxic?
-
Iowa,
I don't think my stand per say has changed. Perhaps trying to keep this thread on topic and defend it from agenda type assaults has made me dig a little deeper into the plight of the abused creatures and their future. Lead poisoning is totally old news. If anyone that is eligible for a hunting licence is not aware of it, they must live under a rock. I would hope that it would be taught as part of the
Hunter Safety courses nationally. But that is not the topic and if folks want to beat that rug to death they should start a thread of their own.
By the do gooders own science they un wittingly admit to bird abuse, that's pretty telling.
If nothing else I hope my brashness has at least brought that bird home to roost.
I hope they get all the Condors out of harms way until the lead problem is resolved.
I wouldn't want those folks baby sitting my children.
Zuma
-
According to the folks that did the research--
they wanted to blame a large part of the implanted/
transplanted Condor deaths on lead poison.
This study was in the Grand Canyon area.
The thing that struck me peculiar was that they
blamed it on hunting losses, creatures that are
shot and not tracked or recovered. The Condors then
eat these creatures and the lead that they consume
brings about their demise.
I say BS. Any thoughts
Zuma
Ok so the thread is about a study that identifies lead from hunting as leading to condor deaths. Also,you beleive the studies are "BS". Other than the thoughts of poo, having read the research do you think the lead is making the birds ill? I have read your post a number of times and I don't see where you have offered another explanation or conducted your own research to argue the poo position.
-
JW
when you speak highly of the peer review process, aren't you implying that transparency is the best way to prevent bias?
I presume that the non-profit you represent obtains work funded by the taxpayer? Would it not be prudent to disclose your possible conflict of interest when presenting your views and citing findings? There have been questions about the effectiveness of the peer review process in other well funded areas of research that I shall leave unnamed in this thread, perhaps for these very reasons.
I understand that you identify with and are proud of your affiliation with sportsmen, and I would even go so far as to say that you and I would enjoy a day in the field as fellow hunters and sportsmen, even if we have never met in person, but If push comes to shove with a government contract administrator that supports anti hunting measures, would you sacrifice your non-profit for the good of the sportsman?
Ergo decedo
-
Zuma, cmon, you're just trolling now. You start this thread saying that condors getting lead from hunters is BS, then by page five you're saying it's a forgone conclusion that it's hunters lead and the problem is the cruel biologists that send condors out to get poisoned?! Seriously? C'mon man, you're not that dumb so you're either trolling or intentionally trying to insult everyone who holds views in opposition to yours.
On the off chance that you are serious, then it's not the biologists that are hurting the condors, it's people who refuse to acknowledge there may be an issue with lead ammo, stop shooting lead and no more problem folks, this is not rocket surgery.
P.S. I can respect most any opinion as long as one is willing to have an honest debate, I may not agree but I can respect you, but the moment you laps into insincerity, ridicule, and mockery you can no longer be respectable but have shown yourself to be contemptible.
-
Before I start, I will admit i have not read the peer reviewed literature whinch has been cited here.
I found this website interesting because it clearly outlines the logic chain which leads to the conclusion that spent ammunition is a significant contributor to lead poisoning in Condors.
http://www.azgfd.gov/w_c/california_condor_lead.shtml
I agree fully with JW.
The empirical evidence supports the conclusion that lead ammunition contributes to poisoning of condors. Perhaps it is not the sole factor, but regardless, it's a pretty simple fix. Pay a bit more for ammunition and save a species. Seems a no brainier to me. Lead has been banned for waterfowl hunting for a long time at least in my state, and we all still manage to hunt ducks just fine.
Frankly I think this is a case as it often is with scientific research that one group of individuals will follow the evidence, and one group will deny the evidence and go with feeling. I don't mean this to be a personal attack in any way, but this sort of debate occurs constantly.
The scientific method proved the world is round, perfected the ammunition we use, and allowed for development of the nano-scale fabrication that gives us the computers we all use to commune here. To now go and suggest that the scientific method is flawed in some way, and as a result, to deny the conclusions of solid science is profoundly misguided. That's not to say that every scientific conclusion is fact, it just says that in order to dispute the conclusion, you need to approach the problem scientifically; that means more than simply saying 'I don't believe it because I think there aren't enough birds and there aren't enough carcasses'.
You need to provide an alternative hypothesis for example: about how condors and other birds are ingesting lead fragments, or you need to provide evidence that ingested lead fragments do not cause an increase in tissue lead levels.
I'll conclude my comments with a quote I particularly enjoy: "you can't reason someone out of a position that they have not reasoned themselves into" ... Perhaps it's a bit philosophical, but I think that basically encompasses my view on scientific denial.
Cheers
-
I guess if we aren't allowed to use studies of other birds to come to a conclusion, then we need to use the studies on condors themselves. Here is a link to the Arizona game and fish department that states "Free-flying condors have frequently been observed with elevated levels of lead in their blood, with evidence of variable lead levels and re-occurring periods of high exposure.
Elevated blood lead levels are temporally (seasonally) associated with increased availability of hunter-killed deer carcasses and gut piles (i.e., when hunters are using lead bullets in condor foraging areas).
To date, no other source of lead has been identified to be:
Prevalent in the geographic range of condors,
Available to condors in concentrated form via a plausible route of ingestion,
Available to condors in a pattern consistent with observed temporal patterns."
http://www.azgfd.gov/w_c/california_condor_lead.shtml (http://www.azgfd.gov/w_c/california_condor_lead.shtml)
To answer a question some one asked way back in the thread. All you need to do is search the hunting units in Northern Arizona, and Southern Utah to see that there is a lot of hunting going on in the Condors 160 mile range.
So, I have presented evidence that Condors are being poisoned by lead from hunting, now, the way science works is you counter with a study that refutes what I have presented, or not.
For further reading on how to debate a topic, please see the following link on what is not ok. A lot of the Anti group on this one have used some of the fallacies listed in the article.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies)
-
I guess if we aren't allowed to use studies of other birds to come to a conclusion, then we need to use the studies on condors themselves. Here is a link to the Arizona game and fish department that states "Free-flying condors have frequently been observed with elevated levels of lead in their blood, with evidence of variable lead levels and re-occurring periods of high exposure.
Elevated blood lead levels are temporally (seasonally) associated with increased availability of hunter-killed deer carcasses and gut piles (i.e., when hunters are using lead bullets in condor foraging areas).
To date, no other source of lead has been identified to be:
Prevalent in the geographic range of condors,
Available to condors in concentrated form via a plausible route of ingestion,
Available to condors in a pattern consistent with observed temporal patterns."
http://www.azgfd.gov/w_c/california_condor_lead.shtml (http://www.azgfd.gov/w_c/california_condor_lead.shtml)
To answer a question some one asked way back in the thread. All you need to do is search the hunting units in Northern Arizona, and Southern Utah to see that there is a lot of hunting going on in the Condors 160 mile range.
So, I have presented evidence that Condors are being poisoned by lead from hunting, now, the way science works is you counter with a study that refutes what I have presented, or not.
For further reading on how to debate a topic, please see the following link on what is not ok. A lot of the Anti group on this one have used some of the fallacies listed in the article.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies)
x2
-
On a little lighter note, I got to see 2 Bald Eagles today while checking my traps, it amazes me how many of them I see in NW Penna. Always a plesant site. Bob
-
That's great Bob. We have them all over my place too.
I have film of them in dog fights with our Ospreys.
Dog fights eeer bird fights :embarassed:
-
For those that must have missed it---
Oh yeah it's from this thread
Yes Jack it is a high dollar industry but I think the
idea and attempts are somewhat noble.
I guess I question the notion of these creatures
supposedly being released back into the wild.
Jw your reply was lengthy, yes but informative to those
that are interested in more than just the documentary
that aired recently. I high lighted what they said in the documentary.
What they didn't say was that the Condors may be getting
lead poisoning from the guts of recovered deer that get killed by
high velocity ammo. I also saw no mention of the guts in the links I read.
It would be cool if you have some pull to bring this to the attention of
those trying to solve these problems. Glad you brought it to our attention.
The topic is about these birds not lead poisoning in general.
Eddie asked us to stay on it. thanks Zuma
Bare in mind this study was done in 2008 so if they are still complaining
about the mortality and poisoning it must be because they continue to
subject the poor birds to that fate. Or the documentry was way old?
Please tell me your take on it.
I included the conclusion. I read the paper in it's intireity
Effectiveness of Action to Reduce Exposure of Free-Ranging ...
to Effectiveness of Action to Reduce Exposure of Free-Ranging ...
Dec 24, 2008 ... Condors were routinely recaptured and treated to reduce their lead levels as ... We simulated the effect of ending the existing lead exposure ...
We used a previously published population model [8] to assess likely long-term trends in the numbers of condors in the absence of further releases and without chelation and other treatment of birds with elevated blood lead concentrations. According to this model, the condor population would tend to decline under present conditions unless natural adult mortality was at the lower end of the likely range or reproduction was at the “maximum conceivable” level (Table 5). Since the assumptions of the “maximum conceivable” scenario are extremely unlikely to apply to any real population of condors, this indicates that the Grand Canyon condor population is unlikely to be self-sustaining at current levels of exposure to lead.
-
According to this model, the condor population would tend to decline under present conditions unless natural adult mortality was at the lower end of the likely range or reproduction was at the “maximum conceivable” level (Table 5).
So then, is lead poisoning considered "Natural"?
http://www.peregrinefund.org/condor
(http://www.peregrinefund.org/condor)
According to the linked information 51.8% of deaths are from Lead poisoning, 5.4% is related to either Starvation, or Shooting. So, we are (Hunters) directly related to about 53% of the deaths of these birds (Factoring in 1/2 of 5.4% for starvation).
The thread is either about Condors, or as the title suggests, Condors and Lead. What is it? It is one or the other. Changing the direction on page 5 is a little strange.
A gut pile that is buried in my home state would likely be dug up by scavengers, and if not totally eaten would then be available for any other scavenger (Coyote, Fox, Crow, Raven, Raptors, and yes, Condors).
As asked before, why is it so much to ask of people to not shoot lead while hunting? I know old habits die hard. it is just strange to me that the stewards of the outdoors won't even try to help if they won't get an immediate result.
The truth of the matter is that without human intervention California Condors would be gone. Dust in the wind. And sadly, without long term intervention, they would still be gone. There are simply too many people that don't see any reason to change the way they do things that don't directly hurt them.
-
ergo decedo ??
not at all. My comments have all been inviting JW to enter the discussion in a more comprehensive manner.
-
ergo decedo ??
not at all. My comments have all been inviting JW to enter the discussion in a more comprehensive manner.
But we have been told by the poster to stay on topic and only give information pertaining to Condors. So, What else needs to be said?
-
Hey you all thanks for your participation.
I'm done here. If you have any problems
with this PM me.
Oh I am a card carring member :)
PM me if you want me to sponser you ;)
by by Zuma
-
Jojo-
I was responding to iowabows implication that I am attacking someone in this thread.
As for the invitation to JW, that was yesterdays invite.
over and out
willie
-
JW
when you speak highly of the peer review process, aren't you implying that transparency is the best way to prevent bias?
I presume that the non-profit you represent obtains work funded by the taxpayer? Would it not be prudent to disclose your possible conflict of interest when presenting your views and citing findings? There have been questions about the effectiveness of the peer review process in other well funded areas of research that I shall leave unnamed in this thread, perhaps for these very reasons.
I understand that you identify with and are proud of your affiliation with sportsmen, and I would even go so far as to say that you and I would enjoy a day in the field as fellow hunters and sportsmen, even if we have never met in person, but If push comes to shove with a government contract administrator that supports anti hunting measures, would you sacrifice your non-profit for the good of the sportsman?
Jw does not receive a penny of tax payer dollars. He is paid with thank you cards from children. His position would not be influenced by money but now withholding thank you cards that is another question. Therefore implying influence not grounded less we account for those children writing letters of gratitude.
-
Glad to see everybody playing nicely, and maybe this is getting off topic, but; why is it just effecting this scavenger and not the common Buzzard and Turkey Buzzard? You can't gut an animal without it being cleaned to the last scrap here. And they eat the asphalt shingles on houses, cushions on your lawn furniture and the rubber around the wind shield and your car wipers and keep on ticking? There is more of them shoulder to shoulder with the proud Eagle eating toxic crap at the Landfills then Tourist on the beach.
Maybe we should be spending money protecting a more, hardy bird.
-
They do.
http://www.nps.gov/pinn/learn/nature/upload/0108%20Pain.pdf (http://www.nps.gov/pinn/learn/nature/upload/0108%20Pain.pdf)
http://www.nwhc.usgs.gov/publications/fact_sheets/pdfs/lead_poisoning_wild_birds_2009.pdf (http://www.nwhc.usgs.gov/publications/fact_sheets/pdfs/lead_poisoning_wild_birds_2009.pdf)
http://www.nwhc.usgs.gov/disease_information/lead_poisoning/ (http://www.nwhc.usgs.gov/disease_information/lead_poisoning/)
This last one is a list of 46 or so pages of studies of lead poisoning of birds. Some links are included in the PDF.
http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/publications/wildlife/research2007/13a_leadshot_lit_review.pdf (http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/publications/wildlife/research2007/13a_leadshot_lit_review.pdf)
-
Going over that, I guess the Buzzard isn't cool enough for a study. Sure wish Coyotes would start getting stupid from all of the lead I'm sure they ingest.
-
Going over that, I guess the Buzzard isn't cool enough for a study. Sure wish Coyotes would start getting stupid from all of the lead I'm sure they ingest.
The trick is getting the lead to stick in them. >:D I'm sure you know how to do that! I'm sure the studies are easier to get funded if the animal is losing numbers quickly, or cute and cuddly.
-
Cute and cuddly is what I was thinking.
-
I've been following along and trying to avoid jumping into this for several reasons. First and foremost being that I really don't care if condors go the way of the pteradactyl.(Hey...I'm just being honest here). That being said, I do care about most other birds affected by this. It is total conceivable in my mind that fragments of lead in the crop would be pulverized into particles that would be absorbed into the blood stream and as such I use bismuth/tin alloy shot and Barnes X bullets in almost all my hunting ammunition. JW is correct in both the performance of the Barnes bullets and that there is absolutely no more wear on your barrel than jacketed bullets would cause. But I have to admit that i am more than a little jaded towards the governmental funded science. Especially when it results in legislation that restricts the second amendment. I know...that's a whole other can of worms. I'm not trying to hi-jack this thread in that direction. Just explaining my thought process.
One of my many hobbies is amateur prospecting. I have panned tons and tons of materials over the years all over the country. To date I have found one .58 cal. miniball and 2 .22 bullets in my pan. That's it for refined lead. What I have found quite often is raw galena ore in small pieces. Yes you can tell the difference between galena ore and refined lead. Is it possible that these birds are getting some of there lead poisoning from naturally occurring galena placer deposits? And if so how much of it is from this source and not shot? Just food for thought. I'm not a scientist nor am I well read on the subject. Perhaps that has already been ruled out in studies. I don't know. Galena deposits are fairly common in the condors range as well as along the migratory path of many waterfowl and birds of prey. Like I said, just food for thought. Josh
-
That's the way my thought process was leaning, too, Josh. I've prospected and drilled in that area and there are mines everywhere with Tailing piles and waste sites. And, I'm with you on the Condor.
-
As for lead in your system, have you been tested?
Yes I have been tested for lead. Every six months for nearly 20 years. I work in a brass and bronze foundry where lead is a major concern.
-
Gun Doc, to answer your naturally occurring galena question, yes, that has been addressed in the studies, even in trace amounts in the blood you can identify the isotope of the lead and from what I can tell there are two naturally occurring and two that are from processed/manufactured lead, one of which is used in bullets, it's the type used in bullets being found in the birds, none of the naturally occurring isotopes.
-
Lead Is a base element noted for its stability that is refined primarily from galena ore. Refined...that means the pure lead is already in the ore. It just has to be extracted from the ore to remove the other elements and impurities. That does not change the isotopes of the lead. It's the same isotopes in the ore as it is in the purified metal. Even in hard cast bullet alloys that have a certain amount of antimony added to achieve the desired hardness, the isotopes of the base elements in that alloy remain distinct and unaltered. Josh
-
Sorry, I misread from data earlier presented in this thread, here's the proper explanation:
"The bloodwork regularly shows two of the four isotopes of lead. One isotope is the one found in leaded gasoline, and it is never found in the bloodwork. Second is a background isotope found naturally occurring in soils and, typically, is waters where glacial deposits left cinnabarite (a lead bearing ore), and this occurs in low levels. But the third and fourth isotopes are found in galena ores that are mined for lead smelting and is used in all kinds of industrial uses, including bullets. THAT is the one that shows up in high levels in sick birds.
Now, to narrow down possible sourcing of that lead in the bloodstream, they also began testing for copper and zinc. Why those two? Gilding metal, 95% copper, 5% zinc. That's the common jacket for dang near every modern bullet manufactured. Copper and zinc also shows up in the blood of lead poisoned raptors at the exact ratio of 95:5. This is what is known in science as a one to one correlation. "
-
Yeah...I read JW's post and I do not and can not refute his information. This being his passion, he would certainly be better read on the subject than I. At face value the copper and zinc traces and especially the ratio would seem conclusive. However, both copper and zinc are included in the group of metals included in galena ore as well as silver, bismuth and a few others that were undoubtedly not tested for. The ratio is a tough one to refute, but it's not iron clad proof. As I said before, I have changed my ammunition to non-toxic for the most part. This is because I believe that lead ammo is certainly suspect. I just don't believe it is the entire problem. Josh
-
JW
when you speak highly of the peer review process, aren't you implying that transparency is the best way to prevent bias?
I presume that the non-profit you represent obtains work funded by the taxpayer? Would it not be prudent to disclose your possible conflict of interest when presenting your views and citing findings? There have been questions about the effectiveness of the peer review process in other well funded areas of research that I shall leave unnamed in this thread, perhaps for these very reasons.
I understand that you identify with and are proud of your affiliation with sportsmen, and I would even go so far as to say that you and I would enjoy a day in the field as fellow hunters and sportsmen, even if we have never met in person, but If push comes to shove with a government contract administrator that supports anti hunting measures, would you sacrifice your non-profit for the good of the sportsman?
Yes, willie, I am confident transparency is critical. And to honor that transparency, I am going to open myself in a manner that is absolutely none of your business.
1) My entire income is derived from a part time job in an upscale wine/liquor store and I bring down a mad income in the high four digits range.
2) The Black Hills Raptor Center receives absolutely NO Federal, State, County, or Municipal funding whatsoever. Why? Because there is no funding for conservation education under any of those agencies. I know. I looked. Hard. Repeatedly. Our funding comes from program fees (93% of all programs are from school programs and close to 3/4 of those fees are paid by the teachers themselves), donations, corporate grants (few and far between), grants/gifts from sportsman's groups, sale of owl pellets, and donations of materials.
3) IF (and we are talking pure fantasy here) we were to receive some of that nonexistant funding from a governmental agency, that means very little to me, personally, because I sit as Secretary/Vice President of the Board of Directors of the organization. Our organization is classified under the IRS Code as a 501(c)3 Non-Profit. Under South Dakota state law, a sitting board member of a Federally recognized non-profit" may not receive wages, salary, stipends, or financial remuneration "of any sort. At best, I can be reimbursed for expenditures of my own money for operating expenses, fixed or variable, capital outlay, or other expenditures incurred in the normal function of the nonprofit. That means I could spend MY money on it, but I can request reimbursement, something that requires a vote by the board of directors. And frankly, I have not kept record of my personal expenditures and am probably close to $10,000 out of pocket at this point, not even counting the mileage on my personal vehicle (old enough to vote and closing in on a quarter million miles, just in case you wanna take a shot at that. The organization does not even have a "company car".)
4) Our non-profit was scrutinized by a retired forensic accounting investigator from the IRS (she worked on the Bernie Madoff case) and other than correcting our definitions of fixed costs and variable cost expenses, we were given a clean bill. That report was sent to a organization that rates non-profits and we were assigned an
A++ rating for financial accountability. Just in case you wanted to try taking that swipe at me next.
Our organization is entirely operated on a volunteer basis. I give, typically, 30 hours of my week to this organization. I carry a phone on me at all times that gets calls from the public asking for help with injured birds of prey as well as prey animals at all hours. I, and other volunteers, drop what we are doing and go out on "rescue calls". Yesterday it was a great horned owl hung on the barbs of a barbed wire fence. The wing was horribly mangled and I had to wait close to three hours to get a callback from the USF&W agent in my area for permission to euthanize an animal in extreme pain. No biggie, my first day working with raptors, I got to kill a golden eagle!
On that particular day, I had an argument with the managing director of that particular raptor center over the issue of lead poisoning of raptors. I quoted the "party line" on the subject with such vehemence I was told to drop the subject or be released immediately. I dropped it. For the moment. When I got home that night I started doing my own research and I was going to build a case that would hammer her arguments into the dirt. I was going to prove her vegan hippy frou-frou opinions were unsupportable. And I was inundated with rock solid research and evidence day after day, incident after incident. I CAME BY THIS POSITION HONESTLY!
Which brings up apoint. I have to wonder why you did not ASK if any of my personal funding or funding of my non-profit came from governmental sources? I have to wonder why you chose to make a baseless accusation without so much as a shred of evidence one way or the other? Was it simply a poor choice of words, or was it like the slick prosecutor stating the accused is a known molestor of innocent farm animals, and when e is checked by the defense, apologizes to the Judge and jury saying, "I do believe you are right, he was never convicted in a court of law", knowng that once he had impugned the integrity of the accused that bell could not be unrung. Either way, swing away at my integrity. I will stand behind it.
-
On a little lighter note, I got to see 2 Bald Eagles today while checking my traps, it amazes me how many of them I see in NW Penna. Always a plesant site. Bob
As a kid I hoped I would see one before they became extinct. And that was certainly possible. Nowadays, they are almost boringly common around here. In fact, ice fishermen whine because they have to watch their fish on the ice closely to keep the white headed vultures from stealing them! Haha! (I hereby admit freely and of my own volition that when ice fishing, I have on occasion slid a trout out on the ice a little bit too far from where I was sitting on the chance that it would get stolen. But in my defense, I always counted that stolen fish as part of my daily limit)
-
I've been following along and trying to avoid jumping into this for several reasons. First and foremost being that I really don't care if condors go the way of the pteradactyl.(Hey...I'm just being honest here). That being said, I do care about most other birds affected by this. It is total conceivable in my mind that fragments of lead in the crop would be pulverized into particles that would be absorbed into the blood stream and as such I use bismuth/tin alloy shot and Barnes X bullets in almost all my hunting ammunition. JW is correct in both the performance of the Barnes bullets and that there is absolutely no more wear on your barrel than jacketed bullets would cause. But I have to admit that i am more than a little jaded towards the governmental funded science. Especially when it results in legislation that restricts the second amendment. I know...that's a whole other can of worms. I'm not trying to hi-jack this thread in that direction. Just explaining my thought process.
One of my many hobbies is amateur prospecting. I have panned tons and tons of materials over the years all over the country. To date I have found one .58 cal. miniball and 2 .22 bullets in my pan. That's it for refined lead. What I have found quite often is raw galena ore in small pieces. Yes you can tell the difference between galena ore and refined lead. Is it possible that these birds are getting some of there lead poisoning from naturally occurring galena placer deposits? And if so how much of it is from this source and not shot? Just food for thought. I'm not a scientist nor am I well read on the subject. Perhaps that has already been ruled out in studies. I don't know. Galena deposits are fairly common in the condors range as well as along the migratory path of many waterfowl and birds of prey. Like I said, just food for thought. Josh
Raptors, including condors, vultures, eagles, hawks, falcons, owls, and caracaras typically do not pick up grit or gravel on purpose much. It may be embedded in a carcass hit by a car and consumed, but it really is a non-starter as far as a source of lead goes. And that still would not account for the connection between lead poisoning and the presence of copper and tin in exact ratios as the gilding metal.
-
A great series of posts JW. Very interesting stuff, actually.
-
JW
my call for transparency was not presented as fighting words, but simply a poor response in an ongoing discussion at the time.
I need to offer more than the preceding explanation, and will send a PM. Please give me a few days, as I am not free at this time to respond appropriately.
thanks for your patience
willie
-
Please stay on topic. No ducks, Jenny Wrens, Rappers or crappers. :laugh:
It's Condors and lead. If you feel the need to spill your guts
make sure there are not lead shrapnel's in them. >:D
I am totally sick of my threads getting hijacked into personal
tirades/rants. To many real capable folks here willing to discuss
these matters with out PUFFING up.
I know the investments we all have in the understanding of our
investments in our individual lives are passionate and precious.
I value and respect all of it. IF --- and I say IF, we are a family here
we are showing signs of being dysfunctional.
I was going to start a new thread about this but things here
were on a very reasonable even keel.
That changed.
Here are a few things to think about--
If you start a thread- stick with it until it fades.
You are the author you must have your powder dry.
It is your responsibility to keep the peace between yourself
and all posters. Mob mentality is portrayed in movies
from "The Wild Bunch" to "On the Waterfront.
That's why I booked out. Termoil sucks.
Zuma
-
Please stay on topic. No ducks, Jenny Wrens, Rappers or crappers. :laugh:
It's Condors and lead. If you feel the need to spill your guts
make sure there are not lead shrapnel's in them. >:D
I am totally sick of my threads getting hijacked into personal
tirades/rants. To many real capable folks here willing to discuss
these matters with out PUFFING up.
I know the investments we all have in the understanding of our
investments in our individual lives are passionate and precious.
I value and respect all of it. IF --- and I say IF, we are a family here
we are showing signs of being dysfunctional.
I was going to start a new thread about this but things here
were on a very reasonable even keel.
That changed.
Here are a few things to think about--
If you start a thread- stick with it until it fades.
You are the author you must have your powder dry.
It is your responsibility to keep the peace between yourself
and all posters. Mob mentality is portrayed in movies
from "The Wild Bunch" to "On the Waterfront.
That's why I booked out. Termoil sucks.
Zuma
Ok so the thread is about a study that identifies lead from hunting as leading to condor deaths. Also, you beleive the studies are "BS". Has your position changed as you have read these post?
-
I am not on trial here. Some here continue to think that
they are some sort of a of prosecuting attorney or a
relentless pit bull that can't let go of a person or preconceived idea.
All the questions have been answered over and over.
Get over it !
Broken record folks, PLEASE start your own thread.
OR would you rather make such a stink here to selfishly
have all your post just go away.
Zuma
-
I am not on trial here. Some here continue to think that
they are some sort of a of prosecuting attorney or a
relentless pit bull that can't let go of a person or preconceived idea.
All the questions have been answered over and over.
Get over it !
Broken record folks, PLEASE start your own thread.
OR would you rather make such a stink here to selfishly
have all your post just go away.
Zuma
Well you are not on trial but you placed your opinion on trial (to be examined) when you ask for a discussion on the topic. I just ask the same question back and on a topic of your's . Not an attack I just ask for your thoughts like you did.
-
Ok so the thread is about a study that identifies lead from hunting as leading to condor deaths. Also, you believe the studies are "BS". Has your position changed as you have read these post?
Ok I will try this. The documentary I don't think was the study.
What they said on the documentary was "We have checked these Condors for lead in their blood and it is caused because our birds eat carcasses not recovered from hunters. Period. They also stated that this problem causes great distress and even death to their birds. And again for the last time-- they did not mentioned GUTPILES.
Perhaps that's what you are missing. Why because the gut piles would certainly out number non recovered game making a more plausible argument.
Gutpiles were mentioned later in the thread and made more sense.
You see there can be good things in discussion.
But re releasing the birds makes no sense at all. Do you not agree??
So no matter how you want to slice it the documentary is missleading and sad.
BS is much easier to type.
Zuma
-
Assuming that any documentary is ironclad is foolhardy. Every documentary is made by a human. More than likely they have a bias one way or the other from the onset. Sometimes due to budget issues they aren't able to get the most knowledgeable people to obtain information from. Ancient Aliens is a documentary. Reefer Madness is a documentary. Evidence disproving your claim has been presented. Now it is your job to provide information supporting your claim. Peer reviewed is best.
-
Ok so the thread is about a study that identifies lead from hunting as leading to condor deaths. Also, you believe the studies are "BS". Has your position changed as you have read these post?
Ok I will try this. The documentary I don't think was the study.
What they said on the documentary was "We have checked these Condors for lead in their blood and it is caused because our birds eat carcasses not recovered from hunters. Period. They also stated that this problem causes great distress and even death to their birds. And again for the last time-- they did not mentioned GUTPILES.
Perhaps that's what you are missing. Why because the gut piles would certainly out number non recovered game making a more plausible argument.
Gutpiles were mentioned later in the thread and made more sense.
You see there can be good things in discussion.
But re releasing the birds makes no sense at all. Do you not agree??
So no matter how you want to slice it the documentary is missleading and sad.
BS is much easier to type.
Zuma
Peer review would be nice to read. You started this thread about a study. If this has changed can you now title this documentary so I can search and watch it?
-
Ok skeptics I guess you have a problem with clicking a link.
So here is the one I posted for you on page five.
Now please stop chewing on my ankles.
There is a message for you at the end of page.
Bare in mind this study was done in 2008 so if they are still complaining
about the mortality and poisoning it must be because they continue to
subject the poor birds to that fate. Or the documentry was way old?
Please tell me your take on it.
I included the conclusion. I read the paper in it's intireity
Effectiveness of Action to Reduce Exposure of Free-Ranging ...
Dec 24, 2008 ... Condors were routinely recaptured and treated to reduce their lead levels as ... We simulated the effect of ending the existing lead exposure ...
We used a previously published population model [8] to assess likely long-term trends in the numbers of condors in the absence of further releases and without chelation and other treatment of birds with elevated blood lead concentrations. According to this model, the condor population would tend to decline under present conditions unless natural adult mortality was at the lower end of the likely range or reproduction was at the “maximum conceivable” level (Table 5). Since the assumptions of the “maximum conceivable” scenario are extremely unlikely to apply to any real population of condors, this indicates that the Grand Canyon condor population is unlikely to be self-sustaining at current levels of exposure to lead.
Rhys E. Green,1,2,* W. Grainger Hunt,3 Christopher N. Parish,3 and Ian Newton4
Tom Pizzari, Editor
Author information ► Article notes ► Copyright and License information ▼
Copyright Green et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.
Go to:
Abstract
California condors (Gymnogyps californianus) released into the wild in Arizona ranged widely in Arizona and Utah. Previous studies have shown that the blood lead concentrations of many of the birds rise because of ingestion of spent lead ammunition. Condors were routinely recaptured and treated to reduce their lead levels as necessary but, even so, several died from lead poisoning. We used tracking data from VHF and satellite tags, together with the results of routine testing of blood lead concentrations, to estimate daily changes in blood lead level in relation to the location of each bird. The mean daily increment in blood lead concentration depended upon both the location of the bird and the time of year. Birds that spent time during the deer hunting season in two areas in which deer were shot with lead ammunition (Kaibab Plateau (Arizona) and Zion (Utah)) were especially likely to have high blood lead levels. The influence upon blood lead level of presence in a particular area declined with time elapsed since the bird was last there. We estimated the daily blood lead level for each bird and its influence upon daily mortality rate from lead poisoning. Condors with high blood lead over a protracted period were much more likely to die than birds with low blood lead or short-term elevation. We simulated the effect of ending the existing lead exposure reduction measures at Kaibab Plateau, which encourage the voluntary use of non-lead ammunition and removal of gut piles of deer and elk killed using lead ammunition. The estimated mortality rate due to lead in the absence of this program was sufficiently high that the condor population would be expected to decline rapidly. The extension of the existing lead reduction program to cover Zion (Utah), as well as the Kaibab plateau, would be expected to reduce mortality caused by lead substantially and allow the condor population to increase.
Introduction
The California Condor (Gymnogyps californianus) became extinct in the wild in the 1987 when the last wild individual was captured and added to the captive flock, which then consisted of 27 birds. Since 1992, releases of these birds and their captive-bred progeny have re-established wild populations of condors in California, Mexico and around the Grand Canyon in Arizona and Utah. Individual condors in these populations have suffered from lead poisoning caused by ingested ammunition, which is the most frequently diagnosed cause of death among Grand Canyon condors. This holds despite intensive efforts to monitor blood concentrations of lead and to treat birds with high levels using chelating agents [1]. The condors in the Grand Canyon population range widely in Arizona and Utah and feed on carrion, a proportion of which comes from the carcasses of game animals shot by hunters using lead ammunition. Ingestion of shotgun pellets and fragments of bullets in flesh from such carcasses is the route by which lead poisoning occurs. Condors are located as frequently as possible using satellite tags and VHF radio tags and those that cease to move are recovered. Birds are also captured routinely and their blood lead concentrations measured. Any individuals with high levels are held for treatment to reduce the burden of lead in the body before release. Action is also taken on the Kaibab Plateau, Arizona to reduce exposure of condors to lead by encouraging hunters to use non-lead bullets and to remove potentially contaminated gut piles. The level of condor mortality caused by lead that would occur in the absence of chelation therapy and lead exposure reduction is of interest because it might not always be practical to locate birds daily and trap all condors routinely once or twice per year for blood lead monitoring, and implementation of lead exposure reduction schemes requires resources [2]. Could the reintroduced population persist if the lead exposure reduction and treatment programs ceased or were reduced in scope? What would be the effect of reducing exposure to spent lead ammunition throughout the range of this population? As a step towards addressing these questions, we report here a statistical model of blood lead levels in free-ranging condors, which extends previous analyses [3]. We took advantage of the unusually complete radio-tracking data, which allow the influence on blood lead of the location of condors within their geographical range to be assessed. Our objectives were to model the distribution of blood lead levels throughout the year in the absence of treatment, and then to estimate the mortality rates that would prevail. Finally, we used the model to explore the possible effects on condor mortality of withdrawing or increasing measures to reduce exposure of condors to spent lead ammunition.
Materials and Methods
Field studies
We used data for 2005, 2006 and 2007 derived from the monitoring of movements and blood lead levels of free-ranging condors [1]. The dependent variable in our analyses was the concentration of lead in the blood of a condor determined within five days after capture. Blood lead levels were determined using a portable field tester (LeadCare Blood Lead Testing System). Some blood samples were also analysed by atomic absorption spectroscopy at the Louisiana State University Diagnostics Laboratory using a Perkin Elmer Analyst 800. Levels of lead in the same blood sample measured using the field tester and in the laboratory were strongly correlated, but laboratory measurements gave significantly higher values (see Figure 2 of reference [1]). Using 99 cases in which the lead concentration in the same blood sample had been determined by both methods, we found that the mean concentration of lead measured in the laboratory was larger than that from the field tester by a factor of 1.914. In all analyses we therefore used a laboratory determination whenever one was available and otherwise adjusted the field tester measurement using this correction factor.
Figure 2Hypothetical changes in blood lead concentration over time for California condors moving between zones with high and low daily risk of ingesting lead.
We modeled the blood lead level in each free-ranging condor in relation to the locations it had used before it was recaptured for testing. During the study period, roost locations of condors marked with VHF or satellite tags were determined on the majority of days for all tagged condors, and attributed to one of the following five zones; Paria (Vermilion Cliffs), Colorado River Corridor, Kaibab Plateau, South Zone and North Zone (Utah). A location was taken to be a roost location if it was obtained later than16.00h. local time. Condors are known to range widely, even within a day [3], so the ideal analysis would take into account the bird's location at several times during each day. However, only the data for satellite tagged birds would permit this. Roost locations were recorded for as many days as possible during the period beginning with the initial release of each bird, or its release after capture for blood lead monitoring and ending with another capture at which blood lead concentration was determined. For days on which the roost location was not recorded, we interpolated the roost zone used by assuming that it was the same as that on the nearest day with data available. Overall, it was necessary to interpolate the roost zone on 27.2% of days, with the range of this proportion for individual birds being 11.1% to 59.9%. We had eligible data derived from 60 individual condors consisting of 322 pairs of blood lead measurements preceded by periods comprising, in total, 41,230 bird-days with known or interpolated roost locations.
Numbers of deer, elk and buffalo reported as killed by hunters in each zone in 2005–2007 were obtained from the Arizona Game and Fish Department and the Utah Department of Natural Resources. We estimated the number of carcasses and gut piles potentially contaminated with lead and left in the field for scavengers by using information collected on the proportion of kills made with lead ammunition and the number of lead-killed animals from which gut piles were brought in by hunters for safe disposal. We also assumed that in addition to the number of animals reported as killed with lead bullets, an additional 10% of that number were wounded and died unrecovered soon after, thereby becoming available to condors.
Analysis and statistical modeling of blood lead data
We assumed that, with no further ingestion, the relationship between blood lead concentration and time after ingestion of fragments of metallic lead could be described by a simple three compartment model, with one-way movement of lead between successive pairs of compartments. Although this model is a simplification, it has the advantage of requiring the estimation of only two parameters and seems likely to capture the main features of real changes in blood lead. We assumed that a constant proportion of the ingested lead enters the blood from the gut per unit time and that fragments are not expelled from the gut within the period that significant absorption is occurring. Hence, the proportion of the lead ingested that remains in the gut at time t (in days) since ingestion is given
since ingestion is given by exp(−k1t), where k1 is a constant, and (1−exp(−k1t)) is the proportion of lead ingested that has moved from the gut to the blood by that time. We also assumed that a constant proportion per unit time of the lead present in the blood was lost to another compartment, such that the amount in the blood would decline by a proportion (1−exp(−k2)) per day in the absence of absorption. The quantity of lead in the blood, as a proportion of that ingested, is then given by the function
(1)
Assuming that blood volume is constant, blood lead concentration is proportional to g(t). Note that this expression approximates to g(t) = exp(−k2t) when k1 is much larger than k2. That is, when absorption from the gut is very rapid, blood lead concentration declines exponentially with time since ingestion. The model is illustrated for a single value of k2 and three values of k1 in Fig. 1.
Figure 1Models of the relationship between blood lead concentration and time since ingestion of metallic lead in California condors.
We next used the function g(t) to explore how the concentration of lead in the blood of an average condor would be expected to change over time, given the possibility of ingestion of lead on more than one day. We assumed that the condor spends some time in areas where there is a high risk each day of ingesting lead and some time in low risk areas. We imagined a large number of condors, all showing the same movement pattern. On each successive day, the average quantity of lead ingested by the birds would, if it was all absorbed immediately, increase the
When you report back after reading this I will post the rest after I quiz you
Zuma
-
What exactly are you attempting to prove? Lead may move out of the blood, but once in the blood it never leaves the body.
The estimated mortality rate due to lead in the absence of this program was sufficiently high that the condor population would be expected to decline rapidly.
Since the assumptions of the “maximum conceivable” scenario are extremely unlikely to apply to any real population of condors, this indicates that the Grand Canyon condor population is unlikely to be self-sustaining at current levels of exposure to lead.
The level of condor mortality caused by lead that would occur in the absence of chelation therapy and lead exposure reduction is of interest because it might not always be practical to locate birds daily and trap all condors routinely once or twice per year for blood lead monitoring, and implementation of lead exposure reduction schemes requires resources [2]. Could the reintroduced population persist if the lead exposure reduction and treatment programs ceased or were reduced in scope? What would be the effect of reducing exposure to spent lead ammunition throughout the range of this population?
This is saying exactly opposite of what you are arguing.
-
I have no idea what you are getting at Jojo. ???
Please let it go. Just agree to disagree. :)
That is if you agree the birds are being abused. :-\
Can you answer me that Jojo??
Are the birds being abused or not?? >:(
I have asked you a similar question on the more defined thread.
-
Abused, no. Allowed to be poisoned by lead, yes. Intentionally, Not really, but if you know you are doing something that isn't good, that is an issue. I don't see how after you posted that study in your defense that you could claim that they aren't being poisoned by lead.
a·buse
verb
əˈbyo͞oz/
1.
use (something) to bad effect or for a bad purpose; misuse.
"the judge abused his power by imposing the fines"
synonyms: misuse, misapply, misemploy; More
2.
treat (a person or an animal) with cruelty or violence, especially regularly or repeatedly.
"riders who abuse their horses should be prosecuted"
synonyms: mistreat, maltreat, ill-treat, treat badly; More
noun
əˈbyo͞os/
1.
the improper use of something.
"alcohol abuse"
synonyms: misuse, misapplication, misemployment; More
2.
cruel and violent treatment of a person or animal.
"a black eye and other signs of physical abuse"
synonyms: mistreatment, maltreatment, ill-treatment;
-
Ok skeptics I guess you have a problem with clicking a link.
So here is the one I posted for you on page five.
Now please stop chewing on my ankles.
There is a message for you at the end of page.
Bare in mind this study was done in 2008 so if they are still complaining
about the mortality and poisoning it must be because they continue to
subject the poor birds to that fate. Or the documentry was way old?
Please tell me your take on it.
I included the conclusion. I read the paper in it's intireity
Effectiveness of Action to Reduce Exposure of Free-Ranging ...
Dec 24, 2008 ... Condors were routinely recaptured and treated to reduce their lead levels as ... We simulated the effect of ending the existing lead exposure ...
We used a previously published population model [8] to assess likely long-term trends in the numbers of condors in the absence of further releases and without chelation and other treatment of birds with elevated blood lead concentrations. According to this model, the condor population would tend to decline under present conditions unless natural adult mortality was at the lower end of the likely range or reproduction was at the “maximum conceivable” level (Table 5). Since the assumptions of the “maximum conceivable” scenario are extremely unlikely to apply to any real population of condors, this indicates that the Grand Canyon condor population is unlikely to be self-sustaining at current levels of exposure to lead.
Rhys E. Green,1,2,* W. Grainger Hunt,3 Christopher N. Parish,3 and Ian Newton4
Tom Pizzari, Editor
Author information ► Article notes ► Copyright and License information ▼
Copyright Green et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.
Go to:
Abstract
California condors (Gymnogyps californianus) released into the wild in Arizona ranged widely in Arizona and Utah. Previous studies have shown that the blood lead concentrations of many of the birds rise because of ingestion of spent lead ammunition. Condors were routinely recaptured and treated to reduce their lead levels as necessary but, even so, several died from lead poisoning. We used tracking data from VHF and satellite tags, together with the results of routine testing of blood lead concentrations, to estimate daily changes in blood lead level in relation to the location of each bird. The mean daily increment in blood lead concentration depended upon both the location of the bird and the time of year. Birds that spent time during the deer hunting season in two areas in which deer were shot with lead ammunition (Kaibab Plateau (Arizona) and Zion (Utah)) were especially likely to have high blood lead levels. The influence upon blood lead level of presence in a particular area declined with time elapsed since the bird was last there. We estimated the daily blood lead level for each bird and its influence upon daily mortality rate from lead poisoning. Condors with high blood lead over a protracted period were much more likely to die than birds with low blood lead or short-term elevation. We simulated the effect of ending the existing lead exposure reduction measures at Kaibab Plateau, which encourage the voluntary use of non-lead ammunition and removal of gut piles of deer and elk killed using lead ammunition. The estimated mortality rate due to lead in the absence of this program was sufficiently high that the condor population would be expected to decline rapidly. The extension of the existing lead reduction program to cover Zion (Utah), as well as the Kaibab plateau, would be expected to reduce mortality caused by lead substantially and allow the condor population to increase.
Introduction
The California Condor (Gymnogyps californianus) became extinct in the wild in the 1987 when the last wild individual was captured and added to the captive flock, which then consisted of 27 birds. Since 1992, releases of these birds and their captive-bred progeny have re-established wild populations of condors in California, Mexico and around the Grand Canyon in Arizona and Utah. Individual condors in these populations have suffered from lead poisoning caused by ingested ammunition, which is the most frequently diagnosed cause of death among Grand Canyon condors. This holds despite intensive efforts to monitor blood concentrations of lead and to treat birds with high levels using chelating agents [1]. The condors in the Grand Canyon population range widely in Arizona and Utah and feed on carrion, a proportion of which comes from the carcasses of game animals shot by hunters using lead ammunition. Ingestion of shotgun pellets and fragments of bullets in flesh from such carcasses is the route by which lead poisoning occurs. Condors are located as frequently as possible using satellite tags and VHF radio tags and those that cease to move are recovered. Birds are also captured routinely and their blood lead concentrations measured. Any individuals with high levels are held for treatment to reduce the burden of lead in the body before release. Action is also taken on the Kaibab Plateau, Arizona to reduce exposure of condors to lead by encouraging hunters to use non-lead bullets and to remove potentially contaminated gut piles. The level of condor mortality caused by lead that would occur in the absence of chelation therapy and lead exposure reduction is of interest because it might not always be practical to locate birds daily and trap all condors routinely once or twice per year for blood lead monitoring, and implementation of lead exposure reduction schemes requires resources [2]. Could the reintroduced population persist if the lead exposure reduction and treatment programs ceased or were reduced in scope? What would be the effect of reducing exposure to spent lead ammunition throughout the range of this population? As a step towards addressing these questions, we report here a statistical model of blood lead levels in free-ranging condors, which extends previous analyses [3]. We took advantage of the unusually complete radio-tracking data, which allow the influence on blood lead of the location of condors within their geographical range to be assessed. Our objectives were to model the distribution of blood lead levels throughout the year in the absence of treatment, and then to estimate the mortality rates that would prevail. Finally, we used the model to explore the possible effects on condor mortality of withdrawing or increasing measures to reduce exposure of condors to spent lead ammunition.
Materials and Methods
Field studies
We used data for 2005, 2006 and 2007 derived from the monitoring of movements and blood lead levels of free-ranging condors [1]. The dependent variable in our analyses was the concentration of lead in the blood of a condor determined within five days after capture. Blood lead levels were determined using a portable field tester (LeadCare Blood Lead Testing System). Some blood samples were also analysed by atomic absorption spectroscopy at the Louisiana State University Diagnostics Laboratory using a Perkin Elmer Analyst 800. Levels of lead in the same blood sample measured using the field tester and in the laboratory were strongly correlated, but laboratory measurements gave significantly higher values (see Figure 2 of reference [1]). Using 99 cases in which the lead concentration in the same blood sample had been determined by both methods, we found that the mean concentration of lead measured in the laboratory was larger than that from the field tester by a factor of 1.914. In all analyses we therefore used a laboratory determination whenever one was available and otherwise adjusted the field tester measurement using this correction factor.
Figure 2Hypothetical changes in blood lead concentration over time for California condors moving between zones with high and low daily risk of ingesting lead.
We modeled the blood lead level in each free-ranging condor in relation to the locations it had used before it was recaptured for testing. During the study period, roost locations of condors marked with VHF or satellite tags were determined on the majority of days for all tagged condors, and attributed to one of the following five zones; Paria (Vermilion Cliffs), Colorado River Corridor, Kaibab Plateau, South Zone and North Zone (Utah). A location was taken to be a roost location if it was obtained later than16.00h. local time. Condors are known to range widely, even within a day [3], so the ideal analysis would take into account the bird's location at several times during each day. However, only the data for satellite tagged birds would permit this. Roost locations were recorded for as many days as possible during the period beginning with the initial release of each bird, or its release after capture for blood lead monitoring and ending with another capture at which blood lead concentration was determined. For days on which the roost location was not recorded, we interpolated the roost zone used by assuming that it was the same as that on the nearest day with data available. Overall, it was necessary to interpolate the roost zone on 27.2% of days, with the range of this proportion for individual birds being 11.1% to 59.9%. We had eligible data derived from 60 individual condors consisting of 322 pairs of blood lead measurements preceded by periods comprising, in total, 41,230 bird-days with known or interpolated roost locations.
Numbers of deer, elk and buffalo reported as killed by hunters in each zone in 2005–2007 were obtained from the Arizona Game and Fish Department and the Utah Department of Natural Resources. We estimated the number of carcasses and gut piles potentially contaminated with lead and left in the field for scavengers by using information collected on the proportion of kills made with lead ammunition and the number of lead-killed animals from which gut piles were brought in by hunters for safe disposal. We also assumed that in addition to the number of animals reported as killed with lead bullets, an additional 10% of that number were wounded and died unrecovered soon after, thereby becoming available to condors.
Analysis and statistical modeling of blood lead data
We assumed that, with no further ingestion, the relationship between blood lead concentration and time after ingestion of fragments of metallic lead could be described by a simple three compartment model, with one-way movement of lead between successive pairs of compartments. Although this model is a simplification, it has the advantage of requiring the estimation of only two parameters and seems likely to capture the main features of real changes in blood lead. We assumed that a constant proportion of the ingested lead enters the blood from the gut per unit time and that fragments are not expelled from the gut within the period that significant absorption is occurring. Hence, the proportion of the lead ingested that remains in the gut at time t (in days) since ingestion is given
since ingestion is given by exp(−k1t), where k1 is a constant, and (1−exp(−k1t)) is the proportion of lead ingested that has moved from the gut to the blood by that time. We also assumed that a constant proportion per unit time of the lead present in the blood was lost to another compartment, such that the amount in the blood would decline by a proportion (1−exp(−k2)) per day in the absence of absorption. The quantity of lead in the blood, as a proportion of that ingested, is then given by the function
(1)
Assuming that blood volume is constant, blood lead concentration is proportional to g(t). Note that this expression approximates to g(t) = exp(−k2t) when k1 is much larger than k2. That is, when absorption from the gut is very rapid, blood lead concentration declines exponentially with time since ingestion. The model is illustrated for a single value of k2 and three values of k1 in Fig. 1.
Figure 1Models of the relationship between blood lead concentration and time since ingestion of metallic lead in California condors.
We next used the function g(t) to explore how the concentration of lead in the blood of an average condor would be expected to change over time, given the possibility of ingestion of lead on more than one day. We assumed that the condor spends some time in areas where there is a high risk each day of ingesting lead and some time in low risk areas. We imagined a large number of condors, all showing the same movement pattern. On each successive day, the average quantity of lead ingested by the birds would, if it was all absorbed immediately, increase the
When you report back after reading this I will post the rest after I quiz you
Zuma
is this the documentary?
-
Jojo I didn't know that was a verb. :embarassed:
Thanks
Iowa-- no does it look like a TV program?? ???
I am sure you will have more and more questions.
I hope they are more challanging.
Are you ready to take the quiz?
Do you think letting Condors eat lead is ethical?
Would you let a Condor eat lead?
-
Jojo I didn't know that was a verb. :embarassed:
Thanks
Iowa-- no does it look like a TV program?? ???
I am sure you will have more and more questions.
I hope they are more challanging.
Are you ready to take the quiz?
Do you think letting Condors eat lead is ethical?
Would you let a Condor eat lead?
I was waiting to get the name of the doc. I really did want to watch it before I made a judgement. You said this was about that now so I just want to be up to speed. What was the name of the documentary?
-
Actually the body does get rid of lead over time. I know a few die hard competition pistol shooters who were told by their doctors that they had to stop shooting for awhile so the lead levels in their blood could drop below a certain level. Another tidbit of information, too much lead in your system makes you impotent.
-
Wow! This would be good if Ancient Tech would check in.
-
Wow! This would be good if Ancient Tech would check in.
Lol not sure how he would fit overshot technology into the mix
-
After reading this I have removed all the lead from my archery equipment.
-
Thanks Marc for your informative post
Iowa it was on a public TV station. WVPT I think?
Zuma
-
Thanks Marc for your informative post
Iowa it was on a public TV station. WVPT I think?
Zuma
what state and city?
-
So their numbers now are 400? Half in the wild. This is pretty cool considering they were in the 20s
-
So their numbers now are 400? Half in the wild. This is pretty cool considering they were in the 20s
Harrisonburg or Front Royal Va
Do you think the documentary will help you to decide whether
the birds are abused?
Just remember the last scene. The handler releases the Condor
back to the wild after being captured and processed for lead
poisoning. For what? To go back and eat more lead? BA
Really not great statistics considering the losses and
suffering of the ones that were and continue to be sacrificed.
I am going to lock the thread 8 pages and no resolve.
Please respond to the other thread. Reprehensible.
Zuma
-
Talked with several prominant wildlife rehabilitators about why the condors have been released. Some of the reasons include:
1) Placeholding. Without a population, another vulture species will expand into that niche making it exceedingly difficult for the condor to be reintroduced. Food resources, nesting resources, and other necessities will be scarcer due to competition and put the condor into an exponentially more difficult position.
2) Culture. Believe it or not, vultures are intelligent enough that they pass along learned lessons, the definition of culture. In the case of these birds, culture is nesting territories, feeding strategies, and cohabitative strategizing (birds sharing the same core territory take cues from each other's soaring patterns to signal the presence of food, etc) that improves survivability.
3) Wildness. Birds raised in captivity do not learn how to process what their instincts tell them to do. From choosing a mate, to nesting techniques and nest site choice, imprinting, territorial imprinting, and likely hundreds of other things they do not learn in the captivity as they are raised by parents in the wild. Not being properly "wild" leaves the bird with a lesser set of survival skills.
4) Supporting wild populations with captive raised allows the captive birds to "school" off the wild birds greatly increasing their chances of survival.
5) Natural genetic selection for hardiness and survival. Captive breeding will not improve the stock and only add to the deselection for hardiness. This was an issue in the early days of peregrine reintroduction. Artificial insemination may have worsened things as quite a number of captive bred peregrines produce sterile eggs. (My first peregrine was a breeding coop reject that did not provide a viable egg in 7 years of breeding despite being a solid flyer and hunter).
These are just the first three people that have responded to my request from the community that deals with these issues on a daily basis. As further responses come in, would you like me to post those as well? Or would you rather just contact the persons that are actually working with condor recovery to ascertain the answers you are asking to receive? I bet I can get an email address for you pretty quick.
-
Thank you very much JW. Makes good sense. :)
Please don't think this is negativity. :o
Although these are solid ideas for what I may think
of as a normal reintroduction (like into a lead free area)
Can you assure us that the folks you talk to can
justify the losses and stress the birds endure?
I would be interested to see Who will do that?
Not a individual but the organization they represent.
Also it would be nice to know how long it might take
to have a lead free enough environment to sustain
the present and future population.
I would suggest at least slowing or moving the studies to
places void of the lead problem. I don't know if that
is possible? What I alone, think will make zero impact
one way or the other. But by good efforts like yours
JW and others of your ilk. I think these big birds plight
will improve. I hope so. It would be my pleasure and I
am quite sure other members to, if you would post
whatever information you can find out, concerning Condors
and lead. I also think there are quite a few folks here that
would go out of their way to help you if they could. I would.
Zuma
I'll keep this thread open as long as you all like, if the
resopnses are meterd and informative. thanks
-
6) Expense. Keeping these bird in captivity is extraordinarily expensive. And if you remove all of them from the wild to caretake them, then you have to go get all the Kansas skipper butterflies, the red nosed dace, the stonerollers, the prairie moccasin orchids, etc, etc.
7) Lead free hunting zones and voluntary lead ammo exchanges are expanding and increasing. If the birds are not there, then when do they know the range is lead free for them?
I am heartened by how public opinion favorable to voluntary choice to go lead free and the number of people taking the ammo exchange has increased in the last few years. Personal anecdotes from people having success using the copper solids/hollowpoints is helping shift the load, especially. And despite how it shares the name with a certain Kennebago driver, I am a huge fan of my Barnes TSX rounds. Puts the game in the DRT (dead right there) category.
Moving the study to another area that is lead free? Where is that, pray tell? Considering they can be 200+ miles further down the road in just a day, basically we would need to start with a Federal ban on all lead ammunition in the southwestern 1/4th of the continental United States as well as forcing a foreign country to adopt our laws on the issue. Considering the luck we have had getting Mexico's help in the war on drugs, I doubt much traction will come with that idea.
For years I have opposed a Federal ban on lead ammunition because it is an ultra-wide brushstroke where a pencil line would suffice. If hunters switch to nontoxic for the actual hunt, the problem goes away. It is a conservation issue, not one where we want legislation coming in ham fisted.
-
This thread is soaring like a Condor in an updraft. ☺
Well, if one good thing came of this thread, it is that
I am going to look into switching to non toxic fishing weights. I just never sat down and thought about it before. Thanks for all the info and discussion.
-
8.) Capture and chelation treatment is fairly quick. And since release back into the wild, some of the birds have shown an unnatural interest in humans and have been endangering themselves by hanging around population centers where they have a higher propensity to get into trouble. The capture and treatment works to sensitize them to humans and convince them to move out of populated areas.
9.) The project has been considered a success for the greater part. And frankly, was anyone expecting perfection?
10) The Endangered Species Act. Directs the Secretary of Interior to develop and review recovery plans for listed species without showing preference for any taxonomic group. Also directs they establish recovery plan criteria for listed species.
So why are you spinning your wheels in here grinding your axe to a razor edge over the subject instead of putting this question to the people that are actually working to resolve the problem? Why not go to the source?
-
8.) Capture and chelation treatment is fairly quick. And since release back into the wild, some of the birds have shown an unnatural interest in humans and have been endangering themselves by hanging around population centers where they have a higher propensity to get into trouble. The capture and treatment works to sensitize them to humans and convince them to move out of populated areas.
So I guess it traumatizes the creatures so mush they want to go remote.
Not to shabby except for the trauma and then the degree of difficulty
to re-capture and re juice them for what, something in excess of $10,000
a pop?.
9.) The project has been considered a success for the greater part. And frankly, was anyone expecting perfection?
By whom? The researchers themselves. Plenty members
here have voiced their trepidations
Along with the peer review study I posted a link to.
Did you read it? It's posted several times.
10) The Endangered Species Act. Directs the Secretary of Interior to develop and review recovery plans for listed species without showing preference for any taxonomic group. Also directs they establish recovery plan criteria for listed species.
Wether they work or not? Is that little ditty in there?
So why are you spinning your wheels in here grinding your axe to a razor edge over the subject instead of putting this question to the people that are actually working to resolve the problem? Why not go to the source?
Well If you are asking me-- I started the thread.
Why are you? All the other members will have to field
that on their own
As far as the source question, if directed to me?
I was relying on you because you said you would tackle
that in a previous post. You haven't even answered the
question about who is charge.
Attaching a name/group name to your 1-10 would be helpful too
No axes here JW, strange ?
Again if the question is for all members- their on their own.
Thanks for the diaolog.
Zuma
-
Radical difference between trauma and stress. Yes, it is a stressor. However it is fleeting. They live in the moment and don't end up in on a therapist's couch over it. Anecdotally, I dealt with a injured great horned owl that stood in full threat posture while I tossed mouse after mouse to her and she wolfed them down. Stressed? Yes. Traumatized, not likely.
Next, yes, by the team that is doing the work, the people that have background education in the field, that have spent the time researching, and are quite capable of making their own conclusions.
Whether they work or not? Wow, failed logic there. How do you predetermine success or failure so that you can decide to go forward with a project or not?
-
Perhaps you missed this post
Ok skeptics I guess you have a problem with clicking a link.
So here is the one I posted for you on page five.
Now please stop chewing on my ankles.
Bare in mind this study was done in 2008 so if they are still complaining
about the mortality and poisoning it must be because they continue to
subject the poor birds to that fate. Or the documentry was way old?
Please tell me your take on it.
I included the conclusion. I read the paper in it's intireity
Effectiveness of Action to Reduce Exposure of Free-Ranging ...
Dec 24, 2008 ... Condors were routinely recaptured and treated to reduce their lead levels as ... We simulated the effect of ending the existing lead exposure ...
We used a previously published population model [8] to assess likely long-term trends in the numbers of condors in the absence of further releases and without chelation and other treatment of birds with elevated blood lead concentrations. According to this model, the condor population would tend to decline under present conditions unless natural adult mortality was at the lower end of the likely range or reproduction was at the “maximum conceivable” level (Table 5). Since the assumptions of the “maximum conceivable” scenario are extremely unlikely to apply to any real population of condors, this indicates that the Grand Canyon condor population is unlikely to be self-sustaining at current levels of exposure to lead.
Rhys E. Green,1,2,* W. Grainger Hunt,3 Christopher N. Parish,3 and Ian Newton4
Tom Pizzari, Editor
Author information ► Article notes ► Copyright and License information ▼
Copyright Green et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.
Go to:
I doubt much has changed in the last several years.
But in the document I saw they said they were losing to many birds.
I don't know the date of the documentary but it was aired just before
I started the thread.
Zuma
-
Thanks for all the contributions folks :)
My closing statement is-- err got to think quick.
Birds are getting abused no matter what. Period..... O:)
I understand the passion of others. O:)I hope they
understand mine. :)It's a good night for you-alls
last statmentments as I will close the thread
late tonight. ::) One post per member.
Please make it one you are proud of,
The other thread will stay open??
Cumbi-ah or whatever. O:)
Zuma
My overwhelming thanks to the moderators
patience and trust in us to be civil and still
have a stimulating discussion. 8)
Promise it won't happen again. :)
-
Something I am wondering in all of this, what with all the concern for the stress on the individuals, or in your word, trauma, are you advocating we end stress/trauma for them? It seems yes. But why condors, or more specifically why JUST condors? Or do you also feel we must eliminate anthropocentric stress/trauma on all individual animals? In that case it appears you would be anti-hunting.
In conservation, there are times when it may be necessary to induce stress (or trauma, if you insist) on animals in order to further the conservation of the species. I speak of trap and transfer, in the specific. This technique has successfully reintroduced the wild turkey to every habitat where they were naturally found as well as many where they were not natural. And many were injured or killed in the process. Same goes for reintroductions of bighorn sheep into numerous areas in the west. Ditto for blackfooted ferrets.
In the big picture, these people are working to recover a species that has a chance of survival. There are and will be bumps in every road worth travelling. It just looks to me that you wish to fault them for not being quitters.
-
If you are looking for me to answer questions? >:(
No can do. No one here answers mine. They just
post what they want to hear themselves. ???
-
According to the folks that did the research--
they wanted to blame a large part of the implanted/
transplanted Condor deaths on lead poison.
This study was in the Grand Canyon area.
The thing that struck me peculiar was that they
blamed it on hunting losses, creatures that are
shot and not tracked or recovered. The Condors then
eat these creatures and the lead that they consume
brings about their demise.
I say BS. Any thoughts
Zuma
Your original post didn't even ask a question and personally this reminds me of some posts on the knapping page that were at best argumentative and uninformative, you asked for my thoughts, well i think that plenty of people answered many ? That arose in this post and you don't like most of the answers so you change trails trying to muddle the issue and then say answer my question well you really just asked fot our opinios and you got'em like them or not, with all due respect zuma
-
Bubby
You are a mans / peoples / folks person IMO
All I did was ask for your thoughts.
Thank you with respect for yours.
Zuma
-
The only thing missing is Ben chiming in,,,,
-
[quote author=mullet
No secrets here. ::)
It's just a good ole boy's downeybrook. O:)
Most likley we all will look back and eat our words. :embarassed:
But for sure totally in respect for "The Plight of the Condor"
Amen, Zuma