The Center for Biological Diversity has been pretty steadfast in its assault on lead ammunition, but they’ve had a couple of setbacks lately.
After having their plea to the EPA to ban lead ammo components and fishing tackle rejected by that organization, the organization filed suit to force the issue. According to a press release on the CBD’s website, the federal judge hearing the suit ruled in September that the court does not have the jurisdiction to hear this case because it was not filed within the statute of limitations to challenge the EPA decision.
In order to avoid the misleading haze of propaganda you’ll encounter on the CBD website, let me recap in simple terms.
In August of 2010, the CBD petitioned the EPA to ban lead bullets and shot (as well as all lead fishing tackle). They did not petition to ban only hunting ammunition, and the ban was not intended to apply only in areas where there may be demonstrable harm caused by lead (e.g. condor habitat). They petitioned to ban all lead ammo everywhere. This would have included ammunition used by hunters, target shooters, military and law enforcement, and even home defense.
The EPA rejected the petition, stating clearly that federal law directly prohibits the agency from regulating ammunition or ammunition components. They couldn’t ban lead ammo if they wanted to. The ban on fishing tackle was considered more thoroughly, and then (in November 2010) it was also rejected because there was no scientific evidence to support the need for an all-out ban.
The CBD (and associated organizations) filed suit immediately, of course. Unfortunately for them, they did not file within 60 days of the initial rejection. For this reason, the court rejected that portion of the lawsuit. The court will, however, continue to look at the suit to ban lead fishing tackle. I hope common sense prevails here as well.
I’m sure the CBD and their associated cronies will appeal the ruling in one way or another, and will continue to push their ill-conceived campaign against lead ammunition.
In the meantime, the organization has returned their focus to Arizona. A few years back, they tried to get Arizona to enact a lead ban similar to California’s condor regulations. They hit a brick wall there, however, because the AZ constitution protects hunters a little more thoroughly. In order to effect such a significant change to the law, the state would have had to literally revise their consitution. That wasn’t going to happen.
The thing is, AZ has a really good and effective voluntary program and solid education. Hunters in the condor range are given some key education, and then allowed to make the choice to switch. Added incentive is provided through free, non-lead ammunition for those who want to switch. For those who choose to use lead (for some hunters it’s not a choice… there is no lead-free ammo available for them), AZ offers various programs such as the gutpile lottery. If the hunters bring out their gutpiles, instead of leaving them in the field for the scavengers, they’re entered into a drawing for prizes.
The organizations then attempted an end-around on the issue by assailing the Bureau of Land Management. Since BLM land is federally managed, they are under different rule-making guidelines. Sensing a weak-link, the CBD and Co. went after the land management planners. They claimed that, by allowing hunters to use lead ammunition, the BLM was failing in its charge to adequately protect the wildlife and habitat in their domain.
A federal judge hearing this case, in conjunction with a wider argument against grazing and off-road vehicle use in the National Monument lands, threw out the arguments last week. After reviewing the facts and the arguments, the judge ruled that the BLM was definitely performing their duties and fulfilled its obligations to protect the wild lands and the wildlife that ranges there.
The case is likely to find its way into the 9th Circuit Court in the very near future.
Thanks to Tony Canales for the heads-up on the Tucson case.
Related Posts
- Lead Ban Chronicles – The Beehive State Now the Focus of Lead Ammo Ban Efforts
- Lead Ban Chronicles – CBD Files Suit Against EPA re: Banning Lead Ammo and Fishing Tackle
- Lead Ban Chronicles – CBD Building A Case Against EPA?
- Lead Ban Chronicles – Utah To Compensate Hunters For Non-Lead Ammo
- Lead Ban Chronicles – North Dakota Tests for Lead




This is truly ridiculous, and really highlights the lengths these people will go to make their point(whatever that is, really). Banning lead ammo? I’ve heard it all now, thanks!