The extent of lead fragmentation observed in deer culled by sharpshooting

Stewart, Chad M.; Veverka, Norman B.

doi:10.1002/jwmg.174

Cited by 16 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 5 publications

(11 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1; Stokke et al 2017). Owing to the softness of Pb and the high velocities achieved by modern centrefire bullets (Hampton et al 2016a), expanding Pb-based bullets often fragment on impact into hundreds of small pieces (Hunt et al 2006(Hunt et al , 2009Grund et al 2010;Kneubuehl 2011;Stewart and Veverka 2011;McTee et al 2017).…”

Section: Wound Ballistics Of Pb-based Bulletsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2d) that are shot for commercial reasons and, hence, human consumption. However, the majority of meat taken for human consumption from macropod carcasses is taken from the hind limbs (Wynn et al 2004), lessening the likelihood of contamination with Pb fragments (Stewart and Veverka 2011). Risks remain considerable for scavenging wildlife.…”

Section: Commercial Macropod Harvestingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Heads in the sand: public health and ecological risks of lead-based bullets for wildlife shooting in Australia

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lead (Pb) is a toxic element banned from fuel, paint and many other products in most developed countries. Nonetheless, it is still widely used in ammunition, including rifle bullets, and Pb-based bullets are almost universally used in Australia. For decades, poisoning from Pb shot (shotguns) has been recognised as a cause of disease in waterfowl and Pb shot has been subsequently banned for waterfowl hunting in many jurisdictions. However, the risks posed by Pb-based bullets (rifles) have not been similarly recognised in Australia. Pb-based rifle bullets frequently fragment, contaminating the tissue of shot animals. Consuming this Pb-contaminated tissue risks harmful Pb exposure and, thus, the health of wildlife scavengers (carrion eaters) and humans and their companion animals who consume harvested meat (game eaters). In Europe, North America and elsewhere, the environmental and human health risks of Pb-based bullets are widely recognised, and non-toxic alternatives (e.g. copper-based bullets) are increasingly being used. However, Australia has no comparable research despite widespread use of shooting, common scavenging by potentially susceptible wildlife species, and people regularly consuming shot meat. We conclude that Australia has its collective 'head in the sand' on this pressing worldwide One Health issue. We present the need for urgent research into this field in Australia.

show abstract

Section: Wound Ballistics Of Pb-based Bulletsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Commercial Macropod Harvestingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Heads in the sand: public health and ecological risks of lead-based bullets for wildlife shooting in Australia

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bullet fragments were limited to the cranium when the cranium was the POA because of the frangibility of the projectiles, (as previously found in [10]). There also were no exiting fragments when the cervical spine was targeted.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…An additional benefit of targeting the cranium and upper cervical vertebrae, versus the lower cervical spine, is that dispersion of metallic fragments from bullets is limited. This appears to present less risk to humans and animals that consume thoracic musculature from these carcasses, compared to lead deposition patterns of hunter-harvested venison where the thoracic cavity is targeted [10, 34]. When CWD sampling using upper cervical shot placement there also is an added benefit of reduced bleeding and tissue dispersion in the field when compared to a cranial POA.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These measures included personal protective equipment and treatment of exposed areas with disinfectants. These samples were subsequently transported to the Anderson Air Force Base veterinary clinic, and orthogonal views of tissues adjacent to point of impact (POI) were obtained using post-mortem digital radiography [10]. All deer carcasses and samples were disposed of via deep burial or carcass donation for consumption.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessment of humaneness using gunshot targeting the brain and cervical spine for cervid depopulation under field conditions

DeNicola¹,

Miller²,

DeNicola³

et al. 2019

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Population reduction or eradication of domestic or non-domestic species may be required to address their impacts on the environment, other species, or human interests. Firearms are often used to accomplish these practical management objectives, and there is increased concern that the methods used may compromise animal welfare. We document the accuracy and humaneness of gunshot placement to the brain and cervical vertebrae of Philippine deer ( Rusa marianna ) on Guam during depopulation activities as a model for meeting AVMA standards of euthanasia under field conditions (e.g., animal is not in hand). Deer were shot with a .223 caliber rifle from 10–125 m and approached immediately (<20 s) for assessment. A subset of adult deer was further evaluated for physiological responses including cessation of heart rate, respiration, ocular reflexes, and post-mortem spasms. All deer shot in the brain (n = 132) and upper cervical spine (C1—C3; n = 18) died immediately due to the destruction of the brain or spinal tissue. Shot placements were all within 1.9 cm of the point of aim (i.e., the center of the target region). The accuracy and immediate insensibility resulting from targeting of C1—C3 demonstrates that this is an alternative target site when animal positioning is not optimal for targeting the brain, or there is a need to preserve brain tissue (e.g., Chronic Wasting Disease testing). While targeting of C4 –C7 vertebrae (n = 6) was accurate and resulted in immediate incapacitation, the failure to produce immediate insensibility does not support the use of this shot placement when upper cervical or brain shot placement is an option. It is reasonable to achieve sufficient accuracy to target the brain or upper cervical vertebrae of deer under field conditions and meet standards of euthanasia while accomplishing management objectives.

show abstract

Ammunition Type and Shot Placement Determine Lead Fragmentation in Deer

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lead remnants from spent ammunition introduce health risks to humans and wildlife that consume game harvested with firearms. Most current research has focused on effects of high‐velocity rifle bullets, whereas low‐velocity lead ammunition has received little attention. We examined whether fragmentation characteristics differed between 3 common low‐velocity ammunition types when shot into the thoracic cavity or shoulder of white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) culled in Indiana, USA, from May–September of 2009. We shot and subsequently radiographed 43 deer to determine the number of fragments, fragment size, and distance traveled by individual fragments. We also radiographed deer post‐evisceration to determine the proportion of fragments available to humans and wildlife scavengers for consumption in muscle and visceral tissue, respectively. All radiographed deer had evidence of fragmentation, with a geometric mean of 13.1 (95% CI = 10.3, 16.8) fragments/deer. Most fragments (89%) were <5 mm from wound channels, and no fragment traveled beyond 205 mm from a wound channel. Fragments were often retained within the muscle tissue of deer with a geometric mean rate of 0.55 (95% CI = 0.48, 0.65). Muzzleloader bullet fragments were larger than those generated by rifled and sabot slugs, and sabot slug fragments had the shortest dispersal from wound channels. Shoulder‐shot placement and bone contact for all ammunition resulted in a greater number of fragments (P < 0.01). Shoulder‐shots also generated more small fragments and higher fragment retention in muscle tissue. The overall mean number of lead fragments detected across our ammunition treatments was less than previous studies. Our results indicate ammunition type and shot placement may be considerations for hunters wishing to limit their potential exposure to lead from harvested big game. Additionally, when compared to high‐velocity rifle bullets, significantly fewer lead fragments are made available to humans and wildlife that consume game harvested with low‐velocity ammunition types, such as those tested here. Complete elimination of lead ingestion by humans and wildlife, however, is only possible by using non‐toxic ammunition alternatives. © 2020 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

The extent of lead fragmentation observed in deer culled by sharpshooting

Cited by 16 publications

References 5 publications

Heads in the sand: public health and ecological risks of lead-based bullets for wildlife shooting in Australia

Heads in the sand: public health and ecological risks of lead-based bullets for wildlife shooting in Australia

Assessment of humaneness using gunshot targeting the brain and cervical spine for cervid depopulation under field conditions

Ammunition Type and Shot Placement Determine Lead Fragmentation in Deer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About