EPA Cannot Regulate Content of Ammunition; Dismisses Anti-hunting Groups’ Lawsuit Seeking to Ban Traditional Ammunition
Hunters and shooters in several states have been subjected to higher ammunition costs due to a lead ammunition ban based on dubious information about condors and other birds of prey. The original justification for the ban was that lead ammunition left in the carcass of a legally harvested game animal was suddenly hurting birds of prey. The only birds known to suffer or die from lead poisoning was the at the hands of some bozo that illegally shot them and not from scavenging from a carcass. After all lead, a naturally occurring element, can be found in the bloodstream of all animals in minute levels—and testing did not show any more lead in captive animals than those in the wild. But who needs facts and logic when you can pass a political agenda based on misinformation?
After the antis found success in liberal states such as California and Oregon, the antis sought to spread the backdoor assault on the Second Amendment by spreading the ban of traditional lead ammunition. To do so, the anti-hunting groups petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to become involved. The EPA refused to weigh in the matter, so the Antis tried to force the issue by filing suit in federal Court.
Fortunately, the courts recognized the ruse and recently the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld the dismissal of the latest lawsuit brought by anti-hunting groups petitioning the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to issue regulations banning traditional ammunition with lead components. This is a victory for more than simply hunters. The suit sought to ban all outdoor lead ammunition use. That would have affected hunters, plinkers and target shooters. Traditional ammunition represents 95 percent of the U.S. market and is the staple ammunition for target shooters, hunters and law enforcement with more than 14 billion rounds sold annually.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for the firearms and ammunition industry, joined the lawsuit on the side of the EPA to ensure that interests of industry and hunters were properly represented. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the EPA had properly dismissed the petition filed under the Toxic Substances Control Act. The petitioners appealed that ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals, which heard the case in late October.
The EPA has consistently denied repeated attempts by anti-hunting groups led by the extremist Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) to have the agency ban traditional ammunition, and the court had dismissed an earlier case brought by CBD seeking the same relief. The latest suit simply added more parties.
“This latest iteration of a frivolous lawsuit is essentially the same as those dismissed earlier and equally without merit,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel. “We are pleased the Court of Appeals considered the legal merits in this case and has now ruled that Congress has not given the EPA the authority to regulate ammunition and putting an end to efforts by anti-hunting zealots to end America’s hunting heritage.”
CBD’s serial petitioning of EPA and its repeated lawsuits are intended to begin shutting down hunting and the shooting sports in America by banning the ammunition that millions of hunters and target shooters choose to use safely and responsibly.
“There is quite simply no sound science that shows the use of traditional ammunition has harmed wildlife populations or that it presents a health risk to humans who consume game taken with such ammunition,” said Keane. “Banning traditional ammunition would cost tens of thousands of jobs in America and destroy wildlife conservation that is funded in part by an 11 percent excise tax on the sale of ammunition. The protection and management of wildlife is properly handled by the professional biologists in the state fish and game agencies, as it has been for over a hundred years.”
Organizations that joined CBD in its lawsuit were the Cascades Raptor Center of Oregon, the Loon Lake Loon Association of Washington, Preserve Our Wildlife of Florida, Tennessee Ornithological Society, Trumpeter Swan Society and Western Nebraska Resources Council.
What do you think the antis will try next? Share your thoughts and opinions in the comment section.