NSSF: Aiming for Accuracy

New NSSF Video Helps Public, Media Understand the Firearms Industry

From NSSF's weekly e-newsletter Bullet Points:

NEW VIDEO EDUCATES PUBLIC ABOUT INDUSTRY . . . "For more than 200 years a unique industry in America has made products that have been part of our country's great tradition of freedom, self-reliance and enjoyment of the outdoors." So begins a new video produced by the National Shooting Sports Foundation called "Lock, Stock and Barrel: Understanding the Firearms Industry" and that is now available as a DVD free of charge or to view online at www.nssf.org. Designed to educate anyone who wants to know more about the history, operation and regulation of the firearms industry, the video is particularly helpful to those who hold misconceptions about the industry. "It's important that an industry that produces a product -- firearms -- that is at times a contentious subject in modern society should be understood and appreciated for the many positive contributions it has made for centuries," said NSSF President Steve Sanetti. "I believe that people who watch this video, perhaps at the local Rotary Club meeting or library, whether they own firearms or not, will come away with a new-found appreciation of our great industry." Potential audiences for the video are the general public, elected officials, teachers and students, local service groups and the media. Members of NSSF are encouraged to show the video to their employees and in their communities to promote a better understanding of the firearms industry. "Lock, Stock and Barrel: Understanding the Firearms Industry" is approximately 15 minutes long. Individual or multiple copies of the DVD are available at www.nssf.org/industryvideo.  Watch the video.

At Burlington Free Press, an Apology and an Op-ed

The Burlington Free Press today ran a letter of apology in its print edition after publishing a reader's letter yesterday that said, "I suggest that before the next annual [moose] killing season, other residents be awarded legal permits to kill hunters . . . ." 

The wording of the print edition apology was similar to that which appeared yesterday online. Here's the print version:

Moose-hunting letter inappropriate

Editor's note: The letters to the editor in Wednesday's editions and on the Free Press Web site included a letter about the annual moose hunt. The letter clearly violates the standards of the Free Press for submissions to the Opinion page by advocating for violence against hunters. The letter in no way reflects the views of this paper. We apologize for publishing the letter.

We were pleased to see that Wayne LaRoche, commissioner of the Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department, provided an op-ed column explaining the value and culture of hunting, as we urged yesterday. Here is what Mr. LaRoche had to say about hunting and the state's moose population:

"Vermont has an abundant moose population. In fact, the moose population in the northeastern part of the state has increased to a level that has damaged their forest habitat and caused losses to forest landowners. The Department of Fish and Wildlife and its biologists carefully manage the moose and other wildlife populations using highly regulated hunting to sustain the healthy and abundant populations so that they do not destroy their own habitat or cause serious losses to landowners. Through time, hunting benefits the moose, the forest landowners, hunters and those of us who enjoy viewing moose."

The mistake of printing the letter having been made, we appreciate the quick response from the newspaper to correct it and applaud Mr. LaRoche for taking advantage of the opportunity to help educate readers about the role hunting plays in wildlife conservation.

What Happened Yesterday in U.S. v. Stevens

For a good overview of the U.S. Supreme Court justices' comments yesterday in the United States v. Stevens case, read Jim Shepherd's account in today's Outdoor Wire. Justice Scalia made a number of informed references to hunting. Also, see the SCOTUS blog. For background, read NSSF's news release and the amicus brief that NSSF submitted to the court.

 

 

Obama Hates Bambi . . .

That's the conclusion—we believe tongue in cheek—of Newsweek's Steve Tuttle when he misconnects the recent surge in firearms and ammunition sales—due to fears that the Administration will push for new restrictions on gun ownership—to somehow aiding deer hunters in their pursuit of game. "The deer don't stand a chance," says Tuttle, in his article.

Tuttle gets the background right when he says that the surge in firearms and ammunition sales over the past year has been a windfall for wildlife conservation. The 1937 Pittman-Robertson Federal Aid In Wildlife Restoration Act imposed an excise tax on the sale of firearms and ammunition, with the funds generated being routed back to the states to underwrite wildlife conservation and habitat preservation projects. Firearms and ammunition manufacturers paid about $110 million in the first quarter of 2009, a 43 percent increase from the same period a year ago due to the surge in sales. That’s more money for conservation. More than $5 billion has been raised for conservation since Pittman-Robertson legislation went into effect 72 years ago. Thankfully, these funds "can't be diverted to other uses," otherwise federal legislators and bureaucrats almost certainly would have diverted them, as some states have tried to, with the result that wildlife populations in America today would not be as healthy or widespread as they are.

Despite the writer's quip that “the deer don’t stand a chance,” deer and other game species are doing quite well under America's hugely successful system of wildlife management, a model emulated around the world. This system is responsible for increasing white-tailed deer populations in America from about 500,000 around the turn of the last century to over 26 million today. No one is unhappy with that except perhaps the victims of car vs. deer accidents or the owners of munched on shrubs in their suburban yards. Similar conservation successes are connected with the wild turkey, Rocky Mountain Elk, wood duck and other game species, benefiting nature watchers and hunters alike. Are there more opportunities for hunters to take deer and to put healthful food on their tables and on the tables of those less fortunate through programs like Hunters for the Hungry? Yes, there are, and there's nothing wrong with that.

 

Young Hunters: Safe and Supervised

The following comment from NSSF has been posted to an MSNBC.com story about a youth hunting accident whose content misleads readers about Families Afield, an initiative supported jointly by NSSF, the U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance and the National Wild Turkey Federation. The comment was posted by NSSF senior vice president Chris Dolnack.

To the Editor:

There is nothing wrong with a family member taking a youngster hunting under supervised conditions in order to pass along the many wholesome traditions that responsible hunting teaches.

By sensationalizing a youth hunting accident, however, your story paints an inaccurate image of young hunters as being unsafe and undermines the successful work of Families Afield, an initiative that seeks to remove restrictive age barriers so that youth can experience hunting with an adult mentor.

Research shows that supervised youth hunting is a safe activity. That's one reason why over the last five years 28 states have changed their hunting laws and regulations to create opportunities for youth to hunt under the supervision of an adult, resulting in 283,000 new and safe hunters. This is good news for hunting, a tradition that faces considerable challenges from urbanization, access and a changing culture.

An introduction to hunting at a young age goes hand in hand with nationwide movement to encourage children to spend more time outdoors being active, enjoying nature and gaining an appreciation for wildlife and habitat. Having tried hunting with a parent or guardian, a child can move on to take a hunter education course, which is required in all 50 states in order to purchase an adult hunting license.

Making the Case for Sporting Firearms at the United Nations

As president of the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute, a Non-Governmental Organization member of the United Nations, Steve Sanetti today is addressing the U.N.'s  Open-Ended Working Group with the goal of explaining the legitimate uses of firearms and ammunition for sporting purposes and hunting by many millions of law-abiding persons worldwide, and urging that civilian firearms should be beyond the scope of any proposed U.N. consideration of fully automatic military firearms when its deliberations turn to small arms and light weapons as part of an International Arms Trade Treaty.

Mr. Sanetti is delivering the speech to approximately 300 delegates at United Nations headquarters in Manhattan. Some segments of the speech are provided here . . .

• Mr. Chairman and Members:

• Thank you for this opportunity to address the Open-Ended Working Group on behalf of the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute, an NGO member of this body and which serves to establish industry standards for safety, interchangeability, reliability and quality related to the manufacturing of sporting firearms . . .

• Sport shooting activities enjoy a deep heritage and broad appeal worldwide, and are rooted in centuries-old traditions built on safety, responsibility, marksmanship, competition, fair chase, respect for wildlife and respect for the land. That responsible civilians can, as they have for centuries, safely own, use and enjoy their personally-owned firearms is dramatically illustrated by the fact that despite an estimated nearly 300 million firearms in lawful private possession in the United States alone, firearms accidents are at an all-time low, accounting for less than 1 percent of all accidental fatalities in the country, dropping by over 42 percent in the last 20 years, according to the National Safety Council.

• Millions of sportsmen and women have a strong appreciation not only for the activities they enjoy, but also for the fine craftsmanship and industrial ingenuity that are hallmarks of the sporting firearms they use and collect for sport shooting. On a personal note, as an avid sport shooter and collector I can say that owning and using firearms for sporting purposes has enriched my life and given me untold hours of pleasure and shared good company . . .

• The world is constantly changing, and there are some who call for social and political reforms that increasingly threaten sport shooting and hunting. That is why I welcome the chance to speak to you on behalf of a responsible and law-abiding industry and for so many sportsmen and women throughout the world who share this passion.

• For as long as firearms have been around, they have been used for hunting and target shooting—traditional activities that are enjoyed with family and friends. The stories of successful hunting trips and competition medals won are passed down through generations and have created the fabric of the sport shooting culture around the world . . .

• The Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute advocates the legitimate, safe and responsible use of sporting firearms, and the right of free passage of those firearms through member states . . .

• It is difficult in the limited time I have this morning/afternoon to capture the full value of hunting in the modern world, but I will try. Hunting is at the core of what makes us human, and contrary to what some may think, hunters celebrate wildlife and have done more to help conserve wildlife and habitat than any other single group in history . . .

• The economic impact of hunting supports more than wildlife conservation, however. Economic stimulus from hunting is visible globally, from small towns in rural America to small villages in African countries where a dependable, yearly food and revenue stream is vitally important. When wildlife is considered as a valuable commodity to protect and conserve, it works to prevent the illegal taking of game and the eventual devastation of species and their habitats.

• . . . In countries such as Namibia, a popular destination for hunters, the economic impact of hunting is substantial, amounting to well over 100 million Namibian dollars and totaling approximately 14 percent of the tourism sector . . .

• So in conclusion, I urge that this group consider carefully the benefits sport shooting and hunting convey to hundreds of millions of law-abiding citizens around the globe, prior to formulating any policies or directives which address our mutual goal of creating appropriate policies regarding the international transport and transfer of fully automatic military weapons. These important goals, both of them, can be addressed and obtained, so long as we all have a proper respect for the rights of law-abiding citizens of disparate cultures and lifestyles that must be allowed to co-exist if all of us are to enjoy the right to the pursuit of happiness, each in our own way.

• Thank you.

Seeding the Story on Lead and Condors

With the California Fish & Game Commission nearing the August 6 deadline by which it will decide whether to expand a ban on traditional ammunition to include small game and upland birds in California condor regions, a story appeared yesterday whose timing bears scrutiny.

The Californian.com reports that a three-month-old, wild-hatched condor chick has tested positive for lead and says a condor official indicated . . .

the lead may have come from the carcasses of animals that may have accidentally swallowed lead ammunition . . .

That's way too many "may haves" on an issue which is reliant on sound science for a fair discussion and where unsubstantiated claims could lead to more bad policies that further erode hunting in the Golden State, reduce hunter-generated revenues that support wildlife conservation, and damage an industry that has contributed millions of dollars in to wildlife programs.

As NSSF has repeatedly noted, most recently in its June 25 news release, the ban against the use of traditional ammunition is not justified due to the lack of conclusive, science-based evidence that links the use of ammunition containing lead components to the health of the California condor.

The article demonstrates how inconclusive the math can be.

A blood sample found 18 micrograms per deciliter in the condor nestling. Daniel George, manager of the condor region near where the chick was hatched, said no guidelines for lead toxicity levels exist for condors (nor, to our knowledge, any other animals except humans). Given the absence of that baseline, scientists often use human thresholds, which are 10 micrograms per deciliter for a child and 25 micrograms per deciliter for an adult.  Yet, scientists determined that the blood lead level of the chick was not significant enough to require treatment even though it exceeded the level of concern for a child. First of all, it is inappropriate and scientifically unsound to apply the blood lead level threshold for concern established by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for human children across species, and, in this case, those guidelines were not even used to recommend treatment.

We'll keep you posted on the actions of the Fish & Game Commission on August 6, and sooner if other news stories begin to suspiciously appear in order to nudge the commission toward expanding the current ban.

See other posts on this blog under the "ammunition" category, and also NSSF's background paper on traditional ammuntion.