There has been a lot of fussing lately about lead bullets. The State of California has banned lead bullets for hunting in certain areas because the endangered California condor was supposedly eating carcass remains, digesting lead fragments and dying.

This was a ban on hunting with lead bullets, which I didn’t agree with, but wasn't really affected by since I don’t live in California. I had also embraced lead-free hunting rounds years ago with the Barnes X Bullet and knew that non-lead bullets are very effective. However, I still didn't like it, because I thought the government was overstepping its bounds and because I knew this was just the beginning.

Yesterday, I was proven right when the Center for Biological Diversity and the American Bird Conservancy filed a petition with the Environmental Protection Agency to ban all use of lead in ammunition and fishing tackle. Notice this doesn't say ban lead ammo for hunting. This would ban lead in all ammunition, which would skyrocket prices and force a lot of us to reduce our time at the range. It would also reduce the amount of money available for wildlife conservation through Pittman/Robertson.

Part of their argument is that there are acceptable substitutes for hunters, but what about shooters who are the true payers of wildlife conservation. I hunt as much as possible, way more than the average hunter, and I bet I don't shoot 100 rounds a year hunting. But, I run between 1,000 and 2,000 rounds a year through my guns training and plinking, which translates into a lot of money going to wildlife through the 11 percent excise tax on ammunition.

Now, I know this isn’t about safety or self-defense, but I have a hard time training without ammo. How about you?