Communication strategies for reducing lead poisoning in wildlife and human health risks

Abstract

Although lead poisoning in North American waterfowl has been reduced, it persists among other wildlife. To address this issue, we review lead poisoning in wildlife and threats to human health, describe the recent socio-political landscape, and develop a framework for reducing lead exposure related to hunting ammunition and fishing tackle. Despite substantial information about lead poisoning in wildlife, an explicit and strategic plan for using existing information to develop an effective communication program is lacking. Local and regional efforts encouraging hunters and anglers to voluntarily use nonlead alternatives could benefit from a nationally coordinated and strategic focus. We propose that the diffusion of innovation theory provides a useful framework for developing and implementing voluntary nonlead hunting ammunition and fishing tackle programs. Further, it can help communicators refine messages, increase efficiencies in developing communication materials, and monitor adoption of nonlead alternatives. The initial step in this process, however, is to engage stakeholders about the importance of the issue and leverage that concern as a catalyst for positive change. Published 2019. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Assessment of Lead‐Free .22 LR Bullets for Shooting European Rabbits

“…The main argument for the use of lead‐free ammunition is to prevent harm to scavenging wildlife through lead exposure, and to a lesser extent, to human consumers of game meat (Arnemo et al 2019, Schulz et al 2019). Poisoning of scavenging wildlife is an example of an indirect and unintentional harm to animals (Fraser and MacRae 2011), whereas wounding during shooting is a direct and intentional harm.…”

“…In response to the health threats posed by toxic lead to humans and scavenging wildlife, there is currently a focus on transitioning from lead‐based to lead‐free bullets for shooting (i.e., harvesting, culling, recreational hunting) of wild animals (Martin et al 2017, Arnemo et al 2019, Newth et al 2019, Schulz et al 2019, Thomas et al 2019). Recently, attention devoted to animal welfare in wildlife management has increased markedly, including for shooting methods (Hampton et al 2016, Stokke et al 2018, DeNicola et al 2019).…”

Policy comparison of lead hunting ammunition bans and voluntary nonlead programs for California condors

“…However, the stark differences evidenced among political leaders and their constituents and jurisdictional complexities among state and federal agencies indicate that option is unlikely (Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies [AFWA] 2017). A more realistic approach may be a national outreach program encouraging all hunters and anglers to voluntarily use nonlead alternatives based on effective messaging and outcome monitoring (Schulz et al 2012, Schulz et al 2019.…”

“…The AFWA and their regional affiliates (e.g., the Midwest Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies; MAFWA) are the likely organizations to spearhead a national voluntary outreach program, similar to their program on humane furbearer trapping standards (AFWA 2018). However, action to date has been incremental with minimal discussions of a comprehensive national voluntary nonlead program (Schulz et al 2019). The lack of a cohesive approach was highlighted in January 2017 when the outgoing USFWS Director issued an order to phase-in nonlead ammunition over several years for hunting on National Wildlife Refuges, also known as Director's Order 219 (USFWS 2017).…”

Is lead‐free .22 long rifle ammunition worth a shot?

“…Many hunters choose lead-free options to reduce lead exposure to scavengers and the human consumers of game meat (Schulz et al 2019). Some governments, such as the state of California, USA, have mandated that hunters shoot lead-free ammunition (Kelly et al 2011).…”