FWS SEEKS COMMENT ON BISMUTH SHOT Waterfowlers must act now if they wish to comment on a proposal by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that would approve bismuth-tin shot as non-toxic and allow it for hunting during the 1994-95 seasons. This move was encouraged by many dissatisfied with steel shot performance, and field tests have been promising (see below). The proposal, which surfaced in the August 22 Federal Register, listed a 30-day comment period. To meet the September 21 deadline, respondents must send remarks to: Director (FWS/MBO), USFWS, 634 ARSLQ, 1849 C St. N.W. Washington, D.C. 20240. For more information contact NRA-ILA Conservation, Wildlife & Natural Resources at (703) 267-1501. Duck Hunting With Bismuth In February, American Hunter editors traveled to Mexico to put this promising new shot to the ultimate test. Here's how it performed. By John M. Taylor Cold water slapped my face as the airboat skimmed across the broad expanse of the Laguna Madre. Ahead, the water and sky merged into a putty-colored monochrome as guide Freddie Zendajas unrelentingly pressed the craft forward toward Widgeon Cove. Across the cabin American Hunter editor Tom Fulgham and our mutual friend Tom Farmer, a lifelong Gulf Coast waterfowler from Galveston, Texas, were hunched against the spray. Looking over their shoulders, in the gray light of predawn I could begin to sce clouds of ducks lifting off the surface of the vast, shallow lagoon. Through the salt-streaked windows, raft upon raft of pintails, widgeon, redheads, and other species could be seen taking flight as the air boat roared toward the last spit of land between us and the Gulf of Mexico. Our quest to evaluate bismuth shot as an alternative to steel had taken a southern turn. Although American Hunter's extensive technical range tests (May '93) clearly showed bismuth's potential, it raised more questions than it answered, and indicated a real, in-the-field test was necessary. Prior to our trip, more than a few minutes had been spent in speculation as to what potential problems would impact bismuth's field performance. The lack of uniformly round pellets had caused patterns to be rather thin. Would they prove insufficient when flying ducks were encountered? Our range tests further showed that many of the pellets fractured both during firing and on impact when we tested penetration on telephone books. Would these brittle pellets shatter on bone, on skin, or even on heavy winter plumage? We even wondered if No. S bismuth pellets would be of sufficient mass to prove lethal on ducks in view of suggestions from some quarters that it might be necessary to select a heavier pellet size for this new shot to be truly effective? We felt we could answer these questions if only there was a way to use bismuth on ducks. We initially requested permits from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service to shoot game-farm-reared ducks with bismuth shot. Stating that no such permits existed, even for their employees, they refused. Canada's seasons were long closed, but Mexico's were open, so here we were at Laguna Vista Lodge, on the Gulf of Mexico (see adjacent sidebar). William "Monty" Montgomery, president of Bismuth Cartridge Company, had forwarded a number of boxes of No. S bismuth 2 3/4- inch magnums to Laguna Vista for the test. This was the same load we had previously tested. It moves a 1 3/16-ounce charge of No. S bismuth-tin shot at an honest 1330+ fps. Range testing indicated that penetration was at least as good as No. 3 steel and nearly as good as lead. Now we would see how it really performs in the field. Amidst hurriedly applying for licenses and organizing our gear, we formulated a plan. If our research was to be valid, we would have to devise a method whereby the ranges at which ducks were shot could be measured and recorded. We looked at the available rangefinders and determined that they would be impractical due to the limitations of their optical systems and because it would be impossible for the rangefinder operator to know precisely which duck would be shot. We then turned to a more practical means_a nylon cord knotted with surveyor's tape at 10-yard increments. Using this system we placed thin poles in the water at 10-yard intervals perpendicular to the front of the blind out lo 60 yards. Then, two similar scts of poles were placed bisecting the 90-degree angle formed by the shore and the primary set. Any duck shot would be within a few feet of a pole and we could accurately record the distance at which it was shot. We attempted to establish distances as each duck was shot so that factors such as wind or the bird's momentum did not skew the finding. One of the two American Hunter staffers would always act as recorder so that the judgment of distance would not be incumbent upon the two shooters. Throughout the three-day test, extreme care was taken to adhere to this protocol. It would have been easy for three dyed-in-the-wool duck hunters to have taken advantage of Mexico's liberal limits and essentially had a lark. To the contrary, by emphasizing the accumulation of data and picking shots for range potential and angle, we never individually or collectively approached a limit. We agreed it was important that no more than two ducks be downed at any one time. Although that rule was occasionally bent, data was accurately recorded for all ducks taken. During the three-day hunt we often changed locations from as close as one side of a pond to the other to a move of several miles. Each time, we repositioned the measuring stakes even though it almost always cost us shots at birds. By noon of our first day, all three guides, Boots Faggard, Freddie Zendajas, and Emielio Rodriguez, were fully into the spirit of our experiment and ably assisted placing stakes as well as hustling to put out decoys and building rudimentary blinds. To ensure proper accumulation of data, we devised a form that recorded all the information we felt necessary to fully explore bismuth's potential as a waterfowling load. Each duck we shot was identified with a numbered tag as it was retrieved. That number was recorded at the time of the kill along with the species and sex of the bird. The shooter and choke used were also recorded. During the test nearly all of the ducks were shot using modified choke as that appeared to provide the bcst pattern efficiency. In addition to the yardage at which the bird fell, we recorded the estimated height of the shot. To enable us to further interpret the data when later examining bagged birds, the body position, flight direction, and angle at which the shot was made were recorded. Reaction to the shot was also noted, including such vital data as "dead in air," or "downed, head up and swimming," etc. Space was also allotted for additional comments such as "retrieved alive" or "both shooters shot same bird." Once we returned to camp, the guides carefully hand-plucked each bird so that we could examine and evaluate the number of hits, penetration, location of hits, recovered pellets, and other pertinent data. Many of the plucked birds were opened by cutting up both sides of the spine with game shears, exposing all internal organs to view. We were especially careful to look for pellets still contained within the birds and at the internal damage done by the shot. In general, we felt that this system worked well. When analyzed, it showed that the bulk of the ducks we shot were between 25 and 45 yards distant and 15 to 35 yards above the surface of the water_ranges consistent with those generally experienced by waterfowlers. Although we planned to shoot a number of ducks at distances greater than 45 yards, the law of averages did not provide that many chances. We did, however, bag about 16 percent of the total birds at 45 yards and beyond with about a 60 percent dead-in-the-air percentage and the remaining 40 percent were hit sufficiently hard to be immobilized on the water. A total of three ducks were lost during the three days_one stiffwinged it beyond the end of a pond; another was able to ny to open water and, since we had no chase boat at that location, escaped; and the other, a brilliant overhead shot, dropped into 15-foothigh cane that was impenetrable by man or dog. When examined, post mortem, the majority of all the pellets that struck the ducks penetrated side to side with easily identifiable entry and exit wounds. Very few shot were recovered. Interestingly, the few bismuth pellets we did recover were deformed, but none was fractured. In addition, we found no evidence of pellet fracturing within the necropsied birds. Even those pellets that passed completely through the breast bone left no shattered residue as we had anticipated. It stands to reason that the previously documented fracturing of pellets from the forces of ignition still exists, but impact fracturing was not evident. One can conclude that our test medium (dry telephone books) may have caused more resistance lhan live tissue and therefore produced a much higher incidence of fracturing than exists under actual ficld conditions. Nearly every type of shot found in the field was taken during the three-day test. Space does not permit us to examine each duck, but here are some examples of the data collected from specific birds. Case no. 1: Drake shoveler, shot crossing on the left side at 45 yards, 10 yards above the water; six total hits_ two in the head, one through the neck, one in the upper breast, and two in the side. The two head pellets and one through the side contributed to instant death. This bW, even though shot at 45 yards, suffered six hits, good evidence that the pattern was anything but too thin. Case no. 2: Drake pintail flaring straight away from the decoys, shot at 25 yards, 20 yards above the water. Ten total hits, five struck the rear of the duck, two broke a leg, and three were found to have gone through the wing. Those pellets that entered the body cavity were recorded as having caused sevcre internal damage ranging far forward into the lungs. This duck was retrieved alive but near death. Although this was not a long shot by any means, it's a common one. Many a duck will decoy and then discover its mistake and leave tail-to. The fact that several pellets ranged forward into the heart-lung area attests to the near lead-like penetration of bismuth. Case no. 3: Drake pintail shot at 55 to 60 yards and recorded as the longest shot taken. The bird was flying straight away from the shooter at a slight angle toward the right. This duck was recorded as dead in the air, and necropsy revealed that four pellets had connected. Of these, one was in the left wing, two in the side, and one in the head. Obviously, the pellet in the head had entered with sufficient retained energy to cause instant death. It is apparent, considering the range involved, that bismuth appears to pack nearly as much punch as lead, even at increased ranges where steel loses effective killing power. Case no. 4: Drake shoveler shot flaring overhead at a distance of 35 yards and 30 yards above water. Recorded as "dead in air," we counted 10 hits. Of these, seven penetrated into the body, two hit the head, and one pellet went through the wing. Three pellets fully penetrated the body side to side. This duck presented another classic flaring shot often encountered in the field. Case no. 5: Drake greenwing teal. This small duck was bagged at an average range_35 yards distant and 30 yards in the air. It was crossing right to left, and was dead in the air from 10 total hits. Of these, nine were in the body and one struck the neck. This small target, although centered in the pattern by the shooter, allayed our fears of too-thin patterns. Case no. 6: Drake widgeon shot on its right side at 40 yards distant and 40 yards above the surface of the water. It was dropped with minimal movement on the water and retrieved dead. Six no. 5 bismuth pellets struck the bird. One was in the neck and the other five fully penetrated thc body. Shot at the beginning of the range at which steel shot begins rapidly to lose velocity and killing power, bismuth came through with complete side-to-side penetration, a good indication of its lead-like lethality. These data continue with similar results_excellent penetration, numerous hits, and good, authoritative kills. Of the ducks shot out to 45 yards, normal duck shooting ranges, over 60 percent were recorded as "dead in the air." The remainder were marked as downed with varying degrees of movement on the surface of the water. Of these, all but three, as previously stated, were retrieved. Although all this data is reassuring, judging cartridge performance in the field requires a seasoned, expericnced eye. "Boots" Faggard, 51, whose seamed face reflects his years of Gulf Coast hunting, was our guide and observed each and every shot we made. Boots begins the season at Los Patos Lodge near Gilchrist, Texas, and when the Texas season closes, he heads south to Laguna Vista. Hunting every day for virtually the entire fall and winter, he has the opportunity to witness many hunters shoot a large number and variety of waterfowl under nearly every imaginable condition. On the last day Boots and I sat in Laguna Vista's comfortable headquarters and discussed his observations of bismuth. "In Texas all of the hunters use steel shot. In Mexico we shoot lead. It is my personal observation that bismuth is more effective than lead," he stated. "As far as a comparison of bismuth and steel; between 25 and 30 yards both are very deadly," Boots continued. "On the longer shots_some of the 40 and 45 yard ones_the penetration was much bclter than steel. Good God it's better!" he exclaimed. "Even when we hunted in high wind, the long, 40 and 45 yard shots were very effective. Those birds were hit hard." Boots further observed, "The (short range) velocity of the bismuth was as quick as steel, but the (long range) velocity doesn't break down like it does with steel. Hunters who hunted before stcel shot became mandatory would compare this bismuth shot very favorably to lead." Boots's bottom line comment spoke volumes, "I was impressed." My own impressions were that the bismuth cartridges we used are a very deadly game load. It is as clean shooting a hunting load as I can recall ever using, a particular plus for those who hunt with autoloaders. We examined both my Beretta A-303 and Tom Farmer's Remington 1100, and both showed very little accumulation of carbon and powder residue on the surface of the gas systems. The bores were almost mirror-bright with virtually no unburned powder in evidence. Although I am enthusiastic in my praise of bismuth shot I must, however temper that praise. I believe that it is incumbent upon Eley Hawk Limited, who are making bismuth shot, the BrownPetersen partnership who are licensing manufacture worldwide, and Bismuth Cartridge Company who are overseeing the loading and sale of bismuth ammunition in North and South America, to seek an alloy that will diminish fracturing, and to develop an economical way to drop, cast, or mold larger pellets. From my observations of No. 5 bismuth on paper and ducks, pellets of at least No. 2 or, better still, BB, should be their goal. If hunters could have a bismuth load of near-comparable downrange retained velocity as No. 2 or BB lead provide for large geese, it would seem that both the hunter's desire for a good, lethal pellet that would not damage his favorite shotgun and the environmentalists' demands for nontoxic, nonpolluting shot would be answered. Yet, it still remains to be seen what resistance the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service will have to accepting bismuth on an equal footing with steel. Will they throw up roadblocks? It is widely rumored that at least one consultant retained by USFWS strongly opposes bismuth. Beyond the regulatory process are other questions. Is there enough bismuth to supply the market? (Current bismuth shot is being manufactured from byproducts of the smelting of other metals, although it can be mined directly.) If bismuth is accepted, will the price come down from its current $20+ a box? And perhaps most intriguing of all, will the major ammunition companies choose to join the parade and begin loading bismuth, or just sit back as they did with steel and wait until a market develops? In the last installment of this series, American Hunter will seek answers from the politicians, biologists, ammunition manufacturers, and others who figure into this final bismuth puzzle. -- This information is presented as a service to the Internet community by the NRA/ILA. Many files are available via anonymous ftp from ftp.nra.org and via WWW at http://www.nra.org Be sure to subscribe to rkba-alert by sending: subscribe rkba-alert Your Full Name as the body of a message to rkba-alert-request@NRA.org Information can also be obtained by connecting to the NRA-ILA GUN-TALK BBS at (703) 719-6406.