Machine guns on the Great Lakes

[Notso_Ken]

Well, the 890,000 children ages 1 to 5 have elevated blood lead levels high enough to affect intelligence, growth and development might disagree with you...Rob

Yes, when I did an academic study of lead levels in the open, there is a clear and convincing correlation of elevated lead levels to distance from roads...an inverse relation. (The study was not set up sufficiently to prove cause and effect, so have to settle for correlation) The closer to a road, the higher the level. It isn't lead from paint, it isn't lead from bullets, it isn't lead from old fishing sinkers. It's the lead from gas back in the 50's, 60's and 70's for all those old muscle cars that got 8mpg.

It is all the old tetra-ethyl lead we burned in our internal combustion self propelled space heaters that contributed the lead thgat caused those issues. If current scientists would do a proper job of validating and verifying their models, they might also find that the residual heat from those internal combustion self propelled space heaters (ie, cars) more accurately predicts the effects they are seeing, since they are still uncovering discrepancies in their results.

Ken

 

[archman]

When did they "grossly mislead the public"? According to the EPA, Michigan introduced 4069 lbs of lead into surface waters in 2004. The Coast Guard is proposing dumping an additional 7000 lbs of lead into the Great Lakes annually via this program. That sounds like a significant amount to me - probably worth doing a study or two on, and doing a cost/benefits analysis of alternatives (like lead free ammunition). And maybe the public, who has to live with the consequences of this and other environmental issues, has a right to know whats going on and make informed decisions.

It's misleading the public by vastly overstating its importance. While the EPA can be applauded for keeping up with piddly surface emissions generated from industry (which is tightly regulated nowadays, not considered a big deal by scientists), those numbers only scratch the surface regarding actual lead imports into the great lakes. What's being omitted is groundwater, runoff and other non-point sources (probably the dominant percentage), atmospherics, and direct dumping from recreational users (another huge source). None of these can be measured nearly as easily as industrial point sources can, unfortunately. Which is why their omission from the recent press releases stands out like a red flag to anyone somewhat familiar with the topic.

One has to be careful with pollution figures within large marine or aquatic habitats. It is common for only certain sources to be reported, and typical for such sources to not adequately represent the survey area.

If memory serves, a water quality professor was recently interviewed regarding this very matter, and stated that lead ammo posed no threat to wildlife unless something actually ate the stuff. If memory also serves, I believe that an old EPA report from the late 1990's listed air sources as responsible for virtually all lead imports into Lake Michigan.

It would more behoove the people living on the Great Lakes to be better informed as to the daily contribution of toxic metals entering their waters via runoff, sewage outfalls, and air pollution, rather than focusing their attentions on this matter. I would like to see follow-up press releases which include other sources of lead entering the Great Lakes (to put the Coast Guard releases into a more plausible perspective), and more interviews with water quality authorities.

 

[caymaniac]

I don't see this as an issue. If the CG needs to designate areas to practice safely then have at it. I sell and lead dives out of Chicago. We have been advising The Warrant Officers of unusual activity from our charters (rebreathers and DPVs) anyway as a result of increased security post 9/11. What's the big deal of giving way to an active fire zone.

I agree, I live a few miles from two fire zones that the coast guard will be using for target practice. I believe that alot of drugs are coming into our area and out via boat. The amount of arrests made each year is miniscule and I hope they do some seaches on some of those idiots that continue to bring in coke, crack and grass. I don't need it, neither does anyone else, not to speak of the problems that comes with some quirky terrorist plot. Not too far away is a nuclear plant that stores plenty of waste outside...just think about that for a minute and tell me it's not okay to have the CG have live ammo and be on alert.

 

[Notso_Ken]

It's misleading the public by vastly overstating its importance. While the EPA can be applauded for keeping up with piddly surface emissions generated from industry (which is tightly regulated nowadays, not considered a big deal by scientists), those numbers only scratch the surface regarding actual lead imports into the great lakes. What's being omitted is groundwater, runoff and other non-point sources (probably the dominant percentage), atmospherics, and direct dumping from recreational users (another huge source). None of these can be measured nearly as easily as industrial point sources can, unfortunately. Which is why their omission from the recent press releases stands out like a red flag to anyone somewhat familiar with the topic.

One has to be careful with pollution figures within large marine or aquatic habitats. It is common for only certain sources to be reported, and typical for such sources to not adequately represent the survey area.

If memory serves, a water quality professor was recently interviewed regarding this very matter, and stated that lead ammo posed no threat to wildlife unless something actually ate the stuff. If memory also serves, I believe that an old EPA report from the late 1990's listed air sources as responsible for virtually all lead imports into Lake Michigan.

It would more behoove the people living on the Great Lakes to be better informed as to the daily contribution of toxic metals entering their waters via runoff, sewage outfalls, and air pollution, rather than focusing their attentions on this matter. I would like to see follow-up press releases which include other sources of lead entering the Great Lakes (to put the Coast Guard releases into a more plausible perspective), and more interviews with water quality authorities.

AMEN!!! Well said! (Much better than I could)

 

[Bob3]

Heck, even the lead fishing sinkers lost every year have to add up to some serious poundage.

Back when salmon snagging was legal we'd easily pull daily over 100lbs of lead out of even the small creeks (under 50' wide).
The lead in the bullets is cased in copper so very little will actually be exposed to the water. I bet the use of "soft weights" puts more lead into suspension than a few tons of bullets.
We used to find 2.75" practice rockets in some areas, plus on the Michigan side, they used little drone aircraft with tiny Mculloch engines, great for gocarts. One of my buddies hauled up a live sidewinder in his chub nets, that went over real well.
There was a bombing range on the Beaver Island group, I forget which little island had it though.
Coasties with guns? I'd rather see them practice than not.

 

[Hoosier]

Not military? Coast guard ships sank uboats in ww2.

http://www.gocoastguard.com/faq.html

Yes, technically and international treaty wise, they aren't military. That's the reason why they aren't heavily armed.

Don't you think that the US coast guard have ability or capability to put the missile or torpedo? They only equip with the minimu fire arms to do their job for policing, not military action. Otherwise, each countries are trying to equip heavily and generate a lot of conflict. This can be very sensitive issue when the coast guard captures the foreign ships.

Sure, the coast guard can be heavily armed during the war.


BTW, where is the place to enjoy shooting in INDY?

 

[FredT]

Metallic lead is hazardous when it splashes on you, or hits you with high kinetic energy. To be bioactive it HAS to be converted to a soluable salt first! Metallic lead in fresh water forms a protective skin, which effectively stops further corrosion. Wrap 95% of the surface metal in gilding metal (the copper jacket stuff) and the "polluton" rate goes to an effective zero. Nice red herring, but the fish under that layer are not edible.:no :no :no

One thing not noted is that in almost all cases the ship's radar can see WAY farther than a 7.62mm or .50 cal will shoot even at ideal angles with a tail wind.

FT