Each year, hunters from 12 of the 27 European Union (EU) countries and the UK shoot over 6 million large game mammals, 12 million rabbits and hares and over 80 million birds. They support an international game meat market worth over 1.1 thousand million Euros. Animals shot with lead ammunition frequently contain lead fragments in the carcass which contaminate meals made from game meat with concentrations of lead substantially above the maximum allowable level (ML) set by European Commission Regulation EC1881/2006 for meat from domesticated animals. This poses a health risk to frequent consumers of wild-shot game meat, with children and pregnant women being particularly vulnerable. Total replacement of lead rifle and shotgun ammunition with available non-toxic alternatives is needed for all hunting in EU nations to prevent exposure of humans and wildlife to ammunition-derived lead and to allow the depletion of the long-term environmental legacy of lead from spent ammunition. We propose that EC1881/2006 is amended to incorporate an ML for game meats as a supplementary measure to the replacement of lead ammunition. This would harmonise food safety standards for lead in meats traded across and imported into the EU.

A proposed European Union (EU)-wide restriction on the use of lead gunshot for shooting in and over wetlands estimated that the societal benefits of a restriction outweighed costs, despite few identified benefits being quantified economically. A subsequent Annex XV Investigation Report on the evidence of impacts of lead ammunition in terrestrial environments concluded that additional measures to control its use are warranted, although to date this has not been further evaluated. To help inform this process, we review the literature and undertake new analyses to estimate the costs of continued use of lead ammunition associated with impacts on wildlife, people and the environment. We estimate minimum annual direct costs across the EU and Europe of c. €383 million–€960 million and €444 million–€1.3 thousand million respectively. The value that society places on being able to avoid these losses, estimated using a ‘willingness to pay’ approach, was c. €2.2 thousand million for wildfowl alone. Our estimated costs of the continued use of lead ammunition across the EU appear to be considerably greater than the likely costs of switching to non‐toxic alternative ammunition types, although these have not been formally estimated in full.

Background: Hunting throughout the European Union (EU) has left an accumulating legacy of spent lead ammunition that has deleterious toxic effects upon the environment, wildlife, and humans who consume hunted game meat. Non-toxic lead substitutes for both rifle and shotgun ammunition have been developed and are required in some EU jurisdictions. Within the EU, at least 28 companies make or distribute non-lead shotgun ammunition, and a further 14 companies distribute non-lead rifle ammunition. However, a broad transition to the use of these products has been resisted by the hunting and ammunition-making communities. Results and conclusions: It is in the self-interest of these communities to recognize the consequences of externalizing the effects of spent lead ammunition to society, and to make hunting more sustainable and socially acceptable. The paper endorses the ongoing process under the European Commission (EC) to introduce wide and fundamental restrictions on the use, trade and possession of lead ammunition for all types of hunting within 3 years, and within 5 years for clay target shooting. This would align EC regulations on lead from ammunition with lead from other anthropogenic sources, and EC regulations that protect the natural environment, especially the conservation of wild birds. Simultaneous EC regulation of lead in marketed game meats would provide extra health protection and assure a safe source of game meat products for consumers.

Denmark implemented a total ban on the use of lead shot for hunting and clay target shooting in 1996. Compliance was not studied systematically until recently. However, sporadic police checks and individual studies indicated that compliance was far from complete in the early years after regulation. To assess current levels of compliance with Danish regulations, we purchased 730 carcasses of pheasants (Phasianus colchicus) and mallards (Anas platyrhynchos) and a further 690 mallard gizzards were obtained from > 14 shooting events distributed across > 10 local authority districts throughout East and West Denmark in the 2016/2017 and 2017/2018 hunting seasons. All carcasses and gizzards were subject to radiography and those that contained shot were examined, pellets removed by dissection and identified to shot type. In all, 3589 pellets (intact or fragmented) were found in 1420 carcasses/gizzards, of which 799 pellets (some fragmented) were identified. Among the sample of pheasants with embedded shot (N = 447), 1.8% (in 2016) and 2.2% (in 2017) were lead shot. Among 148 mallards in 2017 with embedded shot, 3.1% had lead shot. None of the 2017 mallard gizzards had embedded lead shot. We conclude that Danish pheasant and mallard shooters mostly comply with the lead shot regulations. Steel was the most used non-lead alternative. The majority of ingested shot was non-lead, indicating that lead shot is not generally available to pheasant and mallard and suggesting compliance with regulations in recent years/decades. The study showed that the possibility to predict the metal composition of shot pellets from X-ray images alone was highly inaccurate, confirming the necessity of necropsy to determine shot type.