Advertisement

Ambio

, Volume 48, Issue 9, pp 1079–1096 | Cite as

Transitioning to non-toxic ammunition: Making change happen

  • Ruth CromieEmail author
  • Julia Newth
  • Emily Strong
Lead Use in Hunting

Abstract

If the multiple negative health impacts associated with lead ammunition are to be mitigated, a transition to the non-toxic alternatives is needed. This paper aims to map out the pathways to such a transition via a modification of Kotter’s eight step theory of change, identifying key stakeholders, exploring options for those of us advocating change and the relationships between policy and persuasion. The focus is primarily on the UK, but it is of direct relevance to the rest of Europe and beyond. The theory of change model involves (1) creating urgency, (2) building coalitions, (3) creating a vision for change, (4) communicating that vision, (5) removing barriers to enable action, (6) creating short-term or geospatial wins, (7) building on the change and (8) embedding change in culture and regulation. The paper reflects on good progress to date in initial steps, but throughout subsequent steps creative engagement and other disciplines which appreciate the human dimensions such as mediation and psychology of behaviour change have been lacking. Although significant barriers remain for Step 5, the paper identifies the central vision of sustainability of hunting as a shared value around which most stakeholders can engage. The paper concludes that, given the growing momentum surrounding this issue in recent years, the phasing out of lead ammunition is at a tipping point.

Keywords

Conflict Engagement Lead ammunition Stakeholder Sustainable hunting Theory of change 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the editor and reviewers for valuable comments which helped improve a first draft of the paper. We are also grateful to the numerous hunting stakeholders for various discussions which have brought good insights to the issue.

References

  1. AEWA. 2002. AEWA non-toxic shot workshop, 25–26.10.2001, Bucharest, Romania. UNEP/AEWA/Inf.3.6 https://www.unep-aewa.org/en/document/aewa-non-toxic-shot-workshop-25-26102001-bucharest-romania.
  2. AEWA. 2009. Phasing out the use of lead shot for hunting in wetlands: Experiences made and lessons learned by AEWA range states. Bonn, Germany. http://www.unep-aewa.org/sites/default/files/publication/lead-shot-en_0.pdf.
  3. Andreotti, A., V. Guberti, R. Nardelli, S. Pirrello, L. Serra, S. Volponi, and R.E. Green. 2018. Economic assessment of wild bird mortality induced by the use of lead gunshot in European wetlands. Science of the Total Environment 610–611: 1505–1513.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.06.085.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Appelbaum, S.H., S. Habashy, J. Malo, and H. Shafiq. 2012. Back to the future: Revisiting Kotter’s 1996 change model. Journal of Management Development 31: 764–782.  https://doi.org/10.1108/02621711211253231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arnemo, J.M., O. Andersen, S. Stokke, V.G. Thomas, O. Krone, D.J. Pain, and R. Mateo. 2016. Health and environmental risks from lead-based ammunition: Science versus socio-politics. EcoHealth 13: 618–622.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-016-1177-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bellinger, D.C., J. Burger, T.J. Cade, D.A. Cory-Slechta, M. Finkelstein, H. Hu, M. Kosnett, P.J. Landrigan, et al. 2013. Health risks from lead-based ammunition in the environment—A consensus statement of scientists. Environmental Health Perspectives 121: a178–a179.  https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1306945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. BirdLife International. 2015. European Red List of Birds. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
  8. Chase, L., and M.J. Rabe. 2015. Reducing lead on the landscape: Anticipating hunter behavior in absence of a free nonlead ammunition program. PLoS ONE 10: e0128355.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0128355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cromie, R.L., R. Lee, R.J. Delahay, J.L. Newth, M.F. O’Brien, H.A. Fairlamb, J.P. Reeves, and D.A. Stroud. 2012. Ramsar Wetland Disease Manual: Guidelines for assessment, monitoring and management of animal disease in wetlands. Ramsar technical report no. 7. Gland, Switzerland. https://www.wwt.org.uk/rwdm.
  10. Cromie, R., A. Loram, L. Hurst, M. O’Brien, J. Newth, M. Brown, and J. Harradine. 2010. Compliance with the environmental protection (restrictions on use of lead shot) (England) Regulations 1999. Defra, Bristol. http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Default.aspx?Menu=Menu&Module=More&Location=None&ProjectID=16075.
  11. Cromie, R., J. Newth, J. Reeves, K. Beckmann, M. O’Brien, and M. Brown. 2015. The sociological and political aspects of reducing lead poisoning from ammunition in the UK: Why the transition to non-toxic ammunition is so difficult. In Proceedings of the Oxford Lead Symposium. Lead ammunition: Understanding and minimising the risks to human and environmental health, ed. R.J. Delahay and C.J. Spray, 104–124. Edward Grey Institute, The University of Oxford. http://www.oxfordleadsymposium.info/wp-content/uploads/OLS_proceedings/papers/OLS_proceedings_cromie_newth_reeves_obrien_beckman_brown.pdf.
  12. Delahay, R.J., and C.J. Spray, ed. 2015. Proceedings of the Oxford Lead Symposium. Lead ammunition: Understanding and minimising the risks to human and environmental health. Edward Grey Institute, University of Oxford, UK. http://oxfordleadsymposium.info/.
  13. ECHA. 2017. Lead compounds-shot. EC number. 231-100-4. Public consultation responses to Annex XV restriction report. https://echa.europa.eu/previous-consultations-on-restriction-proposals/-/substance-rev/17005/term.
  14. ECHA. 2018a. Lead compounds-shot. EC number. 231-100-4. Public consultation responses to Socio-economic Analysis Committee Draft Opinion. https://echa.europa.eu/previous-consultations-on-restriction-proposals/-/substance-rev/17005/term.
  15. ECHA. 2018b. Investigation report ECHA Annex XV investigation report: A review of the available information on lead in shot used in terrestrial environments, in ammunition and in fishing tackle (ECHA/PR/18/14). https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/13641/lead_ammunition_investigation_report_en.pdf/efdc0ae4-c7be-ee71-48a3-bb8abe20374a.
  16. European Commission. 2004. The sustainable hunting agreement of the European Commission’s sustainable hunting initiative under the birds directive (Directive 79/409/EEC). http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/conservation/wildbirds/hunting/charter_en.htm.
  17. European Environment Agency. 2013. Late lessons from early warnings: Science, precaution, innovation. Summary. EEA report no 1/2013. http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/late-lessons-2.
  18. European Scientists. 2018. An open letter from European scientists on the risks of lead ammunition. http://www.europeanscientists.eu/open-letter/.
  19. FACE. 2018. Guidance on managing risks from lead ammunition. European Federation for Hunting and Conservation. https://www.leadammunitionguidance.com/.
  20. Friend, M., J.C. Franson, and W.L. Anderson. 2009. Biological and societal dimensions of lead poisoning in birds in the USA. In Ingestion of lead from spent ammunition: Implications for wildlife and humans, ed. R.T. Watson, M. Fuller, M. Pokras, and W.G. Hunt, 341–349. The Peregrine Fund, Boise, Idaho, USA.  https://doi.org/10.4080/ilsa.2009.0104. https://www.peregrinefund.org/subsites/conference-lead/PDF/0104%20Friend.pdf.
  21. Friends of the Earth. 2018. Big win: EU bans bee-harming neonics on all outdoor crops. https://friendsoftheearth.uk/bees/eu-bans-beeharming-neonics.
  22. Global Citizen. 2018. 88% of people who saw ‘blue planet II’ have now changed their lifestyle. https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/88-blue-planet-2-changed-david-attenborough/.
  23. Group of Scientists. 2014. Wildlife and human health risks from lead-based ammunition in Europe—a consensus statement by scientists. https://www.zoo.cam.ac.uk/system/files/documents/European-Statement.pdf.
  24. Hill, H.J. 2009. Taking the lead on lead: Tejon Ranch’s experience switching to non-lead ammunition. Abstract in Ingestion of lead from spent ammunition: Implications for Wildlife and Humans, ed. R.T. Watson, M. Fuller, M. Pokras and W.G. Hunt. The Peregrine Fund, Boise, Idaho, USA.  https://doi.org/10.4080/ilsa.2009.0310. https://www.peregrinefund.org/subsites/conference-lead/PDF/0310%20Hill.pdf.
  25. Høgåsen H.R., R. Ørnsrud, H.K. Knutsen, and A. Bernhoft. 2016. Lead intoxication in dogs: risk assessment of feeding dogs trimmings of lead-shot game. BMC Veterinary Research.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-016-0771-z.
  26. IUCN. 2016. WCC 2016 resolution 82: A path forward to address concerns over the use of lead ammunition in hunting. https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/resrecfiles/WCC_2016_RES_082_EN.pdf.
  27. Kanstrup, N. 2006. Non-toxic shot-Danish experiences. In: Waterbirds around the world, ed. G. Boere, C.A. Galbraith, and D.A. Stroud, 861. Edinburgh: The Stationery Office. http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/PDF/pub07_waterbirds_part6.3.4.pdf.
  28. Kanstrup, N. 2015. Practical and social barriers to switching from lead to non-toxic gunshot—a perspective from the EU. In Proceedings of the Oxford Lead Symposium. Lead ammunition: Understanding and minimising the risks to human and environmental health, ed. R.J. Delahay and C.J. Spray, 98–103. Edward Grey Institute, The University of Oxford. http://www.oxfordleadsymposium.info/wp-content/uploads/OLS_proceedings/papers/OLS_proceedings_kanstrup.pdf.
  29. Kanstrup, N. 2019. Lessons learned from 33 years of lead shot regulation in Denmark. In Lead in hunting ammunition: Persistent problems and solutions, ed. N. Kanstrup, V.G. Thomas, and A.D. Fox, Ambio vol. 48, Special Issue.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-018-1125-9.
  30. Kanstrup, N., and T.J. Balsby. 2019. Danish pheasant and mallard hunters comply with the lead shot ban. In Lead in hunting ammunition: Persistent problems and solutions, ed. N. Kanstrup, V.G. Thomas, and A.D. Fox, Ambio vol. 48, Special Issue.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-019-01152-7.
  31. Kanstrup, N., J. Swift, D.A. Stroud, and M. Lewis. 2018. Hunting with lead ammunition is not sustainable: European perspectives. Ambio 47: 846–857.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-018-1042-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Keane, A., J.P.G. Jones, G. Edwards-Jones, and E.J. Milner-Gulland. 2008. The sleeping policeman: Understanding issues of enforcement and compliance in conservation. Animal Conservation 11: 75–82.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-1795.2008.00170.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kotter, J.P. 1995. Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review 73: 59–67.Google Scholar
  34. Kotter, J.P. 1996. Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  35. Lead Ammunition Group. 2018. Update report from the Lead Ammunition Group. http://www.leadammunitiongroup.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Executive-Summary-to-LAG-Update-Report.pdf.
  36. Lead Ammunition Group. 2019. A UK process for assessing and addressing the risks from lead ammunition. Reports, correspondence, meeting minutes and resources. http://www.leadammunitiongroup.org.uk/.
  37. Manfredo, M.J., and A.A. Dayer. 2004. Concepts for exploring the social aspects of human–wildlife conflict in a global context. Human Dimensions of Wildlife.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10871200490505765.
  38. Markowitz, G., and D. Rosner. 2013. Deceit and denial: The deadly politics of industrial pollution. USA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  39. Mateo, R., and N. Kanstrup. 2019. Regulations on lead ammunition adopted in Europe and evidence of compliance. In Lead in hunting ammunition: Persistent problems and solutions, ed. N. Kanstrup, V.G. Thomas, and A.D. Fox, Ambio vol. 48, Special Issue.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-019-01170-5.
  40. Mondain-Monval, J.-Y., P.D. Du Rau, M. Guillemain, and A. Olivier. 2015. Switch to non-toxic shot in the Camargue, France: Effect on waterbird contamination and hunter effectiveness. European Journal of Wildlife Research 61: 271–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Needleman, H., and D. Gee. 2013. Lead in petrol “makes the mind give way.” In Late lessons from early warnings: science, precaution, innovation, 46–75. European Environment Agency.  https://doi.org/10.2800/70069.
  42. Newth, J.L., R.L. Cromie, M.J. Brown, R.J. Delahay, A.A. Meharg, C. Deacon, G.J. Norton, M.F. O’Brien, et al. 2013. Poisoning from lead gunshot: Still a threat to wild waterbirds in Britain. European Journal of Wildlife Research 59: 195–204.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-012-0666-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Newth, J., R. Cromie, and N. Kanstrup. 2015. Lead shot in Europe: conflict between hunters and conservationists. In Conflicts in conservation: Navigating towards solutions, ed. S.M. Redpath, R.J. Gutierrez, K.A. Wood, and J.C. Young, 177–179. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Newth, J.L., A. Lawrence, R.L. Cromie, J.A. Swift, E.C. Rees, K.A. Wood, E.A. Strong, J. Reeves, et al. 2019. Perspectives of ammunition users on the use of lead ammunition and its potential impacts on wildlife and humans. People and Nature.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.30.
  45. Newth, J.L., E.C. Rees, R.L. Cromie, R.A. McDonald, S. Bearhop, D.J. Pain, G.J. Norton, C. Deacon, et al. 2016. Widespread exposure to lead affects the body condition of free-living whooper swans Cygnus cygnus wintering in Britain. Environmental Pollution 209: 60–67.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2015.11.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Oreskes, N., and E.M. Conway. 2011. Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
  47. Otto. 2018. Lead ammunition: Otto goes non-toxic. https://vimeo.com/296476878.
  48. Pain, D.J., I. Dickie, R.E. Green, N. Kanstrup, and R. Cromie. 2019. Wildlife, human and environmental costs of using lead ammunition: An economic review and analysis. In Lead in hunting ammunition: Persistent problems and solutions, ed. N. Kanstrup, V.G. Thomas, and A.D. Fox, Ambio vol. 48, Special Issue.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-019-01157-2.
  49. Payne, J.H., J.P. Holmes, R.A. Hogg, G.M. Van Der Burgt, N.J. Jewell, and D.D.B. Welchman. 2013. Lead intoxication incidents associated with shot from clay pigeon shooting. Veterinary Record 173: 552.  https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.102120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Plaza, P.I., M. Uhart, A. Caselli, G. Wiemeyer, and S.A. Lambertucci. 2018. A review of lead contamination in South American birds: The need for more research and policy changes. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation 16: 201–207.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2018.08.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Redpath, S.M., S. Bhatia, and J. Young. 2015. Tilting at wildlife: Reconsidering human–wildlife conflict. Oryx 49: 222–225.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605314000799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Redpath, S.M., J. Young, A. Evely, W.M. Adams, W.J. Sutherland, A. Whitehouse, A. Amar, R.A. Lambert, et al. 2013. Understanding and managing conservation conflicts. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 28: 100–109.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.08.021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Reed, M.S. 2008. Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review. Biological Conservation 141: 2417–2431.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sieg, R. 2009. Voluntary lead reduction efforts within the Northern Arizona range of the California condor. In Ingestion of lead from spent ammunition: Implications for wildlife and humans, ed. R.T. Watson, M. Fuller, M. Pokras, and W.G. Hunt, 341–349. Boise, Idaho: The Peregrine Fund.  https://doi.org/10.4080/ilsa.2009.0309. https://www.peregrinefund.org/subsites/conference-lead/PDF/0309%20Sieg.pdf.
  55. Stroud, D.A. 2015. Regulation of some sources of lead poisoning: a brief review. In Proceedings of the Oxford Lead Symposium. Lead ammunition: Understanding and minimising the risks to human and environmental health, ed. R.J. Delahay and C.J. Spray, 8–26. Edward Grey Institute, The University of Oxford. http://www.oxfordleadsymposium.info/wp-content/uploads/OLS_proceedings/papers/OLS_proceedings_stroud.pdf.
  56. Thomas, V.G., N. Kanstrup, C. Gremse, V.G. Thomas, N. Kanstrup, and C. Gremse. 2015. Key questions and responses regarding the transition to use of lead-free ammunition. In Proceedings of the Oxford Lead Symposium. Lead ammunition: Understanding and minimising the risks to human and environmental health, ed. R.J. Delahay and C.J. Spray, 125–135. Edward Grey Institute, The University of Oxford. http://www.oxfordleadsymposium.info/wp-content/uploads/OLS_proceedings/papers/OLS_proceedings_thomas_kanstrup_gremse.pdf.
  57. Tinch, R., E. Balian, D. Carss, D.E. de Blas, N.E. Geamana, U. Heink, H. Keune, C. Nesshöver, et al. 2018. Science-policy interfaces for biodiversity: Dynamic learning environments for successful impact. Biodiversity and Conservation 27: 1679.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-016-1155-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Waitrose. 2018. Waitrose & partners food and drink report 2018-19. https://waitrose.pressarea.com/pressrelease/details/78/NEWS_13/10259.
  59. Watson, R.T., M. Fuller, M. Pokras, and W.G. Hunt, eds. 2009. Ingestion of lead from spent ammunition: Implications for wildlife and humans. The Peregrine Fund, Boise, ID, USA. https://www.peregrinefund.org/subsites/conference-lead/2008PbConf_Proceedings.htm.
  60. WHO. 2014. Review of social determinants and the health divide in the WHO European region: Final report. http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/251878/Review-of-social-determinants-and-the-health-divide-in-the-WHO-European-Region-FINAL-REPORT.pdf.
  61. Young, J.C., K. Searle, A. Butler, P. Simmons, A.D. Watt, and A. Jordan. 2016. The role of trust in the resolution of conservation conflicts. Biological Conservation 195: 196–202.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.12.030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. UNEP. 2010. Chemicals Branch, DTIE. Final review of scientific information on lead. https://www.cms.int/sites/default/files/document/UNEP_GC26_INF_11_Add_1_Final_UNEP_Lead_review_and_apppendix_Dec_2010.pdf.
  63. UNEP-CMS. 2014. UNEP/CMS/Resolution 11.15. Preventing poisoning of migratory birds. 11th Meeting of the conference of the parties. Quito, Ecuador. https://www.cms.int/sites/default/files/document/Res_11_15_Preventing_Bird_Poisoning_of_Birds_E_0.pdf.
  64. UNEP-CMS. 2017. UNEP/CMS/Resolution 11.15 (RevCOP12). Preventing poisoning of migratory birds. In 12th Meeting of the conference of the parties. Manilla, Philippines. https://www.cms.int/sites/default/files/document/cms_cop12_res.11.15%28rev.cop12%29_bird-poisoning_e.pdf.
  65. WWT. 2014. Lead poisoning and the non-toxic ammunition solution. Video shown at UN-CMS 11th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaSKlaBUQTU.
  66. WWT Flight of the Swans. 2016. https://www.flightoftheswans.org/.

Copyright information

© Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Wildfowl & Wetlands TrustGloucestershireUK
  2. 2.Centre for Ecology and Conservation, College of Life and Environmental SciencesUniversity of ExeterPenrynUK
  3. 3.Environment and Sustainability Institute, College of Life and Environmental SciencesUniversity of ExeterPenrynUK

Personalised recommendations