                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.
