Why would a copper bullet not work? They seem to expand fine. Bein harder than lead they probably penetrate a little deeper too.

I would think copper bullets would work better but many people seem to be dis-pleased with the results. Not hunting would not be an option. I guess I would just suck it up and go with copper loads even if they were expensive. It would make sense, instead of getting a fine for using lead... which raises a question, how do they know whether or not you are using lead? How are they going to regulate a law like this?

Take a poll of others states and i can almost guarantee that you won't get results like that. The lead ban is stupid. In a state like Cal i can sympathize because of the pollution but other states have not had such problems and do not need to ban.

Nate

If my Barnes copper 7mm Mag bullets can drop an elk with no problem, and actually, I believe, outperform lead bullets, I'm not sure what these guys in California can be "wounding" by using them. Crazy.

Copper bullets have come a long ways, and hunters need to keep with the times or risk continuing to sound like we're out of touch and antiquated. Making the switch to copper just isn't that big a deal. Also, blatantly breaking fish and game laws and admitting to it is idiotic, and it makes me a bit ashamed. We need to be helping our sport, not creating an image of ourselves as arrogant, petty criminals.

I should add I live in a state that does not require unleaded bullets so my attempt with all copper was searching more an accurate handload not trying to comply with law.

Yep, copper is $2.02/LB today and lead is $0.67/LB on the metals markets. However, there is copper and tin in jacketed bullets plus manufacturing cost differences, so it is not a straight comparison.

The Barnes bullets are about twice as expensive as jacketed lead bullets bought as components, but not too much difference in price compared to other premium loaded ammo. The Barnes TSX performs so well that is has been my bullet of choice for deer and elk. Whack!

The article states that they had a survey size of 76 folks. Thats hardly relevant.

Whats more telling is that the CA DFG reported to the commissioners that after over 6000 field contacts by wardens, they had a 99% compliance.

As for Barnes and CA. There's some validity to the complaints. Remember, the bulk of the deer taken in CA are Blacktail, where an average buck is in the 120-140 lb range. It's been my experience (backed by other hunters) is that solid copper just blows through the animal so fast that there is no time for expansion and as result, doesn't leave much of a blood trail. Either you make the "perfect" shot or your tracking and, maybe, losing game.

Other legitimate complaints are accuracy problems. I personally reload overed $450 in Barnes and couldn't get it to group under 4", no matter what recipe I tried. There's not much range time going on at $40 box for factory ammo.

To be fair, other hunters love the stuff. Me? I retired the old springfield and bought a Tikka and switched to E-tips. I got sub-moa back but I haven't put anything on the ground yet so I can't comment on expansion.

What irks us Californians is the way the law was jammed down our throats. We had legitimate gripes about the science, questioned the ammo availability issues and the price per round. We were ignored and the condors are still getting lead poison.

At $2.25 per round, you better believe we're still angry.

Dann brings up a good point, is lead still acceptable at ranges in condor country?

For the posts regarding energy- I'm not a ballistics expert, but I believe density helps in energy retention, although the same weight bullet travelling at the same speed does have the same kinetic energy. The best example I can think of (and forgive me but extreme examples are typically the most illustrative) is that if I throw a baseball and a beach ball of equivalent weight at 30 mph there will be no contest in retained energy at 35 feet. The increased volume necessary for the beach ball to attain the same weight as the baseball results in increased surface area and therefore drag.

That longwinded explanation over with, I don't know that it would or wouldn't make a half inch of difference in drop at 200 yards in your rifle.

Jcarlin,

Yes we can still use lead at the ranges inside the condor zone.

We're waiting for the first annual condor blood-leads to be reported this summer. The ban was enacted in July of last year, we had 99% reported compliance in 2008 and still, last month, 2 condors had lead poisioning. I'm not sure what that means....

With deer hunter success rates around 18% statewide, I'm not convinced hunters are the problem, or at least, the only problem. Hunters are soft targets.

Barnes isn't the whole answer here. There's E-tip, the new GMX and others coming online. Personally, I'll use anything thats accurate, efficent, and reasonably priced.

One of our wardens reported to the game commission that he interviewed a group of 5 hunters that were splitting one box of ammo. None had ever used the ammo, never sighted in and hit the field with 4 rounds. They said they couldn't afford it.

Thats not fair to the hunter and certainly not fair to the animal.

Couple salient points here, if a few folks will wipe the foam from their mouths long enough to contemplate...

First of all, the 30% non-compliance number comes from a localized, informal survey with a total of 76 respondents. It's a hot issue, and the what they got were largely angry, knee-jerk responses from people who could say what they wanted without consequence.

In the field, CA DFG wardens reported close to 99% compliance. These reports are still unscientific, but they are based on widespread checks of hunters across the entire "Condor zone". This was pointed out in the article, by the way.

Point is, it's much ado about nothing. Again.

I'm sure there are some folks out there who've chosen not to comply, just as there are drivers who don't comply with drinking laws.

The lead ban issue is no small thing, but it's important to keep things in perspective. The article in the Monterey Herald actually presented a fair point of view, with points and counterpoints from folks in the know.

I think Dann nailed it by bringing up the fact that some people aren't bothering to sight in when they switch to copper. In my house, we too went through two boxes of copper to sight in our .270. When we popped the first one in, we didn't even hit the paper at 100 yards - it shot that differently.

But it shoots fine now. I'm two for two on textbook kills since we switched. But it does tend to go straight through, and it doesn't expand like lead, so you've really got to hit your target - without that big wound channel, "close" isn't good enough.

With all due respect, and to be only marginally on-topic, I've gotta go against Mr Diehl and say that if I made a bad hit on a big game animal, all other things being equal, I'd much rather be shooting a lead bullet that will deform (and/or fragment) significantly than a copper bullet that will not.

There is a really big difference there, and no one with practical experience with the two different bullet materials can argue this point. When it comes to making a messy wound that will aid blood-trailing, traditional lead bullets are definitely superior to copper or gilding metal... and I think this is the source of the majority of non-lead ammo complaints.

Theoretically, every one of us is a perfect marksman who can consistently make a clean, high-shoulder/spine shot from a quarter mile away. But realistically, under field conditions even the best of us clanks a shot. Ideally, ethical hunters should use a bullet that offers great accuracy, but also allows a certain margin of error to enable a kill and recovery when Murphy steps in.

You folks saying a copper bullet like Barnes TSX doesn't expand or cause a massive wound channel are full of your own baloney! Based on what? Go get Barnes' FREE video if you want to see it in action, or get out in the field and try it.

Deformed and fragmented full lead core bullets slow down faster than a controlled expansion copper bullet and limit the penetration. A bullet that expands and then penetrates completely and leaves 2 bleeding blood trails will leave the animal much closer to the point of impact than a single entry wound.

Practical experience? I have put down several large bucks in their tracks with the TSX, all with massive internal damage and large exit wounds. If your fragmented deformed lead core bullet does not exit, how is that better? I have also killed many head of game with Trophy Bonded Bear Claws and have never recovered a bullet - all pass throughs.

The comment that some rifles don't shoot them well is true. Try another load/bullet combo.

I think your slip is showing.......