Cargando…

Wildlife, human and environmental costs of using lead ammunition: An economic review and analysis

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 eviden...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pain, Deborah J., Dickie, Ian, Green, Rhys E., Kanstrup, Niels, Cromie, Ruth
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6675822/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30879269
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13280-019-01157-2
_version_ 1783440670839537664
author Pain, Deborah J.
Dickie, Ian
Green, Rhys E.
Kanstrup, Niels
Cromie, Ruth
author_facet Pain, Deborah J.
Dickie, Ian
Green, Rhys E.
Kanstrup, Niels
Cromie, Ruth
author_sort Pain, Deborah J.
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6675822
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66758222019-08-14 Wildlife, human and environmental costs of using lead ammunition: An economic review and analysis Pain, Deborah J. Dickie, Ian Green, Rhys E. Kanstrup, Niels Cromie, Ruth Ambio Lead Use in Hunting 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. Springer Netherlands 2019-03-16 2019-09 /pmc/articles/PMC6675822/ /pubmed/30879269 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13280-019-01157-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Lead Use in Hunting
Pain, Deborah J.
Dickie, Ian
Green, Rhys E.
Kanstrup, Niels
Cromie, Ruth
Wildlife, human and environmental costs of using lead ammunition: An economic review and analysis
title Wildlife, human and environmental costs of using lead ammunition: An economic review and analysis
title_full Wildlife, human and environmental costs of using lead ammunition: An economic review and analysis
title_fullStr Wildlife, human and environmental costs of using lead ammunition: An economic review and analysis
title_full_unstemmed Wildlife, human and environmental costs of using lead ammunition: An economic review and analysis
title_short Wildlife, human and environmental costs of using lead ammunition: An economic review and analysis
title_sort wildlife, human and environmental costs of using lead ammunition: an economic review and analysis
topic Lead Use in Hunting
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6675822/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30879269
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13280-019-01157-2
work_keys_str_mv AT paindeborahj wildlifehumanandenvironmentalcostsofusingleadammunitionaneconomicreviewandanalysis
AT dickieian wildlifehumanandenvironmentalcostsofusingleadammunitionaneconomicreviewandanalysis
AT greenrhyse wildlifehumanandenvironmentalcostsofusingleadammunitionaneconomicreviewandanalysis
AT kanstrupniels wildlifehumanandenvironmentalcostsofusingleadammunitionaneconomicreviewandanalysis
AT cromieruth wildlifehumanandenvironmentalcostsofusingleadammunitionaneconomicreviewandanalysis