by Cody McLaughlin - Thursday, May 18, 2023
The Biden administration’s push to ban traditional lead ammunition is back in the news with a heated debate taking place during a recent House Natural Resources Subcommittee hearing on Virginia Rep. Rob Wittman’s bill—H.R. 615—aiming to protect access to traditional lead ammunition and fishing tackle on national wildlife refuges.
During the hearing, testimony from Matt Strickler, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks for the Department of Interior, raised eyebrows among hunting and gun rights activists when he said, “We are taking a cautionary approach to the expansion of hunting and fishing opportunities on the Refuge System. We do not intend to propose any hunting or fishing opportunities that would increase the use of lead on Service lands and waters.”
The second sentence in that statement sparked concerns over the motivations behind such decisions and the potential impact on recreational activities. Reading between the lines, it also shed light on why anti-hunting groups are specifically targeting rulemaking when it comes to increasing our access to national refuge lands.
For background, national refuge lands must be specifically opened to recreational use through a rulemaking process, ostensibly to ensure that recreational activities like hunting and fishing align with the refuge's conservation goals while safeguarding the interests of wildlife and their habitats. Lands managed by federal agencies such as the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service (USFS), on the other hand, are already open unless specifically closed by rulemaking.
Is Strickler’s testimony to be understood as a tit for tat—a one for one—meaning that the Biden administration will not propose any expansion of hunting and fishing opportunities on national refuge lands without first having a lead ammo ban in those places?
Rep. Wittman’s bill, meanwhile, is related to Montana Sen. Steve Daines’ Protecting Access for Hunters and Anglers Act—S. 615—covered by this website earlier this month.
It appears the Biden administration is trying to keep its options open by requesting so-called “flexibility” while using the carrot-and-stick approach to hold the rulemaking over hunters’ heads to trade lead ammo bans for access.
This is right in step with how anti-hunting and anti-gun extremist groups also continue to try to weaponize access opportunities by organizing to oppose any actions that open or expand refuges for hunting and fishing. These groups continue to look for what they perceive as any “low-hanging fruit” to chip away at hunting opportunities and limit the scope of our way of life.
About the Author
Cody McLaughlin is a conservationist and public policy thought leader on issues including hunting, fishing, gun rights, free-market tax and wage policy and the environment. He works as a GOP consultant for conservative political causes and currently on the board of the Alaska Outdoor Council (the Last Frontier’s state NRA affiliate) and is a former board member and lead spokesman of the New Jersey Outdoor Alliance, helping to represent the state’s 1.2 million sportsmen in the political arena.