Blank page introduction Summary Conclusions and Recommendations 9

3. Conclusions and Recommendations

3.1 General situation

Lead poisoning in waterbirds through the ingestion of lead shot pellets is a very serious and large-scale environmental problem which affects wetlands and their species world-wide. Phasing out the use of lead shot is now widely recognised as the only long-term solution to this problem.

It appears that the problem is approached most effectively when awareness raising campaigns, education and training of hunters, and an enhanced availability of non-toxic shot precede legislation, rather than the other way around.

3.2 Legislation and enforcement

Considerable progress has been made since 1995 concerning legislation against the use of lead shot for hunting waterbirds. Nevertheless, there are still many countries in which this issue is not legally (or voluntarily) addressed. Although several major international conventions and agreements address the issue of lead poisoning in waterbirds, either indirectly or specifically, many of the contracting parties are far from complying with the intentions of the Conventions and Agreements they ratified.

• 
  All countries which have not yet signed the relevant international biodiversity conventions/ agreements (specifically Bonn & AEWA, and Ramsar) should be encouraged to do so. The international community of countries which did sign these conventions/agreements (governments, NGO’s, convention/agreement secretariats) should assist with this process, by making information, expertise, logistics and finances available to countries which have shown a need of those.
  

• 
  Countries which did sign agreements and conventions should be held more responsible for their actions regarding the issues addressed by the convention and agreement texts. Countries which do not comply with the conventions they have signed and ratified should be urged to do so.
  

Even if a country has legislation concerning the use of lead shot, it appears that this is not the only factor which decides to what extent the issue is actually being addressed. A strikingly high percentage of countries with legislation has no effective enforcement and reports that illegal hunting does take place. It appears that logistics and finances are often the limiting factor in this issue.

• 
  Legislation is not powerful without effective enforcement. Therefore, governments should consider law enforcement as an important part of the solution to the lead poisoning issue. More logistics and finances should be allocated to this end.
  

Countries which have legislation concerning the use of lead shot are putting more effort into the developments of new legislation than countries without any regulations.

• 
  Countries which already have legislation concerning the use of lead shot should assist countries without legislation in addressing the issue legally, since expertise (legal, organisational, political) could be an important factor which drives the development of legislation. Conservation NGO’s and convention secretariats should be an intermediate factor in this process.
  

3.3 Awareness and education

The awareness of the lead poisoning problem remains extremely low.

• 
  Conservation NGO’s and convention secretariats should put more effort into the awareness raising aspect of the problem. Firstly, authorities need to be alerted, which in turn should take responsibility by using their power, finances and logistics to support awareness campaigns, and by adjusting their legislation accordingly.
  

An important link between awareness raising and an actual improvement of the situation appears to be education of hunters. A highly non-productive situation is reached when hunters structurally disagree with the way authorities want to solve the problem. Mutual lack of understanding and communication, and lack of education for hunters, are the basis of the majority of these disagreements, and limit hunters’ willingness and ability to successfully switch to non-toxic shot.

• 
  Conservation NGO’s and convention secretariats should continue to stimulate/facilitate communication between authorities and hunters. Legislation should not be developed without consulting with researchers and hunters’ organisations about the feasability and implications of legal measures.
  
• 
  Conservation NGO’s and convention secretariats should give high priority to information and education campaigns for hunters. These should consist of both theoretical education (e.g. why is this a serious environmental problem and how does this ultimately affect hunting itself; what has been and can be done about it; which role can hunters play in solving the problem; what are the cost/safety/technical aspects of switching to non-toxic shot) and practical workshops. Information materials should be made widely available.
  

Countries which have experience with these kind of workshops and education campaigns and/or which have finances/logistics available for this, should help countries which have shown a need for them. Conservation NGO’s together with convention secretariats could co-ordinate such projects, supported by national governments, and in co-operation with (international) hunters’ organisations, following the example of the AEWA-FACE-CIC workshop in Romania in 2001 and the various projects initiated by CONSEP in the United States (see the examples below). The development of co-ordinated education programmes like CONSEP would be an important step forward.

• 
  Hunters’ organisations as well as individual hunters should make an effort to actively acquire information about the lead poisoning problem and about the advantages of non-toxic shot, and to acquire the skills necessary in order to strive for wise and sustainable hunting.
  
• 
  Each country should have gun proofing facilities. International hunters’ organisations and Convention/Agreement secretariats should stimulate the national governments to provide these.