The environmentalists said that when animals are shot and their remains are left behind or when they are field-dressed, the toxic ammunition fragments can be ingested by other animals.
A federal court ruled in favor of the National Rifle Association, hunters and the U.S. Forest Service over environmental groups who were pushing to ban lead ammunition in a national forest.
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday unanimously rejected an attempt from the Sierra Club, the Grand Canyon Wildlands Council and the Arizona-based Center for Biological Diversity to order the Forest Service to ban lead ammunition in the Kaibab National Forest, which is a popular hunting destination near the Grand Canyon.
The Center for Biological Diversity first filed the lawsuit in 2012 alleging that the Forest Service violated federal conservation law by failing to regulate lead ammo in the Kaibab. The following year, the NRA, and two hunting groups – the Safari Club and the National Sports Shooting Foundation – joined as defendants in the lawsuit.
The environmentalists said that when animals are shot and their remains are left behind or when they are field-dressed, the toxic ammunition fragments can be ingested by other animals.
Because the center admits that the Forest Service is "not the source of any lead ammunition found in the Kaibab, the question is whether a person who has some power to prevent someone else from contributing to the handling, storage, treatment, transportation, or disposal of hazardous waste is liable," the court wrote in its opinion Friday before stating "that the answer is no."
"This NRA victory is a significant setback for gun control and anti-hunting advocates who see ammo bans as a pivotal leap in their agenda," the rifle association wrote on X after the court's decision.
