Perspectives from natural resource professionals: Attitudes on lead ammunition risks and use of nonlead ammunition

Hunting is a popular activity but continued use of lead ammunition poses risks to wildlife and human health. To inform adoption of the voluntary use of nonlead ammunition, natural resource professionals were surveyed to understand their attitudes about threats to bald eagles, lead poisoning in bald eagles, human health risks from lead bullet fragments in venison, use of nonlead hunting ammunition, and socio-economic nonlead ammunition factors. Differences were examined by hunter status, ammunition type used, and intentions to use nonlead ammunition. Of participants surveyed, 61.0% were hunters and 39.0% nonhunters, with 59.5% of hunters using lead ammunition and 40.5% using nonlead. Concurrently, 68.5% of hunters reported likely intentions to continue using nonlead or convert to nonlead in the future, while 31.5% reported nonlead use was unlikely. Also, some hunters currently using nonlead ammunition indicated they would unlikely continue using nonlead (17.8%). Nonhunters agreed more strongly than hunters regarding general mortality threats to bald eagles. Additionally, nonhunters, hunters using nonlead, and likely nonlead users more strongly agreed about threats of lead exposure to eagles than their counterparts. Nonhunters and likely nonlead users also more strongly agreed than hunters and unlikely nonlead users about the human health risks of lead ammunition and about shooting characteristics of nonlead. Finally, nonhunters and nonlead users agreed more strongly than their counterparts about the socio-economic factors of using nonlead ammunition. Understanding natural resource professional hunters’ attitudes may help with audience segmentation when designing future nonlead outreach messages.