You can thank U.S. EPA. On Friday, gun-lovers won a crucial battle against conservationists and wildlife when, in a surprising move, the agency rejected a request (pdf) from environmental groups for a ban on lead in gun ammunition and tackle.

The Center for Biological Diversity, American Bird Conservancy and other groups argue lead toxins are wreaking havoc on the environment and have some startling numbers to back up the claim, including:

–Up to 20 million birds and other animals are killed each year as a result of lead poisoning.

–At least 75 wild bird species, including bald eagles and endangered California condors, are poisoned by spent lead ammo.

–About 87,000 tons of lead are released into the environment each year as a result of hunting, fishing and shooting ranges. As Change.org Animals blogger Martin Matheny recently pointed out, that’s as many tons as there are in the U.S. Navy’s largest vessel.

–Humans who eat game shot down with lead ammo face serious health risks. A recent study found that up to 87 percent of cooked fowl killed by lead ammo can contain unsafe lead levels.

In the face of such staggering figures, why the rejection? EPA argued it doesn’t have the right to regulate ammo under the Toxic Substances Control Act, which forbids regulation of products subject to an excise tax—including guns. EPA assistant administrator Steve Owens said in a statement, “EPA reached this decision because the agency does not have the legal authority to regulate this type of product under the Toxic Substances Control Act—nor is the agency seeking such authority.”

Eco-groups are countering that this argument is hooey. They just want the dangerous lead component of gun ammo banned, not the guns themselves. Not to mention the fact that EPA has a long history of lead regulation in the marketplace, including products such as paint and pipes.

One wonders if fierce outside pressure had anything to do with the EPA’s confounding dismissal. Could it possibly be?

Look, of course, no further than the NRA. The powerful lobby group waged a fiery battle against a ban, claiming it posed a threat to their most sacred Second Amendment. On Aug. 20, the association sent a letter to EPA administrator Lisa Jackson asking outright for the request to be shot down. None other than notorious environment-hater Sen. James Inhofe (Okla.), who is the Senate’s top Republican on the environment committee, also added his voice to the chorus of dissent. “They are just talking about taking away Americans’ freedom,” he said of the environmental groups.  (Hyperbole much, Senator?)

The big problem with this rejection is that EPA is the only real recourse available to prevent the destruction taking place thanks to poisoned ammo. Nobody’s asking gun-lovers to pack up their pistols; they’re just asking that the shooting be done in a way that doesn’t degrade the ecosystem and threaten human health. If our government’s premiere environmental agency can’t take a stand against the devastation, who can?

This petition was started before EPA made its decision on Friday. But please continue to edit and sign the letter, and tell EPA how important you think it is they reconsider their decision.

Photo credit: Renee V/Wikimedia Commons

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

EPA to NRA: Sure, Go Ahead and Poison Birds With Lead Ammo

Currently, the agency is accepting public comments on whether or not it should finally regulate coal ash as the hazardous substance that it obviously is. (Sign our petition to tell EPA that coal ash is hazardous.) But before it could do that, EPA had to quit promoting a permissive coal ash recycling program, which a hazardous designation could in part end.

Earlier this month, the EPA took down a web page an industry partnership program that promoted the reuse of coal ash in products ranging from consumer goods and building materials to soil treatments for farms. On the one hand, recycling makes sense: Coal ash is the nation’s second largest waste stream (right behind the waste generated by coal mining itself, actually.) If we have to do something with all that waste then some of the recycling options, for instance as a replacement for cement in concrete, are good ways to safely lock away the toxins.

On the other hand, many other reuses make no sense whatsoever and can lead to severe health and environmental problems. Ash, for example, is being used in drywall in people’s homes, for example, and as fill dirt in construction projects, where it can contaminate groundwater.

And just as plenty of soda bottle end up in landfills, not all coal ash gets recycled. Only about 44 percent of the 140 million tons of coal ash we generated 2008 got  reused. Coal burners dumped much of the rest in giant, unlined slurry ponds, where the toxins  can easily leech into groundwater and local waterways. Back in December 2008, a retaining wall in one of these ponds failed at the Tennessee Valley Authority’s Harriman plant, catastrophically releasing as much as 2.6 million cubic yards of ash slurry into a tributary of the Tennessee River.

You can use this handy petition to submit your own public comment and tell both EPA and King Coal that Americans refuse to be poisoned by dirty energy any longer.

We need lots of comments submitted to the EPA, so if you only have time to sign one petition, that’s the one to sign. But if you want to do even more to help, you’re in luck.

Predictably, the coal industry’s allies in Congress are fighting back. Senators Brownback and Conrad are trying to pressure the EPA into rejecting federal coal ash disposal standards. You can sign a petition calling on your Senators to oppose any effort to undermine the EPA’s authority.

Photo credit: Wade Payne/Greenpeace

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

Speak Up And Tell The EPA To Regulate Coal Ash As A Hazardous Substance