Submitted Electronically via eRulemaking Portal

The use of Copper-clad Iron Shot and Fluoropolymer shot coatings do not pose a threat to endangered species or the ecosystem. If you look at the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Maximum contaminate level (MCL), copper and iron levels are on the secondary standard list. The levels of copper used in the Copper-clad iron shot are minimal, and the level of Poly used in the shot coatings is very small, that is, per shot. Introducing safer shots will reduce the use of lead shots, thus would result in a healthier ecosystem. Copper-clad Iron shot does not cause heavy metal poisoning in birds only zinc and lead causes poisoning. Since 1986 lead shot has not been permitted in the United States for hunting waterfowl. I feel that any alternative for lead shots would be positive. In order for the proposed rule to be adopted, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) should put all the facts and figures on the table. For instance in the rule document, the levels of iron coating and Flouropolymer are not compared to the maximum contaminate level. The public may not be aware of what levels are safe to the environment (humans, animals, land and water). The proposed rule does not take into account the number of hunters in the United States, as well as how many shots on average are used per hunter. The rule does not mention if the copper-clad iron shots and polymer coating in excess could be harmful to the environment. Since migratory birds are often hunted near sources of water, would the sediment from the shot degrade the quality of water or aquatic life? Since copper-clad iron shots and polymer coatings are said to be safer for the environment, I think it is important for the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to encourage hunters to use the new safer shot. As well as informing the public about the safety of the shot it is important to inform the public on the details of the shot. As a hunter I feel that without having more information such