Lead Exposure in Bald Eagles from Big Game Hunting, the Continental Implications and Successful Mitigation Efforts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies suggest hunter discarded viscera of big game animals (i.e., offal) is a source of lead available to scavengers. We investigated the incidence of lead exposure in bald eagles in Wyoming during the big game hunting season, the influx of eagles into our study area during the hunt, the geographic origins of eagles exposed to lead, and the efficacy of using non-lead rifle ammunition to reduce lead in eagles. We tested 81 blood samples from bald eagles before, during and after the big game hunting seasons in 2005-2010, excluding 2008, and found eagles had significantly higher lead levels during the hunt. We found 24% of eagles tested had levels indicating at least clinical exposure (>60 ug/dL) during the hunt while no birds did during the non-hunting seasons. We performed driving surveys from 2009-2010 to measure eagle abundance and found evidence to suggest that eagles are attracted to the study area during the hunt. We fitted 10 eagles with satellite transmitters captured during the hunt and all migrated south after the cessation of the hunt. One returned to our study area while the remaining nine traveled north to summer/breed in Canada. The following fall, 80% returned to our study area for the hunting season, indicating that offal provides a seasonal attractant for eagles. We fitted three local breeding eagles with satellite transmitters and none left their breeding territories to feed on offal during the hunt, indicating that lead ingestion may be affecting migrants to a greater degree. During the 2009 and 2010 hunting seasons we provided non-lead rifle ammunition to local hunters and recorded that 24% and 31% of successful hunters used non-lead ammunition, respectively. We found the use of non-lead ammunition significantly reduced lead exposure in eagles, suggesting this is a viable solution to reduce lead exposure in eagles.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".