Lead Ban In All National Waterways Even Missouri 2010

[Whodat]

Hell I got hit in the head with jig n frog 10 years ago,I might have lead poisioning!:):)

[drew03cmc]

NO, they already make cars that few people want to buy, thats how they got into this mess. Subsidies for non-lead, are you kidding me?

SO, what your saying is; there is product that is horrible for birds, plus the mining of it in the Missouri Ozarks has caused tremendous damage to some rivers/streams (some of which will cause missouri/EPA millions to fix), and you don't want to pay the extra $1.50 to buy a bag of tungsten or steel jigheads? There are alternatives, use them. I haven't bought lead jigheads in about a year now, I still use spinnerbaits with lead heads, but that is only because I haven't found an alternative that I like yet, but they are out there.

You couldn't be more wrong. They make cars that people want to buy. Their cars just aren't as efficient or reliable as a cheaper alternative (which is actually made in America, with more American parts, Camry). GM and Chrysler have priced themselves out of the market much as Scott has done in the flyrod market.

Where do you buy lead free jigheads? When I tie over 500 jigs a year, be they Cap Spiders, marabou or flash jigs, that extra $1.50 for 12 really adds up.

[Guest]

deleted

[brownieman]

I been watching this post and think it all boils down to one thing...

Some of us are better at accepting what 'The Man' tells us we can and can't do, to many regs and not enouph enforcement seems to be a problem these days.

With all the bs that goes on concerning the Current I assure you this lead ban has little relevance and poses no threat to the over-all health of this river and should be the least of their concerns considering all that goes on on such streams.

There are not enouph shore birds, ducks, whatever on this river for there to be a genuine concern but whatever, there's no stopping the Feds when they want to impose regs like this. Some of us accept the changes better than others and the feelings of fisherman take a back seat on these type issues I feel.

More Gov. control is the underlying issue I would say and it settles ok with some and not so well with some...just the way it is and I don't look for it to change anytime soon. If we don't like it we can belly ache about it or just carry on, that's about the only choice we have.

[drew03cmc]

I get mine from dick's sporting goods and online, but I am pretty sure that wally word has them as well. I don't tie 500 jigs a year though, are you using them yourself, or do you sell them?

I tend to use them, but always have extra. Also, I could sell them if anyone wanted. I tied 3 dozen cap spiders the other night in a couple hours. They are a jig fly that uses ultra chenille for the body and rubber legs tied behind on the inside of the shank just below the head. They are killer for bluegill and bass.

[ozark trout fisher]

NO, they already make cars that few people want to buy, thats how they got into this mess. Subsidies for non-lead, are you kidding me?

SO, what your saying is; there is product that is horrible for birds, plus the mining of it in the Missouri Ozarks has caused tremendous damage to some rivers/streams (some of which will cause missouri/EPA millions to fix), and you don't want to pay the extra $1.50 to buy a bag of tungsten or steel jigheads? There are alternatives, use them. I haven't bought lead jigheads in about a year now, I still use spinnerbaits with lead heads, but that is only because I haven't found an alternative that I like yet, but they are out there.

The only thing that I am saying is that I don't see the evidence in Ozark Riverways. Until I see some research that convinces me otherwise, I am going to think this is a wholly unnecessary law, which is really gonna make fishing a lot tougher for a lot of people, and is most likely gonna put some small tackle and bait shops under. I just don't think that there is enough waterfowl in the ONSR to warrant this at all.

[Whack'emGood]

You know what cracks me up? Whenever something happens (no matter what it is), there is always a bunch of guys saying "Whats next? They're gonna go to this extreme or that extreme next!!!" and "Next thing you know, they're gonna do this or that!!"

Guys say things like this-- when the facts are that just the one thing is actually happening. Anybody can imagine a step (or 20 steps) further in their minds, but the truth is that this is just one little step.

The bottom line of all of this is--

1. Lure companies will have developed workable and affordable alternatives by the time we need them.

2. They're not going to outlaw all fishing.

3. The sun will come up on the lake tomorrow (and the next day, and the next day, etc.).

This new law, which is good for the environment in which I live and fish (that is a good thing), is not going to make me lose one second of sleep.

Whack'em

[Chief Grey Bear]

Exactly Whack'em.

"Bait fisherman kill all the fish" "State wide 18" length limit" "Catch and release only"

"NO LEAD! Are they for real! They are taking all of our rights. Lead is not harmful! I eat lead all the time..... blah...blah.....blah"

[smallmouthjoe]

I been watching this post and think it all boils down to one thing...

Some of us are better at accepting what 'The Man' tells us we can and can't do, to many regs and not enouph enforcement seems to be a problem these days.

With all the bs that goes on concerning the Current I assure you this lead ban has little relevance and poses no threat to the over-all health of this river and should be the least of their concerns considering all that goes on on such streams.

There are not enouph shore birds, ducks, whatever on this river for there to be a genuine concern but whatever, there's no stopping the Feds when they want to impose regs like this. Some of us accept the changes better than others and the feelings of fisherman take a back seat on these type issues I feel.

More Gov. control is the underlying issue I would say and it settles ok with some and not so well with some...just the way it is and I don't look for it to change anytime soon. If we don't like it we can belly ache about it or just carry on, that's about the only choice we have.

Very well said and i agree completely.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Spot on there Joe. You can definitely see a line in the sand of who cares for the outdoors and want to pass it on to the next generation with minimum amount of impact.

And those that claim to love the outdoors until a slight, momentary inconvenience that will improve the health of the environment is enacted to protect from man what it cannot protect itself.

Brownie did put a nice twist on it though. I am sure that is exactly what they were thinking.