Lead Ban On All Fishing Tackle

[gotmuddy]

You wouldn't recognize the proof if it was branded on your forehead. You're a lost cause. I'm done.

I would if you had any.

[Outside Bend]

Sorry, they do not get **all** their money from the government, they also get it from left leaning "foundations" like the ted turner foundation and the Sierra Club.

http://familyfarmalliance.clubwizard.com/IMUpload/Jan%2008%20Center%20for%20Biological%20Diversity%20III.pdf

left-leaning "foundations," (really no quotes are necessary, they are, after all, actual foundations) are not the same as the US federal government. Try again.

I think I would worry about the gut pile.[/quote}

Sorry, but to me that's just ridiculous. Can you imagine how attractive a target a weighed-down human with 30 lbs of elk guts would be to a bear or mtn lion?

The issue is whether a toxic chemical should continue to find common use in angler's tackle. Since I care about environmental degredation, work in that field, and generally think introducing toxic elements into the ecosystem is a bad idea of course I have an interest in reducing environmental degredation.

As for the jobs argument- I'd suggest taking a page out of the wading boot industries' playbook. Some states and nations are currently banning felt soled wading boots because of their likelihood at transporting aquatic invasive species. Instead of shuttering, many companies invested in new technology and designs. In the case of lead weights, banning them would increase demand for the alternative, folks would have to produce more, and have to hire more folks to do it. I guess I just don't buy the argument people are going to quit fishing altogether if the cost of sinkers goes from $1.50 to $2.50, when they're willing to shell out $8 for a crankbait, $150 for a rod, $300 for a reel, or $40,000 for a boat.

[Wayne SW/MO]

Trav does Ann know you're loose again? You've got to stop dragging yourself into this, it upsets her.

If some common sense had been injected into the petition there probably wouldn't have been much opposition. The thought that birds are swallowing 1/2 oz spinnerbaits or 1 oz sinkers just doesn't seem feasible. I know one study found one bird that had, but you would have to assume it wasn't the smartest bird around and Darwin had plan for them.

If we take a lot of organizations to heart this forum would have no reason to exist. That includes the scientist that buy the pig in the poke from East Anglia. If their research wasn't flawed by their own account, the flaws hidden by their own account, and the earth hadn't heated and cooled for millions of years, I might be more receptive. The only thing they've proven to me is that they are deceptive. That's a documented fact.

[Ann]

Trav does Ann know you're loose again? You've got to stop dragging yourself into this, it upsets her.

[Wayne SW/MO]

There is no real research on the issue and there is an actual proposal put in front of congress. So what are we talking about? Nothing. This is just another thread to stir up controversies and bad feelings.

You're right, research concerning lead fishing tackles impact is solely lacking. It seems a little premature to risk American jobs and increase the import/export balance on vague assumptions.

I wasn't aware of a bill before congress, or committee, do you have a number or reference? If the petition before the EPA goes through its hard to say when or how it would be implemented.

A little research shows that both petitions were overkill and that may be why the first concerning rifle bullets was turned down.

[Ann]

You're right, research concerning lead fishing tackles impact is solely lacking. It seems a little premature to risk American jobs and increase the import/export balance on vague assumptions.

I wasn't aware of a bill before congress, or committee, do you have a number or reference? If the petition before the EPA goes through its hard to say when or how it would be implemented.

A little research shows that both petitions were overkill and that may be why the first concerning rifle bullets was turned down.

Wanye sorry it should have read "until there is..."

[Wayne SW/MO]

"

Sorry, but to me that's just ridiculous. Can you imagine how attractive a target a weighed-down human with 30 lbs of elk guts would be to a bear or mtn lion? "

Sorry OB, but I believe your answer might be closer to ridiculous. I've hunted in lion country and let me bring you up to speed. No one packs anything out, guts or hind quarter without a weapon. There's no indication, scientific or otherwise, that lions prefer one part over the other. The fact remains, why change the whole of the US for one region. I'm all for protecting the Condors, but the deer hunters in Pennsylvania should have to worry about what the eat. It seems that CA has a ban, and I assume the hunters their use Barnes bullets, while the rest of us can continue normally. As for eagle, you don't often see Balds in the the higher elevations away from water. Golden's are few and far between, so putting bullet fragments and them together isn't all that likely.

Outright bans have always been expensive and poorly thought out, the LP tank valves and light-bulbs come to mind. Both were great for China, bad for Americans.

[Outside Bend]

Wayne, the lead bullet issue isn't restricted solely to condors- any animal which will scavenge carcasses- coyotes, bears wolves, ravens, eagles, hawks, your dog, would exposed to potential lead poisoning.

find an ecosystem that has suffered because of lead tackle. Oh wait you can’t because the research isn’t there.

Birds are a part of the ecosystem in which they live.

Birds have suffered due to lead tackle.

Therefore, ecosystems have suffered because of lead tackle.

Wayne- if someone developed a high density plastic with the same weight properties of lead (but which was non-toxic), which you could cast into jigheads, spinners, sinkers, etc...would you switch?

[Wayne SW/MO]

"Wayne- if someone developed a high density plastic with the same weight properties of lead (but which was non-toxic), which you could cast into jigheads, spinners, sinkers, etc...would you switch? "

Certainly and I assume you're talking about Tungsten powder. You may have better facts, but mine says the process isn't that easy right now. Maybe a call for research and then a ban after a true substitute was found would be better. We don't see any evidence of that in the petition however.

Tungsten does seem to be the only viable option where weight to bulk is high. It seems that there is some new evidence that Bismuth may not be as friendly as first thought. The problem with Tungsten, while probably not insurmountable, is cost and melting temperatures. Tungsten can't be processed at home, and it may not be for some small businesses. Obviously an epoxy compound can be.

[zarraspook]

HEY........... Fellows ,, I think you are missing the ORIGNAL point....

If they ( who ever is in charge ) ban lead in ALL fishing tackle - - it's not just "split shot" ...It is spinner baits, weighted hard bait ( 99% of them have some kind of balance / rattle weights in them ), spoons, reels, rods, dip-nets, buoy markers, aerators for bait tanks, and of course jig heads & weights.....

The point is too many people , with too much money and to much time, are trying to tell us (working people ) how to live our lives...

So, if you are willing to let them run your life - - Keep talking about it on this board ..... If you want to stop them ..... Write a letter, send an Email, or contact your congressman !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!