Prevent a ban on lead fishing tackle

[reinhard1]

my point is someone has to convince me that lead shot is harmfull to wildlife. i dont hunt ducks so i realy haven't paid any attention to it. partridge dont eat shot shells only get shot with them and i remove them of course. that is why i brought up the loon example in my last post. they eat fish and i dont believe they eat pellets from shells. so if there is lead found in a loon it has to be the water source and can be there naturaly. and as far as deer it's a no brainer. how can a lead bullet harm you from venison. the meat from a wound is removed before eating unless your andrew zimmerman from bizzare foods. however i try to keep an open mind on a variety of things, but in the meantime let it be lead. good luck.

[mainbutter]

reinhard1:

http://birding.about.com/b/2010/02/27/lead-poisoning-kills-condors.htm

The same principle is probably true for a number of MN's scavenger birds of prey.

And lead in venison:

http://www.startribune.com/local/17480194.html

When the bullet or shot enters the deer, it fragments, splinters, and disintegrates, and embeds small particles well beyond the initial wound. Luckily the amount is generally pretty small, but I wouldn't feed it to a pregnant woman or young child.

[reinhard1]

thank you for the sites and i read them both. it's hard to comment on the condors that died from lead poisening whithout sounding uncaring. three birds from an protectd species and only 350 left of those is never good news. but this issue is national if not world wide. as far as the deer situation at the food shelfs i personaly give food items to the food shelf and volunteer through my church and hand out safe food from semi trucks to the needy. giving wild game from hunters may have good intentions but a bad idea from the get go. not everyhunter proccesses their deer the same and fragments from bullets can happen. i have processed deer for years and have removed the bullets if still in the carcass and all surrounding meat. any food items given to the public should be inspected before given to the public and even then as we see in recalls of hamburger ect. unfortunate situations occour. you are only asking for trouble when the public gets involved in donating wild game even with the best of intentions. good luck.

[spivak]

This lead thing drives me crazy. Why are we so reactionary? Lead is a proven, known toxin that we continue to choose to use. Sure it will cost more to switch out our fishing tackle. If we do it will only cause manufacturers to come up with something different which will eventually come down in price and increase in efficiency. Probably never as cheap or as easy as lead. My goodness, how we squeal when we are called to change just a little. To say "I've been using lead all my life and it's never affected me" is just ridiculous. It's a continuum--who knows how you have been affected. I bit down lots of split shot in my youth but to let my own daughter do that now would only make me an [PoorWordUsage]. We can change as the available information changes.

I worked in Alaska on a Spectacled Eider study. We lugged a portable x-ray machine around the Y-K Delta. Just one ingested lead shot lead to nest failure.

[mainbutter]

I still want to use depleted uranium. It may not mold as easy as lead, but could you IMAGINE how great of a sinker material it would be?

[BartmanMN]

As your Representative, I would like to update you regarding an important issue to which you expressed your opposition: the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) banning fishing tackle containing lead.

Shortly after you contacted me, on September 24, 2010, I joined Representative Dan Boren (OK) and 77 of my colleagues in sending a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson on the issue. Citing the lack of scientific evidence to support a ban and the impact a ban would have on American fishermen, we expressed our opposition to a federal ban on traditional fishing equipment and lures. Moreover, we stressed that individual state fish and wildlife agencies are already monitoring and addressing localized issues involving lead.

Rest assured, your opposition to the EPA banning fishing tackle containing lead will be well remembered during the 111th Congress. Thank you for previously contacting me on this issue and for all you do for our community and country. I care about you and if I or my staff can be of assistance to you regarding this issue or any other, please contact us at the Woodbury or St. Cloud/Waite Park district office or the Washington, DC office.

Sincerely,

Michele Bachmann

Member of Congress

[NTW]

EPA denies ban on lead tackleEmail Print Comments1

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The angling public and the fishing industry once again have beaten back an attempt to ban the manufacture and sale of fishing tackle containing lead.

This time around, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) denied a petition by the Center for Biological Diversity and four other groups.

"The sportfishing community applauds EPA's decision," said Gordon Robertson, vice president of the American Sportfishing Association (ASA). "It represents a solid review of the biological facts, as well as the economic and social impacts that would have resulted from such a sweeping federal action. It is a common sense decision."

In its letter to the groups, EPA said, "You have not demonstrated that the remaining action requested in your petition — a uniform ban of lead for use in all fishing gear — is necessary to protect against an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment, as required by TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) section 21. The petition also does not demonstrate that the action requested is the least burdensome alternative to adequately protect against the concerns, as required by TSCA section 6. Accordingly, EPA is denying your request for a ban on lead in all fishing gear."

Just as did organizations during the 1990s, these groups asserted that a ban was justified because significant numbers of water birds die from ingesting lead sinkers. Scientific research does not support that claim.

"The petitioners claim that lead is threatening loons across the nation, but several studies, including the most recent population study by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, say that loon populations are either stable or increasing throughout most of their range," Robertson said.

In addition to a ban not being needed to protect wildlife, its implementation would have increased costs for both the fishing industry and anglers. Depending on the alternative metal used and current prevailing costs for raw materials, non-leaded fishing tackle products can cost from 10 to 20 times more than equivalent lead products. Also, some do not perform as well as their lead counterparts, and non-lead items are not always as readily available.

A combined effort helped convince EPA to deny the petition, Robertson explained, with 43,000 anglers providing comments "necessary to support the letters sent by organizations."

The Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation, The Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, the National Marine Manufacturers Association, and BoatU.S. took the lead, he added.

"Their letters asking for dismissal were instrumental in helping us get this done," Robertson said. "The letter from CSF was signed by 80 members of Congress, and that's really saying something."

[popriveter]

Quote:

Yeah, the next thing you know these clowns will be picketing the Discovery Channel building, demanding programming condemning lead

They should be protesting the fact that the Discovery Channel building irresponsibly features windows made of clear glass. This creates a great danger for migratory birds. see?