Jump to content
  • GUESTS

    If you want access to members only forums on HSO, you will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up .

    This box will disappear once you are signed in as a member. 😀

  • RECEIVE THE GIFTS MEMBERS SHARE WITH YOU HERE...THEN...CREATE SOMETHING TO ENCHANT OTHERS THAT YOU WANT TO SHARE

    You know what we all love...

    When you enchant people, you fill them with delight and yourself in return. Have Fun!!!

Sign in to follow this  
Craigums

Soft plastics — banned?

Recommended Posts

Anybody concerned this could gain some steam? BTW were do they find these yahoo's that propose such crazy legislation?

_____________________________________________________

http://www.bassmaster.com/news/soft-plastics-banned

By Tyler Reed

FEB 4, 2013

Soft plastics are on the chopping block in the state of Maine.

On Jan. 17, state Representative Paul Davis introduced a bill that would prohibit the use of all "rubber" lures. The bill does not define "rubber" — which is not a standard material for soft baits — so it leaves it open that all soft baits would be prohibited if the bill is passed. Tomorrow, the state's Joint Standing Committee on Inland Fisheries and Wildlife will hold a public hearing on this bill. Make your voice heard!

KeepAmericaFishing officials released a statement last week, noting that it is not aware of any study of fish in the wild regarding problems with soft baits and that research experience is that fish either regurgitate or pass baits that they ingest.

"We are very grateful for our alert and connected Maine B.A.S.S. Nation folks who contacted us concerning this proposed legislative action," said Noreen Clough, B.A.S.S. national conservation director. "Immediately, we joined forces with American Sportfishing Association (ASA) and its KeepAmericaFishing advocacy site to squash this ill-conceived proposal. B.A.S.S. Conservation is the home of the ReBaits program, providing recycling for discarded plastics in 37 states, Canada and South Africa. When anglers bring discarded plastic baits in, there is absolutely no need to legislate a ban on their use."

Below is the testimony that Gordon Robertson, vice president of ASA, will present tomorrow. You can send your own letter to the committee at this link just by submitting your contact information. You do not have to live or fish in Maine to make your voice heard.

Testimony of the American Sportfishing Association on LD 42/HP 37, “An Act to Prohibit the Use of Rubber Lures for Fishing”

Maine Joint Standing Committee on Inland Fisheries and Wildlife

Submitted by Gordon Robertson, Vice President

February 5, 2013

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for the opportunity to present testimony on the topic of soft baits used for recreational fishing. The American Sportfishing Association (ASA) is the sportfishing industry’s trade association and has represented the industry since1933. We understand that for our members’ businesses to succeed the Nation must have abundant and sustainable fisheries. Therefore, we spend considerable resources assuring that actions at the state and federal level support clean waters, healthy habitats and angler access to the public’s fishery resources.

We urge the committee to not pass this legislation but instead allow the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife to conduct the appropriate field studies to determine if this theoretical problem with soft baits poses any practical population management problem in Maine to fish and other aquatic life and to further determine the role of angler education in minimizing the number of soft baits discarded while fishing.

To the best of our knowledge the Maine legislature is the first to consider legislation on this topic. Also, we are not aware of any study other than the 2009 laboratory study by G. Russell Danner published in the North American Journal of Fisheries Management that raises a concern with soft baits. In addition, we know of no study of fish in the wild on this topic. To the contrary industry research involving literally thousands of soft baits to test fish of many species (particularly bass and trout) has indicated minimal problems for the research fish involved. The research experience is that the fish either regurgitate or pass the baits without problem. These studies fed baits appropriate for the size of the fish being tested. It is possible that the Danner study may have fed trout large soft baits and the selection of those size ranges is much less likely to occur by free swimming trout in the wild. There is a wide variety of types, sizes and shapes of soft baits and we are not aware of these causing problems, even in laboratory experiments.

We do know that soft baits are popular among anglers and that they comprise a considerable segment of the artificial bait market. They are popular because they negate the need to obtain and keep live baits and they are effective. For this reason they are especially popular with non-resident anglers who visit Maine to sportfish. From the publication Sportfishing in America published in January 2013 we know that anglers in Maine provide a $614,401,455 economic infusion to the state each year supporting 6,723 Maine jobs. This economic engine from recreational fishing in Maine also provides $42.8 million in state and local tax revenue. Forty-four percent of Maine’s angling days are done by non-resident anglers. Obviously curtailing the use of popular artificial baits may cause a negative impact on tourism expenditures in Maine. In addition, forcing anglers to use live bait, or once live baits, can cause the inadvertent introduction of nonnative invasive aquatic species.

Obviously Maine wishes to take prudent steps to sustain its fishery resource base and the economic base that flows from recreational fishing. Given that there is no study of the impact of soft baits on fish and other aquatic life in the wild, legislation banning these types of popular baits is unwarranted. The legislation seeks to ban “rubber” baits with rubber being undefined. Realistically, there are no such baits on the market as soft baits are made from various substances, none of which are rubber. There are biodegradable soft baits available and this legislation would ban even the use of those baits and certainly does nothing to encourage further research into that area or to improve consumer demand for those types of baits.

Much can also be done through angler education to minimize the number of soft baits lost. There are, and can be more, soft bait recycling programs and programs describing the proper disposal of used soft baits. Anglers by nature are conservationists and they will react positively to practical, commonsense programs that allow them to fish with effective baits and that educate them on their use and disposal. We encourage the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife to work with local angler groups to accomplish this.

Again, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, we urge you to reject this legislation and instead allow the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife to conduct the appropriate field studies to determine if this theoretical problem with soft baits poses any practical population management problem in Maine to fish and other aquatic life and to further determine the role of angler education in minimizing the number of soft baits discarded while fishing.

Thank you and please make these comments part of the official hearing record.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there has been a lot of chatter on the net over this issue.. Sounds like a lot of it started because of the digestive system of trout. Supposedly Trout can not pass the plastics and it then kills them. If that is the case, I dont see why they dont just do area or Lake bans.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical. Take something else away. If it truly endangers trout ban it on certain bodies of water or techniques that are specific.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, the State of Maine doing something like this? Shocking...NOT. What only surprises me is that MA didn't think of it first. Or CA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read some of the literature on this issue and it can lead to big problems for fish species. Like was stated before the lures are not able to be passed thus the fish "thinks" it is full and will not eat again thus starving to death. Granted some species are less susceptible to this than others but I have started looking for soft plastics that are biodegradable. At least then if my line breaks or if the fish keeps it then it is able to degrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not surprised at all. Obviously Berkley had seen this coming a long time ago with Gulp. Also didn't Japan outlaw plastics a few years ago?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Your Responses - Share & Have Fun :)

    • Looks like fish to Me? Not a veggie in sight.🤔   I'm not particular though --I'd still eat em . The Rings--I've used worse-- ?
    • Swiveldigger gets the big win with----346 pts. 2--Juneau4                    298 3--icefishinnut               291 4--BlackLundProV         290   (Ouch)   Just checking for a response.🤐 5--Fishing_Novice         286 6--Rip_Some_Lip           283 7--huckfin                        279 8--mnwildman                257 9--rl_sd                            197   ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Season totals: 1--Fishing_Novice                  6756                         You've  gotta quit taken the same picks.😁 2--Juneau4                              6547 3--BlackLundProV                  6504 4--huckfin                                6488 5--Rip_Some_Lip                    6353 6--icefishinnut                         6311 7--Swiveldigger                       6189 8--mnwildman                         6166 9--rl_sd                                     5696
    • If things in there were actually a bargain they might’ve moved more stuff.  I’ve picked up a couple things there but not more than 5-10% of the times I’ve visited it.   The pricing coupled with the “as is” , no returns policy kept me a bit gun shy of making it a viable source of gear.
    • At least you’re settling for three strikes and you’re out!   Tough start but at least you know now and have a chance to rebound in some way.  Hopefully you can at least get that late season hunt on the “old” property.  Always tough when the permission starts fading after working and and getting to know a good property.
    • Looks like severe heartburn to me!😄
    • As stated for the above reasons....I totally agree.  I can tell you this much, I also hunt late into the season if I am not tagged out, and I loosen my sling more so my thick gloves will slide through it and I can grip my bow.  I have always shot with one, so i can't speak to shooting without one.  I get a piece of mind having it that I can relax my grip and now worry about the bow "jumping" out of my hand,
    • Antsy?  That would be an understatement.  I got out bow hunting 1 time last year due to the job I was working at the time.  That job is history and am now working a job that will allow me to hunt as much as I used to.  Last month has been pretty much a disaster.......the land that we hunt on, first when we went in to kill the areas for the food plot, the guy running the sprayer decided it would be a good idea to put Roundup on the clover plot I put in last year.  It was thick and awesome and I could tell the deer were just hammering it.  Mostly does and fawns, couple small bucks, but hey, when the does need a man, he usually shows up.  Needless to say, I was a little upset when this happened.  Almost lost it when the guy got done spraying the plot and then drove over to me and said "I killed that plot, we should plant a clover or chicory plot there".  Just shook my head and walked away.  Strike one......then about 2 weeks ago the owner of the property informed us that we would no longer be able to bow hunt on his land.  Only muzzleloader, and that's only if they are completely tagged out by then.  STRIKE TWO........so I just planted over 200 dollars worth of seed in food plots that I may never even get to hunt over.  STRIKE THREE!!!!   So now I am in scramble mode to try and find some private land to hunt or start getting out to scout public land in hopes to find a good spot.  All i can do is make the best out of it and hopefully things work out the best.  Either way.....I'm going to up a tree somewhere and totally loving the experience of sitting in the woods with mother nature, with a huge smile on my face!!!!
    • Hey all...........thinking about pulling the trigger on a new bow for the upcoming season (I know a little late in the year, but it is what it is in my world).  Right now I am shooting an Elite GT500 which is a double cam bow.  Thinking about possibly going to a single cam instead of the double but not really sure if that is the route I want to take.  Looking for opinions from folk who shoot either and what they like don't like about the bow.  Not looking for any bow bashing, just what everyone likes and why.  Thanks!
    • I did this with a friend. I actually think it was what is called back bacon not buckboard as he cut it out of the rear loin instead of the shoulder. IMHO it tastes really good. Like a ham of sorts. If it goes over well then I'll do a batch from the shoulder and I think the extra fat content will work better.   I used a bacon mix from Walton's that I ordered. 
×