Get the Lead out Tackle Exchange

[ghotierman]

We're hosting a tackle exchange today 2-7 pm.

stop and swap old lead for new non toxic tackle.

for more information on get the lead out campaign, check out the Minnesota Offic of Environmental Assistance

www.moea.state.mn.us/sinkers

trade you tackle, then stay for a cool bowfishing clinic!

[Ralph Wiggum]

I wish I could make it. I think both would be great!

[Northlander]

I cant believe they dont have a event in Duluth this year. Virginia and Two Harbors but no Duluth?

[TonkaBass]

How many loons die each year from ingesting lead fishing tackle? Probably not as many as killed by accident from a yuppy duck hunter on opening weekend! I sure have noticed that duck populations have soared since the banning of lead shot, oh... wait a second... their aren't nearly as many ducks around due to the destruction of habitat??? Maybe we should be less concerned about lead sinkers and more concerned about developing up north getaways, like brainerd, into a trffic jam on the weekends!

[TurnUpTheFishing]

Sure maybe duck populations are not what they use to be (I dont hunt and really have no opinion on the subject). But what does that have to do with giving fisherman a chance try an alternative to lead tackle?

I think its a good program. Last year I exchange some split shots and jigs and probably got over a one for one exchange. Ill definately do it agian even if I dont get half of what I give.

[pikerliker]

Tonka Bass you know what? The more I hear your views on things the more I like you! I don't think your slamming the people who want to exchange led as you are people missing the forest for the tree's. I agree that habitat destruction for selfish reasons is our #1 problem in this state and country to healthy wildlife and fish populations. While I think it's good to "get the lead out" so to speak I think there are other more important issues that don't get as much press.

~piker

[Fisher Dave]

I think the non toxic tackle is a load of *bull* myself. I think its even more so *bull* that fishermen are promoting it... what is next? No hooks?

When someone has a chance and the ability.. choose one of the less expensive non toxic materials and make a 4 oz sinker and see what it looks like(probably the size of a hockey puck). Then figure how much that is going to cost to make vs the cost of lead (20 cents a pound or less)... and then keep in mind the finished product will be so large it will be near impossible to keep out of a snag on every cast.

Even a river rat is going to have to be an executive to afford $6 a sinker to go catfishing... ok, we got $6 for a weight, another $1 for a hook and swivel, and $2.50 for a big sucker minnow with the recent price increase in bait.. probably due to gas and tax cost... so we are at $9.50 to cast our line in the water in hopes for a flathead catfish.. and we are criminals if we dont use non toxics once it is pushed that far.. nice.

You know.. yesterday I was with another FM'er that I will not name, and we witnessed a flock of ducks flying down the river when we had our standard $2.50 per rig out in the water in hopes of a fish... one of the ducks in the flock of ducks flew into the power line and plummeted(sp?) to its death in the river... that power line at that moment probably killed more ducks(1) in Minnesota than split shots killed in the last 5 years.

Non toxics right now are way too expensive.. dont get me wrong, I would prefer a non toxic that had similar densities as lead(weight/size ratio), but there is nothing out there right now that will provide us as anglers that opportunity without refinancing our homes to fill the tackle box.

The higher cost of materials will only greatly increase the cost of tackle.. far more than what the difference in materials will cost.

[ghotierman]

We had a good turn out and the rep for moea was pleased.

I've been watching this issue for some time. non-lead tackle is not overly cumbersome, as fisher dave suggests. haven't seen a 4oz non lead yet, but the split shot, lindy sinkers and jig heads place side by side are the same in size to lead tackle. in fact, tungsten composite sinkers like those from dr. drop are heavier than lead, for a faster sink rate. the bullet sinkers made of densified plastic are very intriguing as well. as for cost, steel used on some painted jig heads, is often less expensive. in the case of reuseable split shot, the difference is about a penny.

the heavy weights you use in the river, or even bottom bouncers and bait walkers would not seem to pose the same hazard as other lead tackle. the issue is birds (primary studies on loons....waterfowl with lead shot) ingesting lead while 'graveling'...mistaking lead pellets, sinkers, even jig heads as pebbles. I doubt that a 4oz bell sinker, or bottom bouncer is of a size that would be ingested by a loon or duck...just speculating.

thanks all...

[say_der]

I did a rather extensive research project on this very subject for a college paper. This is a very good program that the MOEA sponsors. I attended one of the exchanges as part of my research. I ended up with more split shot & jigs than I came in with. I tested them as part of my research & guess what - they work.

Biggger problems do exist in this state. Does that mean it makes sense to ignore smaller problems that are easily & inexpensively fixed?

Exaggerating the size of the new tackle doesn't fly - a lot of the cool new materials are smaller.

I don't have my research info with me, but cost to the consumer isn't much more. If I remember it correctly I think the AVERAGE angler (I know, very hard to define) would maybe spend 5%-10% more on non-lead stuff alone. So if you spend $100 per year on lead now, you'd maybe be out $105-$110 or so. Big deal. People drop $100's of dollars on rod/reel combo's, $1000's of dollars on boats & then gripe because non-lead substitutes cost a little bit more, something they are probably not buying tons of anyway.

Like I said, it might be a small politically motivated problem that's being solved by this, but I couldn't find a logical reason not to fix the problem if possible. And believe me, I tried because when I first started my research project I was on the other side of the fence.

[Fisher Dave]

Well .. all I know is bismuth shotgun shells cost about twice as much as the steel shells, and the steel shells are about 2 times what it cost for lead shells.

If everything goes non toxic, there are lots of guys that make tackle *out of the garage* that will not be able to anymore, and their equipment will not be able to be used for non toxic materials... So, a person not being able to make their own alone will be reason enough for the tackle manufacturers to spike the price... there is no competition.. the major suppliers will all enjoy the profits.

I dont foresee tungsten(iron) jigs any time soon for a cheap price.. I can forsee a tin nontoxic jig and sinker cheap.. but the density isnt there.

I dont know guys.. this is up there with the 75 cent/per pack of cigarette increase to me.. people who dont smoke, or hate smoking dont care, smokers do care but it doesnt matter what we say.. its going to happen anyhow... In the end, there is absolutely nothing to justify the tax.. at least nothing smokers are causing. How many smokers do you hear saying they agree with the tax? None.

This is a fishing issue that is going to affect all of us and we are going to get bent over in the end if we like it or not.. some of us dont care, I think some like it.. I dont, but it doesnt matter what I say.. its going to happen.. when it does I will be in my basement pouring lead for myself... I might even be able to afford a couple gallons of gas at that time to go fishing because I didnt restock the box with non toxics.

[river rat316]

I agree with Dave on this. If this were to become, a law then you would drive the people that make stuff in there garage, which would leave only major manufactorers left which would drive up the price of tackle dramatically, the only reason stuff is so cheap right now is because of that competition from the little guy! Im not saying non-toxics are bad (obviously) but you need to look at the whole picture

[say_der]

How much do you really spend annually on lead stuff right now?

I realize this is not in the spirit of tackle exchanges, but I came home with more stuff than I went with. If you want to get the non-toxic stuff cheap, go in the store, buy it, and exchange it.

I can't guarantee that you will come out ahead like I did, but it's worth a try to get non-toxic stuff at toxic pricing.

At least the toxic stuff doesn't end up at the bottom of a lake and then into a loon, duck or goose.

[Cooter]

I'm not a duck hunter, but it seems to me the lead shot ban makes far more sense than worrying about lead split shot, jigs, etc. With lead shot, you're looking at thousands of small lead shot scattered in what I would expect is normally shallower water where ducks are likely to feed. On the other hand, most split shot you lose from fishing is not going to be accessible to ducks anyway - and it takes a lot of lost split shot to equal one 12ga lead load.

[fishlakeman]

From what I've heard, the whole reason to eliminate lead tackle is strictly because of it's harmful effects on Loons. I believe that some loons die each year from lead poisoning from lead tackle, but I've seen more loons this year than I have in the past 15 years. I don't think there has been a major decline in the Loon population in the past few years? Please correct me if I'm wrong (seriously, just going off of experience). I fish probably 65 days out of the year, and probably loose an average of 5 lead items in a year on the lakes. Most of these losses occur deeper than 15 feet, now the probablilty of a loon diving down and injesting my lead tackle in deeper than 15 feet of water has to be about the same odds of me winning the powerball. Now I understand that this is multiplied by the number of anglers across the state, but for how much water we have, there just isn't that high of a probability of lead tackle being injested. If it's a mud bottom, more than likely it will settle down a few inches, plus loons look for gravel, not mud.

This issue kind of reminds me of those inner city gun buy back programs. Spending thousands of dollars on getting guns out of the hands of people that wouldn't commit crimes anyway. Totally ineffective.( Also agree with you Fisher Dave on the Cigarette Tax, I don't smoke, but I think it's wrong for the state to bend it's people over, especially when smokers generally are of the lower income percentile.

From what I heard, this program is tax funded. I think the money from taxes would better be spent focusing on the mercury and pcb's problem that effects humans and all wild life, compared to lead contaminating a few birds. This it a tiny concern compared to the other environmental issues our lakes,ponds, and rivers face today.

Don't get me wrong, I'm probably the biggest conservationist of my age a person could be. I practice very selective harvest, and use steel shot for everything except grouse hunting. I convinced my grandpa to put 180 acres of farmland in to crep with great success. I think it's a decent idea to use lead alternative and I probably will buy some, but expecting me to completely eliminate lead from my arsenol... not going to happen. There are better causes out there.

[Fisher Dave]

Cooter.. I agree with the lead shot ban.. yes, a ton of shot makes it into the shallow sloughs.. it is controversal on how much damage the shot did to birds, but it had to do some.. especially on public waters with too many hunters.. 30 boxes of shells a day easy in some places.. that is a whole lot of pellets.. My calculator (in my head) isnt working right now.. but figure 25 shells per box, 1 - 1 3/8 oz of shot per shell @ 30 boxes .. thats a lot of shot... a rough estimate would be 800 ounces on the average, or about 50 pounds... most of it landing in 5' of water or less.. that is a lot of shot... and that is only one day on a busy location.

[TonkaBass]

Well, I guess I will just have to chuck all my lead jig molds. I'll throw them in the same bag as all my flippin jigs and bare jigheads. If we're really lucky maybe "The State of California" will make us throw all our crankbaits too, I mean they do have brass components, and brass does have traces of lead in it. Give me a brake, why do they even put those warnings on rattle traps??? As of yet, pretty sure nobody has suffered from reprodutive harm from a Rattle Trap. (or a Shimano reel, or a Sonar Flash, or from biting split shots for that matter)

[Big G]

Amen Tonka Bass!!!!

Political talk!

[say_der]

TonkaBass - I whole-heartedly agree the destruction of habitat is far worse than sinkers & split shot for ducks. What should be done about the development of up north gateways & the traffic jams?

[Schnauzer]

I agree with outlawing lead shot for gun shells but in my opinion, the lead tackle thing is just too far. It is a solution looking for a problem. I would consider it waaaaaaaay down the list of environmental concerns... and this is coming from a guy who tends to be a bit to the left in the political spectrum of guys who hang out on fishing forums.

I'm going to enjoy the bazillion loons up at the cabin this weekend... and pulling three way crawler harnesses, with lead weights.