Did lead fishing tackle need Federal protection?

Within the now stalled 2012 Sportsmen’s Act was the: Hunting, Fishing and Recreational Shooting Protection Act (S. 838) – Blocking ongoing attempts to federally ban lead in recreational fishing equipment and ammunition by amending the Toxic Substances Control Act by excluding ammunition and fishing tackle from the Toxic Substances Control Act.

The concern for waterfowl is admirable. Years ago I was outspoken in my opposition to banning lead fishing tackle. Part of this was that the ban treated 1-2oz sinkers the same as splitshot. There is evidence that tackle under 1/4 oz may contribute to some loss. And the question then and now might be how much loss needs to occur to ban lead and how do we track this?

My other concern is that back in 2002, the tackle industry asked for more time to bring less toxic products to the market, instead the process has been moved to Asia, with less standards, more profit and fewer lead-free alternatives.

You can thank raptor resource and the other hawk/eagle groups when we cant use any lead lures under 1oz in the future.

You have any idea how expensive it is going to be when you have to crappie fish with a $2 jig head and walleye fish with a $3-$4 jig head? Little tungsten ice jigs are $2 each, now imagine what a 1/8-1/2oz jig head is going to cost you. Most of us won’t be able to afford to fish in the future.

And in the meantime, our pheasant, rabbit, squirrel, and other small/medium game populations will continue to decline due to predation from these hawks and eagles we desperately need to protect and grow in numbers.

I’m with B BK on this one. Nothings perfect and banning lead for splitshot, jigs and anything else thats possible to ban in the fishing and hunting industry is rediculous.

Anyone ever think its one small step at a time for the antis? are they achieveing what they want? Whats next down the road, a shortage of tungeston. Lead is almost everywhere and in an abundance in alot of the ground in North America, theres alot of it here in Iowa and has been mined for many years in the past. Next its going to be the epoxy in the paint they use on quality jigs, whats next? You’ve got to draw the line somewhere.

Wow, tree huggers stay away from our fishing tackle!

I’m willing to listen to anyone first off…but I have a question.

What species is endangered because of lead used fishing?

I know a couple years ago a member posted a video of an eagle that had lead poisoning it was said, but there are more eagles, peregrine falcons, retailed hawks. loons pelicans and owls then I’ve seen in my life…right now, while more people are fishing with lead then ever before.

For our economy, it might be better to ban tungsten?

Guess we’re on the same page Buzz, but I don’t think it’s cold enough for hell to freeze over.

Quote:

---

I’m willing to listen to anyone first off…but I have a question.

What species is endangered because of lead used fishing?

I know a couple years ago a member posted a video of an eagle that had lead poisoning it was said, but there are more eagles, peregrine falcons, retailed hawks. loons pelicans and owls then I’ve seen in my life…right now, while more people are fishing with lead then ever before.

For our economy, it might be better to ban tungsten?

---

X 1000, well put BK!

Quote:

---

Guess we’re on the same page Buzz, but I don’t think it’s cold enough for hell to freeze over.

---

Lol

I remember reading somewhere that an estimated 20 loons die every year in WI due to ingested lead fishing tackle. I remember the article saying the estimate was not as precise as they’d like because loons sink when dead. They hadn’t actually recovered any lead poisoned,dead loons.

In other words,they guessed,then wrote an emotional plea to ban lead tackle because of a ficticious pile of dead loons.

Our problem is the constant barrage of articles like that makes a couple converts here,a couple there. Another BS article converts a few more,then another piece somewhere else…

Repeat a lie (or exaggeration) often enough and it doesn’t matter if it’s true. Public opinion has been changed.

Quote:

---

In other words,they guessed,then wrote an emotional plea to ban lead tackle because of a fictitious pile of dead loons.

---

OK, for the purpose of discussion and since I raised the issue, is there a point – when we make a shift to non-lead tackle and ammo without disastrous ecological evidence? Rather then debate ten dead loons or one hundred? (Personally I think the Loon population is doing just fine).

How much of what we think should or shouldn’t be changed – is based on what we are already familiar with? Does a paradigm shift always need to be at gunpoint? And if the tackle industry had brought more products forward, would a tungsten ice jig still be $2? I can buy my 54 inch TV today for a quarter of what I paid six years ago?

Am I short sighted?

I don’t see a gun, a reason to pull a gun and the 54″ flat screen is still more then what I paid from my tube.

I would guess most folks aren’t in favor of change just to make change.

Quote:

---

And if the tackle industry had brought more products forward, would a tungsten ice jig still be $2? I can buy my 54 inch TV today for a quarter of what I paid six years ago?

---

IMO yes. Tungsten is in short supply. They are not going to open a new mine and new processing plants just to support the USA fishing market. If you didnt know, all tungsten lures are made in a tungsten plant, not a fishing lure mfg plant. Then the raw tungsten pieces are welded onto hooks, or tungsten powder is compressed around hooks to form a tungsten jig head. The latter is much more expensive. In essence all tungsten jigs are made from tungsten balls or shapes already being produced that have been adapted for fishing lures. That is why all tungsten ice jigs look almost the same.

So what I’m saying is, just because USA wants to go lead free, doesnt mean there will be lots more tungsten made. If anything the supply will stay the same and the demand will go sky high forcing prices up with it.

Plus tungsten prices are at an all time high and are projected to go up another 30% by next year. Tungsten hunting ammo is already at $35-40 per 10 shells and going to go up again next year. This isnt TV’s, they cant just make more tungsten now that everybody wants some.

They will make tin composite and steel weights and jigs (already make the weights), but they will be utter crap with no sensitivity at all. We will have to choose between fishing a good jig that’s $3 a pop, or a crap jig that’s $0.50 a pop.

Quote:

---

I would guess most folks aren’t in favor of change just to make change.

---

And for those who favor change it should be a personal decision.

All tungsten lures are not a solid metal either. Since tungsten melts at an outrageously high temp [try 6000 degrees] and is likely impossible for most conventional tackle makers to work with some tungsten jigs are composites….ground tungsten mixed into a catalyst. How harmful is tungsten dust to the people in that environment? The solid tungsten lure bodies are cast with a hook slot and the hooks are added after the fact and are glued in place.

B BK has mentioned lead in Iowa….Illinois too along with several other states. Still being mined. That alone makes me wonder just how bad it is.

Using tungsten is still a choice. I prefer and will stick with lead.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I would guess most folks aren’t in favor of change just to make change.

---

And for those who favor change it should be a personal decision.

---

Without a gun to the head?

So Brian, I take it that your not in favor of the legislation that would exempt lead hunting and fishing tackle from EPA regulation. In other words you don’t see the need to use federal legislation to protect lead. Rather you would like to see it fare on it’s own. Choose to use it or not?

Which Brian?

I think it’s crazy that we need a law to ensure no one can make a law to ban lead (or anything else when there’s no reason to).

It’s not getting that far fetch to say we need a law to ensure we don’t have laws that would make it law to have a law without some common sense behind it.

We are on the same page Vern. I’m just annoyed by it.

I am all in favor of any protection for lead components we use in the fishing industry. I also think that the “other” heavy metals that have been shown to be handy in the same arena should be available if people want them. There are benefits to using tungsten baits but I think anglers should have a choice in what they want to use…not force fed.

Maybe it did need protection. Look around at everything else that is potentially dangerous. The sheeple are constantly trying to outlaw or regulate in into the ground.
But then again what does a protective law mean when our own constitution is being torn down?!

If I had a crystal ball, I’d say that the day isn’t to far away that we will see a lead tackle and ammo ban. My concern is that we need to do more then just try to protect lead tackle or fight a ban. I’m hoping that we somehow find a way to give the industry incentives rather then ultimatums. I suspect the general public will be persuaded by the anti’s to support a ban. Here is a link to the current bans Bans