lead Lure Ban

Get the lead out

Any of you who were at the Northwest Sportshow in Minneapolis last week saw an interesting Scenario. The Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance Get the Lead Out booth next to the Sensible Manufacturers and Anglers for Responsible Tackle (SMART) booth.

In addition, in Section 2 of the Show program, there is a half-page add from the Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance titled Get the Lead Out. This add shows a radiograph of a dead Loon that has a caption x-ray of a dead loon that injested [sic] lead fishing tackle. Even though the process of converting x-ray images to print images severely reduces image clarity, I see four radio-opaque objects in the image. From left to right, the objects appear to be a split shot, an object that looks like a jig head, a 45 degree bend jig hook, and what looks like an ice fly. I m a Radiologic Technologist by profession, and I once volunteered my time in the seventies helping with a capture and x-ray survey of the Geese wintering on Silver Lake in Rochester MN. I understand x-ray images, and have I seen my share of radiographs of birds.

What are the odds that a loon would swallow 4 different pieces of tackle? What are the odds that these four objects are spread out so nicely and do not superimpose one another in any way? The odds are probably about the same as your odds of winning the lottery, 1 in 80 million. This is supposed to be about Loons, but I think I smell a Rat! The other disturbing thing about the add is it has photos of an American Eagle and a Swan. If they are implying Eagles and Swans are at risk, why isn t this data included?

At the Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance booths, one could get a free sample of lead free fishing free tackle. The samples were put together by the MN DNR. What was interesting was the tackle was made in Canada. If lead free tackle is so readily available why didn t the Minnesota DNR spend Minnesota dollars in Minnesota?

I don t know much about the Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance, so I spent some time at their website. It appears the primary mission is to assist businesses and agencies with recycling, waste management, minimizing the amount of pollutants in our environment, research, education and matching grants. All are needed functions. However, I question their involvement in this controversial matter. If it is from the research viewpoint, a study sample of 56 and 46 birds is not a large enough sample for good statistical analysis. If the mission is education, the statistics don’t support the mission! If it’s a matching grant, why arent the partners names on the literature? It appears that a significant amount of money has been spent on this matter and I believe there are more important issues that deserve the focus of the Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance.

Most sound decisions are based on risk-benefit ratio analysis. Is the benefit of banning lead fishing tackle in a stable Loon population worth the economic risk to the Minnesota fishing industry? I don t think so!

The Minnesota House bill to ban lead fishing tackle has been withdrawn. However the Senate bill is still alive. Fellow Minnesota anglers, one of the reasons we choose to fish is the diversion from the complex matters of life. I don t want to get involved in politics but I see this as unwarranted legislation that is unenforceable and another burden for our DNR. If we don t take a stand on this issue, we can expect to see other misguided legislation in the future. If you agree, you need to let your State Senator know that you oppose bill SF #23.

Riverfan, I like your analysis.(seriously) But not so seriously. now I think I may I know why we don’t have many loons in Iowa, must be because they are unable to make the trip while loaded down with Minnesota lead?

If this is what it gets you, I’m glad we don’t have them.

I like loons, don’t get me wrong – my family is full of them – but apparently they cause hysteria in some politician-types. Good thing someone is paying attention and not just looking on in awe at fake x-rays and losing their heads over it.

I wonder if there is some recourse that can be taken in light of perpetrated fraud? Perhaps a savvy Minnesotan could write an editorial to the Star-Trib?

Iowa Guys,

I can see the Iowa EPA bringing a suite against MN for lead contamination from the loons dropping out of the sky as they migrate south.

When I saw the picture of the perch with a jig firmly implanted in it’s rear end, made me think how a loon could eat that perch and end up with a similar problem. Perch with jig in rear end post

Anyway, I think there is a lot to learn about how many loons actually die from lead. Speaking of learning more about loons…many don’t fly south, they fly west. Loons winter out in the Pacific Ocean. (I’m speaking of loons from Minnesota, other states have loons that migrate to the east and south) Actually, after they hatch and spend their first summer here in the Midwest, they spend the next 2-3 years out at sea before flying back here to nest. Pretty interesting stuff.

Jon J.

This is a very simple issue, lead is poison, there are countless species of animals living in our waterways and lakes, not just loons. Lead poisoning will kill any animals just the same as it will kill a human. Do you dump lead into your water supply for your home? Then why the resistance to a bill that prevents us from dumping poison into our waterways. God forbid we should try to do something progressive.

Wadsworth,

I don’t necessarily disagree with that point of view. However, the government pushes this forward under the umbrella that lead is killing loons. They may get a lot more support if they simply studied the issue and presented facts to the public. Nothing I have read supports the argument that loons are endangered by lead. Yes, some loons die of lead poisoning. Does that mean all loons will soon be wiped from the face of the earth? I think not.

I’d rather see something to the effect that “Sportmen deposit XXX pounds/tons of lead into the lakes and rivers. If this continues, XXX will happen” Banning lead because one loon is X-Rayed with a jig in his gut don’t cut it for me.

J.

I agree with you 100% that they are going about this the wrong way with using loons as their selling point, it would make more sense to use examples such as you mentioned. I don’t think we should need as much convincing about this as we do about more controversial issues, it’s common sense that lead is poison, I would like to see the tackle industries come up with an alternative, yes, it will probably cost more, but I don’t think it’s right to be willing to poison our waterways just to save ourselves a couple bucks.

Here is a good read on this subject. It is from a web sight of one of Northern Minnesota top guides. http://www.jeffsundin.com/updates.htm

Rigger

Wadsworth,

Your post is very miss-guided. First, this is not a simple issue. It is very complex when the economic impact is brought into the equation. There are around 30 major tackle manufacturers, and a significant cottage industry in this state. I know three gentlemen who supplement their retirement income making tackle such as lead head jigs. I make my own jig heads and there is no way I can retool to use tin or bismuth. The purpose of this website is to promote the fishing industry. Like it or not, fishing industries are a part of this state’s economy. Is the benefit of a lead lure ban worth the cost? This issue needs to be thoroughly evaluated.

Lead is a naturally occurring element that is common in our environment. It is a neuro toxin that if ingested in sufficient amounts will cause a variety of symptoms, which can lead to death. I m a X-ray Technologist and have worked for 39 years in lead-lined x-ray rooms, worn lead aprons and gloves, and handled many other lead devices. I should be dead!
You are implying that putting lead in our lakes and waterways will kill anything that comes in contact with the water. Where did that information come from? Are you are implying that lead easily dissolves into the water? I haven t had a chance to thoroughly investigate the subject, but I have not seen any indication that lead leaching into river or lake water is a realistic problem Keep in mind that much of our water supply in the past was delivered through lead pipe, even from ancient Roman times. This may not have been the brightest thing we have done in light of what we know today, but to read your comment it sounds like it is a miracle that humanity has survived! Perhaps most people do not know that lead objects skin over with a self-protecting oxide layer that helps minimize toxic impact.

Do something progressive? How about miss-guided? It s scare comments like yours that evoke emotions and hysteria. It s what I would expect from the other side.

I hope I don t come across as being against loons or any living thing. I consider myself about 10 degrees to the right of a tree hugger. I support most the big picture views of the organizations that are the proponents of this bill. What I have a problem with is the deceptions that are being used to sell the uninformed public. There is no question that this bill would pass today if it were put to on a ballot as a referendum. Who would vote against our state bird and our national symbol? What needs to done is to look at the issues logically. More studies need to be done. The risk/benefit ratio must be part of the decision.