We knew it was coming, Washington State lead ban for fishing

[sickbayer]

[I have no crap in my house as i can afford tungston

Well you might be able to afford it, but can't spell it.

Well spotted ill be sure to add you to my christmas card list

[sickbayer]

If ingested, lead is bad. Lead in of itself , i.e. in a river, on the bottom of a lake, it's inert. It poses no threat. It's simple. Do some research

Back in the 80 in the UK " THE use of all fishing lead larger than size 8 (0.06g) split-shot up to 1oz (28.35g) leger bombs was outlawed by the British government in January 1987 following concern that increasing numbers of swans were dying of lead poisoning"
Kinda why i have the mind set that i have today...

[MarkFromSea]

Do you want to pay the extra amount for tungsten? I'd rather buy a steak or more fishing gear with the money. I had a wonderful flat iron last night. I can't even recall what I ate this evening but that steak, yesterday, was pretty damn good! How about this: There are lots of fellow fishermen that would appreciate it if they could buy and use lead fishing gear for years to come. Would you like to help us out? If not, I understand. If you make the call to oppose 2241, I Thank You.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/Default.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[sickbayer]

Do you want to pay the extra amount for tungsten? I'd rather buy a steak or more fishing gear with the money. I had a wonderful flat iron last night. I can't even recall what I ate this evening but that steak, yesterday, was pretty damn good! How about this: There are lots of fellow fishermen that would appreciate it if they could buy and use lead fishing gear for years to come. Would you like to help us out? If not, I understand. If you make the call to oppose 2241, I Thank You.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/Default.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sure ill help out... where is the hat to throw my split shot in. Heck if you need a rod ill throw that in too, but i really believe lead shot should be banned. Granted this bill may go to far.And it should not include DR balls but if it passes i will handle it and find another way. Someone will find a better solution isnt that how we progress.? By the way im not a liberal.

[MarkFromSea]

I could always use another rod! Thanks for the offer!
We can agree to disagree, not a prob.........

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/Default.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; You're welcome to use this link to support the ban on lead. It works for both pro and con on pending legislation.

[sickbayer]

Thanks Mark and really should go hit Lake Wa for a spot of fishing mate.

[BassDood]

If ingested, lead is bad. Lead in of itself , i.e. in a river, on the bottom of a lake, it's inert. It poses no threat. It's simple. Do some research

Back in the 80 in the UK " THE use of all fishing lead larger than size 8 (0.06g) split-shot up to 1oz (28.35g) leger bombs was outlawed by the British government in January 1987 following concern that increasing numbers of swans were dying of lead poisoning"
Kinda why i have the mind set that i have today...

Swans...really? Or ducks. Like I said, if ingested...as in eaten, it is bad. Lead laying on the bottom of a system is inert. Like gold or other metals. It sits there. Again do some research and don't panic

[The Quadfather]

Things like this are such a shame to me. The majority of people think with their own concerns/pocket book/ ----their own new found inconveniences in mind i.e. buying alternative tackle.--- ( how about when you hear people complain about paying tax increases for public education, levys, etc.) Many people who don't have kids themselves will gripe about funding these types of things. It's people like that which need to look beyond themselves and realize that maybe the public education system is trying to put out the youth that will take care of your butt in the near future when we are are dependent on the next generation. I'm just saying that there is a world beyond ourselves...
Sometimes you really have to look beyond yourself at the bigger picture. If it is a step in a cleaner direction in even a small amount, then why not consider it?
(not that the schools have managed their money correctly .... just an example)

[MarkFromSea]

Thanks Mark and really should go hit Lake Wa for a spot of fishing mate.

Someday.........

[natetreat]

I feel that it needs to be mentioned that this not about a threat to humans. This is about birds eating it, loons in particular. The thought that "..well lead is still a bad substance no matter what side of the fence you sit on..." i.e. "we should stop using lead because it is bad" is a ridiculous extrapolation of the logic of ignorance. Lead is not inherently good or bad, but it can poison animals if ingested in large quantities. The history of the legislation relates to bird shot and the birds that were dying from that, not people or anything else. When the EPA first decided to address the issue there were birds dying from eating bird shot made from lead, because it is small, the same size as the gravel that they use to aid in their digestion. In areas with a high population of waterfowl corresponding to a high concentration of hunting pressure on the same body of water, there were a bunch of dead ducks from lead.

But when you're talking about fishing lead versus bird shot, you have to keep in mind that one single shell shot over water expends approximately 225 to 430 small lead pellets into the water, depending on the load, gun gauge, and shot size chosen by the hunter. Over the course of a waterfowl season, millions of lead pellets may be introduced to a body of water. This in turn leads to an increased chance of dabbling ducks, and other water birds, mistakenly ingesting the lead pellets as they select small rocks or grit to assist with their digestive process.

When you're applying this to fishing lead, you need to look at it logically.

1. Fishing lead is not guaranteed to be lost. Although you may snag up on a tree branch now and then, the sheer volume of fishermen needed to put a significant amount of lead on the bottom in a place frequented by ducks that will eat it is unlikely to ever happen. The amount of lead on the bottom left by fishermen does not pose a significant threat to the health of that environment.

2. The fishing lead that is left on the bottom, aside from split shot in smaller sizes, is unlikely to be ingested by the birds. Fishing lead is not gravel. When was the last time you heard of a sea gull trying to down a washed up 10 pound down rigger ball?

3. The federal agencies that have considered these issues, along with their well paid scientists have not found sufficient evidence to prove that fishing lead has an impact on the environment. Why should we second guess the scientists?

This is an ignorant overreaction caused by misplaced common sense. You should not eat lead, that's for certain. If you do, you will suffer from lead poisoning. Ducks shouldn't eat it either. But just because you shouldn't eat it, doesn't mean you shouldn't use it. And it doesn't mean that using it will cause harm to anything. Lead is only soluble in water under certain circumstances. So the lead in your drinking water is not from fishing gear. We're not force feeding people paint chips here, we're catching fish.

The usefulness of lead in recreational and commercial fishing far outweighs the need to legislate out of knee jerk fear. Recreational fishing, which many, myself included, make their livelihood, would be tremendously inconvenienced. There are certain types of fishing that rely strongly on it. The evidence for the ban is nonexistent. The impact that it would have is undeniable. Nobody should support this ban.

That being said, I invite you all again to email, phone and write their congressmen to let them know that you as the voter do not support the lead ban, and let them know that you'll remember their vote come election time.

[natetreat]

Things like this are such a shame to me. The majority of people think with their own concerns/pocket book/ ----their own new found inconveniences in mind i.e. buying alternative tackle.--- ( how about when you hear people complain about paying tax increases for public education, levys, etc.) Many people who don't have kids themselves will gripe about funding these types of things. It's people like that which need to look beyond themselves and realize that maybe the public education system is trying to put out the youth that will take care of your butt in the near future when we are are dependent on the next generation. I'm just saying that there is a world beyond ourselves...
Sometimes you really have to look beyond yourself at the bigger picture. If it is a step in a cleaner direction in even a small amount, then why not consider it?
(not that the schools have managed their money correctly .... just an example)

I can come at it from this angle. I'm not thinking with my pocket book on this one, but with a keen eye for the future and the place of government. If a small number of ducks die and we make sweeping changes in our way of life because of it, than what happens when a couple of mice die? Do we outlaw tractors? When I worked at the pea plant my job was to pick out the dead frogs from the peas before they went to rinse. That was a lot of dead frogs. Should we outlaw pea farming because it kills frogs?

Sure it's the "slippery slope" but it's not unreasonable to assume that the government won't do the same again. The threat is small, but this is a big reaction. It's not gonna hurt our health at all, just the ducks. If it were looked at reasonably by some actual fishermen than it'd be a different story. Like changing the way we do business with split shot. I'm sure that is what our legislators are thinking about when they picture fishing lead. An over abundance of that stuff would be a problem for the ducks. If they said we should use steel split shot, than it would make more sense. But ducks don't just wander around willy nilly eating big stick rocks, rusty hooks and oblong pieces of pencil lead.

If it were actually making the environment safer in a significant way I would be all for it. But it doesn't, so why should we do it?

[Bodofish]

Yep this one of those deals where you really have to choose your battles. Government, slippery slope and all that stuff. We crossed that line long before I was born. I believe it started about the time we started paying the members of the house and senate. They have a need to justify their salaries so they pass more laws whether we need them or not.
There is no argument against lead being very poisonous, it just is. Is it also naturally occurring? Yes it is. To the point, everything is poisonous if you ingest enough. Do we toss enough lead into the water to make a difference? Who really knows? Does it damage the environment by just having it on your line in the water? Or does it need to be eaten to be a concern? We certainly don't add lead to the environment like say a hunter would by broadcasting little lead pellets across an area with every shot. Lead is funny stuff, it's a very stable mineral once it has a layer of oxidation on the outside, kind of like aluminum. Is aluminum poisonous in the same way lead is? You bet it is, should we outlaw airplanes and drift boats too? I guess lead has really gotten a bad rap in the ways it has been used in the past We used lead oxide in paint as a pigment and we spread in places where it could easily be consumed, that is bad, really bad. It's a little different vehicle than a piece of it on your line. Do we really need to be passing laws to protect us from lead on fisherpersons? Do we really pose a significant threat? Should we maybe be setting our sights on something a little higher than fishing weights? Is this a case of legislators passing bills to justify their existence? Will it change the way we fish? You bet it will. Will it push the cost that most of us can endure? Doubt it, we'll find a way. Will it damage a number of small business? Without doubt it will.
An awful lot to consider. So I guess we're down to the point where you need to contact your elected lackeys and let them know how you feel. That's the way the system works. We need to push the govt. or it will push us. Don't forget to vote in every election. Standup and be counted!!!

[MarkFromSea]

For me, it's much simpler: I don't like change.

[Anglinarcher]

Yep this one of those deals where you really have to choose your battles. Government, slippery slope and all that stuff. We crossed that line long before I was born. I believe it started about the time we started paying the members of the house and senate. They have a need to justify their salaries so they pass more laws whether we need them or not.
There is no argument against lead being very poisonous, it just is. Is it also naturally occurring? Yes it is. To the point, everything is poisonous if you ingest enough. Do we toss enough lead into the water to make a difference? Who really knows? Does it damage the environment by just having it on your line in the water? Or does it need to be eaten to be a concern? We certainly don't add lead to the environment like say a hunter would by broadcasting little lead pellets across an area with every shot. Lead is funny stuff, it's a very stable mineral once it has a layer of oxidation on the outside, kind of like aluminum. Is aluminum poisonous in the same way lead is? You bet it is, should we outlaw airplanes and drift boats too? I guess lead has really gotten a bad rap in the ways it has been used in the past We used lead oxide in paint as a pigment and we spread in places where it could easily be consumed, that is bad, really bad. It's a little different vehicle than a piece of it on your line. Do we really need to be passing laws to protect us from lead on fisherpersons? Do we really pose a significant threat? Should we maybe be setting our sights on something a little higher than fishing weights? Is this a case of legislators passing bills to justify their existence? Will it change the way we fish? You bet it will. Will it push the cost that most of us can endure? Doubt it, we'll find a way. Will it damage a number of small business? Without doubt it will.
An awful lot to consider. So I guess we're down to the point where you need to contact your elected lackeys and let them know how you feel. That's the way the system works. We need to push the govt. or it will push us. Don't forget to vote in every election. Standup and be counted!!!

I could not have said it better. Note that science says that lead sinkers are not a problem.

Isn't interesting that commercial fisherman are not being targeted?

I sure wish they would work on the budget like the session was called to do.

[Anglinarcher]

Things like this are such a shame to me. The majority of people think with their own concerns/pocket book/ ----their own new found inconveniences in mind i.e. buying alternative tackle.--- ( how about when you hear people complain about paying tax increases for public education, levys, etc.) Many people who don't have kids themselves will gripe about funding these types of things. It's people like that which need to look beyond themselves and realize that maybe the public education system is trying to put out the youth that will take care of your butt in the near future when we are are dependent on the next generation. I'm just saying that there is a world beyond ourselves...
Sometimes you really have to look beyond yourself at the bigger picture. If it is a step in a cleaner direction in even a small amount, then why not consider it?
(not that the schools have managed their money correctly .... just an example)

I can't argue with the premise that people often vote their pocketbook. Nevertheless, people also vote by emotion when they should vote based on fact. In this case, the facts do not support the bill.

[Anglinarcher]

Do you want to pay the extra amount for tungsten? I'd rather buy a steak or more fishing gear with the money. I had a wonderful flat iron last night. I can't even recall what I ate this evening but that steak, yesterday, was pretty damn good! How about this: There are lots of fellow fishermen that would appreciate it if they could buy and use lead fishing gear for years to come. Would you like to help us out? If not, I understand. If you make the call to oppose 2241, I Thank You.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/Default.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sure ill help out... where is the hat to throw my split shot in. Heck if you need a rod ill throw that in too, but i really believe lead shot should be banned. Granted this bill may go to far.And it should not include DR balls but if it passes i will handle it and find another way. Someone will find a better solution isnt that how we progress.? By the way im not a liberal.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, it is a fair to excellent bet it is a duck.

[Anglinarcher]

If ingested, lead is bad. Lead in of itself , i.e. in a river, on the bottom of a lake, it's inert. It poses no threat. It's simple. Do some research

Back in the 80 in the UK " THE use of all fishing lead larger than size 8 (0.06g) split-shot up to 1oz (28.35g) leger bombs was outlawed by the British government in January 1987 following concern that increasing numbers of swans were dying of lead poisoning"
Kinda why i have the mind set that i have today...

And it has made no difference.

No science was used and the results confirm how UK liberal politics failed.

[Anglinarcher]

[I have no crap in my house as i can afford tungston

Well you might be able to afford it, but can't spell it.

Well spotted ill be sure to add you to my christmas card list

Good catch. Fat fingers on my phone should give you great pleasure.

I'm glad I gave you such pleasure.

[sickbayer]

Just to be really clear to you anglinarcher Im a socialist. So please dont call me a liberal.

[Anglinarcher]

Now things are starting to make itself clear. My apologies.

For the record, care to explain how the two are mutually exclusive?