EPA Rejects Ban of Lead Fishing Gear

[removed][removed] [removed]// <![CDATA[ stLight.options({publisher:'e23c18cb-db20-4e45-adbc-d152d2b1ab31'}); // ]]>[removed]

The EPA rejected a ban of lead fishing gear filed by the American Bird Conservancy and other groups. The petition to ban all lead from fishing gear was filed on August 3 in hopes of trying to save millions of birds and other animals that die each year from ingesting lead fishing and hunting products. This is not the first time that the purposed ban was rejected. In the early 1990's similar organizations purposed the same ban on the premises of increased bird deaths. Activists supporting the ban are also saying that the lead is causing not just harm to animals but also to humans. Scientific research has not shown to support the claims that millions of birds are dying from ingesting the lead which helped the EPA in confirming its decision to deny the petition. The EPA also states that the petition failed to meet the least burdensome alternative clause required of the Toxic Substances Control Act.

Although I feel sympathy for the American Bird Conservancy it seems that the petition was denied because it failed to offer a workable alternative to lead outdoor sporting goods. The cost of non-lead materials for fishing gear is somewhere around 10-20 times higher than current lead offered lures. This increased cost in the material would only cause harm to the fishing industry. Enforcing these regulations would cost millions of dollars and the effects wouldn't be noticed, in my opinion, for sometime. Many people already have lead tackle and if a ban was imposed people would stockpile the lead material and continue to use it. The only way to truly ban the material would be to make people turn in all their lead gear and I doubt that the EPA has the resources available to due such a tasks.

Other groups are saying that lead fishing gear is destroying loons all over the nation. This was proven by the US Fish and Wildlife Service to be untrue. All of these groups that support the ban just seem to be trying to get a ban enacted on something that they have very little research to support their claims. I feel that these groups are reckless in their actions and I am glad that the ban was rejected.

It seems that the EPA was just in their decision to reject the ban. They are not only helping to save an American tradition but also a countless number of local tackle shops that receive a majority of their revenues from sales of lead weights, lures, and other tackles. It is good to see a government organization analysis the effects of a purposed ban instead of just going ahead and enacting it. Thanks EPA for allowing us fishermen to fish another day!

Join the conversation on my blog at OutdoorNews.PoorFish.com.

[removed][removed] [removed]// <![CDATA[ stLight.options({publisher:'e23c18cb-db20-4e45-adbc-d152d2b1ab31'}); // ]]>[removed]