Update on Proposed EPA Ban on Lead In Fishing Tackle

[Gigmaster]

If anyone is interested, last Thursday, the EPA rejected the petition to ban all lead in fishing tackle. The EPA and members of Congress received around 43,000 angry letters (mine included), and wisely backed-down.

But, I don't think this is over, yet. If they act true-to-form, be ready for this to come up again, probably tacked on to some amendment that has nothing to do with fishing, or outdoors, and no one will even notice it. The elections are over now, so be ready for more shenanigans from the Hill.

[Fatman]

Gig

Like you I was glad they denied it as I do a lot of jig fishing. I've talked to a person at the EPA after I sent in my comments and tried to explain to them more clearly that it's not just tackle that's in the stores. We're talking about folks who make it at home. Then I sent her a copy of different costs that home molders would incur if it changed. You would think with all the experts out there in metelourgy they could come up with a product that weighed the same, had the same melting properties and WOULD BE as cheap as, and be able to use my powder paint on it and I'd switch.

BUT!!! they don't. and truthfully I don't think anyone seems to even want to try.

Fatman

[fishdog54]

Fatman,

Isn't gold heavy?? Just sayin! LOL!!!! Is it me or does it seem like the Feds always come after the little guy, because were easier to push around and scare the daylights out of. You'd think they'd have enough to do, with this Marcellus shale gas fiasco going on? I guess not!!

Best Regards, Dave S.

[Wes]

the feds came after nobody. the environmental and animal rights organizations filed this petition (the American Bird Conservancy, the Center for Biological Diversity and a coalition of conservation, hunting and veterinary groups). the feds for once did the right thing and rejected the petition in defense of the little guy. thing to remember is that this'll come up again.

http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress...2577D1004C79BC
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/nov2...11-04-091.html

[tlerm]

When it comes to replacing lead, there are not really many options that are affordable, usable, available, or practical.


lbs/cu ft - Metal or alloy
1,335 -- platinum
1,223 -- tungsten
1,206 -- gold
1,179 -- uranium
848 ---- mercury
708 ---- lead
655 ---- silver
636 ---- molybdenum
616 ---- antifriction metal
557 ---- copper
552 ---- bronze - phosphorous
549 ---- nickel
546 ---- cobolt
540 ---- electrum
540 ---- nickel silver
537 ---- delta metal
537 ---- monel
535 ---- brass - rolled and drawn
534 ---- brass - casting
512 ---- aluminum bronze (3-10% Al)
512 ---- bronze - lead
510 ---- beryllium copper
509 ---- bronze (8-14% Sn)
490 ---- iron
490 ---- steel - rolled
483 ---- steel - stainless
456 ---- cast iron
454 ---- tin
445 ---- zinc
443 ---- white metal
343 ---- vanadium
281 ---- titanium
170 ---- aluminum foil
167 ---- light alloy based on Al
162 ---- aluminum - melted
124 ---- plutonium
115 ---- beryllium
113 ---- light alloy based on Mg
108 ---- magnesium

[fishdog54]

Tim,

What about spent uranium, since it's spent, it should be a little lighter, and also since it's spent it's safe. Right? LOL!!! We used to play (physically handle) mercury in Science class when I was a kid. It may be the reason for my weird sense of humor?

Wes - You are right, but, did not the EPA consider those wack jobs proposals, BEFORE they got the flood of mail, and THEN bowed out? Hmmm. I have no problem with giving credit, where credit is due!

Best Regards, Dave S.