Tags:
quote;
39% of common loon carcasses
Now just what is the acual number of birds?
What part of "this is an incremental step in reducing the availability of lead to loons" would cause anyone to doubt their goal is to ban lead like in the New England states?
As a biologist I have studied and written 2 papers about lead toxicity to waterfowl. This doesn't make me an expert, but it does give me some scientific experience to have some knowledge on the subject. I also manufacture lead sinkers, and I tried to manufacture lead substitute sinkers. I am also a fisherman with some experience on how suitable lead substitutes are. Having been on the Inland Fish Policy Advisory Group for 10 years, I saw this come up once before and luckily get dropped. I established the above for the sole purpose of pointing out that I have given this subject a tremendous amount of thought, so my comments come from careful consideration and not biased emotion.
Let me state up front that there are incidents in which lead toxicity is a problem, but I will need to see the WDFW's data and analysis before I believe a problem exists in Washington.
As several mentioned above, we all need to see the study that is referenced, and we need to carefully consider both the data and the conclusions. If you ask for the study, the State has to provide it under the Freedom of Information law.
Remember, loons are migratory. Even if loons have been found dead with lead toxicity, it doesn't mean the lead was ingested in Washington state unless there is evidence of that. Usually this occurs in waterfowl when feeding on mud flats where gravel is unavailable to waterfowl, but where lead shot has fallen during waterfowl hunting activities. Sure, there are some mud flats in Washington, but not many, and not where the ban is being proposed. Use the common sense test here; if an angler loses a 1/4 oz lead sinker on one of these proposed lakes, what is the likelihood of a migratory loon finding and eating it? Our lakes have no shortage of gravel/pebbles, and of a size that a loon would prefer over a 1/4 oz size...and it would be easier to find a needle in a haystack since at least a needle looks different than a piece of hay.
When I first saw this proposed by Pat Michaels(WDFW) roughly six years ago, it went nowhere because the department was sold on the science, and they didn't want to fight the anglers since lead is important to angler success. Tungsten, Bismuth, and Steel were not readily available as alternatives, and were deemed unacceptable by anglers so the WDFW dropped the issue. Apparently WDFW feels they have a better chance now, but lets prove them wrong and voice our objections. Otherwise consider QuickDrops to be gone, and all your other favorite lead fishing tackle because it is all in the sights of those whose REAL objective is to end fishing and hunting. You better enjoy paying more than a dollar per weight for Kanji Tungsten dropshot sinkers, because that is what you will have to use. Yea, I know some of you are rolling your eyes at the "consipiracy theory" but believe me, these people do exist and are manipulating well-intentioned biologists and legislators to pass laws that make us give up on our activities.
This is a slippery slope that needs to be recognized for the first step that it truly is. Why only Loons? Why not all birds including ducks, geese, doves, etc.? It is all about incrementalism. Loons are mystical creatures, that everyone will agree should be protected. So it is an easy sell to the public, and the law gets passed. Then comes the next argument, that if it protects loons to ban lead in their breeding lakes, then it would protect ducks and geese in their habitats too.
Please be sure to educate these "well-intentioned" but ill-informed rule proposers where and how all of these lead substitutes are manufactured. They are sold as environmentally friendly, when the opposite is true. The production of Tungsten sinkers involves extremely intense heat that wastes energy on an enormous scale, and for what? A fishing sinker! Ever wonder why these lead substitutes are made in China? I suppose it makes sense to pollute the air, ground and water in China but not in the USA? Or waste their energy sources? With very little research it is easy to see that Tungsten and other lead substitutes are NOT environmentally friendly. And we know they are not cost effective. Please pass this on to WDFW.
Gary is right, we all need to act to protect our interests. Insist on the science and insist that any new law accomplishes the targeted purpose, and no more.
The proponents of lead bans pull out all the stops, especially the scare tactics. Much of their claims are completely false, so don't be quick to accept them. Lead is a natural element, and very stable. It does not poison anything until specific unusual conditions exist that allow it to be dissolved where it can be toxic. There are still lead water pipes in use by water companies, and these pose no threat unless acidic conditions or electrolysis conditions exist.
In conclusion, please see this as the threat to your lifestyle that it really is. It is a conspiracy aided unwittingly by well-intentioned but foolish individuals whose salaries you pay with your taxes and license fees. Get involved or suffer the consequences.
P.S. I have made my comments known, and will continue to do so, but they fall on deaf ears because my arguments are dismissed since I manufacture lead fishing sinkers. Don't wait, your ox is being gored right now!
ciao,
Marc
I nominate Marc....
Nice post Marc, very enlightening.
Marc Marcantonio said:What part of "this is an incremental step in reducing the availability of lead to loons" would cause anyone to doubt their goal is to ban lead like in the New England states?
As a biologist I have studied and written 2 papers about lead toxicity to waterfowl. This doesn't make me an expert, but it does give me some scientific experience to have some knowledge on the subject. I also manufacture lead sinkers, and I tried to manufacture lead substitute sinkers. I am also a fisherman with some experience on how suitable lead substitutes are. Having been on the Inland Fish Policy Advisory Group for 10 years, I saw this come up once before and luckily get dropped. I established the above for the sole purpose of pointing out that I have given this subject a tremendous amount of thought, so my comments come from careful consideration and not biased emotion.
Let me state up front that there are incidents in which lead toxicity is a problem, but I will need to see the WDFW's data and analysis before I believe a problem exists in Washington.
As several mentioned above, we all need to see the study that is referenced, and we need to carefully consider both the data and the conclusions. If you ask for the study, the State has to provide it under the Freedom of Information law.
Remember, loons are migratory. Even if loons have been found dead with lead toxicity, it doesn't mean the lead was ingested in Washington state unless there is evidence of that. Usually this occurs in waterfowl when feeding on mud flats where gravel is unavailable to waterfowl, but where lead shot has fallen during waterfowl hunting activities. Sure, there are some mud flats in Washington, but not many, and not where the ban is being proposed. Use the common sense test here; if an angler loses a 1/4 oz lead sinker on one of these proposed lakes, what is the likelihood of a migratory loon finding and eating it? Our lakes have no shortage of gravel/pebbles, and of a size that a loon would prefer over a 1/4 oz size...and it would be easier to find a needle in a haystack since at least a needle looks different than a piece of hay.
When I first saw this proposed by Pat Michaels(WDFW) roughly six years ago, it went nowhere because the department was sold on the science, and they didn't want to fight the anglers since lead is important to angler success. Tungsten, Bismuth, and Steel were not readily available as alternatives, and were deemed unacceptable by anglers so the WDFW dropped the issue. Apparently WDFW feels they have a better chance now, but lets prove them wrong and voice our objections. Otherwise consider QuickDrops to be gone, and all your other favorite lead fishing tackle because it is all in the sights of those whose REAL objective is to end fishing and hunting. You better enjoy paying more than a dollar per weight for Kanji Tungsten dropshot sinkers, because that is what you will have to use. Yea, I know some of you are rolling your eyes at the "consipiracy theory" but believe me, these people do exist and are manipulating well-intentioned biologists and legislators to pass laws that make us give up on our activities.
This is a slippery slope that needs to be recognized for the first step that it truly is. Why only Loons? Why not all birds including ducks, geese, doves, etc.? It is all about incrementalism. Loons are mystical creatures, that everyone will agree should be protected. So it is an easy sell to the public, and the law gets passed. Then comes the next argument, that if it protects loons to ban lead in their breeding lakes, then it would protect ducks and geese in their habitats too.
Please be sure to educate these "well-intentioned" but ill-informed rule proposers where and how all of these lead substitutes are manufactured. They are sold as environmentally friendly, when the opposite is true. The production of Tungsten sinkers involves extremely intense heat that wastes energy on an enormous scale, and for what? A fishing sinker! Ever wonder why these lead substitutes are made in China? I suppose it makes sense to pollute the air, ground and water in China but not in the USA? Or waste their energy sources? With very little research it is easy to see that Tungsten and other lead substitutes are NOT environmentally friendly. And we know they are not cost effective. Please pass this on to WDFW.
Gary is right, we all need to act to protect our interests. Insist on the science and insist that any new law accomplishes the targeted purpose, and no more.
The proponents of lead bans pull out all the stops, especially the scare tactics. Much of their claims are completely false, so don't be quick to accept them. Lead is a natural element, and very stable. It does not poison anything until specific unusual conditions exist that allow it to be dissolved where it can be toxic. There are still lead water pipes in use by water companies, and these pose no threat unless acidic conditions or electrolysis conditions exist.
In conclusion, please see this as the threat to your lifestyle that it really is. It is a conspiracy aided unwittingly by well-intentioned but foolish individuals whose salaries you pay with your taxes and license fees. Get involved or suffer the consequences.
P.S. I have made my comments known, and will continue to do so, but they fall on deaf ears because my arguments are dismissed since I manufacture lead fishing sinkers. Don't wait, your ox is being gored right now!
ciao,
Marc
Posted by Tom Melowitz on September 7, 2019 at 2:45pm
Posted by Eric Urstad on April 3, 2019 at 7:38pm
© 2024 Created by Jordan Doucet. Powered by