I would like to hear from anyone who was in attendance on Saturday at the WDFW Commission Meeting.

Comment

Comment by Rick Lind on December 12, 2009 at 4:59pm

The Audio Transcripts of the Game Commission meeting Dec 4 and 5 are now available on the commissioner’s web site. http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings.html It is not looking like this issue is going away or dying any time soon. To save time you can go to part 2 and go to about 15:40 to hear what the plan for the future is.

Part 1 has the public testimony in it. It is not in any order so you have to go through all of it to hear the comments on the lead ban, about 2 hours. Each speaker got 3 min. so you can skip some. We had some excellent speakers on our side. Thank you to anyone that testified.

Here is an updated article I found on bassmasters dated Dec 8.
http://sports.espn.go.com/outdoors/bassmaster/conservation/news/sto...

Comment by Marc Marcantonio on December 9, 2009 at 12:02pm

The Vice President of the American Sportfishing Association (Gordon Robertson) did testify on Saturday to the Commission; here are his great comments! (He also provided a chart denoting the costs of various metals used as lead substitutes).

Comments of the American Sportfishing Association
To the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission
On Rule Proposal #32, Lead-Tackle on Lakes
Where Loons Breed
December 1, 2009

On behalf of the members of the American Sportfishing Association (ASA), and its Washington members, I urge you to reject a proposal (proposal #32) before the Commission that would make it unlawful to use lead weights weighing less than one half ounce or lead jigs measuring less than 1 ½” in select Washington freshwater lakes.

ASA is the sportfishing industry’s trade association, committed to representing the interests of the entire sportfishing community, providing a unified voice when emerging laws and policies could significantly affect sportfishing business or sportfishing itself. We invest in long-term ventures to ensure the industry will remain strong and prosperous as well as safeguard and promote the enduring economic and conservation values of sportfishing in America.

ASA also represents the interests of America’s 60 million anglers who generate over $45 billion in retail sales, with a $125 billion impact on the nation’s economy and creating employment for over one million people.

According to the Census Bureau and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington is the fifteenth largest state in terms of annual sportfishing expenditures. Annually, fishing license sales and revenues from the federal manufacturers excise tax on fishing tackle, which is paid by our members, provide approximately $25 million for fisheries conservation and restoration in Washington. Washington's 736,000 anglers spent $1.04 billion in 2006, generating $210 million in state and local tax revenue and supporting 15,000 jobs.

The heritage of fishing as a family friendly outdoor activity plays vital societal, economic, and conservation roles. Recreational fishing is a traditional American pastime that introduces new generations to the great outdoors and reconnects others with outdoor activities. America’s anglers are conservationists first and foremost, having paid over $8 billion since 1950 for fisheries conservation, and have a long history of making sacrifices for the betterment of the resources. However, these sacrifices must be science-based with clear evidence that the sacrifice will produce an outcome beneficial to the resources.

Because of the significant lack of evidence that lead fishing tackle poses a risk to loon populations, we are greatly concerned with the current proposed ban on lead
fishing tackle, especially because it is indicated as the first stage in an incremental, sweeping state-wide ban.

Lead Sinker Impacts on Loon Populations
It is important to note that a central tenant of fish and wildlife management is management for the optimal overall population level, not for the well being of any one individual. Simply put, sustaining populations is the goal of fisheries and wildlife management. While lead toxicosis may harm or kill loons, the pivotal question the Commission must consider is: are loon populations significantly reduced by lead sinker ingestion? Or phrased in a more comprehensive fashion: is mortality from lead toxicosis in loons high enough to threaten self-sustaining loon populations? Based on available research the answer to both of these questions is no.

The data presented by supporters of the restriction on lead products claim that 39 percent of loon deaths result from lead toxicosis. However, this estimate was based on only 27 loon carcasses collected from 1996-2008 of which only nine loons were said to have died as a result of ingesting lead fishing tackle. As any scientist would agree, a sample size of 27 individuals over 13 years is not nearly large enough to accurately represent an entire wild bird population. Many other studies, using more comprehensive sampling designs, have concluded that lead fishing tackle does not negatively impact loon populations, and that bans on lead fishing tackle are not warranted.

In its 2000 study, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) found no evidence of a declining loon population or a substantial change in distribution. In fact, while possibly attributable to increased sampling, the number of known loon nests in the state had increased over the 15 years previous to the study. Throughout their North American range, loon populations are stable and increasing in most cases despite substantial threats such as habitat loss, predation, disease and environmental toxins, all of which have much more significant impacts on loon populations than ingestion of lead fishing tackle.

In 1994 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) offered a proposed rule banning the nationwide use of lead and zinc sinkers for fishing. The final rule would have prohibited all persons from: 1) manufacturing, 2) processing, 3) distributing (selling), and 4) importing any lead or zinc-containing fishing sinker (including brass) that is one inch or under in any dimension. The EPA withdrew the rule because of insufficient data to support its supposition that lead sinkers were adversely affecting water bird populations.

Similarly, the European Union in 2006 completed an extensive two year study on the advantages and drawbacks of lead used in various products, including fishing tackle, and their overall effect on the environment, and determined that a ban on lead fishing tackle was not warranted.

A comprehensive 1999 study requested by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Federal Aid and conducted by the National Wildlife Health Research Center in Madison, Wisconsin found that only 3.5% of common loons (from a sample of 313) had ingested lead sinkers and just 27 of 36,671 waterbird and bald eagle carcasses (0.007%) contained ingested lead sinkers. It has also been noted that lead poisoning, when occurring in larger birds, causes the bird to be more noticeable, more vulnerable to capture, and more likely to be brought forward for examination, thus causing examination in a disproportionate frequency in relation to the actual mortality of the population. Samples collected over a wide geographic area and involving many specimens, such as occurred in the National Wildlife Health Center report, provide a more accurate profile of the actual occurrences in the wild.

Lead Alternatives
The proposal also incorrectly claims that alternatives to lead sinkers and jigs are widely available and no more expensive than lead. While steel sinkers are approximately the same cost of lead, most alternative sinker products can cost from six to twenty times more than lead products (depending on the alternative metal and current prevailing raw material costs), are not as available and most do not perform as well. For example, tin is the only reliable substitute for lead split shot sinkers but has a much lesser specific gravity than lead and costs (at prevailing market rates) seven and one-half times that of lead. Steel sinkers must be tie-on or slide-on sinkers and this does not always match the fishing technique required for certain species or locations.

Other substitutes such as bismuth and tungsten are also tie-on or slide-on sinkers and at current market prices are nine and one-half times to thirteen times, respectively, more expensive than lead. These estimates are raw material market costs and do not include the more expensive costs of manufacturing because of the higher temperatures required to work with these metals. Tungsten is also a metal in high demand in the electronics and defense industries and therefore price and availability are volatile.

Making jigs from materials other than lead presents a special problem because of the high heat required for molding metals other than lead. This causes the hook to which the metal is bonded to loose its temper and break or bend when used.

Clearly, mandatory transitioning to non-lead fishing tackle would require significant changes from both the industry and anglers, and therefore would have to be balanced and justified. Given the scarcity of evidence supporting a lead fishing tackle ban at this time, this proposal is clearly unwarranted and ignores that in this Nation fish and wildlife are managed for populations, not individual animals. A full ban of lead sinkers and jigs of any size also forecloses any chance of using alternative products that use emerging technology in composites and coated products that seal the lead surface of the lead or any lead components.

Potential Implications for Fisheries Conservation
The sportfishing industry is concerned about the stated intentions of the supporters of proposal #32 – namely, that this is just the first step in a state-wide ban of lead in recreational fishing products. Lead is not only used in sinkers (including downrigger balls and mooching sinkers – both of which are at the core of Coastal and Puget Sound fishing) and jigs, but in flys, fly line, spinners, ballast for a wide variety of lures, reel components and a host of terminal tackle components that are made of brass.

Anglers are a fickle lot. They are price sensitive but opportunity eager. This state has just seen a great example of the importance of recreational fishing to its economy. Recently expanded sportfishing opportunity in this state provided increased license sales for fishery resource management. It also boosted Washington jobs and its economy. In these challenging economic times the likelihood that the WDFW will experience diminished general fund moneys is high. Such a scenario means that maintaining, or even increasing, angler participation (and thus license money) becomes more critical. In addition, our manufacturing members pay a federal manufactures’ excise tax each quarter and that money is apportioned to each state fishery program based on its license population and size. Washington receives $8.3 million annually from this revenue. A key factor in determining Washington’s apportionment of these monies is the number of licensed anglers in the state. Protecting fishing opportunity, the fishery resource, jobs and the state’s economy is critical to keeping a solid fishery program.

Conclusions
As opposed to a ban on lead sinkers and jigs, we suggest the WDFW:
• Work with the industry to have a full understanding of the non-lead products available and their costs and performance values
• Include information in its media meant to educate anglers about angling techniques on lakes where nesting loons occur
• Encourage anglers to use non-lead terminal tackle on lakes where loons nest and where documented cases indicated mortality from ingesting lead sinkers or jigs
• Provide tips to anglers on how to minimize the loss of tackle
• Analyze the recreational fishing pressure at each of the 13 lakes listed in proposal #32, the actual loon mortality and the actual impacts on loon populations in Washington

At a time when jobs are threatened and the economy is suffering, it is important for industry and government to work together to find ways of supporting jobs, not eliminating them. ASA would be pleased to work with the Commission and the WDFW toward a better understanding of lead in recreational fishing tackle and how to achieve practical solutions that minimize resource impact and maintain a healthy economy.

Comment by Marc Marcantonio on December 8, 2009 at 6:25pm

Mark, thank you for testifying at the hearing on Friday! It certainly will help to make a difference. I understand the ASA also testified.

I got an email from another person who testified on Saturday against the lead proposal. He did say that Virginia Gumm and Danial Poleschook (the loon advocates that proposed the lead ban) were in attendance on Saturday, and that they were furious at the testimony provided by their opposition. Apparently things were a little lively on Saturday.

I'm interested in hearing from everyone who attended, and in their opinion of how it seemed to go with the Commissioners.

Keep up the good work, Mark!

ciao,
Marc