August 30, 2010

Ammo's Off the Hook, But Sinkers Aren't

In today's editions of The Outdoor and Shooting Wire, we're congratulating the shooting community for speaking out - in what has been characterized as "huge numbers" - against a petition before the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that, if accepted, would have resulted in an almost instantaneous ban on lead in ammunition and shot.

Friday, after fewer than three days of the public comment period, the EPA issued a denial of the ammunition portion of the petition, stating the agency it lacked the authority under the Toxic Substances Control Act to regulate ammunition.

More revealing, it continued to say "...nor is the agency seeking such authority."

"Sinkers" - fishing tackle- however, is not off the hook. "As there are no similar jurisdictional issues relating to the agency's authority over fishing sinkers, EPA - as required by law- will continue formally reviewing a second part of the petition related to fishing sinkers."

In other words, the so-far orderly migration to alternatives to lead in fishing tackle might be "accelerated" by an EPA acceptance of the petition from a group of organizations that include the Center for Biological Diversity.

So what is the recreational fishing position on the petition? Honestly, I haven't seen a new position- but the American Sportfishing Association (ASA) has held a pretty clear position on the lead issue since a 2008 recommendation from the American Fisheries Society and The Wildlife Society calling that lead be phased-out and replaced by other materials.

In their position (read it yourself at http://www.asafishing.org/government/lead_in_tackle.html) the ASA says insufficient evidence exists to warrant state or federal bans on lead sinkers used for fishing. Habitat loss, the ASA asserts, is a far greater threat to all waterfowl species than lead sinkers.

The ASA, however, does not run from the fact that lead ingestion can kill water birds- and that lead sinkers undoubtedly contribute at some level to that mortality. Instead, ASA's suggestion is that before laws or regulations are enacted to restrict lead sinkers for fishing on a state or national basis - sufficient data must exist to demonstrate that discarded or lost lead sinkers are an actual threat.

There's also a simple economic reasoning behind their position:

"Depending on the alternative metal and current prevailing raw material costs, non-lead fishing tackle products can cost from six to 20 times more than lead products. Non-lead products may not be as available and most do not perform as well. Mandatory transitioning to non-lead fishing tackle would require significant changes from both the industry and anglers."

Today, some states have prohibitions against lead sinkers, primarily those weighing one ounce or less. But they do not call for an outright ban on lead's usage.

This latest petition, if it were to be adopted by the EPA, would lead to far tougher restrictions-if not outright bans across the board.

The EPA is required to issue their decision on the petition no later than November 1, 2010.

In the meantime, it would seem reasonable that anglers remind the EPA that solid scientific evidence to warrant that ban simply does not exist.


To comment on the fishing tackle issue, you can by going to http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#docketDetail?R=EPA-HQ-OPPT-2010-0681 and clicking on "Comment Due". That will take you to the docket comment page. There, you have 20 minutes and 2,000 words to make your feelings known on the issue.

Might be a small amount of time very well spent.

--Jim Shepherd