September 29, 2010
For more information, contact Gordon Robertson, vice president and Government Affairs lead, x237, or Alyssa Hausman ASA Policy Fellow, x244.
Help Fight Unreasonable Bans on Fishing Tackle
On Wednesday, September 28, Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) introduced S.3850, which seeks to prevent an overarching federal ban on lead in recreational fishing tackle. If enacted, this ban will have a significant economic impact on the recreational fishing industry. To ensure support for this crucial legislation, please contact your Senators urging them to co-sponsor Senator Lincoln’s bill. It is important that industry members send comments.
Please see the information at the bottom of this alert.
The Situation
On August 23, 2010, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was petitioned by the Center for Biological Diversity and four other organizations to ban all lead in ammunition and fishing tackle under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). On August 27, the EPA denied the petition for ammunition because it is exempted from EPA regulation under TSCA, but has not acted on the petition to ban lead in fishing tackle. If accepted as presented, this would result in a ban on all lead in all fishing tackle, including sinkers, jigs, weighted fly line, and components that contain lead such as brass and ballast in a wide variety of lures, including spinner baits, stick baits and more.
A less restrictive ban was proposed in 1992, but the EPA later abandoned it after finding that there was no significant impact of lead on waterbird populations; that the economic impact would be significant; and that the proposed rule was socially unacceptable. This issue keeps being raised but the facts do not change. A national ban of lead tackle is unwarranted.
The Solution
Senator Lincoln introduced legislation that will help to ensure that future regulations on fishing tackle are established based on scientific data instead of unjustified petitions. This bill will amend TSCA so that fishing tackle will be exempt from EPA regulations, the same as ammunition used in hunting and the shooting sports.
The reasons to support this legislation are:
• The data does not support a federal ban on lead sinkers used for fishing. In general, bird populations, including loons and other waterfowl species, are subject to many more substantial threats such as habitat loss through shoreline development. Any lead restrictions need to be based on sound science that supports the appropriate action for a particular water body or species.
• A federal ban of the use of lead in fishing tackle will have a significant negative impact on recreational anglers and fisheries resources, but a negligible impact on waterfowl populations.
• Depending on the alternative metal and current prevailing raw material costs, non-lead fishing tackle products can cost from ten to twenty 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 and costly changes from both the industry and anglers.
• America’s 60 million anglers generate over $45 billion in retail sales with a $125 billion impact on the nation’s economy, creating employment for over one million people.
SHOW YOUR SUPPORT
Send an Electronic Message
Please go to our Policy Alert on ASA’s Legislative Action Center and simply enter your zip code which will direct you a message that you can send to your Senators asking them to support S.3850.
Fax a Message on Your Company Letterhead
We also encourage you to FAX a copy of the same letter to your Senators on your company letterhead, adding information specific to your company. You can find their FAX numbers by going to ASA’s Legislative Action Center and entering your zip code.
SAMPLE MESSAGE FOR YOUR COMPANY LETTERHEAD
Dear Senator XXX:
I am writing to ask for your support of S. 3850, which will finally put an end to unwarranted attempts to ban traditional fishing tackle. In August, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was petitioned to ban the use of lead in fishing tackle under the Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA), despite scientific evidence that fishing tackle does not pose a threat to bird populations. This bill will amend TSCA so that it exempts fishing tackle from EPA regulation, just as it does ammunition. A similar petition submitted in 1992 was denied.
As a member of the sportfishing industry, my company is dependent on clean waters with healthy and abundant fish and wildlife populations and supports science-based initiatives that will help protect the aquatic environment. However, the recent petition is unwarranted and will have a significant negative impact on recreational anglers and the fishery resources.
Although the petitioners aim to reduce waterfowl death from lead sinker ingestion, a study by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has shown that less than one percent of bird mortalities are the result of ingesting lead sinkers. Lead fishing tackle does not present a population-level threat to any bird species. In fact, loon populations - the primary species cited when bans are proposed - are increasing throughout their breeding range. If a particular body of water is of concern, the issue is most effectively addressed by a local science-driven process headed by the state fish and wildlife agency, not a national ban by the federal government.
Lead is used not only in sinkers, but in a wide variety of fishing lures and other tackle components. Contrary to claims made in the current petition to the EPA, alternatives to lead fishing sinkers and jigs are not readily available, and these alternatives are considerably more expensive and do not perform as well. The resultant decrease of fishing tackle purchases will hurt recreational fishing-dependent businesses and diminish the dollars available for fisheries conservation through fishing license sales and the federal manufacturers’ excise tax on fishing equipment. Something our country can ill afford.
I urge you to support S. 3850, because it will ensure that future regulations on fishing tackle are established in response to sound science instead of unjustified petitions.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
