Oppose the Proposed Federal Ban on Lead in Fishing Tackle – Send Public Comment to EPA

• 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 much 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.
• Depending on the alternative metal and current prevailing raw material costs, non-lead fishing tackle products can cost from six to 15 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.
• 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.

Share

1. The EPA has opened the petition for public comments. Please take the following simple step to oppose this ban: Officially submit your comments opposing this ban using the EPA's comment page at www.regulations.gov or CLICK HERE.
   1. Comments are due by September 15.
   2. You can copy and paste the template message below into the official comment form.
2. We also encourage you to turn the comments below into a letter to FAX to Administrator Jackson on your company letterhead.
   1. Please include information about your company.
   2. Her FAX number is: (202) 501-1450.
   3. Please FAX a copy of the same letter to your Congressional delegation. You can find their FAX numbers by clicking here and entering your zip code.

Comments to Submit to EPA

As a member of the marine manufacturing industry, I urge the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to dismiss the petition to ban lead in all fishing tackle.

The sweeping petition has many deficiencies including: (1) misinformation on sinker use and loss; (2) scientific data supporting claims of harm to wild bird populations; (3) the economic impact of higher cost raw materials and that EPA can only regulate the interstate commerce of lead fishing products under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and not their use or manufacture.

As stewards of our nation's natural resources, the sportfishing, marine manufacturing and boating community continues to seek new developments to minimize our environmental impact. In addition, the Sportfishing industry pays some $115 million in federal excise taxes each year for fisheries restoration. Through excise taxes on motor boat fuel, boaters contribute hundreds of millions each year on clean water programs and fisheries habitat protection and conservation.

I am concerned that the results sought by the petitioners greatly exaggerate the biological impacts on waterfowl; ignore the significant economic impacts to anglers, the industry and to fisheries management; and underestimate the potential impact of human health hazards when anglers seek to produce their own fishing sinkers.

I strongly urge you to reject this deficient petition.

• 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 much 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.
• Depending on the alternative metal and current prevailing raw material costs, non-lead fishing tackle products can cost from six to 15 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.
• 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.

Share

1. The EPA has opened the petition for public comments. Please take the following simple step to oppose this ban: Officially submit your comments opposing this ban using the EPA's comment page at www.regulations.gov or CLICK HERE.
   1. Comments are due by September 15.
   2. You can copy and paste the template message below into the official comment form.
2. We also encourage you to turn the comments below into a letter to FAX to Administrator Jackson on your company letterhead.
   1. Please include information about your company.
   2. Her FAX number is: (202) 501-1450.
   3. Please FAX a copy of the same letter to your Congressional delegation. You can find their FAX numbers by clicking here and entering your zip code.

Comments to Submit to EPA

As a member of the marine manufacturing industry, I urge the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to dismiss the petition to ban lead in all fishing tackle.

The sweeping petition has many deficiencies including: (1) misinformation on sinker use and loss; (2) scientific data supporting claims of harm to wild bird populations; (3) the economic impact of higher cost raw materials and that EPA can only regulate the interstate commerce of lead fishing products under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and not their use or manufacture.

As stewards of our nation's natural resources, the sportfishing, marine manufacturing and boating community continues to seek new developments to minimize our environmental impact. In addition, the Sportfishing industry pays some $115 million in federal excise taxes each year for fisheries restoration. Through excise taxes on motor boat fuel, boaters contribute hundreds of millions each year on clean water programs and fisheries habitat protection and conservation.

I am concerned that the results sought by the petitioners greatly exaggerate the biological impacts on waterfowl; ignore the significant economic impacts to anglers, the industry and to fisheries management; and underestimate the potential impact of human health hazards when anglers seek to produce their own fishing sinkers.

I strongly urge you to reject this deficient petition.