[Senkosam]

Now for my good friend, Scott E.

First off it would not happen, be a bit more realistic and I do not dispose of them in the trash, I do have a 1oz and 2oz sinker mold, I have a small pot in the shed that I have some old lead in, some old wheel weights and old sinkers to be melted down into new sinkers....

Since you bring up the subject of disposal of lead, where do you dispose of yours, what about cadmium batteries and mercury thermometers, maybe you should be thinking of that, for years most of Orange Co.'s trash went to the Al Turi Landfill, of course that is now closed for about a month or so, and since it is located along the banks of the Walkill think about what you have been sending right back to yourself living down stream in Walden.

Actually Scott, I need a dump truck to cart all my old jigheads, spinnerbaits and unsusable sinkers to the Wallkill so that I can cause an environmental disaster! As for batteries, I still have 2 dead ones that I'm to lazy to get a $5 refund for, at Wal Mart. Who the h*** takes their old lead to a hazardous waste site anyway. What are you smoking ?? (Not even Wandy!)

I also did not say I was totally for the fishing lead ban, I think there was some bad intent on the side of the sponsors of the bill that is now law,...Although I did say I sided with Wandy it was on the subject of the environment not the sinker ban, I think the ban has less to do with the environment and more to do with a couple of LI politicians whos allegiances are not with the sportsmen but more with the animal rights groups....

Wandy, I am on your side, I have fought this fight many times and there is always someone who feels the environment is fine and needs no help from us, trust me you are fighting the good fight and you may not change Franks mind but you maybe reaching someone not so vocal on these forums.

Scott, you can't have it both ways. You either agree with Wandy's position or you don't. (Confuscius say: Sitting on fence only result in sore anus!!) This is evident because you quote the following facts:

From 1972 to 1999 a total of 105 loons died in NY, that on average is less than 4 loons a year die, 21% of those 105 loons died of lead poisoning, which means about 1 loon a year dies of lead poisoning.

Also remember lead does not oxidize or leach under normal conditions and in normal water Ph, most of our lakes have a neutral Ph 7.0 to 7.5, lead starts to break down at a Ph higher than 8.5 which is an alkali, such as sodium hydroxide or caustic soda, or lower than 6.5 which is a weak acid like muriatic or citric, both high enough to give you a mild chemical burn.

In 1994 and then again in 1995 this bill reached our representatives in Albany it did not pass, then in 2001 and 2002 it came around again, please read through the bill I am sure you will see one reason I believe animal rights groups were behind this, also did any of you recieve any fishing sinker education by the NYSDEC, I bet not

(The fishing reg.s handbook points out lead alternatives.)

Admit it, you have as much of a lead addiction as most of us.
(I alone own more than 50 spinnerbaits costing $1.50-$3.00. )
Who among us is willing to throw their stash away. Certainly not Wandy and certainly not you! But if the state has it's way, it will force anglers to break the law if the following occurs:

If it is found that the education and outreach program has not been successful the department is authorized and shall develop rules and regulations banning the use of lead fishing sinkers and jigheads.

Your points are valid and, I believe, what this whole post is all about. The statistics and DEC information you provide should make everyone think about the possibilities that may be coming that have nothing to do with the environment and all to do with further controlling the sport of fishing.

Frank

 

[JOHN G]

my head is spinning....Frank: are you sure you are not a lawyer.....LOL

 

[Senkosam]

John, unlike lawyers, I like didactic discussions that expose opinions, facts, personalities, ideas (good and bad) and a whole range of arguments that reveal sentiments. At least this site contains strong opinions one way or the other and persons willing to take the time to voice them. The whole truth may not come out or be recognized, but at least we're all trying to show all sides so that all of us are better informed and can, therefore, have more to think about when making up our own minds.

FrankM

 

[Scott E.]

Sore anus??? I will take your advice, your much older and I am sure you have much

more experiance in that area than I!!!

Frank,

First off, long before you came to NYBass I was fighting, debating and posting a whole lot about the environment, from picking up other so called anglers garbage, pre-season fishing, protection of striped bass from commercial fishermen to dredging of the Hudson River, now I have also debated many of these issues with many tougher more educated gents than you and trust me I don't sit on the fence, at any time on anything. Go back into the classic threads you will find this and other debates I have been involved with.

Yes, I agreed with Wandy on many of the problems we are seeing with the environment, did I state that any of those had to do with lead fishing tackle? No I did not. This lead ban reaks of personal political agendas and special interest group money in re-election coffers not environmental.

From 1972 to 1999 a total of 105 loons died in NY, that on average is less than 4 loons a year die, 21% of those 105 loons died of lead poisoning, which means about 1 loon a year dies of lead poisoning.

Now if you read that properly and with the intent I wrote it, do you think less than 1 loon a year dying a good reason to ban all lead fishing tackle? More than 1 deer a year gets hit by cars we don't ban cars do we, they are also enjoyed by the citizens of NYs as well as the visiters to NYS, so as this bill states would make them unique, yet no bills in the state banning cars. Again I think this ban has less to do with the environment and much more with a few politicians with an anti-fishing/hunting animal rights agenda.

Actually Frank you are right about one thing, I will not give up my lead stash I do not have to, check to the left of my reply of where my residence is, I do not live in NY, and PA from what I have read does not plan on any lead ban in the near future, so if anyone is so inclined to get rid of their lead, I might be able to be persuaded to do so.

Also Frank go back and read the summary of the bill and put on your good reading glasses from the Thruway market this time. The education program was supposed to go into effect immediately January 25, 2001 it went back to the state January 9, 2002, they then deemed that the education program failed. Did it actually fail or was the DEC not given the funding purposly???Your state reps then decided through some pressure from fishermen to go with the lesser 1/2 oz or less split shot rules.

Also did you know that necropsy reports of loons that have died from lead, most have died from ingesting lead from shot shells than lead sinkers, it is clearly marked on a box of lead shot shells that they are illegal for waterfoul hunting, but no mention of a ban on lead shot shells has ever made it to the floor of the state house, why???

Again you debate something you will have a much more harder time changing now, where were you in March 2002 when we debated many of these same issues and facts and did you bother writting or calling your reps in Albany before the bill was made law.

Also when debating something, try less personal opinion, conjecture, untrue statements and emotion, use you brain and that fancy box you are sitting in front of reading this to search for the true facts, supporting statistics and such to make your arguement much more believable, it also makes it much easier for those fence sitters to make a decission.

 

[Senkosam]

Again you debate something you will have a much more harder time changing now, where were you in March 2002 when we debated many of these same issues and facts and did you bother writting or calling your reps in Albany before the bill was made law.

I don't know Scott, where were you? These issues are not usually front page articles in my local newpaper and as I've said,
aren't relayed to my club via our county sportsmen's association.
Selective reading seems something you need to break the habit of.

You were "debating and posting". Where, in Albany? Debating and posting on this or any forum is about as effective as farting in a strong wind!

The whole point of the original post was not to save the planet from Mafia dumpers (you get off on some great tangents which refuse to address the issue being debated), but to agree or disagree that anglers are being pressured by more back-door regulations such as a split-shot ban.

Wandy supports the ban yet won't give up his stash. My position is that lead sinkers, spinnerbaits, jigheads, etc., do not pollute our waterways and that PETA is behind more than we'd like to believe. You more than proved my point with the insolubility of lead. Thank you!

You agreed, like it or not, to my other point, namely, back door politics sponsored by animal groups, are erroding sportmen's rights:

This lead ban reaks of personal political agendas and special interest group money in re-election coffers not environmental.

Again, thank you.

You've decided to expand the discussion to toxic dumps, the Wallkill River, PCBs, your elevation to HAZMET sainthood, and any other diversion for the sake of arguing. Well my friend, the soap box is yours. I've made my point (and so have you).

FrankM:beerchug:

 

[JOHN G]

always enjoy a spirited debate, but leave out the personal references, Frank I deleted your last sentence......we can all benefit from the knowledge being put forward by both of you intelligent men WITHOUT the scatological references.......thanks!!!!

 

[Senkosam]

No problem John. It irritates me when tangents and personal attacks versus addressing specific issues, divert everyone's attention from the intent of the original post. Bullscat never clarifies an issue, but rather serves to expand the argument into areas that expand the focus.

There were only (thank God), three persons who decided that the focus should be expanded. The rest were in consensus that the intent of the law was suspect, and that it's longterm, projected effect, mattered little. If the state funded a survey to test 80% of all waterways and water tables and found higher lead concentrations in even 30%, I would be for the ban of all angler-lead. But, until the proof is documented that the above is the case, I'm against it.

Regardless of any survey done, If the alternatives don't affect my presentation and are economical, I have no problem using them just in case they may prevent a loon from keeling over.

FrankM

 

[Scott E.]

Frank,

Every point I made hade to do with the tangents you went off on, although it may be pointless since you seem happy debating Con Vs. Con rather than Pro Vs. Con on the ban. This will be my last post to you on this issue as I am growing tired of your vexatious ramblings, it is like an annoying little puppy dog nipping at my heels, trying to egg me on to play with it. Now if you are working on something dealing with this subject and you would like some help finding it, ask and I will share or help you find it.

By SenkoSam:These issues are not usually front page articles in my local newpaper and as I've said, aren't relayed to my club via our county sportsmen's association.

I am sure Frank you recieve some sort of fishing magazine, because that is where I first learned of it, either in B.A.S.S. or In-fishermen. Maybe you should talk to your clubs president as they should have or the county sportsmans assoc. should have let you know in a club newsletter or something, especially since the state assoc. knew about it.

Please forgive me on one thing though you were not a member of NYBass in March of 2002 so you could not have participated in the thread concerning the lead ban at that time. Here is the link to theClassic Threads - Ban on Lead

You were "debating and posting". Where, in Albany? Debating and posting on this or any forum is about as effective as farting in a strong wind!

No not nessasarilly, possibly someone that either has read the posts might have changed their minds, maybe the facts, stats and many times links supporting my argument has helped them, but I have also written many letters to Albany in the past, as well as writting to our congressmen all mainly on the subject of the environment, rights of sportsmen, protection for Hudson River striped bass, the dredging of the hudson as well as this subject.

The whole point of the original post was not to save the planet from Mafia dumpers (you get off on some great tangents which refuse to address the issue being debated), but to agree or disagree that anglers are being pressured by more back-door regulations such as a split-shot ban.

If you remember you asked how I disposed of my old lead tackle, I told you and then I asked you where you disposed of yours, I didn't get off on a tangent, just went along with your tangent.

Wandy supports the ban yet won't give up his stash. My position is that lead sinkers, spinnerbaits, jigheads, etc., do not pollute our waterways and that PETA is behind more than we'd like to believe. You more than proved my point with the insolubility of lead. Thank you!

You agreed, like it or not, to my other point, namely, back door politics sponsored by animal groups, are erroding sportmen's rights:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This lead ban reaks of personal political agendas and special interest group money in re-election coffers not environmental.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Again, thank you.

Frank, I agreed I didn't like the lead ban from the start, like it or not you agreed with my points fom back in early 2002 before the ban was law.

You've decided to expand the discussion to toxic dumps, the Wallkill River, PCBs, your elevation to HAZMET sainthood, and any other diversion for the sake of arguing. Well my friend, the soap box is yours. I've made my point (and so have you).

The Wallkill and toxic dumps came from your tangent, but rather than repeating myself go back up and read again.

In the bold it should read HAZMAT, Acronym for hazardous materials, no sainthood on that yet though Frank, still waiting on the Pope, he has been busy trying to give it to Mother Theresa

It actually was not there for you, it was there for any doubters of my commitment to the environment and my knowledge of chemicals, since I am one of the guys in the chem suit and one member of a team doing the clean up work, I like to educate myself with the chemicals I will be dealing with and how to lessen its impact upon the environment, never know what kind of methyl ethyl death might be raining on me from a broken pipe, drum or tank.

You have less than two and a half months to go before the ban takes effect, if you plan on fighting to repeal the ban you better get working!!!

 

[Woody]

Let it go Frank

Woody

 

[Senkosam]

In the bold it should read HAZMAT, Acronym for hazardous materials, no sainthood on that yet though Frank, still waiting on the Pope, he has been busy trying to give it to Mother Theresa LOL

If you gain the title of Saint Scott of HAZMET, may I kiss your ring next time we meet? Don't answer that, I know what you're thinking - even for a saint!! LOL

As far as Bassmaster and other fishing rags, the throne is were I do most of my reading. I've gotten tired of all the ads and hidden persuaders to buy stuff, and I accumulate issues in boxes. I don't usually read about environmental degradation in those mags, because it seems we are powerless to do anything about it, except vote. Even that seems useless since politicans will tell you anything to get your vote, yet still enact the party-line.
Bush is a prime example - not supported, but never outvoted.

The only thing I see that may affect the consensus about what we all discuss on this forum, is in refusing to abide by certain regs that are scoff in nature. You were right about one thing, (and I concede we are are in general agreement about many other things, believe or not) - The state hasn't tried to educate the public about alternative. But, what's more, proposed legislative actions that affect sportsmen until just before the vote is taken is not relayed down the chain of associations. Albany has, or should have, a list of all the county federation sportsmen's association contacts. If they do, little correspondence is ever sent concerning concerning decisions that curtail certain facets of the sport. Crappie protection is an example. Plus, input is rarely asked for that might modify or negate the new rule.

Your quoting the actions that will be taken by the DEC, if the public does not respond favorably, is a perfect example.

If the state wanted to suggest alternatives to lead, you're right, education of sportsmen, through their associations is in order. The other way to convince more people to respect a certain new reg. is to inform or make available, case studies done that support the reasoning behind the reg., rather than just mandate it. For universal, statewide rules, you need statewide evidence that danger to man or animal exists. (To protect crappies and sunfish because of commercial fishing is hogwash and an insult to our intelligence! Such acts make other new rules suspect.

For policies that aren't enforcable, such as split shot banning, appealing to our conservation-side with studies that reveal universal trends and consequences will get more cooperation from more people. Every sportsmen's association and club has, as part of their charter, by-laws and membership, provisions that all members respect and protect the environment and promote conservation, individually or en-masse. It's almost a religion for most of us! A member who violates the oath is gone, without exception.

Every one of us here, it goes without saying, respect nature and all natural resources far more than the general population. I knew that about you, even if you doubted it and expressed it about me.

Agree with me or not, we do agree about the politics behind the ban and the fact that in the long run, the only thing it may accomplish is to save a loon-a-year. Eric and you have presented the best arguments for not respecting a ban of jigheads, spinnerbaits and other lures or terminal tackle containing lead, though you both may try alternatives as they become available. I will also, most likely.

By the way, I received a quaterly report from the town's biannual water survey. It shows trace elements of lead that are naturally found, but well within safe guidelines. Who knows, maybe all those split shot I lose contribute. LOL

Frank :beerchug:

 

[JOHN G]

I can never take sides in these discussions, as I don't know half the things they are talking about! LOL...

but I will tell you....the Vocabulary?? how about "Vexatious"

you have to be impressed!

Woody is right, it has gone full circle, time to lay it to rest, everyone has said their piece and Scott has bowed out gracefully of the settee....