In all fairness the case can be made against lead weights in shallow rivers and streams where waterfowl can get a hold of them and swallow them, and where fisherman fish the exact smae spot over and over for years. The idea of banning small lead weights in the Ocean is absolutely ridiculous. The only small weights I use in saltwater are egg shape sinkers either in the surf for Corbina, or for flylining bait with a little weight offshore. You loose a small egg sinker in the surf and it's buried in seconds. You loose one offshore it sinks to the bottom and it has absolutely zero impact to the environment. This is the nature of knee jerk environmentalism. If it was really about environmental impact they would not of bothered with saltwater fishing.

These “environmentalists” are probably buying stock in tungsten to get rich considering our new weights will cost ten times the $. Total joke. Show me the studies, show me the facts. Oh wait they can’t.

Well...there were lead weights on the tire that ran over and killed that raccoon that Mitchell skinned out....:D


http://www.bigwatersedge.com/bwevb/a...1&d=1517945524

http://http://www.bigwatersedge.com/...1&d=1517945524

Last time I went collecting lead tire weights
 

On my mountain bike I bought home a couple of pounds
I wonder how much a tungstun 8oz torpedo sinker cost.ill start making my own steel stinkers they might be a little bigger but when they rust they will look like kelp. :D

Still working on mamas
 

Fur coat.

All I'm saying is it's worth thinking about.

Either we start to think of another solution, or we get lambasted by those "environmentalists" as destroying the water and we are caught without another option.

We should be a lot more concerned about plastic baits than we should lead weights....

The American Sportfishing Association has also come out in opposition to the proposed lead tackle ban. Here's how the ASA addresses the impacts to wildlife in California.

If it passes, I will definitely miss the leadhead jigs I use for fishing swimbaits in saltwater. Not counting the hooks, many of them are under 2 cm in length, including the jigs I use in San Diego Bay and for calicos.

I signed, and wrote Takano, and Calvert not sure what much it will do :confused: But here is also a post I just put up on my personal facebook, just my two cents on it all.. After all, we are the ones who are the first to inform the community on laws changing within our industry/hobby?

"Hey guys, a few fishing friends, and myself are concerned about recent legislation put forth. California will vote Apr. 2nd, 2018 and will likely pass laws stating anything under 50 grams, or just under 2 ounces of lead will be illegal to hold on your persons while fishing. At this time there is no scientific evidence listed in the bill text, rather it's simply deeming the material as an immediate hazardous waste. I ask that you just take a look at what's here and sign the petition that will be presented to the Legislators next week; it will give more time for education to be introduced to the process, and also will allow more time for Mom N' Pop tackle shops to obtain needed materials to support the fishing industry. Thanks for reading "

:ciao:

Signed
 

Damn right I signed that petition.
I'm sick of those politician's in Sacramento.

Signed

Signed
 

I’m all for conservation efforts, and I fully support lead shot ban in wetlands and any shallows. I guess I struggle to see *how* it would be ingested and by what wildlife. Here they cite loons and seals
http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-...202611764.html

They also warn that “These weights are also the most likely to result in human exposure from, for example, an angler clamping a (lead) weight onto the line with his or her teeth." to which I audibly chuckled.

That was the jist of their justification, then automatically deeming it as an immediate hazardous material without any scientific proof in the actual bill text. I have heard it a couple times, and seen it in the comments here. people like Qirk (Rep. who put forth the bill) who heavily support the bill Have likely already in advanced purchased companies ready to produce these steel and tungsten alternatives, ready to rape the mom and pops, and fisherman alike of what they can pillage..

Just my two cents :the_finger::D

Coastside and CCA CAL Letter to Assemblyman Quirk
 

Sent to assemblyman Bill Quirk from Coastside and CCA CAL...

The Coastal Conservation Association of California (CCA CAL) and Coastside Fishing Club oppose Assembly Bill 2787, which proposes to ban the manufacture, sale, and purchase of nearly all fishing weights and sinkers in California. AB 2787 would unnecessarily ban affordable fishing tackle that is used safely by millions of anglers throughout the state in fresh and saltwater sportfishing.
CCA CAL is a statewide, non-profit marine conservation organization working to protect the state’s marine resources and interests of coastal recreational anglers. CCA CAL’s objective is to conserve, promote, and enhance the present and future availability of the coastal resources for the benefit and enjoyment of the general public. CCA has proven time and again that anglers are the best stewards of the marine environment. We work to protect not only the health, habitat and sustainability of our marine resources, but also the interests of recreational anglers and their access to the resources they cherish.
The Coastside Fishing Club is an all-volunteer, 11,000-member recreational fishing organization in Central and Northern California founded in 2002. Coastside actively engages at the local, state and national levels to represent the interests of recreational anglers. Coastside advocates for the protection and enhancement of marine resources and for the public’s right to sustainably access those resources.
The use and handling of recreational fishing products made from lead does not present any significant or unreasonable health hazard to users. No objective, peer-reviewed study justifies AB 2787 on human health grounds. In fact, the marginal increase in lead exposure from sportfishing is tiny and inconsequential. Many generations of Californians have used lead fishing weights with zero signs of negative health effects due to exposure. Moreover, there is no evidence in California that the use of lead fishing weights presents a genuine harm to aquatic, avian or terrestrial wildlife populations. Studies on New England wildlife populations not found in California are not a substitute for evidence needed here. Nor has there been any proof of adverse impact to water quality.
Advocates for banning lead in recreational fishing equipment often claim that there are many widely available and suitable substitutes for lead in recreational fishing tackle. In truth, each substitute has limited applications in sportfishing and either do not provide equivalent performance to lead and/or significantly increase the price of recreational fishing equipment. Present and foreseen technology only provides three reasonable alternatives: steel (both carbon and stainless), tin, and tungsten. Each has limitations in performance and/or price as compared to lead. All other substitutes are impractical or have very limited application and have or will not stand the test of the market place.
According to a 2015 study, developed by the California Sportfishing League, fishing license sales have decreased by over 55% since 1980. The high cost of fishing licenses in California is identified as a leading barrier to participation in the sport. In fact, California is one of the most expensive states in the nation to purchase a fishing license. Further, the decline in hunting and fishing licenses has been identified as one of the primary drivers in the systemic budget deficit that is plaguing the Department of Fish and Wildlife. AB 2787, as drafted, will further drive up the cost of fishing and limit access, thereby further driving Californians away from sportfishing and license purchases. This will only compound the structural budget deficit of the Department of Fish and Wildlife. The decline in participation would also have lasting implications for communities that are dependent on outdoor tourism and recreation for tax revenue and jobs.
AB 2787 would also undermine the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s new R3 program (Retention, Recruitment and Reactivation) that aims to increase fishing participation efforts that are critical to funding state conservation and hatchery programs. R3 is part of a national effort to increase the number of hunters and anglers who participate in these traditional outdoor recreation pursuits.
The millions of Californians engaging in sportfishing will see the cost of participation increase under AB 2787 . Recreational fishing represents good, clean, family-oriented recreation. Recreational fishing nationally enjoys a 93 percent approval rating and promotes essential social and cultural connections across all segments of California’s population. Fishing also has many participants who are over 65, retired and on limited income.
A lead fishing tackle ban is not justified and simply will create a regulatory and enforcement burden while making angling more expensive. harming anglers, manufacturers, retailers, and communities dependent on outdoor tourism. Therefore, CCA CAL and Coastside Fishing Club oppose AB 2787.

The weight of the lead in the political system is crushing us. The political parasites in Sacramento are probably emboldened by the $1.3 TRILLION omnibus spending bill that was just foisted upon us in D.C., sealed and signed mere days after being made public. The amount of dead weight, waste, incompetence and corruption in everything our bloated government does to us is beyond comprehension. They are incapable of managing themselves.

Have a nice day :)

Once we have been criminalized and lead weights are banned from stores, here are some solutions:

Make fishing weights from rocks:
https://youtu.be/JWrmwLwIC5Q

Plastic Easter eggs are a nice shape for making bounce balls.
Find something tough like CementAll or anchor bolt glue, leftover construction glue, epoxy putty, etc. Mix in old fishing weights or chopped up lead scrap as aggregate. If your mixture sticks to the plastic egg shells, give them a smear of Vaseline, or axle grease.
https://youtu.be/GHnJGxZx4LU

It's not good form to bitch and moan about things without offering positive solutions.

Right? Right.

:p

So happy I don't sandblast old painted houses....
 

For restucco anymore.Complyants with the city,over lead paint met double work your ass off. You try to give home owners an affordable price.
State license 20plus yrs.
And yes we tested for lead paint and most were not.
Try cleaning up wet silica sand tangled in visqueen

For anyone that wants to vent a little more about the pending legislation....

http://www.bigwatersedge.com/bwevb/s...ad.php?t=32694

Well, just in case any one got curious, it looks like they met and the law will commence as of 01/01/2025

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...01720180AB2787

It seems we can still use them though even after that date, just it will be illegal to purchase and or sell..

"prohibit a person from manufacturing, selling, or purchasing a fishing weight or sinker in California that has no cross section greater than or equal to two centimeters in length, is under 50 grams in mass, and contains more than 0.1% lead by weight."

Whats next? Is fishing line is going to be considered hazardous waste, therefore subject to strict regulation? WTF!

Hmmm. This looks decently ok? I dont have may weights I currently use that meet that criteria. Our 6 oz dropper loop weights are bigger across than 2 cm and weigh more than 50g. 2 oz carolina rig ok too? Full disclosure...I didnt read the entire bill.

Trout split shot, bass weights (texas, carolina etc), and tiny egg sinkers look like they might be the ones affected.