Congressman Hoyer's response to EPA regs concerning lead weight for fishing...

[soggy dog]

I saw a posting on the Original Board and went through the task of contacting my representatives. Didn't think it was appropriate to post this to that thread (FISHING) and I had a hard time finding it...it's getting late. Anyway, this is the response I got from Congressman Hoyer.


September 13, 2010



Thank you for contacting me to share your concerns with the recently submitted petition to the EPA to ban lead in fishing tackle. I certainly appreciate your taking the time to share your concerns on this matter.



As you know, on August 3, 2010, the American Bird Conservancy, the Association of Avian Veterinarians, and a number of other groups submitted a petition to EPA under Section 21 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) asking EPA to "prohibit the manufacture, processing, and distribution in commerce of lead for shot, bullets, and fishing sinkers."



On August 27, 2010, EPA denied the portion of the petition relating to lead in ammunition because the Agency does not have the legal authority to regulate this type of product under TSCA. However, 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 that portion of the petition. EPA will consider comments submitted by September 15, 2010. Comments can be submitted at www.regulations.gov; enter Docket ID# EPA-HQ-OPPT-2010-0681. While this is a regulatory matter under EPA's jurisdiction, please be assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind should relevant legislation come before the full House of Representatives.



Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me. I also encourage you to visit my Fifth District web site at http://hoyer.house.gov. While there, you can sign up for the Hoyer Herald, access my voting record, and get information about important public issues. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me.



With kindest regards, I am




Sincerely yours,

Steny H. Hoyer

[capt.george]

Steny Has always been a Friend to all User Groups in the Maryland Portion of the Chesapeake , Note -I'm a Registered Independent so this is NOT vote related Post--

[Deep 6]

Ole Steny is letting you know he in not responsible and has abdicated jurisdiction along with the rest of legislators to whatever junk science may be used by the EPA. Kinda like with Co2.

Once EPA decides to ban lead, as they are likely to do, the only recourse will be lawsuits.


While this is a regulatory matter under EPA's jurisdiction, please be assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind should relevant legislation come before the full House of Representatives.


Sincerely yours,

Steny H. Hoyer

[goose70]

Ole Steny is letting you know he in not responsible and has abdicated jurisdiction along with the rest of legislators to whatever junk science may be used by the EPA. Kinda like with Co2.

Once EPA decides to ban lead, as they are likely to do, the only recourse will be lawsuits.


Steny is correct. And the EPA is correct. This is not EPA's proposal, but the folks asking for the lead ban followed the rules, so EPA must consider it. And no "junk science" is involved. The science may not ultimately support a lead ban, but it is not "junk." We are a nation of laws and those laws need to be followed. One of those laws requires the EPA to consider properly submitted proposals, and then take public comment on those proposals before enacting any regulation. That is all the EPA is doing.

There is nothing wrong with different points of view being considered. It's a good process. If you do not want a lead ban, as many of us do not, then why not simply follow the procedures and write to the EPA during its public comment period? No need to hatch conspiracy theories. The federal government, generally, and the EPA in particular, is not out to get fishermen.

[gwag]

Why is it that "we are a nation of laws "when its time to screw the citizen yet when the criminal bastards in our congress break the tax laws etc. they get posh appointments with big salaries.

[goose70]

I'm not sure that anything the EPA is proposing with the Chesapeake cleanup is screwing the citizen, but I do agree that elected officials, CEO's, etc. should adhere to the same laws, and suffer the same punishment, as the rest of us. When that doesn't happen, it rightfully breeds distrust and frustration.

[Deep 6]

And no "junk science" is involved.

Fishermen and beach goers in NC beaches and Hatteras are experiencing biased fabricated and construed junk science to control beach access. I call the evidence to remove lead from fishing equipment the same junk science. National Audubon Society, Defenders of Wildlife and PETA have an agenda and are pushing this with absolutely no authoritative scientific evidence. By using what they create as evidence they will shut down anything they want by fiat. It's not conspiracy, it's simply people who believe they know what's best controlling and mandating policy politically. I happen to disagree with it and hope that other fishermen will see it for what it is and try to stop it.

http://capwiz.com/keepamericafishing/home/

http://www.preservebeachaccess.org/landing/theissue.html#Issue

[goose70]

Fishermen and beach goers in NC beaches and Hatteras are experiencing biased fabricated and construed junk science to control beach access. I call the evidence to remove lead from fishing equipment the same junk science. National Audubon Society, Defenders of Wildlife and PETA have an agenda and are pushing this with absolutely no authoritative scientific evidence. By using what they create as evidence they will shut down anything they want by fiat. It's not conspiracy, it's simply people who believe they know what's best controlling and mandating policy politically. I happen to disagree with it and hope that other fishermen will see it for what it is and try to stop it.

http://capwiz.com/keepamericafishing/home/

http://www.preservebeachaccess.org/landing/theissue.html#Issue

I disagree with much of it, too, but....not to get in an argument over symantics, but I don't believe that any of this is "junk" science. It appears to be perfectly good science but certain groups seem to draw overborad conclusions from it, and then attempt to use it to justify completely shutting people out from our public, natural resources (and the EPA has absolutely nothing to do with beach closures....those are the result of a court order by a very conservative judge).

Again, however, with many petitions you have what is usually at least some good science (that is, data derived from the scientific method), and then different groups come to different conclusions about what that data should mean for public policy. It is the EPA's (or other government agency's, or sometimes even the court's) job to weigh the different conclusions that folks draw from the data and then enact public policy. I'll bet that in the majority of circumstances, the government agency determines that no regulatory action is needed, so the public policy that it enacts is to do nothing. I would be surprised if that's not the result for the proposed lead ban.

[gwag]

I wonder how much tax money is wasted on the Hoyer Herald, in true dead beat politician form his reply was a full page of nothing.

[HYDRAFISH]

Vote non-incumbent if they have been there they have and will fail