Over the weekend, I tried to read the tree huggers' petition that started EPA's initiative to ban lead in fishing tackle. I quickly realized that there is no easy way to determine what parts of the 100-page petition were denied on 8/27. Today I contacted my Congressman's local office by telephone and followed up with the email message below. If you are able to do the same with your elected representatives, maybe we can slow this thing down long enough to make our case. Agency staffers pay more attention to comments from Congressmen than fishermen.

Thank you for speaking with me this afternoon. I am a retired private citizen and, while I represent no one but myself, my views are shared by fishermen throughout the country.

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." A careful reading of the petition and EPA's correspondence indicates that the term "fishing sinkers" is a generalized reference to all types of fishing lures, weights, line, and other tackle that contain lead. The petition is 100 pages in length. I estimate that as much as 95% of its content relates only to ammunition and not to fishing tackle.

On August 27, 2010, EPA denied the portion of the petition relating to lead in ammunition stating that the Agency does not have the legal authority to regulate this type of product under TSCA. EPA further announced that it will continue to evaluate the petition request regarding fishing sinkers and will consider comments submitted via Regulations.gov by September 15, 2010. Unfortunately, EPA did not require the petitioner to revise the petition document to reflect the August 27 denial of 95% of its content, and did not extend the public comment period.

Clearly, commenters are confused by what has happened. This morning, the majority of public comments flowing into the record are from hunters and others voicing their objection to the part of the petition which EPA has already denied. On the other hand, I have discussed this matter with fishermen who were mislead to believe that EPA's denial applied across the board to fishing tackle as well as ammunition.

I appreciate anything Congressman Forbes' office can do to encourage the Environmental Protection Agency to demand an edited document from the petitioners and restart the comment period for Docket # EPA-HQ-OPPT-2010-0681. I would like to participate in this rulemaking, but cannot ascertain what facts and arguments are in play.

Thank you in advance for your assistance.