I really have nothing to add to this, but to point out the irony.
California is criticized for a number of things in the article, including its decision not to continue stocking programs that supported private, warm water hatcheries with state tax dollars.
So, with one less government program on the books, Tobias calls em Commies?
Ok... but the argument of the author of the article is that the state funded stockings are a good government program, ans that California is wrong for moving towards a sustainable wild fishery.
The decision to ban some fishing gear, such as lead split shot, in support of a wild fishery shouldn't be so offensive to those who understand the nature of the complaint. The author is complaining about there being less government subsidies for fishing. The state is withdrawing, not intervening, and that is the issue here.[/QUOTE]
The question is why is it in direct violation of this.
Traditional Lead Fishing Tackle Protected By Law
In December 2014, President Obama signed into law a provision to prohibit federal funds from being used to regulate lead fishing tackle and ammunition under the Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA). This provision was included in the omnibus federal spending bill. The American Sportfishing Association, which strongly supported this action, has been working for the past several years on passage of similar legislation that will provide a permanent exemption for traditional fishing tackle. The spending bill’s text exempting lead fishing tackle and ammunition from regulation under TSCA can be . ASA staff will continue working towards a permanent exemption for traditional fishing tackle in the upcoming Congress. For more information, contact Government Relations Coordinator.
The problem I have with this is if this passes it opens the door to other gear that can me deemed as toxic to the environment. Such as tippet material, ( mono) PVC coated fly lines, The uses of synthetic waders, materials in the construction of lures and flies The past has proven the Anties will go to any lengths try ban hunting and now fishing. They know they can not get either directly banded, so they attack the tools that sportsmen use for fishing and hunting. It is out there PETA and The Sierra Club were the main lobbyist for these regulations.
As far a private stocking. If you owned a pond, lake, or stretch of a stream, would you want the Government to tell you that you can not stock it. If this law were put into effect in NJ The fishing clubs on the Musky and South branch would effectively be shut down with the swipe of a Pen. Shannons and The Musky Tout hatchery did a good thing last year. We all benefitted from the quality of fish and the enjoyment that they gave us. Ask yourself this; If that law proposed was in NJ, or any of the states in the North East would you feel the same?
