Bass Pro Shops   Daveys Locker Sportfishing  Newport Landing Sportfishing  The Fishing Syndicate  Carver Covers  Tight Lines Guide Service  Team 57 fishing  Bob Sands Fishing Tackle 
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: State of Calif banning lead weights under 1 1/2 ounces?

  1. #1

    Default State of Calif banning lead weights under 1 1/2 ounces?

    So my brother-in law is telling me that the State of California is going to try and ban sport fishermen from using (and buying) any lead weights that are under 1 1/2 ounces. The claim is it is killing our water birds and some are supposedly already endangered. They say birds are ingesting small split shot and other small lead sinkers as they feed along the shallow muddy bottoms of lake, ponds, rivers, streams, etc..
    So hasn't this ban by a couple of Assemblymen been going on now for a few years? I've also heard that there is a fear that the State of California is going to stop all Sportfishing entirely in the state. I really don't think this would really ever happen, but they could raise License fees sky high (they already are compared to most other states).
    Anyone have any truthful info about this? I want to set my BIL straight.

  2. #2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishmounter View Post
    So my brother-in law is telling me that the State of California is going to try and ban sport fishermen from using (and buying) any lead weights that are under 1 1/2 ounces. The claim is it is killing our water birds and some are supposedly already endangered. They say birds are ingesting small split shot and other small lead sinkers as they feed along the shallow muddy bottoms of lake, ponds, rivers, streams, etc..
    So hasn't this ban by a couple of Assemblymen been going on now for a few years? I've also heard that there is a fear that the State of California is going to stop all Sportfishing entirely in the state. I really don't think this would really ever happen, but they could raise License fees sky high (they already are compared to most other states).
    Anyone have any truthful info about this? I want to set my BIL straight.
    Let me answer 1 piece of the puzzle of questions you asked. Let's talk about banning sportfishing in the state.

    They won't and can't do it for a couple of reasons.

    1. One is the economic boom to the state. Fishing generates hundreds of Millions of dollars a year of revenue in the state. If they would prohibit sportfishing in CA, think of all the people that would be out of work!!!

    2. In the State Constitution, fishing is written into the document. It say's something like this, "the people have the right to fish in any state waters." (Unless prohibited by other laws) It would take 2/3 of the members of the state congress to change any part of the Constitution.

    The fishing license price increases are on a predetermined rate. So they couldn't double or triple the price of it overnight.
    Last edited by etucker1959; 03-05-2018 at 05:45 PM.

  3. #3

    Default

    Bull @#$ , don't try to rationalize it because this state does whatever it wants with the Democrat clowns in office now. Do you think the people are LOVING their gas tax hike and increase on average of $150 a year on car registration? Do you think your Liberal lawmakers give a crap about what YOU think? They just passed an increase in taxes without a public vote because of a 2/3 super majority because they can and you were perfectly fine with it! Gotta love the selective BULL from you know it alls


    Quote Originally Posted by etucker1959 View Post
    Let me answer 1 piece of the puzzle of questions you asked. Let's talk about banning sportfishing in the state.

    They won't and can't do it for a couple of reasons.

    1. One is the economic boom to the state. Fishing generates hundreds of Millions of dollars a year of revenue in the state. If they would prohibit sportfishing in CA, think of all the people that would be out of work!!!

    2. In the State Constitution, fishing is written into the document. It say's something like this, "the people have the right to fish in any state waters." (Unless prohibited by other laws) It would take 2/3 of the members of the state congress to change any part of the Constitution.

    The fishing license price increases are on a predetermined rate. So they couldn't double or triple the price of it overnight.
    Last edited by steelhead; 03-11-2018 at 09:45 AM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Yo' couch!
    Posts
    2,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by steelhead View Post
    Bull @#$ , don't try to rationalize it because this state does whatever it wants with the Democrat clowns in office now. Do you think the people are LOVING their gas tax hike and increase on average of $150 a year on car registration? Do you think your Liberal lawmakers give a crap about what YOU think? They just passed an increase in taxes without a public vote because of a 2/3 super majority because they can and you were perfectly fine with it! Gotta love the selective BULL from you know it alls
    Didn't hear you complain when you got bent over and took it up the backside by Trump. You know, you being California taxpayer and all.

  5. #5

    Default

    There are weights that are made out of safer materials than lead, Jeff, and those are now being promoted instead of lead weights. I have bought some of them myself. This is a safety issue and nothing more.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by steelhead View Post
    Bull @#$ , don't try to rationalize it because this state does whatever it wants with the Democrat clowns in office now. Do you think the people are LOVING their gas tax hike and increase on average of $150 a year on car registration? Do you think your Liberal lawmakers give a crap about what YOU think? They just passed an increase in taxes without a public vote because of a 2/3 super majority because they can and you were perfectly fine with it! Gotta love the selective BULL from you know it alls
    OHHHHH! So the GOP ramming a billionaires dream tax cut down our throats with 75% of the country against it doesn't count?????
    For all the BS you speak of, Jerry Brown has turned our in debt state to an estimated $1.6 BILLION surplus by the end of the year.
    I'm not really a fan of his, but he has fixed what Arnie screwed up. Now if we can just get him to ease off outdoorsmen a bit. It would be nice.

  7. #7

    Default

    Let me guess, your deductions were over the current standard deduction of 24000 for a couple. Oh nevermind yours would be 12000 because you're not married and you were setback by the new tax law because your property was of high value oh never mind your house is no where near the value where you would have benefited from the SALT more than the 12000 deduction. I am a CA taxpayer but my deductions do not add up to 24000 and yes I still benefitted from the TAX break moron.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Yo' couch!
    Posts
    2,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishmounter View Post
    So my brother-in law is telling me that the State of California is going to try and ban sport fishermen from using (and buying) any lead weights that are under 1 1/2 ounces. The claim is it is killing our water birds and some are supposedly already endangered. They say birds are ingesting small split shot and other small lead sinkers as they feed along the shallow muddy bottoms of lake, ponds, rivers, streams, etc...
    Lead is unsafe at any level. There are alternatives to lead tackle. This is not a ploy to end sportfishing, in spite of the alarmist nonsense from the lead-eating, mouth-breathing right. Nor is it a financial deterrent to sportfishing - if you can't afford to switch to non-lead alternatives, then you probably have more important things than fishing to worry about.

    Quote Originally Posted by fishmounter View Post
    I've also heard that there is a fear that the State of California is going to stop all Sportfishing entirely in the state.
    ARTICLE I DECLARATION OF RIGHTS [SECTION 1 - SEC. 32] ( Article 1 adopted 1879. )

    Section 25.
    The people shall have the right to fish upon and from the public lands of the State and in the waters thereof, excepting upon lands set aside for fish hatcheries, and no land owned by the State shall ever be sold or transferred without reserving in the people the absolute right to fish thereupon; and no law shall ever be passed making it a crime for the people to enter upon the public lands within this State for the purpose of fishing in any water containing fish that have been planted therein by the State; provided, that the legislature may by statute, provide for the season when and the conditions under which the different species of fish may be taken.

    (Sec. 25 added Nov. 8, 1910, by A.C.A. 14. Res.Ch. 44, 1909.)

    Quote Originally Posted by fishmounter View Post
    I really don't think this would really ever happen, but they could raise License fees sky high (they already are compared to most other states).
    The California median income is $67,739. The Nevada median is $55,180. That's a 22.7% difference.
    A California annual fishing license is $48.34. A Nevada license is $41.00. That's a 17.9% difference.

    So, comparing these two states, based on median income, California's fishing license fees are proportional - in fact, they're less.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •