I read the other day that greenies want to get their sticky little fingers into one of my favourite pastimes,fishing.They want to outlaw lead sinkers,yes you heard that right,lead sinkers ,because apparently lead being nasty, is the main cause of ocean pollution.It isn't the tons of oil,fuel ,heavy metals that run-off every time it rains,or the toxic gases pouring out of hydro-thermal vents in the ocean.Even plastic bags,old cars,planes and ships that sink by the ton.Swapping out lead sinkers,that's the trump card.Before you know it the oceans will be so pristine you could drink them,all thanks to greenie environmentalist twats.
I handle lead,every day,300 days out of the year,for nearly 20 years.Providing you wear gloves,face masks when particles are in the air,and you wash your hands thoroughly before eating,it is no more dangerous than any other industrial material.
Replies
Dont get me started on this issue Tom, rec fishing is copping it from all fronts, but we are getting some serious political clout these days and getting a bit more powerful due to a few reasons.
I dont fish with weight or lead much these days unless im deep live baiting, so it wont bother me, but its just ridiculous stuff to want to outlaw the tiny amounts of lead use by rec fishos, the worlds gone mad.
That is the most ridiculous, idiotic thing I have heard in a long time. The dopey Greens and all there fans should find some rain forest up in north Qld and set up home there and they should not be allowed to leave the area. Or better still, lets chop the dopes up and use them as berley.
The only wilderness is between a greenie's ears?
The issue for the so-called greenies is three-fold.
1. Banning lead weights is just the latest round of removing lead from consumptive patterns. Lead was removed from paint and petrol, recall.
2. Lead is removed because it is poisonous. We all know this of course, so let's put things in their more complicated perspective. The issue is more chronic exposure than acute exposure. Put differently, lots of regulations in many countries act against acute exposure, for instance in mining and trades and waste dumping. But chronic exposure is also a real threat, predominantly to wildlife (birds, some rodents, turtles), but also to children (via lead laying about...). Banning lead weights is more about chronic exposure, so points about lead can be safe if you wear protective clothing are irrelevant, as such means reduce acute exposure without addressing chronic exposure. Birds don't wear gloves and nor do your kids if exposed to low pH water with lead dissolution products in it.
3. Climate change. Huh, you say? So here is the kicker you're probably overlooking but which is the actual genesis of the current efforts to ban lead weights. Yes, the lead eights are little and there are many other sources of environmental contamination. And sure, if greenies had more power they would go after Shell and Bayer and Rio Tinto. We all choose our battles. But lead dissolves and becomes mobile in low pH water (weakly acidic). Surface water that is typically neutral (7 pH) becomes acidic (lower pH) in the presence of atmospheric carbon dioxide. So the real issue for greenies is about being pro-active, acting against the increasing risk of chronic lead poisoning of the environment given an atmosphere increasing in carbon dioxide and thus impacting water quality.
I know the example because it is becoming a classic example of discussing how the little things CAN matter in discussions of climate change. The real question is how pro-active is being pro-active enough? Or maybe too pro-active? It's too easy to dismiss the ban based on thinking through risk just in terms of acute hazard versus systemic and chronic exposure.
Lastly, non-lead alternatives are almost as cheap, so what's the problem with being a little bit green doing the same thing? Unless you want to join Abbott as a science denier?
So the lead used electronics,batteries and myriads of other products in quantities that vastly dwarf the amounts that get lost in the ocean by fishermen,they are in the "too hard" basket? Typical greenies ,they are the only ones who love the planet.We are all boofheads hell bent on destroying the planet.Australia in particular is like the crawler in class,always shoots his hand up to be the first to ingratiate himself to teacher."We'll put in a carbon tax,We'll lower our emissions,at the cost of industry,mining and jobs,even though we contribute 1% of crap.We'll be the greenest unemployed people on the planet".
Meanwhile the real polluters like the US and China,they do squat.As I said in my blog,I make leadlights,I have been in contact daily with lead,but I'm still alive and one of the healthiest people I've met.In 18 years I've taken at the most 6 weeks off in sick days,3 of those weeks were recovering from major surgery for nearly losing my hand.
Sorry Prof. Daz, but everyone else's arguments are far more thoroughly explained and carefully thought through.
I can't subscribe to your logic ;)
True,but fish don't usually eat sinkers.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 28 Next