Kevin S

One other impoortant thing to mention is that the two likely lead replacements, although not as toxic as lead are considered dangerous by the US Department of Health and Human Services Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry: Tungsten - There are few guidelines for tungsten and tungsten compounds. For tungsten and insoluble tungsten compounds, NIOSH has established a recommended exposure limit (REL; 10-hour time weighted average) of 5 mg/m³ and a short-term exposure limit (STEL; 15-minute time weighted average) of 10 mg/m³. OSHA has established permissible exposure limits (PELs; 8-hour time weighted average) for tungsten of 5 mg/m³ (insoluble compounds) and 1 mg/m³ (soluble compounds) for construction and shipyard industries. Bismuth - Bismuth compounds have been suggested to be a carcinogen or a cocarcinogen in rats. Some studies have shown that bismuth can cause chromosomal aberrations in rats. More epidemiological studies are required for a more complete determination. Next Mrs. Steans will want to ban tungsten and bismuth because of their ill health effects, which have replaced lead shot when that ban went into effect. We have to stop this ban or we will not be able to use sinkers!!!

A recent study by the Scripps Institution of Oceanography details great harm to fish populations and genetics by the harvesting of large, mature fish. See article at http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080416/sc_nm/...Kw761BdBBAhANEA The DNR sets many of its fishing regulations toward keeping large, mature and genetically successful fish. There are numerous examples of this, most notably LaSalle Lakes regulation for Largemouth or Smallmouth bass of an 18 inch minimum length limit, Lake Bloomington's 15 inch minimum length limit, Lake Michigan's 21 inch minimum length limit, Powerton lakes 18 inch minimum length limit etc. Most regulations protect young, small, immature fish. The fish that don't reproduce or may not have the successful genetic potential of the large, mature fish. The Alliance has a club position on catch and release but in light of this study do we press the DNR, Forest Preserve Districts, and Park Districts to set regulations against the harvesting of mature, successful fish and shift the harvesting of fish to small immature fish? Not everyone is an Alliance member who follows a catch and release ethic. Should the Alliance consider this an important conservation step to protect against the ecological-evolutionary consequences of the harvest of mature, genetically successful fish?

Have any signs been placed by the river walk in Naperville. A lot of people walk along there. The sign would be a good educational tool. Also does the ISA have any signs for fish eating advisories issued by the Illinois Department of Public Health? This would possibly make people think twice about harvesting a fish on the DuPage or Desplaines rivers.

Another interesting topic that comes out of private property rights over river usage is disclosure of pollution. I have fished the DuPage river for many years which many club members fish. The DuPage is not on the list of public rivers and is therefore deemed private property with the landowner owning the stream bed. According to the Illinois Department of Public Health there is a fish consumption advisory on the DuPage river because of PCB's and other pollutants. In Illinois, by law if you sell a piece of property you have to sign a disclosure advising of any envionmental conditions including radon and any other pollutants. How many DuPage river property owners are disclosing PCB and thorium contamination on their property? The same people who will try to charge you with trespassing because you are fishing on their private property are the ones who will claim the stream bed is public property when they want to sell the property because the Illinois Department of Public Health deems the DuPage river polluted. Interesting tidbit to think about!