I volunteer here at a local wildlife rehab facility. Most of the time I get calls about injured hawks, mange infected foxes and such and bring them in for healing and -hopefully - release back into the wild.

In the midst of the big storm we had in Nashville, we got a call about a grounded loon. In the past, we've been able to take them in, let them rest and then release them. This one, however, was exhibiting some unusual symptoms like not holding it's head up all the time. They put it in a tub, gave it some O2 and it died overnight.

Took it to the vet and x-rays showed a sinker had been swallowed. Blood test showed lead poisoning. I was heartbroken. I secretly hoped that not only could I release this beautiful bird, but that it might even greet me this summer in the BW.

I know I'm mostly preaching to the choir here, but please, please don't use lead in any of your fishing gear. Thanks.

I decided to go lead free this year.

That is so sad, jerry. I actually thought mn was lead free. What do I know.

Very sad. I’m getting rid of my lead fishing tackle.

Jerry I have been sharing this on Facebook. Lead sinkers are illegal here but I am sure there are scofflaws and not all states disallow them.

Thank you for bringing to my attention. I knew lead was toxic but the pictures really drive the issue home.

Mocha: "That is so sad, jerry. I actually thought mn was lead free. What do I know."

Not only is it perfectly legal to use lead here in Minnesota, there is a lead sinker production company too in White Bear Lake.

Sad story Jerry and probably more common than we know. One time on a forest preserve lake I saw a mallard flapping it’s wings just offshore. Turns out there was a hook in its foot and the line was wrapped on a deadfall. I was able to free it by cutting the line. Who knows how long it was struggling.

It’s the lead shot that’s not legal. Gun type...

It's a sad story, but it's important to keep things in perspective. Loons are actually doing quite well and their numbers are stable. https://www.minnpost.com/environment/2019/07/how-does-minnesota-know-its-loon-population-is-healthy-it-counts-them/

This post reminds me of a post I saw on Facebook a few months back where a Ontario park employee posted a picture of a lake trout that had died from ingesting a soft plastic fishing lure. The person posting asked fishermen to not release their unused lures in the lake as fish were ingesting them and dying. Apparently this individual thought that what had happened was that someone went fishing and at the end of the day they decided to just empty their tackle box in the lake before going home. I doubt the poster was a fisherman as there seemed to be a disconnect as to how fishing actually works not to mention the cost of lures. Yes, some lures are lost in battle and that can have unintended consequences to wildlife.

I would be curious to know if a further autopsy was done on this bird and what size and style of lead sinker it had ingested.

Also as a side note: Tungsten, a popular lead alternative, is also toxic to most forms of animal life, interfering with molybdenum and copper metabolism.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tungsten

Savage Voyageur: "

Mocha: "That is so sad, jerry. I actually thought mn was lead free. What do I know."

Not only is it perfectly legal to use lead here in Minnesota, there is a lead sinker production company too in White Bear Lake. "

That's Water Gremlin, right? They were temporarily shut-down last year about this time if I remember correctly, due to potential lead contamination of some of the workforce and some waste chemical effluent getting into drinking water sources. I thought that they also made lead-less sinkers, but again, I could be wrong on that. The MN legislature is/was considering a more comprehensive lead fishing tackle ban.

Erica LeMoine (LoonWatch Director) did a wonderful presentation about LoonWatch and loons at this years Canoecopia.

According to Erica, “loons ingest small pebbles which go into their gizzards to help them grind up their food. Loons can mistake sinkers for small pebbles. Also, they can eat fish that have lead jigs or sinkers in their bodies.”

“Approximately 20% of necropsied loons have succumbed to lead poisoning.”

“The loons that swallow lead die a slow painful death which can last from 2 to 3 weeks.”

All the more reason to get lead out of your tackle box if you are a fisherman.

Thanks for the reminder OneMatch.

I will be finding a place to properly dispose my lead tackle before I go out fishing this year.

nctry: "It’s the lead shot that’s not legal. Gun type..."

Lead shot is only illegal for migratory birds per federal law: waterfowl, etc. Lead shot - and lead bullets, for that matter - are legal and still used by the vast majority of hunters for upland game birds like grouse and partridge, and for all other types of game such as deer, bear, etc.

Raptors such as hawks and eagles are often poisoned by lead after feeding on dead game animals like deer who may be carrying old bullets from wounds that didn't kill them at the time they were incurred. The animal healed, but with lead still in them.

There are types of non-toxic ammunition but it can be expensive. Of course, right now you can't even get lead ammo.

I have enough lead split shot and jigs to last for years.
That xray looks like no lead sinker I've seen.
Could be plastic also.
Like I've said before. I doubt any duck or loon has invested a 1/8 oz lead head i broke off in 10 fow.for.
Long live the loon. Beautiful bird.

Went lead free many years ago. I still catch fish without lead. Lead tackle should be banned.

arnesr: "It's a sad story, but it's important to keep things in perspective. Loons are actually doing quite well and their numbers are stable. "

I'm happy the overall population of Loons is strong. That doesn't have anything to do with how I feel about even one animal dying a slow, painful death due to my own selfish decisions.

Lead shot for waterfowl has been banned since 1987.

nctry: "Lead shot for waterfowl has been banned since 1987."

In Minnesota, anyway...

thegildedgopher: "

arnesr: "It's a sad story, but it's important to keep things in perspective. Loons are actually doing quite well and their numbers are stable. "

I'm happy the overall population of Loons is strong. That doesn't have anything to do with how I feel about even one animal dying a slow, painful death due to my own selfish decisions."

Do you pull over and grieve every time you see a dead deer alongside the roadway? Have you given up driving? Should we ban cars? No, it's about balance of resources.

Yes, it's sad and unfortunate when an animal dies, but everything alive dies. We can surely take some precautions, fencing along roadways for deer, packing out tangled line while fishing, and basically doing our best to leave no trace. The fact is we are human and we leave a big footprint no matter how hard we try. Yet, we still coexist with nature and animals and loons in particular with no measurable effect on their populations.

Northland: "

nctry: "It’s the lead shot that’s not legal. Gun type..."

Lead shot is only illegal for migratory birds per federal law: waterfowl, etc. Lead shot - and lead bullets, for that matter - are legal and still used by the vast majority of hunters for upland game birds like grouse and partridge, "

I believe lead shot is banned for upland bird hunting on US Fish and Wildlife, Waterfowl Production Areas.

"Hunting
Waterfowl production areas are open to hunting per state regulations unless specifically prohibited in the district specific section below.
Small game hunters using shotguns, including turkey hunters, are required to use and possess only non-toxic shot."

Lead shot on WPA's

arnesr: "Do you pull over and grieve every time you see a dead deer alongside the roadway? Have you given up driving? Should we ban cars? No, it's about balance of resources. Yes, it's sad and unfortunate when an animal dies, but everything alive dies. We can surely take some precautions, fencing along roadways for deer, packing out tangled line while fishing, and basically doing our best to leave no trace. The fact is we are human and we leave a big footprint no matter how hard we try. Yet, we still coexist with nature and animals and loons in particular with no measurable effect on their populations. "

I mostly take public transit to be honest. The fact that you are comparing the choice to drive a car (almost required to be a functional member of US society in 2021) -vs- the choice to use lead tackle for your hobby, only illustrates how far you're willing to reach to justify your stance.

I will always do whatever I can, within reason, to help the environment and wildlife. I feel it's reasonable to spend a few bucks on non-toxic tackle to reduce the chance that I contribute to an unnecessary, slow, miserable death. You say it's "sad and unfortunate" as if there's nothing that can be done. That is the opposite of my mindset. If you don't see the value in making personal choices on a small scale that will affect maybe only a single life, then this conversation is going nowhere.

Lead bullets will never disappear. It’s a matter of physics- not just price.

Hunting with steel shot is not the best for the same reason... most people will not use it for upland game since it’s not required.

Other side of the argument: Many a goose has been shot “dead-on” with steel where lead would have dropped it instantly.. only to fly away to die a slow death from wounding not unlike the loon...Imagine how many deer would die weeks later from steel bullet wounds...

If you do use it- good for you- but it will never catch on if not required.

Just reality folks.

LindenTree: "

Northland: "

nctry: "It’s the lead shot that’s not legal. Gun type..."

Lead shot is only illegal for migratory birds per federal law: waterfowl, etc. Lead shot - and lead bullets, for that matter - are legal and still used by the vast majority of hunters for upland game birds like grouse and partridge, "

I believe lead shot is banned for upland bird hunting on US Fish and Wildlife, Waterfowl Production Areas.

"Hunting
Waterfowl production areas are open to hunting per state regulations unless specifically prohibited in the district specific section below.
Small game hunters using shotguns, including turkey hunters, are required to use and possess only non-toxic shot."

Lead shot on WPA's "

Yeah, I meant to add in 1991 the ban went federal. Thanks Linden

thegildedgopher: I mostly take public transit, to be honest. The fact that you are comparing the choice to drive a car (almost required to be a functional member of US society in 2021) -vs- the choice to use lead tackle for your hobby only illustrates how far you're willing to reach to justify your stance.

I doubt very much that you take public transportation to canoe in the BWCA, which you no doubt consider your hobby. I guess it is easy for you to place precedence of your hobby of simply canoeing over mine of fishing while canoeing. I understand you don't view fishing as essential, perhaps you buy all of your food at the grocery store.

I don't know about you, but I see a lot of deer alongside the roadway when I travel to canoe country, both alive and dead ones. No one bats an eye at a dead deer amongst a herd population that is on the decline in many areas, but OMG a loon just died... everyone pay attention.

Lead is just the current target, tomorrow it's plastic lures, then hooks are deemed too pointy... fishing is cruel. Before you know it, the government finds a "better" use of the land than fishing and canoeing.

arnesr: "Lead is just the current target, tomorrow it's plastic lures, then hooks are deemed too pointy... fishing is cruel. Before you know it, the government finds a "better" use of the land than fishing and canoeing. "

OK, it all makes sense now. Let me guess, the government is coming for ___________ next?!?!

To set you straight -- fishing is my #1 hobby and passion. It is 100% an essential component of my lifestyle. I come to the BWCA almost solely to fish, and I harvest fish for my table every trip. Buying non-toxic tackle is an investment/sacrifice I'm willing to make in order to reduce the likelihood that I personally contribute to the needless death of wildlife.

arnesr: "I guess it is easy for you to place precedence of your hobby of simply canoeing over mine of fishing while canoeing. I understand you don't view fishing as essential, perhaps you buy all of your food at the grocery store."

We value wildlife differently. But don't tell yourself stories about who I am just to try to prop up your narrative -- because the shoe simply doesn't fit.

Cars are essential you claim and I won't dispute that as I drive everywhere as well. Lead is essential for the type of fishing I do (mainly walleye which relate to the bottom). Sure I could use less effective or more expensive means. Then again, you could just peddle a bike for transportation and "not contribute to the needless death of wildlife." Loons are cool to see and I do enjoy their song while out on the water. I however, have never eaten a loon, but I have eaten many a deer. Loon populations are stable and deer populations are declining, perhaps we don't have our priorities in order. What makes the loon a priority for you?

So what type of non-toxic tackle are you using? Tungsten is also toxic, not to mention the environmental consequences it brings, mainly to China it's leading producer...not our problem I guess.

As you most likely know, loons are migratory. How are you going to keep the loons safe from lead in their winter homes or along their migration? The loon in question died in TN. Who knows where it found the lead shot/sinker/jig that ultimately caused its demise.

Don't kid yourself for one minute that politicians and special interest groups don't have their eye on the BWCA and the surrounding area for other uses that are way more toxic than a the impact of lead tackle.....aka mining and timber. What we view as a treasured resource some view as a wasteland that could be better used in other ways to bring them $$$.

Yes, I'm terrible, I use tungsten. I've searched quite a bit and found some 10-year articles that suggest tungsten might not be the solution. But nothing even remotely recent or conclusive, and nothing specific to wildlife. Please share your sources on the toxicity of tungsten in this application, I'll gladly read further.

You seem only willing to entertain a change if you are guaranteed it will 100% solve all problems. You say "well they're migratory and I can't control what happens in another state so..."

Whereas I am willing to make a change that inconveniences me as long as I am reasonably assured it will have *some* kind of positive impact.

As to your final comment: The politicians that I have supported are working to protect the BWCA from mining and other exploitation. I am very aware of the other side of that argument. Focusing some of my energy on small things like lead tackle does not prevent me from seeing and combatting major threats like mining.

thegildedgopher you are not a terrible person and I'm sorry if I made you feel like I was attacking you personally. I think these types of discussions are valuable as it gives us a view of how others see things and view the resource and I value your opinion even if I don't agree with it.

There is not a lot of information about Tungsten toxicity as it relates specifically to fishing. I already provided one link, but here is what the EPA had to say in 2014:
EPA Fact sheet
I suspect we won't see any real focus on Tungsten tackle until after lead is banned.

Tungsten wasn't discovered until 1781, where as lead was in use prior to Roman times. In fact the symbol for lead is Pb which comes from the Latin word Plumbum, from which we get the English word plumbing. Many older homes still have lead pipes in them. Lead wasn't banned from use in pipes until 1986, though it's use declined from the 1930's onward as more was known about the toxic nature of lead. If you have lead pipes the water is still safe to use cold, but hot water leaches the chemical, hence the warning to flush pipes with cold water before using water for cooking if you live in an older home. In the same manner lead tackle lost in cold water lakes does not dissolve and contaminate the whole lake, it remains stable. Only when ingested does it pose an issue.

I would argue that banning lead tackle is a solution for a problem that does not really exist. Yes, it does cause some casualties, but it does not affect the population of loons as a whole. I still think it's important to study the effects and try to mitigate issues as was done when lead was banned from shot ammunition. This is why I asked if an autopsy was done and what type/size weight caused the birds death. Most studies I have seen simply list lead poisoning as the cause of death and in many cases deaths are still being caused by lead hunting shot that remains in the field. Current legislation being proposed seeks to ban all lead weights under 1 oz. For me that would be a full lead ban as I rarely use a weight in excess of 1/4 oz. Few applications require a 1 oz or greater lead weight, especially in the BWCA.

You didn't make me feel anything but frustrated ;) Honestly though, no hard feelings on my end. I agree it's a healthy debate. I'm sure there are many things we would agree on as well. Thanks for the link, I'll read up.

arnesr: "Yet, we still coexist with nature and animals and loons in particular with no measurable effect on their populations. "

arnesr: "I would argue that banning lead tackle is a solution for a problem that does not really exist. Yes, it does cause some casualties, but it does not affect the population of loons as a whole. "

Studies in the northeast found that over 40% of adult loon mortality was due to lead poisoning from fishing tackle (not ammunition). Almost half the time an adult loon died, it was due specifically to lead introduced by humans. That exists and is pretty measurable. Heck, adult loon mortality goes from 40% to over 50% in one study when you include other causes of death confirmed as human in origin such as boat collisions and fishing line.

More broadly speaking, don't dare to proclaim that we coexist harmlessly with no measurable effect on populations. Over 3 billion birds lost since 1970. Two of the biggest killers of small and migratory birds: building windows with glass that isn't bird-safe and allowing domestic cats to roam free. Fish populations plummeting in the last 50 years all over the word due to poisoning, habitat loss, and overfishing. Insect species in dramatic decline all over the place largely due to pesticide use and habitat loss. This ecologist takes issue with your assertion as we are in the midst of a global mass extinction largely caused by humans.

arnesr: "As you most likely know, loons are migratory. How are you going to keep the loons safe from lead in their winter homes or along their migration? The loon in question died in TN. Who knows where it found the lead shot/sinker/jig that ultimately caused its demise. "

Why do people like you always object to changes because they aren't silver bullets that solve a problem completely and immediately? Why does it have to be all-or-nothing for people like you? Why can we not work toward a better world by taking the small steps along the way?

For what it is worth, it probably found that sinker in or near TN since ingested lead kills birds quite quickly.

arnesr: "No one bats an eye at a dead deer amongst a herd population that is on the decline in many areas"

Most of us are capable of paying attention to and caring about more than one issue at a time, and I assure you that there are plenty of us whose concerns also include deer populations/health.

P.S. Since you've shown that you're willing to fill-in whatever blanks you feel like regarding those debating with you, allow me to make some things clear for you. I worked for almost 10 years as a biologist in natural area restoration and management--applied field ecology in a sense--primarily in lakes and wetlands but also prairies, savannahs, and forests. My girlfriend has worked as a biologist in waterfowl and migratory bird management and conservation for even longer. I seek-out and execute as much change in my life that I can to play my part in making the world a better, healthier, and more harmonious place for life, and I hope/expect others to do the same. I am not perfect, and no one is, but I do not use that as an excuse to give-up and do nothing.

In the other thread: Potential banning of lead jigs in MN
You stated, "Studies in the northeast have found that lead tackle accounts for something like 40% of all adult loon mortality."

Where as in this thead you state, "A study in the northeast found that over 40% of adult loon mortality was due to lead poisoning from fishing tackle (not ammunition)."

Well which is it? Less than 40%, approximately 40%, or more than 40%? What is the sample size we are talking about? How exactly was the survey conducted? Statistics are the devils best friend, they can be used to imply almost anything if you don't provide a reference or details. And where is the link to this study you seem to reference every time the issue shows up? I sure would like to read it and find out what it says rather than hear your interpretation of what you think you read from the "northeast".

My idea is still cement jig heads.
Put the hook in the mold and use fine cement....split shot would not work. Thoughts?

Saw this post on Facebook and it made me sad. Have been using tungsten for a while now, but know that might not be the ultimate solution. Thanks for posting this Jerry!

arnesr: "I sure would like to read it and find out what it says rather than hear your interpretation of what you think you read from the "northeast"."

So sue me for not having every detail memorized for perfect recitation on a message board often less than interested in the technicalities of peer-reviewed scientific journal artcles especially since there has been more than one study along these exact lines. If you really would have wanted to read about this, I would have thought you'd have easily found something with the most basic search engine skills, so I doubt your earnest desire to actually read about it. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, however, here are some links I quickly grabbed for you.

Tiffany Grade, Mark Pokras, Eric LaFlamme, and Harry Vogel. Lead mortality of New Hampshire adult loons Population-Level Effects of Lead Fishing Tackle on Common Loons. The Journal of Wildlife Management

Sidor IF, Pokras MA, Major AR, Poppenga RH, Taylor KM, Miconi RM. Mortality of common loons in New England, 1987 to 2000. J Wildl Dis. 2003 Apr;39(2):306-15. doi: 10.7589/0090-3558-39.2.306. PMID: 12910757.

An article which includes some discussion of other studies in it can be found at LINK

I assume you are capable of reading and interpreting peer-reviewed journal articles given your attitude, so these links should answer most of your questions and provide additional sources to follow after.

thats what makes this site GREAT when GG & ARNESR can come together , it's a beautiful thing ;)
all i got to say on the O.P. is "dumb bird"
i'm just kidding everyone , yes i'm all for getting rid of lead in tackle.

yogi59weedr: "My idea is still cement jig heads.
Put the hook in the mold and use fine cement....split shot would not work. Thoughts?
"

Some Tungsten jigs are basically made that way, where Tungsten powder is combined with a glue or epoxy and molded around a hook. (How would you like to be the laborer in China working with and inhaling a heavy metal powder all day.)

Other Tungsten jigs are made with a cast body that is then either glued or soldered to a hook. Tungsten's melting point of greater than 6,000 degrees F prevents a typical casting approach like you see with lead which melts at 620 degrees F.

Regular concrete I don't think would work well as it is not dense enough and would be corrosive to hooks.

Here is what I'm going to stock my 2026 tackle box with once lead is banned. (Patent Pending) :)






mschi772, Thanks for posting the links to the studies you were referencing. My google skills returned different studies.

The most surprising thing I learned from the first study you referenced is this:
"The timing of lead tackle mortalities and a high incidence of accompanying non-lead associated fishing gear (hooks, fishing line, leaders, swivels, wire), which peaked in July and August, suggest that loons obtain the majority of lead tackle from current fishing activity rather than from a reservoir of lead tackle on lake bottoms. "

That's a stark contrast to what I see being pushed by anti lead folks like yourself that suggest most of the lead poisoning is being caused by loons scooping up bottom sediment to grind up their food in the gizzard. That may still happen, but this study says that is not the majority of cases.

I will admit I don't know much about fishing in New Hampshire having never been there, but I'm guessing that since they don't have 10,000 lakes, fishing pressure might be a tad higher on individual lakes. This could explain the higher incidence of "active" fishing tackle found. I would have liked to see a bit more detail on the size of the lead tackle found, rather than just a smallest, largest and average weight given. It would help to identify the real problem size of baits, which I would assume to be more panfish size baits rather than gamefish size ones. In one of the studies I know it said loons could eat fish up to 12" in length. Most 12" and under fish aren't going to break off while fighting and thus are not going to end up as a wounded fish that a loon might target. Every time I have observed a loon eating it was targeting and consuming much smaller fish, like 3-6". Perhaps loons out east are larger.

So that first study looked at 253 dead loons found over a period of 23 years, or an average of 11 deaths per year in New Hampshire. Make of that what you will. I am sure they did not find every loon that had died, so the number is likely much higher, but I'm sure they located a greater percentage than they would have in a larger state such as MN.

The second study you referenced is more in line with others that I have read. It had studied 522 dead loons from the New England states over a 12 year period. 118 were found to have died from lead poisoning, without a source specified to determine if it was tackle or ammunition related. It did find that 39 others not counted in the 118 died from fishing tackle. It also noted that more than 400 loons had died from an oil spill that were not included in the study.

And yet neither study shows a significant dip in loon population levels. Populations are mostly steady or slightly increasing.

arnesr: "I will admit I don't know much about fishing in New Hampshire having never been there, but I'm guessing that since they don't have 10,000 lakes, fishing pressure might be a tad higher on individual lakes. This could explain the higher incidence of "active" fishing tackle found. I would have liked to see a bit more detail on the size of the lead tackle found, rather than just a smallest, largest and average weight given. It would help to identify the real problem size of baits, which I would assume to be more panfish size baits rather than gamefish size ones. In one of the studies I know it said loons could eat fish up to 12" in length. Most 12" and under fish aren't going to break off while fighting and thus are not going to end up as a wounded fish that a loon might target. Every time I have observed a loon eating it was targeting and consuming much smaller fish, like 3-6". Perhaps loons out east are larger.


So that first study looked at 253 dead loons found over a period of 23 years, or an average of 11 deaths per year in New Hampshire. Make of that what you will. I am sure they did not find every loon that had died, so the number is likely much higher, but I'm sure they located a greater percentage than they would have in a larger state such as MN.


The second study you referenced is more in line with others that I have read. It had studied 522 dead loons from the New England states over a 12 year period. 118 were found to have died from lead poisoning, without a source specified to determine if it was tackle or ammunition related. It did find that 39 others not counted in the 118 died from fishing tackle. It also noted that more than 400 loons had died from an oil spill that were not included in the study."

I would appreciate it if you read the ENTIRE articles instead of skimming some results. There are very good reasons scientific articles are as long as they are, and all the stuff you skip over isn't just meaningless padding to make it look longer. They address many of the things you're alluding to being unsure of here such as the recovery rates of dead and moribund loons, population effects, and the differences one sees in monitoring, recovery, and results among the different times and states.

I'd also like to pick at your interpretation of the 2nd study. You are using total loon numbers from that study 118 toxicosis to a total of 522 dead loons. I would, and have all along, argue that it is more important to focus on the lead-induced mortality of *adult* loons for a variety of reasons. Furthermore, since loons don't winter in this region, including winter mortality numbers also interferes with understanding what kills loons here. The numbers of adult loons in that study dying due to lead toxicosis during the warm season in the north becomes 111/254 or 43.7%.

arnesr: "Perhaps loons out east are larger."

See? This is one of those things you wouldn't be wondering about if you had read thoroughly as I know at least one of these articles discusses how the loons in that area tend to be on the smaller end of size range for loons.

Additionally, of course NH doesn't have as many lakes as MN. MN is huge while NH is small. Number of lakes per a given unit area might be something to consider--or probably even better, the percentage of a state's area that is open water--but I doubt that factoring this in would really change the situation we are facing. Where humans fish in the freshwater breeding range of loons, lead poisoning from fishing tackle is the leading cause of death of loons who have reached maturity. That's pretty horrible, and I can't see any excuse for not trying to find a safer way to fish.

You are killing me smalls.

I did read the ENTIRE two studies you referenced, and I did see where they gave an estimated percentage of recovered loons for study for at least a few years. But you do realize these are just estimates.....a best guess. I was actually giving you the benefit of the doubt and acknowledging there were more deaths than what was listed in the numbers.

Like I said statistics are the devils best friend, you can pick and choose what numbers to include to prove whatever point you want. Hence the "focus on the lead-induced mortality of *adult* loons".

I did not see any reference to the size of loons. I did see that the NH loons that were found dead had a lower weight than the average loon from a comparable population. I would attribute that to the loon being sick, perhaps that's a stretch on my part.

"Weights of live breeding adults
from comparable populations, with average weights of 5.460.8 kg (n583), were
significantly higher than those of loons
found dead"

arnesr: Like I said statistics are the devils best friend, you can pick and choose what numbers to include to prove whatever point you want. Hence the "focus on the lead-induced mortality of *adult* loons". "

If you're trying to assess what is killing loons in their breeding range, what would be the point in including statistics from their winter range? And ruling-out young is a worthwhile way of looking at the statistics to understand what is really happening as well. The young face a very different set of threats given their relative vulnerability and dependence on parents. Sure, lumping them together can tell you some things, but separating them so that the relatively high vulnerability of young to things like trauma and predation aren't skewing the numbers when trying to understand what is happening to adults who have been successful in reaching maturity is not at all unreasonable, especially since here in their summer range, the death of the adults can lead to the death of the young.

Again, studies are showing that where people fish, lead poisoning from fishing tackle is a leading cause of death for mature loons. It may not be 40% everywhere, but it isn't insignificant anywhere that I've seen. Are you really so opposed to figuring-out how to fish without using lead?

-------

The following is less relevant, but addresses something you mentioned earlier for the sake of intrigue.

Circling back to you interest in loon size in MN vs NH. Obviously the sources I provided don't look at MN, but Mager, Walcott, and Evers do discuss selective pressures on loon size and differences between eastern, more coastal, and western, more inland, loons. https://www.fws.gov/uploadedFiles/Mager2007.pdf
Bottom line: loons tend toward being smaller here than there. Reason for that discussed in the study, to nutshell it, is that the selective pressure of our loons' much longer migration to the Carolina/Florida (ish) coast or Gulf of Mexico compared to their loons' wintering as nearby as the Maine coast favors smaller body mass. It isn't a dramatic difference in size as there are plenty of other factors, but you had specifically wondered about this, so here's something that touches a little on that (with some older studies that touch on the subject also cited within).

All other things being about equal, when it comes to north vs south (polar vs tropical; cold vs warm), Bergmann's rule usually (but not always) applies.

mschi772 ,

I'm just trying to separate fact from fiction and get to the bottom of what is really happening with lead and loons and perhaps find a compromise. I acknowledge that some loons are dying from lead. My question specifically is what type and size of lead and how is it happening. The studies you linked have helped answer some but not all of my questions.

What I find fascinating is that you come into this thread thumping your chest claiming to be an expert biologist of 10 years(and your girlfriend as well) and then you give incorrect information. On March 8th, you posted this in the other thread, previously linked:

mschi772 :
"Loons aren't taking lead tackle right off the lines. They're finding dislodged jigs and sinkers at the bottom and mistaking them for rocks, or they're ingesting lead bits when they eat fish that have ingested lead bits."

When pressed for links to the study you are referring to, and you subsequently provide, The study says the exact opposite. That and your accusatory tone kind of eats away at your credibility, just saying.

I have never ran over a manatee in the BWCA or anywhere for that matter, I am pretty certain of that. I do acknowledge I contribute to the decimation of insect populations you referenced earlier, notably the mosquito and those black flies that linger in the canoe and relentlessly bite your ankles. My cat rarely leaves the house and doesn't eat birds. A few small birds have broken their necks flying into our house windows over the years. There, I feel better getting all of that off my chest.

I am opposed to unneeded government regulation to fix a problem that does not exist or that could be mitigated by reasonable means.

arnesr: "Loons aren't taking lead tackle right off the lines. They're finding dislodged jigs and sinkers at the bottom and mistaking them for rocks, or they're ingesting lead bits when they eat fish that have ingested lead bits."

When pressed for links to the study you are referring to, and you subsequently provide, The study says the exact opposite."

Untrue. "Ingesting lead bits when they eat fish that have ingested lead bits" is exactly the sort of pathway that these studies are suggesting that most lead is getting into these birds' systems. No one is hooking a loon. No loons are going around snagging jigs and sinkers right off your line as you fish unless perhaps they happen to take a fish with a jig in the exact moment it is hooked on your line which has probably happened, but is so doubtfully the most common way loons are ingesting lead.

I won't apologize for my accusatory tone. I grew fed-up with anti-intellectualism a long time ago and have next to no patience for agendas that fight to preserve a status quo despite science suggesting change. You want to speak my language? Show me science that debunks the danger that lead poses to wildlife.

mschi772: "

"Loons aren't taking lead tackle right off the lines. They're finding dislodged jigs and sinkers at the bottom and mistaking them for rocks, or they're ingesting lead bits when they eat fish that have ingested lead bits."


When pressed for links to the study you are referring to, and you subsequently provide, The study says the exact opposite."

Untrue. "Ingesting lead bits when they eat fish that have ingested lead bits" is exactly the sort of pathway that these studies are suggesting that most lead is getting into these birds' systems. No one is hooking a loon. No loons are going around snagging jigs and sinkers right off your line as you fish unless perhaps they happen to take a fish with a jig in the exact moment it is hooked on your line which has probably happened, but is so doubtfully the most common way loons are ingesting lead."

Again, from the study you referenced:

"Methods of Lead Tackle Ingestion
Our findings indicate a peak in the timing of lead tackle mortalities in July and August, coinciding with a peak of fishing activity on our proxy lake, which suggests that common loons obtain the majority of ingested lead tackle from current fishing activity (i.e., eating a fish that has ingested a lead jig or sinker and broken the line, or striking at tackle or a fish being retrieved by an angler). "

I have also personally witnessed this behavior of a loon chasing my lure on retrieve. Thankfully I realized what was happening and I was able to reel in my lure faster than he/she could swim.

Living five miles from NH I can categorically state our loons are 30 percent larger. They have a long fishing season and a very short migration. The loons on my lake migrate 18 miles.

Not arguing with this as this local resource backs up that claim

Not 1800 miles as in the Midwest. loon research

Common Loon numbers have been declining for the past two decades. The Audubon Society points to Mercury Poisoning primarily from coal power-plant emissions, acid rain which has reduced their food sources, lead poisoning from lead sinkers and jigs used by anglers, botulism outbreaks in the Great Lakes as well as climate change. This spectacular icon of the BWCA is in trouble and anything we can do to reduce this decline is well worth it IMHO.

arnesr: "

mschi772: "

arnesr: "Loons aren't taking lead tackle right off the lines. They're finding dislodged jigs and sinkers at the bottom and mistaking them for rocks, or they're ingesting lead bits when they eat fish that have ingested lead bits."



When pressed for links to the study you are referring to, and you subsequently provide, The study says the exact opposite."

Untrue. "Ingesting lead bits when they eat fish that have ingested lead bits" is exactly the sort of pathway that these studies are suggesting that most lead is getting into these birds' systems. No one is hooking a loon. No loons are going around snagging jigs and sinkers right off your line as you fish unless perhaps they happen to take a fish with a jig in the exact moment it is hooked on your line which has probably happened, but is so doubtfully the most common way loons are ingesting lead."

Again, from the study you referenced:


"Methods of Lead Tackle Ingestion
Our findings indicate a peak in the timing of lead tackle mortalities in July and August, coinciding with a peak of fishing activity on our proxy lake, which suggests that common loons obtain the majority of ingested lead tackle from current fishing activity (i.e., eating a fish that has ingested a lead jig or sinker and broken the line, or striking at tackle or a fish being retrieved by an angler). "

I have also personally witnessed this behavior of a loon chasing my lure on retrieve. Thankfully I realized what was happening and I was able to reel in my lure faster than he/she could swim."

Have you ever caught a loon while fishing? Do you know anyone who has ever caught a loon while fishing? So you saw a loon that gave chase to your lure. Did it take it? Yeah yeah, you "out-ran" the loon by reeling faster than a loon can swim that one time you saw it, but if it isn't uncommon, what about the times you didn't see it? I consider it quite reasonable to assume that if the main source of lead poisoning for loons was loons actively taking jigs off of lines, people would be CATCHING loons. If you can haul-in a big fish, you can reel-in a loon, but no one is doing that. I suspect that even if initial targeting of lures is common, loons aren't ultimately falling for them which really just leaves ingesting the lead incidentally with fish who have the lead in them and, as indicated as being much less common, mistaking them for rocks for use in their gullets.

yellowcanoe: "Living five miles from NH I can categorically state our loons are 30 percent larger. They have a long fishing season and a very short migration. The loons on my lake migrate 18 miles.


Not arguing with this as this local resource backs up that claim


Not 1800 miles as in the Midwest. loon research "

Good to know, that helps explain how a loon could eat a 12" fish. Thanks for sharing.

mschi772: "

arnesr: "

mschi772: "

arnesr: "Loons aren't taking lead tackle right off the lines. They're finding dislodged jigs and sinkers at the bottom and mistaking them for rocks, or they're ingesting lead bits when they eat fish that have ingested lead bits."



When pressed for links to the study you are referring to, and you subsequently provide, The study says the exact opposite."

Untrue. "Ingesting lead bits when they eat fish that have ingested lead bits" is exactly the sort of pathway that these studies are suggesting that most lead is getting into these birds' systems. No one is hooking a loon. No loons are going around snagging jigs and sinkers right off your line as you fish unless perhaps they happen to take a fish with a jig in the exact moment it is hooked on your line which has probably happened, but is so doubtfully the most common way loons are ingesting lead."

Again, from the study you referenced:



"Methods of Lead Tackle Ingestion
Our findings indicate a peak in the timing of lead tackle mortalities in July and August, coinciding with a peak of fishing activity on our proxy lake, which suggests that common loons obtain the majority of ingested lead tackle from current fishing activity (i.e., eating a fish that has ingested a lead jig or sinker and broken the line, or striking at tackle or a fish being retrieved by an angler). "


I have also personally witnessed this behavior of a loon chasing my lure on retrieve. Thankfully I realized what was happening and I was able to reel in my lure faster than he/she could swim."

Have you ever caught a loon while fishing? Do you know anyone who has ever caught a loon while fishing? So you saw a loon that gave chase to your lure. Did it take it? Yeah yeah, you "out-ran" the loon by reeling faster than a loon can swim. I consider it quite reasonable to assume that if the main source of lead poisoning for loons was loons actively taking jigs off of lines, people would be CATCHING loons. If you can haul-in a big fish, you can reel-in a loon, but no one is doing that. I suspect that even if initial targeting of lures is common, loons aren't ultimately falling for them which really just leaves ingesting the lead incidentally with fish who have the lead in them and, as indicated as being much less common, mistaking them for rocks for use in their gullets."

It happens all the time. As a biologist, especially one that has researched loons, I would expect you to know this.

Report a Hooked Loon

arnesr: "

mschi772: "

arnesr: "

mschi772: "

arnesr: "Loons aren't taking lead tackle right off the lines. They're finding dislodged jigs and sinkers at the bottom and mistaking them for rocks, or they're ingesting lead bits when they eat fish that have ingested lead bits."




When pressed for links to the study you are referring to, and you subsequently provide, The study says the exact opposite."

Untrue. "Ingesting lead bits when they eat fish that have ingested lead bits" is exactly the sort of pathway that these studies are suggesting that most lead is getting into these birds' systems. No one is hooking a loon. No loons are going around snagging jigs and sinkers right off your line as you fish unless perhaps they happen to take a fish with a jig in the exact moment it is hooked on your line which has probably happened, but is so doubtfully the most common way loons are ingesting lead."

Again, from the study you referenced:



"Methods of Lead Tackle Ingestion
Our findings indicate a peak in the timing of lead tackle mortalities in July and August, coinciding with a peak of fishing activity on our proxy lake, which suggests that common loons obtain the majority of ingested lead tackle from current fishing activity (i.e., eating a fish that has ingested a lead jig or sinker and broken the line, or striking at tackle or a fish being retrieved by an angler). "



I have also personally witnessed this behavior of a loon chasing my lure on retrieve. Thankfully I realized what was happening and I was able to reel in my lure faster than he/she could swim."

Have you ever caught a loon while fishing? Do you know anyone who has ever caught a loon while fishing? So you saw a loon that gave chase to your lure. Did it take it? Yeah yeah, you "out-ran" the loon by reeling faster than a loon can swim. I consider it quite reasonable to assume that if the main source of lead poisoning for loons was loons actively taking jigs off of lines, people would be CATCHING loons. If you can haul-in a big fish, you can reel-in a loon, but no one is doing that. I suspect that even if initial targeting of lures is common, loons aren't ultimately falling for them which really just leaves ingesting the lead incidentally with fish who have the lead in them and, as indicated as being much less common, mistaking them for rocks for use in their gullets."

It happens all the time. As a biologist, especially one that has researched loons, I would expect you to know this.


Report a Hooked Loon "

This is literally the first thing I have ever seen regarding loons being hooked, and I have been fishing and camping my whole life in addition to my education and career in biology (which did NOT focus on loon research despite your odd choice to say that I have researched loons, unless you think that following some studies is the same thing as conducting research). I'm not surprised at all that it has happened--I'd be more surprised if it had NEVER happened even once--but I have a hard time believing that it is common.

My girlfriend is going to be making a run up to an avian rehab (or research? both? in any case, she's hauling a bunch of birds up to them for necropsy I think) facility in northern WI soon, so I'll ask her to ask them about this as hooked loons being a common occurrence is news to her as well. I also encourage anyone involved in similar work in the region to weigh-in because this is news to me, and even after, just now, trying to find more information about it, I can find only a few anecdotal stories on the web and no scientific literature addressing this.

EDIT: She's going to REGI (Raptor Education Group, Inc in Antigo, WI), and having searched their site for "loon hook" and read through some of their published stories, they do indeed handle hooked loons. Many/most of them seem to be "externally" hooked either deliberately by horrible people or due to entanglement. The ones that seem to have intended to ingest tackle have gone for lures like Rapala minnows or husky jerks or some-such trolling lures that look like fish--not lead jigs or sinkers. It makes sense that they'd be drawn as visual hunters to lures that more visually simulate their prey, so I still find myself doubting and wanting to see some data on loons deliberately targeting and ingesting lead jigs/sinkers.