Wild Side.Feb. 19, 2012 By Joe Macaluso, Advocate Outdoors writer

Another Valentine’s Day has come and gone.

Hearts and flowers, candy and dinner and even had a friend’s wife (his name will never be divulged here) Facebook-ed that he fixed dinner and watched a Katherine Hepburn movie (believe it was “Springtime”) with her and how much she adored her hubbie for taking that kind of testosterone purge.

Just kidding.

At least once every year — OK, maybe many more than one day — every man should cater to his wife and what better day than Feb. 14 to do that.

Valentine’s Day 2012 will be remembered for something else, something that more men than we’ll ever know will celebrate long into this year and, possibly, years to come.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency rejected another petition to ban the use of lead in fishing tackle. The Center for Biological Diversity led the charge for the ban that claimed fishing tackle was harmful to waterfowl populations.

In denying the petition, the EPA’s announcement read “(the petitioners failed) to provide a basis for finding that the risk presented is an unreasonable risk for which federal action under Section 6a of the Toxic Substances Control Act is necessary.”

The most telling indication is that some folks don’t know how to take “NO” for an answer is that the biological diversity activists had much the same petition rejected by the EPA in November.

That “NO” wasn’t enough, not for these people, because they immediately challenged the ruling in court.

The lead-ban issue isn’t new. We use nontoxic shot to hunt waterfowl today because waterfowl biologists found lead shot to harm ducks, geese and other migratory birds that fed in waterfowl hunting areas.

That’s certainly understandable: What’s amazing is that a handful of people are carrying this angst into the arena of fishing all the while knowing that the effects of lead fishing tackle on waterfowl has been studied across our country and found to have a negligible effect.

American Sportfishing Association vice president Gordon Robertson didn’t mince his words with his reaction to this second try and the suit in court: “The EPA’s decision reaffirms that lead fishing tackle is not harming waterfowl populations ... With antifishing organizations trying to stop recreational fishing using whatever means they can, legislation is necessary to protest our sport from overregulation.”

So, today, Congress has before it the Hunting, Fishing and Recreational Shooting Sports Protection Act, a measure the recreational sporting industry, hunters and fishermen believe it needs to stop these almost incessant, fund-draining challenge.

So, there you have it. Another reason to contact Louisiana’s Congressional delegation and let them know you support the Protection Act.

It’s another reason why you, as sportsmen, need to be active to preserve the activities you love.