|
|
Member
Posts: 1406
| Here is the latest!
Good Luck
Tyee
Summary of important changes: 1. Organizer fees: We propose to significantly lower the required feesfor tournament organizers with the intent of recovering only our "new"costs relating to tournament fishing. Fees would be $25, $100, or $200depending on prize amounts and tournament format. Fees would be lowerfor "immediate release" tournaments less likely to incur incidentalmortality (a major issue for the NRB) with idea of providing a financialincentive to use tournament formats that minimize incidental mortality.Youth and disabled events would be exempt from fees. We could not comeup with a fair and enforceable definition for "charity" or "non-profit"tournaments but believe the lower fee structure will not be animpediment to those events. The $200 fee would be incurred only by"catch-hold-release" or "catch and kill" events awarding more than$10,000 in prizes.
2. Individual participant fees: We have removed the individualtournament participant fee. Although this was a highly recommendedoption by Fishing Tournament Advisory Committee (FTAC), DNR andlegislative legal staff believe the original legislation, 2003 WisconsinAct 249, only gives us authority to charge fees to tournament organizersto recover costs of administering the program.
3. Full recovery of costs: The Natural Resources Board throughmotions and instructions given during public NRB meetings has directedthe Department to recover the costs of administering the tournamentprogram entirely from the fees. Based on public input and advice of theFTAC, we have reduced the cost of the tournament program to only "new"program costs by not including law enforcement costs (on the assumptionthat no new staff or expenses are being incurred with these new rules),and tournament data collections (on the assumption that collectingvaluable biological information from tournaments is actually a benefitto all anglers and shouldn't be paid for by the tournament anglersthemselves). With these changes, the new projected revenues closelymatch the projected new costs at around $33,000 per year.
4. Bass Culling Pilot Study: The NRB in an approved motion alsorequired us to recover any unreimbursed costs of the bass cullingtournament pilot study through fees. We originally prorated the costacross all tournaments, but public comment suggested it should beapplied only to bass tournaments and sunset when the money is collected.So we have proposed a $2/angler surcharge for bass tournaments (exceptimmediate release tournaments) for a six year period to recover thischarge. That fee would be added to the cost of the tournament permit.
5. Tournament limits: We recommend retaining the permit structure withlimits on the number of tournaments based on waterbody size - though weare responding to public input that the originally proposed numberswould be overly limiting on some waters by applying the limits based onthe specific waterbody or river pool where the weigh in will occurrather than pooling the water acreages for connecting waters or chains.This will have the effect of spreading out the effort out on lake chainsand allowing additional tournaments on the Mississippi River.
6. Incidental Mortality: We have learned that there will beincidental mortality of bass and walleyes in "catch-hold-and release"tournaments if the water temperature is above about 75 degrees, and todate there have been no studies or methods developed to improve handlingtechniques to make this go away. Mortalities observed in Wisconsin bassranged from 16-34% and nationally have averaged 25%. We proposed acomplete ban on this tournament format at the hearings but this washighly unpopular with bass tournament anglers. In this rule we proposean alternate strategy of an automatic bag limit reduction from 5 to 3for bass and walleyes during dates when the average water temperaturewould be above 70F for walleyes or 80F for bass. Those dates areapproximately the first week of July through the middle of August (80F)for bass and the middle of June to the first week of September forwalleye (70F).This does not make the incidental mortality issue go away- but it will reduce the mortality since fewer fish will be handled andstress in livewells will be reduced.
7. AIS: The NRB has expressed concern about tournaments spreading VHSand other invasive species. The hearing proposal included a requirementthat tournament organziers submit an AIS plan as part of theirapplication but there is understandably a lot of confusion as to whatthe plan would include and how it would be administered. Given therecent and proposed changes in boat and bait handling laws relating toVHS, we believe the AIS plan requirement is outdated and have replacedit with a requirement that tournament organizers and participants mustcomply with all existing state rules, and that the DNR has the authorityto include appropriate AIS protocols in tournament permits if there areinvasive species issues.
8. Tournament application process: The "open window" for tournamentapplications has been moved up to April 1st through June 30th in theyear prior to the tournament with final decisions made by August 1st.If limits are not reached, organizers can still apply for a permit up to30 days prior to the tournament. There will still be a lottery if limitson particular waterbodies is reached.
9. Other restrictions: The provisions that a fisheries biologist mayadd to the permit if the format is "catch-hold-release" includeredistribution of fish, restriction on the area that can be fished toreduce the time that fish are held in live wells, and the distance fishare transported to the weigh-in site. These conditions would be statedwhen the permit was issued.Hopefully this information will help in your review of the new rules.If you have any questions about the new rules please contact Dr. AndyFayram at [email protected] or 608-266-5250.
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 1406
| and to the NRB!
Here is what is being sent to the NRB:
ORDER OF THE STATE OF WISCONSIN NATURAL RESOURCES BOARD REPEALING AND RECREATING RULES The Wisconsin Natural Resources Board proposes an order to repeal and recreate NR 20.40, relating to regulation of fishing tournaments in inland, outlying, and boundary waters of Wisconsin. FH-22-06 Analysis Prepared by the Department of Natural Resources Statutes Interpreted: In promulgating this rule, ss. 29.014, 29.041, 29.403, and 29.516, Stats., which authorize fishing and the hunting of small game, have been interpreted as giving the department the authority to make changes to fishing regulations on boundary waters of Wisconsin. Additionally, ss. 29.403, and 29.4035, Stats., have been interpreted as allowing the department the authority to write fishing tournament rules that help to ensure good fishing opportunities. Statutory Authority: Sections 29.014(1), 29.039, 29.041, 29.403, and 227.11(2)(a),Stats. Explanation of agency authority: In promulgating this rule, ss. 29.014(1), 29.403, and 29.4035, Stats., have been interpreted as allowing the department the authority to write fishing tournament rules that help to ensure good fishing opportunities. Explanation of Agency Authority to Promulgate the Proposed Rules Under the Statutory Authority: Statutes that authorize the promulgation of this rule order include ss. 29.014(1), 29.403, 29.4035, and 227.11(2), Stats. These sections grant rule making authority to the department to establish and maintain open and closed seasons for fish and game and any bag limits, size limits, rest days and conditions governing the taking of fish and game that will conserve the fish and game supply and ensure the citizens of this state continued opportunities for good fishing, hunting and trapping that the department may establish a program to authorize and regulate fishing tournaments. Related Rule or Statute: None. Plain Language Rule Analysis: This rule exercises authority granted the Department in Wisconsin 2003 Act 249 to promulgate rules to establish a program to authorize and regulate fishing tournaments. New fishing tournament permit requirements are established so that if a fishing tournament consists of 20 or more boats or 100 or more participants or targets trout on classified trout streams or is a catch-hold-release tournament with an off-site weigh-in or has prizes of $10,000 or more a permit from the department is required. If none of those criteria are met, no permit is required. Fishing tournament permit fees are established to cover the cost of the program, estimated to be $32,796 annually, which includes permit application review and approval, catch report review, and database entry. In addition, fees will include an additional $15,000 for six years to recover the $90,000 cost of the bass fishing tournament pilot program (approximately 7,500 bass angler tournament participants * $2 surcharge per participant to the tournament organizer) In addition to the surcharge for bass tournament participants, tournament organizer fees depend on the tournament format and the nature of the contest. Tournament organizers will be charged a fee of $25 if the tournament format is “immediate-release”, targets salmon and/or trout in Lake Superior, Lake Michigan and Green Bay, or if the total value of the prizes is less than $500 (approximately 141 tournaments of this type * $25 = $3,525). Tournament organizers will be charged a fee of $100 if the format is catch-hold-release or “catch and kill”, and the total value of the prizes is greater than $500 but less than $10,000, or where results of the tournament are used to calculate rankings or standings for future prizes worth greater than $500 but less than $10,000 (approximately 217 tournaments of this type * $100 = $21,700). Similarly, tournament organizers will be charged a fee of $200 if the format is catch-hold-release or “catch and kill”, and the total value of the prizes is $10,000 or greater or where results of the tournament are used to calculate rankings or standings for future prizes worth $10,000 or greater (approximately 42 tournaments of this type * $200 = $8,400).
This rule establishes a permit application process by which the department will accept applications for permits from April 1st - June 30th each year for tournaments to be held the following year. Applications received during that period that result in limits on the number of tournaments on a water being exceeded will be subjected to a lottery for the date and location. Prior to the lottery drawing, organizers will be informed and offered an opportunity to modify their application to a date or location where limits have not been reached. Limits on the size and number of fishing tournaments are proposed in this rule. Limits on lakes vary depending on lake size and are based on public access standards set forth in NR 1.91(5)(b). The rule requires a reduced daily bag limit of three for walleye from the second Saturday in June to the first Sunday in September. The rule also requires a reduced daily bag limit of three bass from the first Saturday in July to the second Sunday in August. The rule also establishes other requirements of tournament organizers, including requiring a plan for disposal of dead fish. The rule establishes other general provisions related to fishing tournament format, fish holding, and handling. Summary of and Comparison with Existing or Proposed Federal Regulations: None known. Comparison of Similar Rules in Adjacent States: Fishing tournament regulation in states bordering Wisconsin: Iowa. Iowa’s fishing tournament rules are more stringent than Wisconsin’s current regulations and similar to the type of rules that Act 249 authorizes the department to promulgate. In Iowa, a permit is required to conduct a fishing tournament on public waters under the jurisdiction of the state. Approval of any tournament application is at the discretion of the fisheries management biologist. The DNR may impose special conditions not specifically covered herein for any fishing tournament if deemed necessary to protect the resource or to assure public safety. Special conditions may include, but are not limited to: ? release of live fish ? fish measured to length and released from a boat ? multiple weigh-ins when water temperatures exceed 70 degrees Fahrenheit ? aerated live wells ? designated release areas ? designated release persons
Tournament size: ? on lakes less than 100 surface acres - a 15 boat maximum ? on lakes greater than 100 surface acres - a maximum of one boat per ten surface acres (Biologists may wave this rule for special events.) ? The number of tournaments at any one access area during a given day may be restricted if deemed necessary to avoid congestion with the public or competing tournaments
Iowa rules read, “It is prohibited to sort, cull, highgrade, or replace any fish already in possession. Participants in permitted black bass tournaments are exempted. Any fish taken into possession by holding in a live well, on a stringer or in other fish holding devices is part of the daily bag limit. Once the daily bag limit of a particular species is reached, fishing for that species is permitted as long as all fish of that species caught are immediately released." Illinois. The Illinois DNR requires a fishing tournament permit if: ? Prizes are offered for tagged or marked fish where any of the states waters with special regulations are named as a tournament site; or ? The fishing event is conducted over a period of more than five days during any calendar year, and prizes with a total value in excess of $1,000 are offered, and where any of the waters listed have special regulations; or ? Special exemptions to the site specific regulations for daily creel and size limit are requested for: - catch, hold for weigh-in, and release tournaments for muskellunge on all waters; - black bass catch and release tournaments (Lake Michigan and streams, except that the Mississippi, Ohio, and Wabash Rivers are not eligible for permits which exempt participants from daily catch and size limits)’ - special catch and release tournaments for which the proceeds go towards youth education and/or charity type projects; - national catch and release tournaments; and - special fishing tournaments/events for children under 16, for disabled persons, or for adults over 65.
Issuance or denial of fishing tournament permits are based on the following criteria: ? The capability of the fishery resource to absorb the tournament with minimal impact to its well-being. ? The location of the tournament; catch and release management zones on streams are not eligible for permits. ? The evaluation of the adverse impacts resulting from the additional fishing pressure generated by the tournament on the fish population and the targeted fish species. The evaluation must demonstrate minimal and short-term impacts in order for the ILDNR to issue the permit. Specific items to be considered include: - biological status of the fish population including the species being sought. - length of the tournament; - number of boats and anglers participating in the tournament; - for tagged fish tournaments; provisions for obtaining and tagging targeted fish species; and - safety of anglers and potential boater-user conflicts. ? Demonstrates adequate provisions for holding, handling, and releasing caught fish. Specific criteria are: - Tournament officials must be able to certify that all boats possess a live well (except muskellunge fishing tournaments) measuring at least 18-in long, 12-in deep, and 12-in wide. and be fitted with a functioning aerator and water pump. - Following the weigh-in, fish must be released away from the weigh-in site and as near to the spot where the catch was made as possible by means of a common release boat, or by individual boats. - Common release boats must meet specifications set by the ILDNR and must be certified by the ILDNR as a common release boat. Individual boats can not carry more than the daily creel limit of fish. - For catch, weigh-in, and release muskellunge tournaments, all boats must have a fish cradle to temporarily hold fish in the water while an official determines the length or weight of the fish prior to release. Muskellunge may not be transported to a weigh-in site. ? Adequate identification of participants in fishing tournaments for law enforcement purposes. Specific criteria are: - Tournament officials must keep and have available on site a written record or log of daily participants (including names and boat registration numbers) for inspection by ILDNR officials. - Each participant and boat must be identified in an easily recognizable manner at a distance (patch on the hat or back).
Failure to acquire a permit will result in denial of future applications for a fishing tournament permit by that applicant, sponsor or group for up to 5 years. Michigan. Fishing tournament permits are obtained through the Michigan Recreational Boating Information Center for the use of the waterbody access site. Minnesota. The Minnesota DNR recently (August 2007) put in place new rules for permitting and regulating fishing tournaments. The rules are as follows: ?Fees -Open water contests: Small contests (31-100 participants, 50 or fewer boats) = $120, large contests (more than 100 participants or more than 50 boats) = $400. -Open water contests with off-site weigh-ins: small contests = $500, large contests $1,000. -Ice fishing contests with more than 150 participants = $120. -Fees may be waived by the commissioner for charitable organizations. ?Permits -Permits are issued to Minnesota residents only. -A permit is required for any fishing contest that is limited to specifically named waters is one or more of the following apply 1) there are greater than 30 participants for open-water contests or 150 participants for ice fishing contests, 2) the entry fee is greater than $25/person, 3) the total prize value is greater than $25,000 or 4) the contest is limited to trout species only. -Contests limited to youth age 18 and under do not need a permit. Statewide and regional fishing contests do not need a permit unless they are limited to trout only. -Permit applications will be accepted from August 1st through September 28th. -If permit applications exceed the monthly limits for a given waterbody, the DNR will notify the applicants that their application will be subject to a lottery. Applicants will then be given seven days to change their application but could not change to a location an time period for which applications are already at or above the limit. -The DNR will conduct a drawing for all locations and time periods for which applications exceed limits. First preference in the drawings will be given to applicants for established or traditional fishing contests. Preference points will be given to contests based on the number of times they have been unsuccessful in previous drawings. Contests lose all accumulated preference points after being successfully drawn. -Results of the drawing will be announced no later than November 7th. -Permit applications received after September 28th will be considered on a first come first served basis. ?Monthly limits on the number of fishing contests
Lake size (acres) Maximum number of permitted fishing contests Maximum number of large permitted fishing contests Maximum number of permitted fishing contest days less than 2,000 2 0 4 2,000-4,999 3 1 6 5,000-14,999 4 2 8 15,000-55,000 5 3 10 more than 55,000 no limit no limit no limit
Rivers Maximum number of permitted fishing contests Maximum number of large permitted fishing contests Maximum number of permitted fishing contest days Mississippi River pool #1,2,3,5,5a,6,7,8,9 4 (each pool) 2 (each pool) 8 (each pool) Mississippi River pool #4 5 3 10 Lake St. Croix 4 2 8 St. Croix River 2 1 8 All other rivers 2 1 4 -Up to five additional permits beyond the monthly limits listed above may be issued for fishing tournaments on lakes that are 5,000 acres or larger if the applicants can demonstrate that the contest will provide economic benefits to the local area, promote public awareness of fishing and the state’s resources, and conforms to the best management practices for the lake. ?Weekend Limitations -On any waterbody less than 55,000 acres, the DNR may require at least two weekends per month with no permitted fishing contests. -The DNR may require that multiple-day permitted fishing contests may not include more than one weekend day from Memorial Day through labor day weekend. -Permitted fishing contests may not be held on the weekend of fishing season openers if the contest would target a species that the season is open for. ?Other items -The DNR may include the following restrictions as part of a fishing contest permit 1) restrictions on catch-hold-release or off-site weigh-ins, or denial of catch-hold-release or off-site weigh-ins to prevent undue loss of fish, 2) restrictions on hours that a fishing contest is conducted including specified start and stop times, 3) limits on pre-fishing and proof that such limits were communicated to contest participants and enforced, and 4) limits on the use of parking spaces at state-owned public water access sites and proof that such limits were communicated to the participants and enforced.
Definitions: • Permitted fishing contest means an open-water fishing or ice-fishing contest that requires a permit from the MNDNR. • Permitted fishing contest day means a day on a water body where a permitted fishing contest is held. Two permitted fishing contests that are held on the same water body on the same day count as two permitted fishing contest days. • Large permitted fishing contest means an open-water fishing contest with more than 50 boats or 100 participants that requires a permit from the MNDNR. • Established or traditional fishing contest means a fishing contest that prior to the 2001 tournament season had been issued at least two consecutive permits in the previous two years, or four out of the previous five years, for the same lake and time period. Tournaments granted established status need thereafter to be conducted annually or at least four out of five years to remain established. • Off-site weigh-in means a weigh-in of fish from a fishing contest at a location that is not adjacent to the waters listed on the fishing contest permit. • Pre-fishing means fishing by participants of a permitted fishing contest prior to the scheduled dates of the contest on waters listed on the fishing contest permit. • Participant means a person who is taking part in a fishing contest.
Summary of Factual Data and Analytical Methodologies Used in Support of the Rule: The proposed rule revisions were developed with substantial input from the fishing tournament advisory committee (FTAC), established in July 2004 by the Department as required by 2003 Wisconsin Act 249. The Department concurrently established an internal fishing tournament working group (FTWG) that provided substantial input into these rule revisions. The rule revisions were also reviewed by other department staff represented by members of the FTWG. The FTAC consists of fishing tournament organizers and representatives of the Conservation Congress, sport fishing organizations, and users of the lakes and streams of this state. The FTWG consists of department fisheries, watershed, law enforcement, and legal services staff. The FTAC has met twelve times between August 2004 and June 2007, six of those with the Department’s FWTG. Eleven of those meetings involved discussion of fishing tournament rule revisions. The groups focused on the specific authorities as provided in 2003 Wisconsin Act 249 in developing revised tournament rules. Analysis and Documentation Used in Support of the Agency’s Determination Under s. 227.114, Stats., (Small Business Impact): Small businesses likely to be impacted by this rule include some tournament organizers. Tournament organizers will be affected by the imposition of tournament permit fees and will potentially be impacted by the imposition of the limits on the amount of tournament activity that can take place on a particular waterbody. However, the rules to not prevent any tournament organizer from holding a tournament particularly if the organizer is flexible with regard to location and date of the tournament. Effect on Small Business, Including How the Rule Will Be Enforced: Local businesses that cater to tournament anglers and spectators may be indirectly affected by these regulations. Local communities and businesses may be affected if tournament activity either increases or decreases as a result of these rules. Tournament activity generates local economic activity and can range from tens of thousands of dollars to approximately one million dollars depending on the type of tournament (see the Economic component of the Bass Fishing Tournament Pilot program summary for specific details). The amount of tournament activity in Wisconsin may increase as a result of these rules if they are viewed as more favorable than those of surrounding states. Conversely, the amount of tournament activity may decrease if the rules are viewed as overly restrictive. The Department has no data to answer the question of whether these rules will act to increase or decrease tournament activity and it is therefore difficult to predict the overall economic impact of these regulations although the impact may be of notable magnitude.
Agency contact person: Andrew Fayram, FH/4 101 South Webster Street, Madison, WI 53707-7921; email: [email protected]; phone: 608.266.5250. SECTION 1. NR 20.40 is repealed and recreated to read: NR 20.40 Fishing tournaments. (1) APPLICABILITY. This section applies to fishing tournaments on lakes, rivers, the Great Lakes, Wisconsin-Minnesota boundary waters as defined in s. NR 21.02(16), Wisconsin-Iowa boundary waters as defined in s. NR 22.02(14), and Wisconsin-Michigan boundary waters as defined in s. NR 23.02(10). (2) DEFINITIONS. In this section:
(a) "Aquatic invasive species" has the meaning in s. NR 198.12(1). (b) “Aquatic plant” has the meaning in s. 30.715(1)(a), Stats.
(c) “Catch and kill tournament” means a fishing tournament where fish are caught by participants, reduced to their possession, and retained as part of the participant’s daily bag limit.
(c) “Catch-hold-release tournament” means a fishing tournament where fish caught by participants are reduced to possession and transported, usually for purposes of recording, and live fish are then released to the water from which they came. This format was previously referred to as a “live-release” tournament. (d) "Fishing tournament" means any organized fishing activity, on any water of the state where competition is the primary purpose, and where incentives, such as money, prizes or points, are awarded. (e) “Immediate-release tournament” means a fishing tournament where fish caught by participants are not reduced to possession and transported, but are held only long enough for identification and to document length or weight or both, and released to the water from which they came. (f) "Live well" means a container designed to hold live fish on a boat. (g) "Off-site weigh-in" means a weigh-in of fish caught in a catch-hold-release tournament at a location that is not on the shoreline or adjacent to the waters listed on the fishing tournament permit.
(h) “Open water fishing” means all fishing that occurs except when ice is used as a platform from which to fish. (i) "Organize" means to advance, conduct, direct, establish, promote or otherwise be responsible for the operation of a fishing tournament.
(j) "Organizer" means a person who advances, conducts, directs, establishes, organizes, promotes or otherwise is responsible for the operation of a fishing tournament, but does not include a person who only assists in advertising or publicizing another person's fishing tournament. (k) “Permitted fishing tournament” means a fishing tournament that requires a permit from the department. (l) "Permitted fishing tournament boat days" is a measure of tournament fishing pressure for open water permitted fishing tournaments. It is calculated by multiplying the number of boats participating in an open water permitted fishing tournament by the number of days the permitted fishing tournament is held. Any part of a day shall count as one day. (m) "Person" means any individual, partnership, association, organization or body politic or corporate. (n) “Possess” for the purposes of this section means to own, control, restrain, transport or keep. Once a fish is possessed, it shall be counted towards the angler’s daily bag limit pursuant to s. NR 20.05(7). Any of the following conditions constitute possession: 1. Holding a fish out of the water longer than necessary to remove hooks and measure the fish for length, weight or both. 2. Placing a fish into a live well except to revive a fish or to avoid imminent boating danger. 3. Holding a fish at the side of a stationary boat for longer than necessary to register and revive the fish. 4. Resuming fishing by any angler in the boat prior to the release of the fish.
(m) “Prizes” means money or items that are provided to a tournament participant based on their performance in a competitive fishing event. This does not include “raffle” type prizes which are given to tournament participants independent of their performance in the competitive fishing event.
(n) “Traditional fishing tournament” means a fishing tournament that was issued permits 4 out of 5 years from 2003 to 2007, for the same water or waters and time period. Beginning January 1, 2008, traditional fishing tournaments shall continue to be conducted at least 4 out of 5 years for the same waterbody and time period to remain a traditional fishing tournament. (o) “Weigh-in” means a registration process for catch-hold-release tournaments by which fish are measured and released. (3) PERMIT REQUIRED. No person may carry out a fishing tournament that meets any of the criteria in pars. (a) to (d), without a permit. Fishing tournaments that are statewide or regional in nature do not require a permit. A person shall obtain a permit from the department to organize a fishing tournament if one or more of the following apply: (a) The fishing tournament involves 20 or more boats, or 100 or more participants. (b) The fishing tournament includes any trout species on waters classified as trout streams under s. NR 1.02(7). (c) The fishing tournament is a catch-hold-release tournament with an off-site weigh-in. (d) The total prize value is $10,000 or greater. (4) APPLICATION. A person who wishes to organize a fishing tournament requiring a permit from the department shall apply on forms available from the department. (a) Permit applications shall specify an individual who is responsible for supervising the tournament to ensure compliance with all tournament permit conditions and regulations. (b) Applicants for a fishing tournament permit shall pay a $25.00 non-refundable permit application fee upon submission of the application when the following conditions apply:
1. The tournament format is immediate-release; or
2. Total prizes provided to tournament participants are valued at less than $500; or 3. The tournament targets salmon species on Lake Michigan, Green Bay, or Lake Superior. (c) Applicants for a fishing tournament permit shall pay a $100.00 non-refundable permit application fee upon submission of the application when the following conditions apply:
1. The tournament format is catch-hold-release or catch and kill; and
2. Total prizes provided to tournament participants are valued at $500 or greater and less than $10,000, or where results of the tournament are used to calculate rankings or standings for future prizes are valued at $500 or greater and less than $10,000.
(d) Applicants for a fishing tournament permit shall pay a $200.00 non-refundable permit application fee upon submission of the application when the following conditions apply:
1. The tournament format is catch-hold-release or catch and kill; and
2. Total prizes provided to tournament participants are valued at $10,000 or greater, or where results of the tournament are used to calculate rankings or standings for future prizes valued at $10,000 or greater. (e) Applicants for a fishing tournament where the target species is largemouth bass or smallmouth bass, or both, and the format is catch-hold-release or catch and kill shall pay an additional non-refundable permit surcharge of $2 for each participant for a period of 6 years beginning April 1st 2008 and ending January 1st 2014. (f) There is no fee for a fishing tournament permit where all participants are younger than 18 years of age or are developmentally disabled as defined under s. 51.01(5)(a), Stats., or physically disabled and eligible for a license under s. 29.193(3) or (3m), Stats. Note: Application forms may be obtained at no charge from department service centers and regional offices. (5) PERMIT APPLICATION PROCESS. (a) Beginning April 1st each year, the department shall accept permit applications for fishing tournaments to be held in the following calendar year. (b) If the number of permit applications submitted to the department from April 1st through June 30th exceeds the limits specified in subs. (7) and (, the department shall notify the affected applicants that their requested locations and time period are subject to a drawing. After notification, the department shall allow the affected applicants a minimum of 7 days to change the location or time period requested on their applications to a location or time period for which applications are not already at or above the limits specified in subs. (7) and (. If June 30th falls on a weekend, applications will be accepted through the following Monday. (c) After the deadline to change applications as provided under par. (b), the department shall conduct a random drawing for each location and time period for which applications exceed limits established in subs. (7) and (. Traditional fishing tournaments are not included in a random drawing unless they are competing with other traditional fishing tournaments for limited fishing tournament permits for a body of water. Only one permit application per organizer will be included in a drawing for the same location and time period. (d) By August 1st, the department shall approve or deny permit applications that are submitted by June 30th in compliance with the limits in subs. (7) and (. (e) The department may approve a permit application that is received after June 30th if approving the application would not result in exceeding the limits in subs. (7) and ( and the application is received at least 30 days prior to the start of the tournament. (f) Upon permit approval, tournament organizers shall notify the county and city, village, or town within which the access site, weigh-in site, or headquarters for the tournament is located of the date, time, location, and size of tournament. (6) COMPLIANCE. (a) All participants in a permitted fishing tournament shall comply with all provisions of the permit. (b) If a participant fails to comply with the permit, the violating participant shall promptly be disqualified and expelled from the tournament by the organizer. (c) All organizers of a permitted fishing tournament shall comply with all permit terms and conditions and the rules of this section and shall take adequate measures to ensure that all participants comply with all provisions of the permit. The organizer of a permitted fishing tournament shall provide each participant a copy of the permit conditions and rules specific to the fishing tournament along with potential penalties for noncompliance prior to any participant being allowed to participate in the tournament. (d) Notwithstanding par. (b), the department may take other appropriate enforcement action against a participant or organizer found to be in violation of this chapter or ch. 29, Stats. (e) For the purpose of enforcing this section, a conservation warden or a representative of the department, upon presentation of his or her credentials or department identification card, is authorized at any time gamefish are possessed during the tournament to open and inspect any live well, holding tank, bag, boat, or other device used to hold or transport fish. (f) No tournament angler, organizer, volunteer or other tournament official may prohibit entry or inspections to be conducted under this section unless a court restrains or enjoins the entry or inspection. (7) LIMITS ON SIZE AND NUMBER OF FISHING TOURNAMENTS. The size and number of permitted fishing tournaments allowed on a water body may not exceed the following limits except in Lake Michigan, Green Bay, Lake Superior, and Lake Winnebago where there are no limits on the size and number of permitted fishing tournaments. (a) The following monthly limits on permitted fishing tournament size, number, and total boat days are based on lake acreage are outlined in the table below. LAKE OR LAKE CHAIN SIZE (ACRES) MAXIMUM DAILY NUMBER OF BOATS ALLOWED FOR PERMITTED OPEN WATER FISHING TOURNAMENTS MAXIMUM MONTHLY NUMBER OF PERMITTED FISHING TOURNAMENT BOAT DAYS MAXIMUM DAILY NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS ALLOWED FOR PERMITTED ICE FISHING TOURNAMENTS MAXIMUM DAILY NUMBER OF CONCURRENT PERMITTED FISHING TOURNAMENTS 1. Less than 100 2. 100 – 449 2. 450 – 999 3. 1,000 – 4,999 4. 5,000 – 9,999 5. Larger than 10,000 0
25
50 125 150
Determined by actual acreage (1 boat/50 acres) 0
50
300 1,125 2,400 3,000 50
150
500 1,000 1,500
No Limit 1 (ice fishing only) 1
1 2
2 No Limit
(b) Open water fishing tournaments on lakes or lake chains smaller than 100 acres may be permitted if the department finds that the tournament: 1. Will promote public awareness of fishing and the state's resources and conforms to the best management practices for the lake; or 2. Is a traditional fishing tournament. (c) The following shall apply to fishing tournaments permitted for any combination of lakes within a chain of interconnected lakes: 1. Permitted fishing tournaments may engage in fishing activities in lake chains or connected lakes but the tournament organizer must select a lake where the primary fishing activity or weigh-in will take place. The availability of permits will be based on the acreage of the selected lake as outlined in par. (a).
(d) For boundary water lakes, the limits on the number of permitted fishing contests shall be determined based on the Wisconsin acreage. (e) For flowages and impoundments of rivers, the limits in par. (a) shall include tributaries upstream to the first dam or road crossing unless otherwise specified in the permit. (f) The following provisions apply to rivers:
1. The maximum number of permitted fishing tournaments per month on the Mississippi River, Lake St. Croix, St. Croix River, Wisconsin River, Fox River, and Wolf River are outlined in the following table. RIVER SEGMENT OR SECTION MAXIMUM NUMBER OF PERMITTED FISHING TOURNAMENTS PER MONTH 1. Mississippi River: pool 3; 5; 5A; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; 13 2. Mississippi River: Pool 4 3. Lake St. Croix 4. St. Croix River, Wisconsin River, Fox River, Wolf River (excluding Lake Winnebago system waters as defined in s. NR 20.03(19)) 4 (each pool) 5 4 2 (each 10 mile segment)
2. Fishing tournament waters identified in the permit for Mississippi River pools are limited to no more than 3 pools where each pool is separated by a lock and dam. 3. Fishing tournament waters for Lake St. Croix shall be restricted to the waters between the U.S. highway 10 bridge at Prescott upstream to the Acola Bar. 4. No more than 2 permitted fishing tournaments per month, not to exceed 4 days combined, may be issued for any 10 mile segment of a river not listed in subd. 1., as defined in the permit. If any portion of river permitted overlaps with a previously permitted portion of the same river, it shall be considered the same segment. Segment boundaries shall be readily identifiable features as close to 10 miles apart as possible.
5. Permitted fishing tournaments may engage in fishing activities in multiple pools but the tournament organizer must select the pool where the primary fishing activity or weigh-in will take place. The availability of permits will be based on the selected pool as outlined in subd. 1. ( ADDITIONAL FISHING TOURNAMENT PERMITS. Notwithstanding the limits in sub. (7), the department may allow one additional permit each year for fishing tournaments on lakes greater than 1,000 acres or river segments identified by the department. For additional fishing tournaments permitted under this subsection, the fishing tournament permit applicant shall demonstrate to the department that the tournament: (a) Will promote public awareness of fishing and the state's resources and conform to best management practices for the lake; or (b) Is a traditional fishing tournament. (9) DISPOSITION OF DEAD FISH. The department shall require each applicant to provide a written plan for the disposition of any dead fish encountered within a 48-hour period from the end of the tournament and are a result of the fishing tournament which complies with s. 23.095(1g), Stats. No plan may include retention of any fish contrary to the requirements of department rule. Note: Section 23.095(1g), Stats., General prohibition. No person may damage or attempt to damage any natural resource within the state. Under s. 23.095(1)(a) "Damage" means to commit a physical act that unreasonably destroys, molests, defaces, removes or wastes. (10) GENERAL PROVISIONS AND PERMIT CONDITIONS. (a) No person may organize fishing tournaments on the same body of water with starting dates separated by less than 2 weeks. (b) The department may deny an application for a fishing tournament permit upon determination that the body of water, the fish or other aquatic resources may be substantially harmed by the concentration of fishing activity from the fishing tournament. (c) No person may conduct a fishing tournament on any of the following:
1. Opening weekend of a fishing season of a particular species if fishing tournament targets that species.
2. 3-day Memorial Day weekend
3. Fourth of July.
4. 3-day Labor Day weekend unless it is a traditional fishing tournament. (d) The department may require the tournament organizer to make parking arrangements in addition to those normally present at location where the event is taking place the for fishing tournament participants in order to ensure reasonable public access to the water where the permitted fishing tournament is being conducted. A plan outlining the alternative parking arrangements shall be submitted to the department upon request. The department may withhold approval of a fishing tournament permit application until an adequate alternative parking plan or parking arrangements have been provided by the organizer. (e) For open water permitted fishing tournaments, participants’ boats shall be identified in a uniform manner that makes them easily identifiable on the water as fishing tournament participants and the method for identification shall be provided to the department. This requirement does not apply to tournaments on the Great Lakes for trout and salmon. (f) The following provisions apply to immediate-release tournaments:
1. Participants may not reduce fish to their possession. 2. Participants shall immediately initiate the official tournament registration process upon landing a fish. 3. Participants shall successfully release the fish, as indicated by the capability of the fish to swim away upright under its own power, prior to resuming fishing. (g) The following provisions apply to catch-hold-release tournaments:
1. There will be a daily bag limit of 3 walleye from the second Saturday in June to the first Sunday in September for all catch-hold-release tournaments on all waters with a daily bag limit of 3 walleye or greater. There will be daily bag limit of 3 bass from first Saturday in July to the second Sunday in August for all catch-hold-release tournaments for all waters with a daily bag limit of 3 bass or greater.
Note: These dates are the approximate dates when some Wisconsin waters reach threshold water temperatures that cause increased delayed mortality for bass species and walleye. 2. No person may conduct a catch-hold-release tournament for muskellunge, northern pike, sturgeon or trout with an off-site weigh-in. 3. No person may conduct a catch-hold-release tournament unless they follow the conditions related to fish handling specified on the permit. 4. No person may participate in a catch-hold-release tournament unless their boat is equipped with a live well that is demonstrated to the tournament organizer as functioning properly prior to fishing in the fishing tournament. 5. No person may hold fish in a catch-hold-release tournament in on-shore holding tanks unless the tanks have the capacity to hold at least one gallon of water per pound of fish held and are equipped with an aeration or oxygenation system that maintains the dissolved oxygen at 5 parts per million or higher. 6. No person may conduct a catch-hold-release tournament with an off-site weigh-in unless the fish holding equipment and fish handling procedures at the weigh in site are approved by the department and the approval is specified on the permit. 7. The department shall include permit conditions that specify fish handling requirements during weigh-in for catch-hold-release tournaments. 8. The department may include the following permit conditions related to tournament operation for permitted catch-hold-release tournaments at the point of permit issue when it determines that environmental conditions are not conducive to survival of fish intended for release and the release may constitute unreasonable waste of natural resources under the provisions of s. 23.095 (1g), Stats. a. The department may restrict the area that may be fished by fishing tournament participants to reduce the time that fish are held in live wells, the distance fish are transported to a weigh-in site or both.
b. The department may require redistribution of released fish. (h) All permits for fishing tournaments shall do the following: 1. Identify areas where competitive fishing is prohibited for the following reasons: a. To protect critical habitat, including areas designated by local ordinance for aquatic vegetation preservation or areas where habitat enhancement activity is underway. b. To protect public rights, interests or safety, including designated swimming areas, mooring areas, access areas, navigational channels, staging areas, beaches or other special use areas. 2. Prohibit the use of tagged fish, except when approved by the department for any of the following reasons: a. To enhance collection of data for management purposes as part of a scientific study. b. The tagged fish are legally obtained from a licensed private fish hatchery and are planted under a stocking or introduction permit issued by the department under s. 29.736, Stats., and s. NR 19.05. (i) Pursuant to s. NR 20.05 (7), any fish taken into possession by an individual and not released immediately shall be included as part of the individual's daily bag limit. (j) The time limitations upon the length of a fishing tournament under this section do not include fishing activities by tournament participants carried out prior to the time when the tournament begins. (k) Except for tournaments on the Great Lakes, the fishing portion of any catch-hold-release tournament may not run for more than 10 consecutive hours each day or more than 4 consecutive days. (L) The fishing portion of tournaments on the Great Lakes is not limited in duration. (11) AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES. (a) All tournament participants shall comply with s. 30.715, Stats., and all department rules pertaining to control of aquatic invasive species. (b) Fishing tournament organizers shall inform all tournament participants of procedures recommended by the department to clean and decontaminate boats and equipment of aquatic plants and invasive species prior to the tournament.
(c) The department may include permit conditions necessary to prevent the spread of aquatic invasive species.
(12) REPORTING. Each organizer shall report the results of the organizer’s tournament and other information which the department deems necessary on forms available from the department no later than 30 days following the last day of the tournament. Note: Reporting forms will be issued with permits. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This rule shall take effect on the first day of the month following publication in the Wisconsin administrative register, as provided in s. 227.22(2)(intro.), Stats. SECTION 3. BOARD ADOPTION. This rule was approved and adopted by the State of Wisconsin Natural Resources Board on _____________________. Dated at Madison, Wisconsin,_____________________________________________ STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES By _______________________________________ Matthew J. Frank, Secretary (SEAL)
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 1406
| "In this rule we proposean alternate strategy of an automatic bag limit reduction from 5 to 3for bass and walleyes during dates when the average water temperaturewould be above 70F for walleyes or 80F for bass. Those dates areapproximately the first week of July through the middle of August (80F)for bass and the middle of June to the first week of September forwalleye (70F).This does not make the incidental mortality issue go away- but it will reduce the mortality since fewer fish will be handled andstress in livewells will be reduced."
Doesn't this open the door for even more culling to take place?
Will tournament directors change their regulations to only allow 2 fish per person in posession which allows them to continue fishing and sort their last fish?
Good Luck
Tyee
| |
| | |
| Culling is illegal, so it does not matter what the bag limit is. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 1656
| I think the bag limit portion needs to be defined better, how does one differentiate between a tournament fisherperson and the general public? Most tourney's are already self limiting, so not a huge concern other than the chance for misinterpretation by the warden. Could create future problems, considering wardens aren't exactly the most popular people on the water.
"New" Costs.....still a crock, if there's a study then it should be fronted in advance by the fisherpeople, not legislated like it was on the bass culling study. Which was a political issue not a cost issue and most likely would of been paid by bass fisherpeople had the DNR asked instead of resisted . Also, I don't see where there will be a huge impact in issuing these permits, the same people will still be doing the same thing, they'll just have more control over the process. Oh and be able to charge for it. Don't we pay thier wages already? | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 1406
| Guest, I didn't make myself clear enough, Some tournament organizers chose to reduce the tournament limit to, say...3 fish per person or a 6 fish limit for the weigh in. This allowed anglers to have the state alloted amount in the boat (5)which also allowed them to continue fishing until they had their sttate bag limit of fish per person. In escence they were allowed to keep fishing and choose when to finish by putting that 5th fish in the well.
With this new law, tourney anglers are only going to be able to reduce to posession 3 fish. (during warm water time) hence making many finish fishing early unless the organizers reduce the weigh in's to 2 fish.
Jayman,
"For open water permitted fishing tournaments, participants’ boats shall be identified in a uniform manner that makes them easily identifiable on the water as fishing tournament participants and the method for identification shall be provided to the department."
Your gonna need a bigger sticker!
Good luck
Tyee
Edited by tyee 12/27/2007 10:51 AM
| |
| | |
Location: Rhinelander | "New" Costs.....still a crock, if there's a study then it should be fronted in advance by the fisherpeople, not legislated like it was on the bass culling study. Which was a political issue not a cost issue and most likely would of been paid by bass fisherpeople had the DNR asked instead of resisted . Also, I don't see where there will be a huge impact in issuing these permits, the same people will still be doing the same thing, they'll just have more control over the process. Oh and be able to charge for it. Don't we pay thier wages already?=====================
1) The cost of monitoring and permitting these events has risen significantly over the years, as has the number of events.
2) Of course the same people will be permitting the events, I sure wouldn't want the legislature involved, or a new agency developed, would you?
3) The DNR always charged the budget for handling permits. The new regs will simply change the fee structure to cover the costs to the Department, NOT the 'cost' of folk's wages working FOR the department. Yes, tax base determines the DNR budget, but the DNR doesn't get to select what they need and deduct it from the coffers at the State. The DNR budget is too small to begin with. The Bass study was largely an unfunded mandate, as was this entire ordeal from the State Lawmakers in response to the Lake and Property Owners groups. The DNR doesn't have that as a budget item, so the money has to be recovered somehow. Guess the lawmakers need to fund the next project IMHO. This whole eodeal had to be a monumental pain in the keester to those in the DNR who ended up in the cross hairs as a result of the unfunded mandate.
4) By law, the DNR can't 'ask' the public to fund a study. It's difficult to get approval for a study that is requested by anglers and funded entirely with private dollars, unless the CC process is involved.
Tyee,
I see what you mean, but see this as a 'no major difference' in the overall strategy since culling isn't legal. Once the decision to livewell the first, second and final fish is made, the day is over for that competitor. If it was 6 in the well and 5 on the stage, they just get to delay the final decision for a couple fish and won't have a lock on the weight for the day while waiting to livewell that 6th fish. Interesting challenge, but not that huge a deal. Still, someone will lose because they tossed back a 20" fish and then couldn't get another bigger.... | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 2445
Location: Fremont, Wisconsin | I would like to take a moment and Thank Tyee for posting the information regarding tournaments. I am sure He has spent many hours on this and I for one, as a tournament promoter, tournament fisherman, and fishing addict, very appreciative for the ease he has created for me to access the needed information.
Happy new year to all.
Denny
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 1656
| Steve, I agree, no way would I want another department to oversee running a tournment program.
The cost of a tournament permit, unless changed in the last two years that I'm not aware of, is $0, free.
As for the bass culling study, I think it's a combination of "bad blood" that led to what we have. The bass guys went to the DNR, the DNR opposed. The bass guys went to the legislatures and got it forced down the DNR's throat. DNR takes new culling study and turns it into tournament study. Bass guys screwed up asking for special privilages as tourney fisherpeople and now we all pay.
Hind sight being 20/20, I don't see any reason why the bass guys couldn't have approached the DNR to conduct a culling study AND be willing to pay for it. I think the musky fisherpeople of this state have shown that the DNR is very cooperative, if you're willing to pay. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 794
Location: Elgin, Illinois | Tell me if I am "wrong here"... But, if on Friday, I launch to "prefish" I and my partner can, during the "hot" days, catch and livewell 5 fish, ten total, and then clean them and cook them on Sunday... But, if I am fishing a tournament the next day, my partner and I can only livewell 6, which we are releasing back into the lake/river. What kind of PC BS is the justification for a rule with that result. My Fishing License does not say "second class citizen" or "bad person who fishes tournaments"...
Why are we just laying down and yawning over this... Are we afraid that if we protest this insanity (and that is what it is, plain and simple) it will be worse...
Wasn't it clear that this "incidental mortality" was really not an issue so far as the health of the resource, but was just an "appearance" thing. What has happened to us that we have gone so far astray. My father truly was a member of the "Greatest Generation" because I know for a fact he would have called this what it is... "BS". And, I will follow his footsteps... this is just wrong. This is the kind of creep that will eventually get us "regulated" out of existence.
We have a funny system... If the anti-tournament folks show up at the ramp and try to block us from getting onto the water, they can be arrested. But, if they go to a meeting and "cry and whine" and have no scientific facts to support their position they can still effectively "harass" us. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 794
Location: Elgin, Illinois | Folks, what is this "musky...bass...walleye people", us versus them attitude. Get that idea out of your head right now. We are all fishermen, we all ahve a stake in this cause, that is equal. Today it is something dear to the bass guys... next it might be something important to the walleye or musky crowd. Do not let them divide and conquer us. Joe Cool with his green lawn and lake house don't want any of us on "his" lake. If he can reduce the bass guys today, the walleye guys will be next. Wake up... This was not a "pin prick", this was a knife in our back by the DNR. They ended up "pandering" to a "special interest group".
There is no science to back up the reduced possession limit. No science that says that warm weather tournaments harm the resource. They just appear "bad". Well DNR get some backbone and speak the truth and then react "honestly". If every tournament was a catch and kill we would not really affect the population in any given lake or river (except those very small ones that could easily be protected by limiting the number of tournaments). | |
| | |
Location: Rhinelander | HG,
You hit it dead on. it isn't science that's creating the new tourney regs, it's politics. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 2393
Location: Waukesha Wisconsin | I'm sickened by this. Thank you Mr. Scrooge for the xmas present. This document is so full of holes, I do not know where to start. Great job HG! I'm right there with you. You gave one great example, there are many more that disgust me.
We most certainly are being treated as second class citizens. Rules and regulations like this from my DNR are supposed to fix things that are broken. Did this document fix anything? I agree with your analogy, the property owner who feels they have more rights will be happy. I guess they do after all. | |
| | |
Location: Rhinelander | Keep in mind this was part and parcel to an unfunded MANDATE from our State Legislature. Our DNR ended up trying to handle a social (water use) issue from a fisheries management point of view, because that is how this went down. The folks the DNR sent out into the field to listen to both sides were not politicians or social scientists or DNR Public Relations experts, they were biologists and fisheries managers.
The effort to understand the issues and listen to the public was serious; I attended two of the meetings and had my couple minutes to speak here in Rhinelander. What was proposed was skinned down considerably according to the text Tyee was good enough to provide; it could have been much much worse.
By the way, at the Rhinelander meeting the DNR representatives there clearly indicated the meeting was not about biological impact of competitive angling, and stated that studies available do not show a major negative impact from competitive angling. Much was made of the fact many tournaments give back to the resource in a big way. This was about several groups of folks who do NOT like tournaments applying pressure to the right places, and demanding changes. They didn't get everything they wanted, and in the end if the regs stand as written here, neither did the Tournament supporters.
I bet the other 'side' is just as angry they didn't get all they demanded.
Democracy in action. That, in a nutshell, is what's wrong here. Should fisheries management be politicized? A new Muskie law opening a catch and release season in N Wisconsin was passed this year as a obscure portion of the new budget bill. What is THAT?? The bill was written and introduced by an Eagle River politician, NOT any fisheries manager or biologist. So now we no longer have a closed season for Muskies during the spawn, and some argue that is a really bad move. What on earth is a lawmaker doing 'managing' our fisheries?
We don't (in a sense, this is complicated) manage our fisheries in Wisconsin by science and biology in many cases, we are forced by the structure to manage water use issues, fisheries issues, etc. via public pressure applied by hitting up the right lawmaker or using the Conservation Congress process. Heck, a couple associates and I 'used' the CC process to get a 50" limit on Muskies on Pelican Lake, something that the DNR did support, but most locals fought like mad. We did the due diligence and made sure the Muskie crowd was at the CC meetings, attended a Lake Association meeting and obtained approval from a majority there, got the issue on the CC ballot, called out the 'troops' to attend and vote for the change state wide and got the regs passed. Three guys got done what past attempts from the DNR, Muskie clubs and interested parties failed to do on other lakes. How? By recognizing the battle is largely social/educational and by fighting that battle in the correct arena.
It's possible to change what might be future law the same way, just use the CC to get it voted on by the public or have a lawmaker listen to the folks in Eagle River or Green Bay or any area about what competitive angling means to the local economy. Problem there is I think we'd have an uphill battle; the lake associations and water use groups are pretty well organized.
Not to nit pick, but the body of evidence is there to strongly suggest mortality of walleye, bass, and muskies is much higher in water temps that are mid 70's or up if the fish are held in livewells and transported. Minnesota is also looking at limiting summer events to catch and kill or on-the-water release in the case of Muskies. The Dakotas also put C&K regs on events in very warm conditions. The thing to point out is that the total harvest from even a PWT or FLW in a C&K event is insignificant, and has little biological impact on the population as a whole. Best to harvest fish that will to a large degree die when released anyway, for PR reasons alone. No need to provide more ammo to the Antis.
Also, just a point, the NRB is not the DNR.
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 794
Location: Elgin, Illinois | Okay... Steve you have an exc ellent idea... I think I will start to gather, with lots of help from anyone who can contribute information, the "give backs", as much as possible. Charity tourneys that benefit something, organized club tourneys that result in funds for stocking programs, "conservation dollars" from tournament organizations...
Let's see how the "Lake Associations" and "Water use groups" stack up... Maybe we do need to sound our own horn...
Point me in the right directions and I'll get the information collated and organized. Then I better let someone who "lives" in Wisconsin make the speech! By the way, my wife thinks I spend more time "up there" tan I do working... I hope she is right! | |
| | |
Location: Rhinelander | hg,
Best is to research all tournament permits, and see what each group does with the money. That, sir, will be a very big project, but worth the effort, I'd think. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 2445
Location: Fremont, Wisconsin | I think there are many who run tourneys who visit this board on a regular basis. Start a thread and ask directors to send in there accomplishments via e-mail. you can check there claims easier than finding out what they saiid they did and then proving it. Work together and it will be huge project but better scaled down.
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 794
Location: Elgin, Illinois | Steve...
Could we do that... Have anybody who ran a tournament that visits here... send me an email... I'll open up a new address with my wallye club website. You can help me compose a thread/posting... That would be a start... We could also ask for contact info for "local" tournaments that do it for charity, etc... | |
| | |
| Greg, with all respect,
PART of the reason for the reduced bag limit is the fish being targeted and kept during the event AND public opinion over tournament fishing. Obviously the bigger females are what usually win an event right? By study, tournaments generally weigh a bigger percentage of these fish then the 5 frying pan favorites you are trying to work in to your rant. If you and your partner want to take 10 keepers for the frying pan on Friday, enjoy yourself and hope that you didn't need any of those fish on Saturday I guess. Obviously if you're going to fish the tournament on Saturday, hope you get 3 nice ones to weigh in that are above eater size and be glad to be fishing a tournament at all. Where do you get the "second class citizen" stuff. You seem to think that any regulations as to tournaments makes you one. Smaller bag limits could actually create closer results and a better chance for anyone to win AND from what we WERE getting as a suggested rule, is far better then no tournaments at all during July and August. As far as public opinion, it IS important to have it on your side in such manners as tournament fishing. Especially when there are LARGE groups like PETA with money who are against such things and news organizations willing to publicize their cause. If reduced bag limits during these times helps to reduce dead fish wasted in the pursuit of fame and personal glory, then it should help to improve part of that public image. That, in the long run, should be good for fishing.
Edited by Joel "Doc" Kunz 12/28/2007 7:07 PM
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 794
Location: Elgin, Illinois | Doc,
I agree that it is a rant. But, if the non-tournament angler who launches on Saturday morning at the same time as I do can catch five fish and keep them... What is the justification.... scientificallty... for limiting me to three fish that I will release at the end of the day?
The DNR folks admitted that the "incidental mortality" had no effect on the resource... So, why pander to the "other side of the argument". If "they" have a valid point, let them make it. If they don't, then don't treat them like the spoiled children that they act like and reward their whining with a "half-a$$ed" rule that is totally without logical support... Save for the "appearnces" issue.
Here is the issue. ANd, the one I am going to dig into. The tournament folks do more for the resource and for the "community" than the "whiners". How many fingerlings and fry did the "lakes association and recreational boaters" provide from their own pockets. How many charitable dollars, fishing piers, handicapped access ramps, etc. etc. did these "whiners" provide versus the tournament participants? My money is on the (heretofore) silent tournament participants. I sat on the "conservation committee" for the GNWC and I know how many thousands of dollars were put back into the resource and communities from the fishermen.
How much money has been donated from the FLW raffles at every tournament? Thousands and thousands of dollars flow from the fishermen back to the various chosen projects. I want to know if that was matched by these "other special interest groups".
And, I am sitting on two independent legal opinions that Wisconsin has "crossed the line" with these rules. They have in resorded testimony and statements said they have no basis for the rule except appearances... And, they are "discriminating" against the tournament participats solely on their status and association with other tournament fishermen. If they fish the tournament they get to keep 3 fish. If they fish for fun they get 5 (or whatever the limit on that lake may be if less than 5 or more than 5). That the lawyers tell me is a violation of a fundamental right that the state can justify only with an overwhelming State interest... and, feel good, PC "appearances is not an overwhelmng state interest.
Now, if there are rationally needed rules and regulations, the support from the tournament people will be there, if not they will oppose it.
Finally, do not for a moment fall into the trap of "I don't fish tournaments so I don't care" or worse. If you are a hunter or fisherman, do not think for a moment that because today it is my ox and that tomoorow it won't be yours. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 1406
| Greg, help me understand your thought process please.
You said. "The DNR folks admitted that the "incidental mortality" had no effect on the resource"
Wasn't that comment directed towards the "tournament" group as a whole? It has been shown that on the Winnebago system the total mortality is near 50% in the warm water months (walleyes). It may have no biological impact to the system but THIS IS a social political nightmare don't you think? Shouldn't EVERY fisherperson be upset at this including the tournament angler? I find it hard to understand your's and others disagreement of this new rule? I only question it as to the effect it (may) have on the ethics of some tourney anglers and their desire to bend the rules because of it. Personaly I applaud the DNR for this rule, as a tourney angler shouldn't we be finding ways to protect these fish at this time of year even more? Initially they were discussing catch and kills for this time period for goodness sakes, would you rather have that?
"Overwhelming State interest", help me define that one because it seems pretty grey to me from the outside looking in. I would bet there were a ton of replies at the hearings against tourneys as Steve mentioned in his earlier post and even more phone in objections that the DNR would resort to bringing into evidence for establishing these rules. I'd hate to see you waste your money in a legal battle on this one after all the tournament angler gave them the right to create these rules now didn't we?
Good luck
Tyee
Edited by tyee 12/28/2007 10:35 PM
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 794
Location: Elgin, Illinois | Tyee,
I would have to dig back into a previous thread to find the actual numbers... But, as I recall, the expected/acceptable total exploitation on Winnebago is ahuge number... If every tournament "killed" 50% of the caught fish it would not really affect this number of "acceptable exploitation". Now, stop and think this over, carefully. If I am not in a tournament, I can catch keep, and kill 5 fish...reducing the reource by those 5 fish. If I am in a tournament I can only catch three fish, one and one half of which are going to live (statistics are rdiculous sometimes, but I hope you see my point in the comparison) thereby reducing the resouce by one and one half fish. The tournament angler has paid for the same fishing license as the non tournament angler. He is, fishing in the same water, in the same manner, but has a special bag limit, reduced, because he is associating with other fishermen in an "organized" pursuit. What, overwhelming or compelling State interest justifies this "discrimination"; "appearances", emotional responses to some floating dead fish. They aren't wasted, just ask the Seagulls.
Briefly, the overwhelming State interst is a legal standard that must be met to justify a state's exercise of its police power (the power to regulate activities that are Constitutionally protected rights and privileges). For instance, the State can legally prevent you from yelling "fire" ,when there is none, in a crowded auditorium. The public's safety interest from being protected from the possible injuries caused by a panicked crowd justifies that as being labelled a crime of creating a nuisance or disorderly conduct... But, the State cannot prohibit political criticism or agitation from the stage of that same auditorium, regardless of how "insane" or "ridiculous" you might sound.
A really better example is with milk (believe it or not). The State of Wisconsin can, and should require health related rules to be followed by milk producers, bottlers, and vendors. But, the State of Wisconsin cannot prohibit milk from being imported into Wisconsin from Illinois, just because it has not been produced in Wisconsin, even if they "state" they are doing it for health reasons, there has to be a "real" health reason. There are "limits", constitutionally defind, on a State's exercise of its power to make laws, rukles or regulations. There are various standards applied depending on the type of activity being regulated.
Here we have a final example. The State of Wisconsin (or a city or town, etc) can enact zoning rules. They can under very limited circumstances apply those zoning rules to churches/synagogues/house of worship. But, they cannot differentiate between religions on the application of those rules. A Methodist Church can be barred from building in a certain "zone", because no churches are allowed in that zoning classification. But you could not enact a zoning rule that allowed all but Methodist churches to be built in a designated zone.
You will admit that Wisconsin could not set up a regulation that allowed (now don't get lost here in a treaty rights issue..because those are different rules altogether) only one race to harvest five fish and all others only three or the reverse, everyone but a designated race gets five fish and they only get three...
See, if you are going to make special rules for a "special class" of people, rules that are for them different, you have to have a compelling or overwhelming State interest. And, in this instance, the differentiating factor is what? That the fisherman has "associated" with other fishermen in an organized activity, that is but for that "organized" conclusion, the weighin, identical to the other fishermen engaged in the activity. If Joe Neighbor goes out onto the water with a friend and fishes from 7:00am to 3:00pm, he can come off the water with five fish each, take them home and forever remove them from the total available "bunch of fish" that constitute the resource. But, if Paul Pro, gets together with 149 other fishermen and launches at 7:00am and then returns at 3:00pm to compare and evaluate his success (or if it's me, lack thereof) for the day at a highly formalized weigh-in.. (Cause Joe Neighbor can certainly weigh his fish and compare it with other fishermen he knows who are also coming off the water at the same time, he can only bring in three fish and would be subject to possible criminal prosecution for having the same five fish as Joe Neighbor, who killed his fish instead of throwing them back into the lake or river. See the point, what is the difference? Does that difference justify a different set of rules? This is very close to saying that there is a different bag limit for Methodists or Caucasian people or drivers of red boats! If the state wants to discriminate there has to be a real good reason.
They admited there wasn't one.
But, again, the real issue is do we really want the resource managed by pandering to a "feel good" mentality... a social issue. What about all those people who don't think we should be "harvesting" Bambi, it doesn't "feel good" to them. After all... fish feel pain... maybe we shouldn't be fishing at all... Okay... maybe not yet... But, either we are "intellectually honest" and manage the resource though science or we drift away into emotion. Let's be fair, Lamprey Eels have a right to exist and eat, too. Where do you draw the line? Which "nonsense" is acceptable, tolerable and which isn't? | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 2445
Location: Fremont, Wisconsin | wow, Nevermind.
Edited by stacker 12/29/2007 10:44 AM
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 2393
Location: Waukesha Wisconsin | Rulings in bright pink
My comments in black
We propose to significantly lower the required fees for tournament organizers with the intent of recovering only our "new"costs relating to tournament fishing. Fees would be $25, $100, or $200 depending on prize amounts and tournament format. Fees would be lower for "immediate release" tournaments less likely to incur incidental mortality with idea of providing a financial incentive to use tournament formats that minimize incidental mortality. The $200 fee would be incurred only by"catch-hold-release" or "catch and kill" events awarding more than $10,000 in prizes.
What are these "new costs" for? Are we to assume that the DNR will now be at all of our tournaments? How many DNR officials have you seen at your tournaments? I have no problem with paying more to participate (you know the costs will be handed down to us) if I know where the money is going and it is for the betterment of the resource.
Bass Culling Pilot Study: The NRB in an approved motion also required us to recover any unreimbursed costs of the bass culling tournament pilot study through fees. We have proposed a $2/angler surcharge for bass tournaments (exceptimmediate release tournaments) for a six year period to recover thischarge. That fee would be added to the cost of the tournament permit.
This study was done because national bass circuits wanted to come to Wisconsin. But they would not come without the ability to cull. Legislature crammed this down our throats so that they would get the big boys to play in Wisconsin. At the very least, the national bass tournaments should pay this fee if they return, not the weekend warrior. I see that it is also added to the tournament permit. This means that the organizer will have to guess on the number of participants. Do they get a refund from the DNR if the participation is lower than expected?
Tournament limits: We recommend retaining the permit structure with limits on the number of tournaments based on waterbody size - though weare responding to public input that the originally proposed numbers would be overly limiting on some waters by applying the limits based on the specific waterbody or river pool where the weigh in will occur rather than pooling the water acreages for connecting waters or chains.This will have the effect of spreading out the effort out on lake chains and allowing additional tournaments on the Mississippi River. I actually like this and believe they did the right thing.
Incidental Mortality: We have learned that there will be incidental mortality of bass and walleyes in "catch-hold-and release"tournaments if the water temperature is above about 75 degrees, and todate there have been no studies or methods developed to improve handling techniques to make this go away. I disagree. I've been in too many tournaments where I watched the poor handling methods of organizers. I believe that the good tournament organizers are being punished for poorly run ones. The DNR should be punishing the poorly run not all. I believe that there are tournament organizers that skew the "release studies". These people should be prevented from running future tournaments if they continue poor practices. Do not punish all of us. I've also been involved in national tournaments where the oxygen level of my livewell has been tested upon my return to the docks. I take great pride in how I handle my fish. Every person who has tested my livewell oxygen levels and looked at my fish has told me that my fish were fine and would survive. If this is true, why am I being punished? I believe the better answer would be requiring minimum livewell standards on participating boats AND fining organizers who are not prepared to handle fish properly. Another option would be assessing a fine to every fish deemed unreleasable. It would have been easy to do. Organizers give dead fish penalties now and it is recorded on our slips. Charging us $$$ per dead fish and earmarking the funds for stocking could have been an option. In this rule we propose an automatic bag limit reduction from 5 to 3 for bass and walleyes during dates when the average water temperaturewould be above 70F for walleyes or 80F for bass. Those dates are approximately the first week of July through the middle of August (80F) for bass and the middle of June to the first week of September for walleye (70F).This does not make the incidental mortality issue go away- but it will reduce the mortality since fewer fish will be handled and stress in livewells will be reduced. This is the easy way out. They are not solving the real problem or issue. Education and mandatory rules on fish handling by contestants and organizers is the real answer. They had an opportunity to be leaders in the nation and dropped the ball. Wisconsin could have shown the rest of the nation how to better handle fish to get the mortality down. We believe the AIS plan requirement is outdated and have replaced it with a requirement that tournament organizers and participants must comply with all existing state rules, and that the DNR has the authority to include appropriate AIS protocols in tournament permits if there are invasive species issues. Am I the only one who thinks this reads very silly. They are proposing a ruling that says we have to abide by the law. We have to abide by all state laws regardless of this ruling. Am I missing something here? The "open window" for tournament applications has been moved up to April 1st through June 30th in the year prior to the tournament with final decisions made by August 1st. If limits are not reached, organizers can still apply for a permit up to 30 days prior to the tournament. There will still be a lottery if limits on particular water bodies is reached. Say good-bye to national tournaments in Wisconsin. Can any of you name one national tournament organization that could/would do this? Heck, most live month to month and need to see what sponsors will provide before applying for permits for the following year. I'm also confused on the lottery? Why have one at all? When the quota's are filled their filled, why have a lottery?
The provisions that a fisheries biologist may add to the permit if the format is "catch-hold-release" include redistribution of fish, restriction on the area that can be fished to reduce the time that fish are held in live wells, and the distance fish are transported to the weigh-in site. Say good-bye to the FLW format where you can travel anywhere by water. Doesn't this ruling put more stress to the nearby fishery? We'll all be fishing in a more confined area. Wouldn't this be more detrimental to the resident fish? There is a flip side to this that I understand. Fish take a pounding on the great lakes when we have 5 foot waves. Why not restrict distance based on wave size then? I know it would not be popular by all but it would be something I could live with. (In all honesty, I wish they would have made it a law that no tournament could go out if there were small craft advisories .......... go ahead, beat me up on this)
Edited by Sunshine 12/29/2007 11:51 AM
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 538
| Dennis,
I can find little to quarrel with in your response.
Proper livewells and good livewell utilization along with good weigh in processes would go a long way to preserving more fish.
I do doubt that it will save all, due to rough water and temps. But, the ones that clearly will not make it often go to food pantrys or could become dinner for said fisherman as well.
Limiting fishing, to example Lake Winnebago and not allowing upper Lakes would solve nothing. Would you rather run to Poygan or have to run Stockbridge with 3-4 footers?
I appreciate all the imput from the contributers in this thread. Greg makes me consider some things I have not thought about.
Take care,
Jim O
Edited by Jim Ordway 12/29/2007 1:06 PM
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 2445
Location: Fremont, Wisconsin | Joel "Doc" Kunz - 12/28/2007 7:03 PM
Greg, with all respect,
PART of the reason for the reduced bag limit is the fish being targeted and kept during the event AND public opinion over tournament fishing. Obviously the bigger females are what usually win an event right? By study, tournaments generally weigh a bigger percentage of these fish then the 5 frying pan favorites you are trying to work in to your rant. If you and your partner want to take 10 keepers for the frying pan on Friday, enjoy yourself and hope that you didn't need any of those fish on Saturday I guess. Obviously if you're going to fish the tournament on Saturday, hope you get 3 nice ones to weigh in that are above eater size and be glad to be fishing a tournament at all. Where do you get the "second class citizen" stuff. You seem to think that any regulations as to tournaments makes you one. Smaller bag limits could actually create closer results and a better chance for anyone to win AND from what we WERE getting as a suggested rule, is far better then no tournaments at all during July and August. As far as public opinion, it IS important to have it on your side in such manners as tournament fishing. Especially when there are LARGE groups like PETA with money who are against such things and news organizations willing to publicize their cause. If reduced bag limits during these times helps to reduce dead fish wasted in the pursuit of fame and personal glory, then it should help to improve part of that public image. That, in the long run, should be good for fishing.
Doc,
why oh why do you have to make such comments. Quote: If reduced bags during these times helps to reduce dead fish wasted.... Come on man, what do you think tourneys do with dead fish, throw them down a disposal. what exactly do you mean by this?
....in pursuit of fame and personal glory..... again, explain.
Unless I am reading this wrong, wowee....you just made a hell of a stand against the tournament fisherman.
I think we should attack guides next. They take from MY resource without much of a chance of returning anything to the fisheree. Fish or monies. I would guess these guys would be the original .......in pursuit of fame and personal glory.... | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 794
Location: Elgin, Illinois | Guys, again...
This is a "discussion, among friends... And, Doc is a friend, I certainly saw his passion not in personal terms...
We need to spend our energy protecting our common interest... Not, looking at our narrow perspective as it relates only to ourselves. One only needs to look at "gun control" in California to see what ludicrous results arise from "feel good" legislation. About 20% of the state geographically is precluded from the use of lead bullets of any kind. Magazine capacity and stock shape have created bizarre firearms. So, if you want to see where this could go, just ignore it now and wait and see.
Dennis makes an excellent point, one I can almost fully support. I have retrofitted my boat with an improved livewell system... insulated and oxygenated... In warm weather, if I intend to release fish, I carry ice and monitor the livewell temp with an easy to read thermometer. I wish I possessed better information about livewell management, facts not just my own thoughts an opnions. I don't like to lower the temp more than 5 degrees from the surface temps. Am I right? I believe it helps... The oxygenator is a great thing...
But, I believe that better livewell technology and better handling are ethical matters, not matters for legislation, unless it is applicable to all fishermen. Or, I would certainly support any circuit that demanded better livewells as a condition of participation.
Edited by hgmeyer 12/29/2007 4:48 PM
| |
| | |
Location: Rhinelander | We are full circle back to the social VS biological issues. Some voice social issues I have heard before, choosing to use emotion and 'profiling' in the argument. Not all that uncommon, as some folks use that same debate tactic from the other 'camp'. It will lose the debate for you most times though, because folks are quick to the trigger when someone leaves a door open that wide; no matter the 'camp' or concept.
Reality for everyone depends on their perspective, keep that in mind. That's WHY we have laws and regulations, so reality is spelled out without all the finger pointing, etc. and all of our basic freedoms are not dependent on who is in office at this exact moment and who influences that politician the most. I won't even start on national politics.
There really, IMHO, isn't a fisheries resource protection issue here. If the population of walleyes in any given water cannot support harvest at the level a tournament represents, it also cannot support angling harvest and has to be limited. TAC requirements have done that on waters in the north since the shared resource Treaty issues were clarified. If indeed there was even the slightest threat to the fishery, the area manager needs not issue a permit or limit th number of fish coming off the water in ANYONE'S livewell. HG is right, the attempt here is to legislate a different standard ONLY DURING COMPETITION for those who signed up for the event. Stacker is also right, how can one assign that limit to a competitive angler, and not a Guide? Do the numbers on 5 Guides operating full time on any body of water. What about any other angler, why do they get to target big fish (And many do, it's fishing and it doesn't take a tournament to make one want to catch large fish) and take a limit but not me? If year classes need protection, the area manager can implement a slot limit, like those seen on many waters now.
Here's the deal...the State is not trying to regulate tournament ANGLERS, they are regulating TOURNAMENTS in an attempt to placate the other 'camps' who don't like the ANGLERS on 'their lake'. The State is possibly setting themselves up for no end of trouble by insisting the structure of the law governing the rest of the anglers on that lake that day to NOT apply to me just because I am fishing a PWT or the Denny's event.
I asked if it was a resource issue from harvest standpoint. The answer was no. Attempting to mask social lawmaking based on pressure from special interest groups as a 'resource issue' when there is no 'resource issue' makes for all the confusion. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 2393
Location: Waukesha Wisconsin | Nicely stated Steve, you put it all in perspective .........
But now what do we do?
Shut up and take it?
Wait until spring hearings to try and change it?
Call or write our reps?
Call the DNR?
Voice concerns on sites like this?
Raise money for a law suit?
Boycott tournaments, cutting our own throats?
I guess I'd like to know what tournament directors are doing or how they feel about this. It's interesting that those who run tournaments (outside of our very own Stacker) are silent on this. At least in public.
I believe that most of the anglers and directors just do not care. They will just live with it. Actually some directors may like the reduced workload of weighing fewer fish.
You look at the number of people who actually read this thread and compare it to some of our/my silly threads and you get the feeling that some just do not care. Lots of people who do tournaments on this site who show no interest. | |
| | |
Location: Rhinelander | Actually, we had the chance to do something about this when the hearings were held across the state. I was pleasantly surprised by the big turnouts, and the Chambers of Commerce, event directors, and other interested parties who showed up and had their few minutes to speak. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 794
Location: Elgin, Illinois | To quote John Belushi; "it ain't over till we say it's over"!
I want to pursue the information about who, what, where, tournaments are doing for the State and the "resource". That is a "political" angle that needs to be presented as a collection and analysis of the relevant data.
And, I want to pursue "pursuasion" before "litigation".
So, as I said before, I am looking for ways to gather the tournament information efficiently. | |
| | |
| Denny Denny Denny, You know better then ANYONE that I am NOT against tournament fishermen. WOWEE yourself for making such a claim. Come on my friend and sports show partner, read a little harder before you get on your tournament horse and ride it 
As far as wasted fish. What do they do, go around the lake with a net to scoop up the fish that die from delayed mortality and give them to a food pantry, or do they just die and end up gull food? I'm pretty sure my post was clear that I was talking in reference to the "public opinion" part of the formula. To the public du-fuss or PETA believer, that's a waste. At least the people the day before took their legal limit and ate them = no waste. Also, we both know that the part about the fish going to a food pantry doesn't get enough "ink" and it's my understanding that public opinion is against catch and kill events.
And what am I missing? Tournament fishing isn't about personal achievement? Tournament fishing or fishermen are not concerned with the pursuit of fame or personal glory. OMG, are they stopping handing out checks, publishing pictures and ending all sponsorship opportunities? Wow. I'll reserve THAT comment for our next phone conversation.
As far as the guides. MOST guides do a good job of teaching people to fish or use the resource. That brings dollars in to our communities over a long period of time, even generations. I've met young men who fished with me with their Dad on a guide trip. Said they didn't like fishing because of not catching much. I changed that for this guy and now he brings HIS son fishing. So, I'm STILL giving back and I don't even guide anymore. Same with Bob Vandervelden, Russ Kapitzke and old Smokey who taught ME to fish here. I have a problem with some travel in guides who don't even buy bait locally or won't join the local chamber of commerce, but that's a different story. | |
| | |
| Wanted to add. Well run annual tournaments ALSO help to bring people and money to the area AND any problem I HAD with "travel in" guides (as I stated), was in the past when I was guiding here. Since I quit guiding, I don't care what they do as long as they don't drive like an idiot, but I think that goes for everyone. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 1406
| You have a chnace to voice your opinion!!!!!!!
Good Luck
Tyee
January, 22-23 Natural Resources Board meeting.
Persons interested in appearing before the NRB on this issue should review the public appearances guidelines at: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/nrboard/publicappearance.htm/ and register to appear by calling NRB Executive Staff Assistance Laurie Ross at 608-267-7420 no later than 4pm on Friday, January 18, 2008.
DRN LEGISLATIVE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE MEMBERS
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 1406
| From the Brush Pile! Always worth a chuckle!
Keith Nighswonger IS THE Self-Proclaimed Commissioner Of Professional Bass Fishing. (How is that for arrogance?!?!)
The Brush Pile: It's The Hot Stove League Of Professional Bass Fishing. The Brush Pile is an up to the minute rendering of what I know about the bass fishing world, (no jokes, please.) Whether its a live update from one of our pro correspondents or just something that I came across. If it is something that I think you will find interesting, you will find it here.....in the Brush Pile.
Those who have followed the Brush Pile for a while have noticed the change in tone of this column. The author is experiencing his own, personal Renaissance. Once writing solely for the pure love of fishing, the Brush Pile has evolved, so to speak, into a fan's perspective, (this fan,) of what is right and what is wrong with professional bass fishing today.
With my unique forum, I have the privilege and the responsibility to write the things, that many insiders in the world of Bass Fishing want you to know, but couldn't dare say themselves. I write the truth as I understand it, and my approach is such, based on the available information. Right or wrong, the Brush Pile is opinion, love it or hate it, just make sure not to miss it. To sound off click here.
Going Pro? Read These!
Thinking About Turning Pro? The Article You Must Read!
Making An Impression-Required Reading
ProBassAnglers.com Editorial
Good Morning, Henry Livermore (Reader #158,322)
Thanks For Reading!
Paid Testimonial-In reading the following link be aware that the testimonial involves a product advertised on ProBassAnglers.com
Brim Light
01/06/07-California Not The Worst Anymore! Yaaaay-Whenever I go to a Classic, (this might not be a good year for me to go,) an FLW Championship, (cross that one off the list too, I would be safer in Pakistan,) a PAA Bass Classic, (I think Texas wants me anyway, at least Lyle Lovett says it does,) or an ICAST show, I always have to walk around with a kind of sheepish grin on my face because all of these events require you to wear a press pass. Press passes of course say your name, and embarrassingly, where you are from. I'm from California, (I do have a banjo somewhere in the attic,) which means until recently, I lived in the state with the stupidest rules surrounding bass tournaments.
California laws are written in a manner that makes tournament organizations have to drastically change their rules when, (and if,) they decide to hold an event in our lovely state. A couple years ago, FLW's EverStart events (Strens now,) on Clear Lake allowed only a four fish limit each day because of the wording about number of fish in a boat at one time, if memory serves me, somebody had a 30 pound limit for four fish! Last year we watched in horror as Steve Kennedy had to throw a monster back that was hooked outside the mouth at the Elite Series event on Clear Lake. You see, in California, a bass pro needs a lawyer who can show a bass' intent to eat.
Well, thankfully, California isn't the worst anymore, THANK YOU WISCONSIN!
Wisconsin's Department of Natural Resources comes off as a bureaucracy gone wild with the findings of their study released in a recent memo sent to members of the Natural Resources Board. A study was concluded in June of 2007, with interpreted results that make the "half full, half empty" comment a laughable reality. (What did he just say?-Exactly, if that confused you, the memo to the Natural Resources Board will blow some fuses. Read it if you would like to waste 45 minutes of your life.)
In the wording of Wisconsin's memo, there are some beauties like-
"DISPOSITION OF DEAD FISH." Disposition or Dead Fish? They're dead for crying out loud. Are tournament officials responsible for checking the dead fish's attitudes? I'm guessing unhappy, perhaps resting, maybe relaxed. Of course some may be ridged. I would have to put "Disposition Of Dead Fish" right up there with a Bass' "intent to eat" a lure.
"REQUIRE CONSISTENT AND OBVIOUS MARKING OF TOURNAMENT BOATS." How about a scarlet "F" so all could see, and especially so jet skiers would know to run their slalom races between the fishermen!
In The Public Forum Portion Of The Memo, the lunacy continues-
Public comment
Major Themes:
1. The proposed fees are unreasonably high.
DNR response: The Department has attempted to equitably distribute the costs of administering the fishing tournament program. The proposed fees are necessary to cover the costs of administering the fishing tournament program.
Self Proclaimed Commissioner Of Bass Fishing's Response-"My office is always on the lookout for inappropriate costs passed on to anglers. While it is agreeable that there are social costs attributable to not just fishing tournaments, but all public activities, (including public policy making,) these costs must be reasonable."
2. Proposed fishing tournament permit fees are too high for tournaments held as fund raisers for charities, for fishing/sports clubs, or for conservation projects. Any fees charged would take away funds from the money raised for the charity, club, and/or project.
DNR response: The Department recognizes that some fishing tournaments differ in their purpose. In attempt to address this, the Department proposes that a fee of $25 be charged for “charity-type” tournaments in which proceeds are not returned to the participants.
Self Proclaimed Commissioner Of Bass Fishing's Response-"If The Department of Natural Resources feels that $25.00 is an adequate fee for charity events, then my ruling is that ALL EVENTS SHOULD BE CHARGED ONLY $25.00. IT COSTS AS MUCH TO SOCIETY TO RUN A CHARITY EVENT AS IT WOULD A FOR PROFIT EVENT. Penalty marker thrown, DNR is penalized 15 yards for showing a blatant biased attitude against tournament fishing in general, plus an additional 15 yards for making it so apparent as to be considered taunting to anglers who just want to use the resources, AND a loss of downs. WAKE UP WISCONSIN!"
Final Thoughts By The Commissioner-Bass fishing tournaments provide an opportunity for state resource agencies. They provide opportunities for the collection of data that the public does not have time nor money to fund. The State Of Wisconsin's Department of Natural Resources would be well served to observe the State Of Nevada's practice of having a representative at all events stage out of Calville Bay at Lake Mead in attendance, collecting data at every weigh in. The State of Nevada recognizes the value of these tournaments, and the information they can provide at virtually zero cost to society.
Therefore it is the suggestion of this commissioner's office that The State Of Wisconsin's Department of Natural Resources actually pay tournament organizations a stipend of $150.00 per event and encourage organizations to hold events in the future, so that much needed data can be collected at a fraction of what it would normally cost bureaucrats to conduct a study.
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 1406
| The NRB has approved a tournament regulation plan and it is now up to the legislature. I heard it was a revised NR20.40 but do not have the final copy yet, will post when I get it!
http://wkow.madison.com/News/index.php?ID=18465
Time to start calling and sending e-mails, this thing is on the way for approval!
Good luck
Tyee
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 1314
Location: Menasha, WI | Tyee, Why call our reps? The legislature granted rule-making authority to the DNR. It doesn't have to go to the legislature. It's a done deal as I understand the law. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 1406
| Here it is!
Tournament Regulation FH-22-06
http://dnr.wi.gov/org/nrboard/2008/January/01-08-3B1.pdf
There's a lot of info in here!!!!!!!!
Good Luck
Tyee
| |
| |
|
Mike Staggs Tournament Regulation