Walleye Discussion Forums
| ||
| View previous thread :: View next thread | |
| Jump to page : 1 Now viewing page 1 [25 messages per page] Walleye Fishing -> General Discussion -> Here' what we are up against. |
| Message Subject: Here' what we are up against. | |||
Johnnie Candle |
| ||
 Member Posts: 120 Location: Devils Lake, ND | This letter is very eye opening. I do not live in WI, but as I stated before, these issues scare me a lot. This letter is from the Wisconsin Association of Lakes (WAL) to the state of WI. It is long, but worth the reading. If I read it enough times, I may drive from ND to WI just to vent a little. Keep fighting the good fight. I have sent my letter and got the NPAA involved. i am on your (our) side. WAL POSITION ON PROPOSED FISHING TOUNAMENT RULES Draft 10.06.06 WAL believes that many aspects of the proposed rules, promulgated as required by 2003 Act 249, are positive steps to reduce the potentially negative impacts of tournament fishing on the resource, riparian owners and the public users of the waters. WAL has concerns about the proposed rules in five major areas: protection of small water bodies; funding of DNR expenses related to tournament fishing activities; control and prevention of aquatic invasive species; mortality in catch and release tournaments; and conformance to local ordinances. Small water bodies. The proposed rules allow too many boats relative to surface area on lakes less than 450 acres. The table which defines the maximum number of boats would allow 25 boats on a 100 acre lake, or one per 4 acres. The impact on the fishery and on other users of such density, especially considering the size and power of the boats used by most tournament participants would be immense and unacceptable. To address this issue, WAL recommends the following: (a) Create a separate category for lakes between 100 and 249 acres. Limit the number of tournament boats on these waters to 15 and the number of boat-days to 30. (b) Require a DNR permit for tournaments having 10 or more boats on waters between 100 and 249 acres. (c) Clarify the surface area computation for situations where multiple water bodies are not connected by waters navigable by the typical boat used by participants. WAL recommends that the tournament size and duration be limited by the area of the largest water body. (d) Clarify that the tournament boat days allocation applies toward the limits on all of the water bodies allowed to be used by the tournament participants. (e) Where small water bodies are to be fished as a part of a multiple water body tournament, establish limits by permit on the number of tournament participants who may simultaneously use them. Tournament costs and funding. The proposed fees may be inadequate to fully fund the administrative, research and enforcement efforts related to tournament fishing activity. WAL recommends the following to address the funding issue: (a) Assure that all costs associated with tournament events are recognized, including those for enforcement and research. The fiscal estimate of $76,000 seems to be the absolute minimum required to administer the rule with little left over for enforcement or research. (b) Establish a fee structure that assures that all tournament costs are paid by the organizers and/or participants. While either of the proposed fee alternatives is acceptable, WAL believes the participants should bear some of the burden and so WAL favors Alternative 2. Aquatic invasive species. Wisconsin lakes are increasingly impacted by the introduction of aquatic invasive species. Current regulations and those contained in the draft rule are inadequate to prevent the spread of these invaders from one water body to another. Tournament participants fish many different waters on a regular basis and may even fish multiple water bodies during a single tournament. WAL believes the tournament participants and organizers have a special duty to assure that their activity doesn’t cause AIS infestations. WAL recommends the following be included in the rule: (a) Require the tournament organizers to define a detailed plan for AIS control, including watercraft and trailer inspections at landings, proper disposal of water from bilge, engine cooling systems and live wells, disinfection and other appropriate means to eliminate possible transport of AIS. The DNR should review and approve such plans and be granted authority to enforce the provisions. Tournament organizers should be financially liable for the associated costs. In many cases tournament organizers may find local volunteers to assist in AIS control efforts. (b) Add a statement to the rule which specifically authorizes the DNR to impose conditions over and above what are contained in s. 30.715 WI Statutes and the associated rules. (c) Encourage tournament organizers and participants to promote AIS prevention to the general public. Tournament participants and organizers were the leaders in promoting catch and release fishing and they should take the same leadership role with regard to AIS. Fish mortality. Tournaments conducted under catch and release rules, and especially those where the weigh in was off site, have resulted in significant fish mortality after release. The rules must err on the side of protecting the resource. WAL recommends the following provisions to reduce mortality and to provide incentives to the organizers and participants to properly handle the catch: (a) Require a permit for all catch and release tournaments with a weigh in, regardless of the location of the weigh in. (b) Prohibit the use of bags to transport or hold fish. (c) Establish clear minimum standards for all means of holding and transporting fish. Live well and holding tank specifications for volume, dissolved oxygen and temperature should be included in the rule. The results of numerous studies should be analyzed to determine the standards. (d) Require verification of live well and holding tank operation by the tournament organizer and DNR prior to the tournament and at random during the course of the tournament. If the live well doesn’t meet the requirements, the participant should be disqualified. If holding tanks don’t meet the requirements, the location of the weigh in should be moved to the water’s edge so that fish can be removed from the live well, weighed and returned within a very short time. (e) Establish clear authority for the DNR to impose modified rules on a specific event to reflect the current conditions on the water body including water temperature and presence of disease. The authority should include but not limited to disallowing catch and release, moving weigh in sites and limiting the areas to be fished. (f) WAL supports the requirement for an enforceable plan for disposal of any fish killed during the tournament. DNR should also have authority to keep the fish to be released in a holding area for a minimum of 24 hours following weigh in to assess the impacts of the holding and handling procedures and equipment on mortality. (g) WAL supports the prohibition on catch and release tournaments with an off site weigh in from July 1 to August 31. Local consultation. Many local governments, lake districts and lake and river organizations expend significant effort and money to protect and enhance the quality of their water resources. The efforts include AIS control and prevention, stocking, fish habitat improvement, boating regulations, landing maintenance and others. (a) The DNR and tournament organizers should be required assure that the tournament permit conditions comply with local regulations and that tournament activities don’t adversely impact the work of the local agencies and groups. (b) Information should be required to be provided to all tournament participants regarding local rules and regulations and the DNR authorized to enforce them. (c) When a tournament permit is issued, information copies should be provided in a timely manner to county and town authorities and to the affected water body citizen organizations. | ||
| |||
| Brad B |
| ||
Member Posts: 617 Location: Oshkosh, Wisconsin | I don't have a real problem with much of what WAL is asking for. Small lakes shouldn't be hosting large tournaments. We should pay some attention to AIS. But the ban on live release tournaments makes no sense to me. Our impact is completely insignificant and this makes it look as though we WOULD be doing the lakes and rivers we fish some sort of harm. Likewise, I'm reasonable certain the DNR estimate of $76k to administer tournaments includes a large amount of money they hope to re-coup from the bass culling studies and fiscal impact study done as part of this original rule. I say the bass guys (WSBF) and FLW should be responsible for that $$$. | ||
| |||
| Guest |
| ||
| VERY well said Brad, yes the 76k is about the amount estimated to do the pilot program studies and there was a minor contribution by the Bass folks possibly the flw of 10k I believe, I too think they should be putting up the remainder of the bill but you know that will never happen so were going to be stuck paying for it from the users! Good Luck Tyee Jonnie you have every right to be afraid of this it is scarry! How is the Duck Hunting? | |||
| |||
| boomrr |
| ||
| the 76k is just there new annual number they came up with for enforcement cost of these new rules. They are also tacking on 18,000 annually for five years(90,000 dollars total) to offset the stupid pilot program the bass guys got them involved in.So there annual dip in the fisherguys pocket will be 94,000 (or three new trucks)for the next five years. | |||
| |||
| Don't |
| ||
| Don't let the Antis divide and conquer by bashing bass tournament people. That's exactly what they want. In-fighting and finger pointing will get you no where fast. This bill, and others like it around the country, are spurred on and funded by Anti-fishing and hunting folks who don;t want you to use the resource at all. Complain and point fingers and say that the tournament folks are evil, feel free, many have on these boards, but be careful, you're opening up a Pandoras box that can never be closed. Once a little bit is taken away expect more and more. This incrementalism is how they work. They couldn't achieve anything by attacking the tournaments directly at the major events like the Bassmaster Classic with their silly fish have feelings promotions, so now they'll suffocate everyone in legislation and the courts. They may not get everything at once, but even a morsel is a huge victory for them and a giant loss for all who look at fishing, boating and enjoyment of our aquatic sports as a way of life. Unity is what the fishingworld needs now, not bickering. | |||
| |||
| Shep |
| ||
Member Posts: 3899 | OK, so WAL is saying that there should be less that 25 boats on a 450 acre lake for a tournament? Are they willing to also limit the number of recreational boaters, too? I can guess what their answer would be. | ||
| |||
| Dale |
| ||
Member Posts: 874 Location: Neenah, WI | Good points by all of you. Here's what gets me: The WAL is concerned about invasive species (aren't we all?). I have yet to see any statement from them concerning the reopening of the Fox Locks system. This will lay open the entire Winnebago system to every invasive species in the Great Lakes. For that matter, I haven't heard from the DNR, Walleyes for Tomorrow, Sturgeon for Tomorrow, Ducks Unlimited, Butte des Morts Conservation Club, Otter Street Fishing Club, Shadows on the Wolf, Lighthouse Anglers or any other organization on the system. Some of you may remember that about a year ago I called on clubs in the area to issue public statements in opposition to the locks reopening. I never heard a word. You can bet that this will be a topic of discussion at the Nov. 13 meeting of the Paynes Point Hook and Spear Club. As for the tournament issues: I would like to see a numbers cruncher add all the boats that have fished a MAJOR tournament on the Winnebago system since 1985. Then figure how many fishing hours were available and how many fish were caught. The results could be presented to the critics along with previous statements from the DNR that there are more Walleyes in the system now than at any time in history. The squeeky wheel gets the grease. We've got to fight back. Dale Frank, President Paynes Point Hook and Spear Club 722-1048 Home 740-7876 Cell | ||
| |||
| Dorkrigger |
| ||
| Ditto on Good points by all, especially the "divide and conquer" warning. All tournament anglers must stay united or we will lose this battle. WAL seems to be an interesting organization and I'm not sure why they are in open opposition to tourneys. Check out their list of corporate sponsors-let these sponsors know that you don't want your purchases of products and services being used to lobby for unneccesary regulation of your hobby or livelyhood. http://www.wisconsinlakes.org/AboutWAL/corporatesponsors.htm Most interesting is Mercury Marine... | |||
| |||
| eye lunker |
| ||
| Hey Dork did you notice mercury marine is one of there sponsors | |||
| |||
| eye Lunker |
| ||
Member Posts: 859 Location: Appleton wi | Whoops never mind! My selective vision didnt notice the bottom of your post!  Thanks for the link and info dork. I know i will be emailing them and maybe if enough of anglers do it might make an impact to let the lake association know they are messing with a strong brotherhood here! Edited by eye Lunker 11/13/2006 5:27 PM | ||
| |||
| Dave Nichols |
| ||
| My "nom de guerre" is Dorkrigger, an item that some of you have known. Those that do know me understand that I view these issues very seriously and have spent some time dealing with attacks on our consumptive outdoor activities. I've been watching the Wisconsin issue develop and we should all say a big thank-you to Tyee for being vigilant and staying on point. Thanks to Mark Dahl for making the effort-Mark is a good resource for those of you that are interested in pursuing this. Shep and others on this board have also done a great job and you all deserve a thank-you from tourney fishermen around the country. This appears to be restriction without science and regulation as fund-raising (backdoor taxation). Unfortunately, the "ship may have sailed" on this one. In 2001 the Wisconsin Association of Lakes entered into a cooperative program with the DNR and the Extension Service to assist with planning and protecting "our lakes". This is a noble goal that I'm sure none of us would disagree with on first impression (most tourney fishermen are extremely sensitive to resource protection and environmental damage). However, when you examine the makeup of WAL you'll note that there aren't many "stakeholders" that would have a protective interest in tournament fishing. What exactly did this partnership want to "plan" for and "protect" from? "Consumptive lake use" is one of the stated evils that this partnership was organized to combat. Do you know what "consumptive lake use" means? Is tournament fishing a "consumptive lake use"? In the nomenclature of the anti-hunting and fishing extremists "consumptive use" is a term for hunting and fishing. How long has WAL been able to lobby their "partner" in the DNR for regs against tourney fishing? Experience has shown us that unless you have a stake in the research, preparation and drafting of regulations or legislation then you are at a huge disadvantage when it comes time to change or modify those items. The bottom line is that we, as tournament fishermen/organizers/sponsors need political power and we need to know how to maintain and use that power for the preservation and advancement of our lifestyle. We need to know how to monitor the system so that items like the 2001 Partnership aren't enacted without our participation and input. Wisconsin has many very talented professional walleye anglers. Many of these anglers are astute business people that are thoughtful and well-spoken. These anglers need to use their celebrity for the greater good and become the leaders of a movement to gain political influence. This winter and next year-take a politican fishing. It will be more important to your career in the long run to take a legislator fishing than it will be to take an outdoor writer fishing. Use boat-time to build a relationship, educate and lobby. Everyone can become involved in this process. This is the battleground to stop or defeat this type of regulation. I'll get down from my soapbox now but thanks for fighting the good fight. Organize and keep at it. | |||
| |||
| Jim Coon |
| ||
Member Posts: 499 Location: Appleton | Dick Great post! Everyone needs to do their part NOW before ot is to late. We need to get out to the remaining hearings and write letters to our people in Madison. I also would like to THANK those that have spoke up but others need to get involved THANKS Jim Coon | ||
| |||
| Shep |
| ||
Member Posts: 3899 | Great insight Dick, and I agree, that we are probably too late to prevent this regulation from happening. But maybe, just maybe, if enough of us testify at the remaining hearings, and write e-mails to Pat Schmalz that will be on record, we can get some of the regs modified. Regs like the ban on Live Release tourneys in July/Aug. Perhaps modify the number of tourneys on a body of water, or the final cost to us, the tournament anglers. It funny how WAL would limit the number of boats in a tournament, but if you asked them if they would support limiting the number or speed of pleasure boats on a lake, they would fisght that to the bitter end. These people are friends of PETA, they are ANTI hunting and fishing! They will never give up. They will try to divide and conquer. They need to be stopped! I will be in Wausau tomorrow, and will try to make the Rhinelander hearing. I will be heard! | ||
| |||
| Jump to page : 1 Now viewing page 1 [25 messages per page] |
| Search this forum Printer friendly version E-mail a link to this thread |
Copyright © 2025 OutdoorsFIRST Media | About Us | Contact Us | Advertise
News | Video | Audio | Chat | Forums | Rankings | Big Fish | Sponsors | Classified Boat Ads | Tournaments | FAQ's
News | Video | Audio | Chat | Forums | Rankings | Big Fish | Sponsors | Classified Boat Ads | Tournaments | FAQ's