|
|
Location: Rhinelander | Uhhh, those guys do talk to each other. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1406
| Cash were splitting hairs now, "serious threat"...thats my opinionated definition so lets define it in laymans terms.
The speed limit is 25mph. It is for the safety of others. The road is used by various motor vehicles that can all cause various extents of damage. ALL have to abide by the 25mph law correct? The moped, the 20 year old junker with bad brakes and the 18 wheeler. Who poses the more "serious threat" to the safety of others? Why should some follow it and others not? Should I not have to follow it because I have a new vehicle with state of the art brakes and it is inspected annually?
Take this same threat and relate it to the users of the waterways and insert ice fisherman, shore fisherman, guy with a 14' boat, fisherman with 21'. All capable of transporting live fish from place to place. All CAN pose a "threat" because they use our lakes and rivers. Do we write laws for each user group or laws that are practical for all?
I look at this as the first of more laws to come I'm sure, take ballast water for example and the cleaning of boats it is being looked at now and the main focus from our local DNR is the opening of the locks. They have to develop a system of ensuring no invasives are moved up/down stream of the great lakes. Seems to me to be a no win situation for them (as there are no proven methods of doing this in a timely and cost effective manner). How do they write a law for you or I to transpoort our boat from an infected body of water to another body of water? Or should they? Lets just let those other 200 invasives in and let mother nature deal with it. (insert foot in arse)
Edited by tyee 1/15/2008 8:17 PM
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1656
| "The speed limit is 25mph. It is for the safety of others. The road is used by various motor vehicles that can all cause various extents of damage. ALL have to abide by the 25mph law correct? The moped, the 20 year old junker with bad brakes and the 18 wheeler. Who poses the more "serious threat" to the safety of others? Why should some follow it and others not? Should I not have to follow it because I have a new vehicle with state of the art brakes and it is inspected annually? "
yet all of them are going 30 mph. What's been accomplished?  |
|
| |
|
Location: Rhinelander | Better than the chaos of unregulated 'do what you wish'. Hit someone doing 40mph, and see how that goes. And if an enforcement officer is there, I bet you and everyone else will be doing 25. We just don't like being regulated, even for our own good.
You are arguing that the rule of law is a waste of time. I can't agree with that; it's how our democracy functions top to bottom.  |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1656
| The Autobond? Anarchy?
"unregulated do what you wish" is bit more extreme than "suggested practice". About as extreme as claiming piles of dead fish 10' wide and 3' deep, which was not the case either.
How 'bout instead of a fine for breaking the law, we take their hunting and fishing privilages away for 5 years? It is a "serious threat". Same sentence for someone who doesn't disinfect thier hull? How about not cleaning the weeds off thier trailer? Eurasion milfoil is problem, it's easy to see the offender traveling down the highway? See it all the time.
I'm glad you're pro-active, I'm just being a realist. Errrrr Opinionated, complaining, realist that doesn't operate on fact. |
|
| |
|
Location: Rhinelander | If you try to launch that boat on Pelican with that milfoil on the trailer, and give the association invasives volunteer any trouble there, the warden will come on over and talk it over with you.
'No law' defines anarchy. Not 'no speed limit 'on a specific freeway in Germany. Do 90 in that neighborhood, and get arrested, if that suits. I'll choose to obey the law there. Up to all of us as individuals, and thankfully for us all, most choose to abide by the law more or less.
Fine, some don't think VHS is a serious threat, the folks who make their living and have the degrees and are working as scientists and biologists obviously disagree. I'll choose to listen to them and do what they ask, but that's me. I see the evidence as looking bad enough I don't want to encourage or even chance fish kills all across the state if anything at all I can do will lessen that possibility, but again, that's me. I'd be darned disappointed to see 5 53" muskies floating dead on George, or 125 29" walleyes dead on Thunder because some fool decided to dump bait infected on Winnebago in either lake. But again, that's me! That's why I posted this information in the first place.
I'm obviously opinionated too. However, I won't attack or bash anyone involved in the subject matter of the debate or anyone who has joined in the debate. I'll question, point out what I am trying to indicate offering data from sources, etc. and will ask how the others in the debate came to the stated position they have taken. I'll point out what appears to be mistakes or inaccurate assumptions, point out obvious flip-flops by someone I'm debating, and would expect same from them. I try to steer the conversation to the actual subject matter, and away from train wreck arguments that solve nothing and do not serve the debate. I do so enjoy a good debate!
Don't know about the fish piles, that wasn't me that posted that stuff.
I might complain, but I'll do my best to do so from at least a somewhat informed position. So do you, from what I've seen.
Offer complaints and no resolution, or offer complaints just to complain, and the shoe fits. I'm pretty sure you don't fit that model.
Realist is a great term. Everyone's reality is based on their beliefs, so to speak, so reality can take on quite a few shades to grey. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 538
| Regarding folks who live on he lake, it is my understanding that you can store your bait on the shore or off your pier, but must have ID on the bucket. Perhaps a bit of a problem with ice, but not insurmountable.
This is an incredible thread in itself, with lot of good information, and folks with a lot of time on their hands. Anybody working out there? :).
I agree that the boats are bigger issue than the bait, and less controllable.
If you don't trust someone to use the bait properly, you certainly can not expect that that person thoughrouly cleaned their boat or had it out of the water for 5days in the proper drying conditions.
Yes, the DNR is proper to act, but some common sense is needed.
Inform and trust the folks fishing. If a boater is fishing Pewaukee Lake for three days in a row, there is no need to kill his bait. I would suspect the rules are one size fits all to avoid any confusion as to what lakes are involved and which are 'safe'. It is unenforcable and wasteful. Responsible folks will do the right thing and you will not stop the rest from re-using bait and failing to clean boats when needed. I think a few amendmends to the ruling, as it now exists are in order.
Take care,
Jim O |
|
| |
|
Location: Rhinelander | My son designed a PVC 'livewell' he keeps under the ice at his trailer out on the lake. Holds several dozen minnows, and is easy to retrieve and gather the bait for the day. I'll get images of this contraption soon. |
|
| |
