|
|
Location: MN | http://www.startribune.com/local/west/38259139.html?elr=KArks:DCiUH...
Curious what your thoughts are regarding a proposed plan to charge launching fees at Lake Minnetonka ramps? A local group consisting of lake home owners and local businesses proposed all plan to charge launching fees to pay for programs to fight invasive species. This group proposed a ball park estimate of $5 - $10 fee per launch. I completely agree that increased action towards battling invasive species is great and I would be willing to chip in some money. The issue I have is who should pay for what?
Why should "outsiders" using the ramps be given the majority of the burden for this project. It is reasonable to assume that the primary users of a given body of water are those who live on the lake. Why not have a joint cost in which every home on the lake is charged an assessment and people launching boats are also charged a fee? Why put the burden solely on those using the ramps who do not live on the lake?
This seems to be a case where this association has the mentality of "lets make Lake Minnetonka exclusive" to those who can afford to use it, i.e. live on the lake. Or, lets have someone else pay for the lake we live on. For anyone who has fished or spent time on Lake Minnetonka, it is obvious that the paychecks and bonuses of lakeshore residents are not small. The highest priced Lake Minnetonka home is on the market for roughly $50,000,000.
In summary, it only seems fair that costs to keep the lake healthy be split between all users, not primarily on one group.
What are your thoughts?  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | I might be off base here, but...
Assuming the lakefront property owners mainly only recreate on that lake, the risk of them spreading aquatic nuisance species is relatively low. You're outsiders are the high risk users of the resource, thus they should bear the burden of the cost to prevent the spread of aquatic nuisance species. At least that's how I see it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 431
| Depends on what the purpose is for the fee and who is in charge of managing it. I don't like the idea of giving private groups control over public ramps-sets a bad precedent. If the DNR wants to collect the fee and do the checking go ahead. There are ways to publicly voice opposition to the DNR and "manage" DNR decisions since the DNR is a public body. Private associations are not so easily managed. The article also referenced collecting all sorts of data about the boat being launched. I'm not a serious conspiracy theory kind of guy, but big brother has enough info on me without somebody else collecting it. If I want to give information about what I do through surveys and such, I will--but I want that choice. Just a couple of different angles to think about. |
|
| |
|
![](<a href="http://flmnetwork.com/content/generators/skinny-sig-generator/">")
Posts: 485
Location: On my favorite lake! | I pay 10 bucks locally to launch. I don't see a problem unless you are paying 10 bucks each day then they should have a 30 buck fee for a weekly rate. The ramps should be in good shape and some money going to restocking |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32934
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | It would also be a fair thing to do to sell a yearly launch ticket for a flat, reasonable fee to those who use the water alot. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | Lightning, they wanted a $5-$10/each launch fee.
It's not going to happen. The ramps on Minnetonka are DNR controlled not association controlled so unless they legislate it don't worry about it. If they try to legislate it I won't let it happen so don't worry about it. This "plan" brought out so many negative comments that a Rep or Sen would be committing political suicide by introducing it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 313
Location: On your favorite spot | Sure, let's pay $10 everytime we launch, then all summer we can watch them spray the $%IT out of the foil, which is everywhere, in a vain attempt to "control" it, which dirtys up the water and messes up the fishing. Happened last year on another lake I fish all the time. Anyone who lives on Tonka has the resources to chip in and change "their" lake, shouldn't be on us.
I'll pay $10 to launch when property owners start paying rent to the DNR for having hundreds of square feet of dock out there, 5 boats, and those stupid water trampolines.
Want to make a more enjoyable experience on the lake? Stop mowing your lawn like a putting green and fertilizing it all year. Restore the lakeshore habitat and show everyone you actually care about your lake. Then we can talk.
Hopefully at least a few people that respond to this thread actually fish in Tonka. I'll make sure I buy any bait that I need on the way down instead of waiting until I get there. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1169
Location: New Hope MN | I see nothing wrong with this association purchasing all public landings and issuing a fee to those who wish to use their lake. Yup. I said it... their lake. It is nice to hear people trying to enforce property rights.
I think its vile to use government to stick a gun in someone’s face. Telling them, “I’m entitled to use your lake whenever I feel like it.”
|
|
| |
|
| Want to make a more enjoyable experience on the lake? Stop mowing your lawn like a putting green and fertilizing it all year.
as an interesting aside, Minnesota is the only state with a state-wide ban on phosphorous fertilizer (Maine has a sorta-kinda one that doesn't work). Dane County (Madison) has one, and Wisconsin is currently considering a similar state-wide ban based on the one in Minnesota.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 697
Location: Minnetonka | Thanks for the facts, Shawn. Do you know what the DNR currently spends on upkeep out there, i.e. chemicals, milfoil mowers, dump truck extraction teams? 
Minnetonka is a lot "higher maintenance" than other large bodies of water due to heavy use, but I don't know if I could justify an extra $1,000/yr to launch... that's like 40 Cowgirls! Rogue landings may start to show up around the lake. 
IMO, "doing our part" doesn't involve ramp fees. It is more about respecting the emergent vegetation buoys by not driving inside them even with PWCs, checking your rig for aquatic hitchhikers, securing your trash so it doesn't blow out on or near the lake... and it's about encouraging others to do the same.
Andy |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | Andy, I'm not sure about the costs for the milfoil mowers. I think that may be association money, but I'm not sure. I can ask around.
dtaijo174, I'm guessing that you said that tongue-in-cheek. The waters of the USA belong to EVERYONE unlike those in Europe. NEVER try to get that changed. In England for instance you have to apply for a permit to fish a lake and there's usually a waiting list. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 910
Location: Hastings, mn, 55033 | "I think its vile to use government to stick a gun in someone’s face. Telling them, “I’m entitled to use your lake whenever I feel like it.”
I feel it's even more vile for property owners to attempt to "stick a gun" in the public's face and tell them they cant use a PUBLIC resource without paying them some $$! Lakeshore owners property ends at the WATER LINE. I own Lake Minnetonka just as much as the guy with a $10,000,000 home sitting on it.
Whats next, can me and my neighbors put a gate across he ned of our PUBLIC roadway and charge a toll to help pay for road repairs? I mean the through traffic are the ones mostly responsible for degrading the condition of the road so they should bear most of the cost right??
Where does it end??? |
|
| |
|
| It's a complete joke to want to charge a launch fee for boat inspections. I'll gladly pay a yearly fee AFTER every last exotic species is identified and removed and all native species are reintroduced. The lake association has no desire to protect "their" lake from exotic species they want less boat traffic, PLAIN AND SIMPLE!
Fun Fact: There is mifoil in the pond outside the REI off of 494. How did that get in their? Not by someone launching a boat!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4053
Location: Land of the Musky | I live right next to a 5-acre playground/park. I charge people all the time to park next to it and cook hot dogs or let their kids play next to my home. I figure its my right as an adjacent park property owner
Personally I think they just need to raise everyone’s boat permit by a small amount if they really need money but I do not like this idea much.... Use of your boat on public waterways is alredy being paid by many factors (permits, fishign license, etc.). I just love how many times we are taxed and dinged for anything and everything in life!
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 3157
| yup,,,,lets spray weeds while the bluegills are spawning just like they do on Independence |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3157
| by the way,,wasnt Grays bay landing built with using some money from the state lottery how can you turn around and now think you can charge at it????
Edited by happy hooker 1/28/2009 10:11 AM
|
|
| |
|
| Shawn I caution your confidence in this going nowhere. Many states including MN have DNR ramps that require you to pay a fee just for the ramp, like Indy. What if the DNR was convinced the the homeowners have good intentions for the money or if the homeowners talked the DNR into taking on an abatement plan with the money? All they would have to do then is install a pay before you launch box just like at Indy. I wouldn't discount it as a possibility, look at the statistical imposibility of Franken now with a 250 vote lead. Face it Minnesota loves to pile on programs funded by redundant taxation. Its a scary culture that Minnesotans embrace with a smile. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | The difference with Indy is that is a Three Rivers Park, not a DNR landing. I'm not sure, but I don't think you are required to launch your boat there, but you are required to park. I may be wrong but I think that's the deal there.
The legislators that I've spoken to about this are about as worked up as we are, that's why I'm confident it won't go anywhere. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 227
Location: Maple Grove | At Indy you park your car for free but you must pay a fee to launch. It's $5 a time or a $35 season pass last time I bought one. Treats is correct though...the fee is not DNR but three rivers park.
Joe Olstadt |
|
| |
|
Posts: 670
Location: Otsego, MN | $10 per visit is insane. If they do something, they better make a season pass like the Park District at a reasonable price. What's going to happen if this goes through. Do we have to pay at every launch then?? This is just stupid!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2865
Location: Brookfield, WI | We pay at WI launches. I know, because I always gave the $50 to the guys that took me fishing over the last couple years so they could pay the fee. $50 and a cooler full of beverages and sandwiches. That's the going rate in WI.
Well, most of the time I bring sandwiches. But I always pay the $50 launch fee to whomever takes me.
Kevin
Just the cost of doing business. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 719
| Distressing thought but it won't happen......a can of worms the DNR would never get near.
Kinda like PETA proposing (key word) a ban on fishing |
|
| |
|
Posts: 299
Location: Nowheresville, MN | Marc J, couldn't have written that better myself. The fee at Three Rivers landings is for parking. You can launch for free, but better have a pass to park a vehicle and trailer. I'm still not sure I agree with this. As for Tonka, three accesses are owned by the state. Any fees would have to be approved by the legislature, which as already stated is never going to happen. The DNR has a division which overssees water accesses and is funded by the state general fund and boat registrations and sales(?). If there are no public accesses (free) to a waterbody, the MNDNR no longer assumes control of fish management, i.e. no stocking or surveys. This is where the Three Rivers accesses get sketchy in my opinion. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2361
| MuskyHopeful - 1/28/2009 6:43 PM
We pay at WI launches. I know, because I always gave the $50 to the guys that took me fishing over the last couple years so they could pay the fee. $50 and a cooler full of beverages and sandwiches. That's the going rate in WI.
Well, most of the time I bring sandwiches. But I always pay the $50 launch fee to whomever takes me.
Kevin
Just the cost of doing business.
This is great. When I come to pick you up to fish next year, bring at least THREE launch fees a day, because I like to take my friends to different lakes as the day goes on. THREE launch fees a day ought to about cover it, and roast beef and chicken(breast meat)sandwhiches. I'll let you hold the boat, while I go, ahem, and pay the launch fee. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2361
| Pointerpride102 - 1/27/2009 10:18 PM
I might be off base here, but...
Assuming the lakefront property owners mainly only recreate on that lake, the risk of them spreading aquatic nuisance species is relatively low. You're outsiders are the high risk users of the resource, thus they should bear the burden of the cost to prevent the spread of aquatic nuisance species. At least that's how I see it.
I think some of the other posters pretty well covered it, but how would you like to be told you were an "outsider" on the WI River, since you weren't a landowner, and were now relegated to a second class user responsible to some primary user group, not including you?
Edited by firstsixfeet 1/28/2009 8:17 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 910
Location: Hastings, mn, 55033 | "If there are no public accesses (free) to a waterbody, the MNDNR no longer assumes control of fish management, i.e. no stocking or surveys. "
Are you sure about that? On Square Lake in Washington County MN the only access is at the Washington County Park where you must have a pass. The DNR stocks the lake with Rainbow Trout and at one time Atlantic Salmon. I've been questioned for a creel survey there in the past as well. So there must be some exceptions to that. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | Even though most of the people that screen for invasive species at boat landing volunteer their time, there are still costs associated with the program. Especially if you want them to be informed.
Everyone who drives on a Wisconsin public road pays a fee for the maintenance, in the form of gas tax. In MN I believe you pay extra when you registered a vehicle.
With the increase usage of public waters, it’s not out of the questions that the State any State will try and recoup costs associated with maintaining the landing itself and the waters, not mater the State.
A boat launching fee makes much more sense than a parking fee. At least if you are charged to launch everyone pays including the lake property owners when they launch and retrieve their boats every spring and fall. A parking fee only hits none property owners.
I agree a yearly permit should be obtainable for people that use the launches on a regular basis. If you are going to form a group to fight this, I would keep that option in mind in case you lose and only have that to fall back on. 5$ to 10$ a day without that option is ridicules, and in my opinion exclusionary.
Nail A Pig!
Mike
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | firstsixfeet - 1/28/2009 8:16 PM
Pointerpride102 - 1/27/2009 10:18 PM
I might be off base here, but...
Assuming the lakefront property owners mainly only recreate on that lake, the risk of them spreading aquatic nuisance species is relatively low. You're outsiders are the high risk users of the resource, thus they should bear the burden of the cost to prevent the spread of aquatic nuisance species. At least that's how I see it.
I think some of the other posters pretty well covered it, but how would you like to be told you were an "outsider" on the WI River, since you weren't a landowner, and were now relegated to a second class user responsible to some primary user group, not including you?
I'd be fine with it, my feelings wouldnt be hurt, if that is what you are getting at. The most common way AIS are transfered is through boats coming from water that contains an AIS and moving to a water that doesnt contain an AIS. I'm always happy to see people trying to prevent the spread of AIS. My assumption was that people living on tonka seldomly take their boats out and go elsewhere, that assumption may be incorrect, I've never been on the lake, was just offering up an opinion.
Just a thought from a second class citizen. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 335
Location: Minnesota | Hopefully we aren't moving in the direction of pay to play in MN. What could be next, paying a fee to hunt public lands?
I agree that we need to do whatever is necessary to prevent the spread of exitocs, but this seems like a silly idea from a group of property owners who seem to be a little stuck on themselves. Last year there was a city on Minnetonka that proposed requiring all lakeshore owners to restore native vegetation along the shoreline on their lots. I think that the same people who made sure that didn't get approved belong to this group that wants to place a fee on everyone else to use the lake. It has been my experience that these types of people just don't seem to lead by example when it comes to doing what is right for "their" lake.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | I think its a fair idea IF all the monies are accounted for. Why not share the burden of researching and ridding IAS with everybody who uses the lake? What if the monies went to stocking, would you guys be for or against that? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 313
Location: On your favorite spot | At least currently, we have the money, we have the fish for stocking. The reason we can't use either right now is because the same types of people that are proposing charging for the boat ramps fight our stocking efforts.
Sorry, I don't see this as an attempt to control the AIS. We are mainly talking milfoil, for which no efficient or effective control method exisits. Spraying and cutting are counterproductive.
Getting the cabin cruisers to use their GPS and avoid the shallow foil beds would be much more benificial to the lake and ALL of it's users. I won't charge the lake association for that idea either.
Edited by Marc J 1/29/2009 1:00 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 697
Location: Minnetonka | Marc J - 1/29/2009 12:59 PM
Getting the cabin cruisers to use their GPS and avoid the shallow foil beds would be much more benificial to the lake and ALL of it's users.
A-MEN.
Marc J - 1/29/2009 12:59 PM
I won't charge the lake association for that idea either.
LOL |
|
| |
|
Posts: 699
Location: Hugo, MN | I'll tell you what they should do at Minnetonka and that is limit boat size to 23' and HP to 250-300. The a-holes in the big boats cause more problems than any invasive species. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 299
Location: Nowheresville, MN | castmaster - 1/28/2009 11:24 PM "If there are no public accesses (free) to a waterbody, the MNDNR no longer assumes control of fish management, i.e. no stocking or surveys. " Are you sure about that? On Square Lake in Washington County MN the only access is at the Washington County Park where you must have a pass. The DNR stocks the lake with Rainbow Trout and at one time Atlantic Salmon. I've been questioned for a creel survey there in the past as well. So there must be some exceptions to that. The state attourney general ruled on this issue. Having to pay for a park admission is not the same as having to pay to launch your boat, and therfore the access is still considered public. p.s. It's funny you mentioned Square. I happen to have vast knowldege of the habitat use and movements of minnows in that lake.... |
|
| |
|
| Give it enough time and we will have a situation similar to what is in Europe. All they have to do is Federalize everything i.e. banks, car companies, lakes, etc. and you will see what will happen. Hello USSA!
Edited by hftb 1/29/2009 7:24 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 193
Location: Mayer, MN | Imagine the ramp at Gray's Bay if everyone entering and leaving the lake had to be searched and screened for Milfoil, it would back up to the intersection of Hwy 101 and Hwy 7. I currently pay to launch or more accurately park at Minnetonka Regional Park, due to living in the west metro. So if you're a lake property owner and you're dumping your boat in for the season you can currently skirt that fee also.
Can someone explain to me why the ramp in Mound had the BOAT TRAILER PARKING moved to the street form April to November? Folks, they have taken efforts to remove us boat launching dirtbags from the lake already. Think those condos next to the ramp may have had a hand in that or was that parking needed for the few times per year that the park is that busy?
IF they really want to help the lake try shoreline restoration, dock size limits, ban weed rollers and spraying, filter strips/ buffers to protect from the fertilizers and runoff created by the amount of impervious surface required for palatial estate.
Nickel and dime.  |
|
| |
|
| Let's not forget that just three months ago an amendment to the MN constitution passed. It's a tax with a portion of the proceeds going for fish habitat and water quality. The very items the Association is so worried about! This is new funding thus the fees are not even needed.
It was clearly an end-run in an effort to privatize the lake and it wasn't by chance that they brought it up when the country was watching Obama's first week.
Now if the legislation included all lake owners having no more than 25hp on their respective watercraft.....
TW |
|
| |
|
Posts: 284
Location: Fishing the weeds | Anybody who thinks they agree with this should take a look around the country(especially out east) and see where this leads. I now live in NJ. The highest taxed state. We now pay $12-$30 per day ramp fee, depending on where and when you launch. Now they want to add a fee for each vessel launched at 2 of the largest lakes at up to $100 per vessel, per lake, per year. All in the name of saving the lakes. Most of the weed problems stem from the failing septic systems of the lakefront homes but, they want us to pay. We have some property owners who rope off areas between there docks(illegally) or actually harrass and throw things at guy's fishing along the shores and docks. We also have two lake commissions that have absolutely no clue what they are doing. One in particular is a marina owner who hates fisherman and wants only racing and pleasure boats on the lake. Countless times since they have had control of the two lakes the watr clarity and fishing quality has been devistated. No consideration is given to the DNR before they act. And there are still fisherman in this state that have no problem with it(Morons). They say if you put a frog in a pot of boiling water it will jump out but, if you put it in a pot of cool water and slowly turn up the heat, it will slowly boil to death. Be careful what you wish for or allow to happen. It won't end there! Be ever vigilant.
Edited by Muskie Pat 2/1/2009 3:51 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 5193
| I think the boat owners in Minnesota need to pay a special launch tax state wide .This would solve your pay to launch problem and probably only cost each boat owner a few dollars more.Bill |
|
| |
|
| We think people from Illinois should pay a special launch tax, that would fix alot of problems. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 158
| I would hope that some of the dedicated funds will go to stopping or controlling the invasive species. I really didn't notice much of a difference after the spraying last spring and I really don't think that adding more herbicides to the system can curb the milfoil. Also as someone who has fished my fav Lake Minnetonka for about 15 years I think that this milfoil is maxed out. It basically covers almost everything under 15 feet on the clear side. I probably launch 70-100 times a year and I really hope this non-sense doesn't go through, unless it's only for the sailer-boaters, plus a tax on their stupid polo shirts!! jk I like polo shirts |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | 0723 there is a tax for boat landings, it's called your registration and over the last couple years there was an increase.
Teddy, they are talking about using some of the dedicated funds towards invasive species.
I laugh at how they have milfoil inspectors on tonka though. It's one big milfoil patch and they're more worried about millfoil going in then people leaving. Birds do transport it as much as we do. There's a few private lakes right across the highway that don't have landings that have plenty of milfoil. I hate to say it but inspectors aren't going to stop anything. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 158
| One massive milfoil patch it is. I wonder if I could maybe get an milfoil inspector gig out there. I bet it would go something like this. "Yep, it is growing big and strong this year again, well maybe just a couple quick cast here, just to bring in a sample"
Treats, what are the chances this will go through. I read your previous post that it is unlikely. My buddies at Wayzata Bait are pretty certain it will not too. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1169
Location: New Hope MN | Muskie Treats - 2/3/2009 2:52 PM
I laugh at how they have milfoil inspectors on tonka though. It's one big milfoil patch and they're more worried about millfoil going in then people leaving. Birds do transport it as much as we do. There's a few private lakes right across the highway that don't have landings that have plenty of milfoil. I hate to say it but inspectors aren't going to stop anything.
I can believe that. It's too bad really... I suppose they'll do the same thing with disease and parasites. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | Teddy, it's possible that it could, but after the complete flaming they took on it I don't think it'll go anywhere. Most of the people enjoy being on the counsel and don't want to lose their position.
The people on the LMCD (Lake Minnetonka Conservation District) are all representatives from different cities around the lake. One of the city counsel members asked if I'd be interested in representing Excelsior last year. I had too much on my plate at the time, but I would consider it in future years. There's a lot of opportunity to improve the lake with the new dedicated funds available. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3913
| great thread, compare proposal to how it's managed on the Michigan lake where I live.....
No ramp fees. Property owners are assessed a "annual lake treatemnt fee" on our property taxes. This started about 5 years ago and is now an almost perpetual "we-agreed-to-what-for-how-much??!!" because the weed treatments consist of spraying poison that quickly kills plantlife that then quickly becomes fertilizer for the next generation of the same types of weeds we tried to kill off in the first place. The only winners are, in order......
1) the weeds
2) the stoned hillbilies who ride around in airboats spraying huge jets of poison here and there on the surface of the lake.
3) the guy who employs the guys who spray the poison
4) the township's RETAINED attorney who made $10,000 when the INITIAL contract between the township and the private weed treatemnt service provider was completed. (Do you see the apparent conflict of interest in this one? If the attorney makes yet more bucks on each year's contract renewal......)
Ok, with the context provided above...
I think that on heavily developed lakes it is the property owners who have the most control over those those variables which most impact the state of the lake. We can't blame joe public who uses the public access ramp for 1) the zebras, 2) the foil or 3) leaky septic systems or lawn fertilizer running into the lake. So, property owners should bear a great portion of the cost of short-term lake quality management. No ramp fees for joe public. Let our fishing licence payments, as a part of the DNR's annual budget, help pay for maintenance of the public access and long-term lake improvements.
Property owners can pay for the weeds. After all, we property owners, more than anyone else, are most responsible for the milfoil gardens we've created and perpetuated.
and that's all i have to say about that.. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 193
Location: Mayer, MN | 0723 - 2/3/2009 12:56 PM
I think the boat owners in Minnesota need to pay a special launch tax state wide .This would solve your pay to launch problem and probably only cost each boat owner a few dollars more.Bill
You think like a politician. If there is a problem, we better throw more money at it.
We already live in the land of 10,000 taxes and laws, but it is never enough. How much of our boat registration and fishing license fees end up in the general fund? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 299
Location: Nowheresville, MN | I thought there was no way in you know what that this thing would go beyond an obscure idea. I guess I was wrong. I just received a 2009 Legistlative questionaire from Rep. Connie Doepke. The thing basically asks questions like should we increase education spending, cut taxes, voter ID card, etc. Low and behold the last question, #8: "Do you favor charging a launch fee on Lake Minnetonka in order to fund efforts for eradication of aquatic invasive species in our lake?" Oh brother... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 619
| i fish tonka a few times a month, i often think about w/ all the pleasure boaters/weeds/sail boaters/jet skiers, fairly skinny and beat up fish, etc.....does anyone think as for stocking fish, it would just make more sense to stock a different lake and forget about tonka (let the pleasurers have it), from my perspective (w/ all the hassle on that lake) why not start stocking a different body of water instead? make sense to anyone else? |
|
| |
|
Location: Twin Cities | Slow Rollin - 3/2/2009 10:28 PM
fairly skinny and beat up fish, etc.....
That has certainly not been my experience on that lake. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 193
Location: Mayer, MN | Slow Rollin - 3/3/2009 8:28 AM
i fish tonka a few times a month, i often think about w/ all the pleasure boaters/weeds/sail boaters/jet skiers, fairly skinny and beat up fish, etc.....does anyone think as for stocking fish, it would just make more sense to stock a different lake and forget about tonka (let the pleasurers have it), from my perspective (w/ all the hassle on that lake) why not start stocking a different body of water instead? make sense to anyone else?
Nothing you said makes sense.
(Picture 007_cropped_edited.jpg)
Attachments
----------------
 Picture 007_cropped_edited.jpg (67KB - 167 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 734
Location: Watertown, MN | Slow Rollin, you got to be kidding right, yeah some are skinny, but seen plenty of hawgs out there and caught a few. Don't take a ton of pics, but ask hammskie or hoyer about there fish.
We coulc stop stocking tonka, but what lake would you start up that has that kind of acreage to dispurse fisherman? Tonka fishes huge, just kind more of the beaten path, on the main lake community spots. Tonka is great during non prime time.
While fishing the PMTT, most out of state love the lake and would give anything for it to be in there home state. Several teams come back and make fun trips to it every year. I too would love to see the pleasure boaters gone, but it is a fact of life that we share the resource, now if we could only get them to take driving lessons, so they understand they do not have to follow the channel and shallow water markers. Troyz
|
|
| |
|
Location: Twin Cities | Another thought, the muskies deal with the pleasure boaters day in and day out, they're conditioned and comfortable. If not they swim down about 5 feet and their fine. It affects the fisherman much more than it ever will the fish! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 619
| o.k, o.k, no one else thinks the same as i do, i guess it depends on opinion from what a girthy, thick fish vs a skinny fish is...... i am sure there is no set answer. Troy z, asked what lake would be better, i dont know........IMO any larger body of water less overall factors i mentioned before, river system? i dont know if there are any other lakes in the metro area that would be big enough? maybe within a 30 minute drive there could be a great lake w/o all those hassles??? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 734
Location: Watertown, MN | Slow rollin, that is the ?, any large body of water withing 30 min of the metro I believe has ski's in them, even the rivers. Problem lies with in 30 minutes of a huge population will get high boat traffic, there is talks of adding an additional lake with in the TC area, but it is on the bottom of the priority list, due to the fact the metro already has 20% of the lake in mn stock with muskies, so the metro is a great place to be in that aspect, ton of lake with fish, but tons of people close to those resources.
Troyz |
|
| |
|
Posts: 193
Location: Mayer, MN | Slow rollin, I think we can all agree we want more water, I can't answer that one. I would have to study a map, but then I would not know anything about the biological or social aspects, I'll leave that to the resident experts.
As far as Tonka and traffic, you just have to be out there at certain times. Stay off at peak recreational boater times and pick certain bays over others. You can't expect to go out there at 11:30 through 4 in the afternoon on a Saturday or Sunday and expect to have the lake to yourself. We even have a favorite stretch of shoreline that we share with a couple gentlemen that ski on when it is calm. You can expect that other users are going to be out there at certain times, once you learn the patterns Minnetonka is very enjoyable.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 829
Location: Maple Grove, MN | What is this talk about skinny fish on Minnetonka? Maybe in the middle of summer when some of the fish are keying on panfish and perch, but not in the fall when they fatten up. I caught this one last November, but lost one that was longer and much thicker in September.
There have always been lake shore owners on Minnetoka fighting the public boat ramps. This is just another one of their attempts to limit how many of the "lower classes" can have access to "their" lake. They will fail because there are a lot more of us "lower class" folks than them and we vote too.
Edited by Herb_b 3/3/2009 10:21 PM
Attachments
----------------
89730021.JPG (154KB - 172 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 636
Location: Bloomington, MN | I'll tell you what they should do at Minnetonka and that is limit boat size to 23' and HP to 250-300. The a-holes in the big boats cause more problems than any invasive species. (I don't know how to make previous posts turn blue ,but this was from Marine 1)
Marine 1, there are some w/ 23'++ boats in which the "Captain" is considerate to fisherman and the lake issues. The time it takes to splash and unload a large boat is much more than it takes to put a 14' Lund on a bunk trailer. I understand that it is frustrating to deal with, but that is part of of the "Tonka" show. I totally agree that most of the large boat operators do not understand the wake issues, but the real concern is that due to the volume of large boat traffic which creates the "Minnetonka Chop". The boaters in small crafts have a difficult/dangerous time negotiating these waves. It is not a "Fun for the whole family" type of lake. I do not think the weed issue can get much worse, no matter what is put on that body of water. Your coment on horse power has no merit due to my 26' Chris Craft having only a 130 hp. engine. I can get the boat going with 6 "tubby" people in it up to 31 mph. and I can produce an incredible wake. The lake is loaded with a-holes up the Wha-zoo, no matter if they are in a Sea Nymph w/ a 50 hp Force or a 64' Viking filled sex jacuzzi.
Edited by Clark A 3/3/2009 10:41 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 193
Location: Mayer, MN | Clark A - 3/3/2009 10:20 PM
I totally agree that most of the large boat operators do not understand the wake issues, but the real concern is that due to the volume of large boat traffic which creates the "Minnetonka Chop". The boaters in small crafts have a difficult/dangerous time negotiating these waves.
I like when you're running across the "Minnetonka Chop" and one of those dinner cruise roller wakes is sneaking across the lake hiding in the chop. We slow down in a hurry for those. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 619
| i got in a few heated arguments out there last year....1 guy drove a monster boat between me and a buoy i was casting too.... buoy was in within a medium casting length...i asked him why he didnt go around me? said he didnt have too and he slowed down so its o.k... i yelled at him and asked him how many other people would do the same type of thing and what type of lake etiquette he was used to? 2nd one was i was trolling and a guy ran right behind me and ran over my line, my spinner bait was up in the prop, took me about an 20 minutes to unwind from his prop, didnt offer to help, just said hurry up, i asked him why he cut so close to the back of my boat? cant remember what he said. i bet some have some great stories.......anyone have any thoughts WHY some of large pleasure boater would act that way towards others on the lake, my thought was it may be lack of experience on the water, therefor they really may NOT know better, or what would be considered the RIGHT thing to do......or most acceptable to do? and we know pleasure boaters arent going anywhere, they will always be out there, except at off hours....however some suggestions can help me/others possibly understand WHY the behavior? Knowing could make it easier to deal with and understand where mr pleasure is coming from and their view point, if that makes sense?
Edited by Slow Rollin 3/3/2009 10:52 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 193
Location: Mayer, MN | Nice fish Herb_b! Not so sure about the hat though. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 193
Location: Mayer, MN | Slow rollin, you ask why the behavior?
I chalk it up to ignorance, ego, money or ineptitude.
Don't let it get to you, you have just as much right to be out there. If you leave the lake, they WIN!
Go out there on a Saturday in the fall after the bird and deer seasons have started, you would think you're up north. That's always my favorite time.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1752
Location: Mt. Zion, IL | lots of luck, you bring up a good point with the ignorance. about 8 years ago I was sort of "bored" with bass fishing and picked up a few musky lures at the local tackle shop where I'm at in central IL. I had some sort of soft swimbait that was made locally sort of like a bulldawg and I was anchored on this point. You can't see on either side of this point but to the east there is a no wake zone, and the west is blocked by very very steep banks. I heard this jet ski doing donuts around the corner and things got loud as he was getting close. He did not see me on the point and came within about 35-50 ft of hitting the boat. He was flying around the corner as I had just let the bait sail. He caught the line mid chest and ended up getting ripped off of his jet ski. He came over and apologized and said he was way out of line. I was mad, but what are you supposed to do? I wanted to jerk and set the hook but that's not "right". I just held on to my new rod/reel for dear life. That is the best testament of strength I think there can be for Cortland Spectron haha.
There will be idiots everywhere. Whether they own pleasure boats or fishing boats, some people just don't care, or don't have any common sense. If you throw a marker buoy on my home lake, be prepared to be fished off of your spot and have about 20 onlookers. I have since painted all my marker buoys black so that they do not stick out from across the lake. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 619
| lots of luck - 3/3/2009 11:02 PM
I chalk it up to ignorance, ego, money or ineptitude.
yeah, its too bad and sad somone would ever treat someone indifferently because these types of things....or to think that is O.k to do because of those reasons!!
Edited by Slow Rollin 3/4/2009 8:18 AM
|
|
| |
|
Location: MN | I almost lost a passenger out of the boat after hitting one of those Minnetonka chops. Those wakes come out of nowhere and it's tough to see them until you're right on them; unreal. The worst is all the guys running half plane. In some of the major waterways, it's impossible to safely get on plane and run. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 829
Location: Maple Grove, MN | My experience on Minnetonka has led me to believe that there simply are a lot of jerks and dense people out there and they come in all sizes of boats. Yeah, those big boats can be trouble especially when they "buzz" you. But there are also a lot of inconsiderate fishermen too who do things they should not.
I had a big boat "buzz" me a few years ago on the east side of the main lake. I had to put the trolling motor on max thrust and get out of the way just so I didn't get hit and the guy actually flipped me off as he drove buy. Shortly after that, we decided to head over to Lord Fletchers and get a burger. When we got there, I noticed the boat that had just buzzed us on the dock and there was the guy who had flipped me off bragging loudly about how he had just about swamped a fishing boat. I walked right up to him and said "That was my boat". The guy just turned white and shut up. I gave the guy a disgusted look and walked away. But gosh did I enjoy that moment.
I suggest that you don't let the jerks and dense people out there ruin your time on the water. I have found that while one has to deal with them, its best to just try have fun and focus on the lake and fishing. That is all one can really control anyway. Jerks are everywhere - on the roads, at shopping malls, even the Twins games. Its hard to get away from them and even at home there is that mirror thing.....
Life is short and then you die. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 193
Location: Mayer, MN | Herb_b you summed it up well.
My goal is to have a muskiefirst something or another this season so that maybe a few of us will see each other and give a friendly wave or even an on the water chat session.
Is it June yet? |
|
| |
|
| I think everyone should stop fishing Tonka in protest. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3157
| are some of you guys serious about restricting boat size????
some of the richest most powerful people in the state live on tonka
your gonna tell the Mcmillans they cant have the boat they want if they choose one.
youd have a better chance of low income public housing getting built in Wayzata
Edited by happy hooker 3/6/2009 10:23 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 158
| I am pretty sure that we were just messing around with some wishfull thinking about the boat size restriction, I mean we are not all morons, no one is putting together the coalition as far as I can tell. People just get a bit defensive when we are told about the possibility of being charged to launch on our public resource. Did you think they were serious? hahaha, just messing buddy |
|
| |
|
Posts: 619
| happy hooker - 3/6/2009 10:20 AM
are some of you guys serious about restricting boat size????
some of the richest most powerful people in the state live on tonka
your gonna tell the Mcmillans they cant have the boat they want if they choose
boat size aside, but in any circustance can you help me understand,what makes someone better, more powerful, more rights, than anyone else that has less money? or why wouldn't the same rules and regs apply to a Mcmillan that apply to everyone else?
Edited by Slow Rollin 3/6/2009 11:17 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 3157
| slow roll
the rules would apply
but the tonka crowd would have so much money to throw at legal/political power it would never get to be a rule.
we have rules that work against them too,,city lakes have rules that allow electric motor only, |
|
| |
