Muskie Discussion Forums
| ||
| Moderators: Slamr | View previous thread :: View next thread |
| Jump to page : 1 2 3 4 5 Now viewing page 1 [30 messages per page] Muskie Fishing -> General Discussion -> Spring Hearings |
| Message Subject: Spring Hearings | |||
Pointerpride102 |
| ||
Posts: 16632 Location: The desert | After a club meeting last night we heard of two things musky related being discussed at the hearings. 1) Net size. Not many details were said but the guy that was talking said that if fishing for musky a 30" net would be considered illegal. Brian Swenson and I talked a bit about this saying that it probably meant hoop diameter and that 30" would be too small and a 40" would be needed. Anyone have any info on this topic? 2) Fishing Tournaments. Apparently there is a group out there called People Against Fishing Tournaments (PAFT). They are pushing to get rid of tournaments. Aparently they are proposing fees per person in all boats, fees that wouldnt be included in entry fee. Also limiting number of boats on a body of water by giving out stickers. Also putting high fees to hold a tournament in general. I'm not positive what all they want to do as some of the info we got was unclear, but if anyone else has info on these topics feel free to correct me where I am wrong or am missing info. I for one am all for tournaments and am going to write to some of the WI Representative DNR guys and voice my opinion in favor of tournaments. I'm not too overly worried that tournaments will be banned but I dont want to see our sport ruined by a bunch of people who have no clue about fishing/ tournament fishing. Mike | ||
| Gander Mt Guide |
| ||
Posts: 2515 Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | 1) Enforcement nightmare, won't happen. 2) All these new rules/regs because somebody in our own DNR doesn't like tournaments. I like the notion of a lot of this money going twords enforcement. They have ZERO plans on having biologists and or wardens dedicated to tournament fishing..so where that money is actually going?...who the hell knows. | ||
| Joe_Fisherman |
| ||
| DNR to conduct hearings Public allowed to discuss tournament fishing rules By BOB RIEPENHOFF [email protected] Posted: Sept. 30, 2006 The Department of Natural Resources will hold a series of public hearings on a controversial proposed rules package for fishing tournaments held in Wisconsin. Last week, meeting in Allouez, the Natural Resources Board unanimously approved holding the hearings only after eliminating one of three proposed options for paying the estimated $76,000 annual cost of the tournament program. The option would have divided the cost among organizers, participants and the state's Fish and Wildlife account, which includes proceeds of license sales and a federal tax on hunting and fishing equipment. "They do not want the Fish and Wildlife account used for the tournament program at all," Patrick Schmalz, regulations coordinator with the DNR in Madison, said of the board members. The remaining payment options that will be voted on at the hearings are: • Requiring tournament organizers to pay application fees ranging from $200 to $850, based on the size of the tournament. • Requiring tournament organizers to pay application fees ranging from $50 to $475, and tournament anglers to pay a $19 participant fee that would allow them to fish in an unlimited number of tournaments for the year. In August, board members balked at sending the rules package to public hearings, saying they had received letters from the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation and the Wisconsin Association of Lakes expressing concerns about the proposed rules. 600 bass found dead The letters were written after more than 600 bass were found dead in the La Crosse area after a tournament was held there in July. The DNR was conducting a study of the impact of tournament fishing at that tournament. The federation wants to know whether the public supports a statewide moratorium on bass tournaments in July and August or at least in waters where largemouth bass virus has been detected. The association's concerns include fish mortality, the potential spread of aquatic invasive species, the impact of tournaments on small lakes and the cost of regulating tournaments. To address the concerns and stimulate discussion, the DNR included in the rules package a ban on live-release tournaments from July 1 to Aug 31. In live-release tournaments, Schmalz said, fish are held in live wells, transported to a weigh-in site, weighed and released later. Tournaments where fish are measured and released at boat-side would not be affected by the ban, which Schmalz said was very controversial. "They (tournament organizers and participants) are absolutely opposed to a ban on live-release tournaments in July and August," he said. Revised package The revised rules package also would require tournament organizers to have a plan, approved by the DNR, to prevent the spread of aquatic invasive species. The new rules package also would reduce the amount of tournament fishing activity allowed on small lakes. On lakes from 100 to 449 acres, the number of tournament boat days allowed per month - the number of boats in a tournament multiplied by the number of days of the tournament - was reduced from 100 to 50. On lakes from 450 to 999 acres, the number of boat days was reduced from 450 to 300. Legislation passed in 2003 gave the DNR authority to regulate fishing tournaments and authorized the creation of an advisory committee to oversee the regulations. Schmalz is coordinator of the 23-member committee, which includes members of fishing clubs, tournament organizers and the Conservation Congress. | |||
| Shep |
| ||
Posts: 5874 | OK, the Prposed Tournament Regulations is an ongoing issue right now! There are meetings scheduled throughout the state. There have already held two of them. I broached this subject several times in the last couple months here, and nobody seemed to give it much thought or concern. I'm here to tell you to get to these meetings in your area! I'm not going to post anymore here, but get over to WalleyeFirst.com, and read the many htreads on the subject. This is not a Spring Hearing thing! This is a separate set of hearings going on right now. Where is Tom Mcginis on this? I think this affects you and the WMT tourneys the most. | ||
| HUNTERMD |
| ||
| Hey Shep, You are right! Everyone who fishes in Wisconsin, not only us muskie anglers, should attend the hearings and speak out in opposition to the proposed changes in permitted tournaments. And yes, it will effect the WMT to the point that we would no longer be able to opperate, but also most of the tournaments in the state, I estimate it to be between 80% to 90% of present tournaments, that would not be able to continue to run their tournaments. There is a huge misconception by the WDNR, the general public, and of anglers (both tournament and non-tournament) that tournament promoters and clubs who run tournaments make money hand over fist and the truth of the matter is just the opposite and that most tournaments are run on a shoe-string budget. Adding more cost to the opperation of tournaments will eliminate all or most of the club tournaments(also known as outings, gatherings, fundraisers, ect. because a part of the changes would be all events would have to have a permit) along with most of the independant tournaments and tournament circuits and have to pay a heavy permit cost and cost to the anglers. What most people, including the DNR, are unaware of is the culture of tournament fishing, or the mindset of the true tournament angler. Like myself, I fish for tournaments, and the only extra fishing that I do is pre-fishing, or post-fishing for tournaments. If most of the muskie tournaments that I like to fish are forced to "close their doors", then my motivation to fish is no longer. And unfortunately for the state of Wisconsin, I am not alone. I have had in the last 2 1/2 months, been contacted by some very concerned muskie tournament anglers about the proposed tournament changes , over 150 pro's, and many are like me, that if the muskie tournaments go, so will their dollars spent on fishing license in Wisconsin. It would not be in protest, but we would just loose the reason for angling. The sampling of the pro's comments were about 9% of the WMT anglers, and if the percentage of the muskie anglers who would no longer purchase resident and non-resident Wisconsin fishing license, it would be quite substantial and if you multiplied that response to the hundreds of tournaments and hundreds of thousands of tournament anglers in Wisconsin, then we could be looking at possibly 100,000 or more present Wisconsin fishing license holders, both resident and especially non-resident, not purchasing a Wisconsin fishing licence. The consequences of such radical measures prososed by the tournament regulation changes would be higher license fees for all, to make up for the loss of revenue. In turn, a percentage of the folks who would buy a license will balk at the higher fees and the downward spiral begins, putting our fishing resources in joepardy. It certainly is a slippery slope that this proposed tournament changes will be leading us down to. The problem is even farther reaching then I have discribed, and much more dangerous, and that is why all anglers of every species, tournament anglers and non-tournament anglers alike, should be in opposition of the proposed tournament regulations and should attend the hearing meetings. Thanks and I will be attending the Rhinelander hearings, Tom McInnis | |||
| Pointerpride102 |
| ||
Posts: 16632 Location: The desert | Well put lambeau! I didnt know all of the detials of the proposed changes, evident in my first post, but I do agree that some of the changes proposed for tournaments are not bad changes. I usually fish at least one tournament a year and can say that if I would have to pay a one time fee for the season of 19 dollars I would be more than happy to do that. I also think it is good that we are looking to protect our resources the best we can. I agree that transporting fish in the heat of summer is not a good thing. The changes arent going to cause people to stop fishing. I love fishing for fishing, not fishing to win a prize, just being able to get out and cast is a blessing! Mike | ||
| esoxaddict |
| ||
Posts: 8781 | The way I understand it is it will definitely cost more to run a tournament, and that transport-type tournaments will no longer be held during the warmer months, but I'm not sure any of the tournaments would be forced to shut down. Obviously there would need to be changes to the way they would be run, and finding a location might be more challenging, but I'm not seeing where these measures wqould eliminate any tournaments. It might spread them around and space them out a lot more, but is that bad? Don't get me wrong -- I'm not anti tournament at all, but if a lot of fish are being killed (I don't believe this to be the case) than why not take measures to counter that? I can see how it may effect the financial end -- between entry fees, limiting the number of boats, and still having to spend just as mouch to actually organize it you may wind up losing money, or being forced to raise entry fees and/or decrease payouts to break even. That doesn't sit particularly well with me. Tournaments are a business after all and a business needs to be profitable to continue. Long winded way of saying I can see both sides I guess. Not sure what side I'm on... I can say without a doubt that if all tournament fishing went away for ever I wouldn't be any less motivated to go fishing. I wouldn't be happy about it, but I'd still be out there casting! Edited by esoxaddict 11/8/2006 4:10 PM | ||
| HUNTERMD |
| ||
| Hey Lambeau, I would like to clerify something with your first statement of turning my argument into a transport and non-transport issue. I made no comment about the transport or judge boat tournaments as it would have no outcome as to weather or not we are able to keep the WMT going. It is very expensive to run tournaments properly and with the WMT hosting 21 tournaments in 2007, judge boats for all the tournaments would be just a small drop in the "operating cost bucket". The additional cost for the WMT to pay for the 21 permits would equal over $8,000.00 which is money we just DO NOT HAVE. The added cost would be why we could not continue to go on. One would say that we could increase the cost of the entry fees to pay for the permits but we already know what would happen...for the 2006 season the WMT raised our entry fee from $295 to $300. The outcome was that a little over 26% of our 2005 tournament anglers didn't sign up for the 2006 season even though we used that extra money to raise the Championship pay-out, and the Lapp Trophy bonus, and the Grand Slam along with other increased pay-outs. If we have to raise the fees to pay for the permits, we will be loosing even higher percentage of returning tournament anglers, especially if an increase in pay-outs do not follow the increase in entry fees. In 2006 the WMT gained however in entries from the 2005 season because we were able to attract new anglers to the tour with our increased pay-outs and with current WMT anglers increasing the number of tournaments that they fished from the previous year. My point that most tournaments would have to "close their doors" again has nothing to do with the transport issue. It is a matter of expenses! It is very expensive to run a tournament that most folks don't realize. The added cost would put an already shoe-sting budget to the brink of collapse, forcing tournament after tournament to fold. If you look over the decades of muskie tournaments in Wisconsin that has come and gone, primarily due to finances, the added extra burden of permit fees would accelerate the "mom & pop" tourneys, club outings, independent tourneys, and circuits to fold. I started fishing tournaments in 1982 , and have fished 137 muskie tournaments since 1988 and consider myself a part of the tournament fishing culture and I am not alone. I do not question people for their motivations to fish, deer hunt, trap, throw shoes, play golf, ect. and I expect the same consideration. I think people would be very surprised to find out how many anglers fish only tournaments or pre-fish for them and would pursue other interest if fishing tournaments would be taken away. Also, nearly half of the WMT anglers are from out of state and many of those anglers who I spook with recently told me that they would not be coming to Wisconsin if fishings tournaments were no longer, prefering to fish in their own state if they continue to fish or fish other locations. My statement about the hundreds of tournaments and hundreds of thousands of tournament anglers in Wisconsin ment all tournaments and anglers for all species. Lambeau, I do beleive you have a right to voice your opinion and I have a right to voice mine and inform folks as a tournament organizer what the possible and very realistic consequences of these proposed changes are. And if the additional cost would be too much for the WMT and other tournaments to bear, then as a tournament organizer I think that I have a little credibility in this matter and my experiences should be considered. All of these proposed tournament changes are bad for fishing in Wisconsin, bad for the resource, bad for tourism in Wisconsin, ect. and should not be endorsed by anyone!!! Thanks, Tom McInnis | |||
| Pointerpride102 |
| ||
Posts: 16632 Location: The desert | HUNTERMD - 11/8/2006 8:47 PM All of these proposed tournament changes are bad for fishing in Wisconsin, bad for the resource, bad for tourism in Wisconsin, ect. and should not be endorsed by anyone!!! Thanks, Tom McInnis How would these be bad for the resource? If anything it is preventing the fish from being caught and the possibility of them dying after release, less boats on a lake reduces pollution in the lake, reduces the chance of invasives getting in to the lake. Bad for tourism in WI? I highly doubt this would affect tourism. Yes fishing is a draw for tourism. But so is deer hunting. So is pleasure boating so are so many other things. I HIGHLY doubt that Wisconsin would suffer in tourism if some changes were made to tournaments. You also state that if you had to stop having transport tournaments you would have more costs. So dont do a judge boat? Time stamped digital photography. People dont have digital cameras? Get one, they arent expensive now. I do agree that imposing payments on people running tournaments may be a bit over board, perhaps a one time full year tournament license. Mike Edited by Pointerpride102 11/8/2006 9:03 PM | ||
| lambeau |
| ||
I would like to clerify [sic] something with your first statement of turning my argument into a transport and non-transport issue. I made no comment about the transport or judge boat tournaments as it would have no outcome as to weather [sic] or not we are able to keep the WMT going. fair enough. i'm probably confusing the issue due to your historical opposition to raising size limits on lakes due the impact it has on your tourney structure. ie., that you have to use judge boats. It is very expensive to run tournaments properly and with the WMT hosting 21 tournaments in 2007...21 permits would equal over $8,000.00 which is money we just DO NOT HAVE. well, technically you do "have" it. you collect fees, you pay out money to winners. a couple hundred bucks (at most!) each tourney would hardly shut things down. also, your estimate of over $8000 in increased fees is a worst-case scenario math-wise. there is more than one option being voted on, and it's unlikely that your 60-boat tournies would be subject to the highest fee, based on number of boats. what you're really saying is that you don't want to give any of it back to the state that created and maintains the resource you're benefitting from. exactly how much does it cost you to run your tournament trail in dollars that go back to the resource which you are benefitting from? i paid entry fees to the WMT this year, i'm one of the new competitors to your tour. where did my money go? did ANY of it go to stocking fish, restoring habitat, etc.? after the bills were paid, who profited? the state does a lot of expensive work to do those things, and is basically looking for a way to recoup the costs of doing so from those who are benefitting financially from the resource. when you start talking about real big money tournies in the bass and walleye world which are way beyond anything muskie tournies offer, the fee amounts become even less significant in contrast to the prize payouts. I do not question people for their motivations to fish, deer hunt, trap, throw shoes, play golf, ect. and I expect the same consideration. it's a free country: you can question my motivation, and i'll question yours. the consideration that i'll give you is that i'll question you in a respectful manner. i enjoy tournies, and i'm sure you do too. but to claim that without tournaments the sky would fall and you'd have no reason to fish is the basest form of dichotomous thinking. no disrespect intended personally, but in my opinion, that's a sad thing. And if the additional cost would be too much for the WMT and other tournaments to bear, then as a tournament organizer I think that I have a little credibility in this matter and my experiences should be considered. your expertise in running tournies is a fact. tell us: is the WMT run for profit? do you profit personally from your tournament series? i have no problem with it if you do. in fact, i think you should profit from your work. however, it has implications about your interest in defeating these proposed fees as they would impact your pocketbook in a way that they would not impact club outings, charity fund-raisers, or "mom and pop" events. that is a fact people should know about as well. your tournament-running expertise will gain credibility in my eyes if you can convince me that your opposition to these proposals is about fishing and not about profit. break it down for us...you've been proudly predicting that most if not all of your events next year will have full fields. at 60 boats paying $300 each, that's an $18,000 budget per event. with 16 events, that's a $288,000 budget for one-day events plus 150 boats in the four 2-day events adding $180,000. for a total budget of $468,000 on the season from entry fees alone (before sponsors. i obviously don't know what/how much they donate, but you do have an impressive list on your website). according to your website, you payout $14,000 for one-day events, and $30,000 for two-day events. so your total payouts add up to $224,000 for one-day events plus $120,000 for two-day events. this leaves you with $124,000 to run 21 events, an average of about $6000 per event! you run a good show, but every event i attended was hosted at a bar, most of which i'm sure are more than happy to host the event for the sake of the customers you bring in. are you saying that you can effectively run your tour on $468,000 a year, but you can't do so on $460,000 per year? that's a difference of only 1.7%. if you get generous with the math and look at after-payout costs, it's $124,000 compared to $116,000 a difference of 6.4%. (again, this is worst-case scenario as the WMT events are likely too small to be subject to the highest possible fees.) you're the tournament expert: convince me with the facts, not hyperbole. | |||
| Gander Mt Guide |
| ||
Posts: 2515 Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | Pointerpride102 - 11/8/2006 9:01 PM HUNTERMD - 11/8/2006 8:47 PM All of these proposed tournament changes are bad for fishing in Wisconsin, bad for the resource, bad for tourism in Wisconsin, ect. and should not be endorsed by anyone!!! Thanks, Tom McInnis How would these be bad for the resource? If anything it is preventing the fish from being caught and the possibility of them dying after release, less boats on a lake reduces pollution in the lake, reduces the chance of invasives getting in to the lake. Bad for tourism in WI? I highly doubt this would affect tourism. Yes fishing is a draw for tourism. But so is deer hunting. So is pleasure boating so are so many other things. I HIGHLY doubt that Wisconsin would suffer in tourism if some changes were made to tournaments. You also state that if you had to stop having transport tournaments you would have more costs. So dont do a judge boat? Time stamped digital photography. People dont have digital cameras? Get one, they arent expensive now. I do agree that imposing payments on people running tournaments may be a bit over board, perhaps a one time full year tournament license. Mike 1) You have any idea how many people come to Eagle River, Three Lakes, Land O Lakes, Pewaukee, Okauchee and Phelps because of the PMTT and the WMT? Tourism isn't strictly folks coming from out of state. Those two tournament trails mean big money to local economies in the way of taxes on purchases, keeping bars and restraunts in business, local bait shops etc. Tournaments do bring in big money. I personally know the owner of the Tackle Box in Land O Lakes, she loves to see the "big boats" come to town...bait, lures, tackle. 2) I don't trust half the fish stories I see here, now you'd want tournament directors and anglers to trust a pic to see who wins 10-20k?? Not going to happen. If Tom needs a judge boat for any of his tournaments within my areas and my schedule is open, I'd do it for free. I don't think I'm the only one. 3) Personally, if the majority of the wisconsin public doesn't want to foot the bill for the regulation and administration of tournys, I see no problem with that, but my question is this. Where does the segregation stop? I don't deer hunt but the money I pay for a small games license goes to helping thwart off CWD. I don't Bass fish, but my money is going twords Bass stocking. If 90+ thousand dollars is to be used by the DNR for Tournaments ONLY...I would want to see where every dime of that went, because I don't see them using that money the way its supposed to. | ||
| waldo |
| ||
Posts: 224 Location: Madison | 3) Personally, if the majority of the wisconsin public doesn't want to foot the bill for the regulation and administration of tournys, I see no problem with that That's the heart of it for me. My tax dollars go towards stocking lakes. If the DNR wants to add regulations to protect the fishery from potential harm done by tournament fishing, I'm all for it. I don't have a problem with tournaments making their money off of my tax dollars, as long as they're not harming the fishery. It's the DNR's job to make that determination, otherwise you've got the fox watching the henhouse. -d | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32886 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | GMG, You are dead on on a couple points, but not the imagery option using a Dun Right board and digital camera. Paul Hartman has done that successfully now for a year with no significant problems. He does have a couple judge boats out there as well, but that's just for making sure all is well on the water and getting a few additional images for promotion's sake. The images very clearly show how long the muskie is, and I cannot see a single defensible negative. Positives? 1) Immediate release after 'normal' CPR, no transport and no waiting for a judge boat. 2) No need for Judge Boats, saves the promoter money 3) Beautiful images of EVERY fish caught. 4) A 'conservation' oriented PR image for the event And yes, the measurements hold up very well on the images, judged by the Director and one other official. | ||
| Gander Mt Guide |
| ||
Posts: 2515 Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | If tournaments become self sustaining by gaining additional funds on their own, does that mean our annual fishing license fees will drop? It should. EDIT: Steve, do you have access to any of the PH tourny pics? It'd be cool seeing how well that's done. Edited by Gander Mt Guide 11/9/2006 8:44 AM | ||
| BNelson |
| ||
Location: Contrarian Island | Hunter MD says "Hey Shep, You are right! Everyone who fishes in Wisconsin, not only us muskie anglers, should attend the hearings and speak out in opposition to the proposed changes in permitted tournaments." So far you have not put up any valid argument why "everyone" should oppose the regulations...from what I have read here, and don't take it personally, you are trying to get everyone on your side so your wallet isn't effected. Kind of like how you have opposed higher size limits on some lakes your tourney fishes so you don't have to run judge boats...Now again, this is just my perception but it seems you only seem to oppose things that can put a dent in your wallet...not what is truely good or right for the fishery. Like Lambeau said, how much of any tourney money goes back INTO the fishery you are using for your tournament? If the answer is zero, then by all means..if the DNR see's a way to raise money to supplement the increased usage of the fishery caused by your and the other tournaments I would not be opposed to it. I fish a few tourneys here and there and dont think they are a bad thing but also, a little regulation would not be the sky falling.... If you wanted to cover your worst case scenario tab of $8000 so your bottom line doesn't change doesn't that calculate out to having to add about $6.50 per boat per event to cover it? So if you took it from $300 to $305 and bit the bullet on the other $1.50 you really think that would make a big percentage drop out? Also, I think using digital camera's on a bump board is really the best way to do them...there really is no room for cheating in that scenario GMG. | ||
| Gander Mt Guide |
| ||
Posts: 2515 Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | Ever hear of Photo Shop? It can be done. what would stop somebody from having a laptop and PS to do some dirty work? I could easily stretch another 3-4" in a pic. Especially of a fish laying on a bump board. Now, put 20-50 grand on the line? Its like Butta. | ||
| BNelson |
| ||
Location: Contrarian Island | GMG...you must think there was a 3rd shooter on the grassy knoll too.... Come on...laptop on board? Photoshop? we are musky fishermen not tech wizz kids...do you seriously think anyone fishing a tournament would really do that ... | ||
| Pointerpride102 |
| ||
Posts: 16632 Location: The desert | GMG, I'm not sure I understand your 3rd point. So you are saying, if you have to pay money to musky fish you want to see that money going back to the muskies and the muskies only? As for tourism I dont disagree that the tournaments bring in bunches of people, but so do so many other things. The way I read Toms post was that Wisconsin would fall on hard times if tournaments were gone. To me that is simply not true. Would some bars in smaller towns lose out on a few dollars, probably but then if it is that big of a deal for them the tournament organizers should approach local business that benifit from tournaments and ask for some money to help cover the new fees. Mike | ||
| slimm |
| ||
Posts: 367 Location: Chicago | MSKY HNR - 11/9/2006 9:00 AM GMG...you must think there was a 3rd shooter on the grassy knoll too.... Come on...laptop on board? Photoshop? we are musky fishermen not tech wizz kids...do you seriously think anyone fishing a tournament would really do that ... Yes, and yes to that it is possible. Probable, I would hope not. I have read about a gentleman on the board who regularly has his laptop on board in order to operate his business. Ryan | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32886 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | A boat check in the morning would take care of any issues about an onboard computer; simply cannot have one in the boat. If someone tries to get one past the judges and gets caught, that can be a very serious attempted fraud charge. One could 'pay off' a judge boat, too if the money for first is large enough. The fear of getting caught trying to cheat is usually what keeps the not so honest, honest. | ||
| esoxaddict |
| ||
Posts: 8781 | Brad With a big payout on the line? I'm sure a lot of people would. That could be prevented in any number of ways though. And I agree with Pointer here -- WI isn't going to lose money over this. Sure, fishing tournaments generate revenue for the local economies. But so do hundreds of other activities that are a lot more popular than tournament fishing. What I want to know is this: 1. How is this proposal good/bad for the resource? 2. In what ways is this going to affect me as a tournament angler? | ||
| bnelson |
| ||
| not saying nobody would ever try it..but like Steve said...just check the boats for laptops then too... problem solved....seems they are doing a good job with that format in MN ...it could work just as well for the WMT... | |||
| slimm |
| ||
Posts: 367 Location: Chicago | Agreed. | ||
| Gander Mt Guide |
| ||
Posts: 2515 Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | Pointerpride102 - 11/9/2006 9:01 AM GMG, I'm not sure I understand your 3rd point. So you are saying, if you have to pay money to musky fish you want to see that money going back to the muskies and the muskies only? As for tourism I dont disagree that the tournaments bring in bunches of people, but so do so many other things. The way I read Toms post was that Wisconsin would fall on hard times if tournaments were gone. To me that is simply not true. Would some bars in smaller towns lose out on a few dollars, probably but then if it is that big of a deal for them the tournament organizers should approach local business that benifit from tournaments and ask for some money to help cover the new fees. Mike What I'm saying is that I'm all for tourny fishing regulating itself, with its own funds and I'd want to see a full accounting of where that money went. Also. There has to be a line drawn somewhere as to what gets DNR general fun money and what doesn't. Anti tournament people say that don't want to pay for tournys...I'm saying that I don't bass fish, why should my money go to stocking bass...there has to be a line drawn before every sector of DNR fisheries is segregated. Personally, I'd say have each tourny angler buy a stamp annually and be done with it. 7000 tourny anglers in the state...make the stamp 13.00 and BOOM...90k. | ||
| Shep |
| ||
Posts: 5874 | OK, I'm going to say this once. These proposed regulations are a bad deal. all around. There is not a single scientific reason to add these regulations. Not one! First of all, tournament anglers are being singled out from recreational anglers and boaters. Not only are we going to be asked to pay more, we are also being singled out for AIS inspections, procedures. The proposed rules even require the tournament directors to have a parking plan! Permits will be limited based on the size of the water, only a certain number of tourneys on a given body of water per day/month and participants per tourney, all based on the size of the body of water. No live release tourneys in July and August. I'm not going to get in the judge boat/transport issue here. And anybody who thinks cheating will not happen in a bumpboard take a polaroid tourney has got his head in the sand, so this is not going to be argued here. The fact remains that a bunch of traditional tournaments for all species will be eliminated. The WMT, MWS, FLW League, and Tour events, MWC, SWC, BASS, etc will either not hold their tourneys in WI in those months, or they will have to go to catch and kill tourney, or immediate release tourneys. Bumpboard/Polaroid tourneys would not cut it because of the regulations call for the tourney directors to have a plan to ensure the release happens in a certain time and procedure. This means witneessing. As for the additional fees required? They are talking fees to cover DNR Warden time,. admin fees, additional fees to recoup the failed culling and live release test they did with the Bass tourneys. Yup, most tourneys are run for profit, and any additional fees will not come out of the tourney promotoers paockets, it will come out of yours! Just like when you taxes get raised in the near future, the consumer will end up paying the entire cost. I've been to one of the hearings, and it makes me ill to see this happen. The driving force of this is not the DNR, but the Legislature. All over a couple dead fish and some people who maybe had to drive a little farther to find a launch that was open. You don't think this will affect the club tourneys? Can the C&R club afford a $450 fee, to hold an outing? Milwaukee Chapter of MI will have to limit the number of entrants for the Pewaukee Classic. This is their biggest fund raiser. Cut those dollars in half, and they have half the money to support stocking, and research, and kids programs. I wish I could have made it to the Green Bay hearing last night, but I had a family thing come up. Any additional regulation is a bad thing! Plain and simple. It will hurt the economy, it discriminates against tourney anglers, and it is not necessary. We've held tourneys for many, many years, without these regulations, and have done just fine. No other state has anything close to these regulations. I may not have said everything I wanted to here, but make no mistake. These regulations are going to be the beginning of the end for not only tournament fishing, but recreational fishing. You don'tthink it will get to this? Maybe not in my lifetime, but once these people get a foothold, they don't give up! | ||
| Gander Mt Guide |
| ||
Posts: 2515 Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | "They are talking fees to cover DNR Warden time" Riiight. At the Fondy meeting somebody asked if the DNR is going to allocate wardens for tourny's...."uhm, not at this time". Then where's the money going? I'd like to know how many tourny anglers get checked by wardens...personally, it's never happened to me. Not even on Pewaukee or Okauchee lakes. | ||
| TJ DeVoe |
| ||
Posts: 2323 Location: Stevens Point, WI | GMG, I'm sorry but I disagree! I worked on one of these elite trails this year and I guarantee there isn't one guy that fished the trail that would even attempt to do anything of that caliber! If cheating is going to happen it will be on the smaller tournaments, with larger tournaments of this caliber and bigger, there is wayyyyyyyyyyyy to much at stake if they were caught! If they were caught doing such a thing they would be more than likely banned from the trail or tournament they are fishing for life, not to mention that every person there will know about the cheater, just doesn't pay to do so. The cheating factor in tournaments of this caliber is so very minimal it's not even worth the agruement! Also, tournament anglers get checked, most get checked during prefishing so there is really no need to check license or boat inspection the day of the tournament. The local DNR respects the fact that these tournaments are bringing money to a community. But believe me, the DNR is well aware of what is going on before a tournament and after a tournament. I can recall this summer multiple times when the DNR was watching us run the take-offs and weigh-ins. They would stand right beside the guy who is bumping fish, releasing fish and etc. Edited by Merckid 11/9/2006 9:48 AM | ||
| Gander Mt Guide |
| ||
Posts: 2515 Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | "IF" is an awfully big word. I've both fished tournaments and have been a tournament director....cheating is completely possible if photography is the only basis to judge fish by. The more money you put on the line, the bigger the chances of cheating. Look at the Clam Corp Trap Attack last year...guys filling holes with fish. I hate to break this to you kid, but in the real world, all people aren't as nice as you. Money and greed do terrible things to people. | ||
| TJ DeVoe |
| ||
Posts: 2323 Location: Stevens Point, WI | GMG, I saw this at the very elitest level you could! With payouts such as 50k+, no need to tell me about cheaters. | ||
| Gander Mt Guide |
| ||
Posts: 2515 Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | Of course not, nobody would think of every cheating in big time tournys....na. http://nymag.com/news/intelligencer/17279/ http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9901E1D81238F935A357... http://www.fishingworld.com/SamRayburnPavilion/newsletter/Read.tmpl... http://www.outdoorcentral.com/mc/pr/06/02/07a3a9.asp Edited by Gander Mt Guide 11/9/2006 9:56 AM | ||
| Jump to page : 1 2 3 4 5 Now viewing page 1 [30 messages per page] |
| Search this forum Printer friendly version E-mail a link to this thread |
Copyright © 2024 OutdoorsFIRST Media |