|
|
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
|
|
| |
