Changes to 2015

[DeadI]

I was not able to attend the meeting inSLC tonight but I'm curious how it went. Hope this link works as it describes some interesting possibilities for fish lake. http://wildlife.utah.gov/public_meetings...packet.pdf
[signature]

[Flyfishinglover]

The no limit on perch was accepted in the meeting. Basically a 2 year period test to see if they can drop the perch population then put kokes so the lake trout can eat them and get bigger.

The meeting was only a little over 1 hr or so comparing to last year I stayed for like 2 or 3 hrs and it was still going on when I left.
[signature]

[FishMcFisherson]

It was boring.

One thing that I noticed, is when they were talking about there being no limit on the fish you can keep at your home, they never once mentioned a daily possession limit. They kept saying that "once fish are in your home, they are no longer included in your daily limit".

When this idea was first posted on this site, I wasn't happy because of the possibility of people being able to go back and forth from the lake over and over catching limit after limit. After hearing Drew speak, it sounds to me like that will be the case... You will be legally able to catch a limit, take it home, come back and catch another limit and so on... I plan on sending him an email to confirm (mad I forgot to ask him specifically). I still don't like the idea, but Drew does seem like a pretty strait shooter, so I will curb my anger until we give it some time to see how it will affect our waters. I also wanted to add that he did state "we do not know how this will affect all waters". I am confident that this will cause problems in some places.
[signature]

[Flyfishinglover]

Were you the guy in the second row on the left side of the room wearing a jazz hat???

Ya it was pretty lame comparing to the great comedy acts of last years.

For sure there was tons of spear fishing topics coming out.
[signature]

[DeadI]

As far as fish lake goes are they going to stock the kokes this year? That is what the report made it sound like. I would love to have a healthy population of kokes in that lake, Tiger Trout as well.

And a no limit on the perch and not be in trouble for just killing them in my opionion is this is a long time coming. There are to many perch there. I think I would enjoy catching them a little more if they were bigger. Hopefully this ends up happening.

Fishlake in the future could be a one stop catch all. You could very likely catch Lake trout, Rainbows, Browns, Tiger Trout, Brook Trout, Tiger Musky (long shot I know) Splake, Perch all in one place.
[signature]

[Flyfishinglover]

They said 2 years to see if they can weed out the perch population. They will be doing gill netting each year to figure out if the population decreased and if it's good enough they might do it by 2016. There's to many perch eating all of the plankton so there would be no food for the kokes.

Trust me with how many people who go to fish lake during ice season will be pretty easy to kill the population. They didn't mention anything about tiger trout for fish lake but they are thinking of putting tigers in strawberry.

Another thing they will be doing a gill netting soon at Yuba to see how the perch are doing. The best quote of the day from the crowd was "You mean how well were the pike are after all of those tasty perch." or something like that.

One reservoir will be getting a 16 brook trout limit but one you would have to eat all of those or 14 of them to even catch 2 trout for the limit in your fridge in the end.

Mill creek canyon top part where it's dirt road will be close to cars soon but still can hike up for hunting season.

Huge population on deer in vernal, draper, sandy ect. Might be able to have a certain permit to kill them or many deer will be transported far away from the valley just to return.

Fish lake 4 trout 1 over 24" was confirmed as well.
Don't remember if they confirmed the chumming/bait use of strip bass but I'm sure its going to pass because they had info that many people catch strip bass kill them then toss into the lake or go to the boat ramp and toss them in the dumpster or something like that.

That's all of the regulations I could think of off top of my head right now.
[signature]

[dubob]

[quote FishMcFisherson]One thing that I noticed, is when they were talking about there being no limit on the fish you can keep at your home, they never once mentioned a daily possession limit. They kept saying that "once fish are in your home, they are no longer included in your daily limit".[/quote]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3]I was not there and cannot vouch for what Drew said or didn’t say. But I did read the agenda packet and can assure you that your understanding of the proposed change in possession limit is incorrect. Here is a quote from the agenda packet: “The warm and coolwater fish species (all fish that are not "trout") at your permanent residence do not count as part of your possession limit.”[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3] [/size][/#800000][/font][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3]What you are trying to ignore is some basic definitions with regard to limits. For instance, a daily limit means the maximum limit, in number or amount, of protected aquatic wildlife that one person may legally take during one day (emphasis added). That means that once you catch and keep a limit of fish (species specific), you may not keep any more fish (of that same species) that day. Taking them to your home and putting them in the freezer DOES NOT allow you to return to a body of water and catch and keep more fish of the same species on that same day. Also, under the Possession and Transportation of Dead Fish and Crayfish rules in the Guidebook, you will find this rule: “A person may not take more than one daily limit of game fish in any one day.” This WILL NOT change under the new proposal. Trust me on this.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3] [/size][/#800000][/font][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3]The new proposal will state that “Excluding trout, other game fish kept at the angler’s permanent residence do not count towards an angler’s possession limit for that species or species aggregate.” However, the possession limits (daily & aggregate) and rules will still apply. By all means, I encourage you to contact Drew for clarification. But first, I would suggest you download the agenda packet (if you don’t already have it) as well as a copy of the Guidebook (if you don’t have a hard copy) and actually read and understand them before you do. [cool]
[/size][/#800000][/font]
[signature]

[CoyoteSpinner]

FFL - thanks for sharing your feedback on the meeting. Appreciate you both taking the time to attend and putting the effort into sharing what you recollected from the meeting.

I have to wonder how the bag limit will play out. I expect what's really going to go down is the "daily bag limit" will remain, but the possession limit with not include your fridge/freezer.
Thus - you can go catch a limit one day, but you can't take it home, or to the cooler in your truck and then return to fish more.
But tomorrow you can come back out and start all over, even if you had hamburgers last night.

IMHO - that would be reasonable. I just had some baked catfish from some spring filets, and they were scrumptious.

[TubeDude]

[#0000FF]I was there also...along with several BFTers. I did not take notes but will comment on what I think I heard and my opinions.

With the exception of the new rulings on non-trout possession increases and new regulations on perch in Fish Lake there were not many recommendations for other changes.

Spear fishing regulations will likely remain pretty much as they are...except for encouragement for more spearfishing for smallmouth in Sand Hollow, pacu in Blue Lake and pike in Utah Lake. Really? Good luck with that last one.

Otherwise, as Drew Cushing suggested, it is going to require further study and more creel studies and netting surveys to provide real data on conditions and changes in fisheries that may warrant changes in regulations. And he agrees that it is unwise to make blanket changes by species...for all waters. Each needs individual study and consideration. It was good to hear that. In the past they were seemingly trying to make "one size fits all" rules that were good for some waters and bad for others.

Back to the expanded possession rulings for non-trout species. The regulation that says these allowances only apply to legal residents of Utah, with a fixed residence address, reduces the potential for abuse by out-of-state harvesters...or by Utah residents who are staying in a cabin or an RV while harvesting and keeping full limits every day. The accumulation of frozen or canned fish must be at the primary residence. That requires a lot of back and forth travel for those who would try to make that law work for them.

It was also mentioned that there have been only three DWR citations in 30 years for anglers being found in possession of illegal quantities of fish in their home freezers. But it was admitted that the chances of someone being checked are minimal. So it is mostly still on the honor system. People will keep doing what they have been doing but some folks will now keep more fish. My evaluation is that it is like raising the speed limit to 80 so that speeders will now be legal.

There were presentations from the microphone both by the anglers and spear fishing side of that argument. For the most part the arguments were based upon personal opinions and not the results of creditable studies. People are prone to make their own observations and evaluations to suit their own already made up minds.

Like most anglers, I hate to see anybody else harvest a big fish I would prefer to catch myself. But big fish harvest happens just as frequently among anglers as spear fishermen...perhaps even moreso, considering the group of "happy harvesters" that use all means at their disposal to scoop out all the fish they can...for consumption or even for sale.

One interesting observation I got from Drew Cushing in a private conversation is that in all their planned creel surveys they have never encountered any spear fishermen. But, then again, in the ten plus years I have been back in Utah...fishing up to 100 days per year...I have never been checked for a license. Bottom line is that with the reduced budgets of the DWR they just don't have the people to monitor all waters and enforce all laws.
[/#0000FF]
[signature]

[Flyfishinglover]

You must live at your residential area for 6 months to keep a 4 trout limit one day then have another 4 trout the other day. If you go camper or stay in a trailer by the lake it doesn't count.
[signature]

[TubeDude]

[#0000FF]DWR pointed out another potential problem with the trout limit situation. They are proposing to quadruple the daily trout limit at Oak Creek Lake in the Boulders to 16 trout per day. Over population of stunted brookies and they are trying to reduce the numbers through increased harvest rather than treating the lake. BUT...if someone keeps two days limits of brookies from that lake...32 brookies...they will be unable to keep trout from any other water until they have consumed enough to comply with regulations.

Any time there are temporary changes in regulations for specific species on specific waters there seems to be the potential for running afoul of standard statewide regulations in other areas. But how can you police that?
[/#0000FF]
[signature]

[dubob]

[quote Flyfishinglover]You must live at your residential area for 6 months to keep a 4 trout limit one day then have another 4 trout the other day. If you go camper or stay in a trailer by the lake it doesn't count.[/quote][font "Times New Roman"] [/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]Read the agenda again as well as the Guidebook. You will find this definition with regard to the proposed change for possession limit: "Permanent Residence - for the purposes of this rule only, the domicile an individual relies upon in establishing residency for the purposes of Utah Code §23-13-2(37)." You will notice that there is no mention of a time length.[/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]
[/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]Perhaps you are confusing the 6 months requirement with what is required to be consider a resident and thus eligible to purchase a resident fishing license - "Resident means a person who has a fixed permanent home and principal establishment in Utah for six consecutive months immediately preceding the purchase of a license or permit, AND DOES NOT claim residency for hunting, fishing or trapping in any other state or country." Please note that the time limit only applies to the purchase of a specific class of license. It plays no part in the possession limit determination. If I just permanently moved here (to Utah) last week Wednesday and started fishing on Thursday of last week (after purchasing a non-resident license, of course), fished every day but today, I could legally keep 6 days worth of SM bass in my home freezer if the proposed change were in effect right now. I would not have to live in that home for 6 months to do so.[/#800000][/font]
[font "Times New Roman"]






[/font]
[signature]

[dubob]

[quote TubeDude][#0000ff]But how can you police that?
[/#0000ff][/quote][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]Easy answer - you can't! But then you already knew that didn't you?[/#800000][/font]
[signature]

[TubeDude]

[#0000FF]Sorta. Not sure what I know anymore...or what I forgot.

Sadly, too many of the regulations become more a matter of the honor system. DWR has the honor and violators have the system.
[/#0000FF]
[signature]

[FishMcFisherson]

Well, good. I still don't like it.[:p]
[signature]

[dubob]

[quote TubeDude][#0000ff]Not sure what I know anymore...or what I forgot.[/#0000ff][/quote][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]Amen to that![/#800000][/font]
[signature]

[dubob]

[quote FishMcFisherson]Well, good. I still don't like it.[:p][/quote][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]I can respect that. [angelic][/#800000][/font]
[signature]

[Flyfishinglover]

I just couldn't remember the name of the lake just the definition of the regulation.
[signature]

[Flyfishinglover]

I'm surprised they didn't mention to close walleye spawn season at willard bay. Sadly I forgot to make a comment about it until now. Just to many illegal harvest in the spring time.

As well it was nice that I was the youngest link in the group for 2 years in a row [].
[signature]

[Flyfishinglover]

HMMMMM were you at the meeting when drew said you must live in that area the area for 6 months or longer to keep a double limit. I'm sure you weren't there. [laugh]
[signature]