Posts: 3,088
Threads: 22
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
13
I'm sure many of you have already seen this release from the UDWR:
http://wildlife.utah.gov/news/06-04/fishing_proc.php
Another thread commented about RAC system not working. Here's your chance to get involved, and USE the system.
So, with the meetings starting in the Southern Region on the 16th, and ending in the North on the 24th of June, I'm curious:
Have any of you considered proposing any fishing regulation suggestions to the DWR? If so, what (if it's not a secret)?
Do any of you plan on attending the RAC?
Have any of you organized a group of people to present any new suggestions for the DWR?
I can't help but think that the DWR is doing what they can to involve the public in the decision making process of managing our fisheries, and wildlife. However, I worry that the fishing majority would rather sit back and watch from the bleachers, then complain about things not going their way. What better way than to get involved, and make your voice heard? Will the public continue to criticize the management, even after they have been given many opportunities to get involved in the management? Time to make a difference.
[signature]
Posts: 1,293
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation:
0
i may attend, i havent decided yet. i went to the big game one last spring and was surprised by what i saw. big money having their voices heard while the little guys went unheard. (and were treated rudely by the RAC) im not too impressed with the system. perhaps fishing is different.
[signature]
Posts: 3,088
Threads: 22
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
13
bk -- it's a system that fishermen have been slow to learn how to use it. Yes, the big boys (SFW) have learned VERY quickly how to utilize the system. 1 person's voice won't get far. But, an organized group of sportsmen can get the attention of the RAC very quickly. That's something fishermen need to learn. We can complain about the groups with money all we want, but it's just ignorance that fishermen can't have an eaqual voice. If we would just agree on something, and organize then we, as a group of fishermen, would be much better off.
That's why we should be discussing this stuff a lot sooner than now!
[signature]
Posts: 1,165
Threads: 22
Joined: Jun 2003
Reputation:
1
I would be interested in attending but wonder if it is time worth spending - in other words - do they listen? do they really want input from the sportsman?
My change involves making Strawberry and other slot limit waters barbless. 98% of the fish caught at the Berry have to be released.
Releasing a fish with a bardless hook increases the survival rate!!
Total cost of the change - New text added to the proclamation, new signs around the lake.
Even try to make it voluntary - like they did for retaining the Cuts.
I know the no waters in Utah currently have such a law - maybe they know something that I have not considered.
They have many barbless regs in other states so they must be doing something for the fisheries management.
Ask Kent - Sturgeon on a bardless hook - it works well.
Let me know if I am wasting my breath or just not seeing the big picture.
[signature]
Posts: 4,139
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2002
Reputation:
0
[font "Comic Sans MS"][black][size 3]I don't think anyone said the RAC meetings didn't work. I believe there were suggestions on other avenues that the DWR might take advantage of to attain more public opinion.[/size][/black][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][black][size 3][/size][/black][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][black][size 3]The problem with the RAC meetings, as I see it, are the very comments you mentioned. Well organized, special interest groups have the most say on what is input at the RAC meetings. That doesn't necessarily mean it coincides with the majority of opinions. It just means that well organized groups and lobbying units have a definite advantage to push their agendas than the average joe. [/size][/black][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][black][size 3][/size][/black][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][black][size 3]Am I going to the RAC meetings? No. First, I have no agendas that I'd like to push. Second, I've been to a few, both fishing and hunting and have seen that the limited time available for these meetings, usually an evening of a couple hours, is not enough to get real consensus or true public opinion. [/size][/black][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][size 3][/size][/font][font "Comic Sans MS"][black][size 3][/size][/black][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][black][size 3]That doesn't mean I wouldn't occasionally like to give my vote or opinion on certain issues that may come up without trying to organized a whole movement to be heard. It would be convenient to do it from my own home other than to drive some distance to attend a meeting. [/size][/black][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][black][size 3][/size][/black][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][black][size 3]Just because you may not want to go to a public meeting and express your opinion or view doesn't mean you don't want to be involved. There are other ways the DWR can gather public opinion and consensus. I do plan on taking advantage of the link provided by Fishrman to the DWR site if and when I feel a need to express my opinion. I, personally, am a lot more comfortable with that than going to a RAC meeting. There is more than one way to become involved.[/size][/black][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][size 3][/size][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][size 3]Thanks, PBH, for posting about the upcoming RAC Meetings. I hope that folks who wish to be heard will go and take advantage of it.[/size][/font]
[signature]
Posts: 335
Threads: 4
Joined: May 2005
Reputation:
0
A few of my Bass tournament bretheren went to a rac meeting to discus tournaments, and were treated very disrespectfully by the board. So I would have to say they are a farce not a real opportunity IMO!
[signature]
Posts: 1,293
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation:
0
PBH- its not my ignorance that makes the RAC a bad system. its not my lack of willingness to get involved either. its big money. i saw it first hand and it left a bad taste in my mouth. SFW was given a half hour or more to present their ideas to the board. average sportsman- a minute or so. im sure they worked within the system to gain this priveledge- i dont blame them. but, the system sucks.
as for fishing i think the dwr is doing a great job. im against any changes at strawberry. its working great!
[signature]
Posts: 1,428
Threads: 19
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation:
15
[reply]
My change involves making Strawberry and other slot limit waters barbless. 98% of the fish caught at the Berry have to be released.
Releasing a fish with a bardless hook increases the survival rate!!
I know the no waters in Utah currently have such a law - maybe they know something that I have not considered.
They have many barbless regs in other states so they must be doing something for the fisheries management.
[/reply]
Personally, I strongly believe you are wasting your breath...studies have clearly shown that barbless hooks do not increase survival rates. In fact, many many areas are moving away from such regulations because they have proven to be unnecessary.
According to the Alberta Fish & Game Association's position paper on barbless hooks:
"The Alberta Fish and Game Association has over several years debated and considered the value of barbless hooks. With the recent (2004) Alberta Sport Fishing Regulations prohibiting the use of barbed fishing hooks throughout Alberta, the Alberta Fish and Game Association position must be re-stated.
The following Alberta Fish and Game Association position on the regulation that prohibits the use of barbed hooks includes the following:
1) Scientific evidence does not indicate that higher or lower fish mortalities result from the use of either barbed versus barbless fishhooks.
2) Alberta Fish and Game Association resolutions in previous years have indictated that unnecessary angling regulations be eliminated and that the prohibition on the use of barbed hooks was not required."
[signature]
Posts: 837
Threads: 1
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation:
0
PBH,
I am a little  with your reponse to Bk "[size 1]We can complain about the groups with money all we want, but it's just ignorance that fishermen can't have an eaqual voice."[/size]
[size 1][/size]
IMO, you make it sound as if sportsman as a whole want to just sit back and complain. Sure, there are a lot that do but for the most part most are willing to make an effort for change.
As much as it is "our" responsibility to make changes, its as much if not more the responsibility of the DWR to make changes. Do they make changes??? At times yes, and many times they are good changes.
However, being treated rudely and letting special interests groups control how your organization is ran, leaving out the "average Joe" is only going to hurt them.
I speak from experience and if you would like me to clarify further I will be happy to do so.
[signature]
Posts: 1,428
Threads: 19
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation:
15
[reply] A few of my Bass tournament bretheren went to a rac meeting to discus tournaments, and were treated very disrespectfully by the board. So I would have to say they are a farce not a real opportunity IMO![/reply]
I don't know if you are referring to what I think you are, but...I know that last year some of the "Bass tournament bretheren" requested special privileges and didn't get them. These bass fishermen felt that they should be allowed to hold fish in their live wells that were not within certain lakes legal size slots...the DWR held the belief--and i agree--that bass fishermen should not be allowed special privileges that the average joe did not have. As a result, the "Bass tournament bretheren" threw a huge fit...
What bugs me about people complaining about the RAC process is this:
1) other states are following suit with Utah and changing their own regulation processes to systems almost identical to ours...
2) many people think that if they propose something that their proposal should automatically be followed...and, if it isn't, they claim to be treated unfairly. I have been to many RACs, and have never seen anyone treated unfairly or rudely (except those who become unnecessarily unruly).
3) obviously, one voice is not enough to make a change. If the RAC only hears one person voice an opinion for change, why should they listen?
4) I have personally seen instances where individuals--people not part of an organization--have proposed changes and the changes were made (the Boulder Mountain slot limit for example).
5) it is the system we have; you can sit back and complain about it...or, you can learn how to use it. These instances where people claim to be mistreated or not heard and, therefore, refuse to take part are silly--how will you ever be heard if you just throw your hands in the air?
6) From the DWR's own website: "Do you have a question, idea or issue idea you would like the RACs to consider? Attend your local RAC meeting, fill out a comment card and speak out when your name is called. Check the schedule at this website to find out which meetings you want to attend. You can also contact RAC members by e-mail (see RAC members list). Remember, there is strength in numbers. If you really want to get the RAC's attention, ask others who share your ideas or opinions to come with you to meetings."
[signature]
Posts: 15,611
Threads: 1,326
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation:
16
IMNSHO, barbless hooks for sturgeon does make sense. I realize there aren't many sturgeon in Utah. The reason I say this is that because of their large size and also their tendency to rub on the rocky bottom (when available) when they are hooked, many sturgeon break off. It is far easier for them to work a barbless hook out of their lip by rubbing on the bottom than it would be if it were a barbed hook. I have experienced how easy it is to get a barbless hook out of the mouth of a sturgeon compared to a barbed hook. I accidentally hooked a sturgeon once on a small hook with a barb on it, and it was extremely difficult to get the hook out compared to the barbless hooks.
[signature]
Posts: 15,611
Threads: 1,326
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation:
16
One idea that there has seemed to be a general agreement on BFT is that there should be a limit on white bass at Utah Lake. If my premise is correct, perhaps we should organize as a BFT group and present the idea at a RAC meeting or two?
[signature]
Posts: 1,428
Threads: 19
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation:
15
[reply] If my premise is correct, perhaps we should organize as a BFT group and present the idea at a RAC meeting or two?[/reply]
This is how you get things done...
[signature]
Posts: 188
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
Reputation:
0
The other angle of attack is to make SFW earn the "Fish" part of its name. Can anybody name one thing SFW has done for anglers? Some of you are members of SFW, encourage your leaders to get more involved in angling issues. Or join the Utah Anglers Coalition.
[signature]
Posts: 1,495
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation:
0
Hi Lundman thats a nice thought you have there. I did that years ago. Buying barbless hooks is a real trick here in UT now. If your concerned try pinching the barb closed. This works pretty well.
FYI Idao did this several years ago. They followed it up with a mortality survey on those waters. They found it to be nearly the same. It was costing them more to enforce the new regs than it was to replace the loss of fish. So they canned it and went back to regular hooks.
The real problem here is the power bait fshermen or the nightcrawler fishermen. But not all of them, only the ones that toss their hook out and wait til the fish has swallowed the hook. Mortality rates on these fish is outrageous. Fish hooked in the mouth usually survive the ordeal of being caught. I wish I could remember the exact percentages, it would shock you at the difference.
What I would suggest is teaching fishermen a different method in fishing. Maybe requiring only circle hooks for bait at the Berry. The bottom line is, if you are pulling hooks from anyplace but the mouth of a trout. Their chance of survival is next to none, even if they swim away. They will probably float somewhere else.
Just my 2 cents on this, a devoted Strawberry fisherman.
[signature]
Posts: 1,495
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation:
0
I hate sounding dumb, but here gos. Who is SFW?
[signature]
Posts: 188
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
Reputation:
0
SFW (Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife), the money group mentioned earlier in this thread. They get a lot done for big game hunters, but that's about it.
[signature]
Posts: 1,495
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation:
0
Thanks always nice to be enlightened.
[signature]
Posts: 335
Threads: 4
Joined: May 2005
Reputation:
0
No it wasnt that they didnt get thier way it was that they were treated with disrespect and not allowed to to finish the proposal. Basically they were told to sit down and shut up.
[signature]
Posts: 1,020
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2003
Reputation:
0
Hidden Agendas seem to rule the roost in any meetings I have attended. Not to say that RAC meetings aren't successful ... They just require precise timing on our part to get things done. Knowing what your up against is worth it's weight in gold.
Bass Angler's will have an uphill battle in a Trout State. There can be accomplishments and changes made but your timing must be precise.
We swear by the motto "Catch & Release". Honestly, a permit should allow weigh-in tournaments on slot limit lakes. It's how it's done all over the U.S. Identification flags or bands on the participating boats will enable the weigh-ins to take place.
We have been asking for this long before Bassrods tried to push it. He got treated the same way, with dis-respect.
Once again, this is a trout state. We have some work to do.
[signature]
|
