Posts: 284
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation:
0
Wow! That could have really bit me in the butt. Thanks for the heads up.
[signature]
Posts: 477
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation:
0
Loren, I was hoping you would see this post. I was thinking of you when I sent it.
[signature]
Posts: 582
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2002
Reputation:
0
That's definitely ambiguous. I've known of the closure of the Logan River from Red Banks up until after the 4th of July for years, but I had never really put 2 & 2 together and realized it included White Pine Lake. I've never fished White Pine lake however. What cracks me up are all the characters above Red Banks I've been driving by for several weekends now on my way to Bear Lake. I've seen at least a half dozen of them walking along side the road complete with waders and rods. The Logan River has different rules governing different sections and I don't think some folks ever pick up a proc' let alone read one.
[signature]
Posts: 477
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation:
0
I knew the upper Logan and Franklin basin areas were closed until later as well but I did not know that White Pine was included in this. I know most people who go to White Pine do so from Tony Grove and most don't know where the creek from White Pine enters the Logan. Tony Grove is down stream from Red Banks and so it is not closed.
So, even if you read your proclamation you may still be in violation unless you get a map out and follow the creek to the main river and then check the proclamation. DUMB!
[signature]
Posts: 35
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation:
0
I don't know if this will help any but its worth a shot.
The reasons they have the "special regulations" for that high is to protect Spawning Cutts. Cutts like to run up those tribs. I don't believe or wouldn't think that they go as high as white pine. When They say tribs Sometimes they just mean the streams. I would check with the DWR or try and contact the local Fish cop to find out for sure. Because in similar situations the lake or reservoir is open to fishing but the tribs below and above are not. I would check things out a little more if I were you. Just something to think about.
Tie'em N' Fly'em
[signature]
Posts: 107
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2003
Reputation:
0
When the proclamation refers to tributaries it should only refer to streams. If it includes a lake, it would explicitely state it. So, unless the sign that this guy saw explicitely says "White Pine Lake" I wouldn't worry about it. As noted before, these regulations are in place to protect spawning cutthroat and, in most cases, only apply to streams.
[signature]
Posts: 477
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation:
0
The sign was on the trail as you leave Tony Grove to White Pine Lake. My son checked for the sign on the way out and that's where it was. On this trail you only cross the creek just before you get to the lake.
White Pine has a large Brookie population. They are in good shape but are boarder line of being over populated (heads being bigger than the body type thing).
[signature]
Posts: 698
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation:
0
[red][size 3]If that's the case I've been a bad boy. We were headed up there this weekend on mountain bikes but decided to postpone due to the 6" of SNOW! I've looked all over the proclamation years past and my interpretation was any waters not specifically mentioned in the special regs defaulted to the state wide season and limits clause. The meaning of "tributary" does not include upper impoundments by any normal or accepted definition. If they would have said "any Utah waters in the drainage system to the Logan River above red banks" I could buy off on it. I would have taken it to the judge (and won.) The area has been obscure enough in the past that I don't think anyone has worried much about it but it has become a lot busier the past few years. May be time to address it specifically in the Proclamation. Where are those RAC guys? [/size][/red]
[signature]
Posts: 477
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation:
0
I suppose a call to the DWR would be in order. I, as yet have not done that. I don't know when the DWR assessed that area last but I feel it should be assessed and have its own set of regs that apply directly to it.
Tony Grove is another issue. For the last umpteen years it has winter killed, yet they will plant fish in it as late as July 24 weekend. In the late fall the lake is still full of fish that will winter kill and yet they keep the limit of fish at four. I am not one who keep a lot of fish to eat (about one limit of fish a year max), but why not open it up to a higher limit, later in the fall, for those who like to have a few fish to eat?
[signature]
Posts: 53
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation:
0
Thanks for the update on this. I was wanting to fish tony grove for a few weeks but are you saying by winter killed that all the fish die?? [blush] You are probably saying duh but why do they die? I am wondering because it gets very cold in lots of places... Thanks. I am wondering if I wouldn't waste my time going up there before it is stocked.
[signature]
Posts: 220
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation:
0
I probably should'nt tell everyone but the guy at the DWR who writes the regulations (proclomation) used to write the fine print for insurance compan ies policies until he had a mental breakdown. Having suffered that, he now qualifies for any job at the DWR.
[signature]
Posts: 477
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation:
0
Years ago Tony Grove did not winter kill. Some say that after an earthquake in the early 60's it substantially reduced the water flow into and out of the lake. Due to that and more and more use there is now lots of plant life in the lake. When the lake caps over in the winter all of the plant life will die and that depletes the oxygen in the lake, so the fish die as well. It is basically a dying lake.
White Pine, on the other hand, has less plant life in the lake and a greater water flow in and out of the lake, so it does not winter kill.
Disclaimer: This is my understanding of what little I know of the situation and should not be construed as scientific fact.
[signature]