Heres the deal from where I sit. The state requires us to hand over our tournament results. The state then determines if anything needs to be done to improve or offset the overall impact we have on the lakes bass populations. After 34 years fishing club level tournaments (at a total approaching 600 events participated in) to the best of my knowledge the state has determined that we have little impact on the fisheries. They have placed minor restrictions on 2 bodies of water that we frequently fish tournaments on. They restrict scheduling in the month of August on those lakes. Our tournament directors are on first name basis with the state biologist and tournament permitting officer. We adhere strictly to the biologists recommendations in order to be in good standing to receive further permits. If that were not so we would be disqualified from permits. Its a fact we place high consideration to.

Remember this point the state offers no warm water species restocking. We have essentially fished from the same stock of bass for 34 years. The results have improved on some waters , remained similar on others and seldom we have noticed a strong decline over time. Its natural for all lakes to have ebbs and flows which are dependent on weather, ecological and predation factors not related to fisherman. The alternate factors we cannot provide data for is why we govern our activty level according to state biologist recommendations based on the sciences of their studies.

The level of skin in the game begins with each boater is already required to purchase up to 7 yearly licences, insurances and registration permits to partake in legal first ammendment right to assemble events. We contribute at the point of registration payment to having open and free access to state parks for all residents. At the same time on occasion our ability to use those state parks as tournament sites is denied even after our permit was previously obtained at an earlier date. We should not be hindered by self imposition added unbearable restrictions on our events any more then we already freely and willfully subject to in the name of compliance. We are severely restricted on a majority of lakes by a lack of available parking which has left us unable to have tournaments at will on those lakes. Thats a recent restriction that was not present when I started in the clubs and thus has added pressure to the lakes with available parking. We did not create any impact. It was imposed on us by restrictions we had no say in.

I have strong opinions from having skin in the game and eyes on the water. IMO there is an example of a real negative impact which results in unhealthier habitat changes to the lakes in the state. The fishery is only as viable as the habitat present for all age classes to foster sustainable levels. The resulting negative effects are potentially much greater long term to the fishery quality than any damage caused by our tournaments. Under mamaged weed retardant and its over usage is the devil to habitat sustainability. The retardant is present in the lakes from runoff leeching of lawn chemicals and the acts of outright chemical application weed eradication without bias to species of weeds in the lakes. One needed change IMO is to require anyone with waterfront land to need permits for lawn spray chemicals subjected to fines for misconduct. Also needed is to use stronger restrictive targetted monitoring of weed eradication in the lakes by permits and compliances also subjected to fines. Its time to put the blame where it belongs. Its not the sportsman who need more restrictions. We are easy targets but who in the hell gave any citizen or citizen group the permission to reek potential long term harm to our public waters with retardants. Where is it written that our permission to partake in water recreation does not come with an equal voice in how the powers that be are allowed/required to manage for all citizens equal to thier desired participation. We need to prevent wasteful over destruction of the nursery system that sustains our warm water species at levels that afford recreation and table fare. Whats so hard about that? If we are not given a voice of equal participation then rescind our fees which we were unaware were used for lesser than what is the potential of properly mangaged waters. Managed for the entire chain that participates. Our fees pay for our voices. The land owners fees pay to the waterline. Public water rights began there and we deserve the best quality of fisheries we were lead to believe were determined by our fees.

The collective effects from over use of weed retardants by private citizens is visible in every lake I fished in the last 10 years and dating longer before I started to fully recognize the widening habit unfolding to make the lakes pristine of weeds. It would most certainly result in criminal charges for pollution/damage/possible health hazrds to public water systems if it was done with neglect by any corporate entity. The use of the Clean Water act would have the power to bring any corporate entity to bear the repair of any damages to habitat and water qualities. The outrage would be sufficient and seem justified but somehow the same result over time by unabated usage one lawn at a time remains common place??? Maybe what is needed is for anyone to be given a permit to spray the lawn they must have a sysytem to catch the leech before it enters the water. Why not? Our boating insurance requires high environmental damage coverga in to the hundreds of thouands. We spill a drop of gas and we are subject to violations and fines. Why are homeowners free from being responsible for what they add to the water ways either purposeful or by leech effects.

IMO the general consensus of the public involved at the point of contact is to not give 2 shits about the water quality short of threat from litigation. Laws with teeth are needed to recover healthy long term fisheries. Point and shoot the chemicals and move on is not the answer. The facts of studies that find measurable amounts of weed killer in chidren under the age of 10 isnt enough proof. My bitch is that I spent 35 years of my life with a high level of participation in a small state and have watched the speed up of the decimation of habitat enough to make me forego my participation and have weened my interest at the time being to making stump level declarations/observations. Thanks to Mitch for tolerating my bitch session.


I would love for someone to make my bitch into a petition and publish it for gaining signatures for these isssues which the state had been made aware of but fails to deal with. Or at least forwrad it to the state officials who frequent on this site.