 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
Email conservation director: mgoetting@mnbfn.org
Find Your MN Representatives & Senators
Donate $5 to B.A.S.S. Conservation fund
From http://wrc.umn.edu/spotlightlisteningsessions/index.htm:
Minnesotans will have the chance to voice their opinion in person on how the state should invest resources to protect clean water at statewide public meetings beginning Jan. 19, 2010 coordinated by the University of Minnesota's Water Resources Center.
The meetings, called "listening sessions," will be facilitated by staff from the Water Resources Center and Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources and are a chance for people to voice their opinions on a range of water-related issues from boating and water recreation, to priorities for cleaning up polluted lakes and streams.
| City | Date | Location |
|---|---|---|
| St. Cloud | Jan. 19 | Holiday Inn and Suites 75 37th Ave. S. |
| Chaska | Jan. 21 | University of Minnesota Landscape Arboretum Snyder Auditorium 3675 Arboretum Dr. |
| Crookston | Feb. 3 | University of Minnesota, Crookston Youngquist Auditorium 2900 University Dr. |
| Baxter/Brainerd | Feb. 4 | Northland Arboretum 14520 Conservation Drive |
| Duluth | Feb. 10 | Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Building 525 Lake Ave. S. 4th Floor, Large Conference Room |
| Rochester | Feb. 11 | Holiday Inn South 1630 S. Broadway |
| Marshall | Feb. 16 | Best Western Marshall Inn 1500 E. College Dr. |
| West St. Paul | Feb. 18 | Thompson Park Center-Dakota Lodge 1200 Stassen Lane |
The effort is part of the Minnesota Water Sustainability Framework, a project spearheaded by the Water Resources Center which was charged by the 2009 Minnesota State Legislature to develop a set of recommendations to protect and preserve Minnesota's lakes, streams, rivers and ground waters for the 21st century. The project's final report due to the 2011 legislature, will integrate citizens' values and concerns and serve as a roadmap, with timelines and benchmarks for the investment of an estimated $86 million a year earmarked for the protection of water as a result of Minnesota's Clean Water, Land and Legacy Act.
All Minnesotans are encouraged to take the project's "Minnesotans and Their Water" online survey at wrc.umn.edu/ where they can also sign up to receive monthly updates on the project's progress.
The statewide meetings are co-sponsored by the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources. The Water Resources Center is affiliated with the university's College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences and University of Minnesota Extension.
A recent discovery of zebra mussel shells in Prior Lake means boaters and anglers should take extra precautions when using the popular southwestern metro lake, according to officials from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Although officials aren’t certain whether the shells originally came from live zebra mussels in the lake or were brought to the area on equipment and fell off, they said it’s likely the lake is infested.
After a homeowner reported finding unusual looking shells along the southeast shore of lower Prior Lake, DNR biologists found about a dozen empty zebra mussel shells. DNR staff will look for zebra mussels in Prior Lake as soon as ice is off the lake and will designate the lake as infested if live zebra mussels are found.
A nonnative invasive species, zebra mussels pose serious ecological and economic threats to Minnesota’s lakes and streams. Heavy infestations can kill native mussels, may impact fish populations, can interfere with recreation, and can increase costs for industry, including power and water supply facilities. Native to Eastern Europe and Western Russia, zebra mussels were first discovered in Minnesota in 1989 in the Duluth harbor. They subsequently have spread to eight inland lakes, including Mille Lacs, and to portions of the Mississippi, St. Croix and Zumbro rivers.
If the presence of zebra mussels is confirmed in Prior Lake, it could pose risks for other waters, said Luke Skinner, supervisor of DNR’s invasive species unit.
“As one of the larger lakes in the Twin Cities metro area, Prior Lake has significant boat traffic, with people coming and going all the time,” Skinner said. “Everyone is going to have to be extra vigilant to keep from spreading these pests to other waters.”
Boaters can help prevent further spread of zebra mussels and other invasive species by taking a few simple extra precautions:
The DNR steps up inspections, enforcement and education around infested waters. Under Minnesota law it is a misdemeanor to transport water or prohibited invasive species from designated infested waters.
View related Star Tribune articleOn November 4, 2008, the 2008 General Election ballot stated:
"Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to dedicate funding to protect our drinking water sources; to protect, enhance, and restore our wetlands, prairies, forests, and fish, game, and wildlife habitat; to preserve our arts and cultural heritage; to support our parks and trails; and to protect, enhance, and restore our lakes, rivers, streams, and groundwater by increasing the sales and use tax rate beginning July 1, 2009, by three-eighths of one percent on taxable sales until the year 2034?"
A non-vote constituted a "no" vote for the amendment. View DNR Dedicated Funding Fact Sheet
The bill became necessary after a U.S. District Court decision in September 2006 which potentially subjected approximately 17 million recreational boats to permitting requirements under the Clean Water Act. These permits would have been expensive and subjected recreational boaters to maintenance and operation procedures that were designed for industrial polluters.
"Congress stepped up in the last seconds of the fourth-quarter and gave anglers and boaters a much needed victory," said BASS Conservation Director Chris Horton. "The impending permit requirements for anyone operating a recreational vessel were not the result of any real problem, but rather a court's assumption that there was no difference between large, trans-oceanic shipping vessels and an 18-foot bass boat. Fortunately, the angling and boating communities came together like never before, and successfully convinced Congress that this regulation placed an undue burden on the millions of recreational boaters around the country.
"My thanks to the BASS Federation Nations for their quick response to the many calls to action that went out at various times throughout this legislative course. With their help and the leadership of BASS, the National Marine Manufacturers Association and others, we demonstrated the collective power of the outdoor community."
DNR
statement of need
About 6 years ago our Minnesota Department of Natural Resoures (DNR) instituted
a fishing contest (tournament) permit process to address complaints regarding
busy lakes and accesses. Within this process the DNR limits tournaments based
on the size of the body of water and a tournament organizer must request
a tournament permit that is free of charge.
Today, due to this process, previously reported complaints are virtually
non-existent. However, our DNR has changed this process by amending the statute
which stated "Permits shall be issued without a fee" to "The commissioner
shall charge a fee for the permit that recovers the costs of issuing the
permit and monitoring the activities allowed by the permit.". The language
change was based on the recommendation of the Budget Oversight Committee
to recover the (FY 2006) $108,000 permit administrative costs.
Permit Overview
The permit process is manual and consists of several steps. First, a tournament
organizer downloads the application and mails the completed application to
a DNR regional office. If no scheduling conflict occurs, the permit is granted
and a copy of the application is mailed back to the tournament organizer.
If a conflict occurs, the DNR provides each tournament organizer with the
conflicting tournament organizer's contact information and asks them to resolve
the scheduling conflict. If no resoluation can be made, the DNR will conduct
a drawing to award the permit. Finally at the conclusion of the tournament,
the tournament organizer mails his tournament creel statistics (how many
were caught, how many were released, and the big fish) which is entered in
a database by a DNR employee.
2008 Fees
The DNR is moving forward with the following fee schedule:
Fee for open-water contests:
. Small contests (31-100 participants, 50 or fewer boats): $120
. Large contests (more than 100 participants or more than 50 boats): $400
Fee for contests with off-site weigh-ins:
. Small contests: $500
. Large contests: $1,000
Fee for ice contests (more than 150 participants) is $120.
Fee must be submitted with the application.
See http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fishing/tournaments/regulations.html
Ron Payer, MN DNR Fisheries Chief, stated that these fees will be tracked
and go into the Game & Fish fund to support projects.
Uncommon Fees
Many states do not require tournament permits and even fewer charge a fee.
Other natural resource state agencies fund administrative costs through fishing/boat
licenses and sportfishing equipment (that is subject to a 10% Federal Excise
Tax that is funneled back to states).
| State | Permit? | Permit Fee? | Notes |
| Alabama | Varies | No | Corps of Engineers require
a permit; State parks with launch and weigh-in facilities require a permit |
| Connecticut | Yes | No | |
| Iowa | Yes | No | Permit required for tournaments over 6 boats |
| Louisiana | No | No | |
| Maine | Varies | Varies | catch,
measure and release (CMR) permit for $15--used during the spawn club weigh-in tourney permit for $25, allowing no more than 15 boats to be involved open tourney permit for $55, up to 100 boats and cash prizes up to $10,000 Multi-day permit $150 (allowing up to three consecutive days on one body of water) Maine limits the number of permits of any kind on any one body of water to four opens and three club weigh-in tourneys, CMR’s do not count. |
| Mississippi | No | Varies | Ross Barnett Reservoir
$5 fee per boat for tournaments over 50 boats Pat Harrison Waterway district (8 or 9 lakes) charges a $25 tournament fee |
| Montana | Yes | No | |
| New Mexico | $15-25 | ||
| Oklahoma | No | Varies | Corps of Engineers: free
to $25 (based on size) Grand River Dam Authority: $25-$55 (based on size) Oklahoma State Parks facilities: free to $25 (non-profit vs. profit) National Park Service: $30 ramp fee |
| Ontario Canada | No | No | |
| Oregon | Yes | Varies | Marine
Board charges a $25 fee when over 24 boats Various county park and US Forest Service ramps charge $25 on average |
| Rhode Island | Yes | No | Permit required for tournaments with 6 boats or more |
| South Carolina | No | Varies | Typically around $25 |
| Texas | Varies | No | Some lakes require permits but the TPWD does not |
| Washington | Yes | $24 | Maximum of 7 tournaments per year per organization. |
| West Virginia | Yes | No | |
| Wisconsin | Yes | None at this time |
Moving Forward
We have stated the desire to receive more information and sooner from the
DNR so we could have been better informed about these fees and provide more
feedback in a timely manner back to the DNR as a valued stakeholder. In the
future there is opportunity to reduce permit administrative costs by automating
the current "paper" process to allow tournament organizers to go
online to 1) submit an application 2) check application status 3) and enter
tournament creel survey data. We would also like to investigate other fee
recovery approaches. The DNR should poll to estimate how many tournament
anglers exist in Minnesota. The Wisconsin DNR estimates they have 20,000
tournament anglers. The 2006 Brainerd ice fishing tournament had over 10,000
anglers in itself. If each angler is required to purchase a "tournament
stamp" for $10, the $108,000 dilemma would be fulfilled and it would
be less a burdensome fee than the current schedule (ranging from $125-$1000).
Mickey Goetting
Minnesota B.A.S.S. Federation Nation
Conservation Director & Webmaster
mgoetting@mnbfn.org
Volunteer with the ACT and help protect fishery resources in your area
Are your fisheries' resources worth protecting? Do you want to improve fishing in your area?
If your answers are yes, then you'll want to join the BASS Angler Conservation Team (ACT). The ACT is a network of leisure anglers like you who volunteer to protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitats. ACT members are invited to help fellow anglers, communities and natural resource managers with grassroots projects such as building and placing fish habitats in lakes, planting native aquatic vegetation, ensuring angler access to waterways and more.
 |
The time and work is rewarding. Working hands-on with fisheries biologists and resource experts gives BASS Angler Conservation Team participants a unique look at how fish and wildlife are managed in the wild. In turn, you will have a deeper understanding and appreciation of our natural resources and our need to protect them. |
BASS invites you to get involved. To volunteer your time for grassroots
projects that protect and preserve the nation's waterways, sign up for ACT,
the Angler Conservation
How this will work, is that an organization can send BASS information about
projects. BASS will then generate an email to all ACT members within 100
miles of the project. By doing this, people can get tied into projects and
help others.
Interested parties can sign
up at ESPN/BASS
Online copies available at: B.A.S.S. |
B.A.S.S. Conservation Agenda |
| Taking a leadership role in aquatic resources issues Belonging to BASS, the "Worldwide Leader in Bass Fishing," means much more than membership in a global club of bass anglers. Since the early 1970s, BASS has taken a proactive response to addressing the nation's vital aquatic resource issues. In the early years, it meant taking legal action against industries making a toxic soup of the nation's waterways. Today, the agenda has grown more complex, and BASS follows a parallel path in dealing with the issues through its Conservation Program. View agenda |
Hooks In or Out? |
by Ralph Manns Those of us who try to share the findings of scientific study with non-scientists are often frustrated. It seems very difficult to get the word out. We write about some important discovery, but find anglers, particularly the influential professional and TV bass anglers, either don't read the new information or dismiss the new scientific insights because they conflict with beliefs the anglers already hold. Professional and TV anglers aren't the only ones to be slow in learning and applying the latest "word" from scientists. Biologists, particularly state fisheries workers are often too busy with their own assigned tasks to read all of the literature produced by other scientists. They continue to advise anglers to handle fish using outmoded procedures. Full Article |
Shoreline and Water Quality Impacts from Recreational Boating on the Mississippi RiverOctober 5, 2004by Vern Wagner  Greetings Federation
Members,As your Conservation Director I'd like to keep you all updated on important issues. Habitat needs to be our greatest concern and we are losing habitat at an alarming rate, from shoreline development, boat docks development (large floating) and its accompanying traffic on aquatic habitat areas and many forms of erosion. This week I'd like to share the Conclusions and Current needs section of a recent study done on the Mississippi River. This report can be viewed in its entirety at http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/reports/impacts_mississippi.html. Here is a quote found in this report, which I'm sure has as much meaning to you as it does to me: "A river belongs to no one. And it belongs to everyone. And no one has the right to contribute to the desecration of a river by irresponsible and abusive acts, at the expense of his neighbors and fellow American citizens, near or far removed from the stream itself." - Richard J. Dorer 1968 Conclusions and Current Needs The Upper Mississippi River has formed and evolved within the fine alluvial soils deposited in the valley since the last period of glaciation. With a relatively narrow and sinuous channel, wind driven onshore waves have not been a significant part of the natural processes that created the present day river corridor. These factors have defined the streams geological and morphological characteristics that make it particularly vulnerable to environmental degradation from watercraft-induced wave action. The results of river studies and task force findings make clear the need for additional water surface use management of the Upper Mississippi River. All state and federal agencies involved with management of this resource have a strong commitment to preserving the concept of a multiple-use river, which requires maintaining a careful balance of the important values and uses of this complex river environment. Among these are the values as a wildlife sanctuary and rich mosaic of ecological communities; an important fishery resource; a corridor for commercial navigation; and as a provider of an extensive variety of recreational opportunities. The important underlying principal for assuring the continued sustainability of the river is to ensure any single use does not impair other uses. Certain aspects of current water surface use practices are in direct conflict with this principal, and the resulting environmental degradation and user conflicts must be addressed through a collaborative and adaptive management process. Impairment of the condition and beneficial uses of the river environment, as a result of currently under-regulated recreational traffic, has significant consequences for all public user groups as well as public and private landowners. Lost or reduced opportunity for fishing, boating, sailing, canoeing, hunting, trapping, nature observation, and other esthetic pursuits represents important public costs. The $1.2B derived annually (USACE) from these uses of the Upper Mississippi River System is vital to the economy of the bordering states. Displacement of more passive river uses, as a result of habitat destruction and the user conflicts associated with the wakes from large, fast moving recreational craft, has become a distortion of the concept of a multiple-use river. A primary element for river management planning must be the control of wakes, for all motorized craft, during high flow/pool stage. Water levels approximating a 2-3 foot rise above normal operating pool should be considered as a point of initiation for protected high flow periods. At these times, waves strike the steeper and highly erodible portions of the banks, and the root zones for trees and other riparian vegetation. Additionally, excessive wakes from large craft damage shoreline structure and impair water quality and recreation values at all water stages. Excessive wakes are generated principally from large V-hulled craft operating at a high horsepower output that results in an exceedance of the design hull speed. Even when a semiplaning condition can be achieved, these craft produce wakes with high amplitude and velocity that cause high-energy waves to impact the shoreline. Because of multi-jurisdictional authorities along the considerable extent of the UMRS, and in many cases a lack of water surface use regulatory authority, a system-wide solution will likely not occur within a timeframe that will protect against further impairment of the values and uses of the Mississippi River. Resource values are being lost at an unsustainable rate and local units of government will have to partner with other management entities, by exercising their existing authorities, for the protection and enhancement of the river resources within their jurisdiction. A list of potential options to reduce recreational boating impacts is provided in Table 1. This list is not comprehensive, but does identify a range of alternatives for regulatory authorities, boat manufacturers, recreational users, and other interested parties to begin addressing this issue. Surface water use regulations are an especially important tool. Most would agree it is in the best interest of recreational boaters, regulatory authorities, and the boat industry to work cooperatively to ensure the long-term health and sustainability of the river and continued recreational opportunities for future generations. |
50 Ways to Leave Your Lover and a Few Good Ways to Kill BassSeptember 3, 2004by Vern Wagner As a bass club member, and your Conservation Director, I seem to be spending, as much time working on bass conservation as I do fishing. And as a result I've had some opportunities to look at bass tournament mortality from a number of different perspectives. Research lab results, DNR and tournament study results, both with large and small tourneys. I'm working on tournament weigh-in guidelines for permitted events in Minnesota and to some degree B.A.S.S. tourneys such as the Classic. And with all the information out there, we are coming to believe that we need to move away from plastic bag weigh-ins or at least educate large and small tournament organizers of what not to do. The best system and one that we will likely see soon is a in-water weigh-in scale. This is a scale that can handle having a tub with 4-5 gallons of water and can be "zeroed" between each catch of fish. Fish can be then held in a oxygenated tank, in a perforated bag or basket until being weighed and transferred to the weigh-in tank, and then released. When using a plastic bag and placing a number of fish in it the water in that bag reaches a lethal oxygen level in less then two minutes. And while it will appear that most of these fish will swim away, the hypoxia effect usually results in death within a few days. So, while most of us think that the few seconds that we are bumping fish, wrapping them tight and weighing them, is with-in "safe levels", when this stress is added to an extended period in bag, hypoxia becomes fatal. It also follows that larger fish reach toxic levels quicker due to their needs for H²0. If clubs are to continue to use plastic bags, an improvement would be to instruct guys not to bag fish until instructed to do so, weigh by boat number and control the bags. Only having one bag (two if more then 5lbs of fish) so the second boat couldn't begin bagging until a bag was available. This will slow down the weigh-in, and make guys ready to roll even more impatient then normal, but it is a price and ethic that needs to be practiced by both large and small tournaments. Better for us as bass anglers to make changes, then letting government and the public impose sanctions that are illogical. One big tournament fish kill on a lake can galvanize the sentiment the entire area against tournaments. I figure it will take years to get the real hard-cores singing out of the new weigh-in song book. Please email me your snail mail address. I have a booklet titled "Keeping Bass Alive" that I'd like send you. |
Pool Five Drawdown MeetingsThe U-S Army Corps of Engineers will hold a pair of public meetings in late September to address the potential drawdown of Pool Five on the Mississippi River next summer to improve fish and wildlife habitat. Pool Five includes Lock and Dam Number Five at Minneiska to Lock and Dam Number Four at Alma.The first meeting will be Wednesday, September 22nd, at Wabasha-Kellogg High School, the second meeting will be September 23rd, at Cochrane-Fountain City High School. Both will run from 6:30 to 9:00 p.m. The meetings are designed to provide the public with information about water level management options for Pool Five and to solicit public input. Current plans call for a drawdown between one and a-half and two and
a-half feet. in the summer of 2005, depending on funding availability.
The U-S Army Corps of Engineers recently completed two consecutive
years of summer drawdowns on Pool 8 near La Crosse. |
What disease is this? Find
out |
October 2002 Conservation Update |
August 2002 Conservation Update |
May 2002 Conservation Update |
April 2002 Conservation Update |
Largemouth Bass Virus |
Make sure you are on our email mailing list to receive Federation Nation news and updates.
 |
 |
 |
|
||
 |
|
 |
|
||
