|
Post by Cas (Mike) on Feb 2, 2011 11:03:32 GMT -5
I don’t want to alienate anyone on here, I have a lot of respect for the people on this forum, those that support and those that oppose the LCI, but I do want to chime in on this subject. Is the question: “Is LCI good/bad for Lake Champlain”, or “Are the LCI derbies good/bad for Lake Champlain”? They’re 2 very different questions.
I believe a lot of what the LCI does is good for Lake Champlain. The derbies themselves – are they good? I don’t know if they’re good for Lake Champlain, they’re certainly not good for the fish that die because of them, but are they good for Champlain? What is Lake Champlain? An economic resource? A natural resource? I think it is both, so it’s a double-edged sword, so-to-speak.
Here’s a question: “Is dumping chemicals into the lake, killing natural aquatic species, disrupting spawning patterns of animals, creating a water drinking ban for residents of parts of Lake Champlain good?” It doesn’t sound like it, yet we all support exactly that because we don’t like lamprey. Yet it’s bad when similar things happen because of a derby that disrupts our passion of being out on the lake fishing. Yet would our fishing be as good as it is without people out there fighting to keep Lake Champlain a world class fishery?
As far as them exploiting the lake for financial gain, well – honestly, that’s done by a lot of folks. Marinas, dive shops, tackle shops, motels, restaurants, etc. Now I know it’s not the same - I realize those businesses don’t directly result in dead fish like derbies, however the point is they are still there to make money off of what Lake Champlain has to offer.
I do support recommendations of limiting the number of fish caught in derbies to 3 fish, I think that’s a great idea. Tack on an additional $10 fee per entrant, with that entire $10 fee going to fish and game law enforcement? Make it more expensive, maybe less people would do it, but also funnel some more money towards statewide expenses related to patrolling or studying the effects of derbies? Should the number of derbies on the lake be reduced? I don’t know. Are they a nuisance to us? Sometimes, yes – absolutely. But as others have said, we hold the frost-bite derby, people are thinking of having a similar spring derby, would these also need to be regulated and entered into a drawing of allowable derbies?
We as anglers NEED someone out there representing us at all the meetings, hearings, in Washington, etc. because none of us has the time needed to commit to what’s needed to keep our Lake what it is today. Are they a “boots-on-the-ground” organization? No – I don’t think they are, that was an eye opener for a lot of us over the past year or two. However, I do still think that they have beneficial contributions to the Lake.
I certainly don’t know the answers…
|
|
|
Post by Raz on Feb 2, 2011 17:20:30 GMT -5
I don’t want to alienate anyone on here, I have a lot of respect for the people on this forum, those that support and those that oppose the LCI, but I do want to chime in on this subject. Is the question: “Is LCI good/bad for Lake Champlain”, or “Are the LCI derbies good/bad for Lake Champlain”? They’re 2 very different questions. I believe a lot of what the LCI does is good for Lake Champlain. The derbies themselves – are they good? I don’t know if they’re good for Lake Champlain, they’re certainly not good for the fish that die because of them, but are they good for Champlain? What is Lake Champlain? An economic resource? A natural resource? I think it is both, so it’s a double-edged sword, so-to-speak. Here’s a question: “Is dumping chemicals into the lake, killing natural aquatic species, disrupting spawning patterns of animals, creating a water drinking ban for residents of parts of Lake Champlain good?” It doesn’t sound like it, yet we all support exactly that because we don’t like lamprey. Yet it’s bad when similar things happen because of a derby that disrupts our passion of being out on the lake fishing. Yet would our fishing be as good as it is without people out there fighting to keep Lake Champlain a world class fishery? As far as them exploiting the lake for financial gain, well – honestly, that’s done by a lot of folks. Marinas, dive shops, tackle shops, motels, restaurants, etc. Now I know it’s not the same - I realize those businesses don’t directly result in dead fish like derbies, however the point is they are still there to make money off of what Lake Champlain has to offer. I do support recommendations of limiting the number of fish caught in derbies to 3 fish, I think that’s a great idea. Tack on an additional $10 fee per entrant, with that entire $10 fee going to fish and game law enforcement? Make it more expensive, maybe less people would do it, but also funnel some more money towards statewide expenses related to patrolling or studying the effects of derbies? Should the number of derbies on the lake be reduced? I don’t know. Are they a nuisance to us? Sometimes, yes – absolutely. But as others have said, we hold the frost-bite derby, people are thinking of having a similar spring derby, would these also need to be regulated and entered into a drawing of allowable derbies? We as anglers NEED someone out there representing us at all the meetings, hearings, in Washington, etc. because none of us has the time needed to commit to what’s needed to keep our Lake what it is today. Are they a “boots-on-the-ground” organization? No – I don’t think they are, that was an eye opener for a lot of us over the past year or two. However, I do still think that they have beneficial contributions to the Lake. I certainly don’t know the answers… That's one of the most intelligent responses I've read on this forum in a long time... I wish I were that smart. Great angle Mike. Oh-I don't necessarily agree with the additional 10 dollar charge.
|
|
|
Post by sleepswithdafishes on Feb 2, 2011 19:19:56 GMT -5
Cas You bring up great thoughtful insite!!! One thing about the frost bite derby!!Is a permit needed ? I think and stand corrected if no moneys are given for prizes that its not considered a derby? Again maybe someone can chime in and let us know!!! I think derbys are part of uor fishing culture and deserve a place in our fishing fun! But like most things when money is involved the fun goes out the door !! Sleeps
|
|
|
Post by fishinmachine on Feb 2, 2011 19:57:14 GMT -5
no money=no permit needed
|
|
|
Post by snobbinsbasscat on Feb 2, 2011 20:07:17 GMT -5
I do support recommendations of limiting the number of fish caught in derbies to 3 fish, I think that’s a great idea. Tack on an additional $10 fee per entrant, with that entire $10 fee going to fish and game law enforcement? Make it more expensive, maybe less people would do it, but also funnel some more money towards statewide expenses related to patrolling or studying the effects of derbies? I certainly don’t know the answers… Explain to me why licensed anglers shouldn't be allowed to catch the legal limit of a species of fish in a day. What that licensed angler does with them is his/her business. Tournament anglers are licensed anglers, exercising their right to fish Lake Champlain. $10 more per angler? Why? Tournament anglers certainly have no more right to the lake and its resources than others, but they don't have any less.
|
|
|
Post by mikep on Feb 3, 2011 0:44:41 GMT -5
Mike S, that was great reading. Well said.
MikeP
|
|
|
Post by mikep on Feb 3, 2011 1:15:54 GMT -5
Basscat,
Basscat, I don't think Mike S was saying he wanted to limit the legal catch but rather he was saying the tournament rules might should be 3 fish to reduce the catch overall , since most would stick with the three to transport and register. that way the two fish that now make the trip in a live well to hell and back and get wrenched up and handled for pictures and weigh in would just not have to go through it. For those that wanted to catch 5 as I guess is the limit, then they still could catch five but not enter two in the tournament.
AS far as an extra fee that Mike S contemplates, I think it might be a good idea for all registered tournaments to voluntarily earmark a fee to some good boots on the ground type of cause like the Walleye Association or cause of their choice to benefit the lake. In fact the LCI itself should do that to show they can think about others as well as themselves in a prescribed, predetermined, advertised and obligated fixed amount that is built into the registration forms. No gimmicks. Even if it was an earmarked contribution to Lamprey control...that would be great. I would not give it to enforcement simply because between the coast guard, state police, game wardens from two states, , city of Burlington marine patrol we have enough enforcement. I never have figured the value to checking a fishing license is worth it , if on a boat that cost you 30K along with all the equipment, why anyone would fish without one?
MIkeP
|
|
|
Post by Cas (Mike) on Feb 3, 2011 8:29:53 GMT -5
Explain to me why licensed anglers shouldn't be allowed to catch the legal limit of a species of fish in a day. What that licensed angler does with them is his/her business. Tournament anglers are licensed anglers, exercising their right to fish Lake Champlain. Tournament anglers certainly have no more right to the lake and its resources than others, but they don't have any less. OK - good point, I agree with you there. But look at our frost-bite fleet "non-derby": We have a self proclaimed, one fish size limit, I believe. And even if it's not legally a derby because no money changes hand, that's just us getting around the law. By all intents and purposes, it really is one, lots of people getting together on one day, fishing and catching lots of fish, with many of them returned, and some dying, just like a derby. Don't get me wrong, I'm not opposed to the frost-bite fleet derby, or derbies in general. After all, I participated in the frost-bite fleet derby this year, and plan to again. I'm actually around for the LCI for the first time this year (I'm usually out of town that weekend) and debating fishing it just so I can know first-hand more about it. But is there room for improvement? There always is, with anything. FYI: I do believe some of the millions of $$ for Champlain this year are for studying bass mortality after derbies. And to put another perspective on things - who do you think kills more fish? Derbies or Cormorants?
|
|
|
Post by sleepswithdafishes on Feb 3, 2011 8:50:07 GMT -5
Cas I guess if you added both cormarants and derbys together you have a big number of dead fish!!! But I tend to believe that those fish are there for our enjoyment !! Dont take that wrong as I dont think we should be killing them just for fun!! The frost bite derby as I can see is A great thing !! If more events were like it we probably woulnt be having this conversation!!Oh yea Ive yet to hear what good cormarants do? Sleeps
|
|
|
Post by fishinmachine on Feb 3, 2011 17:28:14 GMT -5
the frostbite derby eliminated a fee to enter for several reasons,,one of which was not to avoid having to pay for a permit, but rather to avoid all the negative things that arise when money is involved,,,i.e. the first frostbite derby
|
|
|
Post by snobbinsbasscat on Feb 4, 2011 9:20:10 GMT -5
I love fishing.
|
|
|
Post by snobbinsbasscat on Feb 4, 2011 9:29:49 GMT -5
Uh huh
|
|
|
Post by rvq on Feb 4, 2011 11:18:02 GMT -5
I think the CVAA should do a study on this. Bob
|
|
|
Post by snobbinsbasscat on Apr 10, 2011 22:06:04 GMT -5
Please direct all LCI-related posts to this thread.
|
|