Home QLinks New Posts Members User CP Calendar FAQ

Go Back   Little River Outfitters Forum > Fly Fishing Board > Tennessee Trout Streams and Tailwaters

View Poll Results: TN Tailwater Guide License?
Against 27 62.79%
For 16 37.21%
Voters: 43. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 09-28-2011, 08:17 PM
Steve Wright's Avatar
Steve Wright Steve Wright is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 41
Default

I have fished the South Holston several days this week & polled every guide I encountered. Each one was for the restricting the # of guided trips per day, have no problem paying a fee of $250 as a resident guide & support non-residents to pay $1,000.00 to guide.
Everyone must have forgotten the article in the News-Sentinel several years ago where Randy Ratliff voiced his desire to see a restriction on guiding ,etc. The seed was planted long ago.

I find it interesting Jim Jordan can't understand the frustrations guides have on the Watauga & SH ....especially when I can remember him being irrate one Saturday afternoon eight years ago ( May 24 I believe it was ) Jim was voicing displeasure of seeing a "guide" from Kentucky in a drift boat on the Holston below Cherokee ,making fun of the big cowboy hat one of the sports was wearing, blah blah blah.He thought his turf was being encroached upon ?.........ironically Jim was leaving that afternoon to stay w/ friends in Ky. & fish the Cumberland.
Some guys go out of state & see no need to buy a license to hunt & fish .......same will happen w/ some guides .
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 09-28-2011, 10:24 PM
old east tn boy's Avatar
old east tn boy old east tn boy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Farragut, TN is home
Posts: 116
Default guide license

Against.

People fishing for trout guided by professionals purely for their own enjoyment (darn good thing we don't have trout tournaments or anything like that) and paying the guide for their services are getting their money's worth, specifically the price for the service. Most of the time clients couldn't care less about anything except catching fish, the more the better. I have to wonder how many even ask about any type of certifications the guide has, maybe it's assumed he's good to go?

So how come guides come here in the first place? Are they better, cheaper, more qualified because they have been certified? Are locals overwhelmed or do they just want it all for themselves? Almost sounds like a turf war on specific rivers. And TWRA in some convoluted way is gonna play cop by administering a new fee?

It's a win-win for TWRA if this goes through, First, they get more money and second, they can say yeah, we took action. Seems to me this does nothing to solve the root problem, which is lack of enforcement and mismanagement.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 09-28-2011, 10:41 PM
waterwolf waterwolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,198
Default

On this stuff, some of y'all make some valid arguments for this new tax, not that it has changed my opinion, however.

My biggest issue is the singling out of trout guides and saying that this tax will help pay for the resource. If that were actually true then maybe, and I mean maybe I could support it. However, this tax won't raise enough money to help at all, and will be wasted just like thousands of dollars are wasted by TWRA each year.

If trout are so valuable then why dump them in every piss trickle that can hold trout through the winter months? Why not focus on the most cost effective ways to raise fish (fingerlings), not stock them in marginal trout waters, and lower the freaking state wide limit? Simple solutions which would vastly help the bottom line.

Maybe I could get on board if I felt like TWRA was actively managing our rivers to produce at a maximum level.

If this tax was aimed at all guides statewide, every freaking one. Then I would be more inclined to support it, but picking the smallest sector and taxing it is absurd and unwarranted.

Here is an idea, if the NE TN guides desire this, then have a specific fee to guide on those rivers, but so far from what I can tell no other guides in this state are in favor.

Here is another idea, have individual river permits, that would certainly generate more revenue.

As with the feds, TWRA doesn't have a revenue problem they have a spending problem.


Also, stating that guides "take" from the resource is factually incorrect. I know of no Fly Fishing trout guides who keep fish.

To those who think all guides to is take, and not give back. Think again, many times clients come from out of state and buy annual licenses to only fish for a few days.

What makes our trout stamp/fishing license different then a guide who pays the exact same amount. We all pay to use the resource, we just use it differently.

And whoever said guides don't fish.....you have to be kidding me.


I think I am going to propose a tax to folks who fish dry flies, because I hate fishing dry flies, and think fish eat them deeper, thus causing more mortality. Dry fly fisherman "take" more from the resource and therefore should be taxed because of this.

Slippery slope this whole guide tax thing is....
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 09-28-2011, 10:45 PM
Steve Wright's Avatar
Steve Wright Steve Wright is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 41
Default

[QUOTE=old east tn boy;96205]Against.

"People fishing for trout guided by professionals purely for their own enjoyment (darn good thing we don't have trout tournaments or anything like that) and paying the guide for their services are getting their money's worth, specifically the price for the service. Most of the time clients couldn't care less about anything except catching fish, the more the better."

Hey they need to hook up w/ 3 new guides from N.C using Y2K egg patterns soaked in power bait..... catching alot & making the customers happy .....probably not considered legal in the trophy section, but who cares ....pure enjoyment !!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 09-28-2011, 11:15 PM
Steve Wright's Avatar
Steve Wright Steve Wright is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 41
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by waterwolf View Post

I think I am going to propose a tax to folks who fish dry flies, because I hate fishing dry flies, and think fish eat them deeper, thus causing more mortality. Dry fly fisherman "take" more from the resource and therefore should be taxed because of this.

....
Now I know you voted for Obama ...probably shine his shoes & _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 09-29-2011, 06:50 AM
waterwolf waterwolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,198
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Wright View Post
Now I know you voted for Obama ...probably shine his shoes & _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Yeah, most who know me, know I am staunch Obama supporter. It is hard to hide my love for him personally, and his liberal views. I love the guy so much I hope he finds a way to permanently stay in power, and has the ability to pass his agenda without using congress. Wait a second, he already bypasses congress...
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 09-29-2011, 08:03 AM
Lumber_Jack's Avatar
Lumber_Jack Lumber_Jack is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 79
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by waterwolf View Post

Here is an idea, if the NE TN guides desire this, then have a specific fee to guide on those rivers, but so far from what I can tell no other guides in this state are in favor.

Here is another idea, have individual river permits, that would certainly generate more revenue.
I would agree with this! I'm actually fine with doing nothing, but the question was posed so I joined in.

I think there is a Jet boat dealer coming to Johnson City, which I fear could add vastly to the river congestion. Which if driven safely and ethically(don't drag chain) they would be fine, but I'm afraid of drifters being run over by some crazy dude with a jet boat. But that's another topic for another day I guess.
__________________
Neil

____________________________________________

Remember......I'm and idiot
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 09-29-2011, 09:35 AM
Steve Wright's Avatar
Steve Wright Steve Wright is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 41
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumber_Jack View Post
I would agree with this! I'm actually fine with doing nothing, but the question was posed so I joined in.
In reality this approach has worked well so far.......some guides try to intimidate the passive ones & get the low-hanging fruit quite easily. Government regulations create problems......men should be men.
Settle your issues as I have & the way Jim Jordan & Chris Ralston would. The boys up in East Tennessee know how to cut tires & deal w/ matters.Guides up there that got "initiated" paid their dues & deal w/ the drama best they can.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 09-29-2011, 11:02 AM
David Knapp's Avatar
David Knapp David Knapp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Crossville, TN
Posts: 2,183
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockeye valdez View Post
First, David thank you for ending your post as you do. "Follow me..." It is a tremendous witness and puts into perspective this discussion.

Second, I am not in favor of raising the fees to the point that only the privileged can participate. This is what happened in Britain, however there is an amount that would acceptable.

We just have to do a better job of caring for our natural resources and it cost money to do it. We've lived on the cheap and are reaping the harvest.
That is reasonable and I can see your perspective. I just would be concerned that TWRA will over do it if they start thinking about raising rates. I really wish we had a tiered system for our trout stamps. I don't think I should have to pay as much for a trout stamp to fish strictly wild streams in the National Forest of east Tennessee simply because that money is mostly going to stock trout. Also, catch and keep fishermen should be paying more, but I may just be biased since I release everything...
__________________
"Then He said to them, 'Follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men.'" Matthew 4:19

http://thetroutzone.blogspot.com
http://www.troutzoneanglers.com
contact: TroutZoneAnglers at gmail dot com
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 09-29-2011, 12:53 PM
ChemEAngler's Avatar
ChemEAngler ChemEAngler is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Knoxville
Posts: 1,137
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Knapp View Post
That is reasonable and I can see your perspective. I just would be concerned that TWRA will over do it if they start thinking about raising rates. I really wish we had a tiered system for our trout stamps. I don't think I should have to pay as much for a trout stamp to fish strictly wild streams in the National Forest of east Tennessee simply because that money is mostly going to stock trout. Also, catch and keep fishermen should be paying more, but I may just be biased since I release everything...

David,

I don't think you are that biased, and I agree with that philosophy. I keep fish on occasion, and think it is only fair that I should pay a little more than somebody who doesn't. I am not talking about doubling the trout stamp fee, just raising it a little. I can guarantee you that most people who keep fish are definitely keeping more than $18 worth of trout.
__________________
Travis

My Blog --> http://tnfishingfanatic.blogspot.com/

My Photo Site --> http://knxtravis80.zenfolio.com/

Email ChemEAngler
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:00 PM.



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.