Home QLinks New Posts Members User CP Calendar FAQ

Go Back   Little River Outfitters Forum > Fly Fishing Board > Fisheries Management & Biology

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 01-24-2007, 08:17 PM
Byron Begley Byron Begley is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Townsend, Tennessee
Posts: 1,364
Default Re: Tennessee Trout Mgmt Plan

Sorry, I forgot about the picture question. Paula can answer that for you. Give her a call. Talk to you later buddy.

Byron
__________________
Byron@LittleRiverOutfitters.com
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-24-2007, 10:04 PM
RFowler RFowler is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Nomad
Posts: 240
Default Re: Tennessee Trout Mgmt Plan

Quote:
Back in the 80's we tried to get some regs on the Caney Fork. We failed. Nothing works unless the landowners agree. And, TWRA won't get involved unless landowners agree. I don't blame them, they've been burned too many times. Byron

I have to respectfully disagree that landowners should have more of a say so about the regs on a particular piece of water they may have land on. It makes no sense from an economical standpoint. Should the thousands of us yield to a fortunate few? It is downright selfish in my opinion. I happened to be one of those landowners a few years ago and have been burned myself. But I never thought that I should've had more of a say so on the regs than a person that didn't own land on the river. These rivers are a public resource. Just because someone owns land adjacent to one of these rivers doesn't give them right to do as they please, or have more influence on the way it's managed. Actually, some landowners should be cited because of their land practices. Some of these waters are in decline because of poor land management on the part of the landowner. Are they fined? No. Do they have benefits such as influencing regulations? Yes. The way I see it, a landowner is just some fortunate person that has no more right to the resource than you and me.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-25-2007, 01:22 PM
kylemc kylemc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 124
Default Re: Tennessee Trout Mgmt Plan

How did TWRA go about getting a quality zone on the Watauga? I have been surveyd three times at the twin bridges take out by TWRA.

I know of no C&R streams in the state.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-25-2007, 02:05 PM
Byron Begley Byron Begley is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Townsend, Tennessee
Posts: 1,364
Default Re: Tennessee Trout Mgmt Plan

Rusty,

I agree with you. I'm not an expert on Tennessee Law but I believe I'm right on the following statement:

Tennessee has a provision called a Private Act. Other states may have them too. But here a State Representative or Senator can ask for a Private Act which exempts his or her district from State Legislation. So, lets say a group of people ask that fish or hunting laws be changed and for the sake of this conversation lets say they are not living in that district. TWRA makes the change because they feel it is prudent, good for the resource and for the anglers or hunters. The people who live in that district don't like it for some reason. They can ask their State Rep to exclude their district through a private act. The State Representative gets enough votes to recind(sp) the legislation. TWRA gets smacked in the face and all the time and energy that they put into the project is wasted. It's happened before. Even the threat of a Private Act can change the direction TWRA can move. Some of you folks know more about this than I do so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Byron
__________________
Byron@LittleRiverOutfitters.com
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-25-2007, 06:17 PM
RFowler RFowler is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Nomad
Posts: 240
Default Re: Tennessee Trout Mgmt Plan

Ah, you meant TWRA getting burned. I thought that's what you meant but wasn't sure.

So, it's politics as usual. Well, like I said before, TWRA is doing the best they can within their political confines. BTW, there's nothing I destest more than black and white laws. The state is losing money because a small group of people want to keep fish, or want junior to be able to keep fish. Junior is spoiled enough just for having private access to the resource. I have nothing against people keeping fish, it's the ones that abuse the resources that get up under my skin. I call them strip-miners. The type that takes fish after fish home and then complains or acts surprised when the fishing is bad, thinking the resource should have no limits. 16th century American Indians were far more intelligent than these types. Sorry, just had to vent a little.

Byron, you have very good ties with your friends at TWRA. Do any of these people have any recommendations for anglers that care? Do they have any information on how to go about proposing a slot limit? That may be our only answer.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-25-2007, 07:39 PM
Flat Fly n's Avatar
Flat Fly n Flat Fly n is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: East TN
Posts: 533
Default Re: Tennessee Trout Mgmt Plan

RF,
Just don't spank the spoiled kid, especially in CA now...... You could go to jail.

It is a problem when so few can impact the many. TWRA has walked this double edge sword and with limited funds and unlimited lawyers out there I am sure it puts them on defensive about change, but change has to happen if we are to improve this fishery.

That is why to me it makes perfect sense to improve JUST that section of the river that has no private ownership. Regulate that section to the max, even make it a delayed harvest, no kill or no fish period for say 4 months of the year to grow some bigger fish or give them a better chance for survival.

BTW... I saw 2 baitfishermen culling smaller fish off their stringers on Saturday. There were 3 fish not 20 feet downstream of them floating belly up. I asked them about it and they said, well, "the herons eat them"

Flat Fly'n

RF. You heading up this way anytime to fish the Clinch?
__________________
I am a great admirer of spectator sports, especially on television; it keeps the riffraff off the trout streams.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-25-2007, 07:42 PM
Kingstonian Kingstonian is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Kingston, TN
Posts: 66
Default Re: Tennessee Trout Mgmt Plan

RF, I agree with your point on property owners being subject to regulations that benefit all. *There are people who deer hunt who think they should be able to kill anything they want on their own property. *Fact is, they own the ground, but not the deer. *I see the property owners along a river as being the same. *Why not let Junior keep 50 trout?

People generally realize that size and number limits are almost voluntary anyway. *There really isn[t enough enforcers to protect the resource from people who insist on catching over number limits or keeping fish under size limits. *But it does establish a standard that most people will adhere to.

One problems with the original trophy area on the clinch was that on an all day float from Peach Orchard or Miller Island to Clinton, the possession rules changed. *Once you enter trophy water, you can't have kept any fish.

I was on the San Juan in NM several years ago, and their rules were C&R only in the top zone, 1 fish minimum size (I think it was 24") in the next downstream zone, then open fishing below that. *Once you started, you moved into less restrictive zones, which gets around the problem that the Clinch had.

But, since most bait fishing occurs from the Dam to Miller Island, I'd think a break at the MI boat ramp permitting numbers fishing upstream and quality fishing downstream would be a good way to permit the fish to grow and still keep the meat fisherman buying licenses (that matters to TWRA and to us). *I'd also like to see slot limits on the Clinch if the biology made sense, although when baitfishing, there isn't much use in releasing dead fish.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-25-2007, 08:03 PM
Byron Begley Byron Begley is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Townsend, Tennessee
Posts: 1,364
Default Re: Tennessee Trout Mgmt Plan

Rusty,

I'll have to think about that one for a while.

I heard some disturbing news about the Cumberland today though I can't back it up. Evidently there is a problem with the dam. If what I heard is correct and I understood the information they may have to lower Lake Cumberland to a point 10 feet below winter pool. That would mean that the water flowing into the tailwater would be warm and it may stay that way for a long time while repairs are made. If that's true, the tailwater would no longer be a coldwater fishery. Has anyone heard about this? Talk about economic impact, not just to the tailwater but to the people trying to make a living on the lake. I've also heard about new leaks in Center Hill Dam. Anyone know about that? These dams are getting old. I'm concerned!

Byron
__________________
Byron@LittleRiverOutfitters.com
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-25-2007, 08:10 PM
Byron Begley Byron Begley is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Townsend, Tennessee
Posts: 1,364
Default Re: Tennessee Trout Mgmt Plan

Flat Fly'n,

I talked to a Clinch River landowner's son today. You know him. Evidently only three people own land from the boat ramp to the dam plus TVA. I don't know much about the Clinch but I think the distance from the boat ramp to the dam is 1.5 miles.

Byron
__________________
Byron@LittleRiverOutfitters.com
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-25-2007, 08:46 PM
RFowler RFowler is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Nomad
Posts: 240
Default Re: Tennessee Trout Mgmt Plan

This is a great thread! One that may lead to some changes on the Clinch.

Flat, you have some great ideas. And, I think you and I are a lot alike. We just want assurance that all possible is being done for the resource. I would also like to see some special regs on the section you mentioned just to see what happens from it. If this blossoms, then special regs on different parts of the river may be an easy sell. I can't tell you when I'll be able to make it back up there but I'll be sure to let you know, it would be great to share a day on the water with you!


King, I agree with your views as well. As long as the meat fishermen can keep their fish at public access area's they may be willing to yield to areas that are more remote.


Byron, no kidding. A lot of the dams in the TVA are getting really old as well. I hope this doesn't turn into a common problem, if it does then this conversation will be irrelevant.

Let's keep this thread active, gentlemen. I sincerely want to help TWRA achieve any progressive goals they may have. It would be great if they would entertain some of our ideas as a result of a conglomerate
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 11:39 PM.



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