Home Register Today's Posts Members User CP Calendar FAQ

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 09-06-2007, 08:24 PM
irfishing irfishing is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 166
Default TWRA email address

Byron,
Thanks for the email address for comments to TWRA. My input of support for the proposed slot limit regulation has been sent. Hope others on the board will voice their opinion to TWRA.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-09-2007, 03:03 PM
Realtyman Realtyman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Caney Fork
Posts: 108
Default Fellow Support

Some of us here in Middle TN have been getting the word out as well and sending in our comments to the e-mail address provided on TWRA's website. At least the Clinch has a fighting chance and that's more than it had this time last year
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-24-2007, 10:19 PM
RuningWolf's Avatar
RuningWolf RuningWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kytroutman View Post
I am all for the slot limits. It would make the Clinch a trophy stretch of waters. I am sympathetic to some of the claims made by the local landowners but a little education of what the river can become in the future will hopefully win out.
If you knew a lot of the landowners and users you might understand they know what it can be. They also know what it is. The river does produce plenty of trophies and the data shows that there is plenty in the river. They study the reports done by TWRA and understand what they mean. They do back the use of science to manage the river. One of reports from the Clinch made a note that the people who use the Clinch where the most educated of any of the other tailwaters overall.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-24-2007, 11:18 PM
RuningWolf's Avatar
RuningWolf RuningWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CinciVol View Post

Maybe everyone is still worn out from the big Clinch debates that went on

I have other commitments and have been slow to respond. Worn out, try over 8 years of this battle

1) Having a happy fisherman (or woman) home by noon rather than a tired one home after dinner after driving two hours each way to the S Holston may just drive down the area divorce rate considerably!

Have you tried the Holston? it may be closer

2) By my odometer, I can get to several spots on the Clinch in 30 miles, while the closest spot on the S Holston is well over 100. Here's my slogan "Slot Limits on the Clinch, Reducing our Dependence on Foreign Oil"

This is not directed at you but there are two slogans we had. “There is more to fishing than fishing” and “There is nothing wrong with this river that getting rid of the snobs and slobs won’t cure”


Honestly though, I would think that placing a slot limit on the river would lower the number of trout you would have to stock annually.
TWRA stock some many fingerlings, and so many catchables, and lord only knows how many fry they have thrown in that cannot be found. The catchables have a short survival rate. Then they disappear. No explanation except that it is not from being caught. The fingerlings and their survivability are what make that fishery.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-24-2007, 11:39 PM
RuningWolf's Avatar
RuningWolf RuningWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 147
Default Re

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockyraccoon View Post
THe slot probably wouldn't lower the number of trout stockings needed.

You are correct. It appears TWRA has done a over kill. Most of the fish are fry they have thrown in and have little to no survivability

IT would however, increase the numbers of quality fish in the proposed slot limit.

Quality an interesting word. TWRA talks of different peoples ideas on quality being vastly different

So, once the fish reach the slot they will be protected. They would still be fair game before they reach the protective slot. So, the folks who want to take some home can,

Many in the "catch and harvest" crowd feel that the 14-20 in fish are better tasting.

So all should be happy and we should all start seeing more of those Clinch torpedos that we all love to tangle with.
I have seen and tangled with plenty of them this year and in years past.

Glad to see where someone the other day someone recognized you for your good service. I sent you a email the other day I hope you got it
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-25-2007, 11:55 PM
RuningWolf's Avatar
RuningWolf RuningWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 147
Default Re

Byron says

“I have always respected size limits for fish and wildlife.”

I would think most people do at least that has been my observation.

“For at least most of my life there has been size limits on gamefish wherever I have fished.”

There where none when I was growing up. We released a lot of fish but kept those that obviously where not going to make. Also when I was growing up fish was a primary source of meat in our house. The size limits came years later when fishing populations dropped; in some instances it was to protect the breeding size fish. There are several factors at play in why the populations of Crappie, walleye, etc dropped. One is the fish they fed on disappeared. Much debate remains if the striper is the cause or not. But every lake or river they are in has problems. Most of the protected limits had nothing to do with over fishing

“Many anglers and hunters take it upon themselves to better their sport. Years ago bass fishermen decided to practice catch and release fishing. It caught on and bass fishing improved.”

There is more to that story than meets the eye. Most people don’t eat bass, they enjoy catching them but it was never high on the fisherman who fished for them catch and harvest list. At least not all the anglers I was exposed to growing up

It was also noted that since tournament fishing started bass populations dropped. I was surprised at the mortality amount in the study I sent you. It would make a good argument for banning bass tournaments during certain times of the year. This thread (http://littleriveroutfitters.com/for...ead.php?t=7568 )does have some info on normal mortality for non-tournament bass, which is quite high, but the disastrous mortality of the tournaments during the warmer months should have raised some eyebrows.

I know a lot of deer hunters who won’t shoot a small buck even though it is legal. Why, because they want to improve their sport.

How is not shooting a small Buck improving your sport? The younger deer IMO are the better eating. When you establish min. antler size limits it cheapens the trophy. A true trophy IMO is one that you match wits with. He has been hunted in all lilely hood before, he knows to fear man. His defensive skills are more honed. You have to scout sometimes in remote areas finally when you locate him you have to wait until the conditions are right to match your skills against his to stand the above average chance of success (yes some get lucky stumble out of their truck sat drinking their coffee smoking a cigarette and one who has lost all sense of self preservation comes by and the rest is history)

“I wouldn’t consider shooting a young jake turkey. I’ve done it but I wouldn’t now. I might harvest a large older gobbler. Or I might just watch him walk away”

I hear stories of the ones that walk away never the one that gets shot. Along with something about “beans”

”So why would anglers have a problem with a size limit on trout in the Clinch River. Maybe some people don’t consider trout a gamefish. I do.”

I have never heard anyone say it wasn’t. This is a given

Some people might argue that tailwater trout are stocked to be caught and eaten. Some may say a tailwater is an artificial fishery, without stocking there wouldn’t be any trout so why not just kill them and take them home.

I have never heard anybody say just kill them all and take them home. I have seen all types of anglers catch more than their limit and take them home. Since cell phones all I have seen have been reported and a good many of them caught.

” When I grew up there were almost no deer in central Kentucky. We never saw a wild turkey. They started stocking turkeys and limiting the harvest of both deer and turkey. Now they are everywhere”

That happened a lot due from over harvesting in the era where if you did not kill game you might not eat.

“It seems to me that a slot limit or size limit on trout in the Clinch River is a compromise that is good for everyone. The fishermen who want to can catch a limit and take them home to eat. The fishermen who fish for the sport only can enjoy what they perceive to be better fishing. I think that should make everyone happy. “

The same can be said without the special regs. it happens now those who want to eat a fish keep them those that don’t release them. All the major tailwaters in East Tenn have special regs. The Clinch does not. Most of the major stakeholders who use the other tailwaters met and agreed to it. The Clinch has a major group who compromise 83-85% of the fishery who do not want them. It should also be noted that there is a decent number of fly fisherman who do not want the regs. Some catch and harvest and some primarily catch and release. I can name several of them by name and so can your. Granted there may be a few spin fisherman that may embrace them but for the most part they do not. They did a survey and found that most anglers on the Clinch do not want them and we know from the data the user groups is predominately local and has remained the same for 15-20 years, at least from the data taken by creditable and verifiable sources that I have seen. It also coincides with years of personal observations on the river. As you may recall there are a lot of years I spend a lot of time on the river

Now tell me when TWRA is committed to providing a diverse fishery for all the different user groups why the majority shcould give way to the small minority here? They don’t travel to fish. Why should they? The Clinch is a wonderful fishery and produces many outstanding sized fish as well. I catch them, I see them caught regularly, I talk to people who catch them regularly. Most of the 17% fish other rivers both those managed by TWRA, those in the National Forrest, the Great Smokey Mtns and fisheries in surrounding states that all have special regs. The length of these waters probably comes close to 1000 or more miles and people want to force special regs down the super majorities throat that only has about 4.5 miles of what could be called public access and about half of that is because of the good graces of landowners. It does not make sense in my book and by my moral values (*See note below) this is wrong. This is the common blue collar worker that is getting something else shoved needlessly down their throat

I know we disagree as I have said in other threads, as well as in one on one conversation with you. I understand your side and where you are coming from but I do not buy it


Have a good day and pet once Dubbing for us.

*(Note I think Byron already knows this but others may misread what has been said or its intent. This is not saying that Byron is a person of low moral character. Byron IMO does have a very high moral character. This is talking of my values, morals, codes that I try to live by. I understand where Bryon is coming from and they are just opposing views, values, etc. based on a different set of reasoning)

Last edited by RuningWolf; 09-26-2007 at 01:11 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-26-2007, 12:04 AM
RuningWolf's Avatar
RuningWolf RuningWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 147
Default Re

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffnles1 View Post
I
Just the opinion from a very opinionated Kentucky fisherman.

Jeff
My family being from Harlan County I understand opinionated!!! I also understand a lot of other issues
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-26-2007, 05:44 AM
kytroutman's Avatar
kytroutman kytroutman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 449
Default

RW, I appreciate and respect your posting. I also saw your origins in Harlan which does explain your defense of the landowners. Being raised in Eastern KY and SE KY, one learns first hand how much damage the outsiders can cause to the natural landscape, i.e. coal.

On the other hand, I understand and have seen first hand, what happens when landowners are able to control a waterway that should for all practical purposes, be open to the public. In Pennsylvania, there are a number of streams now closed to the public because of the landowner/waterway rights. Other streams have the rights purchased by fishing clubs to restrict access to members only. My fear is that may be what's happening to the Clinch, inadvertently. In the end, while the entire public is supporting the Clinch, only a select few may be able to enjoys its benefits. There must be an acceptable middle ground developed to protect the landowners but also further develop the Clinch, more for future generations than ours. If that means the introduction to slot limits, that may be a start. What we want to avoid is an us versus them mentality. The important thing to remember, if slot limits don't work, it is simple to reverse them. If the issue of streambed ownership is enacted, who are the real winners?
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-26-2007, 04:49 PM
Byron Begley Byron Begley is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Townsend, Tennessee
Posts: 1,343
Default

Hi Running Wolf, Uh Oh! Here we go again.

First let me say that I know you are not questioning my integrity and I surely wouldn’t question yours. You and Mrs. Running Wolf will always be friends of mine even if I can’t convince you to change your position and that of LUCRO. But I’m still going to try. Or, maybe you will change mine. Who knows. I also know you are intelligent. Your career alone tells me that.

I have met some of the folks who represent LUCRO and they were nice to me even though they knew I was not on their side of the unfortunate dispute that happened a few years ago. And, maybe in some ways I was on their side. I sort of understood their beef back then but I don’t understand it now.

You made some good points in your last post referring to my comments earlier. You said some things that made sense that I had not thought of before. I guess that’s one of the reasons I like debating with you.

I would like to ask you some questions.

I am having trouble understanding what you meant when you said: “The Clinch has a major group who compromise 83-85% of the fishery who do not want them.” Did you mean that 83% to 85% of the people who fish the Clinch are opposed to regulation changes? Or did you mean that they own 83% to 85% of the land on the Clinch?

How is LUCRO structured. Do they have a President, a Board of Directors, Bylaws and do the members vote on the position the organization takes?

When the President or official leader of LUCRO speaks on behalf of the organization how many people is he or she representing and can that be documented? Do they have membership dues? Are they asked to renew their membership on an annual basis or are they all life members?

How would the President or official leader respond when asked, “Why is your organization against a slot limit on the Clinch River?”

Would you say that LUCRO is against any management ideas that would limit the harvest of trout?

Is LUCRO a 501-3C non-profit organization?

How are they funded?

In your extensive research did you learn how many different individuals fish the Clinch River at least once a year?

Note: RW is a friend and a great guy in my opinion. Mrs RW is a fine lady. Either of them would not do anything to hurt my feelings and I wouldn’t hurt them over this issue or any other. It wouldn’t be worth it. I would just as soon forget the whole thing.

Dubbing just said hey to both of you.

Byron
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-26-2007, 05:13 PM
UofMontanaAlum's Avatar
UofMontanaAlum UofMontanaAlum is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Posts: 177
Send a message via MSN to UofMontanaAlum
Default

I see bait-fishermen walk off the Clinch with over 20 fish on their stringers every Saturday and Sunday and all I ask why is there no enforcement of the already existing 7 fish limit.

I have been down there every weekend with the exception of 1 this summer and I have not once been checked for license or creel limit.

I am all for the slot limit but will they enforce it if it passes?
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 08:33 PM.



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