Trout Stream Regulations Proposals

The list of potential trout stream regs. proposals was recently released by the DNR. They are as follows:

The “Fisheries Long-Range Plan for Trout Stream Resource Management in Southeast Minnesota 2004-2009” has been updated to include progress on goals, action items, and approaches with the addition of numerous new approaches to be used in the coming years. This updated document is the “Fisheries Long-Range Plan for Trout Stream Resource Management in Southeast Minnesota 2010-2015 and Progress Report” (LRP).

One of many important new approaches involves a simplification of the current trout stream regulations while expanding angling opportunities throughout southeast Minnesota. These specific proposed changes include:

1) Remove the barbless hook regulation on all trout streams, in all angling season, in southeast Minnesota (Fillmore, Houston, Winona, Olmsted, Wabasha, and Goodhue counties)

Scientific literature from around the country supports the concept that there is no significant difference in mortality of trout caught with barbed or barbless hooks. Several studies show differences of 0.3% in the two hook types. Natural mortality rates of wild trout range from 25-65% annually. Elimination of this requirement would simplify trout stream regulations. Currently, barbless hooks are required for the winter season (January 1st to March 31st) in 32 trout streams in southeast Minnesota. The winter season consists of a catch-and-release regulation and is primarily used by fly anglers.

2) Extend the current fall catch-and-release season to October 15th from September 30th on all designated trout water in southeast Minnesota

This has been suggested by several anglers as a way to extend their time on stream during the beautiful weeks of fall. The original reasoning behind the September 30th season closing was to protect trout while they were spawning. Brown and brook trout are both fall spawners. MNDNR Lanesboro Fisheries staff spends considerable time in the fall season electrofishing many of our long-term monitoring stations throughout southeast Minnesota. Spawning has been observed as early as the 3rd week of September but generally does not begin in earnest until late October or early November. Many anglers are not aware of this because they are typically not on the trout stream during this time.

3) Extend the current winter season to include all designated trout water in southeast Minnesota

The winter season is currently limited to 32 trout streams in southeast Minnesota. This angling season has not negatively impacted the trout population in these streams and provides an excellent opportunity for anglers to enjoy the unique winter fishing experience. Allowing winter catch-and-release angling on all designated trout stream in southeast Minnesota will simply increase angling opportunities with no significant effect on the resident trout populations.

4) Require that stream reaches with gear restrictions during the regular season follow those gear restrictions in all other seasons.
There has been confusion centered on the restrictions of gear types in several streams in southeast Minnesota. This confusion hinders law enforcement and reduces the effectiveness of a regulations objective (in this case, to increase numbers of large trout). Trout streams that currently limit angling gear to artificial lures and flies would remain that way through all seasons. This restates, in a defined manner, what is already the intention of the regulation and reduces any further confusion.

5) Instrument a new “State Parks Season” in southeast Minnesota where trout anglers could fish from October 15th to December 31st.

Many anglers would like to continue to fish throughout the year.
Brown and brook trout spawn in the fall but we know that most trout populations are not limited by disturbance at the egg stage but most vulnerable by flooding events (high current velocities, high stream turbidity) when they first leave the gravel (called swim-up fry) in late winter. Most anglers are aware of what a trout redd (spawning area) looks like and will refrain from walking in these areas.

Those state parks where this season would be implemented would be Forestville State Park (Canfield Creek, a section of Forestville Creek, and a section of the South Branch Root River), Beaver Creek Valley State Park (East Beaver Creek, a small section of West Beaver Creek, and a section of Main Beaver Creek), Whitewater State Park (a section of Middle Branch Whitewater River, a section of Main Whitewater River, and Trout Run Creek) and Carley State Park (a section of the North Branch Whitewater River).

So are they having a public meeting for these? What is their next step?

I did not see anything to alarming. I would like the year round C&R season. I start getting with drawls in mid November!

The DNR will announce public input meetings in 2010 at a variety of locations.

I’m not sure the winter fishing thing got cleared up as well as it could have. I know this will anger some, but why allow bait during periods of catch and release considering what mortality is of bait hooked fished versus artificial lures?

Thanks for posting the DNR info DA

Quote:

---

I know this will anger some, but why allow bait during periods of catch and release considering what mortality is of bait hooked fished versus artificial lures?

---

Do any of these proposals specifically state only artificial only allowed during the pre-season (currently allowed) extended season (Sept 15- Oct 15) or year round areas (state parks)?

Jan 1 to first Sat in March, bait is allowed on most streams. The proposals want this removed? An entire class of anglers are excluded?

Furthermore AO fishermen get to fish Sept 15 – Oct 15 as well as year round in the southeast parks, but bait anglers do not?

What a joke.

Don’t you think that the proposal of not allowing bait has something to do with the idea of continuing to make southeast Minnesota streams as much of a wild trout, self-sustaining habitat as possible.

There is always Iowa: 365/24/7 harvest; however, it pales in comparison to wild trout management.

Quote:

---

Do any of these proposals specifically state only artificial only allowed during the pre-season (currently allowed) extended season (Sept 15- Oct 15) or year round areas (state parks)?

---

The answer is no.

DA can you tell me how to get a copy of the full proposal or at least the source of your post?

The info was not found searching the MN DNR.

Just got off the phone with Mark Ebbers, DNR fisheries regulation guy.

Mark said if I want the full scoop on the regulation proposal to read the new Hiawatha TU publication or contact Vaughn Snook directly. Isn’t it interesting Vaughn releases the info First to Hiawatha TU. Mark told me he believes Vaughn is a TU member. Conflict of interest!!!

He submitted it to the HTU newsletter because we’ve adopted a new column called Ask The DNR Biologist. It has nothing to do with a conflict of interest. Vaughn’s a good guy and has the best interest of the resource at heart, TU member notwithstanding. The news would have been released officially soon anyway.

Vaugn didn’t write the regulations; he released them.

Calm down.

Well I will just have to wait for MNTU to publish the info on their web site or hope Vaugh would share direct with me.

So just a wild coincidence that Hiawatha TU gets the info first. This would have nothing to do with Vaughn Snook being a TU member and also best buds with MNTU’s #1 guy, Tom Dornack.

Will the publication list who submitted each proposal to Snook and his boss Klotz? Let me guess, ALL proposals came from TU?

This is the sort of post that unnecessarily spreads lies and inuendos.

First off, Tom Dornack isn’t an actively voting member of TU in any capacity as he now is exclusively his own company that does stream work throughout southeast Minnesota, so you can;t put any blame there.

Second, TU is not a fishing organization. It’s a coldwater conservation VOLUNTEER organization, so to suggest that TU was behind the regs is completely false. I should know since I’m the vice president for the southern region of TU in Minnesota. What came out in the newsletter was the first I had ever to view it.

Stop with the insinuations that Vaughn and Steve are the sole persons behind the regs proposals. It’s more than two people involved to get something of this magnitude, and please stop with the inaccuracies that TU is behind the regs proposals. Truth be told, Mark, there are people in TU, who are not in favor of certain components of the proposals.

Will the publication list who submitted each proposal to Snook and his boss Klotz? I just would like to know who is coming up with the proposals if not TU?

I have talked with Mark twice and asked about proposals for regulation change. He told mr to submit any proposals to Snook and Klotz, presuming the proposal is for southeast MN trout streams.

Is the TU newsletter electronic? Link please?

I fish with both bait and fly. It mainly depends on if I have younger boys with and what my kids want to do that day.

I have had to keep trout because the hook got to deep while using worms, I do not ever recalling having this issue with a fly, spinner, etc.

I would think it would make perfect since to not allow bait during the C&R seasons. I rarely keep trout anyway and assumed this was the regs.

Don’t most if not all the winter streams require artificial only? Bait is allowed only after the March season opens?

If the point is to protect the fishery and it helps to not allow bait wouldn’t that be in everyone’s best interest during the C&R season?

Even if TU has its mits in the DNR’s pockets who cares!! I would be more concerned about buying Nebraska’s vote for health care at the tune of $100,000,000. That is going to affect my life more than not using live bait by a certain date.

It gets old reading post about bashing each others fishing style or groups who ultimately are trying to improve things for the future. Am I a member of TU no! I might see if I can take my kids to help on a stream improvement project so they learn how to give back, but I am not going to be a card carrying member anytime soon!

Besides they are proposed regs go to the public meetings and voice your concerns! That’s how it works.

Quote:

---

Don’t most if not all the winter streams require artificial only? Bait is allowed only after the March season opens?

---

I am sorry, this is incorrect. There are only a handful of pre-season streams that do not allow live bait.

Funny you would think whoever gave these proposals to the Lanesboro Fisheries office would want to come forward and take credit? Let me guess. The DNR came up with all of these ideas in their own? So MNTU gained $2M for more habitat improvement projects from the Outdoor Heritage Fund (our tax dollars). I bet the DNR is tickled pink about that. Face the facts. TU and the DNR are tight. Tom Dornack was just recently blabbing about gettin’ the ball rolling to have the DNR open more streams for pre-season. TU has the greatest influence in the DNR. TU is the DNR’s top constituent they must keep happy.

Quote:

---

The DNR came up with all of these ideas in their own? So MNTU gained $2M for more habitat impovement proects from the Outdoor Heritage Fund (our tax dollars).

---

I can tell you that TU does not meet with the DNR to pressure them for regs. Read the fine priint. The regs come from the DNR, not TU. Instead of going online and ripping this thing to shreds. Call Klotz or Snook. I’m sure they’d love to hear from you. At least that way, you’ll get the story and not insinuate anything online.

Winkels – thanks for your post.

The $2 million is a whole different bag of cash. That’s a pretty rigorous process of writing, submitting, and presentling proposals. Just so happens that TU has done it well enbough to get money. I don’t see how you of all people, Mr. Avid Trout Angler, can disparrage a group of people who want to make the resource better, and I’m not talking about fishing. I’m talking about the overall hearlth of the entire watershed. That’s the point of streamwork.

P.S. Have you ever done a creel survey or filled out a questionnaire?

Sure I will contact Snook and/or Klotz. I’m sure money doesn’t talk. No connection between DNR proposed regulation changes and TU point of view. It was somebody recently on MNCC who said the Lessard Outdoor Heritage Fund fits the shoe perfectly for funding TU’s goals.

If you want the breaking news for the proposed trout regulation change, Trout Unlimited should be your first stop.

http://www.hiawathatu.org/newsletters/january%202010.pdf

Quote:

---

It was somebody recently on MNCC who said the Lessard Outdoor Heritage Fund fits the shoe perfectly for funding TU’s goals.

---

You can go ahead and spin this thing any way you’d like, Mark. The reality is that change happens, and certainly, not everyone is going to agree with them. Change in this case is not done for kicks. It’s done to provide more opportunities, provide more miles of waters for anglers to fish, and to continue to offer an array of angling opportunities.

If you believe that there is a connection between LSOHC and TU, I’d like to introduce you to the man on the grassy knoll.

http://www.lsohc.leg.mn/FY2011/index.html

Show me the TU logo on the page. Go ahead and browse through the projects. You’ll see there’s more to it than your TU/LSOHC partnership as you referenced.

DNR= Conservation improving habitat

TU= Conservation improving habitat

DNR + TU= dbl the resources

Endless bickering= BULL@#$%

What part of the equation am I missing?

Even if TU did something to improve their position/standing with legislation unfortunately it is legal. Lobbyists do it every day with a lot worse outcomes!

It seems to me that I am possibly getting a longer period to enjoy my most loved hobby and am grateful for that. So what is the real issue behind all this? Is it because bait is not allowed or is it just a pissing match?

I appreciate the info on the proposal, but everything else I could do with out.

I am picking the side that gives my children, grandchildren, and me the best opportunity to enjoy this wonderful sport.

Our tax dollar pays for everything. I would rather my tax dollar go to TU for improving my trout fishing than someone thinking welfare is a means of income, convicts, terrorists, bank CEOs,ACORN, need I go further?

Quote:

---

DNR= Conservation improving habitat
TU= Conservation improving habitat
DNR + TU= dbl the resources
Endless bickering= BULL@#$%
What part of the equation am I missing?

---

Good point. I like what TU stands for. It is successful and powerful machine. I just believe TU should embrace all methods of legal fishing. There is no legitimate reason to ban bait fisherman from areas with 5, 7, 10, or 12,000 fish per mile.

This proposal is a step in the right direction. I just want to see the details. Again, I want to make sure bait anglers are treated fairly – allowed the same opportunities as spinners and fly fishermen.

Why should fly anglers be allowed to fish all year round and not bait anglers? Is there any legitimate reason to give bait anglers less opportunity?

Statistic: 67.9% of 16 and under Minnesota Trout Fisherman fish worms
Bait Statistic

Statistic: There is a 25% per capita deline in camping, fishing, hunting, and visits to state and natioinal parks since the mid 1980’s – Patricia Zaradica, Conservation Ecologist, Pennsylvania

Statistic: Statistic: Only 3% of Wisconsin trout anglers are less than 20 years of age. Bad news for the future, a sign of a dying sport.
web page

Quote:

“Those kids just starting out on trout fishing have a lot to learn. Give them a break, and let them have fun. And those ‘old timers’ (that will never accept catch and release), they may not have that many years left on the cricks. Let us not continue getting in the other fishermen’s way with these over-cooked, unfair, and inappropriate trout regulations” – Jim Waletzko, former Wisconsin Conservation Congress (WCC) Trout Committee member

Proposal could go like this:

1. Fly angler catch and release technically can fish 365 days a year.

2. NO BAIT allowed period except harvest season.
A. Pre-season Jan 1 – March 31 (THREE MONTH EXCLUSION.
B. No bait allowed Sept 15 – Oct (ONE MONTH EXCLUSION)
C. NO bait allowed Oct 15 – DEC 31 in the parks (TWO AND A HALF MONTH EXCLUSION)

Minimum bait exclusions possible: 1.0 month
Maximum bait exclusions possible: 5.5 months

I thought these were MN proposed regs. I am not worried about WI or PA at this point we have enough issues here in MN.

Sure kids use worms. The number one reason is probably because it is easy and cheap. No offense. We all know statistics can be lean anyway we want them just look at the approval ratings!

Can you tell how many times a fish has gutted a fly, spinner, or rapala? Now how often does this happen with bait?

So if I was using a worm to fish during CR and the fish gutted the hook resulting in death am I now a poacher? Do I just trough the fish on the bank? What is the ethical thing to do?

These are the reasons it excludes a certain type of fisherman.

You cant make 100% percent of the people all the time!

Also a FAIR is were you take pigs to be judged for ribbons.

Quote:

---

I just believe TU should embrace all methods of legal fishing.

---

Show me in writing where TU doesn’t embrace all methods of angling.

You and I have gone round and round on this forum and on others about TU. You continue to spew rhetoric that they are a fishing club, and even have gone so far as to paint them as a fly fishing club. It’s not the FFF who is out there doing stream work, writing grants to get money to do MORE streamwork, as well as hosting kids and even seniors fishing days throughout southeast MN.

It’s a COLDWATER CONSERVATION ORGANIZATION. How many more times do I have to say the same thing over and over?

It’s an apples to oranges comparison to cite Pennsylvania and Wisconsin to Minnesota. Could these three states learn something from one another? Absolutely. Consider how different the regs are just in the three states that encompass the Driftless Area.

I think we get it: you don’t like the proposals, and you’re certainly entitled to your position. Let it rest.

Fine. Let’s talk MN.

Trout Stamps:

2002 – 87,661

2008 – 85,246

– 2.8% over six years

MN Census Bureau

2002 – 5,019,700

2008 – 5,220,393

4.0% over six years

The Minnesota population is growing but the number of fisherman buying trout stamps is not keeping up.

The Patricia Zaradia is a conservation ecologist who happens to be from Pennsylvania. It is not a Pennsylvania specific study. Patricia Zaradic of the Environmental Leadership Program that correlated a decline in visits to U.S. National Parks with an increase in television, video game and Internet use. 25% outdoor decline since the mid-80s, or 1.2% per year, perhaps even accelerating. Hard point to argue against.

Kevin Searock of Baraboo WI did an extensive survey on WI trout fishing past, present, and future outlooks. Here is one response:

“I agree with Ron Benish about the dying breed part. Although people complain about there being too many anglers,” I see the opposite. As a public educator, the X-Box, virtual reality way of doing things is more of a reality than actually going into the field and putting your time in (hunting and fishing both).

Follow trout fishing long enough and you can see that 18-24 year old class and younger is pretty thin. The reality is our sport is a growing trend of older folk, not younger folk. I’d be hard pressed in Minnesota to find someone under the age of 30 who is a TU president, VP, on the state level etc. and it doesn’t necessary transcend to TU. IT covers the whole gamut of fly fishing. There aren’t a lot of younger folk “involved” in fly fishing. At least that is my observation.” — Dave Anderson.

67.9% of 16 and under Minnesota Trout Fisherman fish worms. Take away the opportunities, does this help or hurt our current situation? TU is all about promoting special regulations. No where does it say bait anglers are not welcome in TU however we all know the truth. TU does not have any bait anglers, or at least not any significant percentage.

regs don’t keep kids from getting involved. bad parents are the problem. i put wooly buggers with a little weight on my kids zebcos, and they catch trout just fine.

at least half of the “fly fishers” on the board that you keep begging to be unbanned from, Mark, are fine with allowing bait fishing on some streams in order to keep folks from having a hissy fit. As long as it ain’t slack-lining chub tails in c&r water that is…

I had a long chat with Steve Klots this morning. Learned a lot. Steve said the DNR Fisheries is already getting heat for releasing tidbits of the upcoming regulation proposal (part of their LRP) to Hiawatha TU first, and that this kind of activity might have to stop. Interesting if I want to learn more about proposal change, I should go to the Feb 1 Hiawatha
TU meeting. Steve and Vaugn will be there presenting.

Steve has been in fisheries for 27 years. One thing that is dissaponting is the average trout angler rarely shows up to meetings. Organized anglers show up (TU) and their voice is heard loud and clear. Known bait anglers that do show up rarely speak out. Perhaps they are intimidated. Stereotype forgive me, but in general I believe there often is a class difference. Bait angler country boy versus the rich old man from the city fly fishin. Not always the case, I know. Vast majority of fly anglers come fom big city. Vast majority of bait anglers from the country.

Anyway the proposal regarding bait will likely be like this:

Jan 1 – March 31. Bait not allowed. AO, c&r
Sept 15 – Oct 15. Bait not allowed. AO, c&r
Year round fishing in certain parks and streams. Bait allowed during harvest only: Mid-April to mid- Sept, 5months

AO fishermen get 10.5 – 12 months of trout fishing.

Quote:

---

One thing that is dissaponting is the average trout angler rarely shows up to meetings. Organized anglers show up (TU) and their voice is heard loud and clear. Known bait anglers that do show up rarely speak out. Perhaps they are intimidated. Stereotype forgive me, but in general I believe there often is a class difference. Bait angler country boy versus the rich old man from the city fly fishin.

---

That shows you organization. Every single special interest group on the planet has organization, and more importantly, they educate their membership and get them out to be heard. If the non-artificials crowd doesn’t have the cajones to be heard at a public input meeting, then do I feel sorry for them? Not in the slightest.

Your perception of fly anglers is partially true, just like any perception I’d give you about a bait angler is partially true. Funny thing is, the guys I associate with and fish with don’t fit your blanket stereotype. We’re average guys with average jobs and families. Our gear is what it is and our waders probably all leak. We don’t look like we’ve stepped out of an Orvis magazine. We fly fish because it’s our lifestyle, something you may never understand. We fish because we like the sport, we like the outdoors, and we like the challenges and company it provides.

Bottom line. We do it because it’s fun. Bickering online with people who have give the air that they can’t support anything without a fight or giving their perceptions isn’t fun.

I’m done with this one.

To everyone else, happy holidays, safe travels, and enjoy the outdoors in 2010.

Happy Holidays to you and your family DA. We can agree to disagree! I get why you fly fish. I got it myself for 13 years and I still do!

Vaughn is NOT a member of Trout Unlimited and if he was at one point, it’s been a long time. Considering his position, the primary reason he’s not a member is because he could be falsely and cheaply accused of being in a position of conflict of interest. Beyond, I can assure you Mark, and everyone else reading this, that he is not “best buds” with any current or PAST board members of Hiawatha including the other name you dropped. It’s highly unfortunate that anyone would feel the need to randomly name-drop and likewise malign the hard working individuals of our DNR fisheries department in a selfish motive to undermine their efforts at providing more fishing opportunities to local anglers.

So what if the word of regulations proposals was first thrown out on Hiawatha’s newsletter!? Conflict of interest? Big fat ‘whatever’. Our newsletter goes out via mail and email to hundreds of current and past TU members and is also viewable to anyone who wants to visit hiawathatu.org. If anyone’s got their undies in a bunch over something like that, they’ve got too much time on their hands.

Randy I apologize. Vaughn Snook is not a member of TU. Steve Klotz also told me so. I was misinformed, as I asked the question to Mark Ebbers and he thought Vaughn WAS a member. I actually called Vaughn today but he was out of the office and Steven answered. My mistake for not asking Vaugn or Steve directly before I posted. Mark said the same thing. He would like to join TU but cannot because it would be a conflict of interest. When he retires he says.

As mentioned I spoke with Vaugn’s boss, Steve Klots today for about 45 minutes. I learned all kinds of stuff and he was very helpful and easy to talk to. The final regulation proposal is not in yet. The bait thing needs to be hashed out.

However Steve’s idea was the following: Bait fishing only allowed during harvest season – mid April opener to September 15, five months. The idea is to REMOVE bait fishing from the three month pre-season (currently in place Jan 1 – March 31).

I asked about who comes up with the most regulation change proposals. Does TU come up with direct proposals? Sometimes. Klots gave the example of Hay Creek. It used to be catch and release however made a proposal to change to AO with a 12-16” slot which went into effect 2003. This surprised the DNR as the DNR though TU would want to keep the section C&R as is.

I asked about bait angling for kids and this has been brought up before. I mentioned Dave Ladd and Klots has paid attention to the WI proposal. Klots said what he learned from WI is allowing kids to worm and not adults could be considered discriminatory. I said “I bet some people think AO fishing areas discriminates against bait anglers,” and Klots mentioned he has heard that argument before. As for enforcement, Klots said any CO would have no problem with a kid catching fish. Five fish per kid. Pretty rare to think a dad is going to bring his kid fishing to fill his trunk with fish.

We also talked about water quality. He believes water quality is the biggest factor. We had the best trout season in history for southeast MN. If our spring is a gradual thaw, 2010 will be another record year. So in short we have had tremendous luck. Klots thinks the floods and the rain biggest factor. Klots think land practices are getting worse if anything. Farmers used to rotate between corn and hay. Now they rotate beans and corn. For topsoil erosion beans are the worst followed by corn, followed by Hay. So hay/corn better than beans/corn.

We also talked about trout food. Klots does believe young of year (YOY) are a food source for bigger trout. Gribben Creek has zero sclupins and not much of anything for food except YOY. So Gribben Creek serves as a YOY model stream. I asked about the Kinni and why they are stunted. Klots said he cannot comment without review and says one day he will get there in his retirement days coming up ahead.

Lastly, trout genetics briefly discussed. Klots was familiar with Loren Miller, the U of MN scientist doing genetic testing. Brown trout show incredible genetic diversity. The heritage brook trout are also present however they are not the same as they once were. Over time brook trout have evolved and likely will never grow to the size they used to. Klots in fact agrees that the heritage strain likely predominated over time. However some of the east coast brookies brought over might have also been a heritage strain.

Less opportunities for bait anglers, more opportunities for fly anglers. Bait not allowed Sept 15 – Oct 15. Bait not allowed Oct 15 – Dec 31 in parks. Fly fish, you could do it 12 months a year.

Quote:

---

Less opportunities for bait anglers, more opportunities for fly anglers. Bait not allowed Sept 15 – Oct 15. Bait not allowed Oct 15 – Dec 31 in parks. Fly fish, you could do it 12 months a year.

---

Restate this: artificials 12 months a year. There is NO fly fishing only section in any reach of southeast Minnesota. Look it up. I could throw Panther Martins 12 months a year.

This whole thread could have easily taken a different tone if people do their homework and stop assuming one person is n cahoots with an organization and they are driven by an outside motivating factor. Getting the facts before posting should be a priority. Agreed?

If we want to promote trout fishing, a declining sport much like all outdoor activities in general, we need to do a couple of things. One, simplify the regulations. Two, provide increased trout fishing opportunities to ALL types of trout anglers. That is what the DNR’s long-range plan (LRP) should be about.

Certainly more fishing opportunities for the fly or spin angler. It was only a few generations a go trout fisherman were 80% bait, 20% artificial. Now in MN we are 37% bait and 7% mixed angler. Tables have turned significantly. Yet 37% plus trout fishermen don’t have a voice? They don’t get extra opportunities like the AO fisherman does? Thus they must adapt or not fish? This includes children?

Where are the increased opportunities for bait anglers? 1/3 gut hooked trout die. The statistic goes down if you teach a bait angler how to “properly” fish. I say that with caution because slack line fishing is legal and I’ve done it myself. Feel the line, quick hook set after the taps. Use circle hooks (make it a rule, I would not be opposed). Also note larger trout have a higher survival rate.

Following along, catch rate is 1/hr. Average outing 3-4 hours, maybe one trout dies. Does one trout out of 4, 5, 7, 12,000 trout per mile really matter? Statistically insignificant. Why should we give bait anglers less opportunity? Trout fishing is a blood sport. Some fish are going to die. Fish die from other methods too including anyone who over handles a trout. We are outdoorsmen. Trout is a blood sport.

More opportunities for all. Equality. A time when we have a declining number of our young generation becoming involved. 68% of those that do experience trout fishing do it with bait. Taking opportunities way from children at a time when trout fishing resources are better than they have ever been.

Why not throw in a bone for the bait fisherman. Let him keep a few in the park (that receives supplemental rainbow trout stocking). I bet my boy would love to catch and keep trout fall 2011 and beyond.

For the amount hatcheries have cut down, we could easily balance out and create supplemental rainbow stockings for hard hit areas like WW. Year round harvest on rainbows sounds ideal to me if not the kids sake.

I appreciate TU and any other organization getting kids involved in trout fishing. I commend this. Let us all realize all kids start out with bait. Let kids fall in love with trout stream fishing.

A natural pattern normally follows. Bait, spin, then fly later in live. I am just going the reverse direction? I still fish all

three methods. Right tool for the job.

i fail to see how a no bait restriction takes away an opportunity for a kid to fish. he can fish, just not with bait. throw a panther martin on, or a yarn egg, or a wooly bugger. the kids still has the same opportunity to fish, and catch fish. this argument that no bait hurts kids has no merit, and it’s populist rhetoric at it’s worst( and best). give it a rest, please.

it’s still up to the parent to get over their issue with the regulation, suck it up, and teach their kid another way to fish. kids are just happy their outdoors and you’re spending time with them.