Anonymous Author

This article in in direct response to the article posted by the IOWA DNR on Jan. 18th titled, “Sorting for Larger Fish Now Illegal in Iowa”. I did not write this article, but have been asked by its author to post it to start the initital conversation.

Distress,

Well, I have not given credit where credit was due what seems to be an eternity. So with that, I will start by giving the Iowa DNR acclaims about there performance and how greatly they are appreciated. I would first like to start with the new Culling Law. This law was implemented in my opinion by special interest groups, how else can the behavior of the DNR be justified. I mean they are doing this under the pretence that mortality rates are higher for fish that have been on a stringer or livewell. This may and is likely true however according to the new law if they choose to toss them back at the end of the day this is OK. I guess I do not understand the logic that if you do not catch enough fish to make a meal or that you decide you do not want to clean them you can just return them to the water. What if I am catching bass and then decide I do not want to clean them and start tossing them back only to reconsider and start keeping fish again. OK, now if I decide in the middle of releasing fish that since they are too small it just wouldn’t be worth it. OK, so now I am tossing back a fish I just think is too small and now, I am going to catch some more because it is completely legal and since I have caught a larger fish that I will keep this one to eat. There we go, done. I did not break any law and I did not cull fish, I merely stayed within my legal boundaries and am a model citizen. OOHHH wait, my actions could be construed as culling but since I was sincere in my action is it really culling? Now that I am fishing do I lose my freedom to change my mind?

These laws are blatant attempts to further regulate fishing and impose regulation that have no place in the sport. The days of ropes strung with fish are over in most part and the DNR has proven that it they really do not care about mortality rates. They even encourage the obvious loss of fish in many of the practices they employ catering to the special interest groups. They talk about native vegetation and how important it is to maintain and the solution is to poison the water to kill off all vegetation so that exotics are not in the water. While this is effective they have just eliminated 90% of the available cover and sacrificed well over 90% of the yearlings in the ecosystem. This is a blatant extortion of the fishery and is done primarily for the bank fishermen. While I believe everyone should have ample opportunity to fish I also believe that they need to take in to account the fishery itself.

DNR, You have crossed over every ethical line every drawn and imposed your will upon the environment in ways so destructive that with any other entity the EPA would have shut you down instantaneously. These types of behaviors are destructive and regulations like culling for instance are only a pretence to the banning or limiting of fishing all together. As much as I am sure you think you are doing the right thing, a good look in the mirror is in order and logical decision making needs addressed. Either you do what’s best for the ecosystem or you do what best for the people using the resource. This happy medium you are tying to maintain sucks what little pond scum left. Iowa’s inland waters very so much from governing office to governing office that it is obscene. Harvesting vegetation may make since if it is choking out the life of an ecosystem and restricting culling may be applicable if and only if it is having a direct impact on the ecosystem. We both know that it is not and all your opinions on mortality are just that, opinions! 5 gallons of weed killer effects mortality in ways that the general fisherman could never accomplish even with malice as his motive. You guys are out of control and I look forward to your reply.

Anonymous Author

Quote:

---

DNR, You have crossed over every ethical line every drawn and imposed your will upon the environment in ways so destructive that with any other entity the EPA would have shut you down instantaneously. Anonymous Author

---

There are some intelligent and interesting things to be said about the new culling law, but this isnt it. No one is happy with everything the DNR does (or ANY governmental body for that matter) but when you consider the problems the fisheries bureau has to deal with, the do a compentant job.

The culling law seems to have been adopted successfully by states with fisheries that dwarf Iowa. I am open to anything that may improve the quality of fishing here. I dont view it as heavy handed.

Dave

Sorry Dave but I disagree.
Many if not all the states with culling laws were derived back when the primary method of “holding” fish was on a stringer with the line run through the gill plate which is a death sentence. The fact that Iowa is now implementing this archaic law is in my opinion poor judgment. The culling laws were not even an issue in MN or WI until the Anti-Tournament folks started pressing for ways in which to minimize them on bodies of water they inhabit. Lake association, PETA, and such are the reason any of these formalities have even been brought back in to enforcement. MN has many tournaments every year in which culling is very much part of the competition.
This law is outdated and in the grander scheme of things need not be part of any solution brought forth by a governing body. Use my tax and license dollars to enhance the ecosystem and nurture weed growth, monitor mortality rates, implement slot limits, do the right things. The solution to dump pesticides into the water needs much more attention then a handful of people sorting through a couple fish for the table. Call me silly but enforcing or even the time spent with laws such as these is a waste of my money. Next is when are they going to regulate the pontoon boats cruising the shallows of the lakes I fish. This does more damage to a fishery than anything I can do with a rod and reel.
Jc

Quote:

---

Next is when are they going to regulate the pontoon boats cruising the shallows of the lakes I fish. This does more damage to a fishery than anything I can do with a rod and reel.
Jc

---

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN, YOU WERE MAKING SENSE UNTILL THIS, PONTOONS CRUSING THE SHALLOWS ARE WRECKING YOUR FISHING SPOTS I’LL KEEP THAT IN MIND WHEN I SEE THE NEXT BASS BOAT FLYING BY, I GUESS THAT DOESN’T HURT ANYTHING

I don’t want to speak for him, but what I read form it is I have seen pontoon boats running in the shallows destroying weed growth. (Lake wapogasset comes to mind) I do agree that bass boats to fly, but very seldom do they fly along a shallow shoreline.

just my two cents

Garvi,
John is partially correct that this does impact the native vegetation negitively as well as displace spawning fish. There have been many instances in MN and WI where they limit the bass season to after the spawn which is both beneficial as well as having sound reasoning behind it. On the Pontoon boat example, when a pontoon boat or any boat at any speed creating a signifigant wake will displace everything from the eggs on the beds to the fish that are using them making that spawning attempt completely futile. This discussion is not about bass boats running around and I think this discussion needs to stay on track. The bigger implication to what is happening is more regulations being imposed for what the author calls special interest and not in the best interest of the fishery. The DNR as I see it need to step back and evaluate the ecosystems and then dictate policy on a given body of water that makes since for it nand not and all encompassing law that affects everything. The weed transportation initiative may well be the best thing to come out of any DNR in some time but I think spending budgetary dollars on things as insignifigant as sorting a few fish is obsurd. Culling and tournaments in general do more for good for the fishery than harm in the form of revenue and oppertunity than the DNR does by not allowing the culling. This issues merit is 100% founded by anti tournament associations of which we should not lose sight.
jc

Ussally the DNR will have open sessions during the year on proposed rule changes on this change nothing was mentioned until they made it law. I believe it is targeted agaisnt tournements for no reason other than to satisfy some lobbyists against tournements. I am not happy the way our DNR did buissnes here and certainly takes alot away from there credibility

If the law is targeted toward tournaments, then how did bass tourneys get a special exemption.

The exclusion was trying to thwart an onslaught of backlash. The fact that they now have the law passed makes taking the next step much easier. As in anything you wish to change you need to implement it in steps. A once and for all movement is much harder to implement than 20 baby steps. Take for instance our right to “Bear Arms”… Not quite the same as it was not even 10 years ago let alone when the constitution was written.
jc

In our state of Iowa the majority of walleye tournements are run by local anglers with the exception of maybe a couple a year now that means resident licence$$$ now on the bass side they have alot of national tourneys and that means non resident licence big$$$$ now if the state wants to keep the the big bucks coming I don,t think they are going to step on there toes. Also I might add that bass clubs and walleye clubs nonate money back to many lake improvement projects alot of docks, reefs and other lake projects have been donated from walleye and bass clubs.In knowing both bass and walleye competive anglers the majority put the resourse first and this law has no merit at all and I agree with Mr Crawford this is just the start of changes that are not taking into account the whole picture. To get a tournement licence you must agree to the guide lines the DNR sets in Iowa as far as walleyes are concerned there are no licences fron june 1 to sept 1 reduced limits on some bodys of water limit on number of boats the list goes on and thats fine but now they are really trying to make it hard and its time the tournement people also have a voice

Gianni,JC. I beleive is making very valid points so I won’t repeat alot he has posted.
This is all fueled by anti-fishing and the anti-fun crowd,I do not beleave this is fueled by the D.N.R as a whole,another good example of some anti-tournaments regs out of IA. is the 3 bass limit reg. it has all about wiped out Pro/Am or Draw style bass tournaments,this no culll is just another reg. to slip by and then we will wonder,what happened or why didn’t some one do something.
I know for a fact there are groups right now that are trying to get all IA.team tournaments to go to a paper format.
If you like tournaments or don’t like them do want people making new regs. that don’t have anything to do with fish managment.
Stomp out bad fish and game regs and manage,this is the solution.

I agree that it’s a bad law, and I also agree that the exemption was just put in there to get it through and prevent outrage, but I would be surprised if this was implemented by anti-fishing groups.

Ok last year at the Illinois Presidents meeting we were informed By the head of the fisheries department that Iowa was a no Cull state. we looked into it and found out that it was and the DNR just really never pressed it

If you look in last years Iowa rule book under their deffinition of a creel limit I believe that is where its located. I dont have the book infront of me to be specific.

I know in Illinois we are only allowed to cull in tournaments acording to the wording in the book.

This rule also states once you have your limit you may still fish. So you dont have to quit for the day you can still enjoy yourself

I have this problem with Anonynomus Authors.

I guess my though has always been “if you can’t write it down and sign your name to it…don’t say it”.

Below is from another post about the same issue.

****************
Just got off the phone with THE fella from the IA DNR that drove the law. Sorry, forgot his name.
This will help you understand or “fuel your fire”.
Black Bass exemption. Because of the popularity of bass tournies they made the exemption. The thought behind this was because most tournies have there own rules to protect the bass. Rules for live wells ect. Now Mr. DNR couldn’t say that no bass would ever die because of the culling exemption, but he felt it would be very limited. He also mentioned that when they get a permit from the DNR (for a tournie), they (the dnr) can place “special conditions” on them to ensure the resource is being take care of.
The reason Bass were the only exepmtion was because it’s a “heartier” fish than a walleye. “Just because it’s tail is wiggleing doesn’t mean it’s going to survive”. He talked about “Run and Bump” tournies..but I wasn’t sure what he was talking about…so I’ll skip it here.

Catfish tournies weren’t exempted because of many reasons. Here’s a couple. You can bank fish for cats…which leads to fish being held on stringers, buckets and pails. Most cat tournies you can weigh in your fish dead.
As far as the IA DNR is concerned, they are likely to never have an issue in the state will culling in it’s many forms…However, they plan on upping their enforcement on the rivers below the dams.
They used MO’s law…word for word because they have so many competitive outings.
Couple side notes. There will be a press release explaining what culling is. Apparently, some people think that if you go fishing and end the day with two gills, you can’t throw them back. This is not culling…this is “not wanting to clean two fish”.
He didn’t say this and these are my words not his…but in talking with him, I felt that the BASS folks put presure…no let me rephrase this…
made a good case for the bass turnies guys to cull.

******************

I haven’t reserched this, but it should be known that the IA Legislature votes on statutes which then becomes law. (no discussions with the public ect) the DNR has the power to make “RULES” which are open for discussion and public hearings.

Three personal thoughts. In my mind the DNR’s only role is to protect the resource(s).

Once a fish is on a stringer or in your live well…it should stay there.

The other is that if we all would act as sportsman (including myself) we could cut the DNR budget in half. (I know…I’m a dreamer)

While I respect your opinion I am finding the overall actions as of late to be hit or miss. Why do they allow shoreline owners to posion the weeds in front of there property, do exotic weed control by killing all weeds in a system, or by stocking non-native fish into a system as a means to control another. I guess there are many things going on that help specific goups and hurt others. My personal feeling is to limit creel limits to standards that the fishery can manage, let the bass or walleye guys release the fish if they choose. They could for sure eat every one they catch which would mandate drastic changes in policy. I honestly feel that the groups using the resource will do whats best for them and the resource. If a happy balance is not met then the tournaments will cease on specific bodies of water. This goes for every fishery and ecosystem. I guess managing the release of fish is silly, and its the total you are able to have at any given time that is the longer term issue.
jc

Thanks Briank for your insight.I am speaking as a avid walleye tournement angler and this new law will put a new trist to our tournys but we will survive.The good that will come out of this is I bet the phone has been ringing at the DNR offices and this will awaken the public that they best be involved or your not going to have any input on are game and fish laws.As speaking for both bass and walleye tourney people we do everything possible to release healthy fish.To say something good about sportsman in general today many people don,t save bass for eating and most walleyes over 20in are released to fight again. I can honestly say that was not the case 20yrs ago

Gianni,all the facts are hard to find on who fuels a new reg,but of course anti-fishing groups don’t make the regs,they just have systems that end up makeing rules for the majorty when they are the minortory,I do make contact with anglers that have been working on capital hill in IA. and I just relayed what I was told by them to me,

In MN we take it from all sides and it is hard to keep up with these groups that think they know better than the D.N.R.

One thig is,if the D.N.R receives a phone call from the public they must repond,they don’t like makeing phone calls because they have other things to do [like there job]now imagine an anti-fishing group making 50 calls,they must return them calls and have to come up with solutions to make them stop.

If you want to see some of the issues that concern MN. tournaments go to http://perham.eot.com/~jstokka/mntoc/index.htm

The MN Sport fishing Coalition was started this last year by MN. directors that know MN.tournament anglers deserve a voice.

If tournament and non-tournament anglers do not keep up on the real issues that concern there lifes passion it will slowly be stripped from them in the name of management.

This year the bags limits on bass will go up for reveiw.

Anyone reading this post, please tell me, when you go to a MN.lake do you feel you have a GREAT chance to cautch a limit of bass, the D.N.R themselves says our bass pop. are in great shape.

This reveiw was put up by a agent of the state that was on the verge of retirement and will not be part of the prosses.

This is just a taste of something most of us don’t worry about then wonder,why wasn’t nothing done to stop it,well I for one want them to stop it.