The following is a copy of the email that the DNR sent out in response to inguiries about what was going on with the study.
I as a member of the committee that work on these rules feel that I (and the people that I represented) have been betrayed by the DNR by thier action. The proposal below does not reflect the consensus that the committee arrived at in regaurds to the tournament issues.
It is unfortunate that the DNR has chosen to hold hard and fast on it’s stance against tournament angling in general and the Culling in Bass tournaments which the botched DNR studies where meant to investigate.
One can only wonder if progress could have been made if the DNR had conducted themselves as puplic servants instead of dictators.
“Fayram, Andrew – DNR” <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
A number of you have contacted me about when the proposed rules would be available and what they were likely to contain. I talked to Mike Staggs and we are both in agreement that there is at least a reasonable chance that the new Secretary may want to have some time to consider the public input that has been accumulated and may want input into the proposed rules. So, the version that gets presented to the NRB may be somewhat different than what we’ve been putting together. That is part of the reason that the decision was made to delay the presentation to the NRB until December. I would anticipate the final version of the proposed rules will be available a month or more in advance of the NRB meeting (i.e. November 5th or so). At that point, I’ll send you a copy of the “green sheet” signed by the secretary which will include the entire proposed rule package. But, below is a list of some of the general ideas that DNR Fisheries is planning on talking to the Secretary about that differ from the previously proposed rules.
1) Fees. The NRB has consistently stated that they feel that the cost of administering the tournament program should be assumed by the people involved in tournament fishing and that the cost of the Bass Fishing Tournament Pilot Program be recovered. We are considering having the cost of administering the program and recovery of the Bass Fishing Tournament pilot program funds be passed on to both the tournament organizers and the tournament participants. All the fees we are considering are much lower than those mentioned in the previous proposals, primarily because we had new information on the number of participants. The fee to the organizer will depend on the format and will be relatively low for those tournaments whose proceeds are not given to the participants (i.e. charity type events) and somewhat higher for those that give out relatively large prizes or are catch-hold-release format. In addition, the recovery of the cost of the Bass Fishing Tournament Pilot Program would be accomplished by a surcharge to the tournament organizers based on the number of participants for “catch-hold-release” tournaments that target bass species for a period of six years. The remainder of the cost of administering the program would be recovered by a “tournament stamp” for each participant that is good for one year (just like a fishing license).
2) Tournament application process. The “open window” for tournament applications has been moved up to April 1st through June 30th in the year prior to the tournament. Final decisions by August 1st. If limits are not reached, organizers can still apply for a permit up to 30 days prior to the tournament. Still a lottery if limits on particular waterbodies is reached.
3) July-August “catch-hold-release” ban. Instead of a ban, we have been discussing a reduction in the daily bag limit to 3 (on waters that usually have a bag limit higher than 3) for walleye and bass species for “catch-hold-release” tournaments based on the time periods that some waters in Wisconsin are likely to have temperatures above levels where increased indirect mortality may occur. Those dates are approximately the first week of July through the middle of August (25 C) for bass and the middle of June to the first week of September for walleye (21 C).
4) Limits on the size and number of tournaments. Pretty much the same with the exception that tournaments on lakes chains. In these cases, the tournament organizer picks a particular lake in the chain where the weigh-in or primary fishing activity takes place for the permit, although anglers can still fish the entire chain. The number of tournament permits available will be based on the acreage of that particular lake rather than summing the acreage of all of the lakes.
5) Aquatic Invasive Species Plan. Given that there are other efforts and regulations related to AIS (including the VHS rules), we are considering dropping the additional submission of a AIS plan from the tournament organizers. However, the organizer still would need to advise participants of recommended procedures to clean boats and also the person who issues the permit may require additional conditions to prevent the spread of AIS .
5) Other restrictions. The provisions that a fisheries biologist may add to the permit if the format is “catch-hold-release” include redistribution of fish, restriction on the area that can be fished to reduce the time that fish are held in live wells, and the distance fish are transported to the weigh-in site. These conditions would be stated when the permit was issued.
Those seem to be the biggest changes from the previous rules. As I stated previously, any or all of these may change depending on what the Secretary wants to do. Let me know if you have additional questions.