Boat launch inspections

Quote:

---

If there’s water in the ribs of the boat, whatever little buggers are in the water will make it into the next water when the bilge is turned on or the plug isn’t replace and the boat gets “washed out”.

---

That’s why i tell them to give me a boat wash at boomsite when the wash station is present…That and i want the scum removed…I have a boat that leaks. Hope to replace prior to the 2015 season, but man she leaks…
Before it leaked, i rebuilt the entire boat, removing the floor and everything. I filled up the boat with water to make sure it didn’t leak, and it didn’t. But even with the motor off, and the trailer lifted up so the transom was touching the ground, the ribs in my boat held at least 3 gallons of water. Could not drain that water unless you flipped the boat over.

I’m pretty sure every part of my boat leaks now, so after a period time that water will leech through the rivets…It’s a sure method of transfering invasives. I don’t feel super good about it for sure, but i also know i’m only 1 of many leaking boats in MN and so far i am doing nothing illegal as the rules are written.

It’s hilarious that the DNR still proclaims that we can slow or even prevent the spread of any AIS. Maybe in CO…

In my eyes i don’t think it will be too long before the following happens…

Inspections like in CO
NO LIVE BAIT (Goodbye flathead and sturgeon fishing)
Gated Ramps
Dry Dock periods
Etc
Etc
Etc

All pushed by lake owners who will have to follow ZERO of those rules.

Did anyone catch Klobachars address the other day on closing lock number 1 on the Mississippi river? Havent had time to look it up on line yet. What I have heard of this is it will prevent the spread of invasives in mn.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

If there’s water in the ribs of the boat, whatever little buggers are in the water will make it into the next water when the bilge is turned on or the plug isn’t replace and the boat gets “washed out”.

---

That’s why i tell them to give me a boat wash at boomsite when the wash station is present…That and i want the scum removed…I have a boat that leaks. Hope to replace prior to the 2015 season, but man she leaks…
Before it leaked, i rebuilt the entire boat, removing the floor and everything. I filled up the boat with water to make sure it didn’t leak, and it didn’t. But even with the motor off, and the trailer lifted up so the transom was touching the ground, the ribs in my boat held at least 3 gallons of water. Could not drain that water unless you flipped the boat over.

I’m pretty sure every part of my boat leaks now, so after a period time that water will leech through the rivets…It’s a sure method of transfering invasives. I don’t feel super good about it for sure, but i also know i’m only 1 of many leaking boats in MN and so far i am doing nothing illegal as the rules are written.

It’s hilarious that the DNR still proclaims that we can slow or even prevent the spread of any AIS. Maybe in CO…

In my eyes i don’t think it will be too long before the following happens…

Inspections like in CO
NO LIVE BAIT (Goodbye flathead and sturgeon fishing)
Gated Ramps
Dry Dock periods
Etc
Etc
Etc

All pushed by lake owners who will have to follow ZERO of those rules.

---

As long as there is money involved for grants for studies, law enforcement, training, signs, meetings, per diem’s, mileage there will be invasives allowed. There are to many people & agencies making money off of this for it to go away.

Get a ticket, go to court and plead your case. Relay to the judge every possible way water & invasives can move around the country. If we get enough people to waste the courts time then something will happen on the government level.

Not saying all boaters shouldn’t take the time to do the simple and obvious things to avoid spreading invasive species, but …… considering the number of waterfowl (geese, ducks, herons & cranes to name a few) that sit, swim & feed every single day on our lakes, rivers & streams, does anyone seriously believe that all of this is going to make a huge difference in the spread of many, many invasive species?

Does anyone have any doubt at all that waterfowl probably spread more invasive species than all boaters combined?

(not to mention turtles, which tend to carry a lot of parasites, muskrats, mink, otter and so on)

This subject has come up on a regular basis with clients. So far, when I ask them if they can think of any other way that invasive species can be spread, not a single one has even considered waterfowl.

In my opinion, that means the powers that be are not doing a very good job of reporting all the facts.

Joel,

Someone did a paper on ducks and zebs. I’ll have to find it.

Anyway it claimed that villagers were not transferred by (at least) ducks.

I think that’s hard to believe, but that’s what it said.

People, not ducks~~ WI DNR<<

I really question the “ducks/geese have nothing to do with it theory”.

I know it is only an anecdotal observation, but I have a friend that has a few excavated ponds on his land. He dozed and excavated these in non-wetland spots and they naturally filled with ground water. Two years after the first one filled, he decided to drain it so he could enlarge it. He found an awesome amount of minnow life there. That is in only two years with NO flowage in or out. All three ponds now have nice vegetation, incredible minnow populations (including bullheads up to and over a pound), and thriving leech populations.

Where did all that life come from? The ducks and geese may not be the culprits, but SOMETHING transported and spread the minnows/vegetation, because it did not just magically appear there.

Quote:

---

People, not ducks~~ WI DNR<<

---

Interesting.
I have not seen that before but I would still like to see more than one study before drawing that conclusion.

Common sense would seem to suggest that any bird, reptile or other animal that spends the majority of its time in the water would probably carry a high risk of transporting invasive species.

Not sure if there are more studies out there or not but sure would like to see more done in this area.

I wonder if they took into consideration the distance from contaminated lakes that could be a source to introduce invasives? They say remote wilderness lakes. If that means they are 100s of miles from the nearest contaminated lake, well then duh.

Personally I think man has a higher probability and does spread invasives faster. For every 10 good stewards out there there is probably at least one who doesn’t care.

That being said I don’t like going down this road. If the inspections are reasonably fast and not over zealous, then fine. But when you start putting up gates, closing locks, spending millions on bubbles so the fish can gently swim through it like it was a spa treatment, well then I start getting a little upset.

All parties should admit that stopping the spread is futile. Ok, we are slowing it. In that context then each measure should be weighed by its impact. They should be measured by how much of a burden they are and how they impact our enjoyment of the public water. The problem is, everyone is going to use a different scale.

So what am I saying? I don’t know, you’ll have to explain it to me. I am going to go punch my co-worker in the sack.

Quote:

---

Not sure if there are more studies out there or not but sure would like to see more done in this area.

---

As far as I know Joel, I’ve only seen this one. But one is enough. Every pro spending $$ on ais website out there references it.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

People, not ducks~~ WI DNR<<

---

Interesting.
I have not seen that before but I would still like to see more than one study before drawing that conclusion.

Common sense would seem to suggest that any bird, reptile or other animal that spends the majority of its time in the water would probably carry a high risk of transporting invasive species.

Not sure if there are more studies out there or not but sure would like to see more done in this area.

---

Joel, years ago there was a study done, I believe, at Ohio State univ. that documented a number of things transfered by fowl – fertilized eggs, fry, invasive species… I had a link to it on here a year or two back. If i have time tonight I’ll look for it and re-post

Quote:

---

at Ohio State univ. that documented a number of things transfered by fowl –

---

From back before the “agenda”?

All the more reason we need a ‘frequent user pass’

Pay a fee, take a class, get a pass

Show up at a launch – show your pass, sticker, or whatever and the inspector can take a seat. The only time you would need an inspection is if a CO or sheriff is conducting it or leaving certain high risk lakes (MilleLacs, etc).

I bring this idea to lake groups and they get mighty nervous – a guess we know what the agenda is.

The MN legislature gave 10 million dollars to counties to fund inspection programs……..the silliness is not going stop anytime soon.

See much of the problem with us as a whole is that we think “Oh this wont work, forget it.” or “There is an ulterior motive, so lets not care” I dont care if I disagree with how things are being handled, I still care about TRYING to slow down ais for my kids and grandkids sake. 5-15 mins at a boat launch is nothing compared to in the future not wanting to use the waters because problems have gotten so bad due to no one trying. If you have other options you see fit then email everyone in the state you can, but in the meantime take your plug out, dry your boat, ect. Give it a try and instead of rebelling it and not caring if the problem continues, at least care for the futures sake. Us boaters get blamed for this issue, and instead of taking action to see what we can do different we point the finger elsewhere. Obviously other factors should be of concern, that doesnt mean we still arent an issue. More people just need to at least care about ais, instead of ignoring it and speeding up the contamination, for future generations sake. You can write all your angers and conspiracies on here all you want, but that’s doing nothing positive if your not trying something to help when you use the waters.

Resistance is Futile … You WILL be Assimilated

First I don’t think anybody isn’t trying to do what’s right.

Heres the problem…..

Milfoil was suppose to be the lake killer in this state. It wasn’t. It annoyed the good folks on Tonka but that’s about it.

Zeebs were suppose to kill Erie years ago. It didn’t. The water is cleaner now then ever and the Walleye fishing is at record rates.

So for me personally (I’m not speaking for others) somebody other than those receiving money for studies & enforcement have to show me there is a problem.

I will always comply when asked by an authorized person, but I will never voluntarily give them anymore info then required.

Oh, and in connection with the Snowden thread. I fully expect my response to end up in the DNR data base.

Quote:

---

Oh, and in connection with the Snowden thread. I fully expect my response to end up in the DNR data base.

---

And rightfully so.

I have no problem draining my livewell before I leave the launching area to return home.
However I don’t much care for wasting money to pay someone for leaning against my boat telling me I have to drain my livewell; when if he’d get his head out of his clipboard, he’d see that my livewell has already been drained … right onto the toes of his Eddie Bauer hiking boots.

I just have a little problem with “everyone is guilty until proven innocent.”

Quote:

---

Oh, and in connection with the Snowden thread. I fully expect my response to end up in the DNR data base.

---

the “Do Not Launch List” ?

The problem with the DNR approach is that common sense went out the window when they wrote their regs. Having a plug in your boat going down the highway has never caused the spread of AIS. It is a basic guilty until proven innocent approach. They insult us and treat us like criminals and then are shocked when we have an attitude. I fish Pool 3 and Pool 4 and that is the only place where my boat sees water in any given year. Give me a sticker or something that says I can’t launch anywhere else but infected water and leave me the heck alone. I was pulling out of Colvil to go put in at Evert’s last summer and I hit an inspection and the guy had to spray out my livewell because—get ready for this—-I had sand in it. I told him I was going to go launch at Evert’s within 15 minutes of the check but that didn’t matter at all. Where is the common sense in any of this????

It would take all the self restraint I could muster, to not tell him; I beached on sand bar and took a little swimming break … pretty sure I also have a bit of sand stuck elsewhere. then ask if he would like to inspect and wash THAT too.

Pretty much the same issue I have Rich.

My boat stays on the river (Everts) unless I need to fuel it.

Instead of going across the bridge to Red Wing and the need to pull the plug, I’ll spend around 3-4 cents a gallon more and fuel up in WI. These trips are seldom just for fuel as groceries were normally included. Now I get my groceries in River Fall on my way to Everts.

BTW by filling up at the little Freedom station in Red Wing, I receive a .05 per gallon sr discount, a .10 pg Freedom card discount and I can use any coupons for gas discount on top of the higher prices in WI.

I do my part because I won’t spread ais as long as I stay in the Great State of WI.

Goooo Packers!

^^ a copy of that post should be sent to Jon Edman (director, MN office of TOURISM) with a cc to Tom Landwehr (commissioner, MN DNR)

Why, they have enough scratch paper.

I’m just one guy on a border water…and a catfisher person at that.

I’m a drop in the bucket.
One feather in a pillow.
One fish in a sea.
One cow pie in a field of manure.

cynical toward the bureaucracy … there might be hope for you yet

I’ll play devils advocate.

In regards to being ticketed away from the water with your boat plug in. It is the only way to guarantee a boater pulled the plug when coming out of the water. Without the law being written that way, a person could leave a body of water with water in the boat, travel to another lake and then yank out the plug a few blocks away incase the DNR is at the launch and there you go.

Another thing, while I agree that invasives are not a crisis that will wipe out fishing as we know it, I want as many lakes ecosystems to remain invasive free for as long as possible.

That being said, some major cost benefit analysis needs to be done and done by objective people. Cost includes the pleasure quotient, meaning the bigger the pain in the arse a “preventative” measure is, the less benefit it is.

Quote:

---

Why, they have enough scratch paper.

I’m just one guy on a border water…and a catfisher person at that.

I’m a drop in the bucket.
One feather in a pillow.
One fish in a sea.
One cow pie in a field of manure.

---

So……are you finally admitting sending these guys e-mails and letters is useless? Just cuz we pay their salaries doesn’t mean they have to pay any attention to us.

Quote:

---

Why, they have enough scratch paper.

I’m just one guy on a border water…and a catfisher person at that.

I’m a drop in the bucket.
One feather in a pillow.
One fish in a sea.
One cow pie in a field of manure.

---

Shhhh

its playing