One more year for felt sole?

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    good post by the way iceblue, very worth while to read what you write.....and not I am not being sarcastic.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by akflyfisher View Post
      Please let me know what stream runs through your property so I don't get shot.

      What is with the hatred of TU? I have seen them do a lot to help. Many streams in my home state of PA would be void of trout without TU. I would guess in the thousands of miles of streams!

      save your anger and hatred for the greenies that don't want you to fish not those that actually care about the fish so we can catch them.

      Proud Life Member of TU
      Well - now that you ask the question, TU has a habit of prowling around low-hanging fruit states with low populations trying to make easy headlines about stuff they don't have the expertise or facts to analyze; basically a political organization. They jump on news that they think is an easy way to public opinion. Like felt soles absorb water so that's it. Or mines are bad and that's it. They decide on the answer and then go in later and find support for their position. HELLO. There's more to the analysis than that. That's not what resource management is about. It is what politics is about. And I'll have nothing to do with it, or TU.

      TU basically went to the fish and game commission, proposed this regulation change on felt-soles, the support was total poppycock (just like the non-science behind it - which TU also supported in part, by the way), there was a hearing, now it's passed and there's been some backtracking to put it off another year, and there you have it. Then they gloat about it like it was some big accomplishment, when the sole material change alone, does absolutely nothing.

      Comment


      • #33
        Iceblue, let me first say that I am truly on the fence about the felt sole issue. The intent is to stop the spread of invasive species but I only fish one area (I am stuck on an island and don't travel anywhere to fish) so I cannot spread invasives but I too must suffer.

        As for post #12, the poster speaks of diseases but the main issue with felt soles is the spread of didimo, better known as rock snot. This is not a disease and in fact by itself will not kill fish but what it does do is destroy habitat for benthic macro invertebrate, the source of nutrition for small trout, salmon, and char. With out the small bugs the smolt will have nothing to eat and will then starve to death.

        Rock snot is spreading in the lower 48 quickly and with the numbers of anglers that travel up here from the lower 48 I am sure there is a concern that it could creep into AK waters. Sure, it has not yet and with those thousands that have traveled up so far you would think that it should never happen but we may never know. An ounce of prevention is worth more than a pound of cure.

        Can the spores of rock snot live anywhere on your waders, sure, but it is most likely to survive in area that remains moist. How long does it take for those felt soles to dry out compared to anywhere else on your wading gear. Yup, it seams to never dry out, so those spores could live for weeks deep inside those felt soles.

        You stating that TU should not have come to a BOF meeting to push an agenda is like saying that no group can go to a BOF meeting with an agenda. TU may not know for sure if rock snot will live in AK and I guess the only way to find is to plant some spores and see what happens. That is some homework I don't want to be involved in. TU has some of the best biologist working with them on this, so if they say it could happen, I would listen.

        Comment


        • #34
          As with rock snot, lead poisoning does not kill instantly so you will most likely never see a mass die off from either.

          Better look out, lead sinkers are being banned in some areas and states for the same reason lead shot is outlawed. New York is now lead free fishing.

          Due to the amount of splitshot I lose on our local rivers, I am going lead free this year. Over the past few years I have deposited pounds of the stuff on 3/0 or #7 splitshot at a time. I have been handling (and biting down on) lead shot for years, I figured now is the time to clean up my act.

          Nope, not a greenie but I do appreciate what I have.

          Comment


          • #35
            Jerryman, I may not be a biologist but you are comparing apples to oranges. The main concern for felt soles is didimo, better known as rock snot. This is an invasive algae that blankets the bottoms of streams destroying the habitat of benthic macro invertebrate. Rock snot is not a disease in fact it is harmless to the fish itself but that fact that it reduces food for fish, it then has a negative effect on them.

            There is not 100% conclusive proof that the spread of this invasive came from felt soles but the shoe does fit. How else it is being spread?

            Comment


            • #36
              Maybe the duck hunters in alaska use felt soles on their wades, because it's a dule use item. Both fishing and duck hunting. But I know alot of duck hunters and have hunted a lot of different states in the lower 48 and very few of them use felt sole waders. (what do I mean by this.) I been duck hunting for over 30 years and I have never seen a duck hunter with felt sole waders. So I'd have to say that duck hunters being a problem is not an issue. Weather felt soled shoes are a problem or not, I don't know. But don't pull duck hunters into it, we have enough problems. ; )

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by stevesch View Post
                Well - now that you ask the question, TU has a habit of prowling around low-hanging fruit states with low populations trying to make easy headlines about stuff they don't have the expertise or facts to analyze; basically a political organization. They jump on news that they think is an easy way to public opinion. Like felt soles absorb water so that's it. Or mines are bad and that's it. They decide on the answer and then go in later and find support for their position. HELLO. There's more to the analysis than that. That's not what resource management is about. It is what politics is about. And I'll have nothing to do with it, or TU.

                TU basically went to the fish and game commission, proposed this regulation change on felt-soles, the support was total poppycock (just like the non-science behind it - which TU also supported in part, by the way), there was a hearing, now it's passed and there's been some backtracking to put it off another year, and there you have it. Then they gloat about it like it was some big accomplishment, when the sole material change alone, does absolutely nothing.
                States with low populations? Do you feel PA has a low population? As for Political, I guess we all are in some aspect but TU cannot lobby or endorse any political figure due to their non profit status.

                When you state "TU basically went to the fish and game commission" did you realize you stated that a group of ALASKANS went to the fish and game commission? TU is a true grassroots organization. I do not know anything about the meeting THEY went to but would love to be educated.

                From my knowledge of TU in AK, I would say it was a chapter in Southeast AK that brought this issue up. Not because I think the SE folks are greenies but rather they know how to get things done with ADF&G. It was a SE chapter that pushed to change steelhead regs to one a year over 36". I spoke with the chapter president a back in 1999 and he was telling me how much work they put into having this regulation put into place. Some of the biologist in the chapter are/were gainfully employed by ADF&G. TU has less than a handful of biologist that get paid by them but have thousands that work for them for free (volunteers).

                If you have been born and raised in AK and have not traveled in the lower 48 much, you may not see the damage that has or is happening to our coldwater fisheries. As for mining, it can be extremely devastating. You be on a stream that is full of life and then find an abandoned mine shaft it will be completely dead from there down stream. Travel to coal country in PA and see all the red streams that are there. Cold clear water with the perfect gradient and a wonderful gravel substrate but not a living thing in it.
                I have seen a few of these streams repaired by TU, not through politics but rather through thousands of hours of hard work done by volunteers.

                As for putting it off for a year, that was so that the entire state would be covered rather than just southeast.

                Most of the time TU is only appreciated after it is needed. Be glad that we don't need TU anymore than do YET. Once TU is needed and appreciated, the fishery has already been destroyed and we are all trying to figure out how to fix it. That normally takes many years.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by akflyfisher View Post
                  Jerryman, I may not be a biologist but you are comparing apples to oranges. The main concern for felt soles is didimo, better known as rock snot. This is an invasive algae that blankets the bottoms of streams destroying the habitat of benthic macro invertebrate. Rock snot is not a disease in fact it is harmless to the fish itself but that fact that it reduces food for fish, it then has a negative effect on them.

                  There is not 100% conclusive proof that the spread of this invasive came from felt soles but the shoe does fit. How else it is being spread?
                  AkFF: Didimo is NOT an invasive algae - it is a diatom that is native to most western states, if normally grows in high elevation streams, etc. The concern came about several years ago when heavy grow appeared at lower elevations and it did as you indicated - blanketed the bottoms of SOME streams destroying the habitat of benthic macro invertebrates. Not much has been heard about it lately.

                  I think the main issue is the possible transporting of invasive mussels on felt soles. New Zealand mud snails got into Yellowstone National Park somehow - probably riding in on some type of equipment used while fishing.

                  ClearCeek

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Here is a link to a peer reviewed paper published in Fisheries magazine that concludes that anglers are the primary vector in moving didymo on Vancouver Island

                    http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/stud...ymo-blooms.pdf

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      I found a legal environmentally safe alternative to felt soles, I sewed Tibetan llama hide tanned w/ the urine of the Dalai Lama himself on the soles of my boots. I've waded on every slimy algae covered rock in the western hemisphere and haven't slipped yet. I didn't even slip on the oysters that are starting to grow where I usually fish in the little su :whistle:
                      sigpic




                      I'm taking a poll
                      <--------click this star if you think I should run for Gov

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by MTangler View Post
                        Here is a link to a peer reviewed paper published in Fisheries magazine that concludes that anglers are the primary vector in moving didymo on Vancouver Island

                        http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/stud...ymo-blooms.pdf
                        Look - we've been over that article before on this forum; that isn't even junk science; it's pure junk - happenstance co-occurrence of a boat ramp and the alga being passed off as "science" "proving" something about anglaers. It is not a science journal; "Fisheries" is sort of a newspaper/national enquirer sort of rag - not an original source/and certainly NOT peer-reviewed. Where did you get the idea it was? It's sensationalistic journalism - not more. It "proves" nothing.

                        Clear Creek is quite right; the alga is native to the northern hemisphere, moved around fine without felt, and blooms from time to time.

                        Anything that felt transports, rubber soles can do as well or better.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by stevesch View Post
                          Look - we've been over that article before on this forum; that isn't even junk science; it's pure junk - happenstance co-occurrence of a boat ramp and the alga being passed off as "science" "proving" something about anglaers. It is not a science journal; "Fisheries" is sort of a newspaper/national enquirer sort of rag - not an original source/and certainly NOT peer-reviewed. Where did you get the idea it was? It's sensationalistic journalism - not more. It "proves" nothing.

                          The junk here is your understanding of this publication. Fisheries magazine is an official publication of the American Fisheries Society which is the world's leading professional association of fisheries biologists. The organization is more than 140 years old and is the primary source for scientific information about fisheries management in the world. http://www.fisheries.org

                          It is obvious from your comments that either you are deliberately lying or else you are parroting someone else's lies because you like how they sound. Any attempt to find out more about the publication will immediately show that "Fisheries is the monthly peer-reviewed membership publication of the American Fisheries Society (AFS)." http://www.fisheries.org/afs/docs/pub_authguide.pdf

                          I have no problem if you want to disagree with the conclusions of these fisheries professionals. After all, I'm sure that you have conducted far more scientific research than the authors and reviewers of this paper. However, to attack the source as being "sort of a newspaper/national enquirer sort of rag - not an original source/and certainly NOT peer-reviewed" really hurts your credibility.

                          If you think I am wrong please provide me with any sort of documentation to back up your claims. Just to clarify, I mean reality based measurable information, not just bulletin board opinion.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            felt is not the problem; so eliminating it is not the answer

                            Originally posted by MTangler View Post
                            The junk here is your understanding of this publication. Fisheries magazine is an official publication of the American Fisheries Society which is the world's leading professional association of fisheries biologists. The organization is more than 140 years old and is the primary source for scientific information about fisheries management in the world. http://www.fisheries.org

                            It is obvious from your comments that either you are deliberately lying or else you are parroting someone else's lies because you like how they sound. Any attempt to find out more about the publication will immediately show that "Fisheries is the monthly peer-reviewed membership publication of the American Fisheries Society (AFS)." http://www.fisheries.org/afs/docs/pub_authguide.pdf

                            I have no problem if you want to disagree with the conclusions of these fisheries professionals. After all, I'm sure that you have conducted far more scientific research than the authors and reviewers of this paper. However, to attack the source as being "sort of a newspaper/national enquirer sort of rag - not an original source/and certainly NOT peer-reviewed" really hurts your credibility.

                            If you think I am wrong please provide me with any sort of documentation to back up your claims. Just to clarify, I mean reality based measurable information, not just bulletin board opinion.
                            Ok fine, you asked and here it is: You're wrong. Fisheries is a news rag. It is not really a peer-reviewed journal in the sense of AFS' other publication "Transactions of the American Fisheries Society"; and the subject matter and level of original scientific data (if any at all, and there was none in the felt article) is much less. The felt article was garbage, and if they can show some documentation of transport and dissemination via felt, they would have; instead, they just imply it occurred via felt based on the location of boat ramps. Not a single shread of evidence in that one. Fisheries is the place you send sensationalistic "news" that you can't really publish in the first tier journals. And that felt article was the worst of the worst, and look what it did: made people think that changing the wading shoe material is the answer. If there is any human vector, it is much more likely to be watercraft, and the answer for any of this is changing the human habit of not cleaning their watercraft (or any other equipment), not coating it with rubber (see Fisheries 35(3): 121; for example). Regulating felt does NOTHING.

                            In fact, I think the "threat" of didymo, whose spread on Vancouver Island was the major source of "information" in the felt article in Fisheries, is NOT "science".

                            How can I show you documentation of something that doesn't exist (namely, that felt transports invasives to such a degree over other materials [cleaned or uncleaned], that it warranted legal regulation). The evidence as far as didymo is concerned (and I'm not worried about this species) shows that it is released much more easily from rubber or fabric, than it is from felt.


                            To sum up: felt is not the problem; so eliminating it is not the answer

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by fullbush View Post
                              I heard T.U. in conjunction w/ PETA, are pushing for legislation that 24 hrs prior to fishing the kenai anglers had to wax their knuckles and forearms and yes because of kenaibowfan, their palms. Apparently when releasing the coveted rainbow trout they were introducing trace amounts of testosterone and causing male pattern baldness in the river otters.

                              Excellent, FB.

                              That's exactly how stupid the felt ban sounds.
                              Tim

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Both you guys are wrong! :eek:

                                "Peer-reviewed" and "science" mean nothing anymore. Like everything else, science is biased and infected with politics. No matter what some fancy study said, its purely stupid to ban felt soles. I value Trout U as much as the Sierra Club.

                                Comment

                                Footer Adsense

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X