# Pere Marquette and much more... 12-04-03



## [email protected] (Jan 21, 2001)

Howdy folks! My best buddy in the world Taz and I did get a chance to go float and fish the fly water yesterday all by ourselves for a change and I'll get to that, but first, a little commentary I'd like to share with you all. If this stirs up trouble on any site that I post on, I apologize and I promise to duck without response and go back to the BBT site exclusively, I can't see how it would, but I don't always see things... I'll go ahead and highlight the beginning of the actual "fishing report" below for those that don't care.

"Tasty ale treats!" Ahhh yes, that's a term I stole from either George (Known to many of you as the "Junkie" on TSS) or JT, my other business partner. I don't recall which anymore, possibly because it's been a good number of years since I stole it from an obscure post on TSS between the two of them or, possibly because of my enjoyment of the term mentioned itself? (He, he... Well, never mind, it's a mute point and it's my term now!) It's also the term that caused the big uproar of September 20/21, 2000 when after having read a report of mine that mentioned some consumption of said tasty ale treats at a bar after fishing, a guide trip was cancelled by an angler and his wife via e-mail referring to me as one of the, " intoxicated "anglers" creating conflict and making a mess. " remember that one!? I do, YEEeeeeeeeHaw!

After asking you, the readers of my gibberish, if I was out of hand in my writing and if I should change my style I was overwhelmed by e-mails telling me to keep "my diary" as is and, of course, two or three that said I should just go to a plain old boring "report" instead. Well folks, nothing much has changed! I still mention, and enjoy, the occasional tasty ale (Although not nearly as often as then.) and I'm still very far from being one of the " intoxicated "anglers" creating conflict and making a mess. " Not that I've never been an intoxicated angler, I have been that on a few occasions in the past, but certainly friendly to be around (if not entertaining) and never making a mess. "Creating conflict"... Well now, that's another story sometimes, but never in the manner intended by that e-mail. No, what I was then and still am now is an individual that cares deeply about the river that I call home and it's protection for all users.

I'd be telling one big lie if I said that part of my concern for this resource wasn't selfish, in all honesty I'd have to say a fair portion of it is. For quite some time up until now, right now and on into the foreseeable future my entire livelihood depends on the Pere Marquette. Hell, I probably feel more of a need to protect and preserve it than any of you can possibly fathom! Other than just a few humans, and every dog I've ever met in my life, I can't think of anything I've cared about more. I bounced around all over the world growing up, never planted roots, got into my fair share of trouble and basically had no real direction in life until I moved here better than a decade ago. (Surpassing all previous life records after the third or fourth year I believe.) It didn't take long for me to fall in love with this river and the life that goes along with it and I guess that's the other, much bigger part, of why I care so much.

Why am I telling you all this? Because we have a chance to be a big part in choosing the direction that this little corridor in and of life takes. I want all of you that love it as well, (Most of you probably do, or you wouldn't be reading my reports.) along with me, to be pro active! I don't mean just right now while this forest service river plan revision is taking place, (Although that meeting is what got me thinking.) I mean from now on. To that end I would love to form a not for profit organization that is dedicated to not only the protection and preservation of the river, but also to the rights of all of it's users be it angling, canoeing, sightseeing, etc... 

There are already organizations in place that do, and have done, a tremendous amounts of good for the resource, but another one of those can't be a bad thing and trust me on this, there are also times when a strong united voice of the general end user needs to be heard as well or you'll get walked all over. I'm talking about a range of issues from fisheries creel limits, special regs and rigging, to water quality, general public access, lunker structures, bank erosion and a million things in between. Hey, if we're not busy fighting the good fight we can work on projects in cooperation with the other organizations to do all sorts of good for the river.

At any rate, you get the general idea and these things do take time. The main issue right now is this river plan revision and I'll keep you up to date as best I can as long as you'll send a few e-mails to the links below. In the mean time if there's anyone out there interested in forming something along the lines described above please contact me by clicking this link, (No attachments please, I will not open them.) I'd like to get an idea of what kind of numbers and what sort of core group we would have to work with. Someone with just a little time and with knowledge in areas of setting up a not for profit organization would be extremely helpful as well... 

I tried to call Dr. Nelson again today to see if there was any progress on the web page describing the process of the river plan revision, showing the studies already done, etc., but all I got was voice mail. So, for now let's just address one issue I've already mentioned in a little more plain detail. Loosing ANY type of public river access is completely unacceptable on any river in my mind and that happened to a large extent at Lower Branch Bridge in 1999.

Now, the reason I stated in my last report that "it" (Meaning the meeting and our input.) "May" make a difference is very simple. The last river plan revision was done in 1990 (Two years past the due date of the supposed every five year revisions.) and it clearly called for an improved landing and launch site at the Lower Branch Bridge location. Instead, what we got was a guard rail and rocks making it dangerous at best to even carry a light watercraft in and nearly impossible to launch a drift boat at without destroying it and harming yourself. This alone makes me a bit of a skeptic about these river plan revisions, doesn't it you? I mean, it doesn't really matter what they put in a river plan if they have no intention of following thru, does it? I'd say there's a very good chance that these meetings are just a way of jacking us off while they go and do whatever it is they want to do anyway, but then again, I'm just judging from past performance.

Anyway... Here we are again, it's 2003 going on 2004 and we're only 7 or 8 years overdue on the next every five year revision and I'm thinking, I'm hoping and I'm praying (and I'm not all that religious) that with more public awareness and input that maybe, just maybe, we can make that difference in this planning and then see that the plan is actually followed. Let's start that ball rolling by getting back what should have never been taken and was planned on being improved on in the first place.

I feel I should tell you that I'm just about positive another organization I belong to, am a board member of and an officer of, the M.R.G.A (Michigan River Guides Association) is well on it's way to having it re-opened regardless of what happens in this revision thru several law suits. Thanks to Ray Schmidt and his contacts that care so much, we've had a law firm working on it pro bono for some time now and at a meeting I attended in Wellston on Tuesday night we were given an update that said we are finally ready to start depositions. Our lawyers feel we have enough already to go forward with three different suits and the depositions will only firm that all up. The decision was unanimously made at the meeting to by all means have the lawyers move forward, but it was also agreed that it "appears" at least two of the parties involved realize the mistakes in their decisions and this river plan revision may be a way out for all before it gets ugly, jobs are lost, etc...

Here's the short of it (Yea, like anything I do is short...) on this particular issue of the day... We don't want an improved launch at Lower Branch Bridge unless it's the only option. There are people that live right there on top of it and I wouldn't want a launch in my front yard either, trust me. I know all sides of these issues having lived five years on top of an access myself that had great fishing in the front yard, I sympathize. There are several different options below that location that are an even better choices and don't involve disturbing people in their homes when launching/retrieving a boat or just hanging out with friends discussing the day on the water. The FACT is that the closure has had very diverse effects on the rest of the river and it's user load, so I'm asking you a big favor today. (Whatever day you read this!) CLICK THIS LINK and not only ask, but demand that a large portion of this river be opened up again for people that don't have ten or twelve hours or more to float and fish effectively. The overcrowding of watercraft in other portions of the river can be lessened to a great extent with this alone, I'm on the water enough to know this as fact and so are my counterparts along with many others I know, trust me, it's true! 

*Fishing report of sorts starts here...*

O.K. enough of that, (Just click that link and speak your mind, and if you don't have one about this, speak mine!) back to Tuesday the 2nd of December. I've just written a report I feel strongly about, but I'm also feeling pretty bad about coming down so hard on an organization I've held dear to my heart for a long long time. I suddenly realize that the M.R.G.A meeting is tonight and make a few calls to see if anyone in my area wants to carpool to it. Two guys want to and it turns out that one of them just had a great day on the river with clients! (Something like eleven or twelve fish.) He's not a bull s hitter and I'm p issed that I spent my day in the shop instead of the river. (The shop is kind of boring right now, a few anglers and hunters here and there, but mostly, sitting there bored wondering why we're even still open.) They don't smoke, but being the dumb ass I am, I still do so I drive so that I can. It's a great meeting (See a very small portion above.) with a law enforcement division D.N.R officer as a guest and all I can think about is this river plan revision, lower branch bridge and the fact that I NEED A FIX!

I've been hunting too much and the fish in "my" river are calling to me hard! At first I ask John if he wants to go and he does, but his wife has other plans, it's X-mas shopping day. After that I give it a little more thought before inviting anyone else and decide that there's nothing quite like hanging out with man's true best friend (In my case, Taz.) and going it alone. 

I wake up early the next day after having been pulled over from the cops on the way home the night before, thanking god, myself or what ever higher power that might be responsible for the fact that I didn't have any of "those tasty ale treats" during or after the meeting when I wanted to, and was let go with a "Watch your speed next time." I almost had one, or two, or three... with the guys after the meeting and I believe that about two beers in an hour will get you the .08 they're looking for these days. Anyway, It's 12 degrees outside with wind making it even a bit cooler. The first HUGE drop we've had in a while and I'm sure the fish won't like it, but, since I've made up my mind, I gear up and Taz and I go for it anyway.

I ran the entire fly water and did not, for the most part, practice what I preached in my last report. I probably should have spent more time at fewer holes knowing full well that there are fish in them, but I didn't because having the entire system to yourself makes you want to fish everything. I ran across a total of two anglers the entire time out and one of them was a guide out having fun like myself that had done nothing, the other had hit only one fish this day but had been out with Fred from PM lodge on the Muskegon a couple of days prior and slayed 'em.

I, on the other hand, had one of the best days of my year! I had never seen so few anglers and I hit a good fish when the water warmed in the afternoon, a nice bright hen of about five or six pounds. Unfortunately, I had no way at the time of preserving her beauty for prosperity (Camera in the boat, and Taz hasn't learned to take pictures yet.) but I can tell you I worked hard for her and she took a small natural hex. Not long after that one I caught a nice little bow on that pink egg.

*A fine and colorful specimen of a bow!*









That was it for my fish catching day, but as I said, it was one of my best on the river. I spent most of today in the shop writing this between chores, but I've been home for a while now and I'm definitely ready for one of those tasty ale treats!

I'm meeting with a rep from Cortland in the morning, but after that I'm going out with Taz again to the river and clear my head, I have a guide trip on Saturday, but I "plan" to write again early next week. Till then, do me that favor I asked and tight lines!
_Steve_


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 21, 2001)

Go to this page to click the e-mail links mentoned above. They work there and on all the other sites. I wish HTML code was enabled on this page, I could post more often and life would be much better...

_Steve_


----------



## gunrod (Jan 16, 2001)

Message sent and thanks for updating us on the progress of the revision. 

I fell in love with this river (I love small water) but hate the crowds. If this eleviates some of the over crowding I'm all for it.


----------



## riverman (Jan 9, 2002)

I have to agree with Steve that if you love the PM, (who doesnt?), your input needs to be heard. The issues are thorny and complexed and I ask before you fire off your emails or form opinions you have a good handle on the problems, the water that is being talk about, and how much more pounding the gem of our state can take.
The closure of Landon was a blow to all. It was not the best launch like Steve said because of the cabins, the runoff down the hill, and its closure also involved other "parties". More than likely the depositions that Steve is talking about, revolves around the guide permits $ that is, was, who knows?, suposed to offer access and improvements to launches. Its the guides living and I can see their points and concerns clearly. Plug the Joe yesterday with a guide friend from the PM and the expertise of these men and the boatmanship (when pulling plugs) leaves me in awe. Hammering fish all day was great too!!!!!, but there is more at stake here and I have to say I am really sitting on the fence right now.
The section of river that is being talked about is a fantastic and diverse area of the river. If a launch was to put in where I think Steve is talking about, the pressure on the middle and lower end of this section would be enormous. One of the last rustic campsites on the river would be lost. If you access the river at Mapleleaf (Taylor Rd) as a walkin, I can assure you that you will not be happy with the results of a launch close to that area. 
In Steves last post he talked about the increase traffic of drift boats on the river by private individuals and the problems. No questions about it, but is adding another on/off ramp to a busy expessway going to relieve the problem or only make it so that many more boats can get on and five years down the road we have traffic jams from 37 to Wahalla?
You know I am thinking we have a special regulations section, we have a no motor section, we have motor section, maybe having one section of river that requires a little work to enjoy by boat isnt all that bad. Perhaps the use of electric motors to reach that good nighttime water in the summer is a solution. 
Like I have said, the issues here are many, so please take your time, understand and think down the road about it and then make your opinion. Like the boat name of one excellent guide on the pm says, "pimping aint easy", satisfying all is not going to be easy either. Riverman


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 21, 2001)

Riverman,

I like the way you expressed yourself here and if I owned a house on the river in your location I may be a little more on the fence myself with this one, but I truly believe that breaking up that section a little would help enormously in spreading out the traffic.

Since the fly water went no kill and the landon road access was for all intents and purposes closed off to drift boat access, the mid river sections are being overrun like no ones business. You should try having a house in that area right now, it ain't pretty. 

As you well know, I still do run the Upper to Walhalla section quite a bit, but my clients suffer because of it and their actual fishing time is severely reduced by the sheer amount of water we have to cover in a day. This story is no different for just the average Joe with a boat than it is for a guide.... To long to really enjoy, period. 

Again, If I had a place like yourself in that area where I could actually split it up all I want by launch from the front yard then I actually probably wouldn't be sitting on the fence, I'd be fighting the launch tooth and nail.

Anyway, as stated, I'm 99.9 % sure that it's going to happen no matter what. It's just that this way is much more civil. 

Hey, we need to get out this winter and slam a few silver sides ourselves. I've never really had a chance to spend any time with you, but think it would be a pretty fun day. Let me know!

Steve


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 21, 2001)

Another part of that river plan revision that I'm sure will go thru is the requirement of float permits year around and the number of permits per section will be regulated... In theory thru their studies they will only allow the proper amount of traffic that each section can handle. 

This addresses their "Limits of acceptable change" that were discussed at the last meting and will be set primarily at the next meeting, I hope to see you there.


----------



## riverman (Jan 9, 2002)

Steve, Maybe I should just open a riverside bar with happy hour starting at 3pm and running to 10pm and capitalize on the lost of quiet time on the river!!!! Riverman


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 21, 2001)

I often thought of doing that myself at the place above Rainbow! It's funny you said that because a friend of mine just down from Rainbow Rapids said the exact same thing this fall when he had fisherpeople 24/7 in the front yard waking up the baby at all hours.  

Yep, rivers have become a popular place to be. Just about all of them, not just this one.

Steve


----------



## plugger (Aug 8, 2001)

I dont own property on the pm but I see the need keep the last section Of the river a little less accessable. Opening another section for half day guide trips will not improve the river for most people. I hope people will think and question before they send messages with out enough information. If anyone has any questions on this subject PM me or I sure riverman would be happy to answer questions. If we give this up we will lose something we can never get back.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 21, 2001)

You're not giving anything up, you are taking back what was already historically there. If you start giving up access in one spot without a fight then they'll start taking away more and more, pretty simple really. 

I still don't think you'd want to run a half day trip down there even with it, not enough time to fish after that float at least as far as I'm concerned, but a full day float, guided or not would be much more enjoyable just like it was for as long as any of the old times around here can remember up until they took away access in 1999.

Go ahead, start giving up a little here and there, then see where it gets you in a few more years...


----------



## plugger (Aug 8, 2001)

Does the fact that a lawyer is working pro-bono for the guides association concern any one else?


----------



## gunrod (Jan 16, 2001)

No, I know Ray pretty well and so does everyone who lives in the area. I'm sure it's someone Ray has befriended who loves to fish as much as anyone else.


----------



## riverman (Jan 9, 2002)

I will disagree with that Steve. You and I both know there is some water in that section that will be discovered by the masses and never be the same again. It all comes down to what are we willing to give up(fishing quality) for convenience. Riverman


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 21, 2001)

The lawyer is working on it pro bono because he is sticking up for himself as well as you, the guides and every person with a right to access on Michigan waters. Allowing them to take away access is the complete opposite direction that any sportsperson should want things to go... 

I guess we should give up our handguns as well... Come on guys, you're just worried that someone else might fish "your water" that you have better access to than most. That access has only been closed for a couple of years now it wouldn't be a "new" thing and anyone that's run it in the past already knows about that water. 

I'm not out to argue with you here, as far as I know I like you guys and your ethics. I'm talking about a simple matter of citizens rights, but, as promised, I'll duck soon and run back home without stirring the pot anymore. 

I think anyone reading this thread can clearly see what's going on here. I'm on my way out to fish soon, but will check on things after my fix and return...

Steve


----------



## plugger (Aug 8, 2001)

Right now that section of the river is special, there is access to that section of the river but its not as easy as most other sections, if the access becomes easy it will be the same. Because I have to do the long row into this section it limits the number of times I fish it. The forrest service and Dnr closed many two tracks up and down the river that once gave people access to the river, I dont think your guides association will try to gey them opened back up.


----------



## riverman (Jan 9, 2002)

Steve, Internet pissing matches make me sick and I am not going to start one with you or anyone else. i am probably more on your side than you think. Anyone that has shared a hole with me or came down pluggen knows that protecting "my area" is not me. You are right in saying "taken away" about the launch, but what has been created by it is "special". It still is fishable just like the flies only section is fishable to the bait and hardware man. Just have to take it up a notch. I could go on with other points, and you could counter with yours. Slimeing your boat with spawn and kicking over beers sounds like a lot more fun to me!!!! See you on the river. Riverman


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 21, 2001)

Plugger,

You're wrong, part of our resolution is to fight to keep any and all access open along rivers for anyone. Unfortunately the roads I believe you speak of were taken out In the Huron Manistee National Forest Plan, let's work on that when it's revision takes place. Also unfortunate is that they were not considered "river access" points, just two tracks in the forest... 

Riverman,

I keep forgetting to get any fresh from the river spawn, but if you'll supply the slime for the boat I'll provide the beers for us to knock over!  

_Steve_


----------



## plugger (Aug 8, 2001)

It sure would be nice to have some of the two tracks back for steelhead for local guys, during the week when I fish after work its impossible to walk very far and fish before dark. I am sure salmon season could be a mess. A big problem I see in opening up the access will be during the hex hatch. The pressure this section receives is already extreme, to make it easier will leave the people who arent on their hole by noon out of luck. I know that the middle receives too much pressure, I rowed from sulak to upper with my wife one saturday this fall and actually found every hole taken. Opening up more access may well just bring more people in total and not redistribute them. I would love to have easier access to this section but at what price? I know its a long row but sometimes a little extra effort pays off. Steve I know you fish down below barothys allmost every night during the hex, with less than an 1.5 hour canoe ride or cataraft float how crowded will it be? I would be tickled to be proven wrong, easy access and no crowds, but I am less than optomistic.


----------



## unregistered55 (Mar 12, 2000)

Ok...1st of all I have mixed views on the new launch. I have never even heard of the one that was closed, Landon's was it? I do agree that if a launch is closed by the state or Federal Government you best put in another one to replace it. Cause you are right Steve, if the take and we don't fight they will take take take...BUT..tell me more about Landon's Launch..was this for "Guides Only"??????
Next you say the PM will be soon "Permits Only" Year round??? How nice for the guides!!!! I personally think the permit system is a crock of crap. All the canoe liveries buy them out in the summer not to mention there is no where to get a float permit at 5am in the morning so you can be on the river real early.

What this sounds like to me, and I could be wrong, it a bunch of local guides going to some meetings that us "Private" Driftboat owners don't even hear about and making their own rules to keep us "private" driftboat owners off THEIR River. How about inviting us to these meetings before you try to swindle us into e-mailing someone to help you guys out. Better yet, how do I get one of the orange guide numbers plate and join your elite group so us PRIVATE Driftboat owners have a say in it too?????


----------



## gunrod (Jan 16, 2001)

> How nice for the guides!!!! I personally think the permit system is a crock of crap. All the canoe liveries buy them out in the summer not to mention there is now where to get a float permit at 5am in the morning so you can be on the river real early.


Actually Don you answered part of your own question here. The guides aren't the problem with the permits, the canoe liveries are. They buy up all the permits hoping they will use them all but they go to waste if the canoe'rs don't show. I'm with you on purchasing them though, try buying one on a weekend. They only sell them at the Nat'l Forest office Mon - Fri. 

The idea is right with the permits (limit the number of canoes and boats to a manageable number) but it doesn't work right with the weekend closures and the canoe liveries hogging them.




> Better yet, how do I get one of the orange guide numbers plate and join you elite group so us PRIVATE Driftboat owners have a say in it too?????


Pay $10k and you too can have one. That's what they used to cost (and I think per boat you own) to launch as a guide from a Nat'l Forest run launch. They could be more or less now.


----------



## unregistered55 (Mar 12, 2000)

Yes really...and since I have only been floating the PM for 3 years in my dryfly boat and 6 months in my Hyde am I adding nonsense too?


----------



## plugger (Aug 8, 2001)

I wonder how much more experience I would need before I am qualified to coment . TSS cadis how many decades have you been boating the pm?


----------



## Shoeman (Aug 26, 2000)

The new launch comes at the price of making that stretch "Flies Only"? 
 

LOL @ Plugger. Sit down Mike. You're to old for an opinion.


----------



## plugger (Aug 8, 2001)

Going from bad to worse. Ralph I hope you dont know something!


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 21, 2001)

Hey guys,

I'll doubt I'll get that report out tonight, more likely it'll be tomorrow sometime or the next day, suffice it to say we saw a ton of fish today and the bite was not on...

First off, let me say this. (And you'll likely see much of this again in more detail, in that next "report".) Pushing to have the Lower Branch Bridge launch put "back" in, or, done as planned in the first place, is not in any way some big guide (Or any other click.) conspiracy. It really is as simple as not wanting a precedent set in letting THE PUBLIC loose access on public rivers. Really, it is, that simple. It's happened in other places and when not opposed, it grows to all types of access lost. This pushed along by one private interest or another, in many cases landowners near said accesses...

Second, if you're opposed to that access or any other you'd like to see taken away for that matter, then feel free to use the e-mail link on my page at fishbaldwin to say so. (Can't get all the Carbon Copies to work here.) I put that link there so that the public can be heard, period. I didn't say that my opinions "had" to be what they heard. (As much as logic and I would like to see it that way.) If you want to write and say that Scottville, Custer, Indian Bridge, Walhalla, Maple Leaf, Upper Branch, Sulak, Rainbow Rapids, Bowman's, Gleason's, etc, etc... Should be shut down as well and taken away then by all means, do so! (Although several of those are State access and not an issue at the moment.) Just be heard, that's all I ask.

Third, The meeting I attended was not just a guide invite, (We were actually a small minority there and I was disappointed by the guide turn out.) it was anyone and everyone that has ever gotten themselves on the Huron Manistee National Forest Service's mailing list and (I'm not positive on this so I'll have to check.) I believe it was made public notice in papers around the area and the U.S.F.S. web site. If you would like to be included in mailings that announce meetings and such associated with issues involving the Huron Manistee National Forest (And I suggest you do!) then call the U.S.F.S. here in Baldwin at 1-231-745-4631, give them your info and ask to be included in future mailings. 

Fourth, Canoe Liveries do not take up any float permits from the public. They were issued X amount a long time ago and that's what they have to work with period. There are X amount of public permits available and when they're gone for the day in an area or the entire system, they're gone. These permits, (Canoe livery, guide and pubic.) the amount issued, how issued and when needed are at stake right now by the way, just another reason to be pro-active and heard.

Fifth, Guide permits were issued for free many years ago after public notice was posted for quite some time at every launch and several papers that they would be needed in the future. All you had to do was show prior use as a guide to get one and there was ample time for anyone interested in guiding at the time to do that. (The pay part to the U.S.F.S. comes later in every time you use it.) 

Again, I'd have to check on exact numbers, but when they (Guide permits.) were first issued I think something like sixty or seventy some odd permits were put out there for the Pere Marquette River alone. This number was unacceptable to the powers that be, so for some time it was a use it or loose it proposition. After a few people retired and a bunch were revoked for lack of use, improper reporting, etc. it went to a permit transfer system where in a person could "buy" another person's business and "possibly" have that permit transferred to them. 

According to the U.S.F.S. the commercial permit it's self is worth nothing, nada, zero, but the FACT is that most contracts in buying a guide/outfitter or livery business now involve a clause that states that if the U.S.F.S. does not transfer the permit(s) (And that IS up to their discretion.) the whole deal is off. Unfortunately for me, at the time that they were issued I was managing another sport shop for a living and I was only guiding occasionally. I did not apply for one in time (By the deadline stated.) thinking that I could get one later if I wanted, and I was wrong. The long and short of that, is that I wound up paying more than I want to admit for one later when the transfers were allowed.

I bought a "guide business" but all I really got for my outrageous sum of money was some plastic with numbers on it for my boat and truck making me legal, a whole bunch of paperwork and a big bill from the man at the end of a year. Yes, I get very upset when I see people renegade guiding without one, but only because of what it cost me to get one and what it cost me every time I use it to stay legal. If it were up to me, and it's obviously not, anyone could go out there and try to make a go of it. Guides have a way of thinning themselves out where no permits are required. If you're any good you stay around and if you're not, you don't.

Sixth, I'm sitting here going brain dead and I'm not sure if I've covered everything, but I also feel like I'm sitting here defending myself for trying to defend you, and I think I'm about thru for now. Plugger mentioned something about the public voice being heard as well as guides, landowners and canoe liveries. Weather you want to believe it or not that was my whole point behind forming the organization I spoke of and bringing these things out in the open to begin with!!! If it weren't I certainly wouldn't have put it in my report, I would have just contacted the people I secretly wanted to lobby with! 

Tight lines, have a good winter season and see ya on the water.

Steve


----------



## unregistered55 (Mar 12, 2000)

Ok Steve, well said and I hope you are not brain dead from typing that  I believe I was the one who mentioned the public voice being heard and I wasn't sure if you were just trying to get the general public that was misinformed and your clients to back your issues as a guide or if you really wanted to start a group of people who care about what happens on this river and other rivers in the state. I now know after reading your above post that you just care about what is good for the rivers and want everyone to get involved, guides and the general public. I believe the e-mail link above was your e-mail to send a note to if you were interested in joining your not for profit group to help the river and be heard and I sent an e-mail to you and I am willing to help in whatever way I can reguarding that group.

Now the other e-mail link voiceing the replacment of the launch at lower branch bridge. Personally, I know that stretch can use another launch half way through it. What I need to know is I believe you said that lower branch bridge would not be a good choice for this replacement launch,BUT I also kinda think along the lines of Knockoff:


> I have floated several other stretches on rivers that have limited access and consider them to be "special" places, this is one of those places. I feel the extra effort involved adds emensely in my enjoyment of the experience.
> 
> I believe that too many of our "wild" places are being exploited and neglected. As it stands there is access to these places for those willing to make the effort, I'm happy to leave it at that.


Could you please let us know you feelings on this and also the other options for placement of that replacement launch so we can better understand the issues and make a logical decision based on both your knowledge and ours? Thanks.

Also you mentioned issues with the water craft permits and a few of us stated above our issues with them. I would like to hear your issues with them and your opinion in the solution. To save you some searching our issues with the permits were:

1. There is no where to get a float permit at 5am in the morning so you can be on the river real early.

2....try buying one on a weekend. They only sell them at the Nat'l Forest office Mon - Fri. 

3. Those float permits need to be easier to get. 

4. My wife and I often like to fish weekday evenings ( when we seldom see anyone else) but have to know ahead of time and make a 60 mile round trip to get a permit. If guides decide they want to fun fish at 6:00 pm they just go on their guide permit. 

SUGESTIONS ON THE NEW PERMIT SYSTEM:

1. I suggest anyone that cares to try to fish amonst the craziness of the canoes be issue a permit. PERIOD. We either go out at the crack of dawn to fish before the canoes, or start a late afternoon float after all the canoes are launched and on their way. When I am fishing and canoes approach, I wait and let them pass. WE FISHERMEN do not interfere with a canoer or kayacker who are on the river to float non stop alot faster than us and stop occasionally for lunch, rest stop or a picture.

2. During non Canoeing months, and especially Salmon Season, IF there is to be a year around permit system, the permits need to be issued on a Date and "Start Time of Float" basis. If a certain stretch can handle say 20 boats then 20 boats should get to start every hour on the hour, or something like this idea. Also certain times of the year people choose to float at night ie. Salmon season and Hex season but I am safe to assume that us nighttime float fishermen are too few to need the permit sysytem...

3. Even if the forest service would have internet permits. Which can be good or bad: " who is to stop someone from just sitting down at their computer and "Booking" every weekend and then we'd be back to "NO PERMITS RIVER IS FULL" even quicker..."

4. Perhaps a self serve box like state park vehicle stickers would be in order 

5. I would love to be able to get an annual permit for recreational fishing.


----------



## TSS Caddis (Mar 15, 2002)

No doubt everyone can have an opinion, we owe it to ourselves and everyone else to make sure we know what we are talking about before we muddy the water. There are people going on and on about this that did't even know there used to be a lower branch launch. Steve and others know the river from top to bottom and can comment with experience on the river plan as a whole. I'm like Steve, I liked having the lower launch there since it made access to the hex water more accessable then floating upper to wahalla. That is now one long float that is almost impossible to do in a day and get a descent amount of fishing in.


----------



## unregistered55 (Mar 12, 2000)

TSS...you need to keep some of your opininions to yourself...I may have only been fishing the PM for 3 years but in the 3 years I have fished it more than most people do in 10 years...Show me a photo anywhere on that river from M-37 launch down to Scottsville and I can tell you what stretch of river it is and most likey recall a fish or two I caught in that area...Participate in the discussion but keep you personal opinions about people for to yourself or PM's....


----------



## plugger (Aug 8, 2001)

Tss Caddis We may disagree on this forum but everyone has always been respectfull, even to old guys like me who cant type! There are several launch sites on the PM that have gone over the years I know of two in the marsh that we used as late as the seventys.


----------



## TSS Caddis (Mar 15, 2002)

Plugger, I appologize if you think I was referring to you in my post. It was more directed at the "I slept at a Holiday Inn Express" attitude that seems to rear it's head once in a while around here.


----------



## unregistered55 (Mar 12, 2000)

No apolgy to me...hmmm...What is that word I am looking for...Oh yea...Merry Christmas Tss Caddis 



> _Originally posted by TSS Caddis _
> *Plugger, I appologize if you think I was referring to you in my post. It was more directed at the "I slept at a Holiday Inn Express" attitude that seems to rear it's head once in a while around here. *


Do you think cause not all of us own a cabin on the river we aren't as important as you? Or if we don't live close enough to fish the river every day we aren't important either? Sometimes people need to learn to shut their trap...get the hint yet? We don't want you bias comments on here TSS.


----------



## DANN09 (May 3, 2000)

This seems to going down hill guys. So I suggest backing off a little. Or the lock comes out.


----------



## Shoeman (Aug 26, 2000)

Let it go, Don

It sounds like done deal anyway. I just hope it doesn't come at a price. 

Sure we would all love better access to that stretch, but that's what made it so special and less crowded. Once you open the floodgates even the 1/2 day'ers will start using it. Is that what we really want?


----------



## unregistered55 (Mar 12, 2000)

Ok I am gonna repost My reply here to Steve... Please only post if you have a comment about the issues Steve at BBT brought up in the 1st place and keep personal beef out of it, THANKS and lets all respect Steve and his reason for this post, sorry if I got out of line trying to keep the post on track with the one bad apple. Here is my reply to steve above and I think this sums up where the original topic of this post is at, if not feel free to add to the topic:



Ok Steve, well said and I hope you are not brain dead from typing that I believe I was the one who mentioned the public voice being heard and I wasn't sure if you were just trying to get the general public that was misinformed and your clients to back your issues as a guide or if you really wanted to start a group of people who care about what happens on this river and other rivers in the state. I now know after reading your above post that you just care about what is good for the rivers and want everyone to get involved, guides and the general public. I believe the e-mail link above was your e-mail to send a note to if you were interested in joining your not for profit group to help the river and be heard and I sent an e-mail to you and I am willing to help in whatever way I can reguarding that group.

Now the other e-mail link voiceing the replacment of the launch at lower branch bridge. Personally, I know that stretch can use another launch half way through it. What I need to know is I believe you said that lower branch bridge would not be a good choice for this replacement launch,BUT I also kinda think along the lines of Knockoff:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have floated several other stretches on rivers that have limited access and consider them to be "special" places, this is one of those places. I feel the extra effort involved adds emensely in my enjoyment of the experience.

I believe that too many of our "wild" places are being exploited and neglected. As it stands there is access to these places for those willing to make the effort, I'm happy to leave it at that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Could you please let us know you feelings on this and also the other options for placement of that replacement launch so we can better understand the issues and make a logical decision based on both your knowledge and ours? Thanks.

Also you mentioned issues with the water craft permits and a few of us stated above our issues with them. I would like to hear your issues with them and your opinion in the solution. To save you some searching our issues with the permits were:

1. There is no where to get a float permit at 5am in the morning so you can be on the river real early.

2....try buying one on a weekend. They only sell them at the Nat'l Forest office Mon - Fri. 

3. Those float permits need to be easier to get. 

4. My wife and I often like to fish weekday evenings ( when we seldom see anyone else) but have to know ahead of time and make a 60 mile round trip to get a permit. If guides decide they want to fun fish at 6:00 pm they just go on their guide permit. 

SUGESTIONS ON THE NEW PERMIT SYSTEM:

1. I suggest anyone that cares to try to fish amonst the craziness of the canoes be issue a permit. PERIOD. We either go out at the crack of dawn to fish before the canoes, or start a late afternoon float after all the canoes are launched and on their way. When I am fishing and canoes approach, I wait and let them pass. WE FISHERMEN do not interfere with a canoer or kayacker who are on the river to float non stop alot faster than us and stop occasionally for lunch, rest stop or a picture.

2. During non Canoeing months, and especially Salmon Season, IF there is to be a year around permit system, the permits need to be issued on a Date and "Start Time of Float" basis. If a certain stretch can handle say 20 boats then 20 boats should get to start every hour on the hour, or something like this idea. Also certain times of the year people choose to float at night ie. Salmon season and Hex season but I am safe to assume that us nighttime float fishermen are too few to need the permit sysytem...

3. Even if the forest service would have internet permits. Which can be good or bad: " who is to stop someone from just sitting down at their computer and "Booking" every weekend and then we'd be back to "NO PERMITS RIVER IS FULL" even quicker..."

4. Perhaps a self serve box like state park vehicle stickers would be in order 

5. I would love to be able to get an annual permit for recreational fishing.


----------



## riverman (Jan 9, 2002)

Ralf, Talked to the forest service and it is far from being a done deal to them. I misread Steve too. I think the 99.9% sure its going to happen, is the moving foreward with the depositions. Good luck this weekend, I hope you get into them like we did. This rain might just be the ticket. Riverman


----------



## Shoeman (Aug 26, 2000)

Thanks Kirk.

BTW, use the Gates on some fillets. Buns, lettuce, onion and Catalina dressing = Wood


----------



## TSS Caddis (Mar 15, 2002)

> _Originally posted by northern_outdoorsman _
> *Ok...1st of all I have mixed views on the new launch. I have never even heard of the one that was closed, Landon's was it? I do agree that if a launch is closed by the state or Federal Government you best put in another one to replace it. Cause you are right Steve, if the take and we don't fight they will take take take...BUT..tell me more about Landon's Launch..was this for "Guides Only"??????
> Next you say the PM will be soon "Permits Only" Year round??? How nice for the guides!!!! I personally think the permit system is a crock of crap. All the canoe liveries buy them out in the summer not to mention there is no where to get a float permit at 5am in the morning so you can be on the river real early.
> 
> What this sounds like to me, and I could be wrong, it a bunch of local guides going to some meetings that us "Private" Driftboat owners don't even hear about and making their own rules to keep us "private" driftboat owners off THEIR River. How about inviting us to these meetings before you try to swindle us into e-mailing someone to help you guys out. Better yet, how do I get one of the orange guide numbers plate and join your elite group so us PRIVATE Driftboat owners have a say in it too????? *


By all means please keep posting these inaccuracies. I've enjoyed reading Steve's replies debunking your statements on the PM permit system and the "guide" conspiracy to get "private" driftboat owners off THEIR River.


----------



## Steve (Jan 15, 2000)

This could be a useful thread and therefore I will keep it open but if people don't cool off I will shut it down at least for a few days till cooler heads prevail.


----------



## unregistered55 (Mar 12, 2000)

I'm cool with that last post of mine...BTW Steve did you get my e-mail I never heard back from ya....


----------



## mickey (Sep 25, 2000)

I agree. I have enjoyed reading these posts in regards to river rights and learning from everyone.

TSS,
Remember, you had a problem with guides not so long ago on the Big M.



> On a side note, what's up with all the Schmidt guys that last couple years??? About every third boat you see is one of his boys. With about all of them thinking they own the river. I guess I've always expected more from Ray.


 -TSS Caddis

This sparked big debate about how many Schmidt Stickers, etc. were on the river.

Is this another "guide conspiracy to get you off THEIR river"? 

Hopefully, Steve and others will keep "debunking" so we can learn more about the situation instead of having other's point fingers because they are "know-it-all"s or have fished this river "X" number of years. None of us are surely that and it is ok to be wrong


----------

