# Why Gear Restrictions ?



## bonefishbill

swampbuck said:


> I agree that they have done some good with their stream restoration projects. I think their activities regarding the gas wells were crossing the line. Regarding the gear and no kill restrictions those were purely for their benifit, with no biological justification, it was out rite discrimination against what they see as less worthy fishermen. I do not think they would have had nearly the success with the regulations if not for their well placed connections.
> 
> I hope to some day see the restrictions removed from the Mason tract and "holy waters".


How/Why would you think that activities regarding the gas line--"were crossing the line" ? The threat to the watershed is obvious.


----------



## Ranger Ray

No reason to have gear restrictions. The reason they exist is political. Every other reason given is nothing more than a detractor. Good to see so many staying focused on that fact.


----------



## doogie mac

swampbuck said:


> In my opinion the Ausable group has tried to monopolize the river and surrounding areas for their exclusive benifit.


 Sorry to enter in here fellas.I just went back and got myself up to speed on this topic. As much as I have to disagree with further gear regs and restrictions,I have to really disagree here with your statement swampbuck. Yup,the majority of these guys are fly anglers.Yup,when you get together with this bunch you better be prepared to talk fly fishing. I'm here to tell you though that this organization is top notch and cares deeply about the future of the AuSable and the Mannistee. You should go on the river cleanup! You would be amazed at the CRAP these people dredge up out of the river! -tires,bikes, real estate signs, household garbage from A to Z,canoes,and more friggin beer cans than you can imagine!
Like I said,I'm not for more restrictions. We all have equal right to fish our state's great trout waters. But I will stand up and defend this bunch of guys and gals any day! 
You obviously have no concept what "watch dog" groups like the Anglers of the AuSable do. I challenge you and anyone else who think these people are monopolizing the rivers and sorrounding areas for their benefit to get involved with even half the passion and enthusiasm that this group has. 
This state could use more organizations like the Anglers of the AuSable!


----------



## Ranger Ray

doogie mac said:


> Sorry to enter in here fellas.I just went back and got myself up to speed on this topic. As much as I have to disagree with further gear regs and restrictions,I have to really disagree here with your statement swampbuck. Yup,the majority of these guys are fly anglers.Yup,when you get together with this bunch you better be prepared to talk fly fishing. I'm here to tell you though that this organization is top notch and cares deeply about the future of the AuSable and the Mannistee. You should go on the river cleanup! You would be amazed at the CRAP these people dredge up out of the river! -tires,bikes, real estate signs, household garbage from A to Z,canoes,and more friggin beer cans than you can imagine!
> Like I said,I'm not for more restrictions. We all have equal right to fish our state's great trout waters. But I will stand up and defend this bunch of guys and gals any day!
> You obviously have no concept what "watch dog" groups like the Anglers of the AuSable do. I challenge you and anyone else who think these people are monopolizing the rivers and sorrounding areas for their benefit to get involved with even half the passion and enthusiasm that this group has.
> This state could use more organizations like the Anglers of the AuSable!


Do they support gear restrictions?


----------



## doogie mac

Ranger Ray said:


> Do they support gear restrictions?


 Beats me. Why do you ask?


----------



## Ranger Ray

doogie mac said:


> Beats me. Why do you ask?


I figured you might know. You seem to know a lot about them, hence the reason me asking the question. 

I ask because I am always looking to support groups that have my fishing interests in mind. However, one supporting gear restrictions would not have those interests in mind, so I would not be so inclined to join them.


----------



## doogie mac

Ranger Ray said:


> I figured you might know. You seem to know a lot about them, hence the reason me asking the question.
> 
> I ask because I am always looking to support groups that have my fishing interests in mind. However, one supporting gear restrictions would not have those interests in mind, so I would not be so inclined to join them.


 Nor should you be expected to join
I dont Turkey hunt,so i dont belong to the wild turkey federation.Not much of a Bass fisher either,so nor does my money go to B.A.S.S.I do fish the AuSable and the Mannistee-I dont agree with gear restrictions,but 9 times outta 10 I'm gonna be using my fly rod because thats how I usually prefer to fish. Personally,I would feel right at home going into a meeting and voicing opinions and discussion about gear restrictions with these guys. 
Im just defending the work they do for the river systems-stream improvements,habitat restoration,cleanups and so on. Like some other guys have said previously in this thread,I dont understand what they have to do with g.r.


----------



## toto

doogie, while I have to have to go along with you, in part. These groups do indeed do a great job of protecting the watersheds from garbage, habitat improvements etc. However, I don't think that allows them to have exclusive rights to the water in question.

Listen, I've been on a few outings from this site alone, that have picked up mounds of junk at places such as the Big Man, etc. Does that mean we should exclusive rights to have this designated bait only? We don't want that, nor would we think its right to do so. What you may fail to understand is even though we aren't members of TU etc, we have the same inner feelings for our waters, as they do. What we haven't done, and I will say its just beginning, is coordinate an effort to have a say, just as loudly as TU and the others. Just as we don't think its right, or fair to be locked out of certain waters, unless of course, we used flies, or lures, we don't think its right that we should lock out fly fisherpeople from areas, unless they use bait. 

In the end, these waters are owned by all, and should never be set aside for the special interest groups, even though they do an amazing job of being caretakers of these waters. We pay our taxes, we buy our licenses, and we pay exactly the same amount of money for these as those that have special interests in mind. Hopefully, my point makes sense.


----------



## doogie mac

toto said:


> doogie, while I have to have to go along with you, in part. These groups do indeed do a great job of protecting the watersheds from garbage, habitat improvements etc. However, I don't think that allows them to have exclusive rights to the water in question.
> 
> Listen, I've been on a few outings from this site alone, that have picked up mounds of junk at places such as the Big Man, etc. Does that mean we should exclusive rights to have this designated bait only? We don't want that, nor would we think its right to do so. What you may fail to understand is even though we aren't members of TU etc, we have the same inner feelings for our waters, as they do. What we haven't done, and I will say its just beginning, is coordinate an effort to have a say, just as loudly as TU and the others. Just as we don't think its right, or fair to be locked out of certain waters, unless of course, we used flies, or lures, we don't think its right that we should lock out fly fisherpeople from areas, unless they use bait.
> 
> In the end, these waters are owned by all, and should never be set aside for the special interest groups, even though they do an amazing job of being caretakers of these waters. We pay our taxes, we buy our licenses, and we pay exactly the same amount of money for these as those that have special interests in mind. Hopefully, my point makes sense.


 You are absolutely correct Toto. I very much agree with the arguments against gear regs.
I guess perhaps I got a little careless at pointing fingers here. I can understand how a guy could think that maybe these groups are in it just for themselves. I look at the good an outfit does first-kind of like the mdot adopt a hwy. These are local folks who contribute to something that matters-something that a lot of us may take for granted as we drive down the hwy. My hats off to all of them! I guess thats all I was trying to say...
As far as gear regs go- Im with you guys 100%!! Thanks for throwin a bucket of water on me too,I get a little hot under the collar sometimes:lol::lol:


----------



## WALLEYE MIKE

How would they like it if sections were "bait only" waters?

All waters should be for all fisherman, not just a select few.


----------



## fisheater

Walleye Mike, that's pretty funny, bait only waters. You know they would really understand how it feels to be on the other side of the fence if bait only was instituted on the Holy Waters:lol::lol::lol:


----------



## swampbuck

doogie mac said:


> Sorry to enter in here fellas.I just went back and got myself up to speed on this topic. As much as I have to disagree with further gear regs and restrictions,I have to really disagree here with your statement swampbuck. Yup,the majority of these guys are fly anglers.Yup,when you get together with this bunch you better be prepared to talk fly fishing. I'm here to tell you though that this organization is top notch and cares deeply about the future of the AuSable and the Mannistee. You should go on the river cleanup! You would be amazed at the CRAP these people dredge up out of the river! -tires,bikes, real estate signs, household garbage from A to Z,canoes,and more friggin beer cans than you can imagine!
> Like I said,I'm not for more restrictions. We all have equal right to fish our state's great trout waters. But I will stand up and defend this bunch of guys and gals any day!
> You obviously have no concept what "watch dog" groups like the Anglers of the AuSable do. I challenge you and anyone else who think these people are monopolizing the rivers and sorrounding areas for their benefit to get involved with even half the passion and enthusiasm that this group has.
> This state could use more organizations like the Anglers of the AuSable!


 If you will go back a few post's I gave them credit for their stream restoration projects.


----------



## doogie mac

swampbuck said:


> If you will go back a few post's I gave them credit for their stream restoration projects.


 roger that. Its all good...


----------



## ausable riverboat

doogie mac and others that stick up for The Anglers of the AuSable. Yes they do have a river cleanup ever year they give money to Huron Pines for river work they fight to keep the river wild. If you think they don't want Flys Only and C&R you don't know what your are talking about if you disagree send me a PM and I will give you my phone number. I will talk to you on the phone or meet you in person.


----------



## fishfearme59

I do like to see groups committed to keeping our rivers and streams pristine. But I tend to dislike the gear and C&R regulations. I rarely trout fish anymore because it is almost as confusing as duck hunting. If you are not local or know the area you are fishing in you can get in a lot of trouble. I used to enjoy fishing the trout streams. Although I was never very good with my fly rod as I would have liked. I use flies with a spinning rod and when the trout didn't like my offering I would turn to meat. I rarely would keep any fish for the table but every once in a while it is nice to have one. I believe that the whole debate over the barbless hooks comes down to money. It would cost these guys money to replace all the flies in their hat with barbless ones. They could file the barbs off but then you remove the rust resistant coating from the hook. If you are going to have catch and release fishing you should also require barbless hooks to help lower the mortality rate of these fish. I feel it is a waste of resources to catch a fish and then let it go mortally injured just to die.


----------



## fishinDon

To be 100% clear, the Anglers of the Ausable is a Fly Fishing group. This is their mission statement: "Mission: preserve, protect and enhance the Au Sable for future generations of *fly fishers*."

Here's a Link to Angler's of the Au Sable's web site:
http://www.ausableanglers.org

They are also affiliated with (a chapter of) FFF (Federation of Fly Fishers). FFF sits on the Coldwater Regulations committee for the MDNR. FFF and Anglers of the Au Sable both spoke in front of the Natural Resource Commission in October and November of last year in favor of more gear restrictions.

Now that is 100% clear, I do not and can not disagree that the Anglers of the Au Sable do a ton of great things for the Au Sable watershed. I applaud them for those efforts, and like TU, I would be a member if not for the fact that they openly campaign for gear restrictions that needlessly keep me and thousands of other anglers off of many of Michigan's best public trout waters.

Don


----------



## bonefishbill

fisheater said:


> Walleye Mike, that's pretty funny, bait only waters. You know they would really understand how it feels to be on the other side of the fence if bait only was instituted on the Holy Waters:lol::lol::lol:


_They could-_-litter the area up with Busch beer cans, bait containers--string mono from tree-to-tree. take a dump in the middle of the fisherman's trail..etc, what a fishing paradise !
BTW-these are all things I have seen on un-restricted waters in Pa and Michigan..


----------



## Ranger Ray

I see kids on the unrestricted waters, something I rarely see on the flies only water.


----------



## ih772

bonefishbill said:


> _They could-_-litter the area up with Busch beer cans, bait containers--string mono from tree-to-tree. take a dump in the middle of the fisherman's trail..etc, what a fishing paradise !
> BTW-these are all things I have seen on un-restricted waters in Pa and Michigan..


The FO waters also have their losers. Try having to explain to a young kid why you walked up on a fly fisherman getting high on the bank.


----------



## doogie mac

Good grief you guys.
Garbage is everywhere,guy sitting on the bank getting high is right around the next bend. Teenagers partying and drinking busch light season is coming up! Dude smoking in a drift boat and flicking his ciggy butt into the current happens everyday. 
Kids dont fly fish? why is that? Maybe its because their father or their grampa was not a flyfisher. About the only time ive seen kids actually fishing for trout is when a local organization stocks a mill pond with trout and has a kids day fish. The fact is ,MI is loosing numbers of outdoors people.Kids arent joining the ranks like they used to.
Dont get caught up in generalizations. Get back on track here.


----------



## fishinDon

james d said:


> Yea...you're right. The Tippy Dam reference was over the top. Still I have absolutely 0 doubt that the fishing and the fishing experience would be degraded if the gear restrictions and release rules went away.
> 
> I gotta say that I wasn't planning on a several post debate when I initially posted. Congrats on starting your organization. I've been a TU member for a long time. I hope your organization works as hard on cleanup/habitat/educational/environmental stewardship projects as it does on removing gear restrictions on these couple hundred miles of streams. Our shared outdoor values probably match pretty closely outside this one issue.
> 
> Are you sure about a "dry fly only section" in the mason tract? I don't think that's right. Enjoy your season.


That is the plan James. 

GLFSA already has plans in the works for our first river clean up (date to be released soon). And we also already have members working in cooperation with local watershed groups and municipalities on habitat and restoration projects... More on that later as well...

I've said this before many times, but it's still true: 
TU is a great organization simply for all the great things they do for our streams and rivers, and I would join it if not for this one issue. Problem is I don't want to fund an org that's ultimately using that money to lobby to keep me (or anyone for that matter) out. 

Don


----------



## swampbuck

I believe the sign at one of the landings said Dry fly only, But I havnt paid much attention lately....I know where my methods are unacceptable. I fish above chase bridge, For now.


----------



## REG

james d said:


> Yea...you're right. The Tippy Dam reference was over the top. Still I have absolutely 0 doubt that the fishing and the fishing experience would be degraded if the gear restrictions and release rules went away.


You've made some interesting observations, and I can't necessarily disagree with the mess. However, it is hard to get away from that when there is intense fishing pressure with hordes of anglers concentrated in a given area. Certainly it is at it's worst when dams are causing a captive audience situation, and really, it doesn't matter if we are talking steelhead, salmon, or walleye, white bass, perch, stockerfest trout, etc. As an example, look at the flies only section after salmon season. While it is debatable whether there is more or less of a mess when comparing FO to, say Maple Leaf, a crowd is going to make a mess.

Since gear regs are virtually always tied in with restricted creel, in my mind, it would be interesting to see what would happen in an area where there was a restricted creel, but no gear restriction. Especially on a river where there is no runs of potadromous fish. I would hazard to say you wouldn't see much garbage there either.

Thank you for the congrats to Don for taking initiative, along with a few others to get the GLFSA up and going. It is nice to have an organization of primarily stream anglers committed to conservation that welcomes fishermen regardless of sporting method.


----------

