New AIS law

[Chode2235]

I was having a chat with a buddy the other day how the overall quality of posts has been steadily decreasing. I hold this thread up as exhibit C.

You guys need a little cheese to go with that W[h]ine?

You should feel incredibly privileged (not entitled) to have access to so many wonderful lakes and rivers to fish and recreate. I certainly don't think it is too much for you to take a few extra steps to preserve and protect them a little better.

[Down Deep]

I've watched this thread all the way though and it is one of the best I've read in awhile. No matter what we do sooner or later we will all be standing on the front of our boats smacking carp with baseball bats.

[HookEmHard84]

This is kind of funny, I’m writing a paper for school right now on how the roadside checks for AIS are a violation of individual rights. It’s interesting to see some others opinions on it.

As far as the new AIS regs, I do agree that a lot of money is being used inefficiently

[Scott K]

This is kind of funny, I’m writing a paper for school right now on how the roadside checks for AIS are a violation of individual rights. It’s interesting to see some others opinions on it.

As far as the new AIS regs, I do agree that a lot of money is being used inefficiently

May I ask you what class you are writing the paper for?

[harvey lee]

Scott, it will not cost millions of dollars for stickers, not sure where you got that info.

I sent a request to my state repas to get the contact info for one of the head people at the DNR in regards to the questions above about a chemical that would take care of this issue with ZM. Some wondered if the DNR had bothered to do any research on the chemical end of things.

Well, here is the response from the DNR in regards to chemical treatment.

Tom:

I am assuming that you are looking at the ideas of killing zebra mussels, which have received much attention in the past year or so. There are a number of chemicals that will kill zebra mussels. However, most of these are either not permitted to be used in natural waters, or are more toxic to most other aquatic life than to the zebra mussels. There are additional concerns relating to any attempts at control in a lake. For example, because zebra mussels are not restricted to one particular area of a lake, any attempts to treat must be lakewide. Any chemical must be in high enough dose for a long enough time period to kill the mussels, as they can sense some chemicals and stop filtering for some time. You also need to be able to deliver the chemical to all the bottom types that they may be in, such as on the stems of dense beds of aquatic vegetation, undersides of rocks in piles and inside or on the bottom of woody debris in the lake.

There has been much attention recently on a dead bacteria that can kill zebra mussels. We are following the progress of this research, as this may be a tool that may have use in area treatments. However, right now this chemical is not registered for use in lakes. We are working with Federal researchers to attempt to determine if this product could be effective in lake situations. So far the bacterial control has only been used in facilities, such as in intake and system pipes. To achieve mortality, high doses are needed for extended time periods (up to 6 hours for current treatments). It remains to be seen if the dosage or exposure time could be reduced so that it might be effective in a natural system.

I’m not sure I have addressed all the questions you might have regarding chemical control for zebra mussels. If not, please contact me and I’ll try and answer issues that I have not addressed here. I have copied our Invasive Species Program Supervisor and our Prevention Coordinator who are better able to answer questions you raised about boat washing and/or watercraft decals. They will be able to give you more information on these issues.

Gary Montz

Research Scientist 2, Aquatic Invertebrate Biologist

MNDNR - Division of Ecological and Water Resources

500 Lafayette Road, Box 25

St. Paul, MN 55155-4025

651/259-5121

email: [email protected]

[harvey lee]

Exactly----tackle the problem just like they did the sea lamprey----that's not the method we are currently spending the money on. They are trying to stop the spread---which they can't.

So start working on actual solutions like they did with the sea lamprey problem. Powerwashers, stickers, and fines are not solutions to controlling the mussels. These are to prevent the spread---

People don't want nothing done but me personally, I would trade each powerwasher the DNR has for a scientist sitting in a lab and studying the biology of the mussels. That's my answer for some alternatives to what they are current doing.

No need to trade off the washer as they are at this time and have been working on ZM cure. Nothing yet that can safely be used. As you can see FOO, they are and have been working on solutions along with many others. I cannot believe many just believe the DNr is doing nothing to try and stop this. Too much bad info being posted that is not true. If one wants, they can contact the DNR staff and get all the answers they would like if they are willing to take the time to find out.

Tom:

I am assuming that you are looking at the ideas of killing zebra mussels, which have received much attention in the past year or so. There are a number of chemicals that will kill zebra mussels. However, most of these are either not permitted to be used in natural waters, or are more toxic to most other aquatic life than to the zebra mussels. There are additional concerns relating to any attempts at control in a lake. For example, because zebra mussels are not restricted to one particular area of a lake, any attempts to treat must be lakewide. Any chemical must be in high enough dose for a long enough time period to kill the mussels, as they can sense some chemicals and stop filtering for some time. You also need to be able to deliver the chemical to all the bottom types that they may be in, such as on the stems of dense beds of aquatic vegetation, undersides of rocks in piles and inside or on the bottom of woody debris in the lake.

There has been much attention recently on a dead bacteria that can kill zebra mussels. We are following the progress of this research, as this may be a tool that may have use in area treatments. However, right now this chemical is not registered for use in lakes. We are working with Federal researchers to attempt to determine if this product could be effective in lake situations. So far the bacterial control has only been used in facilities, such as in intake and system pipes. To achieve mortality, high doses are needed for extended time periods (up to 6 hours for current treatments). It remains to be seen if the dosage or exposure time could be reduced so that it might be effective in a natural system.

I’m not sure I have addressed all the questions you might have regarding chemical control for zebra mussels. If not, please contact me and I’ll try and answer issues that I have not addressed here. I have copied our Invasive Species Program Supervisor and our Prevention Coordinator who are better able to answer questions you raised about boat washing and/or watercraft decals. They will be able to give you more information on these issues.

Gary Montz

Research Scientist 2, Aquatic Invertebrate Biologist

MNDNR - Division of Ecological and Water Resources

500 Lafayette Road, Box 25

St. Paul, MN 55155-4025

651/259-5121

email: [email protected]

[Scott K]

Quote:

Scott, it will not cost millions of dollars for stickers, not sure where you got that info.

Just a guess, but I would assume these stickers are about $1 each??? Maybe more maybe less. But lets go with the $1 easy number. They need to be placed on all water crafts correct?? So, that would mean all boats, all canoes, all pontoons, all paddle boats, rafts, etc.. Well if that is the case, I need 5 of them just for my stuff. How many more boats are out there? How many new boats will be sold between now and 2014 and on? How many out of staters come here to fish with their boats, canoes, etc? I would assume 1 million is a low number? How many boats are registered in MN? How many new boats get sold each year? How many out of state people come here with boats each year? Multiply that by however many years before they figure out a sticker isnt going to do anything.

Edit: I just did a quick google search for regitered boats in MN in 2011

Quote:

2. Minnesota — 813,976 registered boats in 2010. Minnesota moved from third to second for boat registrations, increasing 0.3 percent from 2009's 811,775.

This wouldnt include paddle boats, duck hunting boats, out of state people, rafts, etc.. A buck each, adds up quick!

[ANYFISH2]

the water in his bucket isent effecting anything folks. Thats the point. And if u think otherwise its cuz the dnr or the media has done a poor job informing people on how these disease;s were spread. step on the lil man as usually, make em change the water in his bullhead bucket, yet let huge commercial vessals with hundreds of gallons of water in their ballist to change waterways without so much as a hassel.

I completely understand where Dtro is coming from with his bait situation. It is not him and his bullheads or me with my rainbows at Rainy River, where thats the only place we are going that bait, that this law is made for. It for those that are keeping bait to go the next time that might be 5,10,15,ect mile away with the same bait in the same water and toss the bait bucket in, or exchange water at the next lake. It is impossible for them to know who fished where last. That is why all of us must be inconvieneced.

You could always forgo the law and not change the water, move your cooler to the truck and make them prove you didn't change it if you really want to stick it to the man. Risk/reward it guess.

[harvey lee]

Harvey, What kind of boat do you have? Chances are it retains water within strength ribs like many other boats do.

Get off the box and start realizing that you cannot stop the transfer, or even slow it down by doing only what the DNR is asking.

The first time i get pulled over by DNR. I'm unhooking my trailer, and picking it up as high as i can. Even as 3-4 gallons of water drains onto the DNR's feet they will not be able to write me a ticket, because my plug was pulled, my bait was drained, my livewell drained...yet still lots of water in the boat to bring to the next lake...Cant stop it...Move On...How to Kill It? or Maintain it at minimum levels? DON'T KNOW...BUT YOU SHOULD ASK YOUR REPS THAT QUESTION.

I write or e-mail my reps all the time. if you have a question, maybe you could do some research yourself. They will answer your questions if you ask nicely. One can get all the answers they want if they just ask the DNR a few questios or thier reps. Not that hard but it does take some time. Nothing wrong with being well informed.

The DNR is NOT the enemy and they are not out to get us as so many seem to believe.

Want to see a real uproar, get an AIS in the Mn river that hits the catfish and then look out as many of the poeple on here saying it is a waste of time will be screaming bloody7 murder if the catfish are affected.

To answer your question above, I have lifted my boat on the trailer in the garage up 5ft to do some work on the front of the boat and next to no water ran out except for a few drops from the motor. Just did it today after coming home fronm the lake. I also pulled the cover off in the well in the back off the boat and that was as dry as can be. I pulled the 10 screws out that hold the floor board above my fuel tank and cannot find any water there either. if I have water in the bottom of the boat or anywhere else, I cannot find it and it cannot get out if it is somewhere in the boat.

[harvey lee]

Scott, with the number of decals they are having made, I highly doubt that it costs a dollar or even close. Wuth the quanity they would have ordered, I would guess more like 35-60 cents. I am going to e-mail the shop in Iowa that makes our race car decals and see what it would cost for approx 1 million of them made. I am also going to send them the size and wording so I have a reply with the exact amount to make them.

It's stuff like this when poster say it cost this and then others believe it and it is nowhere even close to correct.

Same as the posters who say the DNR should do more research with chemiclas to see what could work there. Gee, if they would have contacted someone at the DNR, they would have gotten the response to see that they have and are doing exaclty that at this time.

Way too many posts with untrue info and guesses and that is a great way to get the wrong info out on a site as big as HSO.

people will say, gee, the state is spending a million or more on decals. For all we know, the state could have had them designed and then bought the machime to make them and then the cost would go down all the more.

[ANYFISH2]

I find it funny that I am arguing for the "other side" in this thread. I feel much the same as Dtro, 4wandering, and others about the unlikelyhood that we can stop or even control the spread effectively. WE probably will just have to see how our lakes adapt to the changes that these invasive may cause.

The plug and water laws are a step, that don't seem all that bad to me, to buy some time until the biologist can find some REAL solution. I can live with that. So as long as they know when it time to give up, accept and adjust manament meathods if need be.

[foo]

Who said research for more chemicals? I didn't see that anywhere this thread. I, as, well as other suggested looking for ways to find out how to control it---like the sea lamprey problem.

They are spending money to control the spread they cannot stop so, people like me see it as a complete waste of resources. The point I was making was if they are going to spend all this money at least try to go after the problem---not this dog and pony show to appease the lake shore owners.

[Scott K]

The cost wasnt the only issue with the stickers. The effectiveness is the biggest issue. But I am curious as to how much they are wasting on stickers. Tom, I would assume there would need to be well over 1 million of them needed, if everyone complied.

And if my beloved catfish were in danger, how many musky and walleye fishermen do you suppose would be willing to alter the way they fish because of catfishermen? Even though the way they fish, wouldnt have anything to do with the problem at hand. Do you suppose they would alter their way of fishing with out complaining?

For instance, if for some reason you needed to remove your batteries in your boat, after every use, but the only reason was for the sake of catfishermen. How many walleye, bass, and musky guys would be in an uproar because it is inconvenient, and doesnt apply to their type of fishing? I would think a lot!

[harvey lee]

Who said research for more chemicals? I didn't see that anywhere this thread. I, as, well as other suggested looking for ways to find out how to control it---like the sea lamprey problem.

They are spending money to control the spread they cannot stop so, people like me see it as a complete waste of resources. The point I was making was if they are going to spend all this money at least try to go after the problem---not this dog and pony show to appease the lake shore owners.

Foo, my bad, I was saying that at this time they are researching possible better cures and I added chemiclas also. I worded it wrong. The DNR is working on a better way to eradicate this issue with AIS. No one it seems at this time has found a cure yet. I am sure that was the same with the sea lamprey.

I believe the DNR realizes that that with this program they cannot totally stop the spread but one can try to slow it until a cure is found and one can hopefully slow it enough. I guess the jury is out on what the results will be as none of us can see into the future through a crystal ball.

[harvey lee]

The cost wasnt the only issue with the stickers. The effectiveness is the biggest issue. But I am curious as to how much they are wasting on stickers. Tom, I would assume there would need to be well over 1 million of them needed, if everyone complied.

And if my beloved catfish were in danger, how many musky and walleye fishermen do you suppose would be willing to alter the way they fish because of catfishermen? Even though the way they fish, wouldnt have anything to do with the problem at hand. Do you suppose they would alter their way of fishing with out complaining?

For instance, if for some reason you needed to remove your batteries in your boat, after every use, but the only reason was for the sake of catfishermen. How many walleye, bass, and musky guys would be in an uproar because it is inconvenient, and doesnt apply to their type of fishing? I would think a lot!

We can guess and assume all day long but that will get us nowhere.

if we were all honest, from what I read and take from the posts, it's not just the decal but every aspect of this program as many posts reflect just that. No one wants to be forced to do it.

I do believe that whjatever the cost is that it really does not matter as it will be too much no matter what I find out. If I were to find out the decal copst is $400,00o, then it will be guaranteed, that a waste of that amount so it really makes no difference and then it will be, we do not need them anyways. I also have an e-mail in to the head of the dept art the DNR who can tell me exactly the reasoning why the DNR felt these decals were needed. At least we will then know why they decided to print them and the reasoning. Right now, all we can do is assume and we all know that it rarely correct.

I know you know I also fish catfish and I to have to abide by all the rules of bait transfer. I have no issue with doing that as it simply takes so little time for me to comply. I could say I only fish the river so I should not have to follow the rules as I am going nowhere else but how would the CO know that?

[DTro]

I find it funny that I am arguing for the "other side" in this thread. I feel much the same as Dtro, 4wandering, and others about the unlikelyhood that we can stop or even control the spread effectively. WE probably will just have to see how our lakes adapt to the changes that these invasive may cause.

The plug and water laws are a step, that don't seem all that bad to me, to buy some time until the biologist can find some REAL solution. I can live with that. So as long as they know when it time to give up, accept and adjust manament meathods if need be.

The plug is a no brainer and is a good practice whether AIS is a concern or not. Some folks do have a real issue getting to their plug though and that is unfortunate.

[harvey lee]

I do not know but for the people that have plugs that come out from the inside of the back of the boat, I had one, why could they not put one in from the back and latch it there?

Just asking.

[Scott K]

Well being there are 800,000+ boats registered in MN, and each and every boat needs one. Then you need to add duck boats, paddle boats, out of staters, and new boats on top of the 800,000+ registered boats. So assuming 1 million I dont think is to far fetched. We all know the govt doesnt shop for the best deals on anything, so it is again safe to assume they arent getting bottom dollar prices. I am sure stickers that would need to adhere to your boat for many years, when being pounded by waves and water all the time, isnt your bottom of the line stickers either. So that is how I justified the $1+ for each sticker.

[foo]

Always have mine on the outside....learned my lesson on the inside plug the hard way.

[harvey lee]

MY sticker is insdie my boat and I see it lasting for as long as the boat.

here is another reply I recieved from a DNR staff from New Ulm regional office in regards to all of this.

Seems birds do not carry this from lake to lake from what the DNR can tell, or at least no great threat. I thought that wildlife could and was a bigger factor but I guess I was wrong there.

Hi Tom,

Thanks for the message. I’ll do my best to address all of your concerns.

Let me start by saying that the issue of Aquatic Invasive Species is one of the top resource priorities in the state. And from the public awareness campaign that is currently going full-bore, you have probably already realized that. But, a widescale chemical treatment for aquatic invasive species in all of Minnesota’s infested waters would certainly prove to be costly and time-consuming, and likely ineffective.

For invasives like curly-leaf pondweed or Eurasian watermilfoil, aquatic herbicides are currently approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and registered for use in Minnesota, but, for many reasons, we are unable to treat all infested waters in attempt to eradicate these invasives. For instance, Minnesota Rule (M.R. 6280.0350 Sup. 4, A) limits the use of herbicides in the littoral areas of lakes (those areas which are 15’ deep or less) to 15% of the area of the lake. Many citizens, along with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) along with the EPA are concerned with water quality issues that would arise from chemicals being placed into waterbodies, which is the reason for the limit. Under special circumstances, that limit may be exceeded (M.R. 6280.0350 Sup. 4, . Each chemical treatment of a lake must be permitted and permits may be issued to local units of government, lake associations, or individual property owners (with lakeshore property). While effective, no aquatic herbicide exists that only targets invasives. So, when issuing permits to treat invasive species, we (DNR) must limit areas, times, and chemical concentrations so that minimal damage is done to native plants, which provide essential functions to the lake and river ecosystems. Even then, no aquatic herbicide is 100% effective at eradicating invasive plants. We are in a mode of management, not removal/eradication, when it comes to aquatic invasive plants. What’s more, with more than 700 lakes infested with curly-leaf pondweed and over 250 waterbodies infested with Eurasian watermilfoil statewide (not counting lakes/waterbodies infested with purple loosestrife, flowering rush or other invasive plants), funding would become an issue even if eradication were possible. Currently, the DNR is working with those same local partners to help manage these aquatic plants within lakes so that they lake may be more easily enjoyed recreationally and so that the chance of spread from an infested waterbody is minimized.

For zebra mussels, a new pesticide is on the market (only released within the last couple months) that claims to be effective at killing both adult and larval (veiligers) mussels. However, this product has not been tested on open-water situations, but rather in confined situations where removal of the species is more easily attained, such as water intake pipes at industrial sites. Trial studies for the use of this product in open-water situations (i.e. lakes, rivers) may begin soon. Still, this product has been tested to have “80 percent efficacy in controlling adult mussels and 90 percent in juveniles” so even it is not 100% effective. That is, the best use of this product is currently for industrial settings where water intakes were being clogged by multiplying zebra mussels.

When Asian carp (e.g. bighead, silver, or grass carp) are concerned, the situation becomes much more difficult. Since these species are spreading into Minnesota via the Mississippi River, an economically important interstate waterway, they are very difficult, if not impossible to keep from entering our states’ waters. Currently, the Minnesota Legislature is considering options that would limit the spread of these invasive species to the Mississippi River and its connecting waters below the Coon Rapids dam. Like all fish, Asian carp can be controlled with Rotenone, an organic chemical that is toxic to fish, but there would be no way to limit the Rotenone intake to only Asian carp – all fish would be subjected to the toxin.

Currently, there are no chemical solutions for control of other aquatic invasives such as rusty crawfish, spiny waterflea, or Viral Hemmorrhagic Septicemia of which I am aware. Please remember that all these invasive species (including the plants) got to be that way for a very good biological reason: they’re very good at growing, adapting, and reproducing within their given niche, and without the natural enemies they faced in their native ranges, we’re fighting an uphill battle.

It is common to think about non-human means of transport when it comes to invasive species. As far as the issue of birds spreading invasives is concerned, there are no studies (to my knowledge) that demonstrate that waterfowl, waterbirds, shorebirds, or any other wildlife species is as great a threat of spreading AIS as are people. And since the dispersal of wildlife is beyond our control anyhow, we must do our best to control those variables which we can.

In 2011, the Minnesota Legislature passed a new law (Minnesota Statute 86B.508) requiring all watercraft to display an aquatic invasive species rules decal. The intent of the decal was to insure that all watercraft operators are aware of laws pertaining to aquatic invasive species. While the decal itself will not prevent the spread of invasive species, it is part of a wide-scale public awareness campaign aimed at controlling the spread of AIS.

We understand that not all new laws are well-liked or accepted, and that the mere presence of these laws themselves will not stop the spread of invasive species. However, we feel that the natural resources of the state, including the water resources, belong to all Minnesotans, and that a level of personal responsibility must be accepted. We are doing all that is within our power to stop the spread, but we need the help of the public. Remember, the time to stop the spread is NOW!, and we must all do our part.

Thanks and have a great open-water season, and please let me know if you have further concerns.

Nick

[harvey lee]

Always have mine on the outside....learned my lesson on the inside plug the hard way.

My last 3 boats have had a plug on the outside with zero issue. Thats as long as I tighten it up.

[LMITOUT]

Since when does the DNR actually make the laws. Last I knew it was our great politicians that do that.

People constantly bashing the DNR when that is not the right people to bash.

This was the DNR's proposal that was passed. THEY brought this wonderful idea to the legislature.

[LMITOUT]

If they need it to be on a sticker, just print it on the license tabs, then every boat will have it. If their goal is to get everyone aware of it, how about this, when you go in to get your new tabs for your boat, have them read a quick 1 page simple rule chart, then have them take a quick 5 question quiz before they can get their tabs.

Question 1: Do you need to pull your plug before leaving the boat landing? Yes or NO

Question 2: Can you use lake water to transfer your bait from lake to lake? Yes or NO

Question 3: Do you need to have a stupid sticker on your boat by 2014? Yes or NO

ETC...

Best idea yet.

Better yet, instead of a quiz/test all that has to be done is add some language to a part of the registration sticker that you would pull off after you pay for the new boat tabs and before applying them to the boat which says something like "By purchasing this watercraft registration you acknowledge all boating and AIS laws", etc. That would eliminate the "play dumb" routine if you get ticketed for whatever boating/AIS law you broke. This is not an uncommon tactic and makes a helluva lot more sense than another sticker nobody will notice after their 3rd time out.

[Alagnak]

HL- I really doubt it matters what your buddy can make stickers for. About as much as it matters what my wife's store can make em for. Whatever it is u can bet money the government is paying double whatever I would at a small biz. Maybe if u quit whizzing away all their time with emails you could find out on Thurs when MN O.D. news comes they'd be able to get something done. ;-)

[MuntzAngling]

The stickers are free at the DMV License Center. I plopped down 4 watercraft registrations and he gave me a sticker for each at no charge. Think of it as a free, one time inconvenience so people who can't police themselves don't ruin it for the rest of us. It sure wore on me until I did it though!