An AIS movement I can get behind!

[Stick in Mud]

We as sportsman do want to slow the spread and even stop it, and/or control it....But i think you're fooling yourself if you think the steps we are taking today are actually slowing anything down. I keep looking at new RED arrows in the DNR fishing handbook of new waters constantly becoming infested. I'm not offering solutions here, but can clearly see how futile our current effort is against the spread.

Technically, it's impossible to know...since we have no idea how many new lakes would be infested without the new laws. I don't know if rates of DWI are going up or down, but if they were going up, you probably wouldn't say it's futile to outlaw drinking and driving because the law isn't working.

Does anyone have any actual data on this? Is the rate of change of new infestation increasing, if angler hours are taken into account?

I bet someone could do (or probably has already done) some interesting modeling on the spread of AIS. If all other variables are held constant (number of angler hours, number of anglers transporting AIS, etc.) and the number of infested lakes continues to rise, then it doesn't take a math major to realize that it's a battle we're going to lose increasingly quickly.

[Mike Walerak]

Quote:

We as sportsman do want to slow the spread and even stop it, and/or control it....But i think you're fooling yourself if you think the steps we are taking today are actually slowing anything down. I keep looking at new RED arrows in the DNR fishing handbook of new waters constantly becoming infested. I'm not offering solutions here, but can clearly see how futile our current effort is against the spread.

One could also say it is a more of problem than you beleive or want to believe. How can you just sit and do NOTHING while it is happening and on top of that you encourage others with post like this to do NOTHING! I think I would at least try to stop or slow the leak before the whole ship sinks! These invasives on top of already distubed systems distrupt fod webs dramatically. There is science on that. Simply check out any books under the heading 'disturbance ecology'. Better yet check out Aldo Leoplold's "Sand County Alminac". This guy had it figured out and documented in the 40's.

[mallardnwalleye]

Technically, it's impossible to know...since we have no idea how many new lakes would be infested without the new laws. I don't know if rates of DWI are going up or down, but if they were going up, you probably wouldn't say it's futile to outlaw drinking and driving because the law isn't working.

Does anyone have any actual data on this? Is the rate of change of new infestation increasing, if angler hours are taken into account?

I bet someone could do (or probably has already done) some interesting modeling on the spread of AIS. If all other variables are held constant (number of angler hours, number of anglers transporting AIS, etc.) and the number of infested lakes continues to rise, then it doesn't take a math major to realize that it's a battle we're going to lose increasingly quickly.

Poor analogy on comparing DWI and AIS.

One risks lives another is a risk of a slight change in a lakes ecosystem.

Big difference!

One has people limiting or attempting to prevent access to public lakes and roadside checks in the past.

Another won't allow roadside specific checks.

Off hand the the modeling would be thrown out as you have to adjust for too many variables (as is the case with most modeling)such as ability of lakes to support AIS's zeebs need rocks and O2, milfoil needs higher nitrogen and some other things.

5% monitored enforcement compared to 1% monitored enforcement won't make much of a difference if the percentage carrying infestation is small. Total enforcement costs too much in terms of money and restriction of access. What's worse zeebs or 9 to 5 hours on lakes?

Again, what recent AIS has really wreaked havoc?

What steps are in place at Great Lakes and River ports to monitor ballast water?

What strides are taken for docked boats in infested waters as these are really the likely culprits? A boat in the water at a landing and on the water for 6 hours has way less a chance of moving zeebs than say a sailboat that sits moored on infested water and is moved to another.

[TruthWalleyes]

It's fact where and how most invasive reached our waters... It was not d fishermen.

[merkman]

One could also say it is a more of problem than you beleive or want to believe. How can you just sit and do NOTHING while it is happening and on top of that you encourage others with post like this to do NOTHING!

Here's what we should do..... save the money and effort spent "doing something" until we can figure out how the money and effort we have to spend; can actually be used to get something done......

There is a big difference between activity and progress..... eventhough some feel they are one and the same.

I have no problem paying (or giving) for progress.... I do have a problem wasting time, money, and effort for activity without progress.

Just my 2 sense...

-Merk

.

[Stick in Mud]

It's fact where and how most invasive reached our waters... It was not d fishermen.

Not to play dense, but I must've missed that memo. The fact is... ?

[delcecchi]

They came to this country by means of commercial interests. Ballast Water, Aquariums, fish farms, etc.

[TruthWalleyes]

Slap some restrictions to help "SLOW" or "PREVENT" the spread on the commercial transportation industries where the invasives START and then spend some money in the states for the invasives that have already taken root to CONTROL them.. Once they are here they cannot be slowed/stopped. They can however be kept out of the states completely to some degree, but that would require us to tackle problems found within commercial shipping and it's much easier to point fingers at us rapala trollers.

[TruthWalleyes]

One could also say it is a more of problem than you beleive or want to believe. How can you just sit and do NOTHING while it is happening and on top of that you encourage others with post like this to do NOTHING! I think I would at least try to stop or slow the leak before the whole ship sinks! These invasives on top of already distubed systems distrupt fod webs dramatically. There is science on that. Simply check out any books under the heading 'disturbance ecology'. Better yet check out Aldo Leoplold's "Sand County Alminac". This guy had it figured out and documented in the 40's.

I have no disrespect for you Mike. Fact is you've taught me quite a bit about walleyes and side imaging. However, i do follow today's rules (To some common sense extent as others have mentioned). I also realize that even with today's laws the spread will not be slowed down short of me not ever launching my boat. I think we can do a lot to manage the existing species. Putting the rabbit back in the hat is not an option right now.

[Mike Walerak]

I've seen it happen in government before that manytimes a proactive approach is far less expensive than a reactive approach.

I would just like my kids to enjoy that same resources I am able to now. So until then I will follow a couple basic rules.

[mallardnwalleye]

I've seen it happen in government before that manytimes a proactive approach is far less expensive than a reactive approach.

I would just like my kids to enjoy that same resources I am able to now. So until then I will follow a couple basic rules.

Yep,

Why aren't our ports in lockdown and why are our lakes in lockdown after the fact?

I haven't seen a drastic change in the resource where invasives are present. Fish to catch as always.

[mallardnwalleye]

Here are some rational thoughts that I hope were or will be thunk about-

1. Determine the probability of contamination of each user group (fishermen,lake shore owners, sailboat owners,moored boats, Tournament fisherman, etc) for each AIS. A transient casual fishermen with a boat stored outside may have an extremely low probability where as a boat moored at an invasives infected lake may have a vey high rate of infection to another lake.

2. Determine enforcement probability meaning how many infected boats are prevented by x amount of enforcement or policing.

3. Determine the cost in dollars, time wasted by usergroups, and cost of enjoyment by not using the resource (priceless in my opinion). of x amount of enforcement.

4. Determine Cost by Invasive of not having x amount of enforcement.

5.Determine who should be regulated and how.

My guess is things like moored boats and boat lifts would be the big thing with zeebs not fishing boats.

My guess is AIS weeds would be with fishing boats.

If enforcement is the option than here is a off the wall idea- have someone sign something to get a boat license that they agree to be monitored and pay a fine for not adhering to the rules while being monitored at public boat ramps.

Put cameras at landings and send the video of steps done or not along with license plate # to India for a cheap compliance sample check. Issue tickets to those who don't go through the steps at the landings. This would eliminate slow downs, leave accesses open and make potential monitoring a 24/7 process instead of a 20-40 hr/week deal now.

Personally my guess is if you do the numbers on checks, monitoring and enforcement of fishermen it is a pretty cost inefficient deal.

[James_R]

One could also say it is a more of problem than you beleive or want to believe. How can you just sit and do NOTHING while it is happening and on top of that you encourage others with post like this to do NOTHING! I think I would at least try to stop or slow the leak before the whole ship sinks! These invasives on top of already distubed systems distrupt fod webs dramatically. There is science on that. Simply check out any books under the heading 'disturbance ecology'. Better yet check out Aldo Leoplold's "Sand County Alminac". This guy had it figured out and documented in the 40's.

What on earth makes you believe that government has the knowledge and expertise to successfully eradicate AIS? Just because you want the state to "do something" doesn't mean they will act wisely, efficiently or even come close to solving the problem. Man has battled invasive species since the dawn of agriculture thousands of years ago. This just seems like manufactured hysteria designed to grow state budgets. Until the state figures out a way to eradicate (not any of that slow the spread nonsense) gypsy moth and

those invasive dandelions from my backyard I'm just fine being in the "do nothing" camp.

[DTro]

Mike, just because we don't agree with the regs doesn't necessarily mean we are in "roll over and do nothing" mode.

And for some yes the regs are "simple" I do agree, but I challenge anyone to fish like I fish for a summer then report back on that ease of complying.

[20lbSloughShark]

I have not met one person yet that exchanges bait water when they leave. Carrying gallons of water with you is very inconvenient.

[Stick in Mud]

They came to this country by means of commercial interests. Ballast Water, Aquariums, fish farms, etc.

Well sure, but "this country" isn't "Lake Mille Lacs" or "Lake Miltona." Are you saying that commercial interest have been responsible for the spread of AIS into the majority of inland lakes that have been infested?

Is there any data on the number of lakes that have been infested by commercial interests vs. non-commercial interests? I'm also still curious about the evidence that waterfowl carry AIS. Has anyone actually found evidence that birds carry them? And certainly other states have dealt with this problem: Is there any comparative data about the effectiveness of different strategies for "preventing" or "slowing" or "controlling" the spread of AIS? How did it work elsewhere?

I'm also curious about the argument about the futility of AIS laws....Is it because AIS are going to be spread by non-sportsmen (birds, commercial shipping, etc.)? Or that AIS will be spread by well-meaning sportsmen because they're (the AIS, I mean) so small/tenacious/dastardly that they'll live in anchor ropes and drift socks and bait containers, etc. etc.? Or because, like any other law, there's bound to be a fraction of the population that will not follow the law (in the same way that littering laws don't eliminate littering because some people will throw their pop cans out the window regardless of rules and penalties against it)?

Sorry for all these questions (and parentheses), but apart from Silly Town, I haven't heard more opinions for or against (Is there any data from other states that shows the rate of infestation in new lakes has been SLOWED by increasing laws?) an issue with nearly zero actual data presented in support of one side or the other.

Maybe our arguments against foolish laws would be more persuasive if we didn't abide by the "I call it a fact, so it's a fact" or the "It seems reasonable, so it must be true" style of argument. Ditto can be said for the "If we pass these laws, things will get better" argument.

[BRULEDRIFTER]

I'm also curious about the argument about the futility of AIS laws....Is it because AIS are going to be spread by non-sportsmen (birds, commercial shipping, etc.)? Or that AIS will be spread by well-meaning sportsmen because they're (the AIS, I mean) so small/tenacious/dastardly that they'll live in anchor ropes and drift socks and bait containers, etc. etc.? Or because, like any other law, there's bound to be a fraction of the population that will not follow the law (in the same way that littering laws don't eliminate littering because some people will throw their pop cans out the window regardless of rules and penalties against it)?

Yes! D: All of the above

[TruthWalleyes]

Maybe our arguments against foolish laws would be more persuasive if we didn't abide by the "I call it a fact, so it's a fact" or the "It seems reasonable, so it must be true" style of argument. Ditto can be said for the "If we pass these laws, things will get better" argument.

There's 21 pages in the APR2013 thead

[MN-FishGuy]

We talk about blaming the commercial industry for bringing certain AIS such as Zebra Mussels into the state to start with, and it all does start with them for many AIS (i'm talking ballast water in these large barges in the Great Lakes), but once that occurs than it is a multitude of other vectors that further spreads the AIS more regionally, and for zebra mussels it's all boats, not just fisherman, and its water equipment (especially docks and lifts that stay in the water for long periods of time in these infested waters). If you've been on Minnetonka lately and pulled up any milfoil, you can see that it is covered in zebra mussels both large and small, and that appears to be the biggest risk of infestation for a new water body, aquatic plants with zebra mussels attached hitchhiking on a boat or trailer. There have been two instances already this month in Minneapolis, inspectors at Lake Harriet stopped two sailboats that came from Minnetonka, one had zebra mussel shells in the sailboat, while the other had vegetation attached to the trailer which had zebra mussels on them.

To me, the steps of cleaning off our boats and trailers of vegetation, removing the drain plug and draining the water to the best of our ability is really pretty simple and doesn't cause me too much heartache. The bait law to me still stinks, as many people don't stick their bait bucket in the water, how does one verify if the water came from the lake or tap, and so on..... Also, the larger amount of water, the higher the risk of zebra mussel veligers being present, which is why the ballast tanks of wake board boats is a concern, but seriously, one gallon of water in a bait bucket, I would say the odds of a zebra mussel veliger being present is pretty low, but the odds of a veliger actually surviving a re-introduction into a new water body is next to 0. Veligers have a mortality rate of 95% under normal conditions in a water body, they are fragile, and introducing very few in a new water body with lots of dilution, the chance of those veligers gaining foothold is low enough for me not to have the law in place.

I think ultimately, no matter how many laws you have, there are always going to be a small subset of people that are ignorant and don't care about the law. I think most people try to do the right thing and do what they can.

[mallardnwalleye]

We talk about blaming the commercial industry for bringing certain AIS such as Zebra Mussels into the state to start with, and it all does start with them for many AIS (i'm talking ballast water in these large barges in the Great Lakes), but once that occurs than it is a multitude of other vectors that further spreads the AIS more regionally, and for zebra mussels it's all boats, not just fisherman, and its water equipment (especially docks and lifts that stay in the water for long periods of time in these infested waters). If you've been on Minnetonka lately and pulled up any milfoil, you can see that it is covered in zebra mussels both large and small, and that appears to be the biggest risk of infestation for a new water body, aquatic plants with zebra mussels attached hitchhiking on a boat or trailer. There have been two instances already this month in Minneapolis, inspectors at Lake Harriet stopped two sailboats that came from Minnetonka, one had zebra mussel shells in the sailboat, while the other had vegetation attached to the trailer which had zebra mussels on them.

To me, the steps of cleaning off our boats and trailers of vegetation, removing the drain plug and draining the water to the best of our ability is really pretty simple and doesn't cause me too much heartache. The bait law to me still stinks, as many people don't stick their bait bucket in the water, how does one verify if the water came from the lake or tap, and so on..... Also, the larger amount of water, the higher the risk of zebra mussel veligers being present, which is why the ballast tanks of wake board boats is a concern, but seriously, one gallon of water in a bait bucket, I would say the odds of a zebra mussel veliger being present is pretty low, but the odds of a veliger actually surviving a re-introduction into a new water body is next to 0. Veligers have a mortality rate of 95% under normal conditions in a water body, they are fragile, and introducing very few in a new water body with lots of dilution, the chance of those veligers gaining foothold is low enough for me not to have the law in place.

I think ultimately, no matter how many laws you have, there are always going to be a small subset of people that are ignorant and don't care about the law. I think most people try to do the right thing and do what they can.

Most folks care and abide by the AIS law but it are these issues that people have problems with:

1. Gates and Hours at Lakes.

2. Communities shutting down accesses or discussing shutting down accesses

3. Overtreatment of infected lakes

4. Laws that are impossible to follow.

5. Road checks.

6. Barney Fife style -2 inch dried weed gets a fine.

When we see guys up in Duluth or at the mouth of the St.Lawrence River inspecting ships ballast water then we will understand that the burden of inspection is equal.

When we see money going for Carp and/or bullhead eradication from draw downs and other means instead of "scorched earth" weed wipeout milfoil control for special interest sailboaters and inboard water skiers on healthy lakes then we will understand that treatment is equal.

[Stick in Mud]

Here are some rational thoughts that I hope were or will be thunk about-

1. Determine the probability of contamination of each user group (fishermen,lake shore owners, sailboat owners,moored boats, Tournament fisherman, etc) for each AIS. A transient casual fishermen with a boat stored outside may have an extremely low probability where as a boat moored at an invasives infected lake may have a vey high rate of infection to another lake.

2. Determine enforcement probability meaning how many infected boats are prevented by x amount of enforcement or policing.

3. Determine the cost in dollars, time wasted by usergroups, and cost of enjoyment by not using the resource (priceless in my opinion). of x amount of enforcement.

4. Determine Cost by Invasive of not having x amount of enforcement.

5.Determine who should be regulated and how.

I think it would be wonderful if such important decisions (and our opinions about them...not yours, I mean the public in general) were driven by such data. Heck, I'd be happy if people--the public and bureaucrats--actually seemed aware that data is relevant to this debate.

As you correctly pointed out regarding an earlier post of mine, I wonder if it's possible to even get this kind of data. You're right--there's a real cost in the loss of enjoyment these current laws cause. But there'd also be a loss of enjoyment if Asian carp were running (swimming, I mean) wild all throughout the Upper Miss watershed. I don't know if those costs can be quantified.

And as you correctly point out, each AIS would need to be treated differently. The "cost" of spiny water fleas in Mille Lacs is pretty low thus far (I think...no expert here, obviously...maybe they have some serious ecological harm, I dunno). Other AIS might have much higher costs--or lower costs--or even benefits. But you couldn't have different systems of regulation/enforcement for different AIS.

Our boat is stored in Lake Mille Lacs from early May through Thanksgiving. If I were to bring it to another lake, it would obviously be a much, much higher risk of spreading AIS than would a boat stored in a "clean" lake. But if I were to get it off the lake, there's no way to know where it came from--unless you station guys at the landings themselves, which is already done and isn't exactly popular.

[mallardnwalleye]

I think it would be wonderful if such important decisions (and our opinions about them...not yours, I mean the public in general) were driven by such data. Heck, I'd be happy if people--the public and bureaucrats--actually seemed aware that data is relevant to this debate.

As you correctly pointed out regarding an earlier post of mine, I wonder if it's possible to even get this kind of data. You're right--there's a real cost in the loss of enjoyment these current laws cause. But there'd also be a loss of enjoyment if Asian carp were running (swimming, I mean) wild all throughout the Upper Miss watershed. I don't know if those costs can be quantified.

And as you correctly point out, each AIS would need to be treated differently. The "cost" of spiny water fleas in Mille Lacs is pretty low thus far (I think...no expert here, obviously...maybe they have some serious ecological harm, I dunno). Other AIS might have much higher costs--or lower costs--or even benefits. But you couldn't have different systems of regulation/enforcement for different AIS.

Our boat is stored in Lake Mille Lacs from early May through Thanksgiving. If I were to bring it to another lake, it would obviously be a much, much higher risk of spreading AIS than would a boat stored in a "clean" lake. But if I were to get it off the lake, there's no way to know where it came from--unless you station guys at the landings themselves, which is already done and isn't exactly popular.

Paragraph

1 -Agreed

2. You could ask the DNR to estimate it. Lake managers-(scientists?) come up with some pretty spurious models-aka guesses that we all pay a lot of tax money for already. Maybe they could justify the AIS programs.

IMO- I would like quantified the actual damage done by zeebs. I would also want to know if risks of expensive lawsuits from property owners are playing into the decisions on AIS inspections.

Asian Carp are a potential threat to safety while boating at high speeds. AIS boat inspection is meaningless as fish (not vilegers or weeds on boats) have to be transferred physically living. Closing locks or paying for Effective barriers has not been done for Asian Carp only meaningless boat inspections.

3. Yes you could have different enforcement for AIS's. We do now as boats get pulled over on the road -all while Asian Carp keep swimming up the Mississippi River unencumbered by any regulations to shipping or locks.

4. You could use cameras and plate or boat reg # recordings as they do on tollways now. Beats the cost and slowdown of a person.

[JBMasterAngler]

Speaking of asian carp. I always hear about electric barriers to prevent them from swimming upstream...wouldn't that be a negative impact on native fish?