Tndeer Logo

Page 2 of 2 <12
Topic Options
#842584 - 07/28/08 08:37 PM Re: Okay. Let's Brainstorm [Re: ]
Crosshairy
10 Point


Registered: 08/22/06
Posts: 2644
Loc: Bartlett, TN

Offline
the canoe registration requirement isn't a bad idea from the general state-wide perspective, because it can generate revenue.

I don't think that revenue would go towards the TWRA, though (At least not directly?) so I guess it's not that critical.

Not to push the Caney issues aside, because I hear your arguments, but I would be more in favor of legislation that generates revenue from the TWRA that does not additionally tax the sportsmen that are already providing the lion's share of funding.

Whether that be canoers, birdwatchers, horseback riders, or whatever - they need a monetary "shot in the arm".

Sorry to half-heartedly hijack your thread...
_________________________
I'm hungry and tired. Don't poke my belly.

Top
#842793 - 07/29/08 12:06 AM Re: Okay. Let's Brainstorm [Re: Crosshairy]
Fordman
12 Point


Registered: 08/06/00
Posts: 5864
Loc: Rockvale,tn

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Crosshairy
the canoe registration requirement isn't a bad idea from the general state-wide perspective, because it can generate revenue.

I don't think that revenue would go towards the TWRA, though (At least not directly?) so I guess it's not that critical.

Not to push the Caney issues aside, because I hear your arguments, but I would be more in favor of legislation that generates revenue from the TWRA that does not additionally tax the sportsmen that are already providing the lion's share of funding.

Whether that be canoers, birdwatchers, horseback riders, or whatever - they need a monetary "shot in the arm".

Sorry to half-heartedly hijack your thread...


Good Pont but I would like to add that currently sportsman foot the bill and we do have a majority of the say in how things are handled by the TWRA. Once you make everyone pay to use a resource you also are obligated to give them equal say in how something is managed. The river is PUBLIC and the public, even though at times is a pain, has as much right to be there as fisherman. Now the public, non angling, would be hard presed to limit fishing on the river because the revenue generated by fisherman is currently substantial. Make the public pay to use the river and the fisherman are now the minority and the smallest revenue maker. Who do you think will sway the comission more the anglers or the non angling public. Never forget that sportsman are the MINORITY in America. Its the non anglers and hunters that will dictate what,where, and how we enjoy the outdoors.
Personally I am all for a river use fee for all outfitters and guides provided its across the table statewide. I think thats a fair requirement. Its America and I am all for someone making a dollar. Does the river seem crowded? Yes compared to last year but even on its worst day its still better than some of your bigger name rivers.

Top
#842797 - 07/29/08 12:51 AM Re: Okay. Let's Brainstorm [Re: B.D.]
madMax
4 Point


Registered: 04/09/08
Posts: 130
Loc: Middle TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Brian Dunigan
1. Register canoes just like motorized craft. This solves the issue of paddlers impacting the resource but not paying a share to maintain it.

2. Anyone who wants to run a commercial canoe/kayak/tube rental operation has to have a permit to do so. The permit entitles the operation to run "x" number of trips on the river per day. There should be a cap on the number of permits available, so that the total number of trips by all commercial operations falls below whatever the maximum sustainable number per day is determined to be. Include fishing guides in this if you want.

3. Commercial operations should have identification clearly displayed somewhere on their watercraft - name and permit number. Warn commercial operators that if there are an excessive and disproportionate number of complaints against any individual operation, it could affect their permit. That way, commercial ops have an incentive to give their customers some rules about being courteous to others on the river, picking up their trash, etc.

bd


I also think these are very good ideas and would make a great start for discussion if they were ever seeking input. The Caney is becoming a unique situation, and I think it would be hard to treat all TN rivers/tailwaters the same.

I also agree with Troy in that the more people they make pay (and give a say) the more people they have to please. You make the rec. canoers and kayakers register to use the resource they are going to have some ideas on how to manage the resource too. However, commercial traffic is almost guaranteed to increase every year from here out so there is def. gonna be a dilemma on the table.

..Bait slinging guides eh? gotta love it

Top
#842804 - 07/29/08 03:52 AM Re: Okay. Let's Brainstorm [Re: B.D.]
rsimms
10 Point


Registered: 09/08/02
Posts: 2675
Loc: Chattanooga, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Brian Dunigan
Richard, I think the distinction on the Caney is simple. The Caney is facing a crowding issue that isn't present (yet?) on the other rivers you discuss. The whole purpose of the permitting is to get a grip on the exploding usage issues so that one group (commercial paddlers) doesn't overwhelm the other groups who want to use the resource.

If crowding becomes an issue on those other rivers in the same way, then yeah, maybe a similar approach should be used. If crowding's not an issue, there's no need to apply it where it's not needed simply because the Caney sets some sort of "precedent."

It's okay, legally and ethically, to "discriminate" between two rivers if the circumstances on the two are different.

We're not breaking entirely new ground here anyway. Overcrowding became an issue on the Ocoee due to the proliferation of commercial rafting businesses, and a similar permitting requirement was started. It has worked well and has prevented the Ocoee from becoming a circus. It's time to start thinking about doing something similar on the Caney, for similar reasons.

bd


But what is the legal definition of "crowded." What is "crowded" to you might just be a "fun group" to someone else.

And how do you prove in court that the crowd is impacting the resource. I'm not saying it can't be done... just saying it can't be done subjectively on a whim.

I can't say this with authority, but I believe Ocoee provided regulatory opportunities 1) because it lies within the boundaries of a National Forest, and 2) the outfitters voluntarily set up a cooperative agreement to give themselves bargaining power with TVA to pay for, and insure, they were provided the water to ply their trade.

Caney doesn't meet #1 criteria, and key word in #2 is "voluntarily." Nobody forced them to cooperate.

There has been at least a couple of mentions of Wildlife Commission. I am certain that the TWRC has absolutely no authority to regulate public river access or requirements, outside of the the canoe registration question. And I believe that would take action by the full legislature, not just wildlife commission.
_________________________
Read my book, "An Outdoor State of Mind"
http://stores.lulu.com/rsimms
"The outdoors is not just a place, it's a state of mind."
http://www.ScenicCityFishing.com

Top
#844239 - 07/29/08 08:41 PM Re: Okay. Let's Brainstorm [Re: ]
Crosshairy
10 Point


Registered: 08/22/06
Posts: 2644
Loc: Bartlett, TN

Offline
Bumping license fees follows the law of diminishing returns, as far as I'm concerned.

In the past, I'd go ahead and by the sportsman's license to avoid the hassle of buying individual license down the road, and because I was likely to take advantage of enough opportunities to make it a cost-effective choice.

I am less and less likely to do this the more that license fees increase, because my hunting and fishing opportunities have already decreased with the higher gas prices. At some point, I'm just going to buy the single licenses that I absolutely need, which means I'll probably spend less than half the cost of the Sportsman's License.

In that scenario, the TWRA probably lost about $50. Multiply that by 50-100,000 sportsmen in the same boat, and it starts to add up fast.

It usually seems that the best solution is to diversify the sources of funding.
_________________________
I'm hungry and tired. Don't poke my belly.

Top
Page 2 of 2 <12


Moderator:  RUGER, Unicam, CBU93, stretch, Bobby G, Cuttin Caller, Kimber45, Mrs.Unicam, Crappie Luck 
Hop to:
Top Posters
4104855
RUGER
86184
Deer Assassin
64740
BSK
60386
Crappie Luck
51368
spitndrum
Newest Members
piglet84, Bowfire985, TieCampBuckSlayer, ChuckNorris, Breesor1
13085 Registered Users
Who's Online
44 registered (ruger7mag, trm, Tnscooter63, Actionfishing, fritoman, RussellvilleRob, 7 invisible) and 97 anonymous users online.
Forum Stats
13085 Members
42 Forums
88247 Topics
1033873 Posts

Max Online: 788 @ 11/11/13 08:06 PM
Moon Phase
CURRENT MOON
July
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31
Forum Donations
The TnDeer.Com Deer Talk Forum is for Tennessee Deer Hunters by Tennessee Deer Hunters. If you enjoy using our Talk Forum and would like to contribute to help in it's up-keep. Just submit your contribution by clicking on the DONATE button below and paying with PayPal or a major credit card. Any amount is much appreciated. Thanks for your support!

TN Burn Safe

Generated in 0.199 seconds in which 0.001 seconds were spent on a total of 15 queries. Zlib compression enabled.