Fishing Wyoming by Boat, new decal to buy $30 Non Resident

[bassassin101]

I THINK WE WILL ALL BE PAYING A FEE OR HIGHER LICEAINCES PRICES OR MORE TO LAUNCH OUR BOATS HERE IN UTAH SOON. IF IT HELPS KEEP THOSE MUSSELS OUT I WILL PAY IT AND HAVE THEM WASH MY BOAT EVERY TIME I LEAVE THE WATER TO GET MY MONEY WORTH. I HEARD THAT PINEVIEW RAISED THEIR LAUNCH RATES FROM 10 TO 13 BUCKS THIS YEAR NOT SURE HAVENT BEEN UP YET THIS YEAR MAYBE WEDNESDAY OR THURSDAY I HOPE. BE PREPARED TO PAY MORE FOR FISHING IN THE NEXT YEAR OR TWO.
[signature]

[flygoddess]

Unfortunatley, some $ could be going to the launch and NOT the species.

I never understood how certain sections of Strawberry could charge, when it is BLM land.

But I agree, any $ that goes to the cause, is okay with me.
[signature]

[dubob]

[quote bassassin101]I HEARD THAT PINEVIEW RAISED THEIR LAUNCH RATES FROM 10 TO 13 BUCKS THIS YEAR.[/quote][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4]You heard wrong. The fees are the same as last year.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[signature]

[Troll]

[quote flygoddess]Just don't put a motor on[][/quote]

See, that's what chaps me off about this. If I bring my Kayak, my wifes Kayak and my sons Kayak, it will cost me $90. Not $30, $90. So we can go for a paddle. Pay 3 times because I have small vessels that only support 1 person each. Not many places for viligars to hide in a kayak.

Will water weenies over 10' have to have a seperate sticker from the tow boat?

As to the out of state fee difference, I wonder how long it will be before state parks start this. $10 to get in for residents, $20 for non residents. Camping for residents will be $20 a night and $30 for non residents.
[signature]

[flygoddess]

I hear you. My hubby and I both have 10'6" pontoons and both with motors.

Does everyone realize, there is an excise tax on you rod or pole? That is one place this money comes from instead of stickers here in Utah.
[signature]

[Wyobraz]

Would you care to offer any evidence that money that is collected from the Pittman Robertson Act goes directly towards Invasive Species prevention and/or education in Utah?

The Utah Division of Wildlife themselves said that the funding for Invasive Species would come from the Tax Payers of Utah via the General Fund of the State.

http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/...10507.html

Wyoming IS NOT like Utah, thank god, and our Game and Fish's budget DOES NOT come from our state's General Fund. They are required by STATE LAW to be self sufficient via license sales etc. The state legislature may give one time funding allowances (like they did this year to start the AIS program) but by law they CAN NOT continue this type of funding.

Here is an interesting report from the Wyoming Game and Fish.

[url "http://gf.state.wy.us/downloads/pdf/annualreports/2009/2009AnnualReport_final.pdf"]http://gf.state.wy.us/...nualReport_final.pdf[/url]

For those who don't think we should be paying for AIS management, and since the state legislature is requiring the G&F to manage for AIS, where would you like to see budget cuts to pay for the estimated cost of $1.5 million annually? Where would Non-Residents like to see cuts so their license fees could be kept lower?

Remember one thing, EVERY single penny you pay for fees and licenses in Wyoming goes DIRECTLY to the management of our wildlife. Wyoming is not like Utah where the revenue from license sales goes into the state's general fund to be managed by Utah's legislature.

FYI, Here is a rough summary/estimate of the revenue sources of the Game and Fish.

78% License sales, Conservation Stamp sales, Preference Points, Application fees, Boater Registration, Access Yes, etc.
12% Federal Aid from the Pittman Robertson Act
5% Investment and Interest
2% Funding allocated by the Wyoming Legislature (This money was specifically allocated to the management of Wolves, Grizz, and Sage Grouse.)
1% Non Fed Grants (These expenditures are well documented in the annual reports. Brucellosis is not one of them)
1% Publication Sales
1% Other
[signature]

[Ryno]

It's actually cheaper for kayaks. Here's text copied from the WYGF website......

Costs for the decal under the emergency regulations are $10 for motorized watercraft registered in Wyoming, $30 for motorized watercraft registered in other states, $5 for non-motorized watercraft owned by Wyoming residents and $15 for non-motorized watercraft owned by non-residents. Inflatables 10 feet or less in length are exempt.
[signature]

[Ryno]

Actually hunting and fishing license sales in Utah are considered restricted funds also, the same as WYGF. This means license sales go directly to UDWR for management of the resources. UDWR has more of a contribution from the general fund than WY, about 10%, but the bulk of their budget is from restricted and federal funds.

Here's link to their funding overview:

[url "http://wildlife.utah.gov/dwr/about-us/191-financial-overview.html"]http://wildlife.utah.gov/dwr/about-us/191-financial-overview.html[/url]
[signature]

[Wyobraz]

Thanks Ryan.

But according to Larry Dalton from the Utah Division of Wildlife the Aquatic Invasive Species program is provided funding from the state's General Fund. Is this not true.

"So our legislature, at our urging, made a decision that this is an all-Utah problem that should be funded with general fund monies, which means taxpayer money."

http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/...10507.html
[signature]

[Wyobraz]

Ryan,

One last question for you. Would address the issue of spreading AIS via water fowl etc. I have heard that claim several times on BFT, and I am curious about Utah's take on this.

Wyoming, along with Kansas, Colorado, and Michigan all have stated that AIS can not be spread via waterfowl. They claim that the only possible way would be for them to spread larva and once they leave the water and dry out while flying the larva then dies and will not contaminate another body of water.

What is your opinion?
[signature]

[madmatt192]

Just saw this on the news tonight. Adult quaggas are now found in sand hollow reservoir
[signature]

[Ryno]

That's correct. The UT AIS program is currently funded through general funds appropriated by the State Legislature. They've done this the last two years. It could change in the future, but like Larry stated, so far the state has made it an "all-Utah" problem.

I suspect it's possible for mussels to be moved via natural means (waterbirds), just highly unlikely. The rapid expansion we're seeing across the country is more likely from boats, trailers, water development, etc. When you look at the map of current mussel distribution, there are many uninfected waters surrounded by infected waters. Even when I visit my family in Michigan, there is one lake with mussels and you can drive a 1/2-mile to another lake without. If natural means were even minimally successful, I think you would see more of these regional areas/waters being infected. Mussels have pretty general water quality requirments, so that's not much of an issue either.

That's just my opinion, but I hesitate to say something is biologically impossible. Hope that helps some.
[signature]

[Troll]

Thanks, Ryno. That makes me feel better. At least I get 1/2 off for not having a motor.
It would be nice if Electric motors were exempt too, as they have no cooling system for the things to hide out in.
Still require the decontamination, but let electric motored craft pay the lower price. Only because they are less likely to be spreaders and the cost of the 140 degree pressure wash would be much less than the decon of a 23' powerboat.
[signature]

[dubob]

[quote Wyobraz]One last question for you. Would address the issue of spreading AIS via water fowl etc. I have heard that claim several times on BFT, and I am curious about Utah's take on this.[/quote]
[size 4][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]Wyobraz,[/#800000][/font][/size]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4]Here is an excerpt from the 2010 Utah Aquatic Invasive Species Management Plan which can be found at this [/size][/#800000][/font][url "http://wildlife.utah.gov/mussels/plan.php"][font "Comic Sans MS"][#000000][size 4]link[/size][/#000000][/font][/url][size 4][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]. Please note the bolded text. While this is not the most productive method of transporting mussels, it is possible that waterfowl and shore birds can and most likely do transport them.[/#800000][/font][/size]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[size 4][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]As I said before, total elimination is not going to be possible with current technology. The best we can hope for is control.[/#800000][/font][/size]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4][/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4][/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Times New Roman"]

[font "Times New Roman"]Pathways of Introduction: The rapid invasion of North America and recent expansion of Dreissenids into the west has been exponential due to their ability to disperse at all different stages of life. Dreissenid mussels disperse in many different ways. The first way they move is naturally, being carried passively as planktonic larvae (veligers) in flowing or wind-driven (wave) water currents and by attaching themselves to other organisms such as crayfish or turtles. They may also attach to legs, feet, and feathers of waterfowl and shore birds, but transport on animals is only a low-level vector (Carlton and Johnson 1993). Dreissenid mussels are most typically transported by humans within vehicles or vessels capable of storing and moving water. Recreational boating and the ability to move boats and other equipment long distances in short periods of time is the primary vector and has increased the potential spread of these mussels. All life forms of Dreissenid mussels can be transported in many ways including the following: ballast systems, live wells, bait wells, bilge tanks, ski storage areas, cooling systems, and basically anywhere water can be stored on a boat. Adult Dreissenid mussels are more likely to attach themselves to boats and equipment and can survive several days out of the water. Some adults have been known to survive up to 27 days in the right conditions of cool temperatures and high humidity. Their veligers are more susceptible to dying in hot, dry Appendix A- 38 conditions (McMahon and Ussery 1995). All human forms of introduction can be prevented if the proper precautions and decontamination procedures are followed.[/font]

[/font]
[signature]