Colorado Fisherman Forum banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,644 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Don't know if you guys saw it yet, but in todays Rocky Mountain News, Ed has just " served" all of us walleye anglers. He stated that only 4 people showed up @ the meeting in Trinidad, and no one, for the one in Burlington. Hmmmmmm, go figure! He's basicly impling that since nobodys giving feedback about walleyes, everyone is happy. Last meeting is Aug31st @ the Holiday Inn @ NW of I-25, and I-70. We should really pack that place, unless we really are all happy with the walleye fishing here in Colorado.
John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
472 Posts
Ed's just trying stir some more interest in my opinion. Which is good because sometimes you really have to kick folks in the butt to show interest in these things.

If no one shows up, the DOW thinks they are on the right track or no one really cares what they do.

I'll be a the Aug 31st meeting on I-25 and I-70. Not specifically for walley but pretty much everything else.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,399 Posts
Ed's the man!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
270 Posts
I'd agree, but what does the division expect. I sorry to say a bulk of the anglers live in the Metro area. The meetings have been in Lamar, easy after work drive for most of us. Burlington another easy after work drive.

I didn't see an angler survey on their website last night. If they want information there are many different ways to get it. The fact that they make it hard to add input either means they don't want it or their not in tune to the information age. I think the division could learn a wealth of information from the 500+ members of this web site. Why aren't they working with Ken to setup polls? I added the poll from this web site and I think the division should be intrested in this type of information. Why isn't Ed using Ken's site to help him get the pulse of the average colorado fisherman. I hope I can make the meeting, but it's difficult with family and other obligations to make it.

Just a rant and rave



What is your favorite species to fish for in Colorado?
Rainbow Trout 8 (6.1%)
Lake Trout (Mackinaw) 6 (4.6%)
Walleye 22 (16.8%)
Wiper 15 (11.5%)
Tiger Muskie 5 (3.8%)
Largemouth Bass 17 (13%)
Smallmouth Bass 3 (2.3%)
Yellow Perch 2 (1.5%)
Crappie 3 (2.3%)
Northern Pike 9 (6.9%)
Brown Trout 12 (9.2%)
Kokanee Salmon 3 (2.3%)
Brook Trout 3 (2.3%)
Cutthroat Trout 2 (1.5%)
Bluegill 0 (0%)
White Bass 0 (0%)
Channel Catfish 6 (4.6%)
Carp 2 (1.5%)
No favorite 13 (9.9%)

Total Votes: 131
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,885 Posts
I'm the guy who always says these meetings are not much more than a dog and pony show anyway but I am surprised at the low turnout. But I gotta wonder, why are they even having a meeting in Lamar or Burlington. The one in Denver, I'm sure alot of guys will show up but I'm betting the decisions have already been made and these meetings are just so they can say they sought imput from the public.

The polls are a good idea-they could have a series of questions that you answer when you get your liscense-that way the DOW would know what every liscense holder thinks about whatever. I'm not talking about alot of questions-maybe just 5-8 and change them each year. The problem with internet polls-its easy to vote alot of times. The questions/poll you submit when you get a liscense would be one man (or woman) one vote.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
472 Posts
I often wonder what would be the outcome if a large number of folks at these meetings told the DOW they were flat out crazy?

Seriously....what if the DOW proposed something so ridiculous and every angler looked them right in the eye and said "That is total BS!"

Wouldn't Mr. Meeting holder feel the pressure and go back to HQ saying, "Guys, we really need to re-think this."
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
487 Posts
Mattsabasser said:
I often wonder what would be the outcome if a large number of folks at these meetings told the DOW they were flat out crazy?

Seriously....what if the DOW proposed something so ridiculous and every angler looked them right in the eye and said "That is total BS!"

Wouldn't Mr. Meeting holder feel the pressure and go back to HQ saying, "Guys, we really need to re-think this."
The outcome is the same. People in GJ tell them they are flat out nuts and corrupt at the meetings. They get it every time here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
324 Posts
so if that appraoch has been used and didn't work why not try to be respectful and offer an opion thats backed up with either independent studies,research, or a petition i have never been to one so i can not say what would happen it juust seems like if you go into anything with the goverment acting like john wayne they will hear nothing where as if a proposal is made and the proper chain of command is followed you can get answers. if i have an issue with any agency i will start at the bottom buut i will not stop untill i get what i wanted out of the situation or a damn good explanation.
by the way this was not targeted at anyone. juust seems like every time i hear about someone going to meetings or having problems just got irate and ended without any answers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,644 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
The DOW sent me a survey last year, and I spent two hours filling that sucker out. It was like 15 pages! I wonder if anyone even looked @ it. Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with Ed at all, I think he's just tring to lite a fire under our a****, that's all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
280 Posts
Who here would like to change the Walleye limit and what would you change it too? I personally think the walleye situation is in good shape.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
943 Posts
i dont care if they have made their decision i am still going there and voicing my opinion. if i dont then i am a hypocrite.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,644 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
I agree that the walleye fishing here is O.K., but I wouldn't mind seeing the 18in. limit reduced, and a slot limit in place. I don't know what the magical #'s would be, but I think that would be a better way to manage the egg bearing fish. IMO. Also, Reduce the daily bag to 4 fish, only one say over 27inches. Like I said, I really don't know what the magical #'s should be, but I think we could make the walleye fisheries here, even better.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
487 Posts
Oats said:
Who here would like to change the Walleye limit and what would you change it too? I personally think the walleye situation is in good shape.
In most places you need a maximum length limit, unless they are just trying to establish a population. In most waters, it should be 3 or 5 fish, with only one over 18" allowed.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
487 Posts
meandmydog said:
so if that appraoch has been used and didn't work why not try to be respectful and offer an opion thats backed up with either independent studies,research, or a petition i have never been to one so i can not say what would happen it juust seems like if you go into anything with the goverment acting like john wayne they will hear nothing where as if a proposal is made and the proper chain of command is followed you can get answers. if i have an issue with any agency i will start at the bottom buut i will not stop untill i get what i wanted out of the situation or a damn good explanation.
by the way this was not targeted at anyone. juust seems like every time i hear about someone going to meetings or having problems just got irate and ended without any answers.
The majority of the people, including myself, use that approach when we deal directly with the DOW. The plain fact is they just don't listen to the people. Myself and others offer countless facts backed up with biological science and other evidence. Very occasionally we do stop them doing something.
The only real way to stop these things is to get new officials and new people on the comission.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
270 Posts
Who here would like to change the Walleye limit and what would you change it too? I personally think the walleye situation is in good shape.


I'd agree for most of the fishing I do I think the DOW is doing a fine job.

Every lake does need to be managed differently to support the populations. I just think they should do better information gathering to support fine-tuning the management plans for specific bodies of water. I fish mostly Chatfield and catch and release most of my fish unless I want one for supper then I'll usually at least catch a trout. I've let larger walleye because I didn't to eat them that night or the next day.

I like to wiper fish, but will Chatfield support a wiper population I don't know, but how many other anglers would like to see wipers on the south west side of town.

Let's face it most of the lake fishing in Colorado is in reservoirs big aquariums managed by the state. The question is what do want in the aquariums and will they support your wish.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top