11-15-2013, 07:57 PM
[font "Calibri"]
Exactly!!!! Chris Penne, Aquatics Biologist for Willard Bay has been predicting for the last two years that the walleye numbers are dropping with few younger class fish to fill in the ranks. I can personally attest to this because he was kind enough to allow me to spend an 11 hour day with him just last month pulling and setting gill nets at the bay. The numbers just aren’t there like in years past. Why open the opportunity for illegal harvest on a fish population that is already in decline???
The idea that DWR Law Enforcement personnel could keep illegal snagging in check is terribly flawed, as snagging occurs at all hours. This clearly makes the case for 24/7 DWR Law Enforcement coverage if there is any hope of preventing the illegal taking of walleyes through snagging. However, DWR data provided at the 18 September 2013 Northern RAC meeting showed that 248 hours were expended by 20 law enforcement personnel (both uniformed and undercover) over the entire 41-day walleye spawn. Using the 24/7 requirement shows that only 10.33 days of coverage were achieved (248/24) for the 41 day coverage requirement. This is only 25 percent of the entire 24/7 coverage requirement. How much illegal snagging occurred during the “uncovered” time is unknown.
The DWR briefer stated at the Wildlife Board Meeting that only 15 citations were issued, 2 for willful snagging and the rest for having no license. Does anyone really believe that someone caught without a fishing license would be bothered by anti-snagging regulations?
Despite the facts that DWR Law Enforcement CANNOT keep the illegal snagging in check with the personnel resources available and the Wildlife Board’s utter disregard of the northern RAC’s recommendation to close the inlet, leads one to the conclusion that “the end justifies the means”. Unfortunately, it also, in a de facto way, sanctions illegal snagging because of the Board’s foreknowledge of Law Enforcement’s inability to provide the necessary policing coverage. This is morally and ethically reprehensible and it taints Utah’s reputation as a place where the idea of “fair chase” for the taking of fish and game prevail. [/font]
[signature]
Exactly!!!! Chris Penne, Aquatics Biologist for Willard Bay has been predicting for the last two years that the walleye numbers are dropping with few younger class fish to fill in the ranks. I can personally attest to this because he was kind enough to allow me to spend an 11 hour day with him just last month pulling and setting gill nets at the bay. The numbers just aren’t there like in years past. Why open the opportunity for illegal harvest on a fish population that is already in decline???
The idea that DWR Law Enforcement personnel could keep illegal snagging in check is terribly flawed, as snagging occurs at all hours. This clearly makes the case for 24/7 DWR Law Enforcement coverage if there is any hope of preventing the illegal taking of walleyes through snagging. However, DWR data provided at the 18 September 2013 Northern RAC meeting showed that 248 hours were expended by 20 law enforcement personnel (both uniformed and undercover) over the entire 41-day walleye spawn. Using the 24/7 requirement shows that only 10.33 days of coverage were achieved (248/24) for the 41 day coverage requirement. This is only 25 percent of the entire 24/7 coverage requirement. How much illegal snagging occurred during the “uncovered” time is unknown.
The DWR briefer stated at the Wildlife Board Meeting that only 15 citations were issued, 2 for willful snagging and the rest for having no license. Does anyone really believe that someone caught without a fishing license would be bothered by anti-snagging regulations?
Despite the facts that DWR Law Enforcement CANNOT keep the illegal snagging in check with the personnel resources available and the Wildlife Board’s utter disregard of the northern RAC’s recommendation to close the inlet, leads one to the conclusion that “the end justifies the means”. Unfortunately, it also, in a de facto way, sanctions illegal snagging because of the Board’s foreknowledge of Law Enforcement’s inability to provide the necessary policing coverage. This is morally and ethically reprehensible and it taints Utah’s reputation as a place where the idea of “fair chase” for the taking of fish and game prevail. [/font]
[signature]