The proclamation states an artificial lure “means a device made of rubber, wood, metal, glass, fiber, feathers, hair or plastic with a hook or hooks attached. Artificial lures (including artificial flies) do not include fish egss or other or other chemically treated or processed natural baits or any natural or human-made food, or any lures that have been treated with a natural or artificial fish attractant or feeding stimulant.”
Wow, that sounds like a lot of stuff lumped into one generalized restriction.
Have you seen the comercials on T.V. about the telecom laws? back when the laws were written, current technology didnt apply. Now we need to update our telecom laws?
Well, sounds to me like we need to update the definitions and restrictions pertaining to artificial only.
As I understand it, the artificial only restrictions on fisheries are to reduce the mortality of fish catches. It cant be to protect populations. Harvest limits, size restrictions, and slot limits are supposed to do that.
But todays technology with treated plastics and scent additives like smelly jelly applied to a fly, or a spinner, or a soft plastic dont increase mortality.
Are the scent treated lures being unfairly lumped into the restrictions pile on some utah waters?
Should the definitions be updated to specify the difference between worms, powerbait, and scent treated plastics and lures?
I for one believe our lakes and rivers do not have enough specific regualtions on them. I would like to see more specifics in the managment of specific bodies of water to properly maintain healthy fish populations.
Our lakes and rivers these days are so “multi-specied” that generalized regulations lead to lower quality fisheries. Or worse yet, regulations set out to protect one species of fish, in a body of water, while four other species suffer due to the regualtions should be a concern to all of us as utah anglers.
The question is, is there enough of us out there who feel the same that we could get the definitions and regualtions changed for next year?