Tennessee just closed their "bait" collecting loophole (unless you like keeping golden shiners and bluntnose minnows and similar spp] and will essentially be off limits to non-scientific collecting.
Relevant regs are online here: http://pub.jfgriffin...fgriffin/10TNFW
No possession outside of point of capture seems pretty clear-cut to me.
Dramatic new changes for 2010
Started by
Guest_daveneely_*
, Mar 10 2010 05:40 PM
67 replies to this topic
#2
Guest_Drew_*
Guest_Drew_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 05:59 PM
That is pretty clear cut Dave. Following that it states, "3)they shall not be imported into Tennessee or exported from Tennessee by anyone;". Is that to be read that folks in TN can't purchase "Class C Bait Fish" from licensed dealers? Or is there something somewhere else stating otherwise?
#3
Guest_daveneely_*
Guest_daveneely_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 06:11 PM
"3)they shall not be imported into Tennessee or exported from Tennessee by anyone;". Is that to be read that folks in TN can't purchase "Class C Bait Fish" from licensed dealers? Or is there something somewhere else stating otherwise?
That's how I would read it. I haven't yet looked to see how pet stores get around it... perhaps through the "commercial" designation. If this is the case, then there might be a mechanism to import native NA species. I also don't know how local health departments continue to be able to offer Gambusia for mosquito "control", given this.
#4
Guest_farmertodd_*
Guest_farmertodd_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 06:37 PM
Wow, they got it through fast than I expected. From a conversation I had at AFS, I was thinking it would be 2011.
Can still go and look... Just can't take 'em home. No one gets upset if you're snorkeling. And with these regulations, you could still seine and photograph non T&E non game species.
Chaps me a little bit tho that goldfish and rainbow trout fall under "bait". Didn't see that one coming.
Todd
Can still go and look... Just can't take 'em home. No one gets upset if you're snorkeling. And with these regulations, you could still seine and photograph non T&E non game species.
Chaps me a little bit tho that goldfish and rainbow trout fall under "bait". Didn't see that one coming.
Todd
#5
Guest_jase_*
Guest_jase_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 07:03 PM
Anything in particular that prompted these changes?
Annoying that many species like sunfish can be legally collected, transported, or sold, but only if they're intended as bait. How is it better to move a fish to a different watershed and stick it on a hook than to bring it home and put it in an aquarium?
Was there any input by folks interested in captive care of NA natives in this process? In my experience, it seems like captive care is generally not deliberately excluded, but rather is simply never even considered as a possible use of native fish.
Annoying that many species like sunfish can be legally collected, transported, or sold, but only if they're intended as bait. How is it better to move a fish to a different watershed and stick it on a hook than to bring it home and put it in an aquarium?
Was there any input by folks interested in captive care of NA natives in this process? In my experience, it seems like captive care is generally not deliberately excluded, but rather is simply never even considered as a possible use of native fish.
#6
Guest_ashtonmj_*
Guest_ashtonmj_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 07:08 PM
Todd, you can buy rainbows for bait to use for stiped bass in the Cumberland. That's been in the regs for a while as long as you have your reciept to show they were bought and not purchased. As Dave pointed out, along with Casper, and maybe myself, that what was previously legal in TN was essentially a loophole that TWRA was aware of for at least the past few years. I spoke with an official prior to the AFS meeting to try and renew my expired permit and got a no, and essentially the same you can look with a net (with a license) or a snorkel.
#7
Guest_Newt_*
Guest_Newt_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 07:22 PM
Well, shoot. Probably for the best, but personally inconvenient.
#8
Guest_farmertodd_*
Guest_farmertodd_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 08:18 PM
Yeah, Matt, probably the same person. I also talked to him in depth about this issue - ie it was illegal for a nature center to have redline and longear in a tank, but it was legal to let your cows walk the streams, disk a field right over the bank, or apparently, drop a megaton fly ash bomb in everyone's drinking water.
It was his concern as well, but it was coming from the top, where it seems folks like simple answers. I gave him a Joe Fish Guy comes to TN scenario, what does he do, and got your answer as well (enjoy the resource while you're there). I brought up Arkansas and Virginia's enlightened responses to this topic, and he said he tried fighting for that, but it wasn't going to go. And I don't think any one person is going to be able to pull this any different way.
Jase, the concerns are VHS, exotic introductions, misidentification of T&E species, and the basic fact, as Matt points out, that they're just not interested in people taking home their wildlife other than to eat it. Since IMHO they really haven't addressed the first three with the current regulations, it sounds like #4 is the real reason. And that's fine. But I'd personally like to see the first three addressed more adequately.
Todd
It was his concern as well, but it was coming from the top, where it seems folks like simple answers. I gave him a Joe Fish Guy comes to TN scenario, what does he do, and got your answer as well (enjoy the resource while you're there). I brought up Arkansas and Virginia's enlightened responses to this topic, and he said he tried fighting for that, but it wasn't going to go. And I don't think any one person is going to be able to pull this any different way.
Jase, the concerns are VHS, exotic introductions, misidentification of T&E species, and the basic fact, as Matt points out, that they're just not interested in people taking home their wildlife other than to eat it. Since IMHO they really haven't addressed the first three with the current regulations, it sounds like #4 is the real reason. And that's fine. But I'd personally like to see the first three addressed more adequately.
Todd
Edited by farmertodd, 10 March 2010 - 08:19 PM.
#9
Guest_jase_*
Guest_jase_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 09:09 PM
You know, if there actually was a requirement that you eat the fish you keep, that'd make the restrictions a bit more palatable to me. However, the fact that it's legitimate to bring home a large breeding age fish as nothing more than a wall ornament and yet you can't bring home a YOY fish for an aquarium is annoying.Jase, the concerns are VHS, exotic introductions, misidentification of T&E species, and the basic fact, as Matt points out, that they're just not interested in people taking home their wildlife other than to eat it. Since IMHO they really haven't addressed the first three with the current regulations, it sounds like #4 is the real reason. And that's fine. But I'd personally like to see the first three addressed more adequately.
Any state really serious about stopping invasives or diseases would simply ban use of fish for bait, or at the very least allow only bait collected on the same body of water (tough to enforce). Anything less makes it look like you're doing something, but still leaves plenty of opportunity for bad stuff to happen.
#10
Guest_ashtonmj_*
Guest_ashtonmj_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 09:15 PM
I think the misidentification of potential T & E's was actually pretty high on the list. Given the number of endemic and cryptic species subgenera representatives change legal status by 8 digit watersheds. It's an enforcement nightmare, especially given the number of enforcement officials and the size of the state. Just the ratio of TWRA employees to square miles or number of species is pretty low. It's been the case made for mussels throughout the country where it remained legal to collect live non-listed individuals for bait until recently. It's been my personal experience lately with crayfish that the incredibly broad blanket ban tends to come first, followed by somewhat reasonable concessions between stakeholders and resource managers. It will be interesting to see how it progresses in the near future. One point that could be made is the ecotourism benefits. Jim Herrig takes people on snorkel trips on Forest Service property (Hiwassee and Conasauga rivers). There is also a great private camp site and canoe livery on the Little River right at one Larry Greenbergs survey sites and the owner is well aware of the beautiful fish he has and tells his patrons. The other more ludicrous things you mention that are legal to do in streams are really a TDEC issue and not a TWRA issue unfortunately.
Anyways, I'd rather take a dip with the snorkel and mask on given the costs of a non-resident license, even the short term one.
Dave, if you stop by at this topic again could you drop me a PM about a fish illustration. Maryland is getting richer...
Anyways, I'd rather take a dip with the snorkel and mask on given the costs of a non-resident license, even the short term one.
Dave, if you stop by at this topic again could you drop me a PM about a fish illustration. Maryland is getting richer...
#11
Guest_UncleWillie_*
Guest_UncleWillie_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 09:17 PM
This is a shame. Looks like I moved out of the state just in time. This was certainly discussion for the last few years with some colleagues the last few years (mostly UT and TVA staffers, students and professors), many of whom kept native fishes as 'bait' in a very nice looking tank for a very long period of time. It does kind of rub me the wrong way since just last year (or the year before - I can't remember) the regulation manual had a long write-up on capturing, holding and using bait from local waters (rather than the widely used goldens and fatheads). I just have to keep saying that it is in the best interest of the fish...
#12
Guest_Newt_*
Guest_Newt_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 09:22 PM
I had talked to a TWRA administrator some time ago who talked about how the agency was trying to regain the attitude that they were stewarding the state's wildlife for the benefit of the state's citizens, as opposed to the attitude that the wildlife belongs to the gummint and the citizens should be grateful for whatever wildlife privileges they have. This seems to be a step back.
I personally wouldn't mind paying a reasonable fee (not the $500/yr aquaculture permit fee) and/or taking tests/filling out forms/submitting my setup to inspection in order to be allowed to keep native fishes. I also think it's a crying shame that schools, parks, nature centers, etc. cannot set up aquaria with native fishes. Somehow I feel certain Bass Pro Shops will find a way around this hurdle, but many public facilities will not.
I personally wouldn't mind paying a reasonable fee (not the $500/yr aquaculture permit fee) and/or taking tests/filling out forms/submitting my setup to inspection in order to be allowed to keep native fishes. I also think it's a crying shame that schools, parks, nature centers, etc. cannot set up aquaria with native fishes. Somehow I feel certain Bass Pro Shops will find a way around this hurdle, but many public facilities will not.
#13
Guest_Newt_*
Guest_Newt_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 09:38 PM
I'm not sold on the bait species restrictions. How many anglers or officers will be able to identify endangered crayfishes or non-sanctioned salamanders on sight? Practically none is my guess. Besides, allowing their use encourages destructive capture efforts in fragile headwater springs and streams. Do you suppose many anglers chasing crawdads or spring lizards will put the rocks and logs back like they found them, or refrain from taking obviously gravid females? I doubt it.
So, a mixed bag from my point of view. Not tough enough on some things, too restrictive on others. They also do not address the take and pointless destruction of non-game species. A walk along any Tennessee reservoir will show you what many anglers do with any "trash fish" they catch, especially gar, bowfin, drum, suckers, and carp. Slinging sunfish on the bank of bass ponds is also a common practice. I'd like to see a rule about that. If you're gonna kill it, use it!
So, a mixed bag from my point of view. Not tough enough on some things, too restrictive on others. They also do not address the take and pointless destruction of non-game species. A walk along any Tennessee reservoir will show you what many anglers do with any "trash fish" they catch, especially gar, bowfin, drum, suckers, and carp. Slinging sunfish on the bank of bass ponds is also a common practice. I'd like to see a rule about that. If you're gonna kill it, use it!
#14
Michael Wolfe
-
- Board of Directors
-
- North Georgia, Oconee River Drainage
Posted 10 March 2010 - 09:40 PM
Well looks like NANFA has lost out on a great opportunity to advance the captive husbandry of North America's native fishes for the educational, scientific, and conservation benefits it affords.
And we can no longer encourage and defend the legal and environmentally responsible collection of native fishes for private aquaria as a valid use of a natural resource in this particular state.
We will have to simply become obedient citizens of law that took no notice of us and cares not about what we believe in (as stated above in bold). Many of you work for the government in one form or another, and it has taught me not to hate government in general. But I work in big business and I have learned that bad decisions are always made at the top of large organizations becasue it is easier for upper management to understand a simple, bad decision than to think through a more nuanced, reasonable approach. Apparently that it true at a state level as well.
And we can no longer encourage and defend the legal and environmentally responsible collection of native fishes for private aquaria as a valid use of a natural resource in this particular state.
We will have to simply become obedient citizens of law that took no notice of us and cares not about what we believe in (as stated above in bold). Many of you work for the government in one form or another, and it has taught me not to hate government in general. But I work in big business and I have learned that bad decisions are always made at the top of large organizations becasue it is easier for upper management to understand a simple, bad decision than to think through a more nuanced, reasonable approach. Apparently that it true at a state level as well.
Either write something worth reading or do something worth writing. - Benjamin Franklin
#15
Guest_Newt_*
Guest_Newt_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 09:49 PM
Let's not be too harsh. I'm pretty agitated about this decision because it effects me personally, but that doesn't mean it's altogether a bad decision. Matt mentioned some of the legitimate reasons for changing the regulations. And, to be fair, the new rules merely change the regulations on fish collected for bait; it was never actually permitted to take fish home for permanent display.
#16
Guest_ashtonmj_*
Guest_ashtonmj_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 09:53 PM
And as I mentioned, these types of things do and can change.
#17
Guest_schambers_*
Guest_schambers_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 09:54 PM
I think the misidentification of potential T & E's was actually pretty high on the list.
Is this a big problem?
#18
Guest_nativeplanter_*
Guest_nativeplanter_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 09:56 PM
I suppose the next step for those that live in Tennessee is to see what the regulations are for importing fish for the pet trade. Surely they aren't going to put the pet stores out of the fish business. Depending on the wording, it might still be possible to buy fish from a licensed vendor as a pet and have it shipped in.
#19
Guest_farmertodd_*
Guest_farmertodd_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 09:58 PM
I think the misidentification of potential T & E's was actually pretty high on the list. Given the number of endemic and cryptic species subgenera representatives change legal status by 8 digit watersheds. It's an enforcement nightmare, especially given the number of enforcement officials and the size of the state.
I totally understand this and sincerely appreciate the burden they're under here. But the solution to that is not moving Pimephales and rainbow trout around the state either, is it? If this is really a concern, I'd rather see banning live bait all together on select stream segments like they have for Mill Creek, but that probably is too complex to be bothered with. Honestly, I don't have any problem with a guide to "live bait free" zones like NC has for wild trout streams. I think you can quickly come up with a list that matches mine for segments that should be off limits, and that is quantifiable. Maybe this is something for SFC to address.
It's been my personal experience lately with crayfish that the incredibly broad blanket ban tends to come first, followed by somewhat reasonable concessions between stakeholders and resource managers.
I hope this is the case.
It will be interesting to see how it progresses in the near future. One point that could be made is the ecotourism benefits. Jim Herrig takes people on snorkel trips on Forest Service property (Hiwassee and Conasauga rivers).
I hope this is the case as well! He is doing an awesome job, and I hope other agencies are seeing the benefit.
The other more ludicrous things you mention that are legal to do in streams are really a TDEC issue and not a TWRA issue unfortunately.
A good point, but I think TWRA is the only one with enough beef to step up to this plate. So I'd like to see some action there. If I were a resident (and I may be some day), I'd spend some of my time pushing for this.
Todd
Edited by farmertodd, 10 March 2010 - 09:58 PM.
#20
Guest_Newt_*
Guest_Newt_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 March 2010 - 10:00 PM
Susan- There are 93 fish species, subspecies, and populations on Tennessee's T&E list, and a lot of them are hard to distinguish from their more common cousins. So, it's at least potentially a big problem.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
NANFA Youtube Channel 
