# UPDATE: This could be coming to your state soon



## Keystone

https://www.trailers.mndnr.gov/

I'm all for not spreading Invasive species but this a load of BS. IMO anything like this should be part of the boat registration. Mandating that anyone transporting through the state have it is also BS. Someone driving from WI to ND should not have to pay MN (a private company at that). What about trucking companies?


*UPDATE:*
This law has been repealed. https://www.trailers.mndnr.gov/


----------



## kofkorn

Maine has a similar law already. However, their sticker is only required if you are planning on launching in Maine. They check at the ramps.


----------



## surfman

How are they preventing ducks from spreading invasive weeds?


----------



## Johnny

I wish FLORIDA had done something like this 50 years ago !!!
But, like you said, who is going to monitor the DUCKS ???

now, EVERY lake in Florida has HYDRILLA WEED in it !! 
Legend has it that it started out from some aquariums being dumped in a few lakes, 
then, the _water fowl_ and boaters spread it from lake to lake like a cancer.

_PUBLIC EDUCATION_ is only part of the solution now, not a preventative, not the final fix.
THEN, all monies collected for stickers, decals, inspections, etc should go to that states DNR
or Fish & Wildlife Services. NOT a private company.

bad stuff - really bad.


jus my dos centavos


----------



## lovedr79

virginia has the signs up for everyone to wash their boats etc. off before launching in different waters for the zebra mussels.


----------



## Jim

wow This can't be enforceable?

_I'm just traveling through Minnesota from another state with my boat and trailer. Do I still need a decal?

Yes, Minnesota law states that anyone transporting watercraft or water-related equipment in Minnesota needs to complete training and display the decal on their trailer.
_


----------



## Jim

This is an important topic that needs attention, especially if you travel across the country.

Thanks for bringing it up Keystone.


----------



## curtdawg88

Seems to me like Maine has a better grasp on this than MN. Just trailering a boat through the state requires training. Load of B.S. to me. And what's really odd to me is that all funds go to a private company. Sounds VERY political to me just disguised as something in the "public interest".


----------



## RiverBottomOutdoors

Not that big of a deal. If it will help stop the spread of invasive species, seems like outdoorsmen would lend their support. My home town lake has areas that are choked by hydrilla so thick it looks like you could walk across it. 

A private company is probably much better than giving the funds to the definition of inefficiency: government.


----------



## PATRIOT

Cross Minnesota off the to-visit list.
Decals do not prevent transfer of invasive species.


----------



## PSG-1

South Carolina has signs at the freshwater boat ramps about invasive species, but there is no enforcement of that as of yet.


----------



## Wood_Duck

Looks like no future travels to that state. I did email the dnr to see if ducks and geese will be require to display an AIS decal though.


----------



## nsjames

[url=https://forum.tinboats.net/viewtopic.php?p=365205#p365205 said:


> RiverBottomOutdoors » 02 Sep 2014, 13:16[/url]"]Not that big of a deal. If it will help stop the spread of invasive species, seems like outdoorsmen would lend their support. My home town lake has areas that are choked by hydrilla so thick it looks like you could walk across it.
> 
> A private company is probably much better than giving the funds to the definition of inefficiency: government.



not that big of a deal to extort $10 out of people that are merely driving through the state?

What if a state decided that you must pay for a vehicle inspection for merely driving through? Think that would fly?

I am not against protecting the ecologies of our rivers and waterways, ubt to make someone purchase a sticker under the guise of an education program when they aren't even going to put their boat or trailer into the water is wrong.


----------



## TNtroller

[url=https://forum.tinboats.net/viewtopic.php?p=365168#p365168 said:


> kofkorn » Tue Sep 02, 2014 6:29 am[/url]"]Maine has a similar law already. However, their sticker is only required if you are planning on launching in Maine. They check at the ramps.



Are your ramps monitored 24/7/365, are they all fee oriented ramps? How does your state monitor this requirement?


----------



## TexasLoneStar56

Texas has enforced a law about the zebra mussels. All boats must be drained, including live wells, upon loading your boat. I think it's a good thing. But I don't agree with what y'all are saying about having to pay another state for traveling through.

Also would like to add:

Hydrilla became a big problem in East Texas lakes about 10 years ago. With the help of the parks & wildlife, they put a species of grass carp in several area lakes, including ours. We had to fork out a few bucks ($50), as did other residence, and were glad to do it. They eat the hydrilla, but they are sterile. It is illegal to catch or kill them. It has been 4 years ago since they put them in our lake. Within only a couple of weeks, we could tell a difference. By the next summer, our lake was back to a beautiful spring fed lake. Those fish are big now (about 20-25 lbs), but they still keep eating it. Yes, it does come back, but the carp have been a blessing to our lakes.   

Keith
Texas

*UPDATE:* July 20th, 2015
TPWD added more baby grass carp to our lake about a month ago, as some of the older ones have died off. There is one of the older ones that swims in and around our dock. It is about 35 lbs now. I've not had to rake out hydrilla in over 4 years. Glad he/she stays around here. Keeps our swimming area clean and beautiful. They are pretty to watch swim, as they swim with grace, almost like a whale. Their dorsal fin slowly comes out of the water, as they gracefully swim. Thankful they are here. [-o<


----------



## RiverBottomOutdoors

[url=https://forum.tinboats.net/viewtopic.php?p=366362#p366362 said:


> nsjames » Yesterday, 4:26 pm[/url]"]
> 
> 
> [url=https://forum.tinboats.net/viewtopic.php?p=365205#p365205 said:
> 
> 
> 
> RiverBottomOutdoors » 02 Sep 2014, 13:16[/url]"]Not that big of a deal. If it will help stop the spread of invasive species, seems like outdoorsmen would lend their support. My home town lake has areas that are choked by hydrilla so thick it looks like you could walk across it.
> 
> A private company is probably much better than giving the funds to the definition of inefficiency: government.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> not that big of a deal to extort $10 out of people that are merely driving through the state?
> 
> What if a state decided that you must pay for a vehicle inspection for merely driving through? Think that would fly?
> 
> I am not against protecting the ecologies of our rivers and waterways, ubt to make someone purchase a sticker under the guise of an education program when they aren't even going to put their boat or trailer into the water is wrong.
Click to expand...


$10...james....$10. You would think that someone who loves the outdoors could get over that small price to pay to help preserve an ecosystem. I guess some can't.


----------



## TexasLoneStar56

True. Passing through is one thing, but entering a body of water is another. We must preserve our rivers and lakes. $10 is a small price to pay to help accomplish that.

Hydrilla is not native to us. It was brought in on boats from other states, as I'm sure it was brought in to them from other places. It can sure take over a body of water in a matter of a year. Like another guy said, looks like you can walk across it. And the more you rake it out of a swimming area, the more you spread their seeds. Been there, done that.

All in all, we all must work together for the preservation of our waters.  

Keith
Texas


----------



## Keystone

> $10...james....$10. You would think that someone who loves the outdoors could get over that small price to pay to help preserve an ecosystem.




Since I never trailer my boat into another state, $10 isn't a big deal. Just add it on to the price of the boat registration. BUT, as the title says, this could 9most likely will) spread to other states. Now I have to have a trailer full of decals just to trailer across a few states. People driving through Minnesota to another state should not have to have this decal. There has not been one case of an infestation from the Interstate (or any roadway). It would be more likely that Waterfowl would do damage than a trailer passing through.


----------



## nsjames

[url=https://forum.tinboats.net/viewtopic.php?p=366400#p366400 said:


> RiverBottomOutdoors » 17 Sep 2014, 03:27[/url]"]
> 
> 
> [url=https://forum.tinboats.net/viewtopic.php?p=366362#p366362 said:
> 
> 
> 
> nsjames » Yesterday, 4:26 pm[/url]"]
> 
> 
> [url=https://forum.tinboats.net/viewtopic.php?p=365205#p365205 said:
> 
> 
> 
> RiverBottomOutdoors » 02 Sep 2014, 13:16[/url]"]Not that big of a deal. If it will help stop the spread of invasive species, seems like outdoorsmen would lend their support. My home town lake has areas that are choked by hydrilla so thick it looks like you could walk across it.
> 
> A private company is probably much better than giving the funds to the definition of inefficiency: government.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> not that big of a deal to extort $10 out of people that are merely driving through the state?
> 
> What if a state decided that you must pay for a vehicle inspection for merely driving through? Think that would fly?
> 
> I am not against protecting the ecologies of our rivers and waterways, ubt to make someone purchase a sticker under the guise of an education program when they aren't even going to put their boat or trailer into the water is wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> $10...james....$10. You would think that someone who loves the outdoors could get over that small price to pay to help preserve an ecosystem. I guess some can't.
Click to expand...



obviously you fail to see the larger picture. This isn't about what it costs or what it's for, but is about the fact that a state has decided that they can force you to pay a private company for any reason, merely by being in that state, and on a federal road.

again, what if they decided that upon entering the state you had to pay to have a safety inspection done by a private company? Would you object then? It's for your own safety after all. 
enjoy your massively bloated government.


----------



## RiverBottomOutdoors

> obviously you fail to see the larger picture. This isn't about what it costs or what it's for, but is about the fact that a state has decided that they can force you to pay a private company for any reason, merely by being in that state, and on a federal road.
> 
> again, what if they decided that upon entering the state you had to pay to have a safety inspection done by a private company? Would you object then? It's for your own safety after all.
> enjoy your massively bloated government.




My state already has a an annual vehicle inspection requirement, as do most states. And get this....the inspections are done by a private company (ie. your mechanic). And.......it's been that way for decades. 

Consider the 10$ fee a toll. If you want to have your GPS reroute you around an entire state or avoid visiting a state altogether to avoid a $10 toll...that's your prerogative.....no matter how absurd. It's $10 to help prevent habitat destruction. I think you need to find something a little more worthwhile to get bent out of shape over.


----------



## nsjames

[url=https://forum.tinboats.net/viewtopic.php?p=366422#p366422 said:


> RiverBottomOutdoors » 17 Sep 2014, 10:44[/url]"]
> 
> 
> 
> obviously you fail to see the larger picture. This isn't about what it costs or what it's for, but is about the fact that a state has decided that they can force you to pay a private company for any reason, merely by being in that state, and on a federal road.
> 
> again, what if they decided that upon entering the state you had to pay to have a safety inspection done by a private company? Would you object then? It's for your own safety after all.
> enjoy your massively bloated government.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My state already has a an annual vehicle inspection requirement, as do most states. And get this....the inspections are done by a private company (ie. your mechanic). And.......it's been that way for decades.
> 
> Consider the 10$ fee a toll. If you want to have your GPS reroute you around an entire state or avoid visiting a state altogether to avoid a $10 toll...that's your prerogative.....no matter how absurd. It's $10 to help prevent habitat destruction. I think you need to find something a little more worthwhile to get bent out of shape over.
Click to expand...


no, "most" states do not, and I live in one that doesn't. So if I drive through your state should I have to pay your state to inspect my car? What if I was simply towing a vehicle on a trailer? Should that also get inspected? Should every brand new car on a commercial car hauler that passes through be subject to inspection?
https://www.phillymag.com/news/2012/03/15/need-vehicle-inspections-pennsylvania/
as of 2012 there were 12 states that still required inspections. So much for "most". :roll: 

whatever. This discussion is pointless because you believe that it's the right thing to do, and using that emotion you have rationalized state sponsored extortion.
I'm done here. Carry on.


----------



## RiverBottomOutdoors

[url=https://forum.tinboats.net/viewtopic.php?p=366423#p366423 said:


> nsjames » 16 minutes ago[/url]"]
> 
> 
> [url=https://forum.tinboats.net/viewtopic.php?p=366422#p366422 said:
> 
> 
> 
> RiverBottomOutdoors » 17 Sep 2014, 10:44[/url]"]
> 
> 
> 
> obviously you fail to see the larger picture. This isn't about what it costs or what it's for, but is about the fact that a state has decided that they can force you to pay a private company for any reason, merely by being in that state, and on a federal road.
> 
> again, what if they decided that upon entering the state you had to pay to have a safety inspection done by a private company? Would you object then? It's for your own safety after all.
> enjoy your massively bloated government.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My state already has a an annual vehicle inspection requirement, as do most states. And get this....the inspections are done by a private company (ie. your mechanic). And.......it's been that way for decades.
> 
> Consider the 10$ fee a toll. If you want to have your GPS reroute you around an entire state or avoid visiting a state altogether to avoid a $10 toll...that's your prerogative.....no matter how absurd. It's $10 to help prevent habitat destruction. I think you need to find something a little more worthwhile to get bent out of shape over.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> no, "most" states do not, and I live in one that doesn't. So if I drive through your state should I have to pay your state to inspect my car? What if I was simply towing a vehicle on a trailer? Should that also get inspected? Should every brand new car on a commercial car hauler that passes through be subject to inspection?
> https://www.phillymag.com/news/2012/03/15/need-vehicle-inspections-pennsylvania/
> as of 2012 there were 12 states that still required inspections. So much for "most". :roll:
> 
> whatever. This discussion is pointless because you believe that it's the right thing to do, and using that emotion you have rationalized state sponsored extortion.
> I'm done here. Carry on.
Click to expand...



You should go join one of those doomsday militias and fight the power! Haha. $10 my friend...$10.


----------



## nsjames

so again, you have no argument other than "it's just ten dollars"
ten dollars here, ten dollars there
what happens when they decide to raise that to 50 dollars, or 100?
Your view is very myopic.


----------



## RiverBottomOutdoors

[url=https://forum.tinboats.net/viewtopic.php?p=366427#p366427 said:


> nsjames » 1 minute ago[/url]"]so again, you have no argument other than "it's just ten dollars"
> ten dollars here, ten dollars there
> what happens when they decide to raise that to 50 dollars, or 100?
> Your view is very myopic.



NO.... my view is that this is a modest fee that goes to a good cause. What if they raise this and what if this or do that...and any other slippery slope argument fallacy doesn't matter. You're the myopic one. You are likely the type that opposes any government endeavor simply because it is a endeavor by the government, no matter the reasoning behind it. 

If the Old Dominion wanted to follow suit. I would gladly pay the fee to support saving our waters from this hydrilla weed that chokes out ecosystems. And if you didn't want to visit my state because of it, I would say we are better off not having people that don't want to support keeping our waters free from invasive species.


----------



## Thejrod

Fees won't stop anyone!


----------



## Wood_Duck

Modest fee or not it's still extortion. That's like just because you decide to come fish my River, the state forces you to buy a trout unlimited membership to my local chapter. Is that fair? Absolutely not. But let's skip the fees and look at the end result...the people that don't give a hoot right now about invasive species will after paying their "modest" fee, continue to not give a hoot. They'll continue to spread them and do what it is they do. Ripping off everyone over some stupid training isn't going to change the people that don't want to change. Where will all these little fees end?


----------



## RiverBottomOutdoors

Next up: Buying a fishing license is extortion. Registering your boat is extortion. Tags for your trailer is extortion. Required boat safety training is extortion.

Get a grip guys. This is not extortion.


----------



## Wood_Duck

Buying a fishing license for my state to fish is fair. Because I'm fishing....in my state. Registering my boat to operate in my state...is fair. Registering my boat and taking training to drive through another state is just idiocy


----------



## muskiemike12

I agree with you Jonah. It is just like paying a toll on a road. If you don't want to pay the toll take a different route. From what I see the cost is only $5.00 not $10.00 I think they are doing this because now the laws for aquatic invasive species (AIS) will have more teeth. Our DNR has always given out AIS decals to place on your trailer. I never put the stickers on my trailer because by doing so you could be issued a ticket for just a stem of a weed somewhere on your equipment. I believe this was done so that the authorities would know if you had been educated on AIS. You will no longer be able to plead ignorance on the subject. Although it will not stop the spread of AIS, it will certainly slow it down.


----------



## Y_J

Why not just collect the $10 fee at the boat ramps for out of state boats? Not to long ago, I moved from California to Georgia and not once did I stop and put a boat in the water. I can't even remember how many states I drove through to get here. At $10 per state it adds up pretty good. And I was on a budget. If I'm going to do some boating and/or fishing is one thing, but just passing through? I don't think so.


----------



## louisvillefisherman

RiverBottomOutdoors said:


> Next up: Buying a fishing license is extortion. Registering your boat is extortion. Tags for your trailer is extortion. Required boat safety training is extortion.



Long time lurker, rare poster here, but this topic has my attention.

Your analogy is not correct.

Based on your comparison, I would have to buy a fishing license just to simply have my fishing pole in my trunk as I drive through your State.

This law is far too reaching. I am all about conservation, but being environmentally considerate does not automatically immune an idea from being stupid.

One more example of the dangers of big government and of those that support it.


----------



## RiverBottomOutdoors

If you want to fish in Minnesota, you have to buy a fishing license. If you want to trailer your boat on their highways, you need this decal. Both are fees for use of resources. Analogy = correct.


----------



## Keystone

[url=https://forum.tinboats.net/viewtopic.php?p=366681#p366681 said:


> RiverBottomOutdoors » 41 minutes ago[/url]"]If you want to fish in Minnesota, you have to buy a fishing license. If you want to trailer your boat on their highways, you need this decal. Both are fees for use of resources. Analogy = correct.




Using your analogy I can safely come to the conclusion that you would have no problem if state surrounding your state required you to purchase a decal to also drive in their state. After all, the added fee would be justified because you would be using their resources.


----------



## RiverBottomOutdoors

Nope. Wouldn't be the first or last road toll I've paid. The toll just to cross the Chesapeake Bay Bridge tunnel here in the Old Dominion is $13...$18 if you're towing a single axel trailer.


----------



## joseph101088

[url=https://forum.tinboats.net/viewtopic.php?p=366422#p366422 said:


> RiverBottomOutdoors » 17 Sep 2014, 10:44[/url]"]
> 
> 
> 
> obviously you fail to see the larger picture. This isn't about what it costs or what it's for, but is about the fact that a state has decided that they can force you to pay a private company for any reason, merely by being in that state, and on a federal road.
> 
> again, what if they decided that upon entering the state you had to pay to have a safety inspection done by a private company? Would you object then? It's for your own safety after all.
> enjoy your massively bloated government.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My state already has a an annual vehicle inspection requirement, as do most states. And get this....the inspections are done by a private company (ie. your mechanic). And.......it's been that way for decades.
> 
> Consider the 10$ fee a toll. If you want to have your GPS reroute you around an entire state or avoid visiting a state altogether to avoid a $10 toll...that's your prerogative.....no matter how absurd. It's $10 to help prevent habitat destruction. I think you need to find something a little more worthwhile to get bent out of shape over.
Click to expand...



And yet with all the inspections they impose on us here in va. there are more carbacues on the sides of the freeways in hampton roads not to mention more abandoned/broke down vehicles than any other state that i have lived in. also va requries a boater safety course for boats with engines bigger than 20 or 25 i believe and yet people still get killed or kill someone on the water after taking a course and acting like fools. people will not listen to what they had to pay ten dollars for. look at all the idiots on the roads and lakes in va. you think they will care about and put to practice something they are forced to read.


----------



## RiverBottomOutdoors

Compulsory education is a pillar of our nation. Looks like it works pretty good to me.


----------



## louisvillefisherman

[url=https://forum.tinboats.net/viewtopic.php?p=366681#p366681 said:


> RiverBottomOutdoors » Yesterday, 12:00[/url]"]If you want to fish in Minnesota, you have to buy a fishing license. If you want to trailer your boat on their highways, you need this decal. Both are fees for use of resources. Analogy = correct.




No. Analogy = wrong.

Your analogy has the person DRIVING through Minnesota (with a rod in trunk), not fishing in Minnesota, therefor the "fishing" license SHOULD not and IS NOT required.

That being true (which it is) then why shouldn't the same apply to the trailer.


----------



## louisvillefisherman

I live in Ohio, and I (theoretically) got a call from my buddy in North Dakota saying he has a free boat for me if I can come get it tomorrow. Therefor I will be driving through MN tonight.

What am I supposed to do? Find the a Dept. of Motor Vehicles on a map, plan my trip around where that location is? Arrive sometime during business hours, wait in line, get the sticker and continue on my way?

Nonsense. 

This is not about the fish, or the weeds. It is about crony capitalism and brain dead environmentalists milking the people for money. Raise the cost of a fishing license or boat registrations in your State (you know, the ones that use your water) and leave those who are simply passing through alone.

Perfect example of the dangers of big government control, and the people who will roll over and let them have it.


----------



## RiverBottomOutdoors

Analogy is correct, sir, even if you don't understand the concept. You could always take a privately owned interstate or highway to pick up your imaginary boat if you don't want pay the toll on the government owned roads.


----------



## jethro

I fish in Maine and have to buy the sticker. It's $20 but does nothing to actually stop the problem (up here it is primarily milfoil they are concerned with). All I do is pay my $20 and stick the sticker (it's a boat sticker, not a trailer sticker). I could have milfoil all over my trailer bunks and boat- what is a sticker going to stop? Here in NH we have lake stewards that actually check your trailer before and after you launch. They are only on specific lakes and only at certain times. I don't know what the answer is but I do know that as fishermen we should be open to any discussion that preserves our waters.


----------



## louisvillefisherman

Jonah, You seem to think that it is acceptable to require a person to go through the hassle I just described, simply to just "drive" through the State.

Your "toll road" analogy is also flawed, as I am using the road that I am being tolled for. I am not using your waterways, yet you still justify the toll. My road toll goes to improving that road that I am using. Your trailer toll, well, is being diverted to a private company who is probably well connected to your corrupt, all democrat controlled (big surprise), State government. (tax heavy dems hold all four State wide offices as well as both legislatures). All in the name of the fish. 

I'm done commenting, I have nothing more to add. Fortunately for me I have no plans on driving through MN.

But be careful what you wish for. You may support this over reach because it benefits a cause that is close to you (fish). But as with every abuse, it never, ever ends there.


----------



## Y_J

[url=https://forum.tinboats.net/viewtopic.php?p=366750#p366750 said:


> louisvillefisherman » September 22nd, 2014, 10:29 am[/url]"]I live in Ohio, and I (theoretically) got a call from my buddy in North Dakota saying he has a free boat for me if I can come get it tomorrow. Therefor I will be driving through MN tonight.
> 
> What am I supposed to do? Find the a Dept. of Motor Vehicles on a map, plan my trip around where that location is? Arrive sometime during business hours, wait in line, get the sticker and continue on my way?
> 
> Nonsense.
> 
> Perfect example of the dangers of big government control, and the people who will roll over and let them have it.


LOL.. Look out for my green Toyota Tacoma... I'm just driving through, aka passing through. No stops, unless I got to pee and I doubt very much there will be any lakes in the rest stop.
Oh, and odds are it will be in the middle of the night anyway.


----------



## openseat

Thoughts from a MN shoreline:

Recreational fishing & its supporting businesses form one of the biggest industries in MN. If the MN legislature was seen as weak on this issue, they would be held responsible for the economic damage from the loss of the resource (despite the ducks contribution). That's also why MN is currently asking the U.S. Congress to permanently close Mississippi River lock and dam no. 1 to slow the spread of asian carp into MN.

States commonly have rules about what you can transport through their jurisdiction, especially in regard to plants and wildlife. The only thing unique in this case is that somebody decided it isn't unduly burdensome in the internet age to have people tap on a keyboard to acknowledge their responsibility. Probably less time than it takes to go on a (great) boat forum and post about it.


----------



## toot

Finally coming to their senses!! =D> 

https://www.outdoornews.com/January-2015/One-of-Minnesota-State-Legislatures-first-orders-of-business-Repeal-AIS-training-law/


----------



## DuraCraft

Well, I never could stand the cold anyway. 10,000 lakes, I reckon I won't be fishing ye.


----------



## rabbit

Ten bucks is chump change except if all states do it I'll be paying 50 bucks and take five courses to get to Fl. So, you have to get off the highway, find the location to take the course, pass the test to resume your travels? That's bull. What about tractors carrying new boats or marina equipment? You'll have drivers that don't know jack abt boats except where to drop the load.
If that's MN's welcome mat then boaters won't go there.
If that's the authoritarian regime they have, who would want to go there? Who's idea was this?
I do river keeping and I have thousands wrapped up in equipment to monitor water. Collect the ten at toll booths if you must but I'm not stopping
off the highway to do a stupid dance for idiots.


----------



## thill

You have to take a course and pay a fee to drive through MN?!?? That is absolutely crazy, and I believe illegal.

If they are serious about this program, they should include it in a state-wide boat launch fee or fishing license, like Delaware does. That would be fair and easy to enforce at the ramps. 

But forcing an AIS course to drive through the state? That is crazy.
Lawsuits are going to quickly crush that one. It doesn't stand a chance.


----------



## Abo_knapper

They have signs and its law here in Arizona for the Zebra musle, you must wipe down and drain your boat which seems reasonable. Driving through Montanna is rediculous, is the weed going to crawl down the highway. If I chose to launch, so be it if a class is convenient for a fishing tourist.. Seems like a revenue generator for some Senetors son, so not so sure we arent giving it to a porkbarrel project disquised as a private company.


----------



## Keystone

Law has been repealed.


----------



## thill

Keystone said:


> Law has been repealed.



No surprise there.

But it would not be a bad idea if they had a little instructional course added to the online fishing license application or state-wide boat ramp permit. Maybe 10 questions or so, to make sure everyone is educated about the hazards of invasive species.

-TH


----------



## nlester

in the late 60s, a bill passed the Senate in California requiring seat belts on motor cycles. it came up for a vote in the lower house and was sent back to a committee to die. This bill fell into the same category.

Target the permit and licensing processes. Require signage at all boat ramps. Texas is even painting signs on the boat ramps. Jack up the fines to help pay for the process. Nothing spreads the word as effectively as fines. 

In the end, this will only slow the spread of invasive species.


----------



## juniata

No problem here with preserving our waters natural resources ect....I'd pay the 10.00.

That being said....Sooner or later this society of ours got to see the realization that you cant regulate everything.....Its to the point where I see state workers wearing hard hats to clean side walks...

Recently took a safety course for bridge construction...ruling states that each crew must have one competent person on site, if he leaves work must stop. So what? one normal competent person and the rest don't have to be?

If we really stop and look at our state agency's...most are struggling to balance their budgets. Our forest suffer from Gypsy moths..and a host of blight's... Wildlife suffer from CWD, blue tongue, ect..ect.. we pump brine into the earth when fracking...Farmers put Ungodly amounts of spray on our fields, And the very state Agencys that want to regulate everything for our welfare spread ton after ton of salt on our roadways....

Sometime I think we are just spinning our wheels. Best not to rely on to much regulation....How about each of us as individuals take a little time, be a little conscious, care a little more.


----------



## jbird68

I was putting in my boat earlier this summer and a college kid was giving a boating survey for the Iowa DNR. It included a question about invasive species transportation along with other topics. When the survey was over he gave me a sticker to put on my trailer. Is that what I need to transport across state lines?


----------



## LDUBS

California requires a mussel tag as part of the boat registration fee. The funds go towards a quagga/zebra mussel prevention program. From what I read, places fed by untreated Colorado River water are exposed. As a result, several lakes in Southern California have been infected. 

At the reservoir I frequent most often, they do a mussel inspection prior to letting you launch. If there is any standing water in the boat, you will get turned away. Nice thing is, if you want them to, they will put a seal between the bow eye and the trailer winch. If they see the seal on your next visit, then no inspection is needed. At other places I’ve been asked to fill out a brief questionnaire about where the boat has been. Inspections are not done, though I suppose they would be if you disclose you’ve been out of state or in an infested area. 

I agree the MN law prompting this thread was a little over the top. What we have here in California seems reasonable to protect our waters. Kind of unusual for California, which might have a reputation for having some quirky laws...


----------



## AlexHayes

Although we don't have to worry anymore since the law was repealed, I figured I'd throw my 2 cents in as a person who actually works in the field of conservation. 

First, I do think it's a little nuts to charge people just to drive through the state with a trailer. If you were planning to boat in the state, then I totally understand that and I'm all for it. However, you'd be surprised at how many people just DO NOT care one bit about what they may be tracking along with them. They just care about themselves and going out and having a good time. This seemed a bit like a preemptive strike. 

2nd, people love to complain about the government. People love to hate Democrats or Republicans. The truth is, they all have their hands in eachothers' pockets. If you think Democrats are solely responsible for regulation think again. Anyway, back to the point. If the government didn't step in and try to combat the spread of invasive species (which can seriously destroy habitat and turn your lovely waters into a lifeless muck hole in short order) who is going to? A private company? No way, there's no money to be made combating invasive species. Is everyone just going to be conscious of it on their own and step up? Once again, no way. Many will, but it takes only one person to not care and spread a noxious weed to a water body where it will only spread further. Many of these invasive weeds multiply by fragmentation. Trying to rake or tear them up or chopping them up with a propeller will cause them to spread like mad. That $10 fee you'd pay to launch a boat (once again, not like the one they tried to impose. A fair fee to use resources) doesn't just go to the government where they play with it and spend it on foolish things. It goes to people like me who are out there on the front lines educating people and physically removing all the invasive plants and animals that have spread like mad due to people simply not knowing or those who do not care. Funding is already basically zilch for these kinds of programs. People like me who help to keep these resources clean for YOU do not make the big bucks. Many are living on okay, but by no means great wages. I know some will think, "then get a different job." The problem with that is there are still people out there who want to enjoy some nice, clean resources the way they are supposed to be. Being able to help make that happen is more rewarding than dollar bills, but none of that will happen without the dollar bills.

Once again, I don't think this particular attempt at a law was structured correctly. But next time you want to complain about government regulation or paying a fee or being required to be educated before using a resource, think about what your water would look like without it. I think its valuable to understand other perspectives on issues like this.


----------



## onthewater102

^^ The way they approached this issue has tarnished a very worthwhile effort.

CT lakes are quickly becoming overrun with Eurasian Milfoil and Curly-leaf Pondweed, and now we have Zebra mussles in places in Western CT. If you think these things aren't that bad take a minute & do a quick google search on the accounts of people who have had to deal with them or the damage they can inflict. 

The issue is that no one cares about these pests until they've had to deal with an infestation, and by the time they get wise to how they should have prevented the problem it's already too late.


----------



## PsychoXP18CC

Well, I am glad to see the law died. Not that it would effect me in any way, but I just like to see these types of overreaching laws overturned. Paying $10 just to drag a boat through where you could otherwise drive without paying the fee is not only illegal, but completely unAmerican. 

I have no problems paying my license and registration fees for using the resources in whatever state I hunt or Fish. But if I'm not using the resources I shouldn't have to pay. I Elk hunt the Santa Fe National Forest every few years and pay a federal habitat fee on top of my state issued tag and license just to be in the forest. No problem, but I shouldn't, and don't have to pay that fee if I'm simply driving the roads through that same forest. The moment I step out of the truck to hunt or fish though, I am obligated to have the habitat stamp. Just as it should be in any other state.


----------



## CRS

the lake I fish in requires that you sign an affidavit that you will not put the boat in any other body of water. No aquatic bait is permitted unless purchased from a licensed zebra mussel free dealer, I cannot find any doing a Google search. This is because of the fear of zebra mussels. The entire thing is a bad joke. While the lake is protected the main tributaries are not. All of the invasive plants and animals that are here will stay once established and will spread. They must be stopped at the boarder and before they reach the harbors. People should not be allowed to own plants or animals of any type that are not native.


----------



## onthewater102

They stowed aboard vessels coming into the great lakes in the ballast water they took on to balance the weight of the ships. From there they've hitched rides in recreational boats & spread ever further.


----------



## gnappi

It sounds to me like someone's out of work son or son in law started a company and got a bill passed so they can get rich. Nepotism is alive and well in all agencies, associations, clubs, unions and more.


----------



## skipper123

Just read this post for the first time and see a lot of conflict that looks like it could be resolved with some fish. TexasLoneStar56
said the grass carp would eat the hydrilla grass and I know they do I have them in my pond. They also eat a lot of other evasive weeds to keep a body of water clean. The goberment can post all the signs they want and charge road tax water tax and trailer tax but it want stop the weeds from taking over. The grass carp on the other hand will and we need them in every body of water that has evasive weeds taking over. I never thought I would see the deep clear waters of Clarks Hill lake on the border of SC and GA have hydrilla but noticed just last year that crap blocking off whole coves from the lake. Its getting really bad. If the goberment would spend that tax on grass carp I'm all for it. I guess this would be a good reason to form or join a fishing club to get together and purchase grass carp to put in the body of waters we fish. Making sure it was ok with DNR of course. From what I understand this mess came from South America first showed up in south Florida and keeps moving north. I have watched it migrate over the last twenty years from the lower part of SC to now the piedmont or middle part of the state. I think the grass carp is the only way to get rid of it and keep it under control. The bow fishermen including myself need not be shooting the carp. We have a plenty gar to shoot at they as will as turtles and water turkeys are out of control as well. Anybody kin to Trump, he knows how to get things done and in a hurry.


----------



## Johnny

that is correct - some states, such as Florida has imported 
grass eating fish such as talapia, carp, and and is currently
experimenting with a sturgeon type that can not reproduce.

the *Jumping Asian Carp* is one example of how an experiment 
can go very, very wrong - very, very quickly.
the snakehead is another example.............


----------



## KMixson

A year or two ago I heard they were doing a study by releasing pythons into the Savannah River site to see if they could breed this far north. If not, no big deal. But what if they find that they can breed this far north and all of a sudden have an explosion of pythons that they were responsible for? Then what? Some of these studies are an idiotic attempt at research. You have to have some common sense. By the way, I do not know how the study turned out.


----------



## Johnny

The big pythons that are being killed in the Everglades this season
are averaging 10-15 feet and the females have an average of 80 to 105
eggs in their belly.....
can you imagine one snake producing a hundred offspring every year ?????
and Darwin proved that animals can adapt to-and live in- just about any environment.
and the iguanas are running rampant in the Florida Keys.
whew - the list is never going to end.


----------



## LDUBS

I just learned today that a number of counties in California have implemented a real time tracking system for boats. What little I know is that once the CF (registration) number is entered then information is provided about where the boat has been and whether there were any previous mussel inspection problems. So if your boat has recently been in a hazardous area or failed to pass an invasive species inspection, you can expect someone will be taking a hard look before they let you launch. On the positive side, if your boat passes inspection a band will be placed between the bow eye and trailer. You can enter any participating lake without any inspection as long as you have the the band. 

After seeing what a quagga/zebra mussel infestation does to a lake, I don't really have a problem with this approach.


----------



## Hunt2871

The Pacific Northwest is dead serious about this. At least the three coastal states as well as Idaho, Utah, Montana and Wyoming. I trailered my boat from New Mexico to Washington about 4 years ago and crossed into Wyoming from Colorado and was stopped at the state line. They asked where the boat had been last and where it was headed and did a quick examination of it and gave me a piece of paper saying it had passed inspection. Didn't cost anything. There was another boat already stopped when I stopped and they were pressure washing the hull, free of charge. I then crossed into Utah and the same thing happened and then again in Oregon and Washington. Happened every time I went from Washington to Oregon and Idaho and back again and also from Idaho to Montana and Wyoming. I have a buddy who lives on the border between Idaho and Wyoming and he is retired and fishes about 180 days a year out of a sizeable jet boat with a cabin on it and LOADS of live wells and lockers which could hold water....it takes them a LONG time to inspect that boat but they do it most days....all the while him giving them what for for wasting his time LOL. I have had this happen on Christmas morning at 3 AM entering Oregon from Washington....as far as I know they are there 24-7, 365. Not a big deal but it can take a minute if its a holiday or a nice day in the summer. Usually not too bad for fisherman and duck hunters at the early morning hours but still a little aggravating.

This and a myriad of other reasons lead me to go home to the SE. We may have hydrilla and mussell problems but you can at least travel a sizeable area without the man inspecting your boat. Florida will be the first in the region to start this foolishness and it won't help matters in the least because it just ain't possible to inspect every boat on I-10, 75 and 95.


----------



## Hunt2871

skipper123 said:


> Just read this post for the first time and see a lot of conflict that looks like it could be resolved with some fish. TexasLoneStar56
> said the grass carp would eat the hydrilla grass and I know they do I have them in my pond. They also eat a lot of other evasive weeds to keep a body of water clean. The goberment can post all the signs they want and charge road tax water tax and trailer tax but it want stop the weeds from taking over. The grass carp on the other hand will and we need them in every body of water that has evasive weeds taking over. I never thought I would see the deep clear waters of Clarks Hill lake on the border of SC and GA have hydrilla but noticed just last year that crap blocking off whole coves from the lake. Its getting really bad. If the goberment would spend that tax on grass carp I'm all for it. I guess this would be a good reason to form or join a fishing club to get together and purchase grass carp to put in the body of waters we fish. Making sure it was ok with DNR of course. From what I understand this mess came from South America first showed up in south Florida and keeps moving north. I have watched it migrate over the last twenty years from the lower part of SC to now the piedmont or middle part of the state. I think the grass carp is the only way to get rid of it and keep it under control. The bow fishermen including myself need not be shooting the carp. We have a plenty gar to shoot at they as will as turtles and water turkeys are out of control as well. Anybody kin to Trump, he knows how to get things done and in a hurry.




The hydrilla problem at Clarks Hill is a testament to what to do about that particular invasive species....it had just about taken over the entire lake....and then someone had the bright idea not to drop the lake 20-30 feet in the winter and lo and behold it stopped being a problem. There is almost none of it in 2022....and may be completely gone. I know I can't find it. It has devastated the duck hunting but its for the best over all. Clarkhill is now designated a recreation asset instead of a hydro power and flood control asset and as such the lake does not have to be practically drained every winter. This past spring during the entire crappie/bass/bream spawn the water was anywhere from 1 foot to 6 feet above full pool.....providing PLENTY of new places to spawn and making it really hard to find and catch fish LOL. Its going to be a boom spawn by next March. 

There are 2 other invasive species on the hill though which are going to be a problem sooner than later.....blue back herring and spotted bass. The former are thicker than cord wood and the latter have just about eliminated the largemouth population.


----------



## LDUBS

Hunt2871 said:


> The Pacific Northwest is dead serious about this. At least the three coastal states as well as Idaho, Utah, Montana and Wyoming. I trailered my boat from New Mexico to Washington about 4 years ago and crossed into Wyoming from Colorado and was stopped at the state line. They asked where the boat had been last and where it was headed and did a quick examination of it and gave me a piece of paper saying it had passed inspection. Didn't cost anything. There was another boat already stopped when I stopped and they were pressure washing the hull, free of charge. I then crossed into Utah and the same thing happened and then again in Oregon and Washington. Happened every time I went from Washington to Oregon and Idaho and back again and also from Idaho to Montana and Wyoming. I have a buddy who lives on the border between Idaho and Wyoming and he is retired and fishes about 180 days a year out of a sizeable jet boat with a cabin on it and LOADS of live wells and lockers which could hold water....it takes them a LONG time to inspect that boat but they do it most days....all the while him giving them what for for wasting his time LOL. I have had this happen on Christmas morning at 3 AM entering Oregon from Washington....as far as I know they are there 24-7, 365. Not a big deal but it can take a minute if its a holiday or a nice day in the summer. Usually not too bad for fisherman and duck hunters at the early morning hours but still a little aggravating.
> 
> This and a myriad of other reasons lead me to go home to the SE. We may have hydrilla and mussell problems but you can at least travel a sizeable area without the man inspecting your boat. Florida will be the first in the region to start this foolishness and it won't help matters in the least because it just ain't possible to inspect every boat on I-10, 75 and 95.




Sadly, my experience over the last couple years is that the mussel inspections have pretty much turned into a rubber stamp. Guys ask for the CF number and complete the form without even looking at the boat. I hope we don't get this infestation in our lakes.


----------

