SpoonDog

A lot of these onerous labor and workplace safety regulations established things like the 40 hour work week and a minimum wage, allowing people the time and money to enjoy fish finders and lures. A lot of them generated environmental regulations which maintain healthy fisheries. sure some government expenditures and regulations are kinda silly, but a lot of them- from environmental regs to fisheries monitoring and research to hatcheries and public lands and reservoirs- are of direct benefit to anglers. As far as compromise, lots of folks from both sides of the political spectrum insist on sticking to their beliefs at all costs, rarely (if ever) are not things so black and white. To insist the government spends too much and then lionize the military (which makes up the bulk of federal discretionary spending) is itself a compromise. If you've been in BPS any time in the past two decades expecting to find a ton of gear made in America, I don't know what to tell you. It just isn't part of their business model. Bass Pro doesn't much care about American jobs because most Americans don't care about American jobs. They want it cheap, without much regard to its provenance. If we We can blame onerous federal regulations while ignoring the fact that many of those regs generate a quality of life most folks in China or Mexico can't afford, that's fine. But until we develop a culture of consumerism where folks will pay a premium for American made, things will stay the same. And if you're walking through Bass Pro lamenting a lack of American made goods but still walking out with that Chinese fishinder and lures- your pocketbook isn't living up to your principles. You're making a compromise.

Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but I watch the full video and I see a woman pushing away a man in the hallway. I see a woman pushing a man away in an elevator. I see a woman whose body language indicates she wants to be left alone. I can't tell if he gives her a shove or a jab, I can't tell if she does it to him - it happens awfully fast. I look at that video and I don't see a woman who's just snapping out of the blue - I see a woman standing up for herself and being beaten for it. Assault is assault, I can get behind that. If you're dealing with a wildcat you don't keep rattling the cage. Punching a lady in the head once you finally get her to lash out is not self defense. Ray Rice walked out of that elevator with nary a scratch. His wife had to be dragged out like a corpse. Assault is assault - which is why I'm amazed some are defending the only person in this scenario who actually seems to have assaulted anyone. Even Ray Rice says he was out of line. And if it winds up Gooddell was sitting on this information, at least he's only implicitly condoning violence against women. It could be a backlash from fans does more damage than the initial scandal. From a purely business standpoint I think the NFL has painted themself into a corner - they can take this and other issues seriously and potentially alienate current fans, or they can continue with the tone-deaf bandaid solutions and alienate potential new markets.

This turd was a football player, being roughed up is part of his job, and if he felt so intimidated or threatened by his wife, perhaps it's a good thing he's looking for a new career. If that were the case, I frankly don't understand how he'd be able to perform in the NFL as well as he did. Ray Rice wasn't the one laying on the floor, and insinuating maybe she deserved it, to me, smacks of blaming the victim. He could've got off the elevator. He could've bought a separate room. He could've called security. There are a million things Ray Rice could've done that didn't involve assaulting someone. And you're right that whether it's a man or a woman is irrelevant- assault is assault. I have to wonder...if it was another NFL player he had done this to, whether the initial punishment would've been more severe.

Part of me doesn't understand what difference it makes - if you're claiming ownership of the captive deer,they're your responsibility. If the fence is inadequate, if they're escaping, if they're diseased and infecting wil deer - you're on the hook. I know companies are billed for fish kills based on the number, species and size of dead animals, maybe deer breeders should be footing the bill for MDCs cwd eradication efforts. It just seems to me the breeders want all the benefits of running these outfits without any of the costs...they don't want to be held accountable. And by moving jurisdiction to a more sympathetic audience in the Ag Department, the party of personal responsibility is doing everything in their power -and exceeding the state Constitution - to make sure breeders won't be held accountable.

I think one could argue the definition of "captive deer" would require them to be kept separated from the wild herd. CWD is spread by direct contact between wild and penned deer. The fact that sportsmen are shooting CWD infected deer outside the canned hunting outfits indicates the pens aren't 100% effective at keeping wild deer out or frankendeer in - the captive part of "captive deer " isn't being met. MDC is charged with protecting the state's fish & wildlife. If a private landowner is caught dumping chemicals or effluent which harm wildlife, it's MDCs job to prosecute. What these canned hunting operations have done is essentially biological pollution - introducing a pathogen which will negatively impact the state's deer herd - that MDC is charged with managing. I don't see any other state agency with that specific jurisdiction, and I don't see how private property rights would trump enforcement.

I agree it looks like a longear, and it wouldn't surprise me to learn of bait-bucket introductions on the Atlantic slope. Redbreast were not native to the Mississippi drainage, but have been introduced in coolwater streams of eastern Kentucky and Tennessee, as well as elsewhere in the region. You may want to contact your local game warden or fisheries biologist and pick their brain.

That's as good a way as any to give the finger to ol' man winter Nice catch!

Back in 2009, I wound up camping at Montauk SP a couple days before the two nice old ladies running the campground were about to lose their jobs. They were two of hundreds of employees let go that year due to budget cuts. You guys complain about how ONSR services were cut last fall- the same thing happens at the state level. om what I've read, ONSR's budget is a little more than 6.5 million. That's comparable to MDC's budget for all conservation agents. It's more than they spend on wildlife biologists, it's more than they spend on fish biologists, it's more than they spend on research biologists. If we have the money to throw around, I'd rather see it spent elsewhere.

IMO it's a moot point. Driving your ATV through the river or on unauthorized trails is still going to be illegal, whether the Park Service owns it or MDC does. Same with hauling your camper out onto the gravel bar, or wandering hinder and yon on a hundred-person scenic horse trip. MDC's mission is to conserve fish, forests and wildlife just as the Park Service's is- changing departments doesn't necessarily change the management, and I could see MDC being even more restrictive than ONSR has been with some uses. And as many people on this board who complain about MDC's lack of enforcement, I'm amazed anyone would advocate they manage the Riverways.

Yep, it's a brown. And if MDC were removing pectoral fins to identify year classes, one would expect all the similarly-size browns in all the waters of the state to also be missing their left pectorals, too. I bet they're not, though, because I bet MDC isn't clipping pectorals. More than likely, the fin erosion is due to hatchery conditions.

MDC is an executive agency, Wayne. http://www.mo.gov/government/guide-to-missouris-government//

Being cynical is easy, though I'm not sure it's realistic. Whether it's Pebble Mine, stream access out west, or gravel mines and chip mills here, activism has had it's successes.

So by eliminating public input, by tying the hands of local NPS staff, and by leaving ONSR rules up to a congressional vote, Smith's amendment will ensure the Riverways' management isn't dictated by a bunch of Washington bureaucrats? I don't get it- but that's nothing new, many of Mr. Smith's positions have left me scratching my head. I've gone ahead and written the state's senators, we'll see what comes of it.

I'm not sure how much effect it'd have. The NFOW seems big enough that wading anglers wouldn't do too much damage. The others are so small...I'd think things like drought and water level play a much bigger role in spawning and recruitment. But if it could be demonstrated it'd improve fishing, I wouldn't be opposed.

Most (if not all) overwinter in a specific high-altitude forest in Mexico. This winter the population is restricted to about an acre and a half of forest. Illegal logging has been an issue in the past, but that's apparently been mitigated. Part of the problem now is Roundup-ready corn and soybeans- the added herbicides kill the milkweed. It's similar to what's happening with quail- modern ag practices are eliminating their food source, and as a result the population declines. Populations which migrate to adequate food sources will persist, populations without food will disappear. I've read elsewhere that some populations will stop migrating entirely and be restricted to Mexico and the southern US, where food is available year round. So they may be doomed throughout much of corn country, but they probably won't die off entirely. But look on the bright side- with 2013 being the 4th-hottest year on record, it won't be long before they can make a comeback

With harvest-able populations in the northern Lake States now, I'm not surprised they'd be expanding their range. I'm not a biologist- but wolves are pack hunters, I'm not sure how much damage one would do to Missouri's livestock industry. Even out west most of the damage is between wolves and sheep, not wolves and cows. And those animals are ranging on 20,000+ acre ranches, not the back forty. Wolves don't like people wolves don't like roads, and it's unlikely they'd be picking off livestock in the small-acreage cow-calf operations which are so common in the Ozarks. I'm just not buying this idea it'd be to protect livestock. Bald eagles probably have at least as much impact on Missouri's livestock as wolves do- but if you shoot one, you're still in trouble. On some level, I don't blame the guy. I'd think it was a big coyote, too- because I'm not expecting to see a gray wolf on an Ozark predator hunt. I'm willing to believe it was an honest mistake- but that doesn't mean he's innocent. The folks who shot the swans every year thinking they're snow geese- I'm sure they don't know the difference, but ignorance is no excuse.

I've been reading some of the fallout on Facebook and elsewhere...it's simply above my comprehension. Whoever said it earlier is absolutely right: I owe some folks at the NPS a beer. There's no way I'd have the patience for his. I've heard about "float-ins" out west- basically a bunch of folks in all manner of craft floating a river to protest water use or access laws. Maybe something similar could be done to demonstrate the economic impact of tourism on these communities. Folks can come dressed as their favorite UN official, and we'll to have a cougar contingent

Did you spin the hair over the lead? I've watched a lot of frogs in ponds and noticed when, at rest, their back end is usually below the water and their head is the only think above the surface. I'm wondering how putting some weight or a bead behind the spun hair, near the bend, would effect the action. I'll have to play around with it.

Bummer. I saw the boat folks had put up a short video on their FB page- looks like a reasonably irritated official giving them the third degree over the parking situation. My favorite moment is in the last few seconds- you can hear a woman saying "If I could direct the conversation in a slightly more productive manner..." before the video cuts out. Figured that was pretty emblematic Shame they spent so much time on such a small part of the management plan, and that they didn't address comments of questions about the rest of it. Then again, ONSR staff have been avoiding the elephant in the room for decades- I guess I should've seen that coming. I'm filing my comments tomorrow, we'll see what happens.

Show starts at six - though the trailer brigade is rallying at Emmenegger beforehand. Make sure to keep us posted on how it goes!

I got a kick out of the video, and apparently the guy's coming up from West Plains to speak at the meeting tonight. Sadly I'm out of town for work- that'd be worth seeing. Hope someone brings popcorn, as well as plenty of tinfoil hats to pass around

Exactly. I really wish ONSR was keeping minutes, as I'd really like to learn how some of the others went. From what I've read on the Salem meeting, it was the standard "if current rules were enforced, it wouldn't be an issue." Granted. But the restrictive proposals- the ones they're fighting - would enforce ONSR rules and regulations already on the book. Many of these folks aren't interested in enforcement, they're interested in the status quo- continuing the use and abuse which has already impacted the Riverways negatively. From what I've read it sounds like most of the push-back is coming from giggers regarding motor restrictions. I guess that's understandable, and while overall I'd rather see Option A implemented, I'd be content with seasonal motor restrictions, allowing folks to gig fish with motorboats during the non-peak float season. To their credit- if the folks who wanted to see changes in ONSR's management were half as dedicated and organized as the folks insisting otherwise, I think it'd already be done. And I do like the t-shirts, even if they are yellow. They did a great job with the graphics- no jetboats, no horses pooping in the stream, no ATVs tearing up the riparian corridor and no campers parked on gravel bars. Looks like a pretty serene place- something we all can hope (and work) for

Looks like the "100 Trailer Rally" is the real deal. T-shirts and everything. Hope folks are able to make it out to Kirkwood Wednesday!

Eh, I'm not sure it'd stick. Heart, brains, liver, kidneys, intestines, stomach, bones and marrow- all commonly used as food, but I'm not sure that makes a gut pile wanton waste. And even if someone wanted to claim they were preventing wanton waste- the provision doesn't allow them to sell the eggs.

With the tough time paddlefish have due to dams and invasive species, I think the hatchery propagation is justified. Its fair to question the costs, and look for ways to defray them, but I think marketing the roe could open a whole new can of worms. MDC is already fighting the legislature on any number of issues, I don't see that getting any better by adding more money to the mix. And when you factor in the costs of building stations, staffing them, enforcement, and evaluation to prevent overharvest, I'm not sure how much the agency or anglers would benefit- especially with the effect a flood of new supply would have on market price. If there were a responsible way of doing it, I think it'd be a great idea. But as much as MDC likes spending money, I'd think it's already been looked at. Worth asking, though.