Gumbo Yes, Bait No.....

[jdmidwest]

I think there is a problem with the Rusty Craw out competing the locals where they are introduced somewhere, it has been going on for a few years.

What I wonder, with all of the government regulations and watchdogs, why are they just now "checking" a few bait shops and finding the culprit for sale? Why not outlaw the sale and restrict the bait shops and bait providers from carrying the craw in the first place.

Lets look at the stats on this one.

SUPPORTING RESEARCH FINDINGS

40% of anglers surveyed by MDC continue to release live bait in waters where they fish. More like 100%, we have all dropped live bait while trying to get it on the hook.

An MDC study of Missouri’s bait industry conducted from 2002 to 2007 found that current approaches to crayfish bait regulation, regulation enforcement and regulation management have not adequately protected Missouri’s fisheries from non-native crayfish invasions. And, even with the old laws we could not enforce, lets make it more confusing by making more laws.

· 27% of shops were selling illegal species of crayfish, including the highly invasive rusty crayfish.

· More than 50% of shops were selling species of crayfish not native to regions where they were being sold. Was it legal to collect and SELL native crawfish?

· 97% of bait shop owners admitted or demonstrated that they didn’t know what species of crayfish they sold. I bet they did not know the species of minnow, cricket, or worm either.

· MDC inspections of bait shops found that many were unable to produce legally-required transaction receipts, many crayfish were being obtained from outside of Missouri and some shops were illegally selling crayfish collected from the wild. But now we want them to sell native craws?

A study that took 5 years to complete, found a problem, did not correct it until 2012. Why did it take 5 more years???

MDC surveys conducted during the summers of 2010 and 2011 found:

· Based on a survey of all Missouri’s bait shops registered as crayfish sellers, about 30% derive an average of 7% of their annual income from live crayfish sales, with 1% being the most commonly reported value. Don't look like they sell alot of them.

· Based on a survey of all registered Missouri aquaculturists, about 29% derive an average of 4% of their annual income from live crayfish sales, with 0 to 2% being the most commonly reported values. Don't look like they raise many of them for Bait.

· Based on responses from a survey of 188 Missouri pet shops, about 10% reported selling live crayfish with those sales amounting to an average of 1% of their total annual income. I always seine minnows and pick up crawfish out of the creek to feed my bass when I kept a few in an aquarium. I never bought any live food for them.

· About 70% of all 70 Missouri commercial fishers who use bait were either strongly or somewhat supportive of proposed regulation language that would prohibit live crayfish bait sales and purchase, but still allow for anglers and commercial fishermen to catch and use their own live crayfish bait wherever they choose. About 17% were either strongly or somewhat opposed to the proposed regulation language. About 91% of written comments supported the proposed regulation language. Alot of 7's there. Most commercial fishermen I know use nets or seines. But at least they support the regs as long as it does not affect them.

· About 12% of 2,612 high school science teachers surveyed and 40% of 58 college and university natural resources, biology and environmental science departments surveyed reported using live crayfish for educational purposes. About 72% of high school teachers and 54% of college instructors obtained their live crayfish from the wild. About 12% of high school teachers and 7% of college instructors got live crayfish from five biological supply companies. Sixty-four (64) % of educators admitted releasing live crayfish to the wild after use, although several regulations already prohibit such release. Flushing down the drain after dissection does not constitute a stream release.

MDC staff have also received reports from pond owners, fisheries managers and fisheries consultants that crayfish are being stocked into outdoor ponds in regions of the state where they are not native. I stock some from time to time in a big silver pot on the stove, then I release the leftovers into my underground sewer stream.....

[Guest]

Just because it hasn't happened in the past doesn't mean it won't happen in the future. This is to prevent the "asian carp" of the crawdad world from taking over. Prevention is much easier than trying to eliminate an invasive species.

[Mitch f]

Just because it hasn't happened in the past doesn't mean it won't happen in the future. This is to prevent the "asian carp" of the crawdad world from taking over. Prevention is much easier than trying to eliminate an invasive species.

Agreed

[fishinwrench]

I guess I am the only one who is admittedly annoyed by the re-making of all these fresh new (yet old) rules and laws. Just in fairly recent days there have been "new regs" announced that.....

Make glass on the rivers illegal.....Yet LITTERING has been illegal forever ! Duh ! So WTF? It's like saying " oh ok fine, you can litter, as long as it's not GLASS".

Then there was this whole felt boot malarky in which they said " This is a real serious thing here, felt tranports didy molecules....but were gonna give you about oooooh let's see, about 8 months to stop wearing felt". Am I seriously the only one that can detect the stupidity there? I'll skip a few equally crazy ones since I think I've either made my point or shown my a$$ and move on to this crawdad thing....

I truly couldn't care less about what the baitshops are allowed to sell because I neither own a baitshop, nor fish with live bait. But I am increasingly disturbed by this constant and seemingly unstoppable movement to outlaw everything short of sitting in front of a television, when the crap they are patting themselves on the back for outlawing has been a unpoliced no-no for as long as I can remember. And I'm just guessing here, but I bet that it's still ok to sell piranha, and it's still ok to experiment and transport genetically twisted bluegill, and release broodstock walleye that have been pumped full of growth hormones. Bon apatite!

[fishinwrench]

...... and meanwhile, raw sewage dams break (oh that's no biggie!) And dead fish litter the James and elsewhere for miles, and that generates no concern whatsoever, from anyone.

Just blows my simple little mind.

[Gavin]

Look on the bright side FW...This one makes sense and it wont cost you anything. The felt sole deal wasnt cheap.

[fishinwrench]

I wonder how many crawdads got eradicated by sewage or chemical spills in the last year ? Way more died from that than at the claws of the killer craws from Arkansas I betcha.

But when their all dead and gone and the smallmouth have had to evolve into midge feeders, we'll blame the Rusty Craw. Amazing!

[jdmidwest]

I wonder how many crawdads got eradicated by sewage or chemical spills in the last year ? Way more died from that than at the claws of the killer craws from Arkansas I betcha.

There are laws in place to prevent pollution of streams, but it still happens. There was a huge fish kill on a creek near Columbia, MO this week.

[Chief Grey Bear]

I guess I am the only one who is admittedly annoyed by the re-making of all these fresh new (yet old) rules and laws. Just in fairly recent days there have been "new regs" announced that.....

Make glass on the rivers illegal.....Yet LITTERING has been illegal forever ! Duh ! So WTF? It's like saying " oh ok fine, you can litter, as long as it's not GLASS".

Then there was this whole felt boot malarky in which they said " This is a real serious thing here, felt tranports didy molecules....but were gonna give you about oooooh let's see, about 8 months to stop wearing felt". Am I seriously the only one that can detect the stupidity there?

Well, it is not a littering law, its the fact that humans are not smart enough to realize that things happen and glass breaks. Glass is sharp and will not only cut you but, will also cut and damage the wild critters that have to live where we like to play. If we could just make one law to outlaw idiots....

I'll skip a few equally crazy ones since I think I've either made my point or shown my a$$ and move on to this crawdad thing....

It is a shame we have to make a law to keep things as nature intended them to be because we are lazy. I have zero problems making law to protect wildlife and the outdoors. They don't have a voice.

And I'm just guessing here, but I bet that it's still ok to sell piranha, and it's still ok to experiment and transport genetically twisted bluegill, and release broodstock walleye that have been pumped full of growth hormones. Bon apatite!

But you like fishing for trout here right??

[eric1978]

...... and meanwhile, raw sewage dams break (oh that's no biggie!) And dead fish litter the James and elsewhere for miles, and that generates no concern whatsoever, from anyone.

Just blows my simple little mind.

That's a good point. While I support most of the regulations that have been recently implemented (because I'm not a knee-jerk anti-gov type and realize there are REASONS for the regs...they're not put into place just for fun), I do have to say it pisses me off something fierce that the vast majority of the new regs we see are aimed at the lowly angler who has little to no power, even as a collective group. Meanwhile, the major environmental offenders who have a huge impact on the health of riparian ecosystems, i.e. farmers, developers, corporations, etc, are just patted on the head and, to a significant degree, a blind eye is turned to the harm they do because they have big money interests and lobbying power behind them. So while we, the anglers, are being inconvenienced with a million new and confusing regulations (albeit for good reasons) those who do the most real damage to our resources are given a free pass because they have money and power. It's a big load of bullshniz.