IFPAG Meeting, Part 2 -- Artificial Lures Only Rule Proposal Update

[Don Wittenberger]

This spring, I filed a proposed rule to ban the use of live and dead bait for tiger muskies. The reason is that fish swallow bait and get hooked in the throat or stomach. I attached to my proposal an article from Musky Hunter Magazine reporting the results of a study in the midwest a few years ago that showed that over 80% of muskies that swallowed hooks died within a few months after being caught.

WDFW designated this proposal as #79 in its “2010 – 2011 Proposal List.” WDFW’s preliminary decision on this proposed rule is, “No – not needed for these populations – also gear restrictions for a single species are very hard to enforce.”

As with all the other proposed rules (there's a lot of them), this proposal was discussed at staff meetings, and opposition came from two places within WDFW, field biology and enforcement. I was told field biologists oppose this rule because they havn’t seen any impact on the tiger muskie population from bait fishing, therefore they don’t see a need for the rule. The Enforcement Division wants special tackle restrictions to apply to water bodies, not specified species, because of the difficulty of proving which species the angler was fishing for. (For example, if barbless hooks are required for trout but not bass at a given lake, all an angler cited for using barbed hooks has to do to defeat the citation is say he was fishing for bass.)

I explained to the WDFW rules people in attendance that many people fish with bait for northern pike in Idaho, and that I foresee an growing number of pike anglers migrating into the tiger muskie fishery and bringing the bait-fishing tactics they’re familiar with into the tiger muskie fishery, which will result in losing muskies because of hook injuries. The proposed rule, I said, is preventive in nature. I'm afraid the WDFW folks didn't find argument that very persuasive.

Working around enforcement’s objection to Proposal #79 is difficult, because it’s not practical to ban bait fishing altogether on tiger muskie lakes. All of these lakes have other fisheries, such as kokanee and trout, in which bait is used. Banning bait from these lakes isn't going to happen. A possible way to resolve enforcement's concern and still achieve the objectives of the rule is to limit the size of hooks that can be used with bait on tiger muskie lakes, but WDFW’s initial reaction to this suggestion wasn’t enthusiastic.

Several other IFPAG members spoke in support of Proposal #79, and none opposed it. In other words, we have the support of IFPAG members representing bass and walleye clubs on this issue. However, they don't make the decision, the Commission does, and I think it’s very unlikely we’d get the Commission to adopt a rule that WDFW opposes. Therefore, I hope to have further discussions with WDFW that will lead to rewriting the proposal in such a way that WDFW will support it. If we make progress there, then later on we'll need anglers to send comments and give testimony supporting the proposal, in order to help persuade the department and Commission to adopt it. Here's the timeline for the rulemaking process:

Sept 1 Public comment period opens

September Regional public meetings to discuss proposals

October 2-3 Commission meeting in Olympia; WDFW briefs Commission on proposals

November 6-7 Commission holds public hearings in Olympia and accepts public testimony on proposals

November WDFW provides information to advisory groups about testimony received and solicits their input

Nov/Dec WDFW approves its final recommendations on proposals

January 2010 WDFW briefs Commission's fish committees

February 2010 Commission meets to adopt rules