# GSLWAG - Suggestions ONLY



## Jeff Bringhurst (May 20, 2009)

If you have a suggestion that you feel should be taken to the GSLWAG meetings, please post them here. 

This is not a topic for arguing your point or bickering about how feel about someone's suggestions! We already have a a thread for that.

Thanks!


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

The first item should be getting rid of phragmites in Utah and how to pay for it. (All of that extra swan tag money could have been used)


----------



## dkhntrdstn (Sep 7, 2007)

Fowlmouth said:


> The first item should be getting rid of phragmites in Utah and how to pay for it. (All of that extra swan tag money could have been used)


+1


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

I would like to chime in with my opinion...this is coming from an upland hunter that only dabbles in the waterfowl game. From what I have seen in all my years of enjoying the swamp life, the hunting has always been about the same from year to year. I really don't see any reason to change that, except to preserve the great hunting we already have. The biggest issue I can see that is choking out the future of great hunting we already have is the phrag. It is a beautiful sight to look out west and see the black smoke when the burns are going on. From 10 miles away it looks like progress. 

Our first priority should be how to mitigate this problem. I see there are some real efforts going on from the DNR as well as volunteer work. How do we step this up and attack it from all sides? If we open up our wet lands and free it from this weed doesn't this open up hunting lands, and at the same time spread out hunting pressure? 

I don't know anything about the handicap blinds, as I have never seen or sat in one. I have no idea what kind of changes they need.

As for limited access for motorized boats. I am interested to see the pros and cons as to limiting the motorized boats from certain areas. If we open up the waters by eliminating phrag is this really an issue?


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

bwhntr said:


> As for limited access for motorized boats. I am interested to see the pros and cons as to limiting the motorized boats from certain areas. If we open up the waters by eliminating phrag is this really an issue?


Yes. They are somewhat related but separate issues.


----------



## Kdub (Sep 6, 2010)

Increase frag destruction. Let the public know what they can do to help get rid of frag. I would be more than happy to spend my time volunteering in the effort if I know when, where, how, etc. I would also like to see more rest areas. Every wma should have one or more. For places with more than one rest area, they should be rotated when you can and can't hunt birds so they dont just raft up and never move off them. No restrictions on your method of travel to and from your hunting hole.


----------



## Hoopermat (Dec 17, 2010)

paddler213 said:


> bwhntr said:
> 
> 
> > As for limited access for motorized boats. I am interested to see the pros and cons as to limiting the motorized boats from certain areas. If we open up the waters by eliminating phrag is this really an issue?
> ...


Explain how they are related. I'm not saying the are not but as a mm boat user I don't see how if we open up the water and hunting area how do we effect the paddler's. 
Or is just your personal opinion or vendetta aginst mm boats.

Maybe you should just paddle faster so we don't beat you to your favorite spot.


----------



## Hoopermat (Dec 17, 2010)

Getting rid of Frag should be the first step. After the areas are cleared of Frag then a plan on how to divide the areas and maintain Frag control could be put in place. But you can make all kinds of rules to force hunters to limit where and when they hunt but what good is that going to do. As previously stated it will destroy water fowl hunting in Utah. With all the waters open you have the best opportunity to preserve Utah water fowl hunting for many generations. 
The frag has to go and i would like to see that as first priority. 
Maybe add a $10 consevation stamp to pay for it. Only if 100% of fund are used to getting rid of the Frag.


----------



## nickpan (May 6, 2008)

Phrag. Plain and simple. The sole benefits of getting that under control are greater than any other issue that may be out there.


----------



## Pumpgunner (Jan 12, 2010)

Maybe the simplest way to resolve the MM/motorless issue is to do like at PSG and have one sub-unit as motorless only on every WMA. It could rotate from year to year so that the whole of every WMA is open to all users over the course of 4 or 5 years. I would like to add that I own a MM and I also use motorless travel in the marsh quite a bit so I'm really not biased one way or the other.
And I agree 1000% that phrag should be the 1st real priority. We may not have anywhere to hunt in 1o years if we don't get it under control!


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Phrag and the overuse of MM on our WMAs are related in that they both impact hunting. But they are separate issues, so should be addressed concurrently. I don't believe that even getting rid of all phrag will address the MM usage issue. I agree with pumpgunner that each WMA should have a motorless area. I don't know if rotating areas is feasible or necessary.


----------



## dkhntrdstn (Sep 7, 2007)

paddler213 said:


> Phrag and the overuse of MM on our WMAs are related in that they both impact hunting. How are mms overrus ? On farmington it close to town so more people go there.Go to other wmas and you wont see that many boats. But they are separate issues, so should be addressed concurrently. I don't believe that even getting rid of all phrag will address the MM usage issue.I dissagree with you on that. because the more opened up to hunting.You are nto pushing every one in one tight area like we are now. I agree with pumpgunner that each WMA should have a motorless area. I don't know if rotating areas is feasible or necessary.


Liked said earlier that the money from the swan app and tags go to fight the phrag 100% of the money.Let get the phrag taken care of and let hope for 3 Years of just rain in the winter to get the lake back up and watch all of the birds stick around then.Right now what hurting us is the weather turning cold to fast and the lake being way to low and then the phrag.


----------



## huntingbuddy (Sep 10, 2007)

I would like to see us as a waterfowling community be more aggressive towards the phrag.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

Phrag, unlimited motorized access, and drought. Those are the three biggies. They need to be addressed in that order of importance. For all those who went to the phrag meeting two months ago, you know what's being done. As far as the other two problems, Drought, nothing but a rain dance and some luck with mother nature is going to cure that. The motorized access problem could be solved by designating a few areas in key places within the WMA's that are rest areas and off limits to hunting. The birds simply need a place to be where they don't get harassed and they can scrounge up a bite of food that hasn't been run over by a boat prop if they are to want to stick around. My.002


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> Phrag, unlimited motorized access, and drought. Those are the three biggies. They need to be addressed in that order of importance. For all those who went to the phrag meeting two months ago, you know what's being done. As far as the other two problems, Drought, nothing but a rain dance and some luck with mother nature is going to cure that. The motorized access problem could be solved by designating a few areas in key places within the WMA's that are rest areas and off limits to hunting. The birds simply need a place to be where they don't get harassed and they can scrounge up a bite of food that hasn't been run over by a boat prop if they are to want to stick around. My.002


OMG Tex!!!!!
Your now unfortunately designated as a puppet too.

I'd like what's best for the birds too.
By the way, very well put and 100% on target.....times that by 2 and to my list add *huge* fees (that go directly to habitat improvment) if not make it unlawful to guide on public ground.


----------



## Cody Freeman (Aug 30, 2011)

paddler213 said:


> Phrag and the overuse of MM on our WMAs are related in that they both impact hunting. But they are separate issues, so should be addressed concurrently. I don't believe that even getting rid of all phrag will address the MM usage issue. I agree with pumpgunner that each WMA should have a motorless area. I don't know if rotating areas is feasible or necessary.


Why motorless?? Why not close them off to paddlers or foot soldiers??


----------



## shaun larsen (Aug 5, 2011)

Cody Freeman said:


> paddler213 said:
> 
> 
> > Phrag and the overuse of MM on our WMAs are related in that they both impact hunting. But they are separate issues, so should be addressed concurrently. I don't believe that even getting rid of all phrag will address the MM usage issue. I agree with pumpgunner that each WMA should have a motorless area. I don't know if rotating areas is feasible or necessary.
> ...


because its not fair! c'mon, we've been over this already 

PHRAG is about the only complaint i have. solve that problem and we will all be alot happier.


----------



## Gee LeDouche (Sep 21, 2007)

I would say my #1 is obvious, FRAG. We gotta find a way to beat this weed or we're all goign to be out of business.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

it should have been OBVIOUS two DECADES ago when we had a chance to eradicate the stuff!

anyone remember the habitat stamp? THAT money was supposed to have been for the.... wait for it.... HABITAT! but was funneled to other things by way of the silly "general fund". Earmarks have GOT to be CREATED for these programs if they have not aready...

without a sound unbiased biological study, the whole save the SAV argument is moot. HOW does anyone know what running a prop through a bunch of sego really does? i mean sure it slices a bit off and may stir the bottom muck a bit but it all grows back in short order. anyone out on the spur this spring? My god the stuff is as thick as ever. in fact, those prop scars in the more solid bottomed areas were FULL of new growth wher it has trouble getting root otherwise... im really not being snide or petty toward the motorless thing with this statement, just reporting what i have seen...


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

1BandMan said:


> ... and to my list add *huge* fees (that go directly to habitat improvment) if not make it unlawful to guide on public ground.


why not eliminate pubilc guiding now? and institute a fee for habitat. (ONLY if its tagged as such)

... what happend with the habitat stamp of days gone by was a fleecing of waterfowlers and should be considered borderline theft imo.


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

Longgun said:


> 1BandMan said:
> 
> 
> > ... and to my list add *huge* fees (that go directly to habitat improvment) if not make it unlawful to guide on public ground.
> ...


I'd be good with the elimination of guiding on public land, and as as you mentioned, as long as the habitat money is for habitat I'd be good with a true State of Utah Habitat Stamp to.

I was just saying there should be huge fees for guiding on public land as they are taking way more than they are giving back in my opinion and this would be one way to off set that big gap if it were to continue.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

agreed whole heartedly...


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

All out war on Phragmites 

Total ban on all public land guiding

Mandatory waterfowl id course, I for one, am sick of being asked what kind of duck is this all the time by inexperienced hunters. We can set it up similar to the swan course.

A rest area on every WMA, by rest area I mean no intrusion what so ever by hunters.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

Mandatory waterfowl ID course for conservation officers........I'm sick of arguing with some of these guys on what ducks I have bagged. True story folks......


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

> I'd be good with the elimination of guiding on public land


What! What the hell does that hurt? What's next? Tell Doyal Moss he cant step foot on the Henries? Tell the Tines Up guys they can't go near the Pahvant... Besides, how many full time waterfowl guides ARE there? I only know of ONE that's worth his salt and he's given back PLENTY. We're nit picking at one tiny little facet of a HUGE problem. I don't think guides on WMA's is even an issue. Lets stick to what really matters. Phrag control, rest areas, and lots more H2O.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> > I'd be good with the elimination of guiding on public land
> 
> 
> What! What the hell does that hurt? What's next? Tell Doyal Moss he cant step foot on the Henries? Tell the Tines Up guys they can't go near the Pahvant... Besides, how many full time waterfowl guides ARE there? I only know of ONE that's worth his salt and he's given back PLENTY. We're nit picking at one tiny little facet of a HUGE problem. I don't think guides on WMA's is even an issue. Lets stick to what really matters. Phrag control, rest areas, and lots more H2O.


One is too many with all the overcrowding everyone complains about, and yes when I say ban them, I mean all, big game guides included! Its time to take the public land back!


----------



## Cody Freeman (Aug 30, 2011)

No new regulations or fees...we have enough of those already. How about putting up donation boxes that 100 percent of donations go toward phrag removal. You can have donation boxes at all the entrances to the WMA information centers and have signs that explain what phrag is and what it is doing to our marshes. The signs need to educate everyone on what we can do to prevent it from spreading, whether you use an air boat, a mud motor, or if your are a paddler or a foot soldier. Lets get our marshes back to what they used to be, then there will be plenty of room for everyone. I don't think we should regulate a certain group of individuals because of their means of transportation to where they hunt. If we need rest areas, then they need to be rest areas to all hunters, not just to those who use mud boats. If you turn my honey hole into a motorless spot, I will still be there three days a week if I have to hike, swim, or paddle to get there...And everyone i know with mud boats feels the same way. We are not just going to stay home if we cant take our mud boats out.


----------



## shaun larsen (Aug 5, 2011)

Fowlmouth said:


> Mandatory waterfowl ID course for conservation officers........I'm sick of arguing with some of these guys on what ducks I have bagged. True story folks......


I know!!! Geez its real sad when these fish cops don't know the difference between a hen redhead and a hen canvas back!! Or a spooner and a mallard :roll: that was a real interesting conversation


----------



## grouse dog (Jul 20, 2011)

honeslty, before the notion of "paying for phrag removal" comes up, i think the dwr should explain why this problem wasnt addressed and taken care of years ago when it was a small problem and wouldnt have been so darn expensive.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

Fowlmouth said:


> Mandatory waterfowl ID course for conservation officers........I'm sick of arguing with some of these guys on what ducks I have bagged. True story folks......


They can take it with the rest of the hunters. 8)


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> > I'd be good with the elimination of guiding on public land
> 
> 
> What! What the hell does that hurt? What's next? Tell Doyal Moss he cant step foot on the Henries? Tell the Tines Up guys they can't go near the Pahvant... Besides, how many full time waterfowl guides ARE there? I only know of ONE that's worth his salt and he's given back PLENTY. We're nit picking at one tiny little facet of a HUGE problem. I don't think guides on WMA's is even an issue. Lets stick to what really matters. Phrag control, rest areas, and lots more H2O.


Excellent post, I have been wondering the samething. Really, the very few waterfowl guides on public land is a drop in the bucket. Who cares?

What we should care about is where our money we donate to our government is being spent. I think for the most part most everybody agrees Phrag is the first and foremost problem. Why are the wetlands only getting $200,000 a year for Phrag? Why is money getting dumped into a "general fund"? This is my biggest problem with government programs and agencies, huge wastes of money. BTW, how much Phrag can be destroyed with $200,000 in the private sector? Honest question.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> Really, the very few waterfowl guides on public land is a drop in the bucket. Who cares?


one guiding one or two folks, ok fine BUT take for instance the one time last year that i made a treck out across the spur while doing some swan scouting. i counted SIX different layout spreads that one tender boat was servicing, whats your take on that?


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

Then you had six different SWAN TAG HOLDERS who bought swan tags through the draw system and was out trying to kill a swan with the help of one guide. So what? They would have been out in the swamps trying to kill one anyways. The way I see it, I would rather have someone shooting at a guided swan that was decoyed or called down to shooting range than pass shooting at them 100 yards in the air and wounding them. I really don't see the issue.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Jeff Bringhurst said:


> This is not a topic for arguing your point or bickering about how feel about someone's suggestions! We already have a a thread for that.
> 
> Thanks!


In addition to the waterfowl ID course can we require a reading comprehension course as well? Maybe that would help jeff get what he asked for?


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

bwhntr,

sorry i wasnt very clear, they werent guiding swans... they were hammering the divers though. 

From the looks of it at the time, they had nearly the entire bay tied up. no issues with that?


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

I just had an epiphany while washing my truck after my brief archery elk hunt. The only guys I saw were on Rinos, never saw a soul while hunting.

Anyway, it occurred to me that the entire WMA system came about as a means to provide the workaday hunter with a place to go to enjoy his sport. H. B.Cromer, Utah Fish and Game Commissioner, wrote in 1907:

*"We have reached the condition where thousands of acres of the best duck ground has been taken by private clubs. The general public is excluded from these grounds. This appears to me to be a great injustice upon the public, and, if continued, will bring us to the same condition that exists in England where the general public are forbidden to shoot any wild game."*

The WMA system began with purchase of marshlands around the GSL in 1911, with the primary motivation being the benefit of the hunters who could not afford to join private clubs. Mudmotors now allow access to all areas of our WMAs, and have been termed the ATVs of the marsh. Less than 20% of Utah's hunters use them, almost 75% do not. In the same spirit that lead to the establishment of our WMAs, perhaps we should ban MM from inside the dikes. We could still allow outboards, as they are limited to deeper water and have always been used inside the dikes. Banning MM inside the WMAs would eliminate any thought that buying a one is required as a "ticket to play" on our WMAs. It would also reduce bird disturbance while allowing travel in the channels, the length of the Turpin, for instance. Also, airboats are already prohibited, but modern MM can go pretty much anywhere inside the dikes before freezeup. MM would still be allowed everywhere else; the Spur, Utah Lake, the GSL, private land, of course.

Failing a Comprehensive Motorless Program, which itself evolved in the very spirit that created our WMAs, that is my suggestion. Only outboards allowed inside our State marshes.


----------



## diverfreak (May 11, 2008)

I aint no Dr. But the last time i looked my 23 horse longtail was an outboard and not an inboard so sounds good to me!


----------



## Swaner (Sep 10, 2007)

paddler213 said:


> Less than 20% of Utah's hunters use them, almost 75% do not.


 *\-\* 
Although I do have an edjumacation, I still don't understand where you come up with all of these fuzzy statistics. See if less than 20% of hunters use them wouldn't that mean that more than 80% of hunters do not?

Regardless, we have another 30 page thread that deals with your motorless plans. This thread is for suggestions and new ideas. We've already heard over and over again that you want more motorless. We get it dude, move on. -O\__-


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

I'd like to see an increased intolerance for litter. I'm sick of seeing trash every time I hunt on a WMA.


----------



## Hoopermat (Dec 17, 2010)

You need to give paddler a break. He's still proud he voted for Obama


----------



## Hoopermat (Dec 17, 2010)

Clarq said:


> I'd like to see an increased intolerance for litter. I'm sick of seeing trash every time I hunt on a WMA.


+1


----------



## shaun larsen (Aug 5, 2011)

Hoopermat said:


> You need to give paddler a break. He's still proud he voted for Obama


 -_O-


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

shaun larsen said:


> Hoopermat said:
> 
> 
> > You need to give paddler a break. He's still proud he voted for Obama
> ...


You bet I am. Obama '12 all the way!!!


----------



## shaun larsen (Aug 5, 2011)

paddler213 said:


> shaun larsen said:
> 
> 
> > Hoopermat said:
> ...


...that explains alot :roll: :roll:


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

paddler213 said:


> shaun larsen said:
> 
> 
> > Hoopermat said:
> ...


Just goes to show that a man with a PhD isn't necessarily all that smart... :mrgreen:


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> paddler213 said:
> 
> 
> > [quote="shaun larsen"2m2ygq9]
> ...


Just goes to show that a man with a PhD isn't necessarily all that smart... :mrgreen:[/quote2m2ygq9]
:lol:


----------



## Greenhead_Slayer (Oct 16, 2007)

I haven't read through the last 5 pages, reading the 13 pages on the other about did me in so if this has already been mentioned my apologies.

I'd like to see management of the area's water levels in a way that is positive to growth of plants like sago pond weed, riparian grasslands, salt grasses, alkali bullrush, salicornia, etc.. Pretty much manage water levels in a way that will encourage growth of feed, not supress them. Some units out on the refuge (I know that will be a whole different story than a WMA) in the past were stellar producers of sago pond weed, and because of that stellar amounts of ducks used that unit. Now the water is much deeper and the growth has declined and the amount of birds have followed with it. I know plenty of people that'd be more than willing to go spread harvested seed in order to get some feed conducive to waterfowl more established. It seems like once the food source is gone early in the season the birds don't stay due to the lack of feed in the WMA's. Increasing the area of water to hold birds is, IE phrag control, is of a higher importance, but following a close second to that should be a sustainable food level in hunting areas for the increased number of birds.

Hopefully that makes sense...


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

Here's an idea :idea: Build some restrooms close to the parking areas in the WMA's. I say this for a couple of reasons. First of all I'm sick of toilet paper and shiz scattered around the marsh. Secondly not all hunters are boys, and girls can't just "whip it out" and whiz wherever.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Fowlmouth said:


> Here's an idea :idea: Build some restrooms close to the parking areas in the WMA's. I say this for a couple of reasons. First of all I'm sick of toilet paper and shiz scattered around the marsh. Secondly not all hunters are boys, and girls can't just "whip it out" and whiz wherever.


Good luck with that. Rich doesn't even have indoor plumbing for his iffice at FB. :roll:


----------

