Looks like we are going to have another lake with no more hydrilla. It appears to me the people in control of the lakes look more in the interest of the pleasure boaters than the fisherman. I know there is no way they can have as much economic impact as the fisherman...why do they do this??? There was not one mention of fisherman just how bad it was for the lake lice and pleasure boaters.

Ok, I am done sorry for the rant. By the way if you are interested in the article it was on page 12B on todays paper.

It has to do with the old saying, "The squeekiest wheel gets the oil."

If the fishermen aren't squeekin', you'll not get any attention.

They were basically saying that they didn't want what happened on Ray Roberts, (about the hydrilla that spread there a few years back) to happen to Joe Pool. So, I guess we know who killed off all the hydrilla on Ray Roberts.

I agree, we fishermen need to make some noise on this one. I find it hard to believe that pleasure boaters and personal watercraft users have a bigger impact on the local economies than fishermen. Joe Pond has been coming on strong, no doubt due to the grass, the article makes hydrilla sound like the devil's weed. Can it really be that bad???

Here's the full text of the article:

Please link to articles - to copy and paste them on another publication is a copyright violation.

E-mail ssandoval@dallasnews.com

An 18 foot drop.

I haven't lived here that long. If that's all that it was Local, I'm glad, because that means it has a chance of building up again. Let's hope they can keep their hands off it when it becomes healthy again with hydrilla.

Basically they don't want to teach the idiot's how to get themselves unstuck when their pleasure boat gets stuck and can't to go anymore. Can we just have one lake that doesn't have any pleasure boating or lake lice. Just a plane ole fishing hole. I did see more than enought idiots out today, none of which followed the slow no wake rule under the bridges. This was on ray hubbard today, people pulling a tubers under the bridge a tubing speed, come on where are the cops when this stuff takes place. I have'nt see a water partol on ray hubbard in 5 years. After fighting the rought wind all day , then the lake idiots came out as the wind died, it was terrible.

Curtis,

I don't know if you are referring to the 66 bridge but there isn't a no wake sign around it or bouys so it can be ran. I think someone will get hurt up there and I don't know whey they took the bouys out but they are gone and no signs so it is free game.

We do kinda have one lake that hasn't got any pleasure boat traffic on it and that is Fork, I don't think I have ever seen anyone skiing or tubing there. I did see one jet ski this spring but that was the only one I have seen in the last 3 years I have been fishing it.

I don't want to make it a their lake vs our lakes, you would think we can coexist on these lakes without getting into it every time we go. Those days may be gone though

Hope you caught some fish today.

http://www.tapms.org/aquatic%20plants%20of%20texas2.pdf

http://aquat1.ifas.ufl.edu/hydcirc.html


Read up and see the real harm unchecked hydrilla can do.

the fishermen will lose every time on this one because Hydrilla is not a native plant and can get out of control plus reservoirs are not technically created to fish out of, they are used for water supply and generation of electricity. I think the best solution is to have the TP&W build new FISHING ONLY lakes. Lakes designed and managed for fishing, no pleasure boaters, no drinking water, just fishing. Think about how cool that would be!! The lakes wouldn't have to be 30,000 acres either (so not as expensive) if you designed a lake for fishing, you could make 100% of the water "fishable" unlike the reservoirs where only 10% has good fishing spots. I remember reading about a state starting to do that already, think it was Mississippi. Money could come from fishing license fees or whatever, I don't know, it seems like the only real solution though, not sure why it hasn't happened?? All I know, it would be freakin' heaven to drive up to a ramp and see a sign that said, NO JET SKIS OR PLEASURE BOATS ALLOWED!!!

I don�t remember which lake it was, I think in Alabama or Georgia, the fishermen hooked up their boats and made a convoy to get some attention to save their lake. As I recall it worked. Maybe it is time for another convoy. I wish we could have come up with this idea before they ruined the absolute best Big Bass Lake in Central Texas. Good Luck! James Roberts

Hypothetical Question:

Although a fishing only lake would be nice, it's not going to happen, unless you go to The Lakes of Danbury or something along those lines. Consider this. The State has a difficult enough time trying to get the okay from the EPA and other environmental groups just to build a lake for municipal purposes. Not sure license fees would even come close to covering the cost of building a lake either. Everyone jumps through their skin when the price of a license increases $5.

Okay, enough of that, here's my question:

When I was growing up (middle school and high school) in the 70's, all we had was a late 60's model 18" Glastron tri-hull runabout (walk thru windshield). That's all my Dad could afford at the time. Plus, with a family of 5, we needed the room. We chased sand bass all over Lewisville, Grapevine, Whitney and Texoma. We fished for crappie the best we could (usually by anchoring or tying to available trees). We fished for catfish. Heck, we even fished for bass. Of course, in order to move around, someone had to pull out the oar and the work began. Now, on a rare occasion, we would go skiing or tubing, but mostly we fished, as a family. My question is, on your "fishing only" lake, would we have been allowed to launch our boat, or would we be considered a "pleasure boat," since technically that's what it was and we didn't have a trolling motor? Under those circumstances, couldn't we end up disciminating against other's who have a different type of fishing craft than ourselves? Why should a family that wants to fish from a pleasure craft be treated any differently than someone in a high end bass boat or center console? Just something to think about. I guess the answer on this type of lake would be to allow any boat on the water, but no water toys (skis, tubes, or personal watercraft like jet skis, etc).

I'm sorry Scott, you and your family would not be allowed Just kiddin', I don't know man, as long as you're fishin' it doesn't matter, here, I'll change the sign for ya: NO JET SKIING OR PLEASURE BOATING!

If the lakes were built right, no skier or boater in their right minds would want to get on it anyway, there just wouldn't be anywhere to pleasure boat so it would kinda take care of itself.

AS for the money, just use all the millions poured into stocking giant reservoirs and build some smaller fishing lakes, 2 or 3000 acre lakes wouldn't cost near as much as the giant reservoirs. I'd much rather have them use license money to go towards the creation, management and maintenance of a FISHING ONLY lake than a lake where vegetation is poisoned and "anti" fishermen run wild.

Besides, like I said, other states are actually doing this already, so it can be done. I remember reading about it in Bassmaster, I'll see if I can find the issue.

Hey Goat Farmer, I know what you meant anyway. I was really just throwing out a past reference since it probably still pertains to some (we sold that boat years ago). I'm for just about anything that will stop the indiscriminate killing of grasses in our lakes. Poisoning around marinas, boat ramps, swim beaches and such is fine, but overall, the positive effect of grass far outweighs the negatives so they need to leave the rest of the lake alone. I'm not too thrilled with the carp idea either.

How would you like to pull a scum frog over this mat?