# A new threat!



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

A friend sent me this link today. I see it as a threat to all boaters who use Texas waters. They have stated on their website that their goal is to stop the use of power boats on all texas flats. They have come out as being opposed to guides in Texas waters. They are even agianst the use of jet and air boats on flats in Texas waters. I see this as a small group of waders and kayakers trying to steal our resources. Groups like this continue to try stopping power boat access in NMH, even when research has proven the closure last time had no efficacy.

Here Is the statement.

*What we adamantly oppose:*

The *complete* closure of any area to fishing. If anglers don't take care of the resource, this could eventually happen.
Shallow-draft boaters (prop, air, or jet) that run across coastal flats in an effort to locate fish or joyride.
(I bet they consider anyone who doesn't slither from a boat and crawl into a school of fish as joyriders)


The destruction of valuable seagrass habitat and the harassment and disturbance of fish and anglers by boaters that utilize the above unethical tactics.
(I would say that if anyone uses a flats boat anywhere within site of one of these guys, it would be called harasment) 

Tournaments, fishing guides, outdoor media, conservation groups, and boat/tackle manufacturers that promote this type of behavior through film, articles and product endorsement.
(This would include any guide, tournament fisherman, outdoor media, ect that entered public waters/flats while trying to catch fish.)

Here is the link for this group. http://wadepaddlepole.net/

If we don't keep an eye on these kinds of groups they will steal our natural resources from us all.

chuck


----------



## Hogheaven (May 25, 2004)

Good thing there's not too many known "Partners". LOL.

Saw this last week some where, as well. Dont think it will catch on here as well as Florida. Course... who knows. I actually saw were someone took the time to place a bunch of Anti Airboat stickers on duck blinds and several poles in Aransas Bay as well as Light house lakes. LOL

Here Come the SeaKittens.


----------



## redfishandy (Feb 28, 2009)

hey chuck im all in with ya. but i have seen some dumb a-- down there. looking for fish


----------



## fishin shallow (Jul 31, 2005)

This is a good way to keep them from installing lights on there yaks and having us boater almost run over them at night or early mornings.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

I don't dissagree, A very small percentage of boaters abuse the resource. In most cases, when someone gets too close, its by accident. I see some odd behavior down south, by boaters and waders alike. Its funny to see a wader get all worked up over a boat running within 800yds of them, claiming the boater is scaring their fish. Then the boater stops and catches a fish right beside their boat. When I'm wading i sometimes get those same feelings, I try to fight those feelings back. I think its human nature to feel threatened when your wading and someone else is approaching in a boat. Its also human nature to look down on someone that uses another fishing method than what you use. There is also a small group that has used these areas for years that feel very posessive of them. That have no idea what the flats boats are capable of doing without any damage whatsoever to the resource.

chuck


----------



## matagorda_castaway (Apr 14, 2009)

haha man what are you talking about "They have come out as being opposed to guides in Texas waters"...?

i just looked at their website for like 3 seconds and saw this:
"We adamantly oppose:....

The destruction of valuable seagrass habitat and the harassment and disturbance of fish and anglers by boaters that utilize the above unethical tactics.

Tournaments, fishing guides, outdoor media, conservation groups, and boat/tackle manufacturers that promote this type of behavior through film, articles and product endorsement. "

that doesnt say anything about banning guides from Texas waters...it just says they dont want guides, tournaments, etc., promoting destruction of seagrass.

i dont think their intentions are bad, but im still gonna drive my boat where i want to lol.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*madagorda*

I made some comments on the adamanet statements in my 1st post. Please read them. All of those are subject to interpretation.

If you have been paying attention to politics lately you have learned from some media outlets, that any form of opposition to the presidents agenda has become racism.

My point is very simple those who hold extreme views in any area can find fault in any use of a resource that is different than their use. My point is we all have to be vigilant in guarding our beloved sport from those who would use sea grass as their excuse to stop fishing of any kind from taking place on the flats from a boat. It is human nature to be gready. It is my opinion this is the latest attempt to steal from me and others the right to fish in a way that is different than this groups.

chuck


----------



## queso1 (Oct 22, 2008)

I'm not sure that their stance is too crazy. They aren't saying that power boats can't go into the flats. They are saying that people shouldnt be motoring through the flats/sea grass. I kind of agree with them. Let's define areas where you can't blow through and have these areas as poling or paddling only. I'm glad you brought these guys to my attention, because I kind of like what they are standing for.


----------



## PasadenaMan (Dec 5, 2007)

That site is not here to stay, they only bought a 1 year domain presense.


----------



## queso1 (Oct 22, 2008)

Strike my last post. I've looked at the website and I am cool with them. Hell, I might even give them some money.

Recreational fishing will never deplete the fish stock - especially with catch and release being embraced. However, you destroy their habitat and we will all be fishing on playstation.

I checked out some of the videos where the shallow sport and mowdy were making chocolate milk. Bunch of ****s.


----------



## jmack (Dec 7, 2006)

queso1 said:


> I checked out some of the videos where the shallow sport and mowdy were making chocolate milk. Bunch of ****s.


Where did you see these videos ?


----------



## queso1 (Oct 22, 2008)

they are on their website, but the links don't work. Therefore, I went to youtube and typed in the titles of the videos.

Vids of a guy saying "look the water is only up to my ankles...let's power out of here." You have a mowdy without, as far as I can see, a jackplate or anything churning up muddy water for about 30 yards.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*queso1*

I have not seen the videos you claim are there. I can tell you, if you pull a tugboat onto the flat it will stir up mud. There are flats boats all over texas that can run over 4" of water for miles without uprooting the grass or bottom.

I have seen it with PETA and other groups start at the weakest link in hunting (archery) and use it as a slippery slope to attempt ban all hunting. Their theory is start on the fringes, cause there is less people to fight and work your way to the middle.

There is a small group of people in the CC area lead by a former CCA chapter leader, trying to shut down access to ninemilehole. He was successful in 2000 and we lost access to large areas of the "hole" for 5 years. (a closure that was proven to be of no value to the seagrass) He was run out of office and has reappeared in different organizations ever since. I suspect we are seeing it again. If I am correct he is likely behind it. I was told he pushed the state (against national and state CCA's wishes) for that closure. He had fished that area for years and he didn't like shallow running boats "poaching" his fish.

chuck


----------



## chicapesca (Jun 7, 2004)

railbird said:


> My point is we all have to be vigilant in guarding our beloved sport from those who would use sea grass as their excuse to stop fishing of any kind from taking place on the flats from a boat. It is human nature to be gready. It is my opinion this is the latest attempt to steal from me and others the right to fish in a way that is different than this groups.
> 
> chuck


I agree with what you are saying for the most part Chuck. However, we have regulations in place right now in the Redfish Bay Scientific Area that would in a perfect world prevent the types of things this group is against. 
I would think that as fishermen and women, we would want the resource we love to continue to grow and enhance the fisheries that rely on it for their lives. You can't dispute the fact that there are more and more boaters out there every year, and if only a fraction of them damage "our" resource, whatever the reason, that will and does make an impact.


----------



## Miles2Fish (Dec 2, 2008)

This isn't really a threat. Areas of skinny water and grass do need protecting from prop scarring and hull removal. I fished Mosquito Lagoon in East Central Florida for 6 years and they had a very large protion of the lagoon committed as a " no motor zone". The closure made for better habitat and better fishing. We either used a boat with a poling platform or kayak fished these areas....The fly fishing in these areas during the week was spectacular because of decreased boat traffic and fishing pressure.


----------



## queso1 (Oct 22, 2008)

Railbird: You make an interesting and valid point. Chip a little bit at a time until you've got everything. No doubt. I can't say whether or not this group has an ulterior motive. I can only look at their message - and to me, their message doesn't sound too wild or draconian. 

If you had a food plot for deer, you wouldn't go tear it up and destroy its intended purpose - to feed the deer. You'd want to nurture it. I think the same should go for the habitat in the flats. Once the habitat is gone, we won't have to worry about the nutjobs at PETA - there won't be any fish to catch ;( .

I think a contributing cause is not indifference or lack of regard by the fishermen - they don't see (or think about) what is going on below the surface of the water. I bet if they could see what the prop was doing and what effect it had, they would change their behavior. If they didn't, they are probably d***s anyway.

As far as youtube goes...go to this group's site and click on "Take Action". On the right hand side there are some videos...but they don't link. Just go to youtube and type in the title of each video.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*Queso1*

I don't see how running an Air Boat across flats destroys the flat. I also can't see how a boat that can run in 4 inches is damaging a flat with an average depth of 14" . The statement supplied lists air boats, jet boats, and prop boats. You seem to disregard all of the statements except the 1 practice you feel you can attack. You are very interested in getting people to look at the 1 video you have found to support your claims. I wonder why that would be.

chuck


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*Miles2fish*

The fishing in NMH is spactacular all the time, but even better during the week. That doesn't mean we should give access to only those young or healthy enough to wade or paddle into the resource. Just because the fisherman of the fine state of florida let this happen to their precious resource, doesn't mean we should just give up here. Especially when the people trying to push this agenda are doing it to move fisherman away from where they like to fish.

Everyone is an environmentalist when they need to be. If city decided to put a land fill up wind from my nice suburban home, I would prolly get real attached to the kangaroo rat that lives behind my house. But if the city wasn't doing, that I might be trapping it and throwing it in the trashcan.

chuck


----------



## queso1 (Oct 22, 2008)

railbird: I never even knew about that site until you brought it to my attention. I have no agenda - I saw a post, I visited the site and I made up my mind accordingly.


----------



## Gottagofishin (Dec 17, 2005)

I guess the value of my poling skiff just went up. 

Seriously, I think the current laws are adequate, and that "most" boaters are responsible concerning potential damage that can be caused by their boats.

Having said that, it turns my stomach to see criss-crossing prop scars across an otherwise pristine flat. 

The problem is enforcement. There is simply no way to observe a boat running a flat and know whether it is doing damage or not.

It's one of those situations where the actions of a few ruin it for everyone. The real question is... "What is the lesser of the two evils?"


----------



## shallowgal (Jun 11, 2004)

I am by no means ecologically insensitive, I catch & release, I kayak fish (sometimes) and fish from Shallow Sports. I know that 99.5% of the time my boat is not tearing up grass. Thats the beauty of a tunnel hull. The motor and prop sit above the bottom of the boat. I also know that prop scars I have seen out in front of my house re-grow the seagrass, then new ones appear, and the grass grows back again. Seen it with my own eyes. I also know that outboard boat sales have been dropping over the past 10 years and are currently at a 20 year low of 188K units. So, seems like fewer boats hitting the water, not more. I happen to be in one of the "offending" videos on that site, and thats my masterful professional videography you are watching. I was there and I happen to know that we were taking off in MUD not GRASS. I was standing in it thank you very much.

I wish there were a way to do what we love and leave the area we are using completely untouched, but that isn't reasonable. I'm young and fit and have a hard enough time paddling across the area in front of my house! I'm willing to bet the car you drive, and the carbon footprint of your homes and businesses are doing far more damage to the environment than a prop scar, but I doubt you'll start biking to work.


----------



## chicapesca (Jun 7, 2004)

Boat sales might be down, but I don't believe that there are less boaters out there. Maybe less in new boats.
Here are some pictures for a little perspective. The aerial pictues tell the real story.


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

I would like to see a photo comparison of the same area over a 3 to 5 year period. A compilation of photos like this does not show anything to make any judgement by.


----------



## Blown2run (Jun 22, 2006)

shallowgal said:


> I wish there were a way to do what we love and leave the area we are using completely untouched, but that isn't reasonable. I'm young and fit and have a hard enough time paddling across the area in front of my house! I'm willing to bet the car you drive, and the carbon footprint of your homes and businesses are doing far more damage to the environment than a prop scar, but I doubt you'll start biking to work.


Good point.:wink:


----------



## Gottagofishin (Dec 17, 2005)

I don't buy that tunnel hulls don't leave prop scars. In really shallow water, the combination of water being sucked up into the tunnel followed a blast from the prop wash is more than enough to uproot the grass. Not many people run a flat with their prop digging through the mud the whole way.


----------



## chicapesca (Jun 7, 2004)

Haute Pursuit said:


> I would like to see a photo comparison of the same area over a 3 to 5 year period. A compilation of photos like this does not show anything to make any judgement by.


Other than showing what the prop scars look like from different perspectives, especially to those that don't do shallow.

I would also like to see a compilation of 1 to 2 year periods as well.


----------



## Slimshady (Jan 11, 2005)

Those same prop scars provide great habitat for fish. Its like a sand pot holes but longer.


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

Slimshady said:


> Those same prop scars provide great habitat for fish. Its like a sand pot holes but longer.


Yeah... big fish gotta eat too!!! :biggrin:


----------



## Specks&Spots (Aug 26, 2007)

They are just building roads for the fish to use so that they don't have to swim through all that grass, but that one picture with the loop de loops, he is showing his artistic side.


----------



## Levi (Mar 6, 2006)

Gottagofishin said:


> I don't buy that tunnel hulls don't leave prop scars. In really shallow water, the combination of water being sucked up into the tunnel followed a blast from the prop wash is more than enough to uproot the grass. Not many people run a flat with their prop digging through the mud the whole way.


I fell in behind a SS 21ft that was running in about 8in of water once, I was in my skiff.... yes the water was a bit mudded up, but the grass was perfectly fine. Waving in the current and healthy, it all comes down to knowing your limits... Heck I guide out of a 22ft Blackjack and fish the hog island/estes area alot and always run the same path, and I have yet to see a scar that I have made... But I know the area well and have my "blow out holes'' to get back up in without making a mess of things. It all comes down to using your head. Yes I have hit bottom before, but now I rarely even churn mud.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*Shallow tunnel hull boats*

I run a 21' majek redfish, I can tell you for a fact, my prop can be jacked up in the tunnel in 4" of water and not even a 1/4" of prop is below the boat. The shallower the water the less thrust my boat needs to stay on plane. I can cruise around at 12-14mph all day long in these conditions and never touch the bottom while on plane. As others can tell you, all you have to do is know your water, know your rig and your fine.

As for grass down south, go look at minutes of meetings pertaining to the scientific areas and NHM and you will find that the grass down south in NMH is transient. I can tell you from my experiences down south there is grass in places this year that didn't have grass last year. There are whole areas that was completely covered in grass last year that has non this year. I assure you props didn't remove 1000 acres of grass without leaving a mark. The scientific studies performed from 2000 to 2005 showed exactly that. There are still people trying to close those waters for purely selfish reasons.

chuck


----------



## Gottagofishin (Dec 17, 2005)

Levi said:


> I fell in behind a SS 21ft that was running in about 8in of water once, I was in my skiff.... yes the water was a bit mudded up, but the grass was perfectly fine. Waving in the current and healthy, it all comes down to knowing your limits... Heck I guide out of a 22ft Blackjack and fish the hog island/estes area alot and always run the same path, and I have yet to see a scar that I have made... But I know the area well and have my "blow out holes'' to get back up in without making a mess of things. It all comes down to using your head. Yes I have hit bottom before, but now I rarely even churn mud.


I talked to a friend of my son's that is working on a PhD in Marine Biology. Specifically studying the grass flats in Texas.

From what he told me you are partially correct. The problem is that the roots get exposed and the grass dies unless something puts the mud back on top of the roots. Go back two weeks later and find that trail. It will likely be there.


----------



## ghillhouse (Jan 6, 2008)

railbird said:


> As for grass down south, go look at minutes of meetings pertaining to the scientific areas and NHM and you will find that the grass down south in NMH is transient. I can tell you from my experiences down south there is grass in places this year that didn't have grass last year. There are whole areas that was completely covered in grass last year that has non this year. I assure you props didn't remove 1000 acres of grass without leaving a mark. The scientific studies performed from 2000 to 2005 showed exactly that. There are still people trying to close those waters for purely selfish reasons.
> 
> chuck


This is true. The idiots who get stuck out there and are blowing mud and grass out their back-end have not been proven to cause significant grass loss. In fact, they can trench NMH all they want, and muddy-up a half mile swath of water.

But it ticks me off that someone could be so callously indifferent to our fishery, and to fellow fishermen. It comes down to the erosion of ethics and responsibility. If you asked most of these chuckle-heads the definition of a good steward, they would answer that it is a hot flight attendant.

I worry that the golden rule of "Not doing something that you wouldn't want others to do" is being replaced with "I do it 'cause I can". Inevitably, the only backstop to that is making it so you can't. So no one should be surprised that a bunch of kayakers tired of getting burned or nearly run-over have decided enough is enough and start putting their money where their mouth is. And although I don't own one, there are a lot of kayaks out there.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

Regardless of whether you can run your boat in spit without causing any physical damage to the habitat---is this a good idea for both your fishing and for those trying to fish around you?
It would seem that many people believe that running boats in skinny water and along shorelines does not spook the fish there.
Hell--I have seen helicopters flying at 1000' feet spook tailing reds.
Even if these fish do not leave for deeper water, they are rattled, and become more difficult to approach and catch--especially on artificials.

It is my belief that motorized traffic on the flats spooks fish and alters their feeding and schooling behavior,and there is a cumulative impact to this pressure over time.
If you disagree with the above then you will disagree with what the TX Wade Paddle Pole site is stating.
If you do agree-- then the only solution to keeping the fishing good for everyone is for everyone to lower their individual impacts in traffic sensitive,shallow areas .


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*Chugger*



chugger said:


> Regardless of whether you can run your boat in spit without causing any physical damage to the habitat---is this a good idea for both your fishing and for those trying to fish around you?
> It would seem that many people believe that running boats in skinny water and along shorelines does not spook the fish there.
> Hell--I have seen helicopters flying at 1000' feet spook tailing reds.
> Even if these fish do not leave for deeper water, they are rattled, and become more difficult to approach and catch--especially on artificials.
> ...


I guess the next thing we should ban is all barge traffic in the ICW. I know it disturbs the fishing, when one of those monsters comes by. Hell I guess while we are at it we should get rid of all boats and cars too. They all have an impact on the environment.

As for motorized traffic on the flats, I have been cruising along on my way to one of my spotsand seen a school of fish rise up. We stopped and limited out right there without leaving the boat. They just stayed and swam around while we pitched to them. Yes, fish will react to boat traffic. Sometimes when someone drives by me, when I am wading, the fish run from them strait to me. Yes, dove will fly away from your truck when it sees you. I guess we should ban all 4 wheel drive vehicles too! Yes, fish react to anything flying above them (helicopters). Many of their most natural predators come from above.

Just because fish might change their feeding pattern and schooling behavior doesn't mean boats should be banned from all flats. I doubt any redfish or trout will decide to start feeding on fence posts or large rocks, or begin schooling up in single file like its a fire drill, just because someone ran across a flat. It is the fishermen's responsibility to decide what effect pressure on a certain area will have on the fish.

The wadepaddlepole group sees all traffic on the flats as harassment. I LIKE MANY OTHERS, DON'T SEE IT THAT WAY!!!

chuck


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

Mr. Railbird,

The "new threart" seems to be the old threat of those who believe that because they own a boat they can do whatever-wherever they please.

You seem prone to exaggeration and misinterpretation.
I am assuming you have not read the TxWPP web site or that you simply wish to misstate the information for dramatic impact.

Personally I am not for banning boats (own 2) or cars(own too many) but I am in favor of some rules of the road and etiquette for using both.
I think speed limits are a good idea for cars and I like running lights on boats--are you opposed to these?
I am not for banning 4x4 vehicles but their use in some areas is restricted by state law-- for example driving in sand dunes and river beds.
Do these restrictions bother you?

And if someone zig-zags their 4x4 through the field I am trying to dove hunt---I will be p----- off.

TxWPP does not advocate closure of any areas to fishing---it does advocate that everyone lower their individual impacts so that we can share the resource more equitably.
Do you find this threatening?


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 11, 2008)

I have to say from looking at people's Avatars, that you can tell someone's stance on this subject just by looking at the boat that they own. The one's that are pro staying out of the flats drive boats that won't even get into the flats. The one's with the flats boats and tunnell hulls are for it. I drive an airboat, it hurts less of the flats than an outboard. I have to agree that the vegetation grows back from a prop scar. If you are so pro against boats running in the flats then you should sell whatever boat you own and save the environment by paddling period. I don't see that happening.


----------



## bk005 (Feb 23, 2005)

W8kski said:


> I have to say from looking at people's Avatars, that you can tell someone's stance on this subject just by looking at the boat that they own. The one's that are pro staying out of the flats drive boats that won't even get into the flats. The one's with the flats boats and tunnell hulls are for it. I drive an airboat, it hurts less of the flats than an outboard. I have to agree that the vegetation grows back from a prop scar. If you are so pro against boats running in the flats then you should sell whatever boat you own and save the environment by paddling period. I don't see that happening.


I dont know what the solution is. People that fail to see the middle ground are doomed to loose the resource someday in the future. Im not naive enough to say I dont notice the scars, or to say they are not getting worse. Im also not bigheaded enough to say I know what the solution is, and discount all others points. I love fishing the flats and always fished tunnel hulls, but if we dont do better at policing ourselves ultimately the govt. will step in and do it for us.

If you have never blown out some donuts your not fishing shallow, and Im not against it, but the idiots burning ruts for 1/2 mile are going to ruin it for all of us someday.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 11, 2008)

I'm not being ignorant by saying I don't see the point. I see the ruts in the flats everytime I go out. I just like the fact that this is the one time where I can actually say that airboats do less damage to the flats than an outboard when there are so many anti airboat people out there.  I see the anti's point in running the flats, but a kayak in the flats will do about the same damage as an airboat in the flats. I take that back. A kayak will do more because they are paddling through the vegetation stirring up the habitat.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

".....but a kayak in the flats will do about the same damage as an airboat in the flats. I take that back. A kayak will do more because they are paddling through the vegetation stirring up the habitat." W8kski

HMMM--Let me think--if given the choice to fish some of the back lakes with/around 6 airboats or with/around 6 kayakers--what would I choose?


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 11, 2008)

HMMM--Let me think--if given the choice to fish some of the back lakes with/around 6 airboats or with/around 6 kayakers--what would I choose?[/QUOTE]

Have you ever fished from an airboat? No one cares about what YOU want. This discussion is talking about what tears up our bays. I would be willing to bet you've never seen six airboats in one place period.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

OK--let me rephrase,
Given the choice to fish some of the back lakes around ONE airboat or around TEN kayakers---I will take the yakers

Yes-- I have been in/fished from an airboat 
Yes--I have seen 6 airboats in one St. Joe lake (this spring as a matter of fact)


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 11, 2008)

But your still talking about the noise of an airboat. That's not what this discussion is about. Maybe you should start a new post. It's about running in the flats and tearing up the vegetation. Can you honestly tell me that an airboat does more harm than an outboard to the flats..........no you can't, and that is my point. It doesn't matter if you have a trolling motor or a paddle, it's still more in the water than an airboat. The last time I read this thread it didn't say, Would you rather be around a loud airboat or a quiet kayak?

By the way....I would've said I've been in one too if someone was calling me out. If you're wanting to highjack a thread, you should go start your own on that subject.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

Mr. W8kski,
I think it is you who is mistaken about the intent of this thread. Railbird's original post was in opposition to the Tx WadePaddlePole web site which is about more ,though includes, habitat destruction.It is also about the impacts of increased motorized traffic on the flats. 
I don't care if you are Jesus C. in a hovercraft, if you are running it down shorelines a in 10 inches of water you are going to be spooking whatever fish are there.

By the way---I actually have been in airboats--didn't care for them too much


----------



## Mrs. Let's Go (Oct 25, 2005)

I fish regularly from a poling skiff and a kayak and i have waded. i have been in airboats and other power boats. I have fishing Florida, Louisiana and most of the Texas coast. I have seen wading do more damage than my kayak has ever done. My paddle doesn't drag the bottom when used correctly - so does not damage. Our poling skiff isn't perfect for all areas, but does little damage when used in applicable situations. I agree with the guy who said it's a matter of using your head. If I was going to choose a mode of fishing that I felt had the least amount of impact on the waters/species in the area, it would be a kayak. And yes, I'm speaking from experience albeit my opinion.


----------



## Trouthappy (Jun 12, 2008)

I've fished in airboats too, can't say I really care for them. Anything running around with an airplane engine is too loud. Used to live in Port O'Connor, and the ICW sounded like an airport in November. In Florida, they torment home owners on the lakes by frog-gigging all night. In general, they're kind of a scruffy-looking bunch. The airboat owners, I mean. They don't scar the grass bottom, or they would probably be outlawed by now.


----------



## DeNada (Sep 29, 2009)

I’m with the Mrs. on this one. The notion that a paddle can destroy grass is absolutely laughable. 

And the Chugger’s assessment of airboats is also dead on. I’ve been around a lot of tailing schools that got nervous and moved off the flats before the approaching airboat was even in sight. Redfish in shallow water hate the sound and vibration from those big motors. W8ski: I’ve never been in an airboat during the summer, have you ever run past a tailing redfish in yours? I didn't think so.

I’m a boat owner and I’ve signed up to support TX Wade Paddle and Pole. Our flats and bays are crowded, and there’s nothing we can do about that. We are long past the point where one user or group of users should be able to dominate the resource with unethical and destructive fishing practices. 

There is absolutely no valid argument for running a boat across a shallow flat unless you’re hugging a lee shoreline to get away from a storm. Paying a tournament entry fee or having a twenty-foot tower on your boat, does not give you that right. Unfortunately, we are now dealing with a group of lazy and ego-driven boaters that bought into some misguided notion that fishing on the Texas coast requires a shallow draft boat, the destruction of habitat, and the harassment of fish and anglers. 

It’s time for a change toward more responsible use of our resources, and I’ll support any effort to get that ball rolling.


----------



## Trouthappy (Jun 12, 2008)

I'll drink a toast to that. Kayakers deserve our respect, for causing such a minimal impact on the resource. Which resource? All of them. These "Own the Bay" types (remember that awful boat ad?) running around with big outboards in inches of water enourage destruction of bay bottom, and they often burn a shoreline of shallow water fish, sometimes just for kicks. The jet ski mentality.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*Responsible use*

My point in starting this thread was to raise the issue of resposible use of the resources. I know there is damage to the flats when people are careless in their use of it. I also know that kayakers in general are a very possesive bunch. It ****** them off if they paddle 2 miles over into a lake and they look up and see a flats boat sitting in their spot. Or they have a boat come within say 3-4 hundred yards of them after they have paddled their little boat all that way. I can understand that. I can also say that if that ****** you off, you need to buy a flats boat cause a flats boat can go anywhere a kayak can go.

I know that people who wade are very protective of "their spot", if anyone comes within site of their location they are likely going to be upset about it. I wade all the time behind my cabin and see fish react to pressure. I also see them calm back down and go right back to eating in a few minutes. If a boat drives by, I can wait for "my spot" to settle down to catch some more fish. I am also waiting for the fish that are likely to be moving in my direction because of the boat traffic that just went by.

Why not look at boat traffic as a positive instead of always a negative, If your assesment of all traffic desturbs fish and causes them to move is correct, then all boat traffic will funnel all the fish between you and them in your direction.

I will say that the group I started this thread about is not looking at any use of the flats (other than with a kayak or by wading) as being acceptable. Just because they don't own a boat capable of taking them to where they wade to, doesn't mean they should be able to ban all boats that can get there.

I can promise those who want to steal from me, the right to use the flats. I will steal from them the right to fish alone. I own a gps and have access to the enternet. I also know some of the people who are involved in this effort and where they fish. I will make a habit of giving accurate fishing reports any time I see them fishing their hallowed spots. They will have a hard time finding a parking spot for their boats before they get out to wade to their spot.

chuck


----------



## DeNada (Sep 29, 2009)

Chuck, 

Apparently you missed the poling part of Wade, Paddle & Pole. They're not trying to close all flats to all boats. They're trying to set aside a few areas where everyone can still fish while not being run over by some inconsiderate jerk. If they are succesfull at closing some areas, then anyone with a shallow draft boat can still fish those spots, either by poling, or parking and wading. 

Your kneejerk reaction is that they're against all boaters. I own a boat, and several of my friends that own boats are also supporting their cause. What differentiates us from you is the fact that we're looking at the big picture and thinking about the future of the resource. 

Given the stance that you have taken with this thread, and your pledge to harass the supporters of this cause, it's pretty obvious that you're NOT thinking of the resource, you're thinking about yourself.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

DeNada said:


> Chuck,
> 
> Apparently you missed the poling part of Wade, Paddle & Pole. They're not trying to close all flats to all boats. They're trying to set aside a few areas where everyone can still fish while not being run over by some inconsiderate jerk. If they are succesfull at closing some areas, then anyone with a shallow draft boat can still fish those spots, either by poling, or parking and wading.
> 
> ...


I have not missed anything, and I do take it personal when greedy people try to take from me, the right to drive out on a flat and set down and drift out to a deeper hole and start over. Their adamant statement lumps anyone who drives across a flat as harassers of fish and ignorant slobs. If they get they're way, I will be robbed of the use of flats the way I enjoy them. If they are successful, I plan on insuring they lose something too.

chuck


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*Repost*



railbird said:


> I have not seen the videos you claim are there. I can tell you, if you pull a tugboat onto the flat it will stir up mud. There are flats boats all over texas that can run over 4" of water for miles without uprooting the grass or bottom.
> 
> I have seen it with PETA and other groups start at the weakest link in hunting (archery) and use it as a slippery slope to attempt ban all hunting. Their theory is start on the fringes, cause there is less people to fight and work your way to the middle.
> 
> ...


Denada maybe you missed this!!


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*Time for a repost*



railbird said:


> The fishing in NMH is spactacular all the time, but even better during the week. That doesn't mean we should give access to only those young or healthy enough to wade or paddle into the resource. Just because the fisherman of the fine state of florida let this happen to their precious resource, doesn't mean we should just give up here. Especially when the people trying to push this agenda are doing it to move fisherman away from where they like to fish.
> 
> Everyone is an environmentalist when they need to be. If city decided to put a land fill up wind from my nice suburban home, I would prolly get real attached to the kangaroo rat that lives behind my house. But if the city wasn't doing, that I might be trapping it and throwing it in the trashcan.
> 
> chuck


Denada, you might have missed this part of my argument!


----------



## DeNada (Sep 29, 2009)

All you're doing is reinforcing my motivation for supporting their cause. I've already read all of that stuff. I read the entire thread before I ever posted. Did you honestly think that reposting all of your pointless ranting was going to change my mind?


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

"My point in starting this thread was to raise the issue of resposible use of the resources." Quote Railbird
BS--I think your point in starting this thread is that you feel threatened by those who do want to use the resource responsibly and that this might exclude you

"Just because they don't own a boat capable of taking them to where they wade to, doesn't mean they should be able to ban all boats that can get there." Quote railbird

I support WadePaddlePole and I own a "go anywhere" boat. I choose not to run it through flats because I do not think this is fair to fellow anglers who would also like to fish those waters after me.

"I will steal from them the right to fish alone."Quote Railbird
I think the intent of WadePaddlePole is not to "steal" a flat from you or to have it to themselves--the intent is to find a way to SHARE a public resource in an equitable fashion --in a way that everyone can continue to find and catch fish.

"If your assesment of all traffic desturbs fish and causes them to move is correct, then all boat traffic will funnel all the fish between you and them in your direction."
Are you serious?


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

What kind of go anywhere boat do you own? 

The last statement is a very simple easy to read statement and yes i'm serious. If your belief is fish run from boat traffic and the traffic is 400yrds away, then it stands to reason all the fish between you and the boat would move closer to you. Do i need to draw you a picture? 

My definition of responsible use of the resource does include the use of it. Theirs does not include use from motorized traffic. I refer you to the kangaroo mouse arguement.

Your statement of them being willing to share the resource is contingent on you fishing their way, with exclusion of all other ways. I definantly feel threatened when groups like his push an agenda for selfish reasons.


chuck


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*denada*



DeNada said:


> All you're doing is reinforcing my motivation for supporting their cause. I've already read all of that stuff. I read the entire thread before I ever posted. Did you honestly think that reposting all of your pointless ranting was going to change my mind?


The answer is NO, i honestly think the only reason you joined this message board is to push you agenda for WPP. Evidenced by this being you 3rd post. I am not trying to persuade you, i am just defending my position. It was however an opportunity to let others, who may not have read them, get to see the otherside.

good luck

chuck


----------



## Trouthappy (Jun 12, 2008)

You mentioned kayakers being unhappy with a boat in their spot.
From what I've seen of kayakers, they collectively have the patience of a saint, with fast boats roaring past them all day, knocking them silly with their wakes. Not once in 20 years have I ever seen a kayaker gesture or yell at another fisherman. They're pretty much the cream of the crop, of bay fishermen, working hard to reach a spot that any joker in a fast boat can reach within minutes. Kayakers paddle against the wind for two miles, and take their luck as its handed to them, even if a boat is anchored in their "spot."


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

"Do i need to draw you a picture?",Railbird

Yes--that would be nice--please include the bleary eyed,pschotic, look on the redfish faces after they have been "funneled" to me for 20th time that day.

"I refer you to the kangaroo mouse arguement." Railbird
I am not up on that one but it sounds interesting?

"I definantly feel threatened when groups like his push an agenda for selfish reasons." Railbird

A clear case of the pot calling the kettle black--is not your insistance on running flats as the sole method of egress, no matter how many people you screw over, the very definition of selfishness.


----------



## SS Minnow (Nov 3, 2005)

based on a lot of peoples opinions on here, the movement should be against boaters who have no clue, not responsible fishermen. almost everyone one of the above posts cites a "inconsiderate boater" which is the real issue. there are inconsiderate people who drive, bike, boat, kayak, pole, hunt, parent, teach, preach, advertise, politicize, and post. its seems like education should be the first priority??? we license people to drive a car, why not drive a boat?

particularly entertaining is the air boat topic. the "scruffy looking" bunch....most of those people are primarily duck hunters who honestly contribute millions to DU. why not advocate stronger sound suppression measures? air boats do not destroy habitat, they are loud.

my .02 anyway.....


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 11, 2008)

DeNada......You totally missed my point with the paddle from a kayak vs. an airboat. To put it another way, I am saying that there is nothing that protrudes into the water from an airboat to damage the habitat. Even a paddle is more than nothing. The loud sound of an airboat does not damage the habitat for the fish. I have been underwater with an outboard in the distance vs an airboat, and I hate to break it to you but an aoutboard has more noise in the water from a distance than an airboat. There is no prop, exhaust or anything in the water to creat the noise. All of the noise is from the prop outside the water. I bet you thought it was the motor huh? Figures.

As far as you asking about have I ever run up on tailing reds in the flats? The answer is yes. I have stopped the boat, jumped out and caught fish right after running up on them. Fish don't leave the bay when they get spooked. They simply dart out of the way and go about 20-30 yards away.

As to your comment about there being absolutely no reason for a boat to run in the flats is false. Do you think airboaters run the flats just to do it. There is a reason for that, and when a fisherman is in site those that are responsible will go way out of their way to go way around and not disturb the fisherman. Airboats aren't made for deep water. There is no flotation in an airboat, they are top heavy with the motor sitting up high. They burn way more fuel in deep water vs. shallow water, and are louder in deep water because they are turning higher RPMs. I know you thought all that noise is coming from those "big motors", but it's not. So next time you are wading and you see an airboat coming and he is 500-600 yards away from you and you throw your hands up in the air like you own the bay, think about that. You don't, and he is doing what he can going out into the chop where airboats are not intended to go to respect you that is acting like a jack*** waving your arms.

I don't own an airboat for the purpose of fishing. I own an airboat for duck hunting. I do take it out occasionally in the summer when the tides are freakishly low. Remember one other thing, if you are ever out there stuck on a sandbar and an airboat comes along.......he's the only one out there that will get you off other than the coast guard or tow boat. I know that would never happen to you because you will never run in the flats.....but just sayin'.


And Trouthappy.......you obviously think that the kayakers are the angels of the bay, and would never offend anyone ever. Well guess what, they aren't. Most of them are just the one's that couldn't afford a boat so their only choice is to paddle their happy a$$e$ out to their spot. To each his own, but if thats their choice of transportation that they choose, they can't hate the player that got there ten times faster, caught more fish while they were paddling and were off to a new spot before they even showed up.


I


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 11, 2008)

Continued for Trouthappy...

You are quick to discriminate based on what kind of boat someone drives. Do you really think that the airboats are the "scruffy ones" that are out there running their "airplane engines"? I hate to tell you but we aren't in Florida running around on 10 and 12 foot boats with aircraft motors. Most nice airboats cost way more than most peoples bay boats. I don't see many $45,000.00 bay boats running around in Matty these days. The keyword there was "many" before you jump all over that.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

Whew---It is a big relief to know that airboats are burning flats and shorelines for a good reason--their comfort. That makes watching them burn mile after mile of shoreline--ruining miles of sightcasting oppurtunities for everyone in the area --- easy to take.
I will probably never wave my arms at another airboat now that I understand how difficult it is for you to operate your $45,000 rig--please go ahead and ruin my day--I know it must be bothersome for you to see someone wave their arms --they just do not understand you.
Total BS on airboats not spooking fish. Oh thats right--I just don't understand how an airboat works--my mistake.
So please clarify:
Do airboats blow or suck?


----------



## DeNada (Sep 29, 2009)

W8 - I'm calling complete BS on your claim that you've seen tailing fish from a running airboat. I didn't say scared fish or running fish, I said TAILING.

I've been wading and paddling our flats for 25 years and I've seen hundreds of incidents where the fish drop their tails and ran when an airboat approaches--and at a much greater distance than when approached by a powerboat. 

Why do you think people are waving their arms at you at 500 yards? I'll tell you why, because those *&&%$#$% airboats SPOOK FISH at that distance!

And your idea that kayakers are a bunch of bums that can't afford boats? Wrong again. I own a boat and a kayak, a lot of people do. We use our boats to get to the flats, and then we get out and paddle shallow to find fish--fish that are tailing and happy--until some jackass blasts in and runs us over. 

Everybody that runs a boat on the flats has their weak justification for doing it. That doesn't make it right, and if you've bought a boat that doesn't run well in deep water, then that was your own stupid move. And by the way, my wading boots and my kayak have never been stuck on a sandbar.


----------



## Guest (Sep 30, 2009)

I don't get to this forum often enough...you guys rock this s**t hard. I appreciate the passionate defense of your respective positions, but ultimately it's about the resources (skinny water and fat fishies) and we all have the obligation to protect them regardless of our preferred mode of transportation. 

Wasn't it Rodney King, who said "can't we all get along"? But Rodney don't fish the LLM from an SS24, a Diamondback airboat or an Ocean 'yak, now do he. To each their own, but protect each other's access to the resource! That's what makes fishing 2 cool.


----------



## Bocephus (May 30, 2008)

Boils down to nothing more than a "ME" attitude from all sides...

Everyone wants to do what they want...and to hell with everyone else !

:headknock


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 11, 2008)

Chugger....

You're probably also a member a PETA and are one of the ********** standing at the boat ramp moaning and complaining because those fish are getting poked with a hook! To answer your question if an airboat sucks or blows I think it is obvious that you have more experience in that area. When your sitting out in the flats in your kayak its all becoming really clear why you're so upset. Gag gag...... Don't come onto this site acting like you know it all degrading people and such. Your just one tree hugger out there trying to turn this into an Obama world. We don't need your kind in our bays anyway. Those that can't respect others and think that they own the bays are the one's that take the fun out of it. The next time you are out there waving your arms like a complete idiot when I'm 500 yards away, I will pull right up to you and ask if you are needing help because your sure trying to flag me down. Then maybe you will think twice that someone was alot more considerate than you would've been. Maybe it will even be the game warden and you can let him know what you think.

Who gives a flying **** if a fish tucks his tail and leaves. That's what fishing is all about. It's fishing, not catching. 

This all goes back to respecting other fisherman, and respecting the resources. You apparently only respect yourself, and think you own the bay.


----------



## Hogheaven (May 25, 2004)

Ive had clients on the airboat, where we motored up to tailing reds, casted, and caught them all while the motor in running. I'll have to video it next time. 

The OP comments were about a website promoting the non destruction of Sea grasses. We all know that they get hurt by Boats. Just look at the skegs on the outboards. Lots of polishing, and little paint. IF The website is for the protection of seagrasses how then can the airboats be destructive to sea grasses. They Arnt. 

What they do have is a noise issue (above the water) They can be quiet though. But not silent. 

IT is really three differnt issues, here. 1. Save the seagrasses. 2. Airboats. 3. Boater Etticate.(all vessels...even the kayaks)

Kind of need three differnt threads. 


If every one is so concerned about the fish and habitat on the flats, then why fish there any way? Why try to injure these fish wish hooks? SARCASIM intended.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*15 square miles*

Guys the reason I brought this up is the WPP guys are painting all people who use the flats in motorized equipment with a broad brush, and targeting them. I fish an area that is roughly 3 miles by 5 miles with access only on the perimeter, if you WPP into it. The group that is supporting this effort is attacking my ability to access this by boat. They expect me to wade/paddle 3-5 miles to access fish. I can access it from about 4 different directions in my boat. On a very crouded day there might be 10 people wading in the whole area and all are likely concentrated in a small area (800x200 yards) on the very edge of the flat. That leaves about 14 square miles that i can run to where i want to fish without bothering any of them. Am I being selfish to want access to the remaining 14 square miles to be granted to people who want to fish there by motorized equipment. I can do this without ever uprooting a single blade of grass. The only arguement they have is its not as good of fishing as it was in the 60's, therefore boat traffic must be the cause.

I can see if a flat is 200x300yds running it and burning it up would be a serious problem for someone wading it, but a flat that is 15-16 sq miles come on.

chuck


----------



## DeNada (Sep 29, 2009)

You're assuming that they are planning to shut down the EXACT area that you're describing. How do you know they're after your personal fishing spot? And even if they were, you would still have about 99.999999% of the Texas coast at your disposal to run and fish as you please. 

Go read their website again. They are not trying to shut down every flat in Texas. They're only trying to get few small areas set aside. If you can't see the longterm benefit of that, then I would argue that your agenda is way more self-serving then there's.


----------



## S_Woody (Feb 23, 2005)

Sorry if this has already been covered but my red arse wont allow me to read through the next 6 pages.

They state that they adamantly oppose these things, however they have partners that are shallow draft boat manufacturers and guides whom fish out of said boats. Sounds like they are barking just to bark. 

I am all for the conservation of the flats and marshes, but conservation is something that should be instilled in sportsmen through education and not segregating the community. I am tired of hearing the long winded fight between kayaker/wader vs. power boater. We are all in the same boat, PUN intended, when it comes to conservation so whinning back and forth gets us right back to square one. I enjoy fishing from any media from barefoot to Bertram so it makes no difference to me how we accomplish these goals, as long as it doesn't take away the rights of anyone.

Ok, not sure if that made sense but I was typing as fast as possible while the boss was away. Everyone relax and pull the popping cork outta your arse...


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*denada*



DeNada said:


> You're assuming that they are planning to shut down the EXACT area that you're describing. How do you know they're after your personal fishing spot? And even if they were, you would still have about 99.999999% of the Texas coast at your disposal to run and fish as you please.
> 
> Go read their website again. They are not trying to shut down every flat in Texas. They're only trying to get few small areas set aside. If you can't see the longterm benefit of that, then I would argue that your agenda is way more self-serving then there's.


Denada, or should i say Jim, The areas being targeted are the same areas targeted in 2000. I am not asuming anything here about where i see waders when i go there. It is obvious their objective is to revisit the area between NMH and yarborough pass. Jim Atkins pushed this thru in 2000 and is likely behind this again. Look on their website you are so interested in people going to under newsworthy, read the article on nmh. Guess what Jim Atkins is named several times in that recent article. If 40% of the articles highlighted by this group focus on 2 areas, don't you think that is their target areas.

I guess you are one of those guys that are willing to take from others so you can have the spot to youself. Why should i quit fishing 14sq miles of water because a very small elite group wants it to themselves. I could understand it if I had to run all over them to fish it, but I don't.

chuck


----------



## S_Woody (Feb 23, 2005)

If and when this is implemented I think the benefits will be seen in future population numbers, but there is gonna be hell to pay until then. It isn't going to create a sanctuary for all fish, but will provide fingerlings a proper refuge and allow them a better opportunity to mature. 

I agree with Chuck in that I don't take kindly to anyone telling me where I can and can't fish. If this does go through I will be fine with it if it is done for the right reasons, those being for the betterment of the habitat and the preservation of "spawning" or "growing up" grounds. However if this is put into action because waders/yakers don't like the sound of boats or being "harassed" by boat traffic then that isn't going to sit well with me. Waders/yakers should be given the right of way, setting up a drift in front of a wader/yaker is horse ***** etiquette but if either of these two things happen to you whilst wading/yaking taking action and chunk egg weights at em to get your point across. If only the strong survive then toughin up that chin and do something about it instead of coming on a forum to betch and moan about it. By all means I am not warranting waders/yakers to pack heat/blades/or potato cannons out into the marsh, but damnit if someone pushes you push back and stand your ground.

This is more evidence of the ************* of America. Man up, if the paddlers unite then there has to be someone out there willing to fight against it so all the propheads need to unite and fight fire with fire.

Rant ftw...


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

W8kski
Sorry to be so long getting back to you.
I was out this morning hugging some trees ( black mangroves) and poking some reds thru the lips with a Mustad 34007 #8.
It sounds like you need to take a few deep breaths and settle down a bit.
It seems you took the "airboat -blow or suck" comment a little too personal
Sorry if I struck a nerve


----------



## Bocephus (May 30, 2008)

You guys are too funny....


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*Denada you are part of the problem*



DeNada said:


> W8 - I'm calling complete BS on your claim that you've seen tailing fish from a running airboat. I didn't say scared fish or running fish, I said TAILING.
> 
> I've been wading and paddling our flats for 25 years and I've seen hundreds of incidents where the fish drop their tails and ran when an airboat approaches--and at a much greater distance than when approached by a powerboat.
> 
> ...


Your statement about waders being justified in giving someone the universal *** sign when an air boat gets within 500 yds of them. Is the biggest bunch of BS as your fond of saying i've heard yet. I've never fished from an air boat, but I've seen plenty on the flats and caught fish when airboats have come through the cut I chose to wade down. I was catching them every cast when he came by and was hooked up again before he got more than a 100yds away. The *** arms are the same as shooting me the bird and if a wader does it when i'm 500 yds away, I will be offended. I might even be waiting for you when you return to your boat. If you continue to do it i just might move your boat across the channel or just lift you power pole and let you swim to it.

chuck


----------



## Hogheaven (May 25, 2004)

Does an Airboat Suck or Blow.... Depends if your In front of the prop, or behind it.


----------



## S_Woody (Feb 23, 2005)

railbird said:


> The *** arms are the same as shooting me the bird and if a wader does it when i'm 500 yds away, I will be offended. I might even be waiting for you when you return to your boat. If you continue to do it i just might move your boat across the channel or just lift you power pole and let you swim to it.
> 
> chuck


Chuck's the man!:idea:


----------



## Tombo (Mar 15, 2005)

Hogheaven said:


> Does an Airboat Suck or Blow.... Depends if your In front of the prop, or behind it.


I know first hand of the sticker you are talking about. :rotfl:


----------



## Tombo (Mar 15, 2005)

I am so confused!


----------



## Vampiro (May 1, 2009)

That site is full of generallities - there are just a few on each side who are innsiderate of others and think they own all the water around them. 

Seems to me that this site is just trying to cause trouble between those with PBs and those without in order to restrict access and fishing in this state. I wonder if ACORN is affiliated with the site in some manner.


----------



## Finn Maccumhail (Feb 16, 2009)

S_Woody said:


> Chuck's an internet tough guy!:idea:


FIFY

Seriously, some of y'all are acting absolutely retarded.

Airboats do tear up the grass & bottoms, especially when they're being pushed along in water too shallow for them to float. And airboats do spook fish on the flats but not always. Also, boats with tunnel-hulls do tear up the bottom, but not always. The bottom line is that the shallower the water, the more sounds are magnified, the easier fish spook.

As for the re-filling of prop scars, scientific research has shown that those scars aren't actually filling up with seagrass but with algae.

TWP&P doesn't advocate the closure of _ANY_ place to fishing or access, just advocating the "drift, troll, or pole" practices in certain areas.

I know a couple guides on there personally and their livelihood comes from the flats and powerboats, they certainly aren't going to jeopardize that.


----------



## flounder boy (Oct 26, 2006)

*yahoooo!!!!!!!!!*

i can be a little slow on the uptake sometimes and correct me if i am wrong but it seems like wpp has alread had quite an impact by generating such a passionately sprited debate. next thing you know the croaker soaker debate will be dropped in the mix!!! ooops did i bring in the croaker debate? lol!!!! i do happen to be a yakker and yes i am a one income family so a boat is out of the question for me. that does not make me any less of a fisherman.  i will put my fish catching skills against any boater, wader, etc... i find rude people are just that. they are generally rude and inconsiderate in all aspects of their life. they come in all shapes and sizes and fish from a boat, kayaks and wade. i agree there needs to be a long range plan in place to preserve the fishing way of life for generations to come. there will never be a solution that please every one so some give and take is necessary. let keep up the discussion and leave the insults behind. tight lines to every one!!!


----------



## redfishandy (Feb 28, 2009)

all of yall need to grow the heck up


----------



## karstopo (Jun 29, 2009)

I primarily kayak fish, but don't agree with this group that wants to ban airboats, power boats, etc on the flats. It seems like another set of unnecessary laws. I haven't had too much trouble with power boats while I fish, so I am a kayaker not in favor of this group or its mission.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

Mr. karstopo,

Perhaps give the web site another read:

http://wadepaddlepole.net/index.html

Here is an excerpt which includes their stance on the issue you refer to in your post:

What we actively support:

Anglers that fish the Texas coastal flats by wading, paddling, or poling.

Protection of the sensitive seagrass habitat that builds and sustains our inshore fisheries.

Efforts to educate boaters and anglers on the ethical and responsible use of our resources.

A few small, shallow-water management areas on the Texas Coast that are open for fishing, but closed to running motorized craft of any type. We are not advocating the closure of large contiguous flats or expansive shallow embayments like the Lower Laguna Madre.

The establishment of more public access points for waders and paddlers so that existing locations might receive less pressure.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

Continued:

The above does not state that they want to manage All flats, only a few,small,traffic sensitive areas


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*Wow these fish must be deaf!!!!!!*

I drove right up within 100 yds of this spot and trolled in and this is the first fish i caught. I continued to fish from my boat for the next 4 hrs and caught 14 more, before i got bored and came home. Here are the pic's. There first 3 shots are of my 1st fish of the day. I will post a video as soon as i figure out how. These fish were more spooked when I hooked up than when i drove in. I didn't see a single wader for the 17 mile drive to here. The last 4 miles was less than 2'. I had 9 reds and 6 drum the norther hit right after my 1st fish.

I do this a couple of times a week and never have any trouble catching lots of fish from the boat. If I had been wading i might have caught more fish, but i wouldn't have had near as much fun. The water was shallow and dirty, but i sight casted every fish. I used a trolling motor and poled depending on depth and situation. The largest fish in this school were 40+. The 1st fish was just under 40". We had 5 others over 30".

They didn't look spooked to me!!!!!!!!!!!!

chuck


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

Here are some videos of todays flats adventure. They don't seem to be too spooky after i drove in there. lol!!!!!!! 
Pay close attention to the huge school in the background of the 3rd video. Hooking up blew them up bad, but they came right back up just 10 minutes later. I sat in this spot for about an hour and caught 6 oversize 30-40 inch reds sitting right there. Now why should my boat be banned from such a place. By the way wading is awesome there. Enjoy!!!!














Chuck


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

Interesting how this has morphed into a "spooked fish" debate. Spooked fish move, breed, eat super spooks, etc.. Prop Scars don't... I know if somebody trenched your yard with a Z-71 after a rain, you'd go ballistic. I fail to see much difference. Damage is damage. No matter what kind of rationalization people try to come up with, it can't be good. On the contrary, I think that the jury's pretty much in that it is unequivocally harmful. I don't see any indication that they're wanting to close access to any spot out there: they're just trying to protect valuable and shrinking seagrass beds that supply a lot of fish and bait... If you're not willing to do your part to protect the fishing resource, just man up and say so. If you are willing, poling, yaking, or wading will just take a little bit more effort on your part. Sorry you've gotta leave most of your beer back in the cooler on the boat.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*D*

I supplied these videos for others enjoyment, and because a few of your WPP buddies have claimed power boats can destroy their fishing from 500 yds away.

As for causing prop scars, I don't support that. If you are implying I did that in my videos, look again. I hate to break the news to you, but my boat and many others can cross 2' of water without touching the bottom.

chuck


----------



## dang_ol (Jul 14, 2008)

dang, i quess if they pass it i will be out of luck i have both a flats boat and an airboat, i just have to say i have caught just as many reds out of my airboat as my flats boat, 
the only people i have ever seen waving at me, was not doing because ****** at me but really needed help, when i am in my airboat i make every effert to go way around, 
one other thing, i can crank my four stroke 75 and my 350 side by side and the 75 is louder, i know me and a friend made a bet on time. its the prop that makes them so loud.


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

railbird said:


> I supplied these videos for others enjoyment, and because a few of your WPP buddies have claimed power boats can destroy their fishing from 500 yds away.
> 
> As for causing prop scars, I don't support that. If you are implying I did that in my videos, look again. I hate to break the news to you, but my boat and many others can cross 2' of water without touching the bottom.
> 
> chuck


 Chuck: as far as the 500 yard deal, how would you know? You're obviously always the one in the power boat... I've seen tailing reds hit the road when a boat passes a long, long way off: no big deal, just go catch em somewhere else. I guess I missed the posts where they made those claims: only one I remember seeing was a 500 yard *** signal between a wader and an airboater, from the airboater's perspective...

No, I didn't imply that you caused prop scars. Such a claim would be pretty stupid, unless you've come up with a means by which to cause a prop scar while you're parked and fishing in a foot or better of water... So you can cross two foot of water. whooptifreakindo. If, on the other hand, you meant to do one of these: " instead of one of these: ' , then I'd really, really like to see you come to a stop, fish, and then get back going without touching the bottom in 2" of water..... There's a lot of powerboaters who think they're not touching the bottom in the flats: they're well out of the area before the evidence becomes clear. (or cloudy with little shreds of seagrass floating around, as the case may be).

In other words, I could really care less what your boat can or can't do. Just get a hovercraft if you want to really do it up right. I just get utterly disgusted every time I see a prop scar. I was duck hunting regularly off of an airboat in an all-but enclosed dead-end flat off of San Antonio bay about ten or twelve years ago: some nutjob cruised in there with a powerboat, cut a prop scar, then did a quick U-turn and left when he found out it was too shallow for him. The same scar still stood out like a sore thumb the last time I was through there about five years later... They're bad news, period. Nobody's trying to keep you from your precious "playground"... They're trying to protect a resource, and if you gave a **** about it you'd break out the wading boots or the pushpole and do your part... Conservation isn't about having free and unfettered access to every drop of salt water in Texas: it's about making smart choices and making personal sacrifices if needed to reduce or remove any negative effect you may have on the system...


----------



## IsleSurfChunker (Sep 25, 2009)

This is a camels nose in the tent moment.....It all sounds innocent enough, which one of us doesn't appreciate the sea grasses? All of us do of course. But that is not their point. Oh it's their stated point for sure, but the next thing we'll see is....no fishing of any kind zones....you see, it's all for the sea grasses....and that is how it always starts. 
I'll not apologize for calling it as I see it. I've seen these knuckleheads act out this stuff for far too long.


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

IsleSurfChunker said:


> This is a camels nose in the tent moment.....It all sounds innocent enough, which one of us doesn't appreciate the sea grasses? All of us do of course. But that is not their point. Oh it's their stated point for sure, but the next thing we'll see is....no fishing of any kind zones....you see, it's all for the sea grasses....and that is how it always starts.
> I'll not apologize for calling it as I see it. I've seen these knuckleheads act out this stuff for far too long.


Do you speculate this wildly on everything?

Heck, their stated "audience" is fishermen. Not "naturalists", not tree huggers (I guess that'd be seagrass huggers), but fishermen.. It's one thing to fudge your ideology to be more palatable to a larger crowd. It's quite another to actively recruit and develop a membership made specifically and intentionally from fishermen and then tell your entire membership "we were just kidding: we're here to ban fishing"....Like it or not, there's a whole lot of fishermen out there that are quite worried about what we're doing to the bays. One of 'em sits at this keyboard...Seagrass is the lifeblood of a lot of bay systems: I think we're being foolish to give it up on the altar of bigger engines and skinnier-water boats.... If that makes me a "grass hugger", then so be it: I've seen the grass, I've seen the good that it does for the bays, and I've seen the damage that we're causing it. This group seems to have a similar viewpoint, and I certainly appreciate the OP bringing it to a lot of like-thinking sportsmen's attention...


----------



## deke (Oct 5, 2004)

"They're trying to protect a resource, and if you gave a **** about it you'd break out the wading boots or the push-pole and do your part... Conservation isn't about having free and unfettered access to every drop of salt water in Texas: it's about making smart choices and making personal sacrifices if needed to reduce or remove any negative effect you may have on the system... "

Really, so because he doesn't want to fish out of a kayak, and lets be clear this is about kayakers and what THEY want. This isn't a big group of "pollers" they include polling so it doesn't sound so severe to boat owners. Ex. "see you can still use your boat", but you have to poll in from a half mile off, or more. And you implied he doesn't care about conservation, because he doesn't think the way you do so that makes him wrong? And the "smart choices" are your point of view, right? 

This is the same as lure fisherman looking down on bait guys and fly fisherman looking down on lure guys. Kayakers have the same mentality, that some how because they fish out of a kayak they are more in tune with nature, it takes more skill, and the way they fish in a more "pure" form. This is the same mentality as fly fisherman, IMO, and I base my opinion on many kayak people that I know and have talked with. Add in the whole "it's us against them(the power boaters) mentality" and you get the same kind of eliteism as you see in the examples I all ready mentioned.

No one wants to see grass torn up, I don't. But attacking Chuck because he likes to drift more than wade is BS. And as others have said, let them get a foot in the door and we are screwed. Close a few areas, then a couple more, and so on. Ask California how they like the "lets save the fish" areas they can no longer fish. And to do this in the PINS area could lead to, and help the aholes running that place put more restrictions on fisherman. From what I understand the guy running it doesn't like fisherman. Now put in his feeble mind that other people, fisherman no less, are trying and willing to close areas around "his" park, and that guy could take this and run, and try to close a hell of a lot more water than you want closed now. 

(If you are a kayaker, sorry just my opinion.)


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

deke said:


> "They're trying to protect a resource, and if you gave a **** about it you'd break out the wading boots or the push-pole and do your part... Conservation isn't about having free and unfettered access to every drop of salt water in Texas: it's about making smart choices and making personal sacrifices if needed to reduce or remove any negative effect you may have on the system... "
> 
> Really, so because he doesn't want to fish out of a kayak, and lets be clear this is about kayakers and what THEY want. This isn't a big group of "pollers" they include polling so it doesn't sound so severe to boat owners. Ex. "see you can still use your boat", but you have to poll in from a half mile off, or more. And you implied he doesn't care about conservation, because he doesn't think the way you do so that makes him wrong? And the "smart choices" are your point of view, right?
> 
> ...


 Yes, I've got a kayak. No, what you said doesn't bother me in the least: I've heard a heck of a lot worse opinions than that on the subject. I'm generally too busy trying to keep from getting plowed under by a burn boat to worry about powerboater's opinions.

The real issue here is the bays: do we or do we have the right to destroy them. Not the legal right, but the moral right. Did God or fate or whatever else you may believe in put that seagrass down there to be fodder for a Mercury prop? The way I see it, that's the ONLY thing that's at issue here: not his legal right to be there with a shallow sport or a dredging barge, not whether he spooks fish, not whether it's just too hard to wade, pole, paddle or whatever.... I routinely fish, and prefer, a heck of a lot of areas that NEVER see a powerboat: the access is too limited, the turns too tight, the running area just too small. I found a means to get to those areas that doesn't damage them. Why is that not a standard theory? Why does free access trump the bay's well-being? If I operated under the same theory that the guys tearing up that seagrass do, it would take a heck of a lot less effort for me to just get a marsh buggy and drive there: however, TPWD, and my conscience, would tend to frown upon the damage I'd cause in doing so. Why doesn't anyone (save myself and other like-minded individuals) frown upon any method to reach a favorite fishing hole that is actively detrimental to the bay system? What's the difference here? I'm not attacking anybody: I'm supporting the health of our bay systems. Period.. Significant in my list of reasons why I use a yak is simply because of it's low impact on the resource. I also don't take deer just because I can if the condition of the local resource doesn't call for it, I don't shoot more than my share of dove, and one of the main reasons I keep my retrievers is to improve my recovery rate of wounded birds...I've also been out there up to my crotch in mud in seagrass restoration programs

As far as the "slippery slope" theory that's being so freely bandied about here, remember at one time not too long ago there was a camel with his nose in the tent over gamefish status for redfish, and another camel with his nose in the tent about whether it should be legal to dump PCB's into Galveston bay... Not all slippery slopes dump into a cesspool...


----------



## redfishandy (Feb 28, 2009)

chuck these videos and pictures are not helping your case. AT ALL. good luck


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*Oh saintly Dwilliams!!*

I can't argue that prop scars don't exist. I also can't argue that seagrass isn't beneficial to our fishery. I just vehemently disagree with the premise that all use other than kayaks and wading is damaging to the sea grass. For that matter, you touch the bottom far more often than I do in a single fishing trip. Every step you take, you are likely crushing some form of sea life, including seagrass, maybe even breaking it off. Every time you drag a stringer you tear seagrass. Every time you anchor your kayak you tear up sea floor. I guess since you (the high and mighty dwiliams) have the right to decide how much damage is ok, you have decided since it is your way, it must be the best.

As for your statement about all power boats causing prop scars, thats like saying no kayaker would ever keep more than his limit of fish, or no kayaker would keep an oversize redfish without tagging it. Its like me saying all kayakers are selfish jerks who are out to steal access to public waters from anyone who doesn't paddle around in a plastic bathtub.

There is an article in the october 2009 edition of texas fish and game magazine that illustrates the end result of your views and attitudes toward other uses of a resource. It is called (fishing the flower gardens). I'll be ****, a petition is being circulated to ban fishing there. Would you like to guess who advocates this? Thats right, divers and dive charter groups. They want to ban all fishing there so dive charters can have the place all to themselves. Commercial fishing has been banned for years, as is touching the bottom for recreational fishing, now they are gunning for the recreational fishermen. Wow seems like a slippery slope huh.

I use the flats the way i like to fish, thankfully you don't have the right to dictate how and where i fish.

chuck


----------



## Specks&Spots (Aug 26, 2007)

redfishandy said:


> chuck these videos and pictures are not helping your case. AT ALL. good luck


The only thing I see disturbing the the sea floor in those videos are the big redfish, someone better get a handle on those things before it is too late.


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

railbird said:


> I can't argue that prop scars don't exist. I also can't argue that seagrass isn't beneficial to our fishery. I just vehemently disagree with the premise that all use other than kayaks and wading is damaging to the sea grass. For that matter, you touch the bottom far more often than I do in a single fishing trip. Every step you take, you are likely crushing some form of sea life, including seagrass, maybe even breaking it off. Every time you drag a stringer you tear seagrass. Every time you anchor your kayak you tear up sea floor. I guess since you (the high and mighty dwiliams) have the right to decide how much damage is ok, you have decided since it is your way, it must be the best.


The whole idea is to minimize negative impact. Just our presence is probably negative at one level or another. I'm comfortable with the concept that the two steps I may take out of the boat to take a **** or something is "minimal damage". No stringer: too much drag. Anchor? Rarely. And no, the "high and mighty dwiliams" (sic) doesn't have the right to decide how much damage is OK: I'll leave that to TPWD. That's why they've decided that kayaks, wading, poling, stake-outs, even anchors, etc.,are acceptable. If you truly want to even go out on the limb and compare what damage I may cause to what a 150 or so with a prop does, that says more about you than it does me.... I've been out in the RBSSA when "skinny water" boats cruise through on step: the "clear" water in their prop wash really belies what they leave behind.. No, it's not the 7-8" deep prop scar that really is the real root of the damage, but the muddy water and shredded grass tells the story pretty well. People just don't often realize what is really going on when they're burning over these flats...If there's not a plume of mud coming out of the prop, the assumption is made that it's the same as six foot of water. It ain't.



railbird said:


> As for your statement about all power boats causing prop scars, thats like saying no kayaker would ever keep more than his limit of fish, or no kayaker would keep an oversize redfish without tagging it. Its like me saying all kayakers are selfish jerks who are out to steal access to public waters from anyone who doesn't paddle around in a plastic bathtub.


 I really don't remember saying that, but I'll run with it: any boat is CAPABLE of leaving significant bottom damage, even tunnel hulls. It's just a matter of how much the operator cares about the resource... The rest of your statement there really speaks for itself and doesn't really deserve much by way of comment.



railbird said:


> There is an article in the october 2009 edition of texas fish and game magazine that illustrates the end result of your views and attitudes toward other uses of a resource. It is called (fishing the flower gardens). I'll be ****, a petition is being circulated to ban fishing there. Would you like to guess who advocates this? Thats right, divers and dive charter groups. They want to ban all fishing there so dive charters can have the place all to themselves. Commercial fishing has been banned for years, as is touching the bottom for recreational fishing, now they are gunning for the recreational fishermen. Wow seems like a slippery slope huh.
> 
> I use the flats the way i like to fish, thankfully you don't have the right to dictate how and where i fish.
> 
> chuck


 Funny, I don't remember dive groups being involved here. It's fishermen you're arguing against. The science is there, whether you choose to believe that or not. Sorry, I just want the next generation to be able to fish seagrass like I can. We've already just about lost Galveston bay, besides a little stretch of seagrass in Christmas bay and the various GBF restoration efforts. Sorry if I just think that we ought to protect what we've got rather than just hacking it to lifeless mush...There's other bays in this state that are showing the effects of the same treatment; I for one say it's worth making an effort to protect them before the damage either "kills" the areas or warrants more stringent governmental protection.. Like those flower gardens... When G-bay's grass beds were destroyed, it was just considered a cost of progress. We're in a different political/environmental climate now, and the "powers that be" are just itching to pull the trigger on protected/restricted status for any area that shows significant damage from human use: I'm just a proponent of trying to do our part as sportsmen to make sure that it doesn't get to the point where those bureaucrats start to take notice and put these areas on their hit list..
All it takes is giving a **** about the resource and be willing to make an effort, however insignificant, to protect it. If that doesn't describe you, you're part of the problem.

Of course, the main thing anybody in Texas needs to worry about is how you like to fish. Lord help us if you wake up one day and decide you like gillnets, shock boats, and explosives...


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*I think you miss the point on purpose. lol*

I happen to care very deeply for our ecosystem. I however, disagree that the science is in on wether the seagrass is damaged by driving over it. I will however offer to take you for a ride and show you the way i fish. As for TP&W, I have been to a few meetings on the subject of the scientific areas, and they say its perfectly ok to drive over seagrass and even trim it off the top (not my practice), its not ok to uproot it. I guess you believe the prop wash is uprooting the seagrass, if so you had better not get anywhere near a flat and should use a trolling motor from a mile or so out to make sure you don't do any damage. I believe otherwise and I will continue to follow what parks and wildlife say is good practice. You are so fond of quoting them, it might be a good idea to read some of their work. I am glad you don't keep fish at least you are doing your part there. One last question, what happens to the fish you gut hook?

D, I have enjoyed the conversation with you and am serious about taking you fishing sometime. I also think the discussion has been useful in showing everyone both sides of a serious debate.

chuck


dwilliams35 said:


> The whole idea is to minimize negative impact. Just our presence is probably negative at one level or another. I'm comfortable with the concept that the two steps I may take out of the boat to take a **** or something is "minimal damage". No stringer: too much drag. Anchor? Rarely. And no, the "high and mighty dwiliams" (sic) doesn't have the right to decide how much damage is OK: I'll leave that to TPWD. That's why they've decided that kayaks, wading, poling, stake-outs, even anchors, etc.,are acceptable. If you truly want to even go out on the limb and compare what damage I may cause to what a 150 or so with a prop does, that says more about you than it does me.... I've been out in the RBSSA when "skinny water" boats cruise through on step: the "clear" water in their prop wash really belies what they leave behind.. No, it's not the 7-8" deep prop scar that really is the real root of the damage, but the muddy water and shredded grass tells the story pretty well. People just don't often realize what is really going on when they're burning over these flats...If there's not a plume of mud coming out of the prop, the assumption is made that it's the same as six foot of water. It ain't.
> 
> I really don't remember saying that, but I'll run with it: any boat is CAPABLE of leaving significant bottom damage, even tunnel hulls. It's just a matter of how much the operator cares about the resource... The rest of your statement there really speaks for itself and doesn't really deserve much by way of comment.
> 
> ...


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

railbird said:


> I happen to care very deeply for our ecosystem. I however, disagree that the science is in on wether the seagrass is damaged by driving over it. I will however offer to take you for a ride and show you the way i fish. As for TP&W, I have been to a few meetings on the subject of the scientific areas, and they say its perfectly ok to drive over seagrass and even trim it off the top (not my practice), its not ok to uproot it. I guess you believe the prop wash is uprooting the seagrass, if so you had better not get anywhere near a flat and should use a trolling motor from a mile or so out to make sure you don't do any damage. I believe otherwise and I will continue to follow what parks and wildlife say is good practice. You are so fond of quoting them, it might be a good idea to read some of their work. I am glad you don't keep fish at least you are doing your part there. One last question, what happens to the fish you gut hook?


 I know the trimming off the top doesn't cause any permanent damage: that's about like mowing your yard... However, I'd say from personal observation that there's a lot more going on down there than a lot of people seem to want to know... Be it prop wash, be it just a minor "cut" that doesn't really show up coming out of the prop, whatever: there's some bottom getting chewed up there on occasion whether it's the true "uprooting" from some wahoo throwing a brown roostertail or not.

When did I quote TPWD? I have read much of their published work on the subject, and with my own personal observations, have come up with my views on the subject..I think the only thing I've said about them is re: their regulations on what is allowed in the RBSSA..

As far as guthooking: I'm not catch and release only: I'm primarily C&R, but will keep an occasional fish or two, especially if guthooked. I put them in a softside cooler in the front hatch: stringers, especially with a slot red or two attached, work about like a drift sock... really cuts down on the paddling efficiency..



railbird said:


> D, I have enjoyed the conversation with you and am serious about taking you fishing sometime. I also think the discussion has been useful in showing everyone both sides of a serious debate.
> 
> chuck


Agreed on all points. I've got a spare yak, too: you'll have to supply your own motor, though...


----------



## Porky (Nov 1, 2006)

I have mixed feelings about it. When wading shallow grass flats in clear water you can see the damage from shallow draft boats, Even skegg marks from wind surfers down on the upper laguna madre. What good does it do to cut back on bay shrimping permits when they are replaced by 100's of tunnel hulled boats. My older brother and I go round & round about it. He has both a shoalwater & gulf coast shallow running boats and I stick with a small standard bay boat. When I see someone doing donuts to get on top I already know what the bottom looks like where they are taking off complete with floating shredded grass.
There arguments for both sides and I don't know the solution, But some chuckle headed politician will surely booger it up for us all.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

"But some chuckle headed politician will surely booger it up for us all." Porky

Get involved and don't let them.
If fishermen are pro active they can call the shots as to future management decisions


----------



## pelochas (Jun 15, 2005)

:headknock about grass?

GRASS?

GTFO! of the Grass...someone please put a F'ng Stay OFF the Grass sign and call it a day


----------



## bogdog (Dec 21, 2006)

as a kayaker, you might think I would be in favor of this law....but for me, THIS IDEA STINKS. we found the ultimate fishing spot this summer. THE MORE BOAT TRAFFIC THE BETTER THE BITE IS!!!!!! If this passes, we lose the best spot I have ever seen.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

bogdog,
You might want to check out the site:

http://wadepaddlepole.net/index.html

No "law" has been proposed and no specific areas have been discussed.
I suspect your ultimate spot is safe.
Are you fishing the prop wash at the PA ferry landing? (just kidding)


----------



## Finn Maccumhail (Feb 16, 2009)

railbird said:


> Here are some videos of todays flats adventure. They don't seem to be too spooky after i drove in there. lol!!!!!!!
> Pay close attention to the huge school in the background of the 3rd video. Hooking up blew them up bad, but they came right back up just 10 minutes later. I sat in this spot for about an hour and caught 6 oversize 30-40 inch reds sitting right there. *Now why should my boat be banned from such a place.* By the way wading is awesome there. Enjoy!!!!
> 
> 
> ...


You're just trying to be stupid if you think the sentence I bolded is true.

Nowhere in the stated goals of the fishing guides who make up WP&P does it say that they want to prevent boats from accessing the flats. Just that they want people to be mindful of the damage they can cause and to be courteous to others fishing on the flats by wading, paddling, or poling (trolling too) across the flats.

And you're also trying to be stupid if you think anybody has said that a boat burning the flats _*ALWAYS*_ will spook fish at 500 yards. It's unpredictable- there are times where I've been wading and all of the sudden a bunch of tails pop up around me so close I've actually poked at a red with my rod tip and the bugger still didn't spook but then there are times when I've poled onto a flat quiet as a mouse only to see a bunch of fish 50 yards away and hauling *** away from the skiff.

But hey, you're just trying to protect what's your's, right? And if somebody ****** you off you might just go raise their PowerPole so their boat drifts away. Way to go Mr. Internet Tough Guy. You're aces in my book.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*Validation*



Finn Maccumhail said:


> You're just trying to be stupid if you think the sentence I bolded is true.
> 
> Nowhere in the stated goals of the fishing guides who make up WP&P does it say that they want to prevent boats from accessing the flats. Just that they want people to be mindful of the damage they can cause and to be courteous to others fishing on the flats by wading, paddling, or poling (trolling too) across the flats.
> 
> ...


Thank you so much for your post, I didn't think I was going to make it thru the day without your undying support.

As for the original statement at the beginning of this thread, I will try to type slow so you can understand. I don't have a problem with their stated goals of protecting the seagrass and being respectful of others while i fish. I do that every time i go out. The problem is with subjective interpretation of their adamantly opposed statements. They do state as a goal to remove flats boats from certain areas, they deem sensitive to boat traffic. They are advocating using existing hunter harassment laws against guys using flats boats, and interpreting any boater that comes within 1000 yds ( exageration for effect)as harassing them. That is where this group is headed.

I guess you are one of those enlightened types who give the *** arms every time you see a boat come within sight, so I will keep my eye out for you.

By the way HOW BIG A BOY ARE YOU!!!!! LOL

chuck


----------



## Finn Maccumhail (Feb 16, 2009)

railbird said:


> Thank you so much for your post, I didn't think I was going to make it thru the day without your undying support.
> 
> As for the original statement at the beginning of this thread, I will try to type slow so you can understand. I don't have a problem with their stated goals of protecting the seagrass and being respectful of others while i fish. I do that every time i go out. The problem is with subjective interpretation of their adamantly opposed statements. They do state as a goal to remove flats boats from certain areas, they deem sensitive to boat traffic. They are advocating using existing hunter harassment laws against guys using flats boats, and interpreting any boater that comes within 1000 yds ( exageration for effect)as harassing them. That is where this group is headed.
> 
> ...


Evidently reading comprehension is not your strong suit, from the front page of the WP&P site:


> A few small, shallow-water management areas on the Texas Coast that are open for fishing, but closed to *running motorized craft of any type.* We are not advocating the closure of large contiguous flats or expansive shallow embayments like the Lower Laguna Madre.


http://wadepaddlepole.net/

_Running motorized craft_ means that you can't be under power from your big motor, not that the boat can't be there. In short, cut the power, raise your motor, and then (if you're not wading) "drift, troll, or pole."

But by all means continue your whining and hyperbole. I'm sure we can all be enlightened by your mind reading skills which have allowed you to discern that all these guides who make their living in powerboats don't want people to be able to use powerboats on certain flats.

And for the record I'm about 6'3" 305 and I'm the guy Roy D. Mercer brings along...


----------



## Gottagofishin (Dec 17, 2005)

I keep reading the "Responsible Fisherman" argument. Let's take a poll. Who hear is irresponsible with their boat in running grass flats?

None of you? Then who is leaving all those marks? The problem is we can all justify our actions, but the reality is that a lot of us are the problem whether we admit it or not.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

Here is a different approach:

http://www.respectyourrivers.org/front_page

I'll volunteer to be Grandpa Red.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*Roy d mercer*

Wow that describes me too, Maybe we can get together some time on the play ground and ride the seasaw. hehehehehe

Wow from your post quoting wpp, they really are trying to cut off boat traffic to flats in texas. The nose is almost under the tent.

chuck


----------



## Finn Maccumhail (Feb 16, 2009)

railbird said:


> Wow that describes me too, Maybe we can get together some time on the play ground and ride the seasaw. hehehehehe
> 
> Wow from your post quoting wpp, they really are trying to cut off boat traffic to flats in texas. The nose is almost under the tent.
> 
> chuck


Man, you have got some sick mind reading skills. You're able to tell that a group wanting people to prevent prop-scarring by not using their motors on the flats (hence the "drift, troll, or pole" maxim), really wants to keep boats off the flats.

Can you tell me what the stock market is going to do? Because surely you can predict the future. Perhaps you can expound upon how a group of guides whose livelihood depends on accessing the flats via powerboat _actually_ want to cut off boat traffic thereby preventing them from earning a living. That is some stellar logic there.

Tell me, do you see black helicopters coming for you?

Bottom line, either you're being intentionally ignorant and raising a ruckus for no reason or this is a well-crafted troll.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*Convenient omitions!*



Finn Maccumhail said:


> Man, you have got some sick mind reading skills. You're able to tell that a group wanting people to prevent prop-scarring by not using their motors on the flats (hence the "drift, troll, or pole" maxim), really wants to keep boats off the flats.
> 
> Can you tell me what the stock market is going to do? Because surely you can predict the future. Perhaps you can expound upon how a group of guides whose livelihood depends on accessing the flats via powerboat _actually_ want to cut off boat traffic thereby preventing them from earning a living. That is some stellar logic there.
> 
> ...


Sorry bud, not reading minds just website. You keep using the guides as your shill here. They are being used by the group for legitimacy. You still can't or won't address the fact that they are advocating stopping motorized access to certain flats that they (as a group) deem too sensetive to motorized use. What you are not seeing is it is a slippery slope from there.

Here is an example of what I'm trying to prevent:
Article TF&G magavine oct 09.
"Fishing the Flower Gardens"
Article is really about banning fishing. Here is my take on the article.

The fishermen who turned divers on to the flower gardens many years ago, never believed the divers would turn on them and try to ban fishing there. As it stands now, touching the bottom anywhere in the flower gardens by a fisherman is outlawed. Now they want to ban all fishing there altogether. The dive groups and fishermen have set mooring bouys all over the flower gardens. Those bouys are coveted by all, because anchoring is not allowed. There are not enough places for fishermen and dive boats to tie off, so the dive boats are trying to ban fishing using environmental reasons. Does any of this sound familiar?

I'm arguing that groups like WPP are starting with a very small set of flats cause nobody will fight just a few. The next step is expansion. The truth is the prop scrarring issue is being used as a tool to get where they are heading.

You are very nieve, stupid, or complicit if you won't admit that it is logical to say, this is just the beginning.

Chuck


----------



## ghillhouse (Jan 6, 2008)

railbird said:


> Sorry bud, not reading minds just website. You keep using the guides as your shill here. They are being used by the group for legitimacy. You still can't or won't address the fact that they are advocating stopping motorized access to certain flats that they (as a group) deem too sensetive to motorized use. What you are not seeing is it is a slippery slope from there.
> 
> Here is an example of what I'm trying to prevent:
> Article TF&G magavine oct 09.
> ...


Seek help now.


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

railbird said:


> Sorry bud, not reading minds just website. You keep using the guides as your shill here. They are being used by the group for legitimacy. You still can't or won't address the fact that they are advocating stopping motorized access to certain flats that they (as a group) deem too sensetive to motorized use. What you are not seeing is it is a slippery slope from there.
> 
> Here is an example of what I'm trying to prevent:
> Article TF&G magavine oct 09.
> ...


Chuck, knowing what you know about live coral reefs, do you actually think it's a bad thing to keep people from dropping an anchor on them??


----------



## expressfish (Jun 8, 2004)

what is this 4" of water they speak of ?? not getting up on plane thats for sure. if the sea beds were all level and flat you might be able to burn 4" hauling arse but once you come off plane or run across a sand bar your tearing it up. Why would you risk running aground ? Oh wait, I'll just ease up on the throttle and blow some mud about 40yard behind me and cross my fingers I get across. Been in the marine buis for many many years and the "skinny" hype is all sales pitch. maybe the state should just transplant oysters to the grass areas so mini reefs can grow. we'll see how may shallow draft boats still want to show off.


----------



## redfishandy (Feb 28, 2009)

hey ckuck here is a shovel. have fun digging out. lol


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*Avoiding issue????*



dwilliams35 said:


> Chuck, knowing what you know about live coral reefs, do you actually think it's a bad thing to keep people from dropping an anchor on them??


I have used some bold print in here, so you can focus in on the foundation of my arguement in the previous post. You seem to have trouble finding legitimate issues to adress. I am only trying to help, don't think I'm singling you out here. Maybe Dwilliams and Finn are as debate challenged as you are.

D, I'm not an english major as many here will attest to however, I don't see from my last post, any statement by me, advocating anchoring on the reefs. I was obviously referring to the fact that the flower gardens are somewhat crouded and the dive boats and fishing boats are competing for the limited number of bouys. I also lamented the fact that *it is already illega*l to contact the reef in any way by fishermen, but not likely illegal for divers. That being said, *the only reason divers are for banning fishermen is to free up more bouys for themselves*. If you can't see the simularities (*self serving attempt to ban others*), then your eyes are closed.

Why are you still not addressing the issue of this being the first step?

Are there absolutely no simularities in these two issues?

Can you honestly say the dive groups and WPP are starting these issues for completely noble environmental issues?

I find it interesting you people, Gill, finn, and D, can't carry on a debate without bringing personal insults into it. I guess you know you have lost on these points and have to attack the messenger instead. i wish you boys were better at this, it would be more fun.

chuck


----------



## fattracker (Jul 16, 2009)

kaykers cant put stepulation on the flat because they don't have to buy tags every year or two they are not even required to use running lights,and by the way speaking of harassment we should be the ones banning kayks because they are the ones how paddle right up to a anchored boat with 4 people fishing and go under two lines that had corks on them so i dont want them titty babies talk about prop rutts ,or harassment


----------



## redfishandy (Feb 28, 2009)

wow !!!


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

Someone please contact MADT

------Mothers Against Drunk Typing


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

railbird said:


> I have used some bold print in here, so you can focus in on the foundation of my arguement in the previous post. You seem to have trouble finding legitimate issues to adress. I am only trying to help, don't think I'm singling you out here. Maybe Dwilliams and Finn are as debate challenged as you are.
> 
> D, I'm not an english major as many here will attest to however, I don't see from my last post, any statement by me, advocating anchoring on the reefs. I was obviously referring to the fact that the flower gardens are somewhat crouded and the dive boats and fishing boats are competing for the limited number of bouys. I also lamented the fact that *it is already illega*l to contact the reef in any way by fishermen, but not likely illegal for divers. That being said, *the only reason divers are for banning fishermen is to free up more bouys for themselves*. If you can't see the simularities (*self serving attempt to ban others*), then your eyes are closed.
> 
> ...


 Well, I really don't remember throwing out any personal insults: however, the issue remains: just as with the seagrass, coral reefs are pretty fragile: is anchoring on them, or other "touching the bottom", a positive or a negative for the system in question? (As I remember, divers can't touch 'em either...) Sure, there may be ulterior motives for the dive vs. fish in the flower gardens: There's a lot of different agendas out there. Whether or not the agendas are served, there are definite positive aspects of the means that comprise their end: the flower gardens weren't being well served by anchoring, and the seagrass isn't being well served by repeated trenchings.. The existence of an agenda behind something doesn't negate positive steps that are undertaken in the pursuit of that agenda. I didn't suggest that you would advocate said anchorage: however, you've repeatedly suggested that it was just another in a line of injustices against fishermen in that particular issue. I'd have to say that the flower gardens themselves and the welfare thereof trumps a fisherman's right to toss a big chunk of iron out. As far as fishing vs. divers: that's a different issue: fair use of a resource: neither has a superior right to use said resource. That right doesn't come with a license to drag up live coral with an anchor, and it doesn't come with a license to leave an all but irreversible trench through the seagrass... Nobody's talking about banning any fishing over the seagrass: it's just a simple matter of regulatory protection of an extraordinarily valuable resource, and fishermen would be required to adjust their methods to facilitate that protection. I really see it as no different than the prohibition of littering the bays: the fishing public's views have changed on that since it was first brought into the public "view": we're better off for it. I'm sure there was quite a few old salts that loudly contended that they had a right to toss an empty beer can overboard as well. "structure", you know....


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

fattracker said:


> kaykers cant put stepulation on the flat because they don't have to buy tags every year or two they are not even required to use running lights,and by the way speaking of harassment we should be the ones banning kayks because they are the ones how paddle right up to a anchored boat with 4 people fishing and go under two lines that had corks on them so i dont want them titty babies talk about prop rutts ,or harassment


What's a "kayk", anyway??? Is that one of those things that negate the need for punctuation and capitalization???


----------



## donf (Aug 8, 2005)

It's the attack of the Yakers!!!!


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

Could it be that Yakers are actually Martians who have come to take over our beloved coastal waters:

http://www.vidivodo.com/211374/mars-attacks-_-trailer


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

chugger said:


> Could it be that Yakers are actually Martians who have come to take over our beloved coastal waters:


Okay, we can handle interplanetary travel with no problem, but once we get here we get boats that we've got to paddle by hand for a few miles a day. Yeah, that makes sense...


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*MARTIANS AR HERE!!!!!!!!!!*

Come on D, we all know you martians are sneaky little devils!!!! We all know Ya'll just do that to throw us off the trail. Beware the X-men are on your trail. lol

chuck


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

dwilliams35
I was kidding of course--only responding to the paranoid rants of some that seem to believe that the low impact use of an area represents an"alien" plot.Crazy 
Hell--I used to wade into many places that are now routinely and repeatedly run through.
We typically found fish at the front end --near the entry/exit creeks.
Many now seem to feel that all the fish will only be at the back end of these areas and trash a whole flat to get there.Crazy again


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

chugger said:


> dwilliams35
> I was kidding of course--only responding to the paranoid rants of some that seem to believe that the low impact use of an area represents an"alien" plot.Crazy
> Hell--I used to wade into many places that are now routinely and repeatedly run through.
> We typically found fish at the front end --near the entry/exit creeks.
> Many now seem to feel that all the fish will only be at the back end of these areas and trash a whole flat to get there.Crazy again


I didn't figure that you were serious: I think the percentage of 2 coolers who would actually believe something like that hovers around 25-30%: chances were pretty good you weren't in there. 
Meanwhile, my main impetus here is simply that since I got the yak and started frequenting some less- or never-traveled waters, I've gotten a great appreciation for just what nature can do if we don't plow it up routinely: I generally make just 1-2 trips a year to the RBSSA waters, and I really think I can see an obvious improvement in the situation there: clearer water, more fish, thicker seagrass, etc. etc. etc... meanwhile the same factors are static or decreasing in areas I more often go to with lots of traffic. 
I enjoy an occasional powerboat trip from time to time: it's nice to be able to just sit on my butt and be lazy when making the trip from one hole to another.. I just see obvious improvements when the trenching is curtailed....


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

The accepted practice used to be to anchor deep and fish shallow--by wading.
There are many estuary lakes that no one would have dreamt running a boat thru some 15-20 yrs ago-not because we couldn't but because we knew we would be screwing up a lot of fishing for ourselves and for those who would fish behind us later.
It easy for fishermen to be seduced by boating manufacturers' ads and the tournament fishing hype of: Run and gun--bump em up---burn it - do not bother to learn it--attitude.
Thats the real "new threat" and the real elitist group---those who take a $40k boat and insist on doing anything they absolutely please for their own convenience and at the expense of all others.
Who is really being selfish here?
Those who want to monopolize areas with horsepower and speed or those who are trying to find an equitable way to share the resource with low impact methods?


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*Stereo types abound!*



chugger said:


> The accepted practice used to be to anchor deep and fish shallow--by wading.
> There are many estuary lakes that no one would have dreamt running a boat thru some 15-20 yrs ago-not because we couldn't but because we knew we would be screwing up a lot of fishing for ourselves and for those who would fish behind us later.
> It easy for fishermen to be seduced by boating manufacturers' ads and the tournament fishing hype of: Run and gun--bump em up---burn it - do not bother to learn it--attitude.
> Thats the real "new threat" and the real elitist group---those who take a $40k boat and insist on doing anything they absolutely please for their own convenience and at the expense of all others.
> ...


Not all flats fishermen fit your stereo type of being a selfish slob. I could easily say all kayakers are broke, good for nothing freeloading (don't have to pay sales tax [email protected]% and boater registration taxes) whiners. When in reality it might only apply to a very small percentage of you.

People who own and operate shallow running boats are very happy to share the resource with other fishermen. I can show you a flat that is absolutely full of fish and is about 15-20 inches deep everywhere you go. It has an exit point that is 4 feet deep. I can run this flat and drift it without ever touching the bottom. It was outlawed for all motorized access for 5 years because of people like you and the groups like the one I started this thread about. I fished it thursday and caught/released 26 fish and was out of there by 3 pm. If they (groups like WPP) have their way this area and areas like this, could be closed to boat traffic. I drifted about 12-13 miles and saw almost no prop scars the entire day. Remember I have a tower that lets me cover about 50 yds in all directions when drifting, and saw very few prop scars. Can any of you honestly say this flat is being destroyed by motorized access?

chuck


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

*Quote Railbird:*

"Not all flats fishermen fit your stereo type of being a selfish slob"

I must agree with you here--only the flats fishermen that I tried to describe succinctly in the previous post--so again here it is --those who run/ burn the flats for only their own gain and convenience ---never giving a thought to other fishermen who want to fish that area.

You are also correct about vast generalizations--they are a dangerous thing and never correct. I would agree that only a small percentage of boaters are "slobs"(though that percentage or total number seems to be growing), but it only takes a few and sometimes only one to spook out an entire flat.

This discussion is becoming circular and is perhaps going nowhere, but it is certainly interesting to hear how many different opinions exist as to how we should approach fishing our flats. Some of those opinions are at loggerheads with each other because of their authors' initial assumptions about the nature of fish-- how they can be fished, and as to how one should respect fellow anglers.

Glad to hear that you caught some fish.
I hope that those who came after you were fortunate as well.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

It was a tough day the wind was blowing 25-35 with gusts to 51 mph. There was only 1 other boat on the entire flat. They were catching fish also, I saw them netting fish several times. Man what a day. I was drifting without a sock so I was covering about 2.5 miles to his 1 mile, we seemed to get to the gut about the same time all day long. He was working the far north end of the flat. We came within a few hundred yds of each other on almost every drift. We didn't find it necessary to give each other the *** arms a single time.


----------



## Melon (Jun 1, 2004)

I just wanted to post own this thread. lol

Someone got the cords on these prop washes?


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*Look what was in the paper!!!!*

An article in the thurday edition of the corpus christi caller times. I guess the black helicopters weren't only my imagination. WPP is going after legislation on this next time around.
http://www.caller.com/news/2009/nov/04/boating-etiquette-a-complex-subject/

please read

chuck


----------



## deke (Oct 5, 2004)

Well written article. This statement jumped out at me; 

"provision that caters to the method of a particular user group at the exclusion of another"

And that Meyers guy is already on the paper's site defending his "land grab", or water grab to be more precise.


----------



## foxyman (Oct 6, 2009)

These are the same persons that started this same thing in the Redfish Bay Area 7 to 8 years ago. Their whole objective is to get a section closed for their own user group. It has nothing to do with conservation or preservation of anything. A user group wanting their own private playground that belongs to the people of Texas. I was on the Sea Grass committee for 6 years I know for a fact what Will Meyers and Tosh Brown are about.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

foxyman said:


> These are the same persons that started this same thing in the Redfish Bay Area 7 to 8 years ago. Their whole objective is to get a section closed for their own user group. It has nothing to do with conservation or preservation of anything. A user group wanting their own private playground that belongs to the people of Texas. I was on the Sea Grass committee for 6 years I know for a fact what Will Meyers and Tosh Brown are about.


Don't forget about jim atkins, he is right in the middle of all this.


----------



## kenny (May 21, 2004)

What a bunch of "busy bodies". Why can't people just mind their own **** business anymore. 
It's always interesting to see how these young "progressives" always want to create new rules, limit access, and force others to do what they think is right.

Hey jackarse, I'm talking to you!


----------



## therealspeckcatcher (Mar 7, 2006)

These areas belong to everyone and I don't believe that any one group should have sole access nor do I believe that any one group should be allowed to destroy it at will. I believe there is a middle ground here and after reading Texas Wade Paddle & Pole's website this sounds to be the most logical solution. If you want to access these areas with a motorized boat then use a trolling motor or pole. Restrictions are always more lenient when their proactive instead of reactive i.e. flounder. By the way thanks for the link to the website i joined right away.


----------



## foxyman (Oct 6, 2009)

I don't think you read it or didn't understand it......


----------



## therealspeckcatcher (Mar 7, 2006)

FAQ's & Misconceptions *
"Texas Wade Paddle & Pole is trying to shut down all shallow flats in Texas."*
This is not true. We are only advocating the management of a few sensitive flats, marshes and estuaries that are currently suffering from excessive motorized traffic and habitat destruction. 
*"Managed Fishing Areas (MFA's) would be for kayaks only*."
An MFA would be open to wading, paddling, poled skiffs, and even trolling motors. Anyone could fish an MFA as long as they are not running a fuel-burning motor through the area. 
*"Airboats and jetdrives don't disturb fish or destroy habitat so why should they be excluded?**"
*All fuel-burning motors that run across shallow flats are disturbing to fish. Trout, redfish, and other predatory species have incredibly sensitive lateral lines that they use to detect and seek the vibrations of small baitfish and prey items within their environment. If they can sense an escaping shrimp in eight-inches of water, then they can certainly feel the vibration of a massive engine under full power. Anyone that has spent time wading, paddling, or poling our shallow flats will attest that fish are indeed spooked by motorized craft. Of course fish also react to waders, paddlers, polers, and trolling motors, but to a much lesser degree. Our goal is not to eliminate all disturbance, but to lower the scale of disturbance and prevent one aggressive user-group from inhibiting the success and enjoyment of everyone else's fishing experience.
With respect to habitat destruction: jetdrive engines get their power from a blast of air/water that moves the boat forward. If jetdrives are run too shallow this blast-effect will uproot seagrass and displace bottom substrate. 
*"This is an elitist group that is selfishly trying to secure private fishing areas for themselves.*"
Quite the opposite. The only group we are excluding are the destructive and unethical anglers who feel that the design of their boat gives them the right to run across shallow flats at the detriment of others that are fishing responsibly. Our flats and bays are crowded, and that's not likely to change. TWPP is promoting low-impact methods which allow everyone to equitably and responsibly share a finite public resource. If we succeed in establishing a system of Managed Fishing Areas, then everyone will be able to fish those areas, as long as they adhere to a basic code of ethics and responsibility. 
*"This is the first step to completely closing areas to fishing.*"
The members of TWPP are fishermen. The majority of us own boats, as well. We did not form this initiative to provide an open door for animal rights groups and anti-fishing interests. The purpose of TWPP is to make sure that all areas of the Texas coast remain open to fishing. As anglers, if we don't do a better job of managing our shallow flats, then they could eventually be managed by interests/organizations that ARE opposed to fishing.

I believe i read it right and i'm not the smartest guy in the world but they didn't use too many big words so i'm pretty sure i understand. Just because someone doesn't agree with a certain point of view doesn't mean they don't get it.


----------



## kenny (May 21, 2004)

I've been fishing over forty years without you peckerwoods. You bunch of sanctimonious twits think you should be the final arbiter of what's "ethical" and what "disturbs fish".


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*LOL!!!!*



therealspeckcatcher said:


> These areas belong to everyone and I don't believe that any one group should have sole access nor do I believe that any one group should be allowed to destroy it at will. I believe there is a middle ground here and after reading Texas Wade Paddle & Pole's website this sounds to be the most logical solution. If you want to access these areas with a motorized boat then use a trolling motor or pole. Restrictions are always more lenient when their proactive instead of reactive i.e. flounder. By the way thanks for the link to the website i joined right away.


I don't believe for a minute you just joined. As for you corrections of facts, give us all a break. I guess fish don't ever get conditioned to noise. You know like me running across a flat so I can make a drift and enjoy the resource my way. I have a really dumb question. How many of you have ever gone to port aransas? When you ride the ferry did you see all the reds bunched up around it feeding. The noice sure doesn't seem to bother them. 
I am glad WPP has been exposed for the flats grabbing greedy bastards they are, and I am sad that the politics of today has turned to the entitlement mentality. I guess because you can't afford a boat, we as the general public owe you a flat to fish with no motor boats allowed on it.

chuck


----------



## DeNada (Sep 29, 2009)

I'm not sure why you're so upset about all of this Railbird. With that ridiculous stork roost you've got welded on your boat, you should be able to park on the edge and cast across any flat on the Texas coast. 

And by the way...

1) I own a boat and I'm a member of this group. Go read their stats. 1/3 of them are boat owners. 

2) I love the way you're pitching a fit about fishing "my way" while calling TWPP a bunch of greedy entitled bastards. 

3) If you honestly believe that your ferry landing scenario is analogous to tailing fish in a foot of water, then you're an even bigger fool than you appear.

4) TWPP has been exposed? By who? You?


----------



## kenny (May 21, 2004)

DeNada said:


> I'm not sure why you're so upset about all of this Railbird. With that ridiculous stork roost you've got welded on your boat, you should be able to park on the edge and cast across any flat on the Texas coast.
> 
> And by the way...
> 
> ...


So your organizational goal is to rid the flats of "jackasses"?
I have an idea. How about report people that plow up the flats. Why make MORE rules when there's little enforcement of current ones? 
It's a zero tolerance stance that your organization seems to have. Rather than police the few you want to limit everyone, no exceptions.
After all, you obviously have everyones best interest at in mind. What about the next group "that has everyones best interest in mind"?

You see, in my country there is personal freedom and personal 
responsibility.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*exposed!!!!*



DeNada said:


> I'm not sure why you're so upset about all of this Railbird. With that ridiculous stork roost you've got welded on your boat, you should be able to park on the edge and cast across any flat on the Texas coast.
> 
> .
> And by the way...
> ...


Conditioning was my point. I guess I should spell it out for you progressives.

chuck


----------



## foxyman (Oct 6, 2009)

Just take airboats for instance. I will gladly prove the point that I can run trough a school of redfish and go right back to them in 10 minutes and catch them. What spooks them is to stop on top of them. This is the same group that during the seagrass debates wanted to eliminate airboats, they donot hurt seagrass.......... Their motives are for an elitist group that has their own adjenda. I dealt with these same individuals for 6 yrs. Believe me they have alterier motives.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

Quote, kenny
"So your organizational goal is to rid the flats of "jackasses"?"

That sounds like a great mission statement to me
I think I will start a new group: No Jackasses On the Flats.com

Quote,railtird
"I guess fish don't ever get conditioned to noise. You know like me running across a flat so I can make a drift and enjoy the resource my way."
"Conditioning was my point. I guess I should spell it out for you progressives."

I think I get it
When you run across the flat you are actually doing everyone a favor by conditioning the fish to engine noise.
So the more you run the flat ---the more good you do your fellow fisherman
And fish that are so spooky you can not even think about them just haven't been "conditioned" enough--do you hire out?
This seems similar to your "funnel the fish" theory--where you are actually just assisting your fellow angler by moving the fish over to them.
You are just a people person
I almost forgot--you are also an animal lover--as in how you do those Redfish a favor when you release them from the top of the oil derrick on your boat.

Perhaps we could move a ferry boat down to the Hole and crank it up in the middle---makes it easier to locate the fish.

Quote, foxyman
" I will gladly prove the point that I can run trough a school of redfish and go right back to them in 10 minutes and catch them. What spooks them is to stop on top of them. "

Why don't you help railbird with his grand humanitarian project of "conditioning" the fish for us all.You sound perfect for the job and he will need the help if he is to condition the entire Texas coast so there are no more spooky Reds.


----------



## kenny (May 21, 2004)

Chuggar,
Good luck with your new website!LMAO 
I don't care how you try, there will always be inconsiderate, selfish fishermen. 
Maybe if you fished more and quit trying to decided how I should fish, you'd be a happier man.
You're just a bunch of thirty something brainwashed enviro-idiots.
Arguing with your group is pointless, after all you already know what's best for everyone else.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

Kenny,
I fish a lot (ask my wife)
Happiness?----quite contented--thanks for your concern
30 something? I wish--just add 2 decades
idiot? thats another one for the wife--I think she would go with a yes
brainwashed? No---but I have been prop washed --perhaps by you,railbird, and foxyman.

know what's best? No--but I do know what's worse--It's worse to not catch fish because someone ran right through them than to catch them.


----------



## DANO (May 23, 2005)

I just wanted to post on this thread,..


----------



## DeNada (Sep 29, 2009)

Last night I emailed this thread to the guy that keeps the TWPP website. He sends his thanks....

"Every time those 2cool guys start crowing about their towers and airboats and fish herding we get 10-12 new sign-ups..."

Keep up the good work fellers!

And, Kenny: I'm 46 and I probably fish more than half the people on this board. No brainwashing, no 30-something, no enviro-idiot. Just a guy that's tired of getting run over by lazy, ego-driven SOB's that think their boat design allows them to blast through the tailing fish that I found before they ever got out of bed.


----------



## therealspeckcatcher (Mar 7, 2006)

I just love when people start calling names and insulting others it really shows their level of intelligence. The way i see it when this stuff starts the conversation is over. I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed man. Y'all have a nice day.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

"Every time those 2cool guys start crowing about their towers and airboats and fish herding we get 10-12 new sign-ups..."

Being a smart-arse can back fire on you sometimes


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

prop scars are actually fish highways... those against it, please, don't ever throw your bait into a prop scar or sand pocket... only throw your game into grass beds...


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

dwilliams35 said:


> Well, I really don't remember throwing out any personal insults: however, the issue remains: just as with the seagrass, coral reefs are pretty fragile: is anchoring on them, or other "touching the bottom", a positive or a negative for the system in question? (As I remember, divers can't touch 'em either...) Sure, there may be ulterior motives for the dive vs. fish in the flower gardens: There's a lot of different agendas out there. Whether or not the agendas are served, there are definite positive aspects of the means that comprise their end: the flower gardens weren't being well served by anchoring, and the seagrass isn't being well served by repeated trenchings.. The existence of an agenda behind something doesn't negate positive steps that are undertaken in the pursuit of that agenda. I didn't suggest that you would advocate said anchorage: however, you've repeatedly suggested that it was just another in a line of injustices against fishermen in that particular issue. I'd have to say that the flower gardens themselves and the welfare thereof trumps a fisherman's right to toss a big chunk of iron out. As far as fishing vs. divers: that's a different issue: fair use of a resource: neither has a superior right to use said resource. That right doesn't come with a license to drag up live coral with an anchor, and it doesn't come with a license to leave an all but irreversible trench through the seagrass... Nobody's talking about banning any fishing over the seagrass: it's just a simple matter of regulatory protection of an extraordinarily valuable resource, and fishermen would be required to adjust their methods to facilitate that protection. I really see it as no different than the prohibition of littering the bays: the fishing public's views have changed on that since it was first brought into the public "view": we're better off for it. I'm sure there was quite a few old salts that loudly contended that they had a right to toss an empty beer can overboard as well. "structure", you know....


Hey, here's what Ross Perot thought about coral reefs back in the day... LMAO

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,975967,00.html


----------



## Specks&Spots (Aug 26, 2007)

DeNada said:


> Just a guy that's tired of getting run over by lazy, ego-driven SOB's that think their boat design allows them to blast through the tailing fish that I found before they ever got out of bed.


I thought this was about prop scars and saving sea grass?


----------



## deke (Oct 5, 2004)

Specks&Spots said:


> I thought this was about prop scars and saving sea grass?


Great point! The truth finally comes out, we all knew what their real agenda was, but it was nice to see one of them say it out loud.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

The" truth "is easy to figure out if you just bother to read the website and this is what the original post of this thread attacked.

http://wadepaddlepole.net/index.html

The "real agenda" seems up front to me-- as a matter of fact it is stated in black and white.
FROM THE WEB SITE:

What we actively SUPPORT:

Anglers that fish the Texas coastal flats by wading, paddling, or poling.

Protection of the sensitive seagrass habitat that builds and sustains our inshore fisheries.

Efforts to educate boaters and anglers on the ethical and responsible use of our resources.

A system of Managed Fishing Areas (MFA's) on the Texas Coast that are open for fishing, but closed to RUNNING motorized craft.

The establishment of more public access points for waders and paddlers so that existing locations might receive less pressure.

What we adamantly OPPOSE:

The complete closure of any area to fishing.

Boaters (prop, air, or jet) that run across shallow coastal flats in an effort to locate fish or joyride. We are not opposed to boaters using a lee shoreline to protect their safety during bad weather.

The destruction of valuable seagrass habitat and the harassment and disturbance of fish and anglers by boaters that utilize the above unethical tactics.

Tournaments, fishing guides, outdoor media, conservation groups, and boat/tackle manufacturers that promote this type of behavior through film, articles and product endorsement.


----------



## kenny (May 21, 2004)

"And, Kenny: I'm 46 and I probably fish more than half the people on this board. No brainwashing, no 30-something, no enviro-idiot. Just a guy that's tired of getting run over by lazy, ego-driven SOB's that think their boat design allows them to blast through the tailing fish that I found before they ever got out of bed."

No, but your old enough to know better. 
It's amazing that you can judge people so easily, but I guess it shouldn't be surprising. After all, you and your cohorts all know what's in everyones (your) best interest.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

Pot calling the kettle black.
You think that your view: "I'll do whatever/wherever I please" is in everyones best interest.
I've seen a lot of that view and the methods it spawns on the flats.
That selfish attitude is destroying fishing opportunities for many others.


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

what a fugg'd up regulation driven org... go blow sour grape suckers.


----------



## Red3Fish (Jun 4, 2004)

*I am not going to enter the arguement....BUT..*

I fished POC in the 60's on up to now. Then, and on up to the 70's, there were very few shallow running boats...you ran deep and pulled in and waded or drifted. There were several rather large flats that virtually ALWAYS had RF on them....not anymore.

I, and my group have caught 5 RF, that I remember, that had spiral cuts down their backs from prop cuts. This is over a lot of time, like 40yrs, mostly in the last 20 yrs, but how many more that we didn't catch, had the cuts? It doesn't matter anymore because the RF have abandoned these flats.

*A* boat running across a flat might not spook them, but 10 or 15 a day will.

I am pretty old, and however it turns out wont affect me much, but I think all of you would be better off, if you just ran the deep water, and pull in and drift, wade, pole, kayak, the water less than 3' deep.

Passing laws might not be the best way,.....maybe just educating everyone that running the flats *does* screw up the fishing for everyone. I know, I know...that is pretty far fetched!!

YOUR boat might not tear up the grass, but the guy that sees you running there, and then runs his boat there, might.

The shallow water RF fishing in POC is NOT what it used to be, I know this. IMHO it is the result of many shallow water boats running the shallow water and for sure not YOUR boat, but that other guy tearing up the grass flats.

Later
R3F


----------



## Freshwaterman (May 21, 2004)

> *Then, and on up to the 70's*, there were very few shallow running boats...you ran deep and pulled in and waded or drifted. There were several rather large flats that virtually ALWAYS had RF on them....not anymore.


I agree with what you're saying.

I have spent my entire life fishing and hunting the bays. I never saw any shallow draft boats, other than a few homemade scooters, until the mid to late '80's. The first, commercially mass produced tunnelled boat, that I remember seeing, was the Redfin and they started showing up around 1986 or '87.

Before that no one, that I can remember, purposefully drove shallow. And, that's why I consider those the good -ole - days, not because there was more fish. The fishing, IMO, is as good or better than it was back then. You just don't get to fish the same places that you use to, as much, unfortunately. I've just had to adjust my tactics.


----------



## robul (Apr 26, 2007)

ducks kill more seagrass then flats boats.. If they are that concerned they need to go buy a shotgun and paddle or pole over to there favoriote duck blind and kill some ducks! save the wetlands kill some ducks!


----------



## Won Mo Kasst (Mar 27, 2008)

*From the FAQ page...*

So lets say if I were to poll a party barge in there and start playing loud music, would you start up a group against music on the bays? Heck, I might just have to start practicing my drums out there!

What about people who are not physically able to wade, paddle, or poll a boat? Are they just SOL?


----------



## DeNada (Sep 29, 2009)

What about people who are not physically able to wade, paddle, or poll a boat? Are they just SOL?

No, they could still fish the 99.9999999 percent of the Texas coastal waters that would still be open to people who want to run shallow, spook fish, and destroy habitat. 

If you people will stop with the knee-jerk reactions and just read their website, you'll learn that THEY ARE NOT TRYING TO SHUT DOWN EVERY FLAT IN TEXAS. They are only pushing for a few, small managed areas.

Jeez, what does it take to get that point across?


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

nothing, the point is.. they KNOW that you start shutting down one thing, others will follow... your cause suks, go shut down your street in front of your house to make it safer.


----------



## foxyman (Oct 6, 2009)

DeNada, that group is just like the H1N1 Virus it will spread and nothing to stop it. I know these people well and know their elitist ways and their motives for wanting their own little play ground.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

*motives?*

Foxyman,

What are these motives that you feel are not stated on the WPP web site?

What are elitist ways?

Who do you know well?

This sounds like the makings of a Dan Brown novel: "The WPP Code"


----------



## DeNada (Sep 29, 2009)

Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid
You step out of line, the man come and take you away

Tell me this, Foxy and Infamous: what color are the helicopters that are circling your house. Let me guess....black?


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

Foxyman,

Time to adjust the meds


----------



## Tight Knot (Sep 8, 2004)

Just curious which flat would suit this group?
Dagger
Ransom
Steadman
Fin and Feather
Brown and Root
Hog Island
Estes
Super Flats
I am really impressed you guys can communicate with the fish. I have alot to learn.
Tight Knot


----------



## kenny (May 21, 2004)

chugger said:


> Pot calling the kettle black.
> You think that your view: "I'll do whatever/wherever I please" is in everyones best interest.
> I've seen a lot of that view and the methods it spawns on the flats.
> That selfish attitude is destroying fishing opportunities for many others.


I never said that "I'll do whatever/wherever I please" is my view.

You guys just don't get it.

Your organization has several ideas that are just fine. Unfortunately you don't seem to know when your right to fish a certain flat the way you want, intrudes on my right to fish that same flat.

There are enough people in this country telling other people how to live, how to think, what car they should drive, what they can say and not say, and now you and your crowd wants to tell me where I can and can't fish in my boat.

Over reaching, like you are now, will turn people off and away from the good ideas your organization espouse.


----------



## deke (Oct 5, 2004)

DeNada said:


> No, they could still fish the 99.9999999 percent of the Texas coastal waters that would still be open to people who want to run shallow, spook fish, and destroy habitat.
> 
> If you people will stop with the knee-jerk reactions and just read their website, you'll learn that THEY ARE NOT TRYING TO SHUT DOWN EVERY FLAT IN TEXAS. They are only pushing for a few, small managed areas.


"few managed areas" ,lol who "manages" these areas? They just want an area for their own use for their own type of fishing, hell might as well say flyfish only.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

"Just curious which flat would suit this group?
Dagger
Ransom
Steadman
Fin and Feather
Brown and Root
Hog Island
Estes
Super Flats
I am really impressed you guys can communicate with the fish. I have alot to learn." Tight Knot

Tight Knot---Just curious-which flat do you think is the most hammered?______


"Unfortunately you don't seem to know when your right to fish a certain flat the way you want, intrudes on my right to fish that same flat." kenny

I do not think this is about who has exclusive rights-- it is instead about which methods will best allow the most people to share an area in an equitable way.
Would you disagree that more people can share a flat if they are wading,paddling, poling, trolling, and drifting, than if they are all running the flat full tilt?
Some spots just can't handle the escalating boat traffic--the carrying capacity has been reached.
I believe that I have fished enough and logged enough time to have an opinion about how they have changed for the worse.
I have watched fish scattered,spooked and rendered un-fishable by irresponsible boating traffic for years.And it's getting worse.
There are many people that feel the same way.


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

"discuss" all you want... sounds like liberals to me... ban this, ban that... like I said, your motives suck. no changing my mind or debating.  I got an idea, how about adding a white male fisherman only area too? LMAO

drive a little further than east galv bay, or matty, or rockport, port oconnor.... about the only way these days to have your own flat.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

Have a look at the number of posts the guys supporting this group and you will see they are here only for this issue. Chugger 37 posts (prolly all on this thread), Denada (9 definantly all on this thread). I would bet one of these boys is the founder of this flats grabbing group. 

I have an idea, we all can start a group that likes fishing the ICW. Then we can go to the state and have them shut down the barge traffic, so it doesn't scare the trout. I know from past experience there is not as many trout in the landcut than there used to be, I bet the barges are scaring off all the trout. What do ya'll think. lets go get'em.

chuck


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

Why don't you guys tell us which flats you believe are best suited for your no running zones. Explain to the ignorant which areas you believe can't handle the escalating boat traffic.


----------



## rsparker67 (Mar 30, 2008)

railbird said:


> Why don't you guys tell us which flats you believe are best suited for your no running zones. Explain to the ignorant which areas you believe can't handle the escalating boat traffic.


thats a question i've been wondering through out this whole debate... seems to me they don't want to say cuz it will show they want more than 99.99999% of the flats they say they don't want...


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

WELL!!!!!!!! WE ARE WAITING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## TXTECHKA (May 28, 2009)

I think its rediculous. I agree with protecting our resources and everything, I send my money to CCA and DU and whatnot but more rules and bigger government never works. A better approach could be encouragment (like catch and release) rather than enforcement.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

TXTECHKA
Are you not glad that CCA (GCCA) pushed for a few rules?
Gamefish status for Redfish and the net ban (to name a few).
Or should have commercial netters been encouraged?


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

still waiting on what flats you want to manage without evil power boaters.... and please, put in my request, white male fishermen only flats, it would make me happy too. LMAO

I'm kinda trying to figure out why those partners are with ya... I see a few of them as hard core, poling type specialists and such.. and with big attitude of elitism... but anyways, talk about segregating yourself from the population...


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

I here crickets!!!!!!!!


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

"Why don't you guys tell us which flats you believe are best suited for your no running zones. Explain to the ignorant which areas you believe can't handle the escalating boat traffic." railbird

Well!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm just a member-- but if I get a vote I'm nominating the!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Envelope Please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-----and the winner is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:

The Playpen


But,railbird, they are gonna need those GPS coordinates mui pronto.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

LOL, You guys just lost all credability. If all the areas are inconsequential you would be able to list them. 

Oh, and by the way, I couldn't agree more, you are a member.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

Man--I'm kinda old and need to go to bed

" If all the areas are inconsequential you would be able to list them." railbird

I don't even understand the above quote
railbird--I have a feeling you don't sleep well unless you get the last post
so take a last swipe and catch a few ZZZZs


----------



## deke (Oct 5, 2004)

"it is instead about which methods will best allow the most people to share an area in an equitable way."

And by most you mean you and your group. How would this allow "most" to fish a spot when the minority kayaks, or poles?


----------



## kenny (May 21, 2004)

Man I'm glad the upper coast water is too deep and too sandy for this bunch. Why don't you guys try fishing on the weekdays if you want a more "pristine experience".
Better yet, just move to Florida. They have all manner of NO zones.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

deke
Would you disagree that more people can share a flat if they are wading,paddling, poling, trolling, and drifting, than if they are all running the flat full tilt?


----------



## RAT DADDY (Jun 2, 2009)

Just because ya'll can not afford a shallow running and drafting boat don't be taking it out on the ones that can. We all just have to learn to get along out there on the water. There are plenty of area's out there for all of us to fish. For the most part we are not disturbing the sea grass on the flats anyhow. That should be your only argument as far as fishing goes hey they are anyones fish not yours so DEAL WITH IT...


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

chugger said:


> deke
> Would you disagree that more people can share a flat if they are wading,paddling, poling, trolling, and drifting, than if they are all running the flat full tilt?


what do you mean by share?


----------



## Melon (Jun 1, 2004)

Just another way for the tree huggers(peta)to infiltrate the fishing community and share what they want for themselves. I see yankers all the time paddling around up in the flats with no fishing poles just camera's. Then when taking taking off you have to literally burn the grass beds because they are all doing figure eights waving high to each other and swapping spit. LOL


----------



## jdot7749 (Dec 1, 2008)

Preservationists(TWPP), unlike conservationists are a selfish lot. They want to preserve the areas and resources in question for everyone's use as long as it is used in the manner they deem fit. Conservationists want everyone to use the areas and resources but to leave it in a condition that it can recover itself from.

Just my opinion.


----------



## jdot7749 (Dec 1, 2008)

It all comes down to etiquette on the water for which there are no written rules. The TWPP guys want all motorized craft to observe etiquette by staying far away while they are in the area but they also want you to never go there in case they want to use the areas that particular day.


----------



## chugger (Jul 12, 2009)

Quote:
Originally Posted by chugger 
deke
Would you disagree that more people can share a flat if they are wading,paddling, poling, trolling, and drifting, than if they are all running the flat full tilt?

Quote Infamous:
what do you mean by share?

Substitute: "catch more fish on" for "share" in the statement above


----------



## Tight Knot (Sep 8, 2004)

Hey Chugger you still have not told us which Flat suits your agenda. We are still curiuos.
Tight Knot


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

chugger said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by chugger
> deke
> Would you disagree that more people can share a flat if they are wading,paddling, poling, trolling, and drifting, than if they are all running the flat full tilt?
> ...


ok, so if your sentence was worded as such

(Would you disagree that more people can *"catch more fish on"* a flat if they are wading,paddling, poling, trolling, and drifting, than if they are all running the flat full tilt?)

other than stating I have never tried to work a lure at 40 mph to catch a fish...

my answer would be, depends. 

I've seen stringers of trout pulled out of the boat wakes of passerbys on the ICW, seen schools of fish pushed up in pockets of flats where out in the middle people ran their boats, ran over schools of fish at 40 mph in a foot of water, turned around, shut down, casted and caught some of them... etc...

seems like you guys might need to fish at night.. instead of banning for selfish elitist reasons


----------



## specksorreds (Aug 24, 2005)

*Hey Chugger*



chugger said:


> Foxyman,
> 
> Time to adjust the meds


Better be nice to Foxyman, he's a pretty crusty old man  and knows his stuff well.


----------



## foxyman (Oct 6, 2009)

Probably not as old and crusty as I am, but that is beside the point. I just don't think they are reading thatcr deep into their statements and goals. When they started 7 yrs ago they wanted to shut down all of Redfish Bay. Everyone to their own opinion, but believe me you do not want to get this started on the coast.. I have had the best that the coast had to offer for the past 50 years. You are the ones that are going to suffer the consequences.
I invented "crusty" ask any of my old customers.


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

specksorreds said:


> Better be nice to Foxyman, he's a pretty crusty old man  and knows his stuff well.


 the original trout scout? :biggrin:


----------



## foxyman (Oct 6, 2009)

Not hardly, way before him.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*HIDDED AGENDA EXPOSED!!!!!!!!!!*

This thread was started to point out, to all serious flats fishermen who need to know, where and from whom an attack is coming. I think chugger and denada have done a very good job of laying out what their real agenda is, for that I want to thank them. Lets see where their arguement has gone.

1. It all started we're only out trying to protect the sea grass.
2. Then it was we have to protect the fish from the (harassment) of power boats on the flats.
3. Next it was waders are being harassed by air boats crossing a flat a 1/2 mile away from waders and tpw should fine them using existing hunter harassment laws.
4. David Sikes of the caller times exposed their agenda as a flats grabbing group of kayakers and wade fishermen.
5. They as a group fessed up and said we are only wanting to exclude access to a small number of flats that we deem to be sensitive to boat traffic. (prolly their favorite fishing holes)
5. Finally, the last effort is we only want .01% of the water in Texas.

Well, do we really believe they will stop here? Lets say for arguements sake they are being truthfull. Lets do the math, lets figure 3000 square miles of inshore water. 
3000 x .01% = .3 square miles
.3 sq miles x 640 acres/mile = 192 acres

192 acres equal prolly 1 pretty small lake in the lighthouse lakes. As it stands now, I have a hard time believing they only want 192 acres of flats in Texas waters.

Last time they were successful in closing a flat to boat traffic, they shut down the northern end of nine mile hole (from the between the 201 and 203 channels to the southern edge of yarbourogh). Nine mile hole is roughly 27 square miles if you include all flats south of yarbourogh. The area closed to boat traffic comprised an area 2.5 miles X 5 miles = 12.5 square miles. THATS RIGHT!!!! Their last successful attemt to steal flats from texas flats fishermen comprised 8000 acres. The state has since realized the arguement for the last closing, was specious at best.

I have a hard time believing they only want a small 192 acre area for themselves, when last time they locked off 8000 acres.

I am glad we have finally established the real agenda, locking out everyone who doesn't fish the way they fish, without regard to the strawman arguements (protect the sea grass) they have put forth.

It has been days since we have asked the question, (which flats are you boys trying tp close). If they thought fishermen wouldn't mind the closure and would agree with them, they would come out and list them. Instead they will continue to sneak around and lobby the state for their agenda, and by the time the next legislative session comes around they will have written the legislation and will try to sneak it through without us knowing it existed.

chuck


----------



## Reel Bender (Sep 30, 2004)

FYI

Especially newbies to fish Corpus out of Flour Bluff.

If you fish near the causeway there is a no-prop zone. It's not publicized very well. Ask IJ.


----------



## troutomatic1488 (Jun 18, 2006)

railbird said:


> Have a look at the number of posts the guys supporting this group and you will see they are here only for this issue. Chugger 37 posts (prolly all on this thread), Denada (9 definantly all on this thread). I would bet one of these boys is the founder of this flats grabbing group.
> 
> I have an idea, we all can start a group that likes fishing the ICW. Then we can go to the state and have them shut down the barge traffic, so it doesn't scare the trout. I know from past experience there is not as many trout in the landcut than there used to be, I bet the barges are scaring off all the trout. What do ya'll think. lets go get'em.
> 
> chuck


railbird 38 chugger 37 railbird wins !


----------



## foxyman (Oct 6, 2009)

What railbird said is right on


----------



## shallowgal (Jun 11, 2004)

So lets hear where their designated areas are. That seems like a major part of their program they should disclose if they are trying to be forthright about their agenda. 

Could it be that they realize the serious objections that would arise from people who would be losing their fishing grounds?

Or do they just not yet know where they want to target?


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*They Know!!*



shallowgal said:


> So lets hear where their designated areas are. That seems like a major part of their program they should disclose if they are trying to be forthright about their agenda.
> 
> Could it be that they realize the serious objections that would arise from people who would be losing their fishing grounds?
> 
> Or do they just not yet know where they want to target?


They (WPP.net) know exactly the areas they are targeting. Have you noticed they disappeared when we started calling them out? They will never reveal where they plan to attack first, because they know the uproar that will ensue. They will continue to sneak around behind the scenes and will come in and create a few strawman arguements, but they will never answer the question. *Which flats are you after?*

chuck


----------



## foxyman (Oct 6, 2009)

Check on their web site and see where the most (according to their demographics) the percentage of the people fish. I believe that more people use the light house lakes and brown and roots flat are from not Port A. Look at the list of their board of directors and you will find that they all have condos and home in Port A. That is why Port A got the 38% number for people using that area. Oh, by the way they do want all of Estes Flats shut down also.............. Also I would not recomend not purchasing Tosh Browns cook book or any of his photos as they are telling us who to support............


----------

