New fees Proposed!!!

I spend time as a citizen volunteer for the Fish and Wildlife Dept here in Washington State. I have been involved in the Quagga mussel issue in a minor way here in this state. Believe me, you want to spend as much money in fees and taxes as you can to stop this invasion. It can be catastrophic!
 
The question is will "fees and taxes" stop the spread of the invasive species? My suspicion is no it will not. You are gong to always have some irresponsible boaters. The inspection and cleaning did not stop the invasion in Lake Powell, and many of the other Lakes in the West. It was brought there by some recreational boater. The original problem was commercial ships, discharging their ballast water. The article talks about ballast water in Utah--the only ballast water I can envision is in a few trailerable sailboats. I doubt that these sailboats infected the lakes other than Powell.

Unfortunately many political bodies tax, and then use the money for other purposes than what it is designated for.

My own experience with inspections is that in the past, they were not adequate and those doing them, had no idea of the habits of the invasive species. Hopefully they are more enlightened now.

http://nas.er.usgs.gov/taxgroup/mollusks/zebramussel/ has maps which are updated daily--I have to assume that this is accurate.
 
In Oregon, as perhaps in other states, paddlers must now have a sticker, on their person or on their boat, an Invasive Species Permit, cost five bucks per year, IIRC. These are transferable, so you can take yours with you from canoe to kayak, to rowboat, etc. Administered by the State Marine Board. I am in support of the concept, but share the skepticisms localboy and thataway have voiced.

Currently, I believe no one has documented quaggia mussels or zebra mussels in the Columbia or any of its tribs. Raising awareness is helpful, if only to delay the introduction of these nasty bastards.
 
thataway":31aan08x said:
The question is will "fees and taxes" stop the spread of the invasive species? My suspicion is no it will not. You are gong to always have some irresponsible boaters. The inspection and cleaning did not stop the invasion in Lake Powell, and many of the other Lakes in the West. It was brought there by some recreational boater. The original problem was commercial ships, discharging their ballast water. The article talks about ballast water in Utah--the only ballast water I can envision is in a few trailerable sailboats. I doubt that these sailboats infected the lakes other than Powell.

Unfortunately many political bodies tax, and then use the money for other purposes than what it is designated for.

My own experience with inspections is that in the past, they were not adequate and those doing them, had no idea of the habits of the invasive species. Hopefully they are more enlightened now.

http://nas.er.usgs.gov/taxgroup/mollusks/zebramussel/ has maps which are updated daily--I have to assume that this is accurate.
Click to expand...
So what would you propose as the appropriate solution? And how would said solution get funded?
 
They should build decontamination stations at the infected lakes and require boats leaving the lakes be decontaminated. Boaters should have to pay to be decontaminated. The approach right now hasn't worked and people who don't care are going to continue to not care. It will cost a whole lot less to control it now then letting it spread to every lake. The real way to take care of it would be to have the scientists figure out how to sterilize the little buggers so they can't breed. Maybe we should require everyone who drinks water to buy the stickers. :lol:
 
I would agree with the "user fee which actually paid for a service" vs the taxation. However, the sterilization before going into Lake Powell didn't work--so not sure that the sterilization coming out of a lake would work. That would mean that all of us who boat at Powell would have to have a sterilization process before we put the boat into storage, or trailered it 2000 miles back to a place where the boat would be put into fresh water, where the muscles don't grow. So far, none of them in Florida.

A lot of the problem is not muscles on the bottom of the boats, but larvae (veliger) in the bilges, bait wells, thru hull fittings, and engine water passages. Heat, desiccation, chlorination and use of Potassium permanganate can be effective.

Once the invasive muscle is in the river system, it is likely to spread down stream.
 
I was told last year at Yellowstone that I was the worst kind of boater. Because I do clean and dry my boat before I take the next trip. The ranger told me they let their guard down when they see a clean boat. 2 years ago at Yellowstone when I told the ranger my last lake was Lake Powell 6 weeks earlier I got a 45 minute inspection. With Lake Powell all of the down stream lakes are already infected so the source was probably from a down stream lake. At the Great Salt Lake they have fresh water tanks that you can back the trailer and boat into and run the motors and flush hoses to rinse everything off. They could do the same thing at Powell just with hot water. Being able to go from one lake to the next is going to be a thing of the past.
 
For what its worth, one way entomologists combat pests is to find an effective parasite that can biologically fight the pest or invasive species.

The parasite can be another insect, a micro-organism, a predator, or any biological foe of the pest.

This takes some research, often including field testing the beneficial parasite on the pest.

And it can backfire, such as when the beneficial parasite takes on other unintended victims which are usually useful, and decimates them.

However, wouldn't it be nice to find a parasite that would decimate the Quagga mussels? :D

Joe. :teeth :thup
 
see http://le.utah.gov/~2015/bills/static/S ... l#73-18-26


Except as provided in Subsection (5), money in the Boating Account may
40 be used for:
41 (a) the construction, improvement, operation, and maintenance of publicly owned
42 boating facilities;
43 (b) boater education; and
44 (c) the payment of the costs and expenses of the division in administering and
45 enforcing this chapter.
46 (5) Fees collected under Section 73-18-26 and deposited into the Boating Account
47 shall be used for aquatic invasive species interdiction



Should help pay for active surveillance and inspections on boats, and at water facilities
 
It seems like another money grab. Where did the current monies come from for education and improving boater facilities. Boat licenses and fishing licenses money got lost somewhere? Where's EPA we are spending big money to fund?
D.D.
 
Will-C":1lisdcrf said:
It seems like another money grab. Where did the current monies come from for education and improving boater facilities. Boat licenses and fishing licenses money got lost somewhere? Where's EPA we are spending big money to fund?
D.D.
Click to expand...
The EPA's budget has been reduced 5 years in a row and many in congress are doing all they can to eliminate it entirely.
 
From U.S. news
" Over the past year, the EPA has been rocked by embarrassing scandals, including revelations that a high-ranking agency official had defrauded the agency of more than a million dollars over a decade by impersonating a CIA agent, an employee was caught watching porn for six hours a day on the taxpayer dime (and who received a performance bonus), and widespread reports that employees at the EPA’s office in Denver had repeatedly used a hallway as a bathroom".
D.D.
 
I'm always amazed at how many folks have such a low opinion of the government, and endlessly complain about it (usually with anecdotal evidence); but rarely do such folks propose solutions.....other than to rely on various "invisible hands" of true believer principles, convinced that if these principles are never compromised, all problems will automagically be solved.
 
I have an idea. Why not use all the tax money generated by Washington state weed smokers to fund fixing the mussel problem. I live in one of the top ten most corrupt states Pa. I hope your faith in the government fixing everything plays out well for you.
D.D.
 
more fees isn't going to do the trick
buying a stupid permit isn't going to do the trick
boat sterilization stations aren't going to do the trick

We need boater sterilization stations for the inconsiderate slob boaters that you see going down the road with some kind of full on garden attached to their boat :)

I think we may have to get used to more fees for everything, I've already threatened some students with an aggravation fee
 
I have another idea. Instead of boaters and sportsman having to clean up the mess brought upon by foreign vessels dumping contaminated ballast tanks. Why not check the ballast tanks for contaminated ballast water before letting them get into the Great Lakes. Impose fees on those ocean going vessels since that's who responsible for the problem. Imagine that the party who is responsible has to bear the burden of the expense to clean up the mess they brought here. Since it's fresh water mussel why not require that no fresh water can be used as ballast. Just salt water in which the mussels might not survive.
D.D.
 
Will-C":13mawnox said:
I have another idea. Instead of boaters and sportsman having to clean up the mess brought upon by foreign vessels dumping contaminated ballast tanks. Why not check the ballast tanks for contaminated ballast water before letting them get into the Great Lakes. Impose fees on those ocean going vessels since that's who responsible for the problem. Imagine that the party who is responsible has to bear the burden of the expense to clean up the mess they brought here. Since it's fresh water mussel why not require that no fresh water can be used as ballast. Just salt water in which the mussels might not survive.
D.D.
Click to expand...
It's too damn late for that idea. There are already contaminated lakes in the US. How do YOU propose we stop the spread? And tell me how we do that without some governmental enforcement of something? :roll:
 
Back
Top