West Side Tournament Anglers - DNR Rule Clarification

[jgip087]

Today I contacted the DNR because I was planning an open tournament for next year on Muskegon and was informed of some news I should share.  I asked them about boats running from Muskegon to other fisheries (White, Mona, etc.) and transporting their catch back for weigh-in and releasing in Muskegon.  The Lansing office informed me that the practice is absolutely illegal, citing that it is illegal to transport live fish from one body of water to another especially in a VHS zone (Lake Michigan). Bummer!

[djkimmel]

It has always been 'illegal' and discussed a number of times in the past even before VHS became an issue. Almost 20 years ago, I was involved, as a young conservation director and board member, with a few other board members in proposing voluntarily shutting the running of Lake Michigan off for B.A.S.S. federation events. I got creamed by angry anglers AND business people. Even though the ideas were not originally mine, I appeared to be the point person for the proposed changes.

At that time about 20 years ago I thought the MDNR was going to start enforcing the issue and add additional restrictions on us (because the fisheries chief at that time told me he was going to do it). I took a ton of heat for many different reasons, and then the MDNR never made the changes or increased enforcement. I was only trying to allow us to continue to have bass tournaments but many other accusations were made. It was not fun.

The MDNR has not made any habit of enforcing the regulation on bass tournaments though discussion comes up about Lake Michigan and even Lake St. Clair and Lake Erie several times a year.

The MDNR plants and moves more fish from lake to lake (especially if you look back over the past 110 or so years) probably than anyone but they could decide to start enforcing this at any time on bass tournaments. They could cite the existing regulations. They could add in the additional VHS-related regulations as a reason to show up at weigh-ins at certain areas and start writing tickets.

I have no idea if they actually will or intend to? They don't have a ton of staff it is something we should all be aware of.

I was against any tournaments going through the locks on the Cheboygan River FROM Mullett Lake out into Lake Huron personally and spoke out against it because our care for the bass should exceed our desire to fish a few more acres of water. The MDNR has found VHS virus in some fish out in Lake Huron near the Cheboygan area and they have not found any in Mullett Lake. I would hate to risk a fishery that great just to have a few more fishing spots.

Bass tournaments would definitely be blamed if VHS virus is found in Mullett Lake and they were aware any anglers brought bass back from below the lock into the chain of lakes.

I would much more prefer that we make voluntary adjustments to our practices before we would have legal versions forced on us so discussion is always worthwhile. At the same time those many years ago that myself and a few others tried to get the Lake Michigan closed, we proposed voluntarily reducing the team tournament creel limit from 10 to 7.

We got creamed over that too! You look now though and most larger team tournaments have long voluntarily reduced their team creel limit to 5. I guess we were just too far ahead of our time back then without enough discussion...?

I imagine we'll just have some more discussion now since this is one of the hot topics every winter on this website and others about closing or leaving Lake Michigan open, usually sitting right on a dead-locked 50-50 for and against. I guess that would change if the MDNR decided to start enforcing the law...?

[jgip087]

I had no idea that was such a long standing rule.  I default to rule 1 of most tournaments and think tournament directors should start taking responsibility to close the tournaments to follow all state and local laws. I guess all it would take is for someone to protest and point to that rule and a tournament director's hands would be tied. If you don't follow your own rules it is a great way to lose in court.

[troossien1]

Absolutely ridiculous.. I can understand burt mullet because of the locks, but what stops fish with VHS from coming in to "Muskegon, White, or Mona" or for that matter any of the other ones! Haven't they tracked smallmouth  that have been transported from one lake to another? Don't they almost always go back?....

Even if they didn't muskegon lake could always use something to boost the bass fishery!

[djkimmel]

I had no idea that was such a long standing rule.  I default to rule 1 of most tournaments and think tournament directors should start taking responsibility to close the tournaments to follow all state and local laws. I guess all it would take is for someone to protest and point to that rule and a tournament director's hands would be tied. If you don't follow your own rules it is a great way to lose in court.

It might not be as cut and dried as you think. All of these lakes are 'connected' and the definitions in the regulations may not have been tested in court before. See bassinkid16's comments.

To my knowledge, there aren't any studies on the movements of Lake Michigan smallmouth bass (or largemouth bass) around all of those lakes / drowned river mouths. For all we (and the MDNR) know, those bass move between the lakes on their own, or return from some of the waters to other waters after they are released. Anglers have been moving bass (and other fish) between these waters over 30 years. Maybe the bass you catch at the mouth of Muskegon was in Mona Lake earlier in the year from its own or because of another angler? I don't think anyone knows much about that on a large scale.

Other studies have shown some bass populations are definite homebodies while other bass populations, especially riverine smallmouth bass, will travel incredible distances during a year every year.

Could tournament anglers (not just bass, but any tournament angler that brings in live fish to a weigh in that are released) potentially help things like VHS virus spread farther, faster? Possibly.

Could natural fish movements throughout all the connected waters already be doing the same thing regardless of anglers behavior? Possibly.

The one thing I definitely think needs to stop - any anglers bringing live fish from the Great Lakes and releasing them into unconnected inland lakes! Regardless of the reason for doing so - especially these private 'stocking' programs anglers sometimes start! The risk of spreading disease like LBV or VHS, and introducing damaging exotics, is too great.

[Genie]

Lesson learned - I ask Dan before I make any decision!  Dan, should I wear my brown slacks or shorts today because of the heat?

[jgip087]

I definitely agree with you on no connection right now on the spread of VHS. However, when you sign an entry form you are signing a legal contract between you and the party running the tournament. If they do not uphold the agreement (rules) then they have breached that contract. The rule that would be in violation is of following all state and local laws since it is unlawful to transport live fish. The only way this changes is if someone, or an organization, challenges the law as it is written. I have personally been back and forth on leaving the lake open or closing it but I do believe we should all follow the regulations set forth by the DNR and if we don't agree with the rules then we advocate for them to be altered.

[dominater]

I don't meant crack open a can of worms that has already been discussed on this forum.  I just want to make sure I understand the law you are referencing - copied from the DNR Fishing Guide (P. 15) for this year:

A person who catches fish in a lake or a Great Lake shall not release
those fish alive in any public waters of the state if those fish are listed
as Susceptible Fish Species, except that those fish may be released
alive in that lake, or that Great Lake, or in a connecting body of water
to that lake, or that Great Lake, so long as those fish can freely move
between the original location of capture and the location of release.
This provision does not apply to baitfish.

The underlined portion seems to define the test for connecting waters (if the fish can freely move between original location of capture and location of release).  It seems straightforward.  What am I missing?

[Waterfoul]

I don't meant crack open a can of worms that has already been discussed on this forum.  I just want to make sure I understand the law you are referencing - copied from the DNR Fishing Guide (P. 15) for this year:

A person who catches fish in a lake or a Great Lake shall not release
those fish alive in any public waters of the state if those fish are listed
as Susceptible Fish Species, except that those fish may be released
alive in that lake, or that Great Lake, or in a connecting body of water
to that lake, or that Great Lake, so long as those fish can freely move
between the original location of capture and the location of release.
This provision does not apply to baitfish.

The underlined portion seems to define the test for connecting waters (if the fish can freely move between original location of capture and location of release).  It seems straightforward.  What am I missing?

You beat me to it.  This is the exact rule that every tournament director I have ever asked cites when they have "open to run" tournaments.  "Freely move" pretty much makes it legal to move a fish from White to Muskegon (or from/to any waters connecected to Lake Michigan).  No dam.  No lock.  Not illegal.

If the original poster talked to the DNR themselves, then they got someone who did not read or does not understand the rules and regulations.

[djkimmel]

Lesson learned - I ask Dan before I make any decision!  Dan, should I wear my brown slacks or shorts today because of the heat?

No. Try a lighter color with a breathable fabric.

[djkimmel]

As far as the regulation, did you find a clear, legal definition of 'freely move?' Probably not which means it can be interpreted 10 different ways which is just another example of fisheries order or regulation that you will get multiple answers from multiple MDNR people for multiple reasons. And until you test it in court on those types of waters, I would classify it as possible gray area, possibly affected by bias and/or lack of much data and/or knowledge.

I have asked questions like these of many tournament directors over the years. That is sometimes not appreciated much. Plus, a tournament director's opinion does not make law or set legal precedence. Courts do that.

I was in a BFL Regional once on Table Rock where a local water enforcement officer stopped our entire blastoff (of course as I was half way out the channel mouth on my turn to go). He said we were all getting on plane too early and breaking no wake regulations. I was already past him. I admit I looked at the tournament director and he gave me a stealthy 'GO' wave, so I hammered it and ran 60 miles 1 way at full speed before I stopped to fish.

That 70HP patrol boat wasn't going to know where I went. I guess after some threats and discussion about things like dire consequences, the peace officer let the blast off resume.

Mostly, he was really ticked off because he tried to chase 3 boats in a row as they jumped on plane. His little 70HP never had a chance and he as not happy that they weren't pulling over for him. We thought we were doing it right. He thought most of us were breaking the law. We thought we were doing it right. (Well, most of us anyway)