Originally Posted by littledavid123
I don't support the ban because as South Dakota just ruled, state and federal employees are exempt from the law when perfroming official business. Which means they can tramp up and down the streams all day performing surveys while wearing felt, but we have to risk our necks going without. This tells me it is only a feel good decision and they don't really care.
I agree. My belief is that this is a fairness issue
Most of you are unaware that in the proposed and passed legislation that I have been able to find, there is an exemption for state and federal employees
This allows fisheries as well as other personnel to use felt soled waders and boots. It seems to me that if this is important, those who are routinely in the waters and are more likely to be in different watersheds routinely, should be the first to transition to rubber soles. Instead the state exempts their own people while mandating a change for their population.
Notice the nearly identical language in legislation in Montana and Vermont. Montana's is stalled in committee and Vermont's has passed. If the ban is based on science, should it not apply to everyone? This is the kind of legislation that burdens the public, but exempts government which drives me nuts.
"NEW SECTION.**Section 2.**Use of felt-soled boots and waders prohibited.
(1) A person may not use external felt-soled boots or external felt-soled waders in the waters of the state.
(2) The possession of external felt-soled boots or external felt-soled waders on the banks or shores of a stream or lake or in a boat, raft, canoe, or other water vessel is prima facie evidence that the person or persons in whose possession the boots or waders are found were using the boots or waders in the waters of the state.
(3) The provisions of this section do not apply to a state or federal employee or emergency personnel, including fire, law enforcement, and emergency medical technicians, using external felt-soled boots or external felt-soled waders when acting within the scope of duty.
Montana Fly Fishing Report » Felt Ban in Montana, Blog, and Fishing Report - Madison & Missouri Rivers
"Sec. 1. 10 V.S.A. § 4616 is added to read: § 4616. FELT-SOLED BOOTS AND WADERS; USE PROHIBITED
It is unlawful to use external felt-soled boots or external felt-soled waders in the waters of Vermont, except that a state or federal employee or emergency personnel, including fire, law enforcement, and EMT personnel, may use external felt-soled boots or external felt-soled waders in the discharge of official duties.
So the ultimate irony is that a warden can give you a citation for wearing felt boots while wearing felt boots himself. How crazy is that?
My second reason is that
Dydimo is the main reason for the felt sole ban. See the article below on by the Center for Aquatic Nuisance Species.
However, it has now been shown that felt boots are NOT causing dydimo blooms
Max Bothwell, a research scientist for Environment Canada, who wrote an influential article that linked angler's felt soled boots to dydimo spread has now reversed himself and said that anglers are not responsible.
Here is his original article, On the Boots of Fishermen:
He now believes that dydimo has been in North American waters and that it is a change in water chemistry, specifically lower phosphorus levels
that has caused dydimo blooms.
Read the article in the current issue of American Angler, July-August, 2013, pp 8-9.
"'I no longer believe the problem is North American streams is the result of it (dydimo) being moved around.' …. Scientists are now convinced that dydimo lives in many streams, but blooms only when the water has far less than the normal amount of phosphorus…… The most damaging dydimo episode in the US seems to have been on Rapid Creek in South Dakota, where a six-mile bloom dramatically impacted a blue ribbon brown trout fishery. In 2007 and 2008, Bothwell and other scientists added phosphorus to sections of Rapid Creek. Sure enough, the dydimo mats shrank"
He published his findings in Freshwater Biology (2012) 57, 641–653 in an article titled:
Didymosphenia geminata growth rates and bloom formation in relation to ambient dissolved phosphorus concentration
"The blooms were present only in rivers where average dissolved P was very low. Didymo in higher nutrient waters had higher cell division rates, shorter stalks, and did not form blooms.
…. the blooms are caused by low nutrients in the overlying water, which promotes excessive stalk production. Subsequent surveys, experiments and observations in New Zealand have all been consistent with low nutrients (specifically low P) driving the blooms."
What causes didymo blooms
I think this recent discovery makes more sense than the old theory that all of a sudden dydimo sprang due to anglers boots when anglers have been using these same rivers for over a century with no dydimo blooms.
What is causing the dydimo blooms, I surmise, is the current trend of reducing phosphorus in detergents and lawn fertilizer. So as we get rid of phosphorus to prevent algae blooms we get dydimo blooms.
Ever wonder why NZ has such a problem with dydimo? They have lots of crystal clear streams and rivers with low phosphorus because there is little run off from agriculture and lawns.
Basic epidemiology 101 states that we cannot stop the spread of what has already spread. How we then prevent disease is to make the target population less receptive to the disease. We allow the addition of some phosphorus into fertilizers in the river drainage of these dydimo affected rivers.
Thirdly, there is no single chemical decontamination method that will kill all invasives WITHOUT damaging the waders and boots
. Now that it has been established that felt soles are not responsible for dydimo blooms, the worst invasive is the New Zealand Mud Snails. They are resistant to chemicals and felt is NOT where they hide. They hide IN the boot, under the footbed and any crevice.
A study by the California Department of Fish and Game found hundreds of NZ Mud snails lodged inside the crevices of individual test boots. Over 50% of them were less than 1 mm in diameter
. Replacing felt with rubber is not going to stop them.
"The majority of NZMS recovered were associated with wading boots. NZMS were observed on the tongue area of wading boots, associated with the laces or the area of the tongue that was tucked beneath the lacing eyelets. Large numbers of small NZMS were present inside of the boots, having worked down between the boot and the neoprene bootie of the wader. If the boots contained padded insole inserts, NZMS were also found underneath the inserts, associated with sand grains. NZMS were recovered from every treated set of wading gear. Numbers of NZMS per sample ranged from 1 to 227 with a mean of 33 (Appendix 2). Over 50% of NZMS recovered were < 1 mm in size (Table 4)."
Finally, New Zealand has the most rigid laws
(The fine for spreading invasives is 5 years in Prison and/or a $100,000.00 fine). Yet this has not stopped the spread of invasives
We have 300 times the population of New Zealand, small fines and no jail time; and yet there are those that believe that rubber soles will stop the spread of invasives. Clearly that ignores the evidence.