Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-12-2010   #21
freexbiker's Avatar
B.F.E., Wyoming
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 907
Originally Posted by puhalu View Post
The fees being charged are not outrageous ($5). I'll gladly do my part to help WY G&F try to keep our watersheds healthy.

Adds up when you have several boats though. I do agree that some regulation may help but the way they are going about it is not well thought out. I have 3 boats, a sailboat, a SUP (where does this fit in?) and will soon have a drift boat. 30$ all for non motorized vehicles that all are dried out and on the sailboat and drift boats the bunks are sprayed with bleach solution. A little unneccesary eh?

As said above, it sounds like oregon has the right Idea where you buy a single tag for all your boats. Much like a conservation stamp that is required for annual licenses. I have no problem with trying to keep invasive species down, but the G&F's method isn't quite thought out well.

freexbiker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2010   #22
cataraftgirl's Avatar
Sandy, Utah
Paddling Since: 1997
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,120
The comment about contacting the program manager was meant for folks who were unfairly ticketed to perhaps get some relief from the fines. It was funny that the program manager stated that she wasn't aware that anyone had been ticketed or fined last year since the program was new.

cataraftgirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2010   #23
NW, Wyoming
Paddling Since: 1995
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 4
A little unneccesary eh?
No. Disinfecting with bleach is definitely not unnecessary (unless of course you only float 1 river). You’re doing the right thing. If everyone were as conscientious, we wouldn’t have the problem to begin with. WY G&F doesn’t recommend bleach, though:

Can I disinfect my watercraft using bleach or other chemicals?
No. Hot water or drying are the only approved decontamination methods in Wyoming.
Chemicals, such as bleach, have not been proven to be effective in disinfecting all AIS and may damage your watercraft and equipment.

SUP (where does this fit in?)

G&F's method isn't quite thought out well.
Maybe not, but they've (a handful of senior-level biologists, I assume) thought about it a lot more than we have. We should give them the benefit of the doubt.

You're a fortunate guy if you can find the time to use 6 boats a year. At $1.73 per month for all 6, I'd say you'll probably get your money's worth.
puhalu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2010   #24
Adrenaline Junkey's Avatar
Heyburn Idaho, Idaho
Paddling Since: 2009
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 28
The problem I have with the sticker is that it pays for washing stations and inspections. the remote places most of us use our crafts will never see washing stations and most of us already clean or dry boats out. the inspections just hinder most folks and the people doing the inspections have a lot to learn. every time i have been there one no one looked at the underside of the boat or tied to educate me about it. Just the check for personnel safety equipment

Ada county was the ones writing the tickets last year and i promise i did see a few written and the deputy made the comment when he was writing up my warning that next time he would cite me too if it wasn't affixed to the hull
Adrenaline Junkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2010   #25
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,302
So let me get this straight...

I'm planning on being around the Selway area this summer, and combining it with a road trip. Eventually this summer I will definitely be rafting in Idaho... so that's one sticker. If I run the Selway or South Fork Salmon I may self-support my Fusion, so that's two stickers. Then, when I'm in the area I'll probably want to run the Lochsa, and will want a playboat, so that's three stickers. And, without a doubt, I plan to run some big shit during that trip as well and will need a Burn to creek in, so that's four stickers.

Tina shares the raft with me, but still has three boats, so that's 7 stickers total. Damn, forgot Syd's boat (my 8 year olds)... that's 8 stickers.

Okay, so roughly 8 boats loaded up on my truck (not including any of my friends of course... that's just immediate family). And, since we are vacationing in Idaho, we will have all of those boats at once (even though we can all agree we will rarely be using more than two boats).

On that same trip I was hoping to drive through Wyoming and hit up some action there, then some Montana, and then Idaho... so now I need stickers for two states... so I need 16 stickers.

And apparently on top of all of that, I'm going to have to stop at checkpoints to go through all of these boats... Question, if you basically always roll your raft up to transport it, and then bury it under small gear, then how exactly are you expected to stop and get it checked at a station? Unless it's at a takeout.

It appears to me that this law was poorly thought out and is being poorly implemented, and targets a user group that doesn't appear to have a whole lot of contact with zebra mussels. When was the last time you spotted a zebra mussel? I'm still at zero. It makes since around reservoirs (as you see in Colorado), but for me, my invasive species act funds should help to pay to remove reservoirs, not fund them (since this would be a great way to limit mussels). And as far as zebra mussels being a huge threat... they may be, but I think most of us could agree that the construction of new dams, mining and oil drilling in pristine wilderness areas, and global warming might be more of an issue. Invasive Species is a bullshit tax.
Kyle McCutchen
Cutch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2010   #26
Dipshit with the most.
carvedog's Avatar
Bellevue, Idaho
Paddling Since: 1991
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,496
Originally Posted by Cutch View Post
On that same trip I was hoping to drive through Wyoming and hit up some action there, then some Montana, and then Idaho... so now I need stickers for two states... so I need 16 stickers.

It appears to me that this law was poorly thought out and is being poorly implemented, and targets a user group that doesn't appear to have a whole lot of contact with zebra mussels...........Invasive Species is a bullshit tax.
No doubt about it that it is a bs law, with almost all money going to enforcement.....

Sorry that you are the user that is being forced to pay excessively for this due to the amount of boats you have.

We did try to raise the alarm two years ago when this was being voted on. It was almost a foregone conclusion even then that it would pass. You know scare the people with fear of snakebite and then sell the anti-venom.
carvedog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2010   #27
jmcdannel's Avatar
Boise, Idaho
Paddling Since: 1989
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 159
I argued this issue at length on the Idaho Whitewater Association Facebook page yesterday. Since the comments made there are relevant to this thread, I'll share them here. Or you can become a fan (and a member) at
Welcome to Facebook

Idaho Whitewater Association:
Well, it looks like Wyoming has jumped on the Invasive Species bandwagon. They are charging $15 for out-of-state non-motorized boats! It seems to me like they really want to keep us out! State rolls out program to block invasive species Too bad there isn't a dislike button on Facebook. I say, if you think this stinks, "like" this post to make your dissaproval heard.
State rolls out program to block invasive species

You, Jerry Kiser, Adrianne McDannel Burlile and 2 others like this.

Jim Moss:
$15 to keep the Zebra mussel out is cheap. The Zebra muscle is in Colorado and the Grand Canyon. It takes over. Quit your complaining and be thankful that Wyoming is trying to keep Idaho from being invaded.

Marti Bridges:
The problem is motorized boats overwhelmingly, not rafts, canoes and kayaks. Of course, those rafters with trailers need to not back them into the river, either. IF the Grand Canyon wasn't backed up into various lakes Zebra mussels would be far less of a problem. There is something fundamentally wrong with a river teaming with rainbow trout on a 110 degree day in the desert.

Idaho Whitewater Association:
The issue I'm concerned with is not the effort to keep them out, it's that rafts and kayaks are being held responsible to fund the efforts even though we pose very little risk to transporting them. It's motorized boaters, water being hauled by trucks or other motorized means, and even felt-soled boots that are likely carriers.

Another issue with the Idaho program is the way the fees are handled. We have two agencies with their fingers in the funds. Even though they raised the prices, they are putting even less of that $7 into the actual IS fund than they did when they collected $5.

Oregon is doing a much better job with their system. They've virtually eliminated the cost to create the sticker by allowing the permit to be printed after your online purchase. Therefore, more money goes into the fund.

Oregon also only requires one person per boat to have a permit and they are transferable among family. Idaho requires a permit be attached to the boat. That would be like the F&G requiring a license for each fishing pole.

I also think it is a waste of time, money and resources to inspect whitewater boats at the inspection stations. We pose such a low risk that there is no need to inspect whitewater boats. We very rarely go in infested water, we rarely carry water around in our boats and we don't have all the nooks and crannies for the little buggers to hide in. There are plenty of other ways these mussels can get into Idaho that are more likely than on a raft. Furthermore, the inspectors received ZERO training in how to inspect non motorized craft. They don't even know where to look even if there could be something on our boats. All of the training is completely focused on motorized boats. The training materials are the same ones used for Washington and Colorado - two states that have left non-motorized craft out of this since they aren't the problem.

Idaho has it all wrong and it sounds like Wyoming is following our model, not the Oregon model.

IWA is *trying* to make things right, but we aren't getting any cooperation from lawmakers or the administrators of the fund/program. But trust me, we'll keep trying,

--Josh McDannel

Jim Moss:
It does not take nooks and crannies, it takes moisture. Young ones are only 1/4 long. It does not matter if rafts and kayaks have a low probability, it is there is any chance.

They are a very destructive mussel and once they get into a waterway they are there forever.

Your statement about a permit per family is short sited. I have three boats. I get one permit so they don't check two of my boats. The permits need to be per boat. If the fishing rods are the carriers then you need a permit for each carrier. Quit complaining about a little bit of money to keep the waterway open.

Besides you have to skip two beers at the end of a run.

It sucks money is not going to where it needs to go.

Idaho Whitewater Association:
There are no documented cases of mussels attaching to rafts or kayaks. Even if they did, finding them would be much easier. They attach along creases and can get into the various parts of engines and jets. If they are on a hull, they are easier to see and remove. And they won't survive as long there anyway. Sure, if you go roll practice in lake mead and don't clean your boat you could transport them. But does it make sense to inspect EVERY single kayak because of the remote chance that someone did that?

If you think we need to inspect every remote tiny possible method that can move them, then we are missing a large number of vessels that *could* transport them. I think the money spent inspecting a very low risk boat would be better spent on public education. If everyone who visits infested waters know how to make sure that they don't transport them, then we have a better chance of keeping them out.

Idaho has been trying to get non-motorized boats to register for years and we've fought that successfully. The same congressman behind non-motorized registration is behind the non-motorized IS fees. He's a politician of the worst kind and his slimy politics are driving this program.... See More

I know very well the destructive abilities of these things. And I really hope they don't make it here or anywhere else that they haven't already infested. But it is not right to single out a group who is not going to be a part of the problem. Fisherman are much more likely to transport them, but our law does not require inflatable under 10 feet to participate. Guess what - fisherman are the group that has inflatable under 10 feet. Tubes and fishing cats. But the legislature didn't want to mobilize that user group to oppose the stickers because they are big and organized and tougher to deal with than us lowly whitewater boaters.

As for my short sightedness, I disagree. Many of us have several boats for different rivers and situation. Having more boats does not increase the likelihood of me transporting mussels. I can only man one boat at a time. If you come to Idaho with three boats and only one has a sticker, that's 2 tickets.

If you have a rental business or a guide service - the fees add up. If you have 6 boats in your garage, it adds up. Besides, I already pay well over a hundred dollars per year in user fees to go boating - much more than the power boater pay to register their boats. I boated in Oregon, paid $7 + fee for my sticker there. I'll have to buy stickers in Idaho for 2 or 3 boats, and if I get over to Wyoming, I'll have to buy another couple $15 stickers. $58 and I'm not the problem. I'll never have my boat in infested waters and I clean, drain (not really applicable), dry.

The system is broken and we need to fix it.

Clean Drain Dry

--Josh McDannel
jmcdannel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2010   #28
Front Range, Colorado
Paddling Since: 97
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 82
Birds carry these species from drainage to drainage as well. Tax the dippers!
Hey Zeus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2010   #29
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,302
Thanks for sharing that JMC.

Sounds like we need to start taxing all fisherman per pole to be fair.

I think many of us agree with you in that mussels are a problem that needs to be handled/watched/monitored. And the law completely targets a river user group that has little to do with mussels spreading.

Kyle McCutchen
Cutch is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Topic Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Oregon To Require Boat Owners To Buy Permit To Fund Invasive Species Programs Andy H. Whitewater Kayaking 0 11-29-2009 06:47 PM
Invasive Mussels Found in Lake Powell richp Whitewater Kayaking 14 08-15-2007 05:18 PM
Poudre bumper sticker!!! Bailey Whitewater Kayaking 3 09-18-2005 07:45 PM
Lost/Stolen Fluid Paddle "Whitman" Sticker kalancp Lost & Found 0 07-17-2005 08:25 PM

» Classified Ads
Dagger Mamba Creeker 7.6...

posted by Rendezvous River Sports


Jackson 2014 Rockstar...

posted by Scardenas95

Demo Jackson Karma L

posted by 4CRS

Used 2016 Jackson Karma LG whitewater kayak - lightly used...

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities

Copyright 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:01 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.