Quiet Waters Act Proposed by The Back country Hunters and Anglers

[James Riley]

The only time I'm trolling James is when I'm on the river, Buzz left because he was sick of it and that's his decision. There's thousands of people that continually fish rivers that their gand pappy showed them through the advances of technology . I never said I wanted Buzz to be like me. You still can't get over that can you? Have you ever been paddle fishing on the Missouri? There's tons of men, women and children fishing the banks. Whether it be set lines, bank fishing or snagging, and there's boats cruising all day long. I've been doing that for 10 years up there and I'm yet to see a conflict.

You don't see it but you just made my point. LOL! First, you ask why he left when: 1. You know damn well why he left. Thus making your question rhetorical (troll), and resigning the balance of your post about your enjoyment of the waters he left to serve NO other purpose than to mean "why don't you stay and be like me." If that weren't the case then you would not have mentioned it, now would you? Or, 2. You really didn't know why he left but chock it up to his decision when in reality he was driven out by those he obviously can't tolerate because he's not like you. If you were so tolerant of his not being like you then you wouldn't counsel him on what you perceive to be his inappropriate behavior, especially when he left the area to avoid that very fking thing.

In other words, I was right: You were saying "Why leave, Buzz? Why not be like me? Why not stay and enjoy these waters like the rest of "us"? Otherwise, why would you ask why he left and then follow it with a description of how you roll?

You do it again in this recent post, telling us about all the people who are not like Buzz and who don't mind all the fighting that you say you've been witness to. (As a side note, you contradict yourself in having seen it all and then, in this post, say you haven't seen a conflict in 10 years. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, you must be talking about two different areas. Even in that case, however, the BHA proposal may very well be aimed at keeping this area from becoming like the other areas you are referring to. Regardless, Buzz isn't like you and all those people you mention. So he left. So you should not care why, especially if you don't like the way he conducts himself around people like you.

But to answer your question: No, I've never been there. And if there are "tons of men, women and children fishing the banks . . . set lines, bank fishing or snagging, and there's boats cruising all day long" then I will *never* go there. Rather than wonder why I won't go, don't ask. I'm not like you. You would not understand me. Just be glad I'm not there and don't waste your breath rubbing it in about how you and your ilk have monopolized an area to the point that a guy like me would never want to go there.

 

[cowboy]

Well - I was initially on the fence on this one. I took the time to read all the posts multiple times, read the act, went to various web sites to read all the facts/opinions and would like to thank everyone for helping me form my opinion that will not be changed.

I am now 100% in favor of this Act and will support BHA to get it fully implemented. I think my grandkids will appreciate my efforts. Carry on.

 

[Straight Arrow]

What seems to be missed are the restrictions already in place which seem to be effective and accepted. There are presently restrictions on the Missouri River downstream from Craig and through the canyon. There are restrictions on the Smith River which limit the number of boats on the water daily. As I recall, those restrictions were imposed after conflicts escalated to the point of crisis and even beyond an obvious need for change. This proposal is intended to prevent the crisis conflicts in those areas with that high potential.
But of course, there are those who consider every privilege as a "right" and are focused solely on "me, me, me ... and my boat". My advice: Wrap your head around the fact that the only constant in life is change. How you accept it is on you.

 

[canis521]

Anyone have an argument to this besides the erosion deal which I can't seem to wrap my head around?

I hope this gives you some direction in what you are looking for. Some years ago I started looking into the potential impact that mud motors (aka, long-tail motors, shallow water motors--if your not familiar with these, do a quick Google search, it's impressive where these boats can go. As far as I know, there aren't too many being run in MT) may have on waterways--just out of curiosity, not work related. It's been a bit but I recalled some of the articles I found that discussed various impact of motors in general:

http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/ShorelandZoning/documents/201301041052.pdf
https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/wri974105

As 1-pointer pointed out, there is quite a bit of information that can be found with a quick search. These two studies are cited often and give a good overall picture of the effects of motorized traffic on waterways. Citations within these reports will provide endless reading about shoreline erosion and other impacts.