Bloomer
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Justin Elledge…I inquired given I confirmed I was paid through 11/22 and received the email. I was told it was a targeted email, so suspect if you were current through 10/22 you likely shouldn’t have received the reply email. Still unsure why I did, as I confirmed again I was current through 11/22. Well, now 11/23.
Similar issue for me. I typically keep paid up one year ahead. Confirmed with TU before LAP sign up that my membership was current through 11/22. Received same email stating I need to renew TU membership or I’d be refunded. Just went ahead and paid for another year but can’t seem to get confirmation from GRTU all is good…..
Appreciate the efforts of those coordinating and trying to facilitate sign up for the LAP. They don’t seem to get a lot of (positive) attention when things go right, but likely feel a ton of (negative) pressure when things go wrong.
I stay pretty quiet and don’t offer much input as most of the time I’d probably be wrong anyway. But with all the chatter on changes to sign up, it just seems to me there isn’t any one suggestion that balances fairness to everyone; someone or a group will likely feel as if they’re at less of an advantage of obtaining membership to the LAP or others (for whatever reason) had an advantage. For that reason, my thought is leave sign up the way it is, slots fill on first come basis (possibly set up a que system as has been suggested to help manage server capacity). Realize that means some may not get a membership, including myself. But that also means someone who hasn’t had an opportunity to be a member may get to experience the LAP or a former member who missed it in a prior year may have a chance again. I’ll certainly give it my best try to sign up, but if unsuccessful I’m still going to fish either way, just will access the river a different (and less convenient) way. Then try again next year.
Probably not a popular opinion…….
LAP access, funding for additional stocking events/more trout/species/education, promotion/enforcement of C&R by residents, etc….
Aside from info posted here on the subject, I’m pretty much uninformed. Not local and haven’t spent time on the river since last winter (generally avoid crowds and the summer river scene).
Seems this development is off and running. I can’t fathom an approach that stops it from proceeding, but do agree engagement and guidance from TU would be a good start, along with discussion with developers. I can’t help but think TU would take an interest given the good work on developing this fishery and its prior longevity.
I’m not an expert in this area but given the size of the development and proximity to the river and sensitive ecosystem, there no doubt had to be reviews and permits obtained (likely through TCEQ, TPWD, USFWS, ACoE), along with assessments of the overall impact and proposed mitigation strategy. If land clearing has already begun, again, it seems these permits and approvals are already in place. Would be interesting to understand what (if anything) has been proposed and approved for protection of the river and surrounding ecosystem.
If stopping the development is not an option, to me, seeing if there is an opportunity to partner with them to try and make something positive happen (or at least reduce the negative impact on the river and fishery) would be the next best approach. After all, one of their selling points is the proximity to the fishery. On the surface, it seems they see value in it and who would be best to partner with on ensuring its long term success than GRTU?
(Maybe too optimistic but just thinking aloud)
Thanks @Jimbo
Fingers crossed on getting a spot in the LAP this year.
Had planned on joining but fractured a bone in my knee and was getting fitted for a brace on Saturday morning. Hopefully will be at next one.
Nice work! Thanks for taking the time to do this.
@mhamlettster agree, the population I was referring to is the general public who does not participate in GRTU nor the LAP, nor practice C&R
Realize there is a trophy limit of 1/day but was thinking/thought that was a per day limit. Haven’t fished the coast in years but thought there were tags issued with the license for trophy fish. Once the tag is used, that’s it for the angler for the term of their license. I guess my point is there are people within the public (not GRTU/LAP members) who are fishing the river and not practicing C&R. If they follow the law, at least requiring them to tag the fish may help reduce some of the pressure from those that do not practice C&R and exercise daily limits. Just a thought, perhaps not a reasonable approach.
Maybe a dumb (and obvious question), but any work with TPWD to implement a tag program with the purchase of a license for the population that doesn’t practice catch and release? Maybe it already exists and I’m uneducated.
Welcome to GRTU from someone who still considers himself very much a beginner, as well. As has been mentioned, nothing beats education, time in the river, and time with a guide. I’ve done all, just being 2.5 hours away lends to a lower frequency. Appreciate the post and the responses thus far, they have been helpful to me.
My wife, for the first time ever, has indicated some interest in learning to fly fish. Appreciate Dana’s comments above and will be checking into TWFF for her. Also the comment of a float trip for both of us is a great idea. Will be looking into tbat too.
Welcone again and hope we cross paths.
John
<p style=”text-align: left;”>Had a family commitment I couldn’t reschedule (already did once). Hoping to catch next stocking!</p>
@J.C.
Thank you for explaining. That sounds very interesting.
Jimbo….can you explain what electro-shock is and its purpose?
