-----Original Message-----
From: Cichra,Charles [mailto:cecichra@ufl.edu]
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 2:30 PM
To: Eggeman, Diane
Subject: Alachua County Waterways Meeting - DUCK HUNTING?
Diane,
FYI - Here is a collection of some of the e-mails about the Alachua County Waterways Management program, I mentioned to you at the recent grass carp risk assessment meeting. Most of the people who are listed below are very active in DU and avid waterfowl hunters.
Chuck
Charles E. Cichra
Professor / Extension Fisheries Specialist
University of Florida
Department of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
7922 NW 71st Street
Gainesville, Florida 32653-3071
Phone: (352)392-9617 ext 249
Cell: (352)339-6173
Fax: (352)392-3672
Web:
http://fishweb.ifas.ufl.edu/Cichra/Cichra.htm
************************************************** **********************
****
-----Original Message-----
From: jim carnes [mailto:thecarneshouse@msn.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 10:50 AM
To:
awilliams@millenniumbank.net;
blackrhino12@hotmail.com;
lindagshine@earthlink.net;
cmena@thig.com;
Davidlworthy@yahoo.com;
Dgrabow@ducks.org;
EdDyksterhouse@Avmed.org; Cichra,Charles;
Gobble2@yahoo.com;
kielbrian@hotmail.com;
kirk_ruth@bellsouth.net;
leesbes@atlantic.net;
mtlminc@aol.com;
Npearson@ch2m.com;
rferdig@ufl.edu;
RogerS@JMCo.com;
RUSALMOORE@aol.com;
spasteur@ch2m.com
Subject: Alachua County Waterways Meeting
David Worthy was able to attend last nights meeting and the outlook is not good. Sportsmen were out numbered by home owners/lakeside residents almost
3 to 1. Everyone seems to agree that there are already laws on the books about noise but no way to enforce them. Unfortunately the home owners are pushing for a total ban on airboats and curfews for after dark usage.
If we
don't let our voices be heard then we are headed towards loosing access to our lakes, especially ORANGE, NEWNAN'S and SANTA FE.
************************************************** **********************
I spoke with a county commissioner concerning the Alachua County waterways Planning Board and I was advised that this is NOT heading in a direction that we would like. I encourage everyone to either visit the web site(see the link below) and voice your opinion or better yet attend any of the stake holder meetings that you can. If we aren't careful we may loose the privilege of duck hunting, night fishing, frog gigging and many other water based activities in Alachua County.
Jim
N
>From: "Larry Schnell" <schnell@ufl.edu>
>To: <info@alachuawaterways.org>
>Subject: News Bulletin 10; Second Consensus Meeting June 19
>Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:31:32 -0400
>
>The second Consensus Meeting is Tuesday, June 19, 6:30 p.m.-9 p.m.
>Location: Room 285c at the Holland Law Center, University of Florida
>You may view this online at
>http://alachuawaterways.org/newsletters10.html
>
>Progress Toward Consensus
>
>These are the summary statements the team has interpreted after the
>June 7 stakeholder representatives' discussions.
>
>At the June 19th meeting; further discussion will occur to see if
>consensus can be achieved on these themes; if further rewording is
>needed, or if consensus is not possible.
>
>
>Speed limits in selected areas based on safety and environmental
>concerns The discussion about creating new speed limits began with the
>suggestion of a 40 mph speed limit to prevent potential conflicts
>between motorized and non-motorized craft. The ensuing conversation
>focused on the broader topic of new speed limits for safety reasons.
>Stakeholders appeared to approach agreement that the need for any
>proposed speed limits must (1) be adequately proven (justified) and (2)
>must not be broad-based, but only implemented in the area where the
>need has been proven to exist. Also, who would enforce the speed limit,
>FWC or the ASO, needs to be determined.
>
>Waterways management
>Various groups suggested that (1) existing regulations need to be
>enforced and (2) the public needs to be educated on the existing
>regulations. A question posed was how to increase enforcement of
>existing laws. Some suggested that agencies, such as FWC (or ASO), will
>need more resources (e.g., officers) to increase law enforcement
>efforts. There was agreement that a better process (mechanism) is
>needed for informing officers of violations or safety problems. Groups
>noted that, when notified, FWC is very responsive. Questions arose over
>how to resolve jurisdictional issues at county and regional boundary
>lines. It was suggested that state government has the primary
>responsibility for enforcement, not the county. Stakeholder groups
>seemed to agree with formation of a waterways advisory board composed
>of all relevant stakeholder groups. The purpose of the board needs to
>be well defined (for example, educational).
>
>Regulation
>A) Noise - There was discussion by the stakeholders of the noise issue.
>Most of the discussion focused on airboats although there was some
>discussion of other types of boat as well. Most of the discussion
>concerned decibel levels allowed under state law and county ordinance,
>the impact of noise on residents who live near water bodies, the value
>of mufflers to suppress noise, power-loading , the rights of waterway
>users including airboaters, and vegetative buffer zones.
>
>The conversation was reasonable and fairly discussed but there was
>little movement toward consensus on any aspect of the noise issue.
>
>B) Alcohol - There was consensus that alcohol abuse by boat operators
>is unacceptable. There was some uncertainty over what the state law
>actually says concerning possession of alcohol in a boat. It was hoped
>that the presence of Law Enforcement at our next meeting on June 19th
>will bring some clarity to the issue.
>
> Education
>1) There was consensus that the county should provide signage to help
>protect sensitive environmental features and wildlife.
>
>2) The stake holders agreed that there is adequate boater safety
>education available but that not everyone who should make use of the
>information does so. One of the stakeholders pointed out that, under
>the current system, 'boaters are as educated as they want to be."
>
> Land Use Restrictions
>
>Waterfront development and site design standards - 1) regulating or
>restricting waterfront home fertilizer use and 2) better septic tank
>monitoring, inspections and standards for waterfront homes.
>
>Access and Use of Waterways
>
>Almost consensus on: Do not ban any type of watercraft from any water
>area (exception 1: it would be OK for areas that are truly
>environmentally sensitive for habitat or wildlife, if very clearly
>defined and signed); exception 2- very specific no wake or idle speed
>zones would be acceptable if clear rationale is established and
>recommended by a waterways advisory board. Also, these would need to be
>very clearly delineated and signed so that there is no ambiguity or
uncertainty as to where that zone is.
************************************************** **********************
***
>-----Original Message-----
>From: jim carnes [mailto:thecarneshouse@msn.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 1:48 PM
>To:
schnell@ufl.edu
>Subject: RE: Online survey for water fowl group
>
>
>Thank you Larry, I will forward this to everyone in our group.
>
>Jim Carnes
>
>
> >From: "Larry Schnell" <schnell@ufl.edu>
> >To: "Jeff Carnes" <thecarneshouse@msn.com>
> >CC: <delaneyb@ufl.edu>
> >Subject: Online survey for water fowl group
> >Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 11:43:54 -0500
> >
> >Jeff: The University of Florida Waterways Masterplan Team discussed
>giving
> >your group a survey site for your organization only. The link to this
> >survey is below. Please share this link with your group. We welcome
> >your input in this process.
> >
> >Please let me know if you have any difficulties with the site or
>questions.
> >
> >Larry Schnell
> >
> >
> >
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=496283128523
************************************************** **********************
Good morning gang,
I have attached a link for the survey from the Alachua County Water Management Planning Committee. This is a different survey than the one on their website. This survey has been put together for our group (duck
hunters/fisherman) and our input is very important. Steve, Scott, Kevin and I were able to attend the meeting with the committee a few weeks ago and
they were very open and interested in our concerns and comments regarding the current and future usage of the waterways in Alachua County. This additional survey is one way to have our voices heard. They are willing to schedule another meeting with us if we are willing to do so and could produce a much larger turnout. I know that everyone is busy and it is often difficult to find the time away from work and families to attend another
meeting or function. However, if we are not diligent and pay attention to what is going on around us it may not be necessary to find time to plan a hunting trip in this county because some day soon you may not be allowed to hunt in Alachua County.
javascriptl('http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=496283128523');
Thanks
Jim