All that being said, waterfowl transport more than every fisherman ever could. They hitch rides in their feathers and on the legs. Mother nature will find a way.
I don't know if banning felt is the answer, but if my personal reason for wearing felt is for my potential safety at the "expense" of contaminating an entire watershed, I think I would have to re-examine my thinking on how I could be safer on the water.
And, of course, any concientious fisherperson would rinse and dry their boots, as we do our boats' hull and trailer each and every time after a trip. Regardless of what body of water is the next destination, even if it's the same one. That's my habit...no "expense to the entire watershed", just my water bill, a miniscule cost.
Rayz
Loc: North West N.J. and South Hero Vt.
They were originally baned in Vermont because they thought they spred an invasive algae called Didymo. They then concluded it was native to the state and reversed the ban.
GSMJr
Loc: SoCal> Pflugerville (Austin), TX
FourchonLa. wrote:
All that being said, waterfowl transport more than every fisherman ever could. They hitch rides in their feathers and on the legs. Mother nature will find a way.
In California they will probably commission studies and legislate to restrict water foul to one body of water.
And spent a 10 million dollars doing it.
I have two sets of wading boots. One for use in the areas infected with didymo I use one set and I save another for unaffected areas. I make sure they dry for a week.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.