Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    Member bigbitef11's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    mitchell, sd
    Posts
    556

    Reetz Re-opening in July?

    If the GFP commision approves the one overs (WE, YP, and BC), removes the Black Bass harvest restrictions, and the closed unless permission oct 1 to April 30.

  2. Member bigbitef11's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    mitchell, sd
    Posts
    556
    #2
    UnfortunateIy, I see the Reetz's want the black bass slot limit off and the lake closed to public part of the year with the special regs off.

  3. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Hitchcock, SD
    Posts
    3,657
    #3
    Boy that will be good for a while!
    Imagine the paper tournament you could have there!
    Dave

  4. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Webster South Dakota
    Posts
    244
    #4
    Quote Originally Posted by bass57348 View Post
    Imagine the paper tournament you could have there!
    It wouldn't have to be a paper tournament. If this all gets approved the old bass slot is getting pulled and we'll move forward with the statewide reg.

    Here's the news release that they gave: https://gfp.sd.gov/news/detail/1157/

    Now, here's the sleazy thing that they're up to. That news release doesn't mention everything that's included in the deal. They leave out the part where the GFP is paying $8,000 a year to the Reetz family for this 5 months of access. If you really feel like diving into this, here's a link to the whole discussion at the last commission meeting. The Reetz stuff starts at 1 hour 34 minutes. http://www.sd.net/blogs/archive/2018...parks-meeting/

    Don't get me wrong, no one is more excited to get back out on Reetz than I am. It's 5 miles down the road and was part of the reason I decided to move to where I live. That being said, I can't help but have a bit of a bad taste in my mouth over how this is being handled. I don't so much care about the money or the weird regulations, but it does bother me a great deal that press release requesting the public for their input doesn't include all the details. It seems sneaky and misleading to hold back some of the most important information of the whole transaction. Do sportsmen want for their license dollars to go towards access to a catch and release only (except for bass) lake that is closed more of the year than it's open, and during those other 7 months of the year the people getting paid get to keep all the walleyes, perch and crappies that they want? Maybe it's a good use of sportsman's dollars, maybe it's not, but if you're going to open it up to public comment, don't make it look like this is all for free and dress it up to hide what it really is. However... Like I said, I'll be the first one at the ramp if and when they drop the gate

    This is going to open the door for all the section 8 lake owners to sue the crap out of the department for this whole ridiculous compromise too. This entire thing remains the same mess that it has been for 20 years. It's actually probably worse now.

  5. Member bigbitef11's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    mitchell, sd
    Posts
    556
    #5
    They really don't have any choice but to dress this one up. It needs to be worthwhile for Reetz family to open it back up.

    As long as its been taking to reopen, the negotiations sure must have been tough.

    I'm not an ice fisherman, so its hard for me to be completely frustrated.

    No Black Bass trophy protective reg. I'd like an explaination on that one.

    I think the SDGFP is aware that this is going to get more messy (Because of the new legislation/compromise.) I think they need to make more bad deals like this one to open everyone eye's about how bad this Nonmeandered compromise is.

  6. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Webster South Dakota
    Posts
    244
    #6
    Quote Originally Posted by bigbitef11 View Post
    They really don't have any choice but to dress this one up. It needs to be worthwhile for Reetz family to open it back up.
    You're exactly right. The public was going to flip out if they heard about the money stuff and the commission was going to get pushed into a corner where they were going to have to strike down their own rule change. If you listen to that audio from the meeting you can hear them patting themselves on the backs plenty... That's kind of the point of my rant though. They're out there cherry picking what they tell us in order to get their own proposals passed. That's dirty politics 101.

    Quote Originally Posted by bigbitef11 View Post
    I'm not an ice fisherman, so its hard for me to be completely frustrated.
    Same here, but for the people who only ice fish it's going to be hard to look out over that lake in January and know that their license dollars are being given to that family that is out there keeping their limit of walleyes every day. It is what it is, but from an ice fisherman's perspective this couldn't be any worse. I feel bad for em.

    Quote Originally Posted by bigbitef11 View Post
    No Black Bass trophy protective reg. I'd like an explaination on that one.
    That's easy. Who do you think is making all these rules? It's not the GFP. What do walleye fishermen hate? Smallmouth.

    Quote Originally Posted by bigbitef11 View Post
    I think the SDGFP is aware that this is going to get more messy (Because of the new legislation/compromise.) I think they need to make more bad deals like this one to open everyone eye's about how bad this Nonmeandered compromise is.
    It's the top dawg that's running this one. The peons couldn't get it done so Hepler has taken this into his own hands. He's either trying to make himself look like he's getting stuff done so they keep him around after we elect a new governor, or he knows he's out the door either way so he's going cowboy and doing whatever the F he wants before he's done.

    Like I said, subjectively I'm ecstatic. The only thing that bothers me is that I can't be out there in April and October too. I just want to fish. From an objective standpoint though, this is all completely rotten.

  7. Member bigbitef11's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    mitchell, sd
    Posts
    556
    #7
    Quote Originally Posted by redxdu View Post
    You're exactly right. The public was going to flip out if they heard about the money stuff and the commission was going to get pushed into a corner where they were going to have to strike down their own rule change. If you listen to that audio from the meeting you can hear them patting themselves on the backs plenty... That's kind of the point of my rant though. They're out there cherry picking what they tell us in order to get their own proposals passed. That's dirty politics 101.



    Same here, but for the people who only ice fish it's going to be hard to look out over that lake in January and know that their license dollars are being given to that family that is out there keeping their limit of walleyes every day. It is what it is, but from an ice fisherman's perspective this couldn't be any worse. I feel bad for em.



    That's easy. Who do you think is making all these rules? It's not the GFP. What do walleye fishermen hate? Smallmouth.





    Like I said, subjectively I'm ecstatic. The only thing that bothers me is that I can't be out there in April and October too. I just want to fish. From an objective standpoint though, this is all completely rotten.
    I totally agree

  8. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Hitchcock, SD
    Posts
    3,657
    #8
    Great, now we have farmers setting harvest limits, maybe we should have fish and wildlife biologists set the farm program.
    Dave

  9. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Webster South Dakota
    Posts
    244
    #9
    They voted this afternoon. Reetz will be reopening under the terms of the agreement that was proposed. They saved face a little by revealing that all the $8,000 dollars that the GFP pays them will be donated to the Webster school district athletic department.

    I don't know what date it will open, but it sounds like it will be fairly soon.

  10. Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Victoria, Minnesota
    Posts
    118
    #10
    So which lake is next.... First domino I bet. Plus the GFP isn’t as time invested in other small lakes as far as I know. All those extra surveys on Reetz feels like it was a waste to me.

    sucked to to drive by and not fish it on our trip in May but I don’t know that I will in the future. The whole reason it was special was because of the special regulations. Maybe there won’t be much ice fishing pressure from the family and friends but I bet there will be.

  11. Member bigbitef11's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    mitchell, sd
    Posts
    556
    #11
    There were very few who commented support for this deal, so I'll be surprised if there is much public fishing pressure on Reetz. A little SMB harvest should be a good thing. I'm heading up that way in August and excited.

    I just hope there is enough water in the lakes.

  12. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    154
    #12
    Lucky for anglers the Reetz family is willing to work with the state. The 8K they are paying is peanuts compared to what they could get if they ran it up to the the Supreme Court. Your state is essentially saying they can not profit from land they have owned for five generations unless they strike a deal with the state.