TU putting Oregon felt sole ban on the agenda

Trout Unlimited at the State Council Level has been involved in lobbying our state legislators in Salem to ban felt sole wading boots in the 2011 legislature. The following info is from Dave Kumlien, Executive Director of the Whirling Disease Foundation and Trout Unlimited:

It is a very good idea on reaching out to fly shops, guides, and outfitters on the Oregon effort to regulate the use of felt soled waders and boots. I know that as a still active 36 year Montana fly fishing outfitter and a former 20 year fly shop owner, I would appreciate this sort of opportunity to make input on your effort. I am sure you will find supporters and detractors. In my opinion it is very important to be armed with the information about the science behind the move to eliminate felt. You will hear lots of statements from the uniformed that there is “no data, no science” behind this effort to eliminate felt, and this is not true. Following is a link to a good summary of the science behind the TU felt sole policy.

[Money quote from report: There is sound scientific evidence that anglers are moving invasives and that felt is much worse than any other part of a boot or any other fishing equipment.]

It is important to understand that the goal of the TU eliminate felt sole policy is to reduce, not eliminate the risk of moving aquatic invasive species (AIS) by anglers. Essentially, there is no way to eliminate the risk of anglers moving AIS, no treatment, no chemical that will totally eliminate the risk. The only certain way to eliminate risk is to eliminate the activity, and we, TU, are most definitely not recommending to anyone that we quit fishing! Understand, too, that this effort to eliminate the use of felt soles is only a small part of the overall message to practice the clean angling techniques to inspect, clean, and dry angling equipment and to avoid moving fish, fish parts, plants or water between drainages. The felt sole policy provides a tremendous opportunity to talk about the rest of this important message regarding aquatic invasive species.

Regarding Korkers, they are opposed to the move to eliminate felt soles and will not support any effort to eliminate the use of felt soles by regulation or law. However, Korkers does understand the threat of AIS to our cold water trough and salmon resource, and they do support the clean angling effort. When TU announced the eliminate felt sole policy at its annual meeting in ’08 and Simms Fishing Products Company followed the next week with an announcement at the AFFTA Fly Fishing Trade Show endorsing the TU policy and announcing that Simms was dropping felt from their product line 2010.

Korkers immediately opposed the policy. Korkers actively opposed the TU policy and lobbied everyone, including me, the author, to oppose the idea. At the 2009 AFFTA trade show Korkers presented their “pro choice” marketing program actively opposing the TU policy. Mind you, Korkers is concerned about the angler’s role in moving AIS, but they will tell you that their concern regarding eliminating the use of felt is based on product liability claiming that alternative soled boots are unsafe.

I’ve extensively tested and used all of the new alternative soled boots, and I’ve found that rubber with studs is equal to any felt sole product. Korkers does not believe this. It’s a subjective position and for either side of the issue, impossible to defend with facts. The liability issue is also subjective and debatable, but it is the Korker’s position, and they won’t budge. TU has come to an agreement with Korkers to work with them to produce a Korkers/TU cleaning angling sole package of a rubber and studded rubber sole with Korkers making a donation to TU’s AIS program from the sale of these boots and soles. I worked on this clean angling sole package idea, and I applaud Korkers for their effort.

You’re also likely to hear feedback that this “eliminate felt sole” policy is a conspiracy between TU and Simms. Here are the facts. First, the TU policy was originated by me and was based on my 15 years of working on whirling disease and other AIS. The motivation to write the TU policy came from numerous discussions and meetings with fish health and aquatic invasive species specialists over many years, growing scientific evidence regarding the movement of AIS by anglers, and an official request from the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources in 2008 asking TU to lead an effort to get the angling public and boot and wader manufacturers to eliminate the use of felt soles.

Simms had nothing to do with the formulation of the TU policy. At the time we announced the TU policy at the annual meeting in Salt Lake City in ‘08 TU had no idea that Simms would introduce their new Vibram rubber Rivertread sole at the AFFTA show or would announce that they were dropping felt soles from their product line in 2010. This information was kept under tight wraps by Simms, and I wasn’t aware of the dropping felt soles from the product line until I heard it at the AFFTA show. Furthermore, at the time that Simms introduced their new Rivertread soled boot and announced their “no felt in the product line in 2010” policy, Simms was NOT a TU donor. Since then, Simms has made a small contribution, $5,000 to be exact, to TU’s AIS program. The TU AIS program budget is $200K. The Simms contribution is generous but not a significant part of the budget. TU has worked with but independently from the wader and boot manufacturing industry.

Finally, I would like to say that it is not TU national’s policy to seek regulatory bans on felt. The ban in Alaska was originated by a TU member and then supported by the AK TU State Council. In Vermont, the legislation to ban felt was introduced by a Vermont Representative David Deen who had no prior contact with TU. In Maryland, the ban is being pushed by their Bureau of Inland Fisheries. When asked, TU has provided information to these groups regarding the science of felt, and I did travel to Alaska at the invitation (and expense) of Alaska TU to testify in the AK Board of Fisheries hearings. I also was requested by the Vermont legislature to testify on the Vermont bill.

To be effective, this eliminate felt sole policy must be supported and carried by the grassroots TU members. Nothing will kill this effort faster, I believe, than having this effort to eliminate felt appear to be orchestrated by the national TU office and its “hired guns.” You guys are doing this the right way, and I am prepared to help however you need me to.

This entry was posted in Oregon Conservation News. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to TU putting Oregon felt sole ban on the agenda

  1. Rob R says:

    Sincere thanks to Dave Kumlien and Bob Wiltshire for providing a thorough review of the science behind this proposal. I was highly skeptical until reading through Bob’s summary of the science. While I strongly disagree about the gripping ability of rubber compared to felt, it’s no longer an issue worthy of debate. Doesn’t matter. We have a responsibility to make the change.

  2. Fishkamp says:

    I just got the guide boots and put nine star cleats in each boot and love ’em. They stick like glue on slick rocks.

  3. Rob R says:

    Until the star cleats bust off one by one. My pair, with very few river miles, is down to three or four star cleats each. But there seem to be better options out there now.

  4. Brian Chaney says:

    This is a very informative post with a lot of scientific information about this issue, which I applaud. However, despite what I think are good/accurate intentions, I don’t feel “Korkers position” has been clearly or fairly represented in this blog. Korkers has a unique technology called Omnitrax that allows soles to be interchanged. This is a totally unique product and something that no other wading boot manufacturer offers. Therefore, by nature, the product is more versatile than traditional “fixed” sole wading boots which is advantageous to both retailers and to anglers who now have a “choice” to decide what is best for their store or for their angling experience (hence “Pro Choice”). All of our boots come with two soles in a box with others available for purchase, which allow anglers to “interchange” soles and dry soles in a unique fashion (a responsible alternative to help stop the spread of invasive species). And as the science states, completely ” cleaning & drying” all gear is the best way to fight the spread of invasive species (because organisms can be transferred in ALL areas of a boot or wader). With Korkers, you could potentially fish responsibly one day in felt, the next in sticky rubber, and the next in studded sticky rubber…..or 3 consecutive days in different river systems with different pairs of felt soles. Traditional wading boots cannot accomplish this and is one reason felt soled boots are a problem….on traditional wading boots. This is where I think our stance on this issue often gets “misunderstood.” I can tell you that since the surprise recommendation from TU a couple years ago to ban felt, no company has worked harder to learn about this issue, understand this issue, and think of creative alternatives that will ultimately help fight the spread of invasive species and enhance angler safety. We have continually supported TU, StopANS, and The Clean Angling Pledge’s efforts to inform and educate the public on this issue. We all support the clean angling pledge and continue educate all retailers and anglers to “inspect, clean, and DRY” their gear. We have also expanded our product line to create more rubber alternative soles and boot option packages. Our acceptance of felt as an alternative is based solely on our unique product offering and on the countless hours of field testing that indicate felt offers superior grip & traction to rubber. We are working on a lot of new technologies that will continue to position Korkers as an innovation leader and as a thought leader with regards to protecting the environment. If anyone would like to know more about Korkers position on this or other important issues, I would ask that you call us for a direct quote on our position.

  5. Doug says:

    Interesting subject that warrants merit. I don’t have a problem with a felt sole ban, however, my boots still have years of life left in them. I do not want to be forced to spend a hundred bucks or more on something that doesn’t need replacing (because of wear).
    I suggest a grace period to this proposed new law so that hundreds, or thousands of fishermen and women, do not have to go out and replace expensive gear.
    I am not a travelling fisherman. I fish locally, and the chance of me contributing to this problem is extremely remote, if non-existent. I personally will not throw away a perfectly good pair of boots. I will continue to use mine until they wear out.
    New law, or not.

  6. DonC says:

    I’m concerned about invasive species, what’s the best way to prevent the spread of these things?

  7. Matt Siegmund says:

    I’ve had boots for over six months with 10 star cleats in each. I’ve got a lot of trips on them, including half a dozen on the N Umpqua and they work great. Plus I have not lost one yet.

  8. JohnB says:

    Is there a way to treat felt sole boots after fishing? 1 part bleach to parts water? I have a newer pair of felt soled boots that I will wear until they are completely shot and do not want to be forced to buy a new pair until I absolutely have to.

  9. Richard says:

    I haven’t been fly-fishing all that long; since 2004, so my experiences may not reflect those of lifelong fly fishermen.

    My first pair of boots were rubber bottomed and performed poorly; I was constantly being swept off of my feet by even the mildest of currents, and on several occasions damned near floated down river. To “fix” this, I purchased a pair of Korker’s Safety Sandals with the carbide spikes; this was not at all a solution as the sandals were bulky, heavy, created more drag in the water and had the same effect of pulling me off of my feet.

    After many frustrating, and dare I say potentially dangerous fishing trips, I bought a pair of felt soled boots. Let me tell you; they’re the ONLY thing that worked! I was able to get into deeper, faster water without fear of my feet being pulled out. The felt soles provided stability, and comfort, unlike either rubber soled boots or the spiked sandals.

    I understand the logic & thinking behind this ban, but a good portion also reminds me of the ridiculous debate that raged on about the spotted owl.

    Banning felt soles feels like an alarmist’s answer, after all, there isn’t a call to wipe out other invasive species (read: large & smallmouth bass).

    Perhaps the answer, as it has already been asked, it whether there’s a way to clean (or disinfect) the felt soles to prevent invasives from spreading.

  10. Rob R says:

    I know it’s a pain, but you should read the attached literature. It explains that felt prevents disinfectants from penetrating and fully cleaning a boot.

    And as much as a ban may irritate all of us, the fact is anglers won’t police themselves. It’s a small price to pay considering the value we place on our river-time.

  11. DonC says:

    Thanks Rob, but if disinfectants aren’t the answer how do you prevent spreading invasive species? I think this is a very important topic and would like to know what protocol is.

  12. phil mamer says:

    From looking at invasive species sights on the internet, isn’t Didymo a native of the Columbia River Basin. Please respond to my email address. I certainly understand the need for disinfection to prevent spread of other species.
    Thanks
    Phil

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *