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.
