# Idaho invasive species sticker



## Outlaw (Mar 8, 2010)

According to a local last year, the Forest Service has refused to enforce the sticker law. However, this was in Payette Drainage. I'm not sure about other parts of the state. If the Forest Service is out, I suppose game wardens and sheriffs would be the only people to worry about. It's a very unpopular program in Idaho to say the least. The stores refuse to sell the stickers, and a few river rangers refuse to enforce the law as well. I just heard Idaho law makers are looking to increase fees and establish a special out of state price as well. In the entire summer that I lived in Garden Valley, I never saw or heard of anyone getting busted for the sticker. However, I have heard of invasive species checkpoints going up along Highway 55. There again... never seen one.


----------



## slamkal (Apr 8, 2009)

we did middle fork salmon last year. the fed rangers said they were not enforcing this. However I thought it would be too easy for some state official to be waiting at the confluence with $50 (or whatever) fines. So it was cheap insurance, and in theory its for a good cause (although in practice its probably going to plug some budget deficit somewhere else while not stepping up any actions against invasive specieds).


----------



## AndrewC (Jul 6, 2008)

The sticker now costs $7 - they raised the price by $2 a couple months ago. They are required for all kayaks, and any inflatable over 8 feet in length. They only started the program last year, and there was very little enforcement for nonmotorized users. We'll see what happens this year. I have heard of people being ticketed for not having one, though. I believe it's a $70 fine for not having one.


----------



## mttodd (Jan 29, 2009)

Seems like a good idea to have just in case of a ranger with an attitude. Sounds more like an out of state (invasive species) tax. Maybe they made a change to the specs recently, but the parks and rec site now says 10 feet or longer.


----------



## cataraftgirl (Jun 5, 2009)

I purchased the tags last year and laminated them (as instructed on the Parks & Rec website) then attached them to my cataraft with a zip tie. I was checked once on I-15 between the Utah state line and Pocatello at a checkpoint. I also had them casually checked by river rangers on the Southfork Snake, Main Salmon, and Middle Fork. The Middle Fork ranger told us that since it was the first year of the program, they weren't issuing fines. However, one person on The Buzz related a story about a friend getting fined by a river ranger. I bought two tags, and let a kayaker friend use one for a weekend Southfork trip. At the end of the trip she removed the tag and gave it back to me, and I let another friend use it on a Main Salmon trip. I have since learned that this is not allowed, and that was why the guy's friend got a fine. A ranger saw him take the tag off his raft and put it on his kayak (I think I got the story right). I don't mind buying the tags, but I'd sure like to get more than a one trip use out of them. I'm not sure that they'd have any way of knowing if you used the tag on more than one boat, other than watching you switch the tags right in front of them. I guess I'll let my friends fend for themselves this year instead of being a "law breaker." But I'm still buying a spare tag in case somebody from my group shows up at put-in without one.
KJ
PS - The out of state fee only applies to motorized watercraft.


----------



## slamkal (Apr 8, 2009)

last year it was 10' limit. Not sure of the length this year ....


----------



## cataraftgirl (Jun 5, 2009)

Still 10 ft. for inflatables. You need a sticker for hard shell kayaks and canoes.


----------



## Adrenaline Junkey (Dec 10, 2009)

I did the laminated thing last year as well and switched it between the drift boat motorized boat and our small fishing pontoons. this year its figured into your motorized boats registration and if its a hard boat it must be stuck on the hull. we were fishing cj strike last year and they were writing tickets left and right and I got a warning for having it laminated and velcro to the boat. also some lakes and rivers its mandatory regardless of the size of boat.


----------



## cataraftgirl (Jun 5, 2009)

The laminated tag is allowed on inflatables, but I guess you are supposed to have the tag stuck to the hull of hard boats (motorized boats, drift boats, kayaks, canoes). However, the ranger on the Southfork didn't comment on the fact that my friend had one of my laminated tags zip tied to her kayak. The length thing only applies to inflatables.
Adrenaline Junkey - I'm assuming the warning you got for the laminated tag was for your drift boat. If not, then the ranger needs to be educated on their own program. The instructions for using the laminated tag on inflatable boats is right on the Parks & Rec website. I have the contact info for the program manager. She says she would like to know if rangers aren't enforcing the rules properly.
KJ


----------



## Wirednoodle (Feb 10, 2009)

We have the same tag in Oregon now. Each boat has to have one on someone's person on the boat. Luckily it doesn't matter who's name is on them. I am sure they will adjust it to gouge folk more at a later date.


----------



## Adrenaline Junkey (Dec 10, 2009)

cataraftgirl said:


> The laminated tag is allowed on inflatables, but I guess you are supposed to have the tag stuck to the hull of hard boats (motorized boats, drift boats, kayaks, canoes). However, the ranger on the Southfork didn't comment on the fact that my friend had one of my laminated tags zip tied to her kayak. The length thing only applies to inflatables.
> Adrenaline Junkey - I'm assuming the warning you got for the laminated tag was for your drift boat. If not, then the ranger needs to be educated on their own program. The instructions for using the laminated tag on inflatable boats is right on the Parks & Rec website. I have the contact info for the program manager. She says she would like to know if rangers aren't enforcing the rules properly.
> KJ


 It was on a motorized boat they said it had to be affixed to the hull and it was the sheriff's office they were inspecting every boat that was going in the water, I got 3 inspections in 3 days but only one warning all different officers but i explained to them where wasn't a glue store withing 35 miles and we were camped there. I don't have a problem paying for it But i kinda frown on having to buy one for all of them sure would be nice to just move it around as when we fish at henry's lake there mandatory on all vessels regardless of size.


----------



## kellip (Mar 1, 2007)

cataraftgirl said:


> I have the contact info for the program manager. She says she would like to know if rangers aren't enforcing the rules properly.
> KJ


I have yet to buy a sticker for any of my 5 kayaks and I'm certainly not reporting the rangers that don't enforce a fee I don't believe in. I'm not going to draw attention to the places we didn't get checked last year... but I didn't get checked. There was a check station on 55 at Smith's Ferry last year.


----------



## Outlaw (Mar 8, 2010)

I might have misunderstood what you're trying to say. I hope that you're not implying that you would notify parks and rec. of any violations. That's unfortunate for all of us boaters who simply think that the law is being used to plug budget gaps and unfairly target boaters for a problem we are generally not responsible for creating. 




cataraftgirl said:


> The laminated tag is allowed on inflatables, but I guess you are supposed to have the tag stuck to the hull of hard boats (motorized boats, drift boats, kayaks, canoes). However, the ranger on the Southfork didn't comment on the fact that my friend had one of my laminated tags zip tied to her kayak. The length thing only applies to inflatables.
> Adrenaline Junkey - I'm assuming the warning you got for the laminated tag was for your drift boat. If not, then the ranger needs to be educated on their own program. The instructions for using the laminated tag on inflatable boats is right on the Parks & Rec website. I have the contact info for the program manager. She says she would like to know if rangers aren't enforcing the rules properly.
> KJ


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

parks and rec website:

Stickers can be slit with a knife and attached to the vessel with a zip tie, plastic attachment, or other similar mechanism. You may want to put a backing of some type on the sticker to prevent it from tearing before slitting. You may also want to consider having the sticker laminated into a hang tag or attaching the sticker to a sturdy placard before attaching it to the vessel. 

___________________
On my raft, I just stuck it on my left oar tower. Simple. 

On the cat, I used a small cam strap to attach it to my frame last year, I didn't want that flapping around on my frame in transit. It's powder coated with a hammered finish, and I don't want to stick it right on the frame. I thought about putting it on the back of my chair, but then on multi-days it wouldn't be visible. I'm getting some funky new oar locks, I might just put it on them.


----------



## jmcdannel (Apr 22, 2009)

My boat is 6 feet long, 12.5 feet wide - so I'm good to go without a sticker right?


----------



## freexbiker (Jul 18, 2005)

jmcdannel said:


> My boat is 6 feet long, 12.5 feet wide - so I'm good to go without a sticker right?


Only if you row it that way....


Wyoming has just adopted this POS idea... Looks like boats under 10' don't need one. I think. I work in a fly shop and we are supposed to start selling them on Thursday, yet I have no idea who has to have one or the policies on them. Just another law slipped in by a bunch of people that have no idea what they are doing and are blinded by the $$$.


----------



## jmcdannel (Apr 22, 2009)

Yikes - that's bad news. I've been involved with fighting the Idaho IS program and it stinks. Lawmakers suck. Does Wyoming require a sticker for each boat you own? Oregon at least got part of it right - you buy one permit and carry it with you. So if you have 8 boats, you only have to buy one sticker (for each boat you have on the water at the same time). In Idaho you need one for each (at least technically, by the letter of the law). This would be like Fish and Game requiring a license for each fishing pole.

What really stinks about the Idaho program is that they require rafts and kayaks to stop at the inspection stations. The is no evidence or example of a quagga or zebra mussel attaching to a raft or kayak. They stick to the inside parts of motor boats or hang out in live wells. It's a huge waste of time, money and resources to do these inspections. When's the last time you saw a raft in lake mead? The inspectors don't even have any training specific to inspecting rafts and kayaks - it's all made up as they go.


----------



## freexbiker (Jul 18, 2005)

What I have heard is Wyoming requires a sticker for each boat. Also, there are going to be "Inspection Areas" that as a boater you are required to stop at... 

Right now our biggest worry is for guides (who never, or rarely, leave the N. Platte) to stop EVERY time they take out. After reading a bit more into it. It sounds like the WYO legislation has one person that owns a boat.... So this fine piece of law-making came from a completely un educated source...

Nothin better than Politics....


----------



## puhalu (Apr 12, 2010)

The programs being implemented might not be perfect, but I think we can all agree that mitigating the effects of invasive species is essential to the long-term health of the American West. Some watersheds already have severe problems with things like whirling disease and mussels. The states owe it to us to prevent infestation of pristine waters.
As for the types of craft they inspect, it makes sense. Aquatic invasive species can easily be transported in mud or small amounts of water. There is a much greater chance of contamination from motor boats, of course, but if we exempt rafts then what about the guy with a Zodiac who brings it here from infested waters in the mid-west? There are many grey areas - where do we draw the line? 
Freshwater resources in the West are in bad enough shape without widespread infestations of something like zebra mussels.
The fees being charged are not outrageous ($5). I'll gladly do my part to help WY G&F try to keep our watersheds healthy.
Aquatic Invasive Species in Wyoming - 6287


----------



## freexbiker (Jul 18, 2005)

puhalu said:


> The fees being charged are not outrageous ($5). I'll gladly do my part to help WY G&F try to keep our watersheds healthy.


 
Adds up when you have several boats though. I do agree that some regulation may help but the way they are going about it is not well thought out. I have 3 boats, a sailboat, a SUP (where does this fit in?) and will soon have a drift boat. 30$ all for non motorized vehicles that all are dried out and on the sailboat and drift boats the bunks are sprayed with bleach solution. A little unneccesary eh? 

As said above, it sounds like oregon has the right Idea where you buy a single tag for all your boats. Much like a conservation stamp that is required for annual licenses. I have no problem with trying to keep invasive species down, but the G&F's method isn't quite thought out well.


----------



## cataraftgirl (Jun 5, 2009)

The comment about contacting the program manager was meant for folks who were unfairly ticketed to perhaps get some relief from the fines. It was funny that the program manager stated that she wasn't aware that anyone had been ticketed or fined last year since the program was new.
KJ


----------



## puhalu (Apr 12, 2010)

> A little unneccesary eh?


No. Disinfecting with bleach is definitely not unnecessary (unless of course you only float 1 river). You’re doing the right thing. If everyone were as conscientious, we wouldn’t have the problem to begin with. WY G&F doesn’t recommend bleach, though:

*Can I disinfect my watercraft using bleach or other chemicals? *
No. Hot water or drying are the only approved decontamination methods in Wyoming. 
Chemicals, such as bleach, have not been proven to be effective in disinfecting all AIS and may damage your watercraft and equipment.




> SUP (where does this fit in?)


Waikiki



> G&F's method isn't quite thought out well.


Maybe not, but they've (a handful of senior-level biologists, I assume) thought about it a lot more than we have. We should give them the benefit of the doubt.

You're a fortunate guy if you can find the time to use 6 boats a year. At $1.73 per month for all 6, I'd say you'll probably get your money's worth.


----------



## Adrenaline Junkey (Dec 10, 2009)

The problem I have with the sticker is that it pays for washing stations and inspections. the remote places most of us use our crafts will never see washing stations and most of us already clean or dry boats out. the inspections just hinder most folks and the people doing the inspections have a lot to learn. every time i have been there one no one looked at the underside of the boat or tied to educate me about it. Just the check for personnel safety equipment 

Ada county was the ones writing the tickets last year and i promise i did see a few written and the deputy made the comment when he was writing up my warning that next time he would cite me too if it wasn't affixed to the hull


----------



## Cutch (Nov 4, 2003)

So let me get this straight...

I'm planning on being around the Selway area this summer, and combining it with a road trip. Eventually this summer I will definitely be rafting in Idaho... so that's one sticker. If I run the Selway or South Fork Salmon I may self-support my Fusion, so that's two stickers. Then, when I'm in the area I'll probably want to run the Lochsa, and will want a playboat, so that's three stickers. And, without a doubt, I plan to run some big shit during that trip as well and will need a Burn to creek in, so that's four stickers. 

Tina shares the raft with me, but still has three boats, so that's 7 stickers total. Damn, forgot Syd's boat (my 8 year olds)... that's 8 stickers. 

Okay, so roughly 8 boats loaded up on my truck (not including any of my friends of course... that's just immediate family). And, since we are vacationing in Idaho, we will have all of those boats at once (even though we can all agree we will rarely be using more than two boats). 

On that same trip I was hoping to drive through Wyoming and hit up some action there, then some Montana, and then Idaho... so now I need stickers for two states... so I need 16 stickers. 

And apparently on top of all of that, I'm going to have to stop at checkpoints to go through all of these boats... Question, if you basically always roll your raft up to transport it, and then bury it under small gear, then how exactly are you expected to stop and get it checked at a station? Unless it's at a takeout.

It appears to me that this law was poorly thought out and is being poorly implemented, and targets a user group that doesn't appear to have a whole lot of contact with zebra mussels. When was the last time you spotted a zebra mussel? I'm still at zero. It makes since around reservoirs (as you see in Colorado), but for me, my invasive species act funds should help to pay to remove reservoirs, not fund them (since this would be a great way to limit mussels). And as far as zebra mussels being a huge threat... they may be, but I think most of us could agree that the construction of new dams, mining and oil drilling in pristine wilderness areas, and global warming might be more of an issue. Invasive Species is a bullshit tax.


----------



## carvedog (May 11, 2005)

Cutch said:


> On that same trip I was hoping to drive through Wyoming and hit up some action there, then some Montana, and then Idaho... so now I need stickers for two states... so I need 16 stickers.
> 
> It appears to me that this law was poorly thought out and is being poorly implemented, and targets a user group that doesn't appear to have a whole lot of contact with zebra mussels...........Invasive Species is a bullshit tax.


No doubt about it that it is a bs law, with almost all money going to enforcement.....

Sorry that you are the user that is being forced to pay excessively for this due to the amount of boats you have.

We did try to raise the alarm two years ago when this was being voted on. It was almost a foregone conclusion even then that it would pass. You know scare the people with fear of snakebite and then sell the anti-venom.


----------



## jmcdannel (Apr 22, 2009)

I argued this issue at length on the Idaho Whitewater Association Facebook page yesterday. Since the comments made there are relevant to this thread, I'll share them here. Or you can become a fan (and a member) at 
Welcome to Facebook

*Idaho Whitewater Association: *
Well, it looks like Wyoming has jumped on the Invasive Species bandwagon. They are charging $15 for out-of-state non-motorized boats! It seems to me like they really want to keep us out! State rolls out program to block invasive species Too bad there isn't a dislike button on Facebook. I say, if you think this stinks, "like" this post to make your dissaproval heard.
State rolls out program to block invasive species

You, Jerry Kiser, Adrianne McDannel Burlile and 2 others like this.

*Jim Moss:*
$15 to keep the Zebra mussel out is cheap. The Zebra muscle is in Colorado and the Grand Canyon. It takes over. Quit your complaining and be thankful that Wyoming is trying to keep Idaho from being invaded.

*Marti Bridges:*
The problem is motorized boats overwhelmingly, not rafts, canoes and kayaks. Of course, those rafters with trailers need to not back them into the river, either. IF the Grand Canyon wasn't backed up into various lakes Zebra mussels would be far less of a problem. There is something fundamentally wrong with a river teaming with rainbow trout on a 110 degree day in the desert.

*Idaho Whitewater Association:*
The issue I'm concerned with is not the effort to keep them out, it's that rafts and kayaks are being held responsible to fund the efforts even though we pose very little risk to transporting them. It's motorized boaters, water being hauled by trucks or other motorized means, and even felt-soled boots that are likely carriers.

Another issue with the Idaho program is the way the fees are handled. We have two agencies with their fingers in the funds. Even though they raised the prices, they are putting even less of that $7 into the actual IS fund than they did when they collected $5.

Oregon is doing a much better job with their system. They've virtually eliminated the cost to create the sticker by allowing the permit to be printed after your online purchase. Therefore, more money goes into the fund. 

Oregon also only requires one person per boat to have a permit and they are transferable among family. Idaho requires a permit be attached to the boat. That would be like the F&G requiring a license for each fishing pole.

I also think it is a waste of time, money and resources to inspect whitewater boats at the inspection stations. We pose such a low risk that there is no need to inspect whitewater boats. We very rarely go in infested water, we rarely carry water around in our boats and we don't have all the nooks and crannies for the little buggers to hide in. There are plenty of other ways these mussels can get into Idaho that are more likely than on a raft. Furthermore, the inspectors received ZERO training in how to inspect non motorized craft. They don't even know where to look even if there could be something on our boats. All of the training is completely focused on motorized boats. The training materials are the same ones used for Washington and Colorado - two states that have left non-motorized craft out of this since they aren't the problem.

Idaho has it all wrong and it sounds like Wyoming is following our model, not the Oregon model.

IWA is *trying* to make things right, but we aren't getting any cooperation from lawmakers or the administrators of the fund/program. But trust me, we'll keep trying,

--Josh McDannel

*Jim Moss:*
It does not take nooks and crannies, it takes moisture. Young ones are only 1/4 long. It does not matter if rafts and kayaks have a low probability, it is there is any chance.

They are a very destructive mussel and once they get into a waterway they are there forever.

Your statement about a permit per family is short sited. I have three boats. I get one permit so they don't check two of my boats. The permits need to be per boat. If the fishing rods are the carriers then you need a permit for each carrier. Quit complaining about a little bit of money to keep the waterway open.

Besides you have to skip two beers at the end of a run.

It sucks money is not going to where it needs to go.

*Idaho Whitewater Association:*
There are no documented cases of mussels attaching to rafts or kayaks. Even if they did, finding them would be much easier. They attach along creases and can get into the various parts of engines and jets. If they are on a hull, they are easier to see and remove. And they won't survive as long there anyway. Sure, if you go roll practice in lake mead and don't clean your boat you could transport them. But does it make sense to inspect EVERY single kayak because of the remote chance that someone did that?

If you think we need to inspect every remote tiny possible method that can move them, then we are missing a large number of vessels that *could* transport them. I think the money spent inspecting a very low risk boat would be better spent on public education. If everyone who visits infested waters know how to make sure that they don't transport them, then we have a better chance of keeping them out.

Idaho has been trying to get non-motorized boats to register for years and we've fought that successfully. The same congressman behind non-motorized registration is behind the non-motorized IS fees. He's a politician of the worst kind and his slimy politics are driving this program.... See More

I know very well the destructive abilities of these things. And I really hope they don't make it here or anywhere else that they haven't already infested. But it is not right to single out a group who is not going to be a part of the problem. Fisherman are much more likely to transport them, but our law does not require inflatable under 10 feet to participate. Guess what - fisherman are the group that has inflatable under 10 feet. Tubes and fishing cats. But the legislature didn't want to mobilize that user group to oppose the stickers because they are big and organized and tougher to deal with than us lowly whitewater boaters.

As for my short sightedness, I disagree. Many of us have several boats for different rivers and situation. Having more boats does not increase the likelihood of me transporting mussels. I can only man one boat at a time. If you come to Idaho with three boats and only one has a sticker, that's 2 tickets.

If you have a rental business or a guide service - the fees add up. If you have 6 boats in your garage, it adds up. Besides, I already pay well over a hundred dollars per year in user fees to go boating - much more than the power boater pay to register their boats. I boated in Oregon, paid $7 + fee for my sticker there. I'll have to buy stickers in Idaho for 2 or 3 boats, and if I get over to Wyoming, I'll have to buy another couple $15 stickers. $58 and I'm not the problem. I'll never have my boat in infested waters and I clean, drain (not really applicable), dry.

The system is broken and we need to fix it.

Clean Drain Dry

--Josh McDannel


----------



## Hey Zeus (Mar 19, 2007)

Birds carry these species from drainage to drainage as well. Tax the dippers!


----------



## Cutch (Nov 4, 2003)

Thanks for sharing that JMC. 

Sounds like we need to start taxing all fisherman per pole to be fair.  

I think many of us agree with you in that mussels are a problem that needs to be handled/watched/monitored. And the law completely targets a river user group that has little to do with mussels spreading.


----------

