Very important boating announcement

[chompot]

.....Because the lake is going to take a dive financially
without private launch.

The lake and the concession that runs the fishing and events are two separate things. It could hurt the concession.... maybe... I do not have access to their financials. The cost of additional insurance premium vs. what gross sales are of private launching would not be too hard to figure out. It may have been a smarter business decision than many of us think.

Am I bummed.... sure am. I launch there often but I always have to laugh when people think lakes will have to close when fisherman stop paying. The water district makes their money from selling water. Fishing is not in their AOR.

[Cadillyak]

Plain out sucks. Can't launch my tube not my yak. That's a dagger. Unfortunately I can't partake in the vine until things are righted

[seal]

I'm sorry but as well as Irvine has been run this announcement is not being handled well. I completely understand that some information may not be able to be released but at the same time the brevity of this statement leaves all hanging without any hope that a solution is being discussed. A simple update to either give hope or to let all know that this will be the outcome for the foreseeable future would certainly go a long way.

I sure hope an update is coming soon.

Like Hawgz I spent a lot of time on this lake in years gone by and although not the local I once was it is a special place in an urban jungle, a lot of people care about it's future.

[Hotbite909]

Even though I did not get specific on the issue, I was just added a comment on the fishing. That's it

[plumbertom]

You all do realize this is just bulls#!t, don't you?
This is just a lie to increase the profits of the boat rental concessionaire.

[seal]

Well Plumbertom that's about the best response yet, lol!

[Steve Carson]

You all do realize this is just bulls#!t, don't you?
This is just a lie to increase the profits of the boat rental concessionaire.

Sorry Plumbertom, Your statement is absolutely incorrect.
As has been mentioned several times previously, there are only a handful of insurance carriers in the entire country [fewer than 10] who handle the specialized insurance products required for "private recreational fishing lakes" coverage.
All of them gave Irvine Lake a flat "No", with the exception of one, which added the strict caveat that no privately-owned watercraft of any kind would be allowed, period, not even those such as are owned by competitive bass anglers who may carry their own extensive insurance coverage.
The good news is that lake management are adding to the rental fleet, so a bit more variety in the types of craft available should be in place soon.
However, the current situation is in no way what management wants, and as unhappy as many longtime Irvine anglers may be, so are we, but this is the situation we find ourselves in.

[boomstikit]

I understand what is going on with the insurance and all but... do you really expect your "regulars" to shell out $80+ (admission, boat rental, etc.) every week to fish? I know that lowering prices would increase business. Has that been discussed? Because as it stands right now, I will take my tube (and money) and go elsewhere.

[georgia_brown]

Sorry Plumbertom, Your statement is absolutely incorrect.
As has been mentioned several times previously, there are only a handful of insurance carriers in the entire country [fewer than 10] who handle the specialized insurance products required for "private recreational fishing lakes" coverage.
All of them gave Irvine Lake a flat "No", with the exception of one, which added the strict caveat that no privately-owned watercraft of any kind would be allowed, period, not even those such as are owned by competitive bass anglers who may carry their own extensive insurance coverage.
The good news is that lake management are adding to the rental fleet, so a bit more variety in the types of craft available should be in place soon.
However, the current situation is in no way what management wants, and as unhappy as many longtime Irvine anglers may be, so are we, but this is the situation we find ourselves in.

Seems like it'd be best if it were taken via imminent domain and made a public lake. How come OC doesn't have any fishing lakes like San Diego and LA counties do? Why are they all private? How do municipalities get around this whole illegal mexicans sneaking in a homemade raft and putting too many people on it problem? I'm sure they do that at El Capitan and Lake Castiac too right. Just thinking aloud for the most part. I don't really understand the situation but it's just weird to me that every halfway decent place to fish in OC is a private pay lake.

[esteban1t]

Seems like it'd be best if it were taken via imminent domain and made a public lake. How come OC doesn't have any fishing lakes like San Diego and LA counties do? Why are they all private? How do municipalities get around this whole illegal mexicans sneaking in a homemade raft and putting too many people on it problem? I'm sure they do that at El Capitan and Lake Castiac too right. Just thinking aloud for the most part. I don't really understand the situation but it's just weird to me that every halfway decent place to fish in OC is a private pay lake.

illegal mexicans? are you making the assumption that they were illegal because they were mexicans? or because in fact they were illegal? i dont recall reading anywhere that they were illegal