Guests - If You want access to member only forums on FM. You will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up on Fishing Minnesota.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
barney

How is this "new State Park" good for Vermilion?

31 posts in this topic

"Minnesota State Parks Director Courtland Nelson said the big state parks on the North Shore see more than half a million visitors a year, and he thinks a Lake Vermilion park could see as many as 400,000 visitors annually."

This quote was taken from the July 24, 2007 Timberjay.

I have read the comments on another post regarding this proposal and am bored with the "that's what I'm talkin about", "gimmee five", etc. thinking. Do you really think that trading ~140 lots, ~75 of which are lakeshore, under the strictest zoning restrictions possible, is worth 400,000 "visitors annually". Or am I missing something? I thought there was concern about Lake Vermilion becoming increasingly overcrowded? Guess not. Maybe it's just because the ~140 potential landowners can afford it, huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:

"Minnesota State Parks Director Courtland Nelson said the big state parks on the North Shore see more than half a million visitors a year, and he thinks a Lake Vermilion park could see as many as 400,000 visitors annually."

This quote was taken from the July 24, 2007 Timberjay.

I have read the comments on another post regarding this proposal and am bored with the "that's what I'm talkin about", "gimmee five", etc. thinking. Do you really think that trading ~140 lots, ~75 of which are lakeshore, under the strictest zoning restrictions possible, is worth 400,000 "visitors annually". Or am I missing something? I thought there was concern about Lake Vermilion becoming increasingly overcrowded? Guess not. Maybe it's just because the ~140 potential landowners can afford it, huh?


Barney,

Right now I am inclined to agree with you on this one!

But your view just may be what the (powers that be) want all of us to think! confused.gif

This sounds like a win-win for U.S. Steel no matter which way it goes!

I cannot see where either option will be good for Vermilion!

Cliff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

unhfortunately, NIMBY or none of the above or leave it be are options. One good point is that the guys with the megabuck houses don't seem to be around much. Beats having a bunch of blue collar doofs camping at the park and running around in their beat up 16 foot lunds.

:-) sarcasm alert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Barney – I think you bring up an excellent point. Honestly, if there was a way to ensure that the 3-Bays development would not affect the water quality or habitat of the surrounding area I would prefer it to the park. Unfortunately, US Steel and the St Louis County Planning Department have been less than honest with the public to this point so it is impossible to believe anything they say. As odd as it may seem, based on the numbers that have been floated, it looks like a development (if done within the framework of the EIS) would have less long term impact than a state park. Win-Win for US Steel either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lake vermillion is just going to turn into any mid-minnesota or cities lake in time anyways becuase everyone keeps expanding north but why rush the process by building more or making it a larger attraction (park) than it is... I love the lake because it's nothing like any lake of size south of our area. Besides people that travel to come to vermillion, most of us the grew up around the area or don't fish anywhere else have no idea of how ridiculously crowded a larger lake is once you get south.. I hate to think of it becoming like those lakes but with plans such as this it doesn't look good... it may be of help to local economy but for what most of value the lake for... not good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:

unhfortunately, NIMBY or none of the above or leave it be are options. One good point is that the guys with the megabuck houses don't seem to be around much. Beats having a bunch of blue collar doofs camping at the park and running around in their beat up 16 foot lunds.

:-) sarcasm alert


Thats 16.5 foot LUNDS Mister!

Quote:

"Minnesota State Parks Director Courtland Nelson said the big state parks on the North Shore see more than half a million visitors a year, and he thinks a Lake Vermilion park could see as many as 400,000 visitors annually."

This quote was taken from the July 24, 2007 Timberjay.

I have read the comments on another post regarding this proposal and am bored with the "that's what I'm talkin about", "gimmee five", etc. thinking. Do you really think that trading ~140 lots, ~75 of which are lakeshore, under the strictest zoning restrictions possible, is worth 400,000 "visitors annually". Or am I missing something? I thought there was concern about
Lake Vermilion becoming increasingly overcrowded?
Guess not. Maybe it's just because the ~140 potential landowners can afford it, huh?


Vermilion is overcrowded. Not that thats bad, just the way it is. If I want a Natural, clean, quiet lake where I can fish without being in steady boat wakes I'll go elsewhere. We all call it Minnetonka North.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:

"Minnesota State Parks Director Courtland Nelson said the big state parks on the North Shore see more than half a million visitors a year, and he thinks a Lake Vermilion park could see as many as 400,000 visitors annually."

This quote was taken from the July 24, 2007 Timberjay.

I have read the comments on another post regarding this proposal and am bored with the "that's what I'm talkin about", "gimmee five", etc. thinking. Do you really think that trading ~140 lots, ~75 of which are lakeshore, under the strictest zoning restrictions possible, is worth 400,000 "visitors annually". Or am I missing something? I thought there was concern about Lake Vermilion becoming increasingly overcrowded? Guess not. Maybe it's just because the ~140 potential landowners can afford it, huh?


Well let's start with the State Park will be available to anyone who can afford the state park sticker, what $20 or so per year and then a campsite. It will not be restricted to the 140 lots that will be priced out of the average working mans means.

And the jab at the blue collar guys running around in their 2nd rate boats sounds like someone would really like to make the Big V Lake Minnetonka North and keep the serfs in their place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy Guys! I think Del was trying to throw a little humor into this discussion. :grin

Lets try to keep this civil.

Cliff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:

And the jab at the blue collar guys running around in their 2nd rate boats sounds like someone would really like to make the Big V Lake Minnetonka North and keep the serfs in their place.


Hey now....I thought only non-locals were supposed to call Vermilion "The BIG V"... shocked.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hooo!!! Thank god!!!

I was wondering if I was the only one who thought this whole state park deal was a bad idea!!!! Glad to see that I am not the only one!!! Once again..win/win for big business and for those living in the metro. Bad/Bad for those of us who pay taxes here.

Later,

Justin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:

Once again..win/win for big business and for those living in the metro. Bad/Bad for those of us who pay taxes here.


Please expand on this statement and provide examples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am simply amazed that people are actually in favor of private development on Lake Vermilion! A state park means the land is all of ours. It also means shoreline protection and habitat for fish and animals. Do you really think the sandy shoreline all these folks want is good for fish? The DNR does a good job keeping natural vegetation in the lake unlike private landowners. The other thing is that think of the great hunting opportunities that will exist on this land. Don't expect the private landowners to allow you to shoot bambi in their yard. Wake up folks! This is an opportunity to lock in a huge piece of real estate that everybody can use rather than have it go the way of so many other lakes. 400,000 visitors to a state park per year...that's visits, not nights staying over and certainly not people fishing on the lake.

Be ashamed of yourself if you think the state park is a bad idea! confused.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15% of the shoreline on Vermilion is Public, which includes State, County , and Federal lands. The rest is being lotted up and sold. Somewhere in the future it will all be developed and all the problems associated with that will follow. I personally inventoried the shoreline and vegetation, both aquatic and terrestial, along the proposed park, 3 bays area, two years ago. There are some excellent spawning areas for several fish species, nesting habitat for loons and other waterfowl and is basically wild. If it gets developed some of that will be lost along with more power boats, jet skies, and the other toys big money can bring. If it goes to a park there will be some more anglers on that end with a campground but the shoreline and fish and wildlife habitat will be better off. Personally I'd rather have a few more anglers on that end that a bunch of jet skies and huge boats that make alot of noise.

Hat's off to the Gov and all that are trying to make this into a park. smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:

Hey now....I thought only non-locals were supposed to call Vermilion "The BIG V"...
shocked.gif


Well when you consider that I moved to the "Range" from Duluth in "99" I am not really a local at least by "Range" standards tongue.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting comments for or against. My wife and I bought a place on the Lake in hopes of retiring there. I was born in Virginia although most of my younger years were in Moorehead. My wife is from the big town of Nimrod grin.gif located in central Minnesota. We both have aspirations of spending time in the North Country till death due us part. We chose the lake for it's large size which gives great fishing oppurtunities, its location in the state as well as for the oppurtunity for peace and quiet. Yes we live in the metro area now, we raised our kids in the metro because we could make a living there. Soon it will be time for us to chase our dream of a more relaxed life style. Unfourunatley I do agree with a lot of people that Vermilion is going to turn into nothing more than a lake minnetonka. I have only had my place for 4 years and I already see a big difference in the increase of pleasure crafts on the lake. Wether this issue is for private land development or for a state park, I am not sure if any one wins with exception to the steel company. Don't get me wrong, I am not one of those that say this is my lake and you can not use it. That would be wrong as with all public lakes it is for all of us to use. I just wish that it would not turn into such a recreation lake. It would be nice that which ever way this issue goes that the new people that either buy there property and build there dream or visit a new state park that they look out for the future of this great lake that I soon would like to call home. Just my two cents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:

Be ashamed of yourself if you think the state park is a bad idea!
confused.gif


Hmmm, I see this boiling down to an us versus them debate. Personally I think that everyone would do well to keep in mind what's best for the lake, and keep that the number one priority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:

15% of the shoreline on Vermilion is Public, which includes State, County , and Federal lands. The rest is being lotted up and sold. Somewhere in the future it will all be developed and all the problems associated with that will follow. I personally inventoried the shoreline and vegetation, both aquatic and terrestial, along the proposed park, 3 bays area, two years ago. There are some excellent spawning areas for several fish species, nesting habitat for loons and other waterfowl and is basically wild. If it gets developed some of that will be lost along with more power boats, jet skies, and the other toys big money can bring. If it goes to a park there will be some more anglers on that end with a campground but the shoreline and fish and wildlife habitat will be better off. Personally I'd rather have a few more anglers on that end that a bunch of jet skies and huge boats that make alot of noise.

Hat's off to the Gov and all that are trying to make this into a park.
smile.gif


YES!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bringing some humor?

yah sure You betcha. Some folks don't understand smiley with sarcasm alert, eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your smiley didn't show up even most jokes and sarcasm are founded in some truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well... I guess I can toss in my pennies.

If the choice is between the park and the condos, I would prefer to see the park. I honestly believe that it would be better for the area. And by the area, I mean the lake. The state is going to do a lot more to protect the shoreline, spawning beds, etc. than will private land owners who are going to want their beaches, docks, etc. I have no problem with those who are able to afford to have a place there, other than the fact that their continuing to put their mini-mansions up over time will raise taxes for those who have been there for many years. It's happened in the Brainerd area, and the disease is moving East.

I honestly don't think there's much we'll be able to do at this point. US Steel has a win/win... it could be a loss for the local folks, or it could turn out to be a decent boon for some business owners.

On a side note, I don't remember this much uproar over the changes taking place on the East Two River... but then again, maybe a new hotel, some shops, a new bridge, and a lot of changes to what Tower has been for years doesn't bother some as much at it does others...personally, I enjoyed having our boathouse on the river.. it's now gone. It's all about who's ox is getting gored. If it affects you directly, it makes you upset, regardless of what's going to be best for someone or something else. If it doesn't, you most likely don't really care about it...

Me, I guess I might just have to go camping in that park here & there... be a different view of the lake to see in the evening and morning than I'm used to, if nothing else. grin.gif

OH... and Delecchi... it's 16.5' CRESTLINERS.... tongue.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"It's happened in the Brainerd area, and the disease is moving East."

You got that right!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please expand on this statement and provide examples.


Read my new post under "New State Park?"

Justin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:

Be ashamed of yourself if you think the state park is a bad idea!
confused.gif


Why should I be ashamed? I live here and you don't! mad.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking about the brainerd area when i was referencing how this park or building project would effect verm.. I was at the whitefish chain a few weekends ago and I COULD not believe how much activity was out there no wonder barely anyone could give a solid report for the area becuase they can't even fish in peace anywhere at all on the lake..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because someone estimates, and it is an estimate, that 400K people may vist the new state park doesn't mean that all 400K will launch a boat. I would bet that lots of people will stop by the park for a hike or lunch on the lakeshore. A lot of others will be lake residents and resorters who are already on the lake and want to visit the park. The rest will come up to camp, launch the boat and enjoy the lake like anyone else.

What the area gets is very large tract of land reserved for public use forever. Look to the future this park will be very important 50 years from now when large tracts of land may not be availabe. It will be developed just enough for people to have access, but retain the rugged look that it is now. Tower and resorts will get extra business because visitors will need gas and other supplies. Even more will be looking around for a place to stay and eat. Some people will be encouraged to start or expand businesses improving the infrastructure of the area.

I know there are some downsides, there always are, but my first impression it that this proposal is a plus for the area. I remember that VNP was initially protested by many, but ultimately turned out to be something many of us enjoy and are greatfull we have in our backyard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0