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
LundExplorer

Stuntz Bay Boathouses

13 posts in this topic

Good article in the Duluth News Tribune on Sunday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any update on the decision?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds like it will be a couple of months yet.

Cliff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The MN Historical Society gave a big thumbs up to listing on the historic register. The last stop is at the federal level, where like Cliff said, it will be a couple of months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Historical register?! How about a public eyesore instead.?

Take a beautiful wilderness bay and add about a 100 run down multi colored boat "shacks" and what do you get? Well if you have a lot of money and a good lawyer, you get it listed in the Historical register.

In my opinion they should either be cleaned up to fit better into there surroundings or be removed all together. If anyone else on the lake had their boathouse in such a state of disrepair, it would be condemned and would have to be removed.

If the people that own these shacks, feel they have such an historical importance to the area perhaps they should maintain them. Instead they have allowed a large number of them to fall into total disrepair and destroy the natural beauty of Stuntz bay.

This is a total sham, either fix them or tear it all down, but please don't tell me how historical it all is. They get bought and sold all the time and that's all this is about "MONEY"!

"Ace" cool.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
grin.gifNice to have you back Guideman!!! The site has been a bit wishy-washy without you!! wink.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gee Terry, why don't you give us your opinion.

The Stuntz bay association has tried for years to get the owners of the houses in disrepair to clean them up.

While I agree that some of the boathouses are in need of major work, your comments about it all being about money is way off the mark.

Why don't you educate yourself some more about it and go to the Stuntz bay association meeting. Maybe you'll find out what it is all about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am right there with Ace. I share his opinion. Either fix them or tear them down. To declare these eyesores as historical landmarks seems laughable. From a persons perspective who does not have a vested interest in the boathouses, it would appear that the only reason the houses in major disrepair are still standing is so they can be sold. Fixing them would require capital and cut into profits. Once you tear them down you lose your investment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The boathouses per current lease situation with the DNR, cannot be sold.

The ones that are in disrepair are so due in large part to:

1. The current leaseholder does not use it, does not want to take care of it.

2. The leaseholder/owner is deceased and lease has transferred to the DNR.

Trust me if they could be sold, they would be. Plenty of market out there for it.

Also, the current DNR lease situation puts very restrictive limits on what the leaseholder can do to improve the boathouse. Listing on the historic register would eventually change that and allow preservation - improvements - just what you guys want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't wish to start an argument over the issue however, if you think they aren't being sold, you are just being nieve. You may not see them in the paper that you read however, they are in the News the Timber Jay and the Ely Echo every summer. In fact, they are sold along with island cabins all the time. Are these folks circumventing the law

or are they just using handy loop holes?

I'm not asking you to improve them, I'd be much happier if they just maintained them. Repairs to a damaged structure are hardly improvements they are "Maintainence". Hang a new door, replace the rotten timbers so it isn't hanging into the water and maybe paint the thing all one color.

The DNR has those restrictions because they don't want them there either. They are a blight on our public shoreline, it's a state park for heaven sake, it doesn't belong to the Stuntz bay Assc.

My clients from out state, can't believe that we allow such an eyesore to exsist on this beautiful lake. And now they want us to accept that shanty town as an Historical site, perhaps histerical is a better word for it.

Why should I have have to subsidize them with my taxes. I have a old house on the lake, however it is actually maintained by the owner, perhaps I should mess it up a bit and see if I can have it declared an Hisorical site. What a joke!!

I don't think you'll want me at one of the Stuntz bay association meetings, do they even allow any non memebers to attend, much less to speak their piece??

"Ace" cool.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Terry, from the very first line ya wrote on this subject you started an argument.

That notwithstanding, it appears that your opinion about the mere existence of the boathouses differs from mine. For several reasons, I'd suspect. Good luck with that, and we'll see what happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I simply offered my opinion on a public issue which we all have a right to do. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on this issue without making it something personal. Just an FYI from me to you, I'm not the only local that feels this way about this issue.

"Ace" cool.gif

Is the ice gone yet??? No Ace, go back to sleep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, and I am offering mine, nothing personal.

You know the saying, "One man's trash is another man's treasure"

I am sure that there are others that see it from your perspective, just as there are those who see it from my perspective. Whether they are local or not.

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



  • Posts

    • Rube
      Was on Skogman last night. Could not get anything of size to bite. 3 " sunnies and 6" crappies this time. The vex was lit up most of the time with lookers.  Last year did Ok with bigger crappies and sunnies. Middle of the week - not to much activity - nice weather- was hoping for better results. Oh well - that's fishing. Good Luck
    • SkunkedAgain
      You're running up against a political position here, not a logical one. I'm struggling to remember if it was Pawlenty or Ventura but one of them started to swing things heavily towards "fees" because they could argue that they weren't new taxes. I think that mentality has permeated through many layers of government by now, so I'm not surprised to hear someone from the DNR state that fishing license fees aren't taxes.   It doesn't really matter, we are paying to use something that requires money to stock and manage. Whatever it's called, it will never be free unless fishing pressure drastically decreases.
    • Rube
      Spent a few hours on Skogman yesterday. (3:00 to 6:30)  Most of the time the vexlar was so lit up that you couldn't see the lure. Bad news is that they were very small sunnies and crappies. Fished in the area of the cluster of ice houses in  24  ft water. No fish kept this time out. Good ice but getting a little sloppy.
    • SaintPaulPaul
      Another Spring-like day on Thursday. I got skunked but my buddy landed a couple of nice ones. C & R.
    • Rhino26
      Very true! Cenaiko Lake had at least 100 houses on it at 7 in the morning on Saturday and it is only a 28 acres. It is absolutely packed with fish though.