Thread: Sardis Rod Limit

Originally Posted by feelay

Nah...I'm more of a sportsman than that. I never fish more than 14 at a time.

Go ahead and admit it. You're just cheap and don't want to buy more than 14 rod holders!

Thought I could help you out on the "next round" you're going to probably want some scientific evidence to help push the 4 pole agenda. Fact is if you go before a hearing with just a bunch of bickering you will probably be laughed at. I've heard a couple people mention knowing these biologists and being in contact with some that disagree with the proposed regulations. You're going to want them to bring a case study to the hearing and present it in a professional manner. This may be vital to your case and will definately show strong orientation on your side.

Originally Posted by JMcEndree7

Thought I could help you out on the "next round" you're going to probably want some scientific evidence to help push the 4 pole agenda. Fact is if you go before a hearing with just a bunch of bickering you will probably be laughed at. I've heard a couple people mention knowing these biologists and being in contact with some that disagree with the proposed regulations. You're going to want them to bring a case study to the hearing and present it in a professional manner. This may be vital to your case and will definately show strong orientation on your side.

You missed the point....... What we are wanting is for then to show us the scientific evidence they used to go from 5 poles to 3. Their scientific evidence showed going to a 10 inch 15 fish limit but after one meeting of bitching and moaning they changed the numbers to 11, 15 and 3. Let them show us where this was needed and I think everyone would be ok with it. Besides, I can understand lowering the creel limit to reduce pressure but does lowering the length limit not increase pressure??? Things just don't add up in their changes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just trying to help man. I didn't miss any point I was just offering advice on being well prepared to preserve your preference of fishing. It's kind of obvious that their evidence compliments the 11-15-3 change as well or it wouldn't have been taken into account. If it only took "bitching and moaning" to change their minds the first time what do you think conducting a professional presentation would do?

I sent an e-mail to MDWFP last week requesting the data used to reach this conclusion. So far not even an acknowledgement of the e-mail.

Originally Posted by JMcEndree7

Just trying to help man. I didn't miss any point I was just offering advice on being well prepared to preserve your preference of fishing. It's kind of obvious that their evidence compliments the 11-15-3 change as well or it wouldn't have been taken into account. If it only took "bitching and moaning" to change their minds the first time what do you think conducting a professional presentation would do?

Don't see how their "evidence" compliments anything. The 11-15-3 rule wasn't even included in the Notice of Intent.

So you think they completely disregarded the evidence? If so just read my final sentence. I'm not here to argue with you but help so try to work the problem not look for an argument.

If it only took bitching and moaning to change their mind the first time I figure it will work again. I do agree with you on being organized though. The one question I would like answered is what evidence changed from the meeting at Enid till 2 weeks later when they changed the numbers? It is a rather simple question and all I'm asking for is a simple answer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk