Actually I do have some opinions on this matter. First I will say that the idea of forming an organization to speak collectively to improve and protect our fisheries is a good one. That is how you get heard by the powers that be in this world. Sadly, most anglers complain about what is happening to our lakes and rivers but never organize in a collective voice to get anything accomplished. Probably, because this takes a lot of commitment, time and effort on the part of a few and money from the masses to make the organization a viable one. Basically, a lot of people like to complain but not enough want to really make the commitment to make this happen.Originally Posted by mhall
Secondly, any changes to regulations needs to be addressed from a scientific point of view, backed by scientific data to show that proposed changes to regulations will in fact benefit the fishery while at the same time not have a devastating impact on the economies that would be affected by changes.
I am sure there are changes that may need to be addressed on some lakes and rivers to enhance the fisheries and forming an advocacy group to do so would be a good thing as long as the aforementioned things are taken into consideration. Proposals to change regulations to make all the size and possession limits on all our waters the same so that someone does not have to take the time to verse themselves on what the regulations are for that body of water are not the type of proposals that would meet that standard. We have different regulations for different bodies of water because of the need to protect those fisheries..not for our convenience or inconveniece.
Reply With Quote