3 rod rule needs our help

[Trolling82]

I'm ok with giving money to NY to be able to fish. Ok with maybe having to buy a trout stamp in the future. And I think it'd be awesome to be able to purchase a 3rd rod license thingy. I have a 22' boat and it can get kind of stuffy on there with 4 people on board all day just to run 8 rods (and that's just the downriggers. no planers). I'm all for giving to the Conservation Fund.

What I have a problem with is the state taking money out of the conservation fund for non-conservation projects or to fatten the wallet of some already over-paid politician. They need to do a huge audit of the conservation fund and make sure the money is going to the right places. Such as improving fishing areas. They make this stink about spreading mussels and diseases from bait fish when it was the industrial ships that brought them over from China or who knows where in the first place! Put more money into trout stocking! I know I for one would love to see more areas I can fly fish for brookies. Another thing that would be awesome is to see more smelt stocked. I net for smelt in the spring on the fingerlakes and you have to hit it on the right day to get more than a handful. Plus more smelt = bigger and more fish! I would love to help start out a smelt stocking in the fingerlakes. They are native right?

[Fishtails]

I said awhile back that the best way to get this to happen is to propose a special paid permit for the use of a third rod. This would generate revenue PLUS give state power over where three rods can be utilized.

I know most everyone complains and cringes over more fees, but really......big deal!! Personally, I've spent more money burning gas pulling my boat to the lake only to find I couldn't even fish cause it was to rough, than a seasonal NY fishing license costs me. They can do whatever they want with my money....long as I can go fish

[spoonfed-1]

Seems that quite a few of us wouldn't mind another fee to support the fishery.

I thought I just paid 70 bucks for a license that was 40 last season. Lets take it easy there guys. They GOT their increase

My paycheck don't go up like that.

Lets let them spend that money before they go into my pocket for any more.

Glen

[janz]

Glen how come your one of the very few that ever makes total sense on this board?

[Has Been]

So the rich get the right to pay a little more to run extra rods? . How about extra money for a licence so I can drive 100 miles per hour? Or extra money so I can vote twice? Since when should we be 'Buying' our rights. The licene fee is supose to be used to manage the resource not sell privledge. If we as sportsman buy into it we condone it.

[Erbyjoe]

HB you like to stir the pot don't you Why can't you just state your opinion and be done with it ????????? I think we all know where you stand on this. Lets move on with Life

[Has Been]

These fees & or stamps are fees I may have to pay also & I don't like to pay more for something I already get with really no good reason.A lot of you say you don't care as long as you can still fish. Well you should care .The gov is banking on that.Since when did they become an outfitter for lack of a better word. That part really has no bearing on my position of the three rod. I don't like the gov playing me like a fiddle & nickle & diming me.The state makes a lot of money on licences & tax rev from LO fisherman. They need to spend it better. Is that stirring the pot?

[ray koziatek]

Just adding a little flame to the post eber, no fuel no burn. Typical old school flamer give it a jab then a your the idiot for not seeing it his way approace..

[muskybob]

OK, let's try to keep this thread discussion on the 3-rod rule please.

[Erbyjoe]

I agree 100 % with you on spending and where the $$ goes. I fish in 4 states and I'm at the mercy of everyone of them. I'm just saying I respect your opion and you should in turn respect mine and who ever else on this site. Lets just get back to why this site is the best out there.

[Erbyjoe]

Ray I would never do that Sorry Musky wasn't try to start any thing

[muskybob]

Ray I would never do that Sorry Musky wasn't try to start any thing

No problem Erin, this is a great topic and needs to be discussed in a rational manner. I just don't want to see it go off course. I do that myself pretty good

[Has Been]

If the law passes & I think it probably will ,there should be no special fees or stamps or use permits asociated with it. All who buy a NYS freshwater licence should be allowed to fish within that law . I still feel as strongly as I do but The law, be it 2 0r 3 rods has nothing to do with its executtion. This state makes mega bucks off the LO fishery in licences & indirect tax revenue. . One guy said he spent about 10 grand or so last year up hear. At 8% thats 800 bucks & thats one guy & now they want an extra 10 or 20 . It's extortion to some degree.

You can call me a flame Ray but please don't call me a flamer.I don't want my wife to find out.

[Fishtails]

Glen how come your one of the very few that ever makes total sense on this board?

Nice Jan...you just insulted the vast majority of the entire LOU community.

[janz]

Sorry Rod and the rest of the members here, it was a spur of the moment post and I didn't realize it would be taken that way, as I really don't need to pay out any more money than its costing now and it seems Glen was first to address any more increases. BTW I'm over $10,000 a year to fish Lake Ontario and its tribs just as Glen and yourself. No more increases please.

[Fishtails]

I totally understand your point of view Jan. It's not that I don't agree with you...I do!! I guess what I was thinking is that for what would probably be a nominal fee permit to run a third rod, you could buy one or two less flasher/fly combos and probably cover the cost of the permit. To be able to run a third rod, It would be worth it to me.

To think we will get something for nothing in NY seems a tad far fetched to me...maybe I'm wrong? I'm just trying to be realistic. I'm not a NY resident, but I did own a summer cottage in NY for 8 years so I got a taste of how things are run.

BTW Jan...I still have not gotten any pics of that new boat of yours. Email some to Jeff and I....we wanna see it

[janz]

I think the already increased fees (license almost double in cost) should cover the extra rod. Still don't have the boat complete yet but getting close.

www.lateroncharters.com

[OldTex]

Just for residents???// For years Iv e spent 6 months a year living 8 miles north of Ithaca..Got a 24.5 Trophy..looks like Splitshots only has step on back..Just for starters my non res. license went from $40 to $70 last Oct..Locals like Bears in Tburg and Gene Moore share in the thousands I contribute to the local and state economy....Why do I travel 1750 miles every year to pay New Yorks inflated taxes and prices....because NY offers some of the best trout and salmon fishing in the country....Three rods would help on those slo days....Also I dont deplete the population.because I never keep a fish unless Its hurt or a big one in a derby.........but I have thousands of pictures to show and gloat to my bass fishing buddies here at home.

[spoonfed-1]

Got to hand it to you Tex.

I thought I had it tough at 530 mi. round trip LOL

I commute every weekend so thats 2120 mi a month from April through Oct. so I guess I do got it pretty bad.

Sure would be nice just to stay up there for 6 months.

Did you put your autograph on the petiton?

Every name will help.

Welcome to the board.

Glen

[Fish Hunter]

I'm for the 3 rods.

[choo-choo]

I'm 100% all for a three rod rule on Lake Ontario.It would help us try to figure out the daily puzzle, as to what and where the fish will bite. There can be so many variables on any given day....the third rod would help connect the dots to put that salmon/trout puzzle together . Lets see...LURES 1) spoons, dodger /flies,flasher /flies,stickbaits,body baits, spinners,cut bait . 2)Fishing method..Downriggers, , slide divers , planer boards, jet divers, copper line ,leadcore line, wire dipseys,mono dipseys,braid dipseys,flatlines. 3)Speed...Surface speed, down speed. 4)Temperature throughout the water column . 5)wind speed ,wave height,wind direction,trolling direction,currents on top ,currents down deep.Time of day, sunny, overcast, raining,. Lure colors and combinationsof lures and of colors for flasher/flies ,dodger flies,spoons,spinners ,stickbaits, body baits and cutbait.Water clarity...and everything else that i have forgotten to list here .

[sfarm]

choo-choo the only thing I see you forgot was......a fish on..

[NitroMusky]

Yikes! right or wrong, I have to say that this 'justification' for the 3 rod rule is frightening .

In reading this, a couple things strike me:

1-proponents appear to be looking for justifications/excuses to hide behind as a means to push through this law. this appearance is bolstered when potential consequences are rather thouroughly dismissed and data points are taken out of context to support this position.

2-There are some very altruistic rationales/benefits suggested (increasing the Lk O/NYS tourism, help the disadvantaged single angler) as well as some self-serving ones (e.g. help me to find the pattern faster, help me catch fish on a slow day).

Rather than simply trying to throw justifications at it, find a singular issue (or two) to rally behind, and look at how the 3 rod rule could be applied to help solve it. But be sure to find a way to apply this rule with surgical precision as a means to support that goal AND be willing to acknowledge and propose ways to offset any unintended negative consequences. Don’t just say there are fewer fishermen today and conclude its OK for everyone to runthe extra lines…if the 3 rod rule works to increase tourism and fishing as some hope, then the future # of fish taken WILL go up. The DEC has to manage the fishery #s overall, and the rods/man is part of that equation and balance. Create an estimate of how much it will increase fishing days, how much it will decrease fish populations and determine if in fact it will negatively impact the DEC’s management goals. Then provide proof that it won't or propose a compromise solution it will.

to this end, it strikes me that the 3 rod rule would benefit skilled anglers the most and minimally benefit the unskilled who need the most help. For the skilled: It will raise the frequency of limit-catches and result in more frequent C+R releases (and higher mortality). It will indeed have some benefit the unskilled, but dragging 2 or 3 (or 5) lures where there are no fish is still a 0 result. I’m all for helping people catch more fish, especially if it might help the industry and tourism, but PLEASE at least acknowledge the unintended consequence: this will likely increase the average take/trip and C+R mortality numbers- it CERTAINLY will not lower them!

Why not consider some of the compromises proposed?

1-It strikes me as fair trade to keep less per trip but catch them more consistently. Many guys here purport to be C+R anyway so why would it matter if the limit is lower?

2-If the goal is to help the single angler, howabout the 3-rod rule be limited to the first 1-2 anglers per boat and 2 thereafter or better yet limit to boats with 1 or 2 anglers. afterall, most here state that they woudln't run 3 and don't even always run 2/man with more than a few anglers anyway, so it wouldn't affect them in those situations anyway.

As for the ‘poll’ I would NOT put any credence in any passive polls put up on a site like this. Totally skewed result. I will leave it at that.

sorry if this construed as as a 'flame' but if eveyone orgainized and agreed on an issue and balanced solution with unbiased supporting data, this would have a much stronger base of support.

NM

[ray koziatek]

Ok ill put a pole on my wifes "knitting and crochet" site probly a lot more informed folks on that site to accuratly form opinions there ...Higher mortalty for catch and released , Ill bet there are hundreds of Muskys littering the shore of many lakes ... As most guys who fish muskies release them and they apparently die then if they get one fish (or whatever the limit is) then maybe it sould mandatory they keep their limit and call it a day.

[NitroMusky]

Ok ill put a pole on my wifes "knitting and crochet" site probly a lot more informed folks on that site to accuratly form opinions there ...

Haha, Touche Ray! I didn't want to go down the rabbit hole on this, but since you called me on it...Reality is that I do know a bit more than a hair about survey research. I'm not suggesting the conclusion is wrong (or right) only that the approach is such that its not representative of anything. While I agree that us LOU loyalists are the only ones that matter, the reality is:

In addition to internet biases in general, any focused internet forum attracts participants who are much more actively engaged on the topic/sport than the rest, thus imparting more bias. within that, its further skewed to users who visit more frequently. Add onto it that the poll was a passive one rather than activly soliciting responses, and you introduce the potential to unequally attact 'voters' from each side of the issue. Lastly, the question still exists whether it should be among a survey of ALL NYS residents, since the *potential* financial impacts of increased stocking and tourism dollars affect everyone. Give'em the facts and let them decide.

Again, not saying the conclusion is wrong only that we know almost nuthin with any certainty.

Higher mortalty for catch and released , Ill bet there are hundreds of Muskys littering the shore of many lakes ... As most guys who fish muskies release them and they apparently die then if they get one fish (or whatever the limit is) then maybe it sould mandatory they keep their limit and call it a day.

Ray, c'mon lets not twist words...mortality rate of kept fish is 100%, mortality rate of fish in general is whatever the natural rate is, while the rate of mortality of C+R is somewhere in between. They average out to a total mortality rate for the fishery as a whole, which in turn affects the total fish population (and in cases of stocked fish: the stocking requirements). All else constant, (more fish caught) = (more fish kept and released) = (higher mortality); however significant or insignificant the impacts may be. I'm not suggesting the magnitude of the actual impact, only acknowledging that the impact exists.