Nice work Tony. We will discuss this further on the boat.I have a few ideas to run by you. Most likely I will be able to attend the meeting in September.

Again thanks for pushing so hard for this

Count me in too Tony ~

1. Below is the final revised copy of the “4-rod” White Paper. If you have statements either pro or con you want read at the Sept 8th meeting please PM them to me.

Re: Amendment Request for CT, 26-112-43

The White Paper is organized into 3-parts:

Part 1. - Section I., Executive Summary, sets forth the change request and supportive summary statements.
(Since CT salt-water angling regs do not restrict “line” use, this amendment would apply to fresh-water angling only.)

Part 2. - Section II. , Supportive Briefs, included segments intended to backup the Executive Summary statements.

Part 3. - An addendum that reports excerpts of State Fishery regs pertaining to “line” use.

I. Executive Summary:

A. Proposed Change:

Currently, In-land fisheries reg, CT, 26-112-43, states in part:

(a) "Angling” means fishing with hook and line which shall be personally attended, but shall not include ice fishing or snagging or snatching. Not more than two lines, with or without rods, may be used at one time.

This request is to change CT, 26-112-43, to read, “not more than four lines” and add, “When using more than 2 rods, no one angler may occupy more than 20-feet of shoreline”.


Incorporating the above verbiage the reg change could read as follows:

(a) "Angling" means fishing with hook and line which shall be personally attended, but shall not include ice fishing or snagging or snatching. Not more than four lines, with or without rods, may be used at one time. When using more than two lines, no one angler may occupy more than 20' of shoreline.

B. Summary Rational for the Proposed Change

Freshwater “line” limitations vary across the country. The limitations run the gamut from one “1-line” to no “line” limitations and all states contacted, including CT, are not able to state an underlying rational for their “line” regs.

Absent an underlying reg rational, state regs are conventions. Conventions shaped by unknown influences and rendered sacrosanct by “time on the books”. Many hypothesize these “line” limitations are set by a rational process that addresses the fishery’s requirements and the needs of anglers. However, “line” regs viewed from a macro view perspective appear to be arbitrary and set by imitation.

In Section II, C., below, a grouping of “line” regs reveals a remarkable pattern of “regional-imitation”. A study of the state grouping gives rise to questions: What is the rational for the disparity in “line” regs between CT, MA, RI, ‘2-lines” and FL, LA, TX -no limit? What do the popular state fisheries like FL, LA and TX, that have extraordinary fishery management programs, know or don’t know about fisheries management as compared to states like CT, MA and RI? Are the sportsman standards in any of these states different? Are the per capita dollars spent for the fisheries in these states different? Is there a rational response to a disparity in regional inter-state “line” regs?

Rational answers to the above are difficult to find and are lost impart to an imitative regulatory process. For me the unanswered questions raise another question, “Why not a “4-line” option?” A “4-line” option would enhance the angling experience of many sportsmen and attract angling / tourism dollars to CT’s beautiful fresh waters.

As an aside, CT’s saltwater sport-angling from relatively scarce public shorelines has no line limitation, while fresh water angling is limited to “2-Lines”. CT may stand alone with an unexplainable “line” reg convention.

Be that as it may, times are changing and Northeast “line” limitations are being liberalized to enhance angler satisfaction and improve inter-state competition for angling dollars. In these changing times CT’s “2-lines” places CT at a disadvantage in the inter-state competition for angling dollars.

NY and other states are recognizing that in-state sportsmen’s expenditures are significant economic- drivers.
NY is in the process of changing their “line” reg under New York’s proposed reg, NY S2462B-2011-NY.

“catching more fish under a broad array of techniques enhances angler satisfaction more than any other factor, which in turn will increase the demand for fishing licenses and stimulate in-state angling expenditures.... New Jersey and Michigan both have a 3-rod rule, from which they have continued to see a favorable impact to their recreational fisherman.”

Additionally, Pennsylvania, has proposed changes to become effective in January 1, 2012:
Subpart B. Fishing, CHAPTER 63. GENERAL FISHING REGULATIONS, § 63.6. Authorized devices for game fish, baitfish and fishbait.
(a) It is unlawful to fish for game fish with more than [two being changed to] three lines of any description, whether fished by rod or by hand, at one time…

Unfortunately, in view of NJ, NY and PA migration to a “3-line” limit, it appears that regional-imitation underpins the change process.

NY’s Legislative preamble provides a noteworthy recognition of the consumer demand relationship to state economic-drivers:
” the increased appeal to …small crewed boats, the 'weekend warrior', the recreationalist, the vacationer, the retired couple who have saved up for a boat and now have the time and health to use it will all benefit from this…Return visits to the fishery are a boon to the local economies. Return trips mean more money spent locally for fuel, food, lodging, launches, parking, and rentals.” (Preamble, NY S2462B-2011-NY)”

In comparison to NJ, NY and PA, CT’s “2-line” convention diminishes angling satisfaction and restricts certain angling techniques for carp, cat and troller fisherman. And, as neighboring states increase “line” conventions, inter-state competition for angling dollars will increase, which will negatively impact important CT state economic-drivers. Conversely, a “4-line” option makes CT fresh waters more attractive to anglers and will give CT a competitive advantage with a rational “line” reg (see II, B.) over our neighboring states that are adopting “3-line” imitation standards.

While a “4-line” option would benefit the state and sportsmen-anglers, it may produce unintended consequences to some angling experiences on children’s ponds, certain trout waters, crowded shorelines and the like. These potential issues could/would be addressed by the following:
1.These waters could/should be governed by local regs, in a similar manner to the current exception process that applies to CT’s freshwaters.
2. Further more, a “4-line” option would prove impractical on many fast-moving waters and, thus, self-regulating.
3. Finally, the reg change insertion of, “When using more than 2 rods, no one angler may occupy more than 20' of shoreline “, would improve issues concerning angler etiquette, as it pertains to “hogging” the shoreline, while improving the experience of all sportsmen.


Finally, it should be noted, that the “4-rod” proposed option would not exploit the fishery, since creel limits will remain unchanged.




II. Supportive Briefs

A. Economic-Drivers/ Inter-state Competition:

In the Northeast it appears that “2-line” conventions are giving way to inter-state competition for sportsmen expenditures. The “2-line” convention has been liberalized in NJ and MI, and NY/PA have proposed legislation to change their legislation to “3-lines”.

NY’s preamble, to the proposed 3-line legislative change, specifically states “angling expenditures” as a driver for change.

Attention to these economic-drivers in interstate sportsmen competition is substantiated by the American Sportsfishing Association Statistics for CT-2006. The 2006 report represents the most recent study and portrays the importance of sportsmen expenditures to CT’s economy. A review of the 2006 statistics set forth below demonstrates that sportsmen’s in-state retail sales generate an almost 2 to 1 dollar for dollar increase to in-state expenditures through an economic multiplier effect, which in turn creates jobs, salaries and tax revenue.

• CT Sportsmen Retail Sales = $268,881,719
• Total Economic Impact Multiplier = $445,971,378
• Salaries, Wages, Business Owner’s Income = $156,468,052
• Jobs = 4,465
• Federal Tax Revenue = $42,070,001
• State & Local Tax Revenue = $28,480,265

http://www.asafishing.org/statistics/saleco_trends/2006ei_all_state.html

As more anglers are attracted to CT waters, more angling dollars will be spent in CT which generates more jobs, more tackle store revenue, more state revenue, etc.

A rationally based “line” reg policy that appeals to a broad array of angling techniques will benefit important CT economic-drivers.



B. The Demand Side / Angler Satisfaction

Supporters of this reg change applaud NY, NJ, PA, etc., actions to break away from archaic conventions. However, we ask that an implicit question be answered before setting any “line” standard. What is the underlying rational for “line” regs?

While a “more is better” “line” convention has “economic driver” merit from the perspective of inter-state competition, it ignores angler-specialist demand to the detriment of inter-state competitive advantage.
Anglers engaged in specialized, sportsmen-angling pursuits, such as “trollers”, carp and cat fisherman would be attracted to CT’s freshwaters by a “4-line” option. Typically, these anglers travel long distances and spend big dollars in the pursuit of their angling experience.

This section will attempt to provide a rational answer in support of the “4-line” option from a sportsmen’s perspectives:

• “Motor trolling” Fisherman: (trailing a lure, bait, or similar device used to attract or catch fish from a boat while being propelled (Wisconsin Anglers Guide)

Angler 1.

Right now I would use 4 rods in this manner:
2 - riggers
1 - surface
1 - lead core

Take Twin Lake for example, there are times the downriggers are hot, then the rigger bite stops and the lead core starts.

Also, I could choose to target multiple species - 1 rigger for trout and one for kokanee.

I do this with great ease when my young daughter is in the boat - so doing it when I am by myself would be the same :-)

I can tell you that the effect of having 4 rods in the water is so much more productive then when I only have 2… I believe that the extra lines help attract the fish - which is half the battle when trolling.

Angler 2.

I fish alone a lot and that is why it would be nice to use the extra rods. I could run 2 at the 35'-40' depth for kokes and 2 at the 20-25' mark for the trout at the same time. If I had someone with me then maybe it would be 6 rods in the water or maybe 8 if I had a bigger boat- all the while not occupying any more territory than someone running two long lead lines. I can run 4 rigger lines and not take up anywhere near the amount of area from the lead lines.

Angler 3.

Traveling out of state several times a year to other fisheries because we can use more than 4 rods per person, we would be delighted and grateful to stay in the area and spend our money on local gas stations, food and lodging in the great state of Connecticut.

4. Why are Ct’s fresh-waters rod regs different from CT’s salt-waters rod regs? The Race, Rocky Neck jetty’s and other popular salt-water areas can get very crowded and yet it doesn’t seemed to cause a problem.



• Carp & Cat Fisherman

Angler 1.

The Ct chapter of the Carp anglers group consists of about 20 ACTIVE members whose goals are: To recognize carp as an exciting and challenging sport fish, To become better carp anglers by assisting others and encouraging them to do the same, To treat carp with respect and promote the release of trophy size fish, Most of all, go fishing and HAVE FUN. The carp-anglers group is a nationwide club with additional members from all over the world. Carp angling is one of the fastest growing angling segments in the country.

For the past 2 years Hartford Ct has been host to the "Tournament of Champions" The TOC is the "finals" of the C.A.R.P tournament series held across the USA. The Ct river is known as a great fishery for all species, ESPECIALLY carp. Fisherman travel from all over the country to fish it, and it is ALWAYS on the "to do" list for carp guys.

The four rod proposal, if passed, would help to bring more out of state carp fisherman to the state of Ct. Being able to use four rods helps us on the Long session trips (sometimes up to 40 hours on the bank. Many fisherman from our neighboring states visit at least once a year for our friendly Mass vs Ct tournament, and would visit more if they had the chance to use up to 4 rods. While its often difficult for some to use more than three rods for carp, a fourth would make fishing more fun. While waiting for the carp to arrive a fisherman could cast for bass, pan fish etc. to pass the time. In short, 4 rods means, more out of state fisherman visiting, a bump for tackle shop sales, and makes Ct a "destination" for specimen anglers from all over New England.

Bank space is always a concern, whether using 2 rods or 4. Most fisherman follow common sense and only use the appropriate space needed. I don't believe that opening the rules up to 4 rods would change this. As bank fisherman, we need to have our rods close together in order to properly fish the area targeted. Carp fishing most often includes what we call a "rod pod" which is essentially one of the most sophisticated rod holders available. All rods sit on the pod which takes up no more than 4 feet of bank space.
I agree with the proposal that when using 4 rods no fisherman shall take up more than 20 ft of bank space…

Angler 2.

The 4 rod proposal is a HUGE topic for bank fisherman. While I target only carp, having the opportunity to present 3 or 4 different baits makes a HUGE difference. If I am to spend 30+ hours on the bank to catch 1 or 2 30+lb fish I need all the advantages I can get. Carp fishing is 100% catch and release by specimen fisherman and 90% of the sport is concentrated on fish care. The euro style of fishing for carp is pretty advanced using alarms and pagers to know when a fish is hooked, all rods need to be close and able to reach in a matter of seconds.

Understandably there will be concerns of people not using common sense and taking up more bank-space than necessary, but that happens anyway, always has always will. Out of the THOUSANDS of hours I've spent on the water, I've maybe seen it cause a problem 1 time and once it was pointed out, the fisherman reset his lines as to not cause problems.

This proposal changes nothing with creel limits or any of the other laws allready in place.

Angeler 3.

… Ct is a GREAT STATE for carp fishing.
Many carp guys TRAVEL. A rod increase would DEF. help with out-of-staters fishing Ct thereby increasing license sales.
To have a couple extra lines in the water is HUGE! Even to be able to cast a pan-fish line while some baits are soaking for carp or catfish can often make a trip to the water that much more enjoyable.

Angler 4.

I fish for carp and the action can be very slow. ….. Because of the style of fishing, 4 rods would greatly improve my odds and give me more hope during those slow days.
Carp fishing is similar to trapping: you scout and bait an area and set up your rods in 1 location and wait for the fish to show up. You never know if the fish will be there, how deep they will be, or what they will hit. I usually leave my rods in for 30 minutes to an hour before checking my bait, which doesn't give me many casts to experiment and figure out a pattern. If I can use 4 rods that means I can try 4 different depths and 4 different baits, which will allow me to figure out a pattern much quicker.
It's all about covering more water and improving your odds. Take a look at professional bass fisherman: they often have 4 or more rods rigged up with different baits, and they can use their boat and electronics to scout large areas with a variety of different depths and cover. They only use 1 rod at a time but have the ability to cover way more water and experiment a lot more than a carp fisherman can.
Using 4 rods will improve our odds and make fishing more enjoyable. I think if this law is passed it will also help boost the popularity of fishing in CT. I've spoken to several out of state carp fisherman that have said they would buy a license and fish in CT if they could use 4 rods.
It will also be good for beginners because carp fishing is tough and if beginners can use 4 rods they are twice as likely to hook up with a fish.

Angler 4.

Down here in Jersey we are allowed to use 3 rods. Using 4-rods would be a great benefit to my carp fishing.
I haven't had any problems with other people regarding the number of lines in the water. The only problem I've had is feisty carp swimming across my other lines tangling them up, but that happens with 2 rods also. I don't see any big negatives to having extra lines.
For the most part people who will be using 4 rods understand fishing etiquette and the guys that cause problems by putting out way too many lines are already doing so illegally.

Angler 5.

I am an out of state carp angler. I live near Boston, MA. Whenever I can get a few days of vacations, I often take my car and drive somewhere in neighboring states and try to find carp, exploring and scouting multiple spots. I spent a lot of time in NYS and in Quebec. I never really did it in CT, but I know I should as fantastic fish have been caught by CT anglers in that beautiful state.

Allowing 4-rods would send me to CT right away, multiple times a year! Why? Because it is just so much more effective and enjoyable to explore new spots using more than 2 rods. Carp fishing tends to be slow and difficult, and this is even harder when you explore new venues. Having the opportunity to use multiple rods allows to test multiple distances, multiple bait, multiple rigs, etc. This makes carp fishing so much more enjoyable.

Also, I'm an expatriate from Europe (France), and carp fishing is BIG in Europe. And 4 rods is the norm out there. And European carp anglers would just love to find a very scenic east coast state in the US where they could spend vacations, spend their money and enjoy carp fishing as they are used to.

So... It's not only about making local anglers more happy, I genuinely believe this proposal has a significant economical value for the state of CT (fishing licenses and more).

Angler 6.
A 4-rod option would make for better cat fishing. I could fish different depths of water at the same time and use different baits in search of the fish.
Crowded shore-lines has been raised as an issue on CT shorelines. Limiting shore-line access to 20-feet per angler when using more than 2-rods would solve the issue and take up less shore-line than most “2-line” fisherman use. Also, on fast moving waters multiple lines would regulate themselves, since a current would tangle multiple lines.


C. State “Rod/Line” Conventions: The "WHY?" of line conventions

The “question” begs an answer: Why are 1,2, 3,4, or unlimited “line” conventions adopted by any given state? Are the conventions misguided by an undefined and/or uninformed notion of “sportsmanship”? Are the conventions motivated by “imitation”? Is it avoidance of inter-state competition? Is it “that’s the way it has always been”? (PA states that the “2-line” has been on the books since 1930 and no one can explain, why “2-lines”?)

In the words of a high-ranking CT Department of Natural Resources, official, “…the 2-line” convention is just that, a “convention”. In support of that statement, I have spoken to a number of state fishery departments and have yet to learn the rational for “line” conventions; no one could provide an answer to “WHY?”.


A review of “line” conventions set forth below, demonstrates a pattern of “geographic-convention-imitation” and begs for an answer to “WHY?”. As stated in the Executive Summary: “Why do CT and MA have a “2-line” restriction” and FL, LA and TX have no “line” limitation?”

.
State Line Regulation Summary:

• 1 rod MN but lake specific,

• 2-rods CT, GA (some qualifications), IL- (3-pole trolling), IA, , MA, ME NE, NH, NY (Changing to 3), ND, OH, PA(changing to 3), RI,VT

• 3-rods IN, , KS-$6.50 3rd pole permit , NJ , NY reg change in process, WI (3-lines/lures)

• No limit specified AL, AR, DE, FL, KY, LA, MD, MS, MI, MO-label rods if more than 3-must be attended, MT, NC, OK, SD, TN, TX, WA-( You may not Fish with a rod not under your immediate control or leave your gear unattended), WV, WY

• Two Pole Stamp AZ- $6, CA- $13(?), CO-$5, ID-$13.75, NV $10, NM-$4, OR-$17, UT $5(?)

• North Carolina Not more than 2 of these devices may be used by any fisherman at the same time, except when fishing in a boat.


For now the “WHY” is unanswered and to that I raise the question, “Why not a “4-line” option?”

A “4-line” option would enhance the angling experience of many fisherman and attract angling / tourism dollars to CT’s beautiful fresh waters. Additionally, the implementation of, “When using more than 2 rods, no one angler may occupy more than 20' of shoreline “, improves issues concerning angler etiquette.








Addendum A: State “ROD/Line” Conventions

AL Summary as it relates to MRS ( http://pub.jfgriffin.com/doc/jfgriffin/09ALAB)

• No restriction on amount of rods

Alaska http://www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/Statewide/regulations/Statewideregs.cfm
• Sport fishing gear: Unless provided in 5 AAC 75.020 -- 5 AAC 75.049 (area-specific regulations), or by the area regulations in 5 AAC 46 -- 5 AAC 70, sport fishing may only be conducted by the use of a single line having attached to it not more than one plug, spoon, spinner, or series of spinners, or two flies, or two hooks. The line must be closely attended.
• Freshwater sport fishing: (1) A person may not take fish in fresh water with (a) a fixed or weighted hooks and lures (except those of standard manufacture), (b) multiple hooks with gap between point and shank larger than 1/2 inch, unless permitted in the area regulations in the Arctic-Yukon-Kuskokwim area, (c) spear, unless permitted by the area regulations, or (d) arrow, unless permitted by the area regulations.
• Appears there are other provincial rules that may be additive, but in general there appears to be no restriction for the use of more than one rod.

Arizona
• Fish & Game Department
2222 West Greenway Road
Phoenix, AZ 85023-4312
(602) 942-3000

• http://www.azgfd.gov/pdfs/h_f/regulations/FishingRegulations.pdf
• Two Pole Stamp The $6 two-pole stamp is an optional stamp that validates
a valid fishing license for simultaneous fishing that is the taking of fish by no
more than two lines (poles) and not to exceed two hooks or two artificial
lures or flies per line.


Arkansas
• Game & Fish Commission
#2 Natural Resources Drive
Little Rock, AR 72205
(501) 223-6300
http://www.agfc.com/fishing/Pages/default.aspx
• Appears to be no limitation on number of “rod” use.
California
• Department of Fish & Game
1416 Ninth Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 653-7664
Second Rod Validation $13.53 Allows an angler to fish with two rods or lines in inland waters, except for waters in which only artificial lures or barbless hooks may be used.



Colorado

• LEGALMETHODS OF TAKE
1. ONE PERSONALLY ATTENDED LINE — Each line shall have only 3 common hooks
attached.

• 4. SECOND ROD STAMP—Anglers can use a second rod, handline or tip up by purchasing a
second rod stamp.Anglers can buy only 1 second rod stamp per season.
(a) Second rod stamps are nontransferable.
(b)Asecond rod stamp is not required when only using trotlines or jugs.

• K. "Personally attended line" means a rod and line, hand line, or tip up that is used for fishing and which is under the personal control of a person who is in proximity to it
•
2nd Rod Stamp (Available to licensed residents, licensed nonresidents and youth under 16 years, licensed or unlicensed.) Res $5.00 Non-Res $5.00
DELAWARE
Dept. of Natural Resources & Environmental Control
89 Kings Highway, PO Box 1401
Dover, DE 19901
(302) 739-4403
http://www.fw.delaware.gov/Fisheries/Documents/2010%20Delaware%20Fishing%20Guide.pdf
• Appears to be no limitation on number of “rod” use.
Florida
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
Farris Bryant Building
620 South Meridian Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1600
(850) 488-4676 Fax: (850) 488-1961
http://www.fwc.state.fl.us/docs/Freshwater/09FLFW-regs.pdf

• Methods of taking freshwater fish
Game fish and nongame fish may be taken with pole and line or rod and reel. There is no limit on the number of rods an angler may use.
GEORGIA
Dept. of Natural Resources
East Towers, Suite 1252
205 Butler Street SE.
Atlanta, GA 30334
(404) 656-3500
http://www.georgiawildlife.com/sites/def...gulations_1.pdf

• There is no restriction on the number of poles and lines used to fish for game fish
except:
– Fishing for trout: 1 pole
– Fishing on Public Fishing Areas: 2 poles
– Sport shad fishing: 2 poles
• Anglers using more than two poles and
• lines to fish for shad must abide by commercial regs


IDAHO
Dept. of Fish & Game
PO Box 25
Boise, ID 83707
(208) 334-3700
http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/fish/rules/full_booklet.pdf

• Two-Pole Validation: A person who has a valid resident or
nonresident fishing license may purchase a two-pole validation.
This validation authorizes the license holder to use two poles or
rods at the same time on waters and during seasons specified
by Commission Rule. Valid for all fish including salmon and
steelhead.
Two-Pole Permit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.75



ILLINOIS
Dept. of Natural Resources
One Natural Resources Way
Springfield, IL 62702-1271
(217) 782-6302
http://dnr.state.il.us/fish/digest/2010%20Fishing%20Guide.pdf
• (Resident sport fishing; annual . . . . . . . . . $15.00
Resident sport fish;
• 65 years old and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $7.75
• A 2 POLE AND LINE FISHING ONLY regulation permits the angler to
take fish with no more than 2 poles with no more than 2 hooks or lures per line.
• Trolling is permissible, provided the angler has not more than three poles and lines with not more than two hooks or lures on each.

INDIANA
Department of Natural Resources
402 West Washington Street, Room 160
Indianapolis, IN 46204-2748
(317) 232-4200
http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/files/fw-2010FG.pdf

• Annual Fishing License $17

• Fish with up to three poles or hand lines at one time. Each line is limited to no more than two single or multi-barbed hooks, two artificial baits or two live bait harnesses.


IOWA
Department of Natural Resources
East Ninth & Grand Avenue
Wallace Building
Des Moines, IA 50319-0034
(515) 281-5145
http://www.iowadnr.gov/law/regs/regs_fish.pdf

• Resident Fishing : Annual 16 years old and older $17.50
Trout Fee $11.00, Lifetime (65 years old and older) $51.00

• When fishing by hook and line you cannot use more than two lines or more than two hooks on each line when still fishing or trolling.

KANSAS
Dept. of Wildlife & Parks
900 Jackson Street, Suite 502
Topeka, KS 66612-1220
(913) 296-2281

• Annual Fishing License -$20.50 Resident, $42.50 Nonresident
• Three-pole Permit $6.50 Resident/Nonresident
• Trout Permit (required if 16 and older) $12.50 Resident/Nonresident
• LEGAL EQUIPMENT
Each angler is limited to two rods (three
with three-pole permit) with no more than two
baited hooks (single or treble) or artificial
lures per line.



KENTUCKY
Dept. of Fish & Wildlife Res.
#1 Game Farm Road
Frakfort, KY 40601
(502) 564-3400
http://fw.ky.gov/pdf/2010fishguidefishingregs.pdf

• Annual Fishing License -$20, Trout Stamp-$10
• Appears no limit on number of “rods”
• Kentucky residents 65 years of age
and older who present proof of age and
residency are eligible to purchase the
discounted $5 Senior Combination


LOUISIANA
Dept. of Wildlife & Fisheries
PO Box 98000
Baton Rouge, LA 70898-9000
(504) 765-2800
http://www.wlf.state.la.us/fishing/recreational-fishing

• Basic Fishing $9.50
• Saltwater License (Basic Fishing required) $5.50
• Senior Fish/Hunt 1 $5.00

MAINE
Dept. of Inland Fisheries & Wildlife
284 State Street, Station #41
Augusta, ME 04333
(207) 287-2766

• Resident Fishing (16 and older) - $25.00
• Appears no “rod” limitation

MARYLAND
Department of Natural Resources
580 Taylor Avenue
Annapolis, MD 21401
(410) 260-8100

• Resident $20.50
• Appears no “rod” limitation

Massachusetts Fishing
Dept. of Fisheries, Wildlife
& Environmental Law Enforcement
100 Cambridge Street, Room 1901
Boston, MA 02202
(617) 724-1614
http://www.mass.gov/dfwele/dfw/

• Resident Citizen/Alien Fishing** $27.50
• Resident Citizen Minor Fishing (Age 15-17) $11.50
• Resident Citizen Fishing Age (Age 65-69) $16.25
• Resident Citizen Fishing (Age 70 or over, or paraplegic, blind, mentally retarded) free
• More than two hooks (TWO ROD LIMIT) for fishing or more than five hooks when ice fishing. A hook is defined as an angling device attached to a fishing line which is designed to take one fish at a time but is not limited to devices commonly called spinners, spoons, bait harnesses, lead head jigs or plugs.

MICHIGAN
Department of Natural Resources
Box 30257
Lansing, MI 48909
(517) 373-9900 or 373-1270
http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/
• All Species: $28.00, Senior $11.20
• Appears no limit on “lines/rods” except for bordering waters with Indiana and Wisconsin

MINNESOTA
Department of Natural Resources
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155-4040
(651) 296-6157
http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/rlp/regulations/fishing/fishing2010.pdf
RES ID
o Anglers may use only one line during the open water season

ENT LICENSES (for fishing the license is valid March 2010 – April 30, 2011)
o Angling, Individual (age 16 and older) $17.00
o Angling, Conservation Individual (1/2 limit) 11.00
o Trout and Salmon Stamp Validation (see page 6) 10.00
o Walleye Stamp Validation (Voluntary) (See page 6) 5.00


MISSISSIPPI
Dept. of Wildlife, Fisheries & Parks
2906 North 8th Street, PO Box 451
Jackson, MS 39205
(601) 362-9212
http://home.mdwfp.com/

o All Game Hunting/Freshwater Fishing (Does not include Archery/Primitive Weapon, General Crossbow, Fall Turkey Permit, WMA User Permit or Waterfowl Stamp. Senior Exempt Lifetime***
o Appears no limit to number of “rods”


Missouri
Department of Natural Resources
PO Box 176
Jefferson City, MO 65102
(800) 334-6946
http://www.dnr.state.mo.us/

If more than 3-poles are used the poles must be labeled with full name and address. Max of 33-hooks. Poles must be attended every 24-hrs. Mississippi River has slightly different regs.

Montana
MT Fish, Wildlife & Parks
1420 East 6th Avenue
PO Box 200701
Helena, MT 59620-0701
406-444-2535
FAX: 406-444-4952

Could not find any restrictions on number of poles.

Regs do not recommend “fizzing” for deep water fish bladder issues, due to the risk of infection. Recommend tying the eye of a hook to a weight, flattening the barb and tying a 50 ft line to the hook “bend”. Hook the fish in the bottom lip and lower into the water.


Nebraska
Nebraska Game and Parks Commission
2200 N. 33rd St.
Lincoln, NE 68503-0370 –
Ph. (402) 471-0641

Anglers are limited to no more than two lines, with a
maximum of two hooks on each line, with these being any type of attached line (rod
and reel or fishing pole) on all lakes, ponds or reservoirs or in their inlets, outlets and canals within one-half mile of these bodies of water, with the exception of ice-fishing
line limits.


Nevada

Second rod stamp= $10

New Hampshire

2-rod limit


New Jersey

When fishing from shoreline no more than 3-fishing rods. Could not find any limitation on rods when fishing from a boat. Would appreciate any info to the contrary.

New Mexico

Department of Game and Fish
Main Office
Department of Game and Fish
PO Box 25112, Santa Fe, NM 87504
1 Wildlife Way, Santa Fe, NM 87507

1-rod. 2nd rod validation permit cost $4.

New York
Bureau of Fisheries
625 Broadway
Albany, NY 12233-4753
518-402-8924
An angler may operate no more than two lines with or without a rod, and each line is limited to not more than five lures or baits or a combination of both, and in addition, each line shall not exceed fifteen hook points in any combination of single, double or treble hooks. Snatching, lifting, hooking and use of tip-ups are not angling.


North Carolina
Does not appear to limit the number or rods
North Dakota
Specific Regulations/Definitions
Legal hook and line equipment for each angler is two poles statewide except:
• One pole only is legal at:
o Garrison Dam Tailrace - while fishing from the piers and wingwalls.
o Drayton Dam - while shore fishing between boat ramp and area - designated "closed to fishing."
• Four poles are legal while ice fishing.
- Note: When fishing a water body where both open water and ice fishing occur at the same time, an angler is allowed a maximum of four poles of which no more than two poles can be used in open water

Ohio
Anglers may not use more than two fishing lines,
whether fastened to a pole, a rod and reel, or hand held.


Oklahoma
Appear to be no limitation

Oregon
The ODFW just updated their website with the new 2010 fishing regulations. Great news for anglers in Oregon, for a small fee ($17) you can now use 2 rods on most lakes!

Pennsylvania
Unlawful to fish with more than two fishing lines at any
time when fishing for game fish, baitfish or both.

Rhode Island
(www.dem.ri.gov/pubs/regs/index.htm#FandW), 4808 Tower Hill Road, Wakefield, RI 02879, 401-789-3094 or 401-222-3075

Could not find a restriction on rods, but the available info is not user friendly.
South Carolina

Game fish may be caught with only hook and line, fly rod, casting rod, pole and line
or hand line. Not more than 2 of these devices may be used by any fisherman at the same time, except when fishing in a boat. An unlimited number of lawful fishing devices may be used if every boat occupant (who would normally be required to have a fishing
license) possesses a valid fishing license.
• Bows and arrows for taking nongame fish only and


South Dakota
Could not find a restriction on “number of rods”

(Unattended Lines: Each line used must be under the direct
supervision and within the unaided observation of the legal user at all times.)



Tennessee
Ellington Agricultural Center
P. O. Box 40747
Nashville, TN 37204................ 615-781-6500

Pole or Rod Limit: There is no limit on the number of poles, with some exceptions for specific waters.

Texas
Could not find a restriction on “number of rods”


Utah
If you have a valid Utah second-pole permit, and a valid fishing or combination license, you can fish with two poles at any water in the state during its open fishing season.


Vermont
Not more than 2-lines

Virginia
As a general rule appears to be no restriction on “number of rods”

Washington
600 Capitol Way N
Olympia, WA
98501-1091

You may not Fish with a rod not under your immediate control.
or leave your gear unattended. No mention on “number of rods”.


West Virginia
No mention of “rod Limitation”

Wisconsin
It is illegal to fish with more than three hooks, baits, or lures.
• to take fish by any means other than hook and line unless

Wyoming

No mention of “rod Limitation”

Since I have been going flat-out since the Sept 8th FAC meeting this is a late report on my perceptions of the meeting re 4-rod:

Steve Clowe(?) accompanied me and set up a nice display for carp fisherman. Thanks Steve.


In a meet and greet session before the meeting, many compliments were received on the white paper. Bob Crook, CAC and Peter Aarestad, DEP, important players in the process, were very complementary. However, prior to the meeting via a phone call with the FAC Chairman and during the meet and greet session I felt a strong resistance to change.

The FAC Chairman is a traditionalist fly fisherman and my read is that he harbors preconceive notations that a sportsman's use of 4-rod will "rape and pillage" the trout fishery. Reminds me of the old reactionist adage, if "man was meant to fly, God would have given him wings".

Therefore, early on in my presentation, I set out to meet the "rape and pillage" misperception/objection to a "4-rod option" by emphasizing:
- the sportsmen's skill aspects of figuring out the puzzle,
-the reverence that sportsmen share for their prey
-and conveying that the primary interest was catch and release, not putting meat on the table.

I modified the request to include that if a "4-rod option" were to be elected in CT that the fisherman would have to release the fish (or have the creel limit reduced).

I believe, the "catch and release" modification under-cut any significant objections from the advisory committee, except for one influential member (Weiss I think) who said, he wouldn't troll with more than 2-rods because he would tangle them-to that weak comment, Crook jokingly told me later, "Welcome to the legislative process" lol.

Be that as it may, The FAC Chairman cut me short and ordered me to give the floor to the CARP fisherman who was supposed to be there for a Q & A session. There were very little Q & A time. Crook and Mitch voiced support and the Chairman cut discussion short with a negative statement like, " I have my reservations, I can envision 10 to 20-mortally, injured, fish released by 4-rod.

The proposal is tabled to a Dec FAC meeting and the Chairman said, any change would have to wait for FAC's recommendations for 2013 reg change proposals.

The 2013 waiting period is a change as to what I understood from Aarestad, since his position was that the FAC was an advisory committee and the DEP could make a decision earlier.

After my presentation there was a break and I met with Arrested and Crook. I shared my offended feeling from the Chairman, by saying that, "I got cut short from the "bully-pulpit", not by any rational and open discussion".

Aarrestad, who is great guy, shared that he and Hyatt were new in their jobs and he would visit with Hyatt as to how to proceed. I am sympathetic to the political necessities dictated by the bureaucratized environment. The FAC Chairman, has built a powerful position by holding the seat for years and I detect the "tail will wag the dog" on this due to one dogmatic position set against the enjoyment of many sportsmen.

Aarestad suggested that I wage a PR campaign on the CTF, I told him that the productivity return on a CTF grass roots effort, has run its course.
Crook said he could help me move through different channels, but I am not about too do it on my own.

Bottom-line, I think carp fisherman have a good chance of getting a 4-rod option, maybe this year, since it will not violate FAC trout dogmatic, sensitivities . All other fisherman's interest will get tabled and committeed to death by FAC.

Eventually we will all get a 3-rod option because, we have alerted the CT powers that "line limitation" change is on the way. Since NJ and NY have changed to 3-rod, I project CT will change through the regulatory process of "regional imitation".

Again, these are only my perceptions and read of the situation. I would welcome any other comments and perceptions by the many CTFers who were at the meeting.

Thanks to all who contributed to this thread. Your contributions, pro and/or con, were represented in the white paper and at the meeting.

Great job, although it sounds like the usual bureaucratic nonsense that makes most of us avoid meetings like that - like the plague.

I had a zoming board meeting a month ago and I still have the hives.....

Until people who are passionate about the 'entire' fishery experience are in positions of power - we will always get fractionalized biased results when trying to invoke change.

I applaud you for the work you have done - I would have probably said something that shouldn't have been said if I was at the meeting instead... LOL