Kayak Fishing Adventures on Big Water’s Edge  

Go Back   Kayak Fishing Adventures on Big Water’s Edge > Kayak Fishing Forum - Message Board > General Kayak Fishing Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-01-2009, 05:33 PM   #1
tylerdurden
Bad Clone
 
tylerdurden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 874
BRTF option 4 is what is best for fishermen in San Diego. It is the San Diego array from WG2.

Options 1-3 all expand the current LJ reserve, and add the Scripps SMCA that really screws us kayakers over. A proposed allowed use on the spreadsheet included in the link is to allow bait catching by H&L only in the Scripps SMCA. This is a step in the right direction to allow bait by H&L but this is still obviously unacceptable.

The difference between options 1 and 2 in is the boudary of the south LJ reserve. Option 2 is moved slightly to the south.


BRTF option 3 is best for Point Dume, with 2 being worse, and 1 being not acceptable.
In PV option 2 is OK, option 1 is unaccpetable.
I don't know enough about Laguna to comment on that one. Someone?
BRTF option 4 is best in San Diego.

Correct me if I'm wrong.
__________________
MLPA, if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem

Let the Fish and Game Commission know what you think about the proposed maps.

Be ready for December 9th and 10th.




tylerdurden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2009, 05:39 PM   #2
tylerdurden
Bad Clone
 
tylerdurden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 874
To fight this...
Get as many people possible to email the BRTF in support of the good options.

Lobby the local council members and county supervisors to support the good options.

Thank the government officials who have supported us.
__________________
MLPA, if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem

Let the Fish and Game Commission know what you think about the proposed maps.

Be ready for December 9th and 10th.




tylerdurden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2009, 06:05 PM   #3
dsafety
Olivenhain Bob
 
dsafety's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Olivenhain, CA
Posts: 1,122
Billy V's comment raises a good question. In my email to the MLPA folks I specifically said that I support option 2. Option 2 is now option 4. Should we all resend our emails?

Bob
dsafety is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2009, 06:12 PM   #4
tylerdurden
Bad Clone
 
tylerdurden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 874
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsafety View Post
Billy V's comment raises a good question. In my email to the MLPA folks I specifically said that I support option 2. Option 2 is now option 4. Should we all resend our emails?

Bob
Yep. Go ahead and send a clarifying email. Better safe than sorry.

edit->
We still support the map from Work Group 2.

The difference is in the BRTF options 2 is no longer the good option, 4 is. The BRTF options are all new. I wish the labeled them ABCD instead.

So WG2 is good, BRTF 4 in San Diego is good.

Any other questions go ahead and ask.
__________________
MLPA, if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem

Let the Fish and Game Commission know what you think about the proposed maps.

Be ready for December 9th and 10th.




tylerdurden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2009, 07:37 PM   #5
Billy V
Senior Member
 
Billy V's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bay Ho
Posts: 1,382
In all my e-mails I word it as follows:

I Support Work Group 2 Map Proposal. -This differs from the Now Option 2, but I strongly feel they will use it to screw us over anyway they can.

Lets try to keep it together in these last few days. Believe me, I know what stress you are going through. Thats all i want to say for now.

-They will spin it into a word game.

Persistent kelp
Maximum kelp
Elk Kelp
Giant Kelp
your sisters ass kelp
Billy V is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2009, 07:40 PM   #6
PAL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 754
Fisherman preferred BRTF options by geography:

Santa Barbara: None. There’s only a single BRTF option. It includes an SMCA at Naples. SUPPORT RSG PROPOSAL 2

Malibu: Option 3. The boundary is WEST of Dume.

Palos Verdes: Option 2. Keeps Rocky Pt open.

Orange County: None. Both options are inefficient and hard to enforce wedges focused on the shoreline. SUPPORT RSG PROPOSAL 2

San Diego: Option 4. Leaves LJ as is.

Catalina: Again, there’s only a single option and it includes an unnecessary SMR at Long Pt. SUPPORT RSG PROPOSAL 2
PAL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2009, 07:46 PM   #7
Billy V
Senior Member
 
Billy V's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bay Ho
Posts: 1,382
I would suggest in the interest of safe guarding ALL OUR hard work that we send additional E-Mails that clarify our position for San Diego.

"I Support Work Group 2 Map Proposal, and BTRF Option 4 for San Diego"
Billy V is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
© 2002 Big Water's Edge. All rights reserved.