|
|
Location: Green Bay, WI | http://dnr.wi.gov/org/nrboard/congress/spring_hearings/index.html
Plug in the county you want or get the whole state's results. The resolutions introduced by citizens last night aren't published yet, apparently.
It looks as though we here on MF aren't the only ones that didn't like the early season, lol...
#12 C&R SEASON FOR MUSKELLUNGE: 1801 (yes); 3232 (No)
#13 C&R SEASON FOR MUSKELLUNGE: 1202 (yes); 3617 (No)
TB
Edited by tcbetka 4/15/2008 5:44 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | I see the 50 on Enterprise got through. Nice!
Hey Norm, are we going to try for a 72" limit next season?!? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1996
Location: Pelican Lake/Three Lakes Chain | Oh, not so quick Mr. Pointer. As predicted it did not do so well in Langlade County or Lincoln, a border county. It will be interesting to see what happens with this with state approval but without local.
It is amazing that the Enterprise lake association passed it 42-0, but in all of Langlade County (where Enterprise is Located) it could only muster 30 votes. Seems as if the Lake Association didn't see their proposal through. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32951
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Would be nice to see the Enterprise limit passed. I remember when that lake kicked out a couple 50's a season. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 282
Location: north west wisconsin | here is the statewide summary:
http://dnr.wi.gov/org/nrboard/congress/spring_hearings/2008/2008Res... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | More good news from the Hearings, the following resolutions where passed in Vilas County. Musky fishermen need to continue to get out and support this stuff, next year could be a very big year at the spring hearings.
Muskie 50" Size Limit on Big Sand Lake, Vilas County 53yes 25no Passed
Muskie 50" Size Limit on Lake Kentuck, Vilas County 50yes 29no Passed
Muskie 50" Size Limit on Long Lake, Vilas County 54yes 24no Passed
I first heard about this from Rob Manthi on TheNextBite.
Nail A Pig!
Mike |
|
| |
|
Location: Lake Tomahawk, WI | Funny how Twin is never even in the discussion for a 50" limit.
On a non-muskie related topic, was nice to see the ban on baiting deer recieve a yes vote. Not sure if it will ever happen, too much money involved.
Enjoy the rain!!!
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 619
Location: Verona, WI | Sorry for the ignorance on the topic but how do the vote results impact actual policy/rulemaking? Last year the extended season south of HWY 10 passed and I see it was on the ballot again and passed this year. Are these advisory only?
Shane |
|
| |
|
Location: Green Bay, WI | Well I am certainly not an expert in the process by any means, but I do think I understand it well enough--so I will try to summarize it for you. There used to be an explanation of it on the CC's website, but I see that it has been removed following the hearings last week.
For the Conservation Congress process, the first year a resolution is introduced, it is voted on in at least one certain county. It can be introduced in more than one county, and in fact this is exactly what we did with the 54" muskellunge limit increase for Green Bay; introduced it in 21 counties simultaneously. But if it passes, then it goes to one of a number of CC committees, and the exact one is assigned by the CC Executive Committee at the May hearing. These individual committees then meet in the fall to discuss whether or not the issues proposed in the spring hearings had enough merit to be forwarded on to the full CC statewide ballot.
If successful, the matter then goes back to the CC Executive Committee, and then gets placed on the statewide ballot the following spring. From there, all 72 counties vote on the issue. If successful, the matter can then be forwarded to the Natural Resources Board as an *advisory* recommendation (to increase the size limit on Green bay muskellunge to 54", for instance). From there the NRB acts--but first they request the input of the DNR biologists, and whomever else they deem appropriate. But if that process is successful, then the matter is forwarded to the State Legislature for consideration. If successful at that point, it becomes law and can be implemented during the following season.
Now there are obviously shortcuts to this procedure--for example an emergency action by the NRB to grant an immediate cessation of musky harvest (or immediately close the season), as could possibly happen if VHSv is found to be killing a lot of muskies in Green Bay this spring. But short of that (ie; if the DNR doesn't step in), a resolution proposal advanced by a citizen must go through at least a two-year process.
So it takes some time, and YES (in answer to your original question) the CC's recommendation to the NRB is only advisory. The NRB, as I understand it, can simply say no...and the process ends right there. But obviously they'd need to base that decision on the recommendations of someone with expertise in that area--say the fisheries biology team.
Hope I didn't get this too far off. Maybe someone else will add details where necessary.
TB |
|
| |
|
Posts: 619
Location: Verona, WI | Tom,
Thanks for the thorough answer.
Shane |
|
| |
|
Location: Green Bay, WI | No problem Shane. I am sure others might have more to add as well.
The thing that is a bit uncertain, is what happens when a resolution gets to the NRB. Nothing I have found really describes the process, and I wonder if it's because there really isn't any *one* process? Obviously the input of the specialists in that particular area will be solicited--but I have never really found out how long this can take.
Suffice it to say that the process will take at least two years. But without the CC process, a citizen really doesn't have much hope of getting something passed into law. Yes, you could get a biologist to advance a proposal through the DNR process, but this isn't a simple process by any means either...
TB |
|
| |
|
Posts: 9
| Shane / Tom
Tom's outline is right.
Think of the Spring Hearings as a public meeting REQUIRED for the dnr to get resource changes through. That is they take all of their changes for the year and use that meeting to meet the public noticing / meeting requirement.
In the case of the northern zone musky reg change (established by the legislature ) the DNR had it on as a resolution question during the 08 PUBLIC spring hearings as a way of meeting the public notice requirement (since the legislative process never had one). Even though the DNR had to implement the change, because it was a resource reg the state determined that it still needed to go through the public hearing process. So it was truly "a cart before the horse" scenario
So you have DNR submitted resolutions, CC Executive submitted resolutions, and than at the end of the meeting, newly submitted citizen questions that go through the process Tom described. A citizen should always try and get the DNR to propose the resolution because it bypasses the need to go through the CC committee approval, and knocks off a year. Plus, if it gets public support, almost always gets adopted by the NRB because of the DNR support (true with fishery stuff not necessarily with other issues...). The 54 inch resolution will be very unique if it makes it through the NRB based on DNR supporting it based on wide public support, but not a strict biological need. I'm not sure I know of any fishery change that made it to law that was submitted at a local level, but I never researched that.
NOTE: There were a couple resolutions proposed in Racine and Florence counties this year that were aimed at setting standards for the advancement of citizen resolutions. The idea was that too many resolutions are getting stopped at the CC committee level and not being put on as statewide questions the following year. It passed in those two counties by a 98 YES to 5 NO margin - so it must have hit home.
Good Fishing,
Randy Reading
Edited by bunzman 4/27/2008 7:58 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 10
Location: WI | Here is the link to an article in today's Green Bay Press Gazette about the 2009 muskie fishing season.
http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/2008...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 303
Location: WI | Can a person find out who wrote (or introduced) a certain resolution that was on the 08 ballot? |
|
| |
|
Location: Green Bay, WI | Yes, I believe you can... That should be public record, but you might have to contact the CC offices in Madison to get it. You might have to do some back-tracing though, as anything on the printed statewide ballot this year was either written by the DNR, or written by a citizen *last* year, and made to this year's statewide ballot.
The other thing you might try is to talk to your county CC chairperson. You can find them here: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/nrboard/congress/members/local/
Just contact the appropriate person, and they should be able to get you that information if all else fails.
TB |
|
| |
|
Posts: 9
| If you want a copy of a resolution before May when it gets posted at the CC site, contact: [email protected].
Edited by bunzman 4/25/2008 7:11 AM
|
|
| |
Spring Hearing results