|
|
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | I wish the statewide panfish bag restriction advisory question had passed. |
|
| |
|
Location: Green Bay, WI | Wow...a close one. It got defeated by only 84 votes. I didn't think it would have had that much problem, to be honest.
TB |
|
| |
|
Posts: 210
| Regarding the number of lines trolling, at the meeting I attended, we were told we had to vote yes for one of the three choices. If we didn't vote yes for one of them, our ballot was maked incorrectly and we would have to fill out a new ballot, or have our ballot not count. |
|
| |
|
Location: Green Bay, WI | Ebenezer - 4/13/2012 9:23 PM
Regarding the number of lines trolling, at the meeting I attended, we were told we had to vote yes for one of the three choices. If we didn't vote yes for one of them, our ballot was maked incorrectly and we would have to fill out a new ballot, or have our ballot not count.
WOW! That's weird--and I don't think that was the way it was intended. For instance, what if you were NOT in favor of statewide trolling, at all? I cannot imagine that was the intent of those questions--in fact I am pretty much certain that it wasn't, because I talked to Tim Simonson the week before the hearings. As I understand it, those three questions were merely to investigate what configuration of line limits would be favored, if the DNR were to allow statewide trolling. What did the rocket scientist who gave you guys those instructions do when they got to question #75? Sheesh--didn't it ever occur to them that maybe someone didn't want to have statewide trolling AT ALL? That's like saying you can have any color boat you want...as long as it's black!
I guess in the end it didn't really matter though, because all three questions were soundly defeated anyways.
TB |
|
| |
|
| I could not make it this year. wish I had been able to.
Trying some simple math (which is not my strong suit)
On the trolling questions, if 30 voted, and 10 wanted 1 line, 10 wanted 2 line and 10 wanted 3 line trolling, and each voted no for the other 2 options, each would be 20 N votes and 10 Y votes. It was almost guaranteed all 3 would fail to some extent unless a massive majority chose yes on the same number of lines.
If they had asked it differently it would have been much more conclusive. IE.
Do you support trolling with 1 line per angler on all lakes under 400 acres, 2 lines per angler on lakes of 400 to 1200 acres, and 3 lines per angler on lakes over 1200 acres in size?
Or
1) Do you support allowing trolling on all lakes in the state?
If you answered yes to #1 do you support trolling with:
2. ) 1 line per angler Y N
3.) 2 lines per angler Y N
4.) 3 lines per angler Y N
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for the CC question on trolling, I doubt the DNR looks at the CC questions when creation their options. Thus the DNR questions were created in a vaccum, and did not taek into account there would be another question on trolling. |
|
| |
