Info. below was copied directly from the Wis. Bass Federation Forum. It is some great points to USE AT THE HEARINGS!!!!
The FLW has retained an attorney. His name is Peter McKeever. He attended the last hearing and will be in Lacrosse and others. He talked to me on the phone today and offered some real suggestions for all of us attending those hearings. Here is what he had to say:
Feel free to use some or all of the following recommendations for distribution to the tournament fishing community in Wisconsin via your web site or other tools. Regarding the public hearings on the proposed tournament fishing rules, there are several things that anglers can do at the hearings to be more effective:
1. Testify, even if somebody else has already made the points you would make.
Numbers count. At the Fond du Lac hearing, many people passed up the chance to testify because the points they wanted to make had already been made by others. Even though somebody may feel his or her points were already made, it is important that person also testify and make the same points. Numbers count when they total up the public comments. Don’t pass up the opportunity to speak.
2. If you ask questions, you still need to testify to get your points in the record.
The comments made during the Q & A portion of the public hearing are not recorded and are not part of the official record of feedback to the Natural Resources Board on the proposed rule. In Fond du Lac, many more people asked questions than actually testified, and many of those questions were critical of parts of the rule, either explicitly or implicitly. However, those concerns are not automatically made a part of the record. People who ask questions must also submit an appearance slip (available at the hearing location) and then formally testify to be sure their comments are recorded. It is the testimony that gets summarized for the Natural Resources Board, not the questions or the commentary that accompanies the questions..
3. Be specific with your recommendations for changes or additions to the rules.
Very few of those who testified in Fond du Lac had specific suggestions for improving the rule, particularly regarding the proposed ban on live release tournaments in July and August. It is not enough to stand up and say, “I am vehemently opposed to the whole rule.” Attacks on the DNR and accusations that they are “out to get” tournament anglers don’t help. The department needs to hear specific suggestions for addressing the problem that the Natural Resources Board believes is present and that the July-August ban is intended to address: post release mortality.
Whether you believe the DNR data or not, it would be far better to acknowledge that under certain conditions there may occasionally be a problem with post-release mortality and to then suggest alternative practical solutions: fewer fish in the live well, ice in the live well, faster weigh-ins, better staggering of weigh-ins, shorter lines, etc. when conditions require.
It appears that many anglers may not be making the distinction between the fish that swims away from the live well and the one that washes up on shore a day or two later. The DNR is drawing a distinction between successful live releases, which they seem to acknowledge is a pretty high percentage of fish caught, and those which are successfully released and die a day or two or three later. It is the latter group that is the concern for the Natural Resources Board: fish that die after apparently being released successfully. This is perceived as the waste of a resource, which nobody likes or wants. The Board members need to hear solutions, not broad based attacks on the department’s data, credibility, motivations, or personnel..
When you testify, make specific suggestions for reducing or eliminating this concern. More testimony regarding factors that may influence survival rates would be helpful: air and water temperature, water levels, dissolved oxygen, transport distance, numbers of fish, wind and wave conditions, etc.
4. Testify: don’t be shy.
At Fond du Lac a relatively small number of people actually testified. There were some very thoughtful and experienced anglers in the audience who said nothing publicly. One said he was too shy. If this issue matters to you, this is your opportunity to speak out. Take advantage of it. If you want the DNR to be held accountable, you need to be willing to also be held accountable for what you have to say.
————–