Felt sole ban in RI

[DZ]

Originally Posted by TEAM7x

A comment left to a posting on my blogsite:

"FYI, an executive member of RI Trout Unlimited Ch225, specifically requested the banning of felt bottom waders in RI fresh water at the last public RIDEM fishing regulations meeting held at the Warwick Police station at the end of this past summer. His request and comments should be in the public record."

Well...a check of the DEM website does not show a public hearing agenda item concerning adoption of this regulation, nor any hearing in "late summer." There MAY have been a meeting, but no evidence exists of a properly noticed "hearing" as required by law. If anyone can find that notice or minutes thereof, post it up!
Further, an "executive" of TU RI 225 speaks for whom?...The thousands of salwater anglers represented by RISAA and others that were completely unaware of this proposal? Was this issue brought forward as a result of a vote by TU members? Again a check of TU newsletters shows no agenda item concerning felt sole ban.

Appears we have one "executive" TU member persuading RIDEM to adopt a regulation in the dark of night! Priceless!

team7x.com

Just heard back from RIDEM: Public hearing was held on June 1st, 2011. I have the minutes, names, etc. Proposal for felt sole ban was made by a member of Northern RI Chapter of Trout Unlimited, a member of Narragansett Trout Unlimited, and a member of Federated Rhode Island Sportman's Club. Seems the RIDEM Enforcement Division incorporated the rule to cover all waters for "ease of inforcement".

Good news is there is a vehicle to get this rule changed: petition for change at this years public hearing for 2013 rules. Who knows how vigilant enforcement will be this season. I asked the division to post some clarification on their web page because there was all sorts of misinformation about this controversy.

Our first step might be to ask RISAA to get the Marine Fisheries Council to bring up the topic and send a memorandum to the Freshwater Division recommending that marine waters be deleted.

Letters to the DEM director would also be beneficial - she would be the only one who could possibly alter the regulation for the upcoming season. I believe she has that power.

DZ

[Bill L]

The ban on felt soles is in the freshwater fishing regulations. Section 2.6 of these regualtions clearly defines the boundaries of freshwater and saltwater sections of the streams where these regulations apply. These regulated sections do include tidal and marine state waters, where felt soles would be prohibited.

I think it is clear that these reglations do NOT apply to any of the seaward portions of these rivers and streams from these boundaries, and could be legally argued to that point.

[DZ]

Originally Posted by Bill L

The ban on felt soles is in the freshwater fishing regulations. Section 2.6 of these regualtions clearly defines the boundaries of freshwater and saltwater sections of the streams where these regulations apply. These regulated sections do include tidal and marine state waters, where felt soles would be prohibited.

I think it is clear that these reglations do NOT apply to any of the seaward portions of these rivers and streams from these boundaries, and could be legally argued to that point.

Bill,
I totally agree with your reasoning but that is not the case from what I was told.

Quote from F&W: "It (the regulation) was made inclusive of all waters for Enforcement purposes; so that anglers were not confused as to where the freshwater/saltwater boundaries were in estuarine areas."

Basically what the above statement means is that instead of trying to figuere out where you can or cannot use them it would make it simpler to just include all waters including marine. I don't like it, don't feel it's necessary in the open surf, and will do my part to get it changed. I encourage all others to do the same.

DZ

[Bill L]

That may be their intent, but the exact wording of 2.6 is: "Boundaries - The defined boundaries for the freshwater and saltwater sections of the sate's rivers and streams, with regard to the areas where Freshwater Regualtions apply, are as follows:"

I guess they may try and enforce it on the ocean front, but at least maybe anybody that is caught could argue that they are outside of the regulated area, and possibly get off and avoid a fine. I realize that the regulation regarding the felt soles says "any state waters", which is contradictory to the later definition of the boundaries.

And if the boundaries are clearly defined in the regulations already, why do they think we would be confused on where the boundaries are (aside from someone not reading the regulation)?

[JohnR]

Team7x - PM on the way - thanks...

[Justfishin']

Basically what the above statement means is that instead of trying to figuere out where you can or cannot use them it would make it simpler to just include all waters including marine. I don't like it, don't feel it's necessary in the open surf, and will do my part to get it changed. I encourage all others to do the same.

While it does stink to have it be all waters inclusive of marine, there is a logic to it- this will keep the weekend warriors who don't give a s**t about what they spread or where in check. Unfortunately, thats about 2 in 5 "anglers'. And as much as I really hate the reg., I don't feel arguing boundries or mean high tide marks will serve any useful purpose. I think that the best that might be done would be post any area where fresh water runs to the salt, but again, there's going to be the jerk factor to screw it up for the rest of us.