Growing up as a kid we were allowed to have 4 poles . Now i'd be happy with 2 poles in the water and being able to cast around with the third.

 

I live in Indiana and already have a 3 pole limit and think that ohio should have a 3 pole limit. I use to fish Michigan with a 2 pole limit, now they have a 3 pole limit. its just going to take enough people pushing for a 3 pole limit to get the laws changed. I troll lake erie and there is times when I would love to be able to run 3 poles. but I don't see it happening in the near future.
sherman

 

Buy a non resident Kentucky license. I was out on the river from the boat solo yesterday. I was using 5 rods for catfish, and doing an occasional casting with a 6th rod for skipjack.

 

I think Ohio should have a unlimited pole.


Sent from my iPhone using Ohub Campfire

 

I believe they touched on this subject at the catfish summit in cincy and they said it wasn't happening. I purchased a w.v. license and I run at least 4 cat rods and a night crawler on the big O. For 50$ it was a no brainer for me....

 

The way I look at it. The old law of two poles need changed. Also I don't understand u can have several limb lines, and several jugs out but only two poles. Doesn't make sense. I was at the catfish summit. The odnr has no clue what's going on out on the water. Hopefully they need to get there head out of there butts.


Sent from my iPhone using Ohub Campfire

 

The way I look at it. The old law of two poles need changed. Also I don't understand u can have several limb lines, and several jugs out but only two poles. Doesn't make sense. I was at the catfish summit. The odnr has no clue what's going on out on the water. Hopefully they need to get there head out of there butts.


Sent from my iPhone using Ohub Campfire

I couldn't have said it better. What really sucks is when your on a lake a you see a single guy trolling 4 poles, while your sittn there with your two. Not that I blame him though.

 

I emailed them the same question. Even suggested the idea of paying maybe an extra $5 per extra rod. Seems like a very simple revenue increase that would not cost the state a dime.
I'd pay an extra $5-10 to fish one or two more rods.
They just want to take our money and tell us to **** up a tree. One of the many things I hate about Ohio. They actually told me there was very little interest expressed by people to fish more than two rods. Yeah. Right. Why not give the people that ARE interested the opportunity to do so??? No one is saying you must fish more than two rods.

 

I emailed them the same question. Even suggested the idea of paying maybe an extra $5 per extra rod. Seems like a very simple revenue increase that would not cost the state a dime.
I'd pay an extra $5-10 to fish one or two more rods.
They just want to take our money and tell us to **** up a tree. One of the many things I hate about Ohio. They actually told me there was very little interest expressed by people to fish more than two rods. Yeah. Right. Why not give the people that ARE interested the opportunity to do so??? No one is saying you must fish more than two rods.

I do not know a single Lake Erie troller who doesn't want to use three rods per person. I also know guys who will fish the PA side of the border so they can run the extra rods...

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app

 

I’m going to look in to some sort of way to petition this and try to get them to increase it to 3. It will be a website that everyone could sign and if we could be over 10,000 people to sign and willing to pay the extra fee for the extra pole. They will see it could increase the revenue close to $100,000. They may open their eyes because a lot of people is paying an extra $50 to fish with as many poles as they want by buying Kentucky fishing license.

 

I'm pretty sure this was actually talked about within the DNR. If I recall I think they shot it down because of the northern part of the state. I'll try to find something online about it.

 

I’m going to look in to some sort of way to petition this and try to get them to increase it to 3. It will be a website that everyone could sign and if we could be over 10,000 people to sign and willing to pay the extra fee for the extra pole. They will see it could increase the revenue close to $100,000. They may open their eyes because a lot of people is paying an extra $50 to fish with as many poles as they want by buying Kentucky fishing license.

www.change.org

I could get quite a few people to sign and share it, which would get more shares and signs.

With permission from the OP, I can start working on a rough draft, post it here and we can start writing this petition out.

 

I'm all about adding opportunity & for that privilege I'd pay for an additional endorsement on my license.
- Keep bag limits the same
Because it does not matter to most of us are CP&R anyway)

My only real concern is that the pile of revenue this creates could get added to the general fund & do little or nothing for the very people who provide it .

 

Since no response from the OP, I'll work on a change.org letter this coming week at work and post it here.

 

I have been working on it should have it posted this weekend.

Since no response from the OP, I'll work on a change.org letter this coming week at work and post it here.

 

Between 635,000 and 650,000 fishing license were sold last year in Ohio. Maybe more. Say half of those people add one rod for $5.

(635000/2) x $5 = $1,587,000. The DNR is telling us they couldn't use another $1.5million+???? Yeah, right. A government entity that doesn't mind increasing our yearly fee with no real gain for us, but give them a chance to drastically increase their revenue AND we get something for the extra(optional) fee and they're not interested.

I'm getting a bit fired up thinking about it. Heck, even if only 5% of people opted for an extra rod they'd still pull in an extra $150k. And that's only allowing people one extra rod. I'd pay to use three more rods. I'm not saying I would use five rods, but if I wanted to I could.

 

PA allows a third rod with out any extra fee...just saying...

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app

 

florida allows as many rods meaning a number that you can monitor. just my 2 cents. dave

 

I have been working on it should have it posted this weekend.

If you'd like someone to look over it and suggest changes, you can email it to me at D.G.Birrell@gmail.com

 

Ok I been involved wityh this debate with ODNR for the last several years and can tell you that the DNR is aware of a small group of folks who would be interested in a 3 rod limit, ( Trollers, Catfish and carp guys) and the DNR does agree that for those situations, its plausible but after doing surveys for the last two years to a broad scope of anglers, the vast majority of everyday folks replied with they didn't see any reason for it and only a small group of catfish, trollers and carp guys thought it was a good idea. anyways, the DNR has it on there watch list and will eventually probably change it but.. not in the next few years as license costs are very political and adding anything like a trout stamp or a 3rd rod fee would be quite costly to switch computer systems, tags, new brochures etc to make the changes and then there is the enforcement issues that would need to be addressed. Last point is that any more money going to DNR would really just go into the states reglar fund so you are dreaming if you think it would mean more funds for DNR, it just doesn't work that way. I applaud your efforts but can tell you that is where the state stands on this issue. an yeah it was discussed at the catfish summit,

Here is tha short comments from the Catfish summit, notes I received from Scott hale,
"Topic: Rod limits (increasing the number of rods per angler from 2 to 3 or more).
SH: This is something we have looked at in the past, but opinions are split among anglers, and they tend to be fishery specific. For example, on Lake Erie, anglers that cast prefer the current 2-rod limit and those that troll would like to see this increased to three. Likewise, in our inland waters, some anglers would like to see the current 2-rod limit remain and others would like to see this increased. In our surveys, we did not have an extremely strong response favoring a change. However, there is no reason that we can’t consider this in the future and discuss if such a change might be appropriate for some areas and not for others."

Salmonid

 

So, because some anglers don't see a reason, then it's a no to all off us? Makes sense.

As far enforcement, what would they be enforcing then that they aren't now?

 

enforcement becomes an issue where an officer would have to stop and ask everyone who had 3 rods out and that is time consuming and not the way enforcement likes to work, so some sort of visible marker would need to be in use in a perfect world so an officer could see something and or that you were NOT displaying something to know a possible infraction was involved before approaching someone. Does that make sense? While many folks think there is NO enforcement now, its important that in the eyes of the officers, that is good so folks will continue to feel comfortable to still break laws In other words, if enforcement is heavy, the bad folks will just go somewhere else making it that much harder to catch because they start getting sneaky about it vs being comfortable breaking laws. Also its important to understand that the more invisible enforcement is the better


Salmonid

 

For example, on Lake Erie, anglers that cast prefer the current 2-rod limit and those that troll would like to see this increased to three. Likewise, in our inland waters, some anglers would like to see the current 2-rod limit remain and others would like to see this increased.

Salmonid

So are casting anglers NOT wanting a 3 rod limit to stay on the same playing field as trolling anglers? Or do they not care?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Ohub Campfire mobile app

 

... not in the next few years as license costs are very political and adding anything like a trout stamp or a 3rd rod fee would be quite costly to switch computer systems, tags, new brochures etc to make the changes and then there is the enforcement issues that would need to be addressed...

This needs to be addressed, I'm sorry but I am an IT major that works in the industry, I must correct you as this information is wrong and misleading.

Trout Stamp: Unnecessary, and is really not part of the subject.

Third Rod Fee: Simple addition of a boxed area on the license that would have two variables; A star inside for those who DO have it, an X or other shape (two shapes that are not modifiable to look like one another, ie one that takes up the center one that doens't) that shows that someone does have it. A legend printed right underneath. Counterfeitable? Yes. Is it worth going beyond this? Probably not, no.

Switching Computer Systems: This is extremely unnecessary and over exaggerated by whatever your source of reference for this. The state would have required software to design the license template in the first place. In order to make simple additions to a template, the same software, which the state already has a license for (or even any PDF editor) is all that is required to make these chages.

Brochures: These are updated YEARLY. Why would adding a third rod be any different than changing the fishing year and adding a new bullet point to CHANGES FOR THIS YEAR. This is nothing new, the pamphlet is changed every year.
Ref: Ohio Fishing Regulations 2014-2015, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Page 7: Top of page all changes are listed in red lettering. I bet you they use a PDF editor for this!

Enforcement Issues: I see zero issues with this. the ODNR is no longer allow to do safety inspections in boats without reasonable cause. They lost something on their roster, why not change a law for them to memorize and send a memo out? I'm sure they have many many meetings and could be informed of law changes in one of the many many meetings they have.

I have the utmost respect for you Salmonid, but I'm sorry, these changes you speak of are minimal at best.

The Real Problem
Ohio Legislation. And I don't really see this being a problem if we have a petition circulating. As long as they headline of the petition isn't implying someone WANTS the law changed, but do they MIND the law change? Simple adjusting of wording makes makes people believe what they're reading is different and can cause a much different reaction to "surveys."

The English language is a real beast of burden.

 

in the states surveys, the Erie guys were very adamant one way or the others, the casters do NOT want 3 rods and the trollers DO want 3 rods and a large group of the Casters had their groups go online and heavily state that they did NOT want to see 3 rods in use on the surveys, ( there was an organized movement from them to go online and say NO to the 3 rod limit) This put the NO's way over the YES's in the survey so it appears the Majority of folks do not want it.. The state was aware of this ploy and is why they are willing to relook at it in the future

Salmonid