Tuesday April 09, 2002
I don't agree with you on signs one bit. The fewer the better. If you concern is about backing up your arguement over spring conservation season I suggest you do like many others. Put a copy of the ND rules and regs in your tackle box.
Then to say the sign at Golden Lake was a "bad sign"...come on. Maybe you should get into the sign making business.
What's next? Do you want signs posted about near known duck sloughs telling you its illegal to use lead shot?
We as sportsmen and WOMEN! must take it upon ourselves to read and understand the rules and regulations. I tend to think you GUYS are getting lazy and dont want to take responsibility for reading and understand the regs. Hey ND rules are 50 times easier than Minnesota's.
I think that article in the Herald was slanted. To infer Minnesota officials want to make things easier....who believes that?
Sunday April 07, 2002
Brad Dokken, of the Grand Forks Herald, had an interesting story in Sunday's paper.
For those of you that haven't read it it's here:
I also received an e-mail from Terry Steinwand, the fisheries chief of North Dakota. He responded as such:
<<During a recent fisheries division meeting we discussed the issue of signing on a statewide basis. Some good discussion ensued and it was the consensus that many areas were 'cluttered' with signs that the public wasn't reading. It's a matter of providing too much information and not getting the message out. We tried to fix this a few years ago by going to kiosks, which would incorporate the signs into a single, protected area. Even with that, during select creel surveys we would ask anglers standing right by the signs or kiosks whether or not they'd ever seen a specific sign and the majority replied they had not even though they were standing right by it!
We decided we would reduce signage across the state in order to more effectively get specific messages out to the public, i.e., information and education. We also felt that by putting regulatory signs on some areas while not on others implied that those areas signed were the only areas with that regulation, which was likely not true. The regulations are contained in the fishing guide and are available to all licensed anglers. We will still put signage up for special projects such as tagging studies, aquatic nuisance species posters, etc. but felt that cluttering an area with a number of signs that the majority of the public was reading was not a good use of our time.>>
Now, I inclined to disagree with Terry's position.
For example: there is not a single sign down at the North Landing in Grand Forks on the Red River. Not ONE. (There is a sign about 1/4 mile from the river that IDENTIFIES the North Landing, but none at ALL by the landing.
Clutter and overwhelming signage is not applicable there. I, for one, found the signs reassuring during spring conservation season, as it provided me a 'formal authority' when I questioned other anglers concerning their harvest. No arguing..."just go and read the sign."
To defend Terry, I WILL say that one fall day 2 years ago, I put my boat in North Golden lake. A Game and Fish gentleman came along and pointed to a sign. He asked if I read it. I said yes, I did. He then asked me to read it again.
So I started to read this sign. It started in Big Bold Letters: "NO HUNTING"... Now it went on from there, but I replied to the GnF official, "I don't hunt, and I'm not hunting so what is the problem?"
He pointed to the SMALL little writing at the bottom that said, "No fishing during the fall migration" or something like that. I was flabbergasted. (Not to mention thoroughly embarassed...)
The sign that was there was addressed to hunters, not to fishermen. It was a 'bad' sign. He helped me load my boat back up, and told me I could fish on the NORTH end of the lake...
Anyway, my point of all this is simple. Signs are GOOD. Well written signs are needed. There is NO WAY anglers should be expected to memorize every lake/river restriction within the State.
I think it is short-sighted for the Game and Fish to remove these signs, and they are not 'helping' anyone. The removal does more damage than good.
Please e-mail Terry, with your thoughts, here:
Any other anglers have an opinion?
Thursday March 28, 2002
Thanks Kent and Dogman, I guess I'll just have to spend some of George's tax cut on that this year. I like Fords, but what the heck is with the new fangle disposable hinges? I just got rid of a 79 Ford a year and a half ago, and it never needed hinge work.