As 1018 gets some kickback from IFAW so 1236 now rears it's ugly head

[cap]

Check this out....If these two bills gain any traction you will be saying goodbye to your ice fishing in Northern Maine....no live bait...no stocking of salmon in the Fish River Chain...a whole slew of answers to problems that don't exist...this bill was hastily put together it looks like on March 30th because 1018 did not have IFAW support and others spoke against it as well

Aren't these laws supposed to all be in place back in January?  This one obviously was a go around by the pols in Augusta and the fly fishing mafia....

http://legislature.maine.gov/legis/bills/getPDF.asp?paper=HP0859&item=1&snum=128

This is the slippery slope of the Heritage Act that IFAW warned about when it was passed...soon enough any water with a brook trout in it and you can say goodbye to live bait and stocking of brook trout...but also salmon, togue...kiss your ice fishing goodby boys...and thank George Smith and his cronies....

[Anomaly]

It wold appear George Smith is not a friend.

Has there been a hearing on 1236 yet?

If not, we had better be landing our butts there! If it has, we need to jump on this and share the crap out it everywhere we can.

If it hadn’t been for some vocal folks at the hearing on wild foraging, then lots of sharing and communication on social media directly with George and Saviello, the foraging bill would have been passed today, instead of being pulled.

[Moosekill]

SUMMARY
 This bill limits the Commissioner of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife to adding to the
 list of state heritage fish waters only those lakes and ponds identified as eastern brook
 trout waters and arctic charr waters that according to reliable records have not been
 stocked for at least 25 years or have never been stocked.

Trying to understand how this negatively effects anything. 

[Anomaly]

SUMMARY
 This bill limits the Commissioner of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife to adding to the
 list of state heritage fish waters only those lakes and ponds identified as eastern brook
 trout waters and arctic charr waters that according to reliable records have not been
 stocked for at least 25 years or have never been stocked.

Trying to understand how this negatively effects anything.

Yeah, I’ve reread this and will do so a couple more times. I don’t find it as catastrophic as I lurched to after reading cap’s first post. cap, can you  clarify the overarching issues you mentioned? Thanks!

[Moosekill]

Cap mentioned two bills, but only linked one.  I don't know anything about the heritage water stuff, but this bill looks like it limits the ability of the Commissioner to declare waters heritage, rather than making it easier for him to do it.  Perhaps the other bill is different.

[cap]

We already have The Heritage Waters Act which was opposed by IFAW bios because it managed by legislative fiat rather than what the conditions on the ground are....These two bills are an attempt to increase the number of Heritage Waters by including  tributaries to waters already claimed to be Heritage waters and then in addiction adding whole watersheds to those same heritage waters...in effect since everything is connected then everything will or could be "legislated" as Heritage water...and in so doing they would be off limits to any stocking of brook trout and other stocked species and they would also be off limits to Live fish as bait...so basically with the two bills any friggin drainage ditch if it had a brook trout in it and whatever is connected to it would be off limits to stocking and live bait fishing. Stocked salmon and ice fishing for them with live bait would be taken away from us....

The people behind these bills want to stop ice fishing in northern Maine...they have been trying to accomplish this for the last two decades...they say we kill too many of "their" fish....the fish they want to exploit for rich toney fly anglers during the open season...

Read into it....see their plan...it is always coached in terms of conservation but in effect it is divisive and they want a lock on certain parts of the state for rich anglers from away to come and fly fish...it has always been the plan...

Several big money Orvis endorsed type camp owners have been behind this...do your due diligence and check it out...the first bill IFAW bios spoke out against....almost immediately the second bill was introduced as a work around....we don't need or want either of them we already have enough friggin laws and the state has pros managing our fish for us...we don't need any monday morning quarterbacks outguessing the state Biologists and managers...in fact the whole Heritage Brook trout Act was a backroom deal from the start...

[Moosekill]

Yes, I did read the one you linked.  It removes the ability of the commissioner to add new waters to the list, and only allows waters that support brook trout or arctic char and haven't been stocked in over 25 years.  It does allow the commissioner to remove waters however.  So this would be a good thing if you want to make sure more waters aren't added that you can add salmon and pike to. 

Not sure on your other bill but if you link it I will look at it too.