The newest maps are up - Kayak Fishing Adventures on Big Water’s Edge

tylerdurden · 11-01-2009, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsafety

Billy V's comment raises a good question. In my email to the MLPA folks I specifically said that I support option 2. Option 2 is now option 4. Should we all resend our emails?

Bob

Yep. Go ahead and send a clarifying email. Better safe than sorry.

edit->
We still support the map from Work Group 2.

The difference is in the BRTF options 2 is no longer the good option, 4 is. The BRTF options are all new. I wish the labeled them ABCD instead.

So WG2 is good, BRTF 4 in San Diego is good.

Any other questions go ahead and ask.

Billy V · 11-01-2009, 07:37 PM

In all my e-mails I word it as follows:

I Support Work Group 2 Map Proposal. -This differs from the Now Option 2, but I strongly feel they will use it to screw us over anyway they can.

Lets try to keep it together in these last few days. Believe me, I know what stress you are going through. Thats all i want to say for now.

-They will spin it into a word game.

Persistent kelp
Maximum kelp
Elk Kelp
Giant Kelp
your sisters ass kelp

PAL · 11-01-2009, 07:40 PM

Fisherman preferred BRTF options by geography:

Santa Barbara: None. There’s only a single BRTF option. It includes an SMCA at Naples. SUPPORT RSG PROPOSAL 2

Malibu: Option 3. The boundary is WEST of Dume.

Palos Verdes: Option 2. Keeps Rocky Pt open.

Orange County: None. Both options are inefficient and hard to enforce wedges focused on the shoreline. SUPPORT RSG PROPOSAL 2

San Diego: Option 4. Leaves LJ as is.

Catalina: Again, there’s only a single option and it includes an unnecessary SMR at Long Pt. SUPPORT RSG PROPOSAL 2

Billy V · 11-01-2009, 07:46 PM

I would suggest in the interest of safe guarding ALL OUR hard work that we send additional E-Mails that clarify our position for San Diego.

"I Support Work Group 2 Map Proposal, and BTRF Option 4 for San Diego"

tylerdurden · 11-01-2009, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billy V

I would suggest in the interest of safe guarding ALL OUR hard work that we send additional E-Mails that clarify our position for San Diego.

"I Support Work Group 2 Map Proposal, and BTRF Option 4 for San Diego"

That sums it up for SD. I agree.

tylerdurden · 11-02-2009, 08:45 AM

Be very careful about what you support.

WG2
BRTF 4 for SD

zenspearo · 11-02-2009, 11:16 AM

I spoke to the I-Team.

They said they still accept comments for WG2 and the new BRTF options.

The sample letters on Spearboard and Bloodydecks

http://www.spearboard.com/showthread...88#post1080588

I have been revised to carefully point out WG versus Options.

Trust me guys. I heard enough expletives about the new BRTF option designation to make a sailor blush. This is FUBAR on their part.

Recommendation: Resend the emails to clarify that you are, for SD, supporting WG2 map and BRTF Option 4.

11-02-2009, 08:45 AM	#6
tylerdurden Bad Clone Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 874	Be very careful about what you support. WG2 BRTF 4 for SD __________________ MLPA, if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem Let the Fish and Game Commission know what you think about the proposed maps. Be ready for December 9th and 10th.

11-02-2009, 11:16 AM	#7
zenspearo Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 167	I spoke to the I-Team. They said they still accept comments for WG2 and the new BRTF options. The sample letters on Spearboard and Bloodydecks http://www.spearboard.com/showthread...88#post1080588 I have been revised to carefully point out WG versus Options. Trust me guys. I heard enough expletives about the new BRTF option designation to make a sailor blush. This is FUBAR on their part. Recommendation: Resend the emails to clarify that you are, for SD, supporting WG2 map and BRTF Option 4. __________________ A spearo, but we are in this MLPA mess together

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

11-01-2009, 07:37 PM	#2
Billy V Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bay Ho Posts: 1,382	In all my e-mails I word it as follows: I Support Work Group 2 Map Proposal. -This differs from the Now Option 2, but I strongly feel they will use it to screw us over anyway they can. Lets try to keep it together in these last few days. Believe me, I know what stress you are going through. Thats all i want to say for now. -They will spin it into a word game. Persistent kelp Maximum kelp Elk Kelp Giant Kelp your sisters ass kelp

11-01-2009, 07:40 PM	#3
PAL Senior Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 754	Fisherman preferred BRTF options by geography: Santa Barbara: None. There’s only a single BRTF option. It includes an SMCA at Naples. SUPPORT RSG PROPOSAL 2 Malibu: Option 3. The boundary is WEST of Dume. Palos Verdes: Option 2. Keeps Rocky Pt open. Orange County: None. Both options are inefficient and hard to enforce wedges focused on the shoreline. SUPPORT RSG PROPOSAL 2 San Diego: Option 4. Leaves LJ as is. Catalina: Again, there’s only a single option and it includes an unnecessary SMR at Long Pt. SUPPORT RSG PROPOSAL 2

11-01-2009, 07:46 PM	#4
Billy V Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bay Ho Posts: 1,382	I would suggest in the interest of safe guarding ALL OUR hard work that we send additional E-Mails that clarify our position for San Diego. "I Support Work Group 2 Map Proposal, and BTRF Option 4 for San Diego"