Signatures 261 total
-
1
Name: Sam Batschelet on Feb 1, 2007Comments: I am strongly against this proposalFlag
-
2
Name: Ralph A. Ford, Jr on Feb 1, 2007Comments: West Branch Delaware Regulation Proposal #R4-5 claims that :Flag
-
3
Name: Dennis Cabarle on Feb 1, 2007Comments: Definetely AGAINST THE BAN. This is the most ridiculous proposal I've ever heard.Flag
-
4
Name: Casey Angelo on Feb 1, 2007Comments:Flag
-
5
Name: Jeffrey Church on Feb 1, 2007Comments: As a licensed guide who regularly fishes these waters with clients, I, nor my clients were never asked to take part in your survey. This is a knee jerk reaction to a vocal minority and demonstrates the limited perceptive skills of NY DEC. There are real problems with flow issues and lack of protection during the spawn that desewrve your attention rather than banning fishing from boats. What happens when the water is too high to wade or with an elderly or disabled angler. Very narrow minded thinkers you are.Flag
-
6
Name: Joe Tutino on Feb 1, 2007Comments: As a long time angler of the entire system and a wader a that for the most part I disagree with this new reg proposal as it stands...If this is going to happend there should be flows used as a part of the reg...Maybe under 600 cfs no craft in that zone and maybe only on the weekends........ What happends when the river is @ 2000 cfs Not many waders out and about except few nuts like me..... From what I understand though the details have not be worked out yet..Flag
-
7
Name: Joe Tutino on Feb 1, 2007Comments: As a long time angler of the entire system and a wader a that for the most part I disagree with this new reg proposal as it stands...If this is going to happend there should be flows used as a part of the reg...Maybe under 600 cfs no craft in that zone and maybe only on the weekends........ What happends when the river is @ 2000 cfs Not many waders out and about except few nuts like me..... From what I understand though the details have not be worked out yet..Flag
-
8
Name: John Butler on Feb 1, 2007Comments: I'd like to let you know that I am against the ban. Fishing from drift boats is a big part of the sport of fly fishing and affords one the opportunity to enjoy the surrounding countryside, while engaging in a very enjoyable activity. I can't think of a single reason why drift boats should be banned. John Butler.Flag
-
9
Name: John Warakomski on Feb 1, 2007Comments: A ban on fishing from boats will only increase problems. 1. All the wade areas will be utilized by boaters and waders alike, which will only minimize room for everyone. 2. Elderly fisher that hires a float trip will no longer be able to fish at all. 3. Disabled fly fishers that had an opportunity to float and fish will no longer be able to fish at all. 4. Women who hire a float trip because they are not comfortable with wading will also not be able to fish at all. 5. There will be times at high water that no one will be able fish the WB because you cannot fish from the boat and the water is too high to wade. 6. The wade fisherman should be satisfied with the current regulations because there is considerable time to have the river to them selves because the water is too low (400/500 cfs or less) to float and there are no significant releases. 8. During that 500 cfs to 1000 cfs where both wade and float fisherman use the WB, there is still considerable room for everyone. The guides know the river ethics. People who rent boats to float the river in most part do not know river ethics. 8. The upper WB from Stileville to Balls Eddy has good wade fisherman access - many guides will not float that portion of the river because the wade fisherman are to plentiful and a guide has to row past all the water the wade fisherman are using. 9. The lower WB has less wade fisherman access and should no way be limited to just fishing from boats. If you ask a wade fisherman about the boat traffic, you know what the answer will be. If there are to be requlations on boats, it should be tied into fow at Hale Eddy - no drift boats at 450 cfs or lower and this should be for the upper WB ONLY. The state should be looking into providing boat access for the WB not regulating the drift boats, along with getting adequate releases to protect the whole fishery from the dam to Calicoon.Flag
-
10
Name: William Hanley on Feb 1, 2007Comments: Seems rather restrictive... especially for our "Senior" anglers Some of them aren't as comfortable wading and hiking as they use to be!Flag
-
11
Name: Richard A Carroll on Feb 1, 2007Comments: I would only agree to this below a certain flow rate, such as 6-700 fps.Flag
-
12
Name: John Shipley on Feb 1, 2007Comments: Hold the phone! Are we looking for a huge increase in drownings of wading fishermen This is big water when it's up and when it's low most don't put in anyway... perhaps a minimum cfm regulation for floating would serve the river well.Flag
-
13
Name: Tim Evans on Feb 1, 2007Comments: no!!!Flag
-
14
Name: Lynne Cherba on Feb 1, 2007Comments:Flag
-
15
Name: Anonymous on Feb 1, 2007Comments: A public water and the qualitative most important fishery in the North East cannot be closed to a part of anglers just because a minority feels "crowded". Instead, river and fishing etiquette should be considered.Flag
-
16
Name: Ricardo Rodrigues on Feb 1, 2007Comments: I am 100% against this proposalFlag
-
17
Name: Melissa Rodrigues on Feb 1, 2007Comments: I love fishing the West Branch and im most deffinetly against this proposal.Flag
-
18
Name: Denis Ferfecki on Feb 2, 2007Comments:Flag
-
19
Name: Anonymous on Feb 2, 2007Comments: What is the State trying to pull I think they are trying to shift the focus from the fact they have long mismanaged the resource.Flag
-
20
Name: Mark Hunt on Feb 2, 2007Comments: I am completely against this ban.Flag
-
21
Name: Mark Heister on Feb 2, 2007Comments: This is not a valid proposal yet a very short sighted attempt to limit access on a state fishery. i am a New york resident and should have access to this river as i see fit.Flag
-
22
Name: Mark Heister on Feb 2, 2007Comments: This is not a valid proposal yet a very short sighted attempt to limit access on a state fishery. i am a New york resident and should have access to this river as i see fit.Flag
-
23
Name: Anonymous on Feb 2, 2007Comments: I fish the West Branch of the Delaware River and am strongly against proposed regulation # R4-5.Flag
-
24
Name: Joseph S Manning on Feb 2, 2007Comments: I oppose the ban of watercraft on the delawareFlag
-
25
Name: Benjamin Spalding on Feb 2, 2007Comments: this will impact tourism in the area for sure.Flag
-
26
Name: John O. Boag on Feb 2, 2007Comments: I fish the West Branch of the Delaware River and am strongly against proposed regulation # R4-5.Flag
-
27
Name: Edward W Dolshun on Feb 2, 2007Comments:Flag
-
28
Name: F. J. Rizzo on Feb 2, 2007Comments:Flag
-
29
Name: David Zieff on Feb 2, 2007Comments:Flag
-
30
Name: Thomas Florkowski on Feb 2, 2007Comments:Flag
-
31
Name: Randall Tanton on Feb 2, 2007Comments: I am not in favor of this Proposal #R4-5.Flag
-
32
Name: Lawrence Jones on Feb 2, 2007Comments: I both wade and float the river. Each is a great experience. Niether takes anything away from the other.Flag
-
33
Name: Gregory Herdemian on Feb 2, 2007Comments:Flag
-
34
Name: Joshua Forster on Feb 2, 2007Comments: Although I can understand the complaints by some wadding anglers, I don't agree that one should ban the entire river to drift boat access simply because of a few inconsiderate anglers on both sides of this issue. I can remember a time, not so long ago, when anglers would thoughtfully ask permission to float through or behind wadding anglers and permission was kindly granted without one feeling as though he/she were a pariah for the asking. LetFlag
-
35
Name: James Greene on Feb 2, 2007Comments: The purposes and benefits of this proposal are unclear. I can't envision any useful outcome of such a sweeping regulation. Therefore I strongly oppose it.Flag
-
36
Name: Anonymous on Feb 2, 2007Comments: My comments speak for all anglers. The problem with watercraft is not due to the professional guides whom cinduct themselves with edicate and finesse. The problem of cogestion and its resultant anger is directly linked to increased usage of the system by untrained canoeists and selfish fisherman using personal wtaercraft such as the pontoon boats. These individuals have little or no sensitivity to fish lies and edicate and fair distance between anglers. I suggest we prohibate the use of canoes, pontoons and other perssonal craft from the entire cold water sytem inclusive of the east branch, west branch and mainstem through stockport.Flag
-
37
Name: Chris Cleaver on Feb 2, 2007Comments: An absurd proposal. If the non-boaters want this, then we should have days when no one can wade fish and only boats be allowed on the water.Flag
-
38
Name: Keith Berkelhamer on Feb 2, 2007Comments:Flag
-
39
Name: Nemo Fontecchio` on Feb 2, 2007Comments: I fish the West Branch of the Delaware River and am strongly against proposed regulation # R4-5. Thank You, Nemo FontecchioFlag
-
40
Name: John Bass on Feb 2, 2007Comments: I fish from a cataraft trout fishing because I am confined to a wheelchair. You would be denying me the opportunity to enjoy fishing some really great water. Just because I can't walk I should not be penalized.Flag
-
41
Name: Michael Phillippe on Feb 2, 2007Comments: What we need is education of guides!! They often do interfere with wade fishing, but that does not have to be the case.Flag
-
42
Name: Vic Schuster on Feb 2, 2007Comments:Flag
-
43
Name: Paul Mauro on Feb 2, 2007Comments: I feel a complete ban of watercraft is a bad idea. I have been fishing the west branch for my years, and i have experienced the boat traffic while fishing from shore, it does sometimes become a problem. i think a ban on watercraft @ a specific water level would make much more sense. During high water the river is very difficult to fish from shore and a drift boat is the only way. But when the water is lower there is no need for a drift boat, most spots can be fishined by wading.Flag
-
44
Name: Kenneth Hughes on Feb 2, 2007Comments: Subject: Input on Possible Fishing Regulation Changes for 2008; ID # R4-5 I fish the West Branch of the Delaware River and am strongly against proposed regulation # R4-5. Thank You, Ken HughesFlag
-
45
Name: Paul Mauro on Feb 2, 2007Comments: I feel a complete ban of watercraft is a bad idea. I have been fishing the west branch for my years, and i have experienced the boat traffic while fishing from shore, it does sometimes become a problem. i think a ban on watercraft @ a specific water level would make much more sense. During high water the river is very difficult to fish from shore and a drift boat is the only way. But when the water is lower there is no need for a drift boat, most spots can be fishined by wading.Flag
-
46
Name: Jeffrey Melrose on Feb 2, 2007Comments: Drift boats are a reasonable way of fishing this river - usually fishing to fish out of reach of wading anglers - when waters drop low enough for anglers to wade the entire river, drift boats are generally unable to float anyway. I fish the river mainly via wading and only on a few occasions have had issue with boats (usually canoes or kayaks - not with drift boats and fishermen who know what they are doing and how to handle a drift boat). There are too many guides/resorts and businesses that would suffer from this change- it would potentially damage the already shaky economy of an area that depends on the availability of fishing related services for the majority of the year (guides/resorts/fly and tackle shops/restaurants etc.) I live in Virginia and travel 6 hrs to fish this river at least 2-3 times a year for a few days at a time and I usually float only once or twice a year. Drift boats enhance this fishery and the majority of drift boat operators give ample room to wading anglers. Yes, they can occasionally 'get in the way', but so can someone who is standing in the river in 'your spot' or walking through it because thy didn't realize they should be fishing there, not walking there.Flag
-
47
Name: John Applegate on Feb 2, 2007Comments:Flag
-
48
Name: Mark Sturtevant on Feb 2, 2007Comments: I fish the Delaware system 4 or 5 times a year usually for a week or so at a time. I am mainly a wading angler but I cannot support a ban on watercraftFlag
-
49
Name: James M Keech on Feb 2, 2007Comments: This is a BAD regulation.Flag
-
50
Name: Anonymous on Feb 2, 2007Comments:Flag