Government of Alberta January Public Engagement Sessions

[cube]

Not Sure if this Has Already been Posted Yet or Not. Sorry for the repeat if it has.

Government of Alberta January Public Engagement Sessions
http://aep.alberta.ca/about-us/publi...-sessions.aspx
Northern Pike and Walleye Public Information Session (Calgary)
Alberta Environment and Parks is hosting public information sessions to share the Draft Recreational Fisheries Management Frameworks for Northern Pike and Walleye and to hear your thoughts on proposed recreational fisheries management objectives.
Location:
Croatian Canadian Cultural Centre
3010 12 St NE,
Calgary, Alberta
Date:
January 10, 2018
Time:
6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Presentation at 6:30, open house to follow
Additional Details:
Information on the draft frameworks and the consultation lakes is available at: https://talkaep.alberta.ca/

Northern Pike and Walleye Public Information Session (Edmonton)
Alberta Environment and Parks is hosting public information sessions to share the Draft Recreational Fisheries Management Frameworks for Northern Pike and Walleye and to hear your thoughts on proposed recreational fisheries management objectives.
Location:
Kinsmen Banquet Centre
47 Riel Drive,
St. Albert, Alberta
Date:
January 11, 2018
Time:
6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Presentation at 6:30, open house to follow
Additional Details:
Information on the draft frameworks and the consultation lakes is available at: https://talkaep.alberta.ca/

Northern Pike and Walleye Public Information Session (Slave Lake)
Alberta Environment and Parks is hosting public information sessions to share the Draft Recreational Fisheries Management Frameworks for Northern Pike and Walleye and to hear your thoughts on proposed recreational fisheries management objectives.
Location:
Slave Lake Government Hub
101-3 Street SW,
Slave Lake, Alberta
Date:
January 17, 2018
Time:
6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Presentation at 6:30, open house to follow
Additional Details:
Information on the draft frameworks and the consultation lakes is available at: https://talkaep.alberta.ca/














Northern Pike and Walleye Public Information Session (Grande Prairie)
Alberta Environment and Parks is hosting public information sessions to share the Draft Recreational Fisheries Management Frameworks for Northern Pike and Walleye and to hear your thoughts on proposed recreational fisheries management objectives.
Location:
Montrose Cultural Center – Teresa Sargent Hall
9839-103 Avenue,
Grande Prairie, Alberta
Date:
January 18, 2018
Time:
6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Presentation at 6:30, open house to follow
Additional Details:
Information on the draft frameworks and the consultation lakes is available at: https://talkaep.alberta.ca/

Northern Pike and Walleye Public Information Session (Lac La Biche)
Alberta Environment and Parks is hosting public information sessions to share the Draft Recreational Fisheries Management Frameworks for Northern Pike and Walleye and to hear your thoughts on proposed recreational fisheries management objectives.
Location:
Bold Centre
Devon Room
8702 91 Avenue,
Lac La Biche, Alberta
Date:
January 22, 2018
Time:
6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Presentation at 6:30, open house to follow
Additional Details:
Information on the draft frameworks and the consultation lakes is available at: https://talkaep.alberta.ca/

Publicly Organized
Publicly organized - Angling Regulation Changes (Lac Bellevue Hall) – January 16
Topic: Discuss Proposed Changes to Fishing Regulations
January 16, 2018 at 7:00 pm
Lac Bellevue Hall (located on Hwy 881 - 12 miles south of St. Paul)
This is your opportunity to hear from the Alberta Government the proposed changes and to provide your comments on your preferred fish management options and regulations
Contact Ray Mackowecki at Ray@enviromak.com

Edmonton Trout Club – North-Central Alberta Native Trout Recovery Plan (Edmonton) – January 16
Tuesday, January 16, 2018 - 7:00 PM - Regular Meeting @ Queen Mary Park Community Hall 10844 117 St. - Guest speaker Jessica Reilly - Senior Fisheries Biologist for Rocky Mountain House & Mike Blackburn - Senior Fish Biologist for Edson about north central native trout recovery program.

[Stinky Buffalo]

Thanks for posting!

[SNAPFisher]

Thanks cube!

Why the 11th in Edmonton. The wife's Bday. "Gee honey, I'd love to celebrate your birthday but I'd rather attend this pike and walleye information session..."

Followed by silence and then my untimely demise...or is it deservedly

I'll be interested to hear feedback and then might try to attend the Lac Bell. one.

[PEIslander]

Bump.

The Calgary session is this week. While the intent of the sessions may be to go through the motions on the Pike & Walleye Management plans, it's a opportunity to get some face to face time with the Bio's and talk about other proposed changes in PP1 like those in the below link.

https://mywildalberta.ca/fishing/reg...t-changes.aspx

[cube]

Just wondering if anyone had any feedback from yesterdays Calgary meeting?

[Joe Quiroga]

Originally Posted by PEIslander

Bump.

The Calgary session is this week. While the intent of the sessions may be to go through the motions on the Pike & Walleye Management plans, it's a opportunity to get some face to face time with the Bio's and talk about other proposed changes in PP1 like those in the below link.

https://mywildalberta.ca/fishing/reg...t-changes.aspx

Would be nice to see Tilley and Cowoki go to catch and release, which appears to be what they are intending for next season. Fishing out there has been pretty rough the last couple years.

[petecatch]

Angry with not being able to keep the occasional Pike next year at most of our larger lakes/reservoirs, joining Walleye?

Mad that our resources are being mismanaged by the government (Going from harvesting 3 pike to 0 between this year, whirling disease)?

Think that protecting some species (e.g. walleye), to the point that introduced walleye overrunning a lake impacts pike populations is bad management?

Believe that spending 10X less on stocking than other provinces and fewer non-native species, then claiming every lake with non-native fish should be self-sustaining and stopping harvest is not the solution?

Agree, that the recent online surveys are biased in their questions, designed to serve an agenda meanwhile give the illusion they've asked the public and received public approval?

Think that other provinces manage their resources more effectively?

Want to know the real reason these changes are being made and what they don't want you to know?

Sick of other provinces laughing at our fish management approaches?

Let's organize and be heard. This is one of the biggest changes to angling in our province that they are trying to slip by us whilst we're not paying attention.

Tonight:

Croatian Canadian Cultural Centre
3010 12 St NE,
Calgary, Alberta
Date:
January 10, 2018
Time:
6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Presentation at 6:30, open house to follow

[cheemo]

Got an email from a relative who is a fisheries biologist about these meetings. He is urging us to speak up at these meetings. He mentioned that the government website surveys only focused on catch and release, zero limits on pike, and tags for pike and walleye in some lakes. There was no option in the surveys for consumptive low risk harvesting of walleye and pike. The ecological imbalance suggests that walleye needs to be harvested in many lakes to allow pike, perch and whitefish to re-establish themselves.

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by cube

Just wondering if anyone had any feedback from yesterdays Calgary meeting?

It states that it is tonight so has not happened yet.

Looks like Petecatch is suggesting some topics. I'm guessing that is one vote "against"

[Mikediz]

I will be there tonight and I hope we get a good public turn out who will provide constructive viewpoints and questions

[chuck0039]

I'm going to sit in on the meetings in St Albert tomorrow night with some friends.

If they are concerned about Walleye population collapsing in some lake, then why are they allowing the harvest of the breeding stock? Keep the tag system in place for the Class "B" and "C" get rid of Class "A" tags ( for now) and hire more enforcement to ensure people are adhering to it.

If they do make the limit for walleye and Pike zero, they will still need to hire more F & W officers. Unfortunately some People will still feel its their right to keep fish, legal or not.

I love to fish mostly for catch & Release but I do like to have a fish fry once or twice a year. I really hope they don't shut the lakes down and they keep the tag system in place.

[slough shark]

Originally Posted by Joe Quiroga

Would be nice to see Tilley and Cowoki go to catch and release, which appears to be what they are intending for next season. Fishing out there has been pretty rough the last couple years.

Don’t know about cowaki but I hope they don’t mess with Tilley, they really shouldn’t need to as it doesn’t get pounded by pressure like a lot of lakes closer to the cities. We already have enough c&r lakes, we don’t need to turn everything in Alberta into a lake where you can keep anything

[petecatch]

Been speaking to 2 AB bios this afternoon, here's what I found out.

There are main 2 drivers for these changes:

1. They want to save money on enforcement, and one of the considerations for going to zero limit on Pike is so that they don't have to enforce those lakes as often.

2. Dave Park etc. came up with a new system of measuring population sustainability called the Fish Sustainability Index (FSI) in 2013. It's Alberta made, by it's own admission flawed, doesn't have peer review support, isn't based on any literature and they haven't published any literature on it. We're the only jurisdiction using it. FWIN are done at least every 5 years, many of the lakes going to zero were done in 2012 (before FSI). They also think it's an awesome new system and think every other jurisdiction should be using it.

First thing it spits out? 0 limit for Pike at southern lakes and this year 0 limit for Pike at the remaining major lakes. All on draft FWIN's we don't get to see until after the regulation changes have been made.

Smell a fish? Seems like management came up with a system that doesn't work, a number of bios don't agree with it and they're in fear of their jobs. Bonus, F&W are happy with having less workload. Emperor's new clothes.

Dave Park is there tonite, question we should be asking him is why we're not using the accepted practices of fisheries management and using FSI instead when it's spitting out junk changes like this.

[slough shark]

Originally Posted by petecatch

Been speaking to 2 AB bios this afternoon, here's what I found out.

There are main 2 drivers for these changes:

1. They want to save money on enforcement, and one of the considerations for going to zero limit on Pike is so that they don't have to enforce those lakes as often.

2. Dave Park etc. came up with a new system of measuring population sustainability called the Fish Sustainability Index (FSI) in 2013. It's Alberta made, by it's own admission flawed, doesn't have peer review support, isn't based on any literature and they haven't published any literature on it. We're the only jurisdiction using it. FWIN are done at least every 5 years, many of the lakes going to zero were done in 2012 (before FSI). They also think it's an awesome new system and think every other jurisdiction should be using it.

First thing it spits out? 0 limit for Pike at southern lakes and this year 0 limit for Pike at the remaining major lakes. All on draft FWIN's we don't get to see until after the regulation changes have been made.

Smell a fish? Seems like management came up with a system that doesn't work, a number of bios don't agree with it and they're in fear of their jobs. Bonus, F&W are happy with having less workload. Emperor's new clothes.

Dave Park is there tonite, question we should be asking him is why we're not using the accepted practices of fisheries management and using FSI instead when it's spitting out junk changes like this.

I would suspect this model also says c&r for all walleye too in southern ab rather than allow some retention of them and solve the problem of reduced or collapsing populations of other species 🤔 you know god forbid actually address the main reason

[Couleestalker]

Originally Posted by Joe Quiroga

Would be nice to see Tilley and Cowoki go to catch and release, which appears to be what they are intending for next season. Fishing out there has been pretty rough the last couple years.

Seriously? How much fishing pressure are on these 2 lakes? Almost non existent in the summer as you are no even allowed gas powered motors on Tilley B, and very few people fish them in the winter compared to Newell, Rock, Kitsim, Badger, Crawling Valley and other unnamed lakes around Brooks. They commercial fished them until the closure and there was never a concern then. I would argue that these two reservoirs have some of the lowest angler hours out of all the reservoirs in and around the Brooks area. This will only ad to the fishing pressure in the remaining lakes that still allow some harvest.

I am starting to question the sampling methods and modelling the government is using to create these chages.

[Joe Quiroga]

Originally Posted by Couleestalker

Seriously? How much fishing pressure are on these 2 lakes? Almost non existent in the summer as you are no even allowed gas powered motors on Tilley B, and very few people fish them in the winter compared to Newell, Rock, Kitsim, Badger, Crawling Valley and other unnamed lakes around Brooks. They commercial fished them until the closure and there was never a concern then. I would argue that these two reservoirs have some of the lowest angler hours out of all the reservoirs in and around the Brooks area. This will only ad to the fishing pressure in the remaining lakes that still allow some harvest.

I am starting to question the sampling methods and modelling the government is using to create these chages.

Yes, seriously. It was commercially fished up to what 2013, 2014? Since then I've seen literal van loads of people / families filling buckets out there. One group I saw even had a table set up for gutting and scaling.

Cowoki is in even worse shape.

[Couleestalker]

Originally Posted by Joe Quiroga

Yes, seriously. It was commercially fished up to what 2013, 2014? Since then I've seen literal van loads of people / families filling buckets out there. One group I saw even had a table set up for gutting and scaling.

Cowoki is in even worse shape.

Filling buckets? So do mean they are taking more than they are allowed? Are the van loads of people targeting pike, or maybe they are catching whitefish, burbot, maybe the odd walleye.

Just shows that people enjoy eating fish they catch and its a perfect example of increased fishing pressure on a lake that historically very few people fish due to the mismanagement of all the other lakes and increased closures.

I routinely drive by both Tilley B and Cowoki. There are not that many people fishing these lakes.

[petecatch]

Originally Posted by slough shark

I would suspect this model also says c&r for all walleye too in southern ab rather than allow some retention of them and solve the problem of reduced or collapsing populations of other species 🤔 you know god forbid actually address the main reason

Correct.

Out of the 34 lakes surveyed this year on the new FSI system, Northern Pike are now at risk in 30 lakes, the majority Very High or High Risk, and 60% of these lakes are going Catch and Release and still Walleye lakes are C&R apart from the ones they want to start charging for tags. Tags generate more enforcement revenue.

Are you going tonight?

[Joe Quiroga]

Not saying there's anything illegal going on, just an observation.

I'm okay with it going to catch and release for a while, I think it needs it. Just my opinion though. Obviously I am in the minority on this one heh.

[PerchBuster]

http://www.outdoorcanada.ca/Why-you-...lease-big-fish

Please read this link. I can’t make it to the meeting but I think this would be a great topic for one of you to bring up in the discussion in my stead as the info comes from highly respected sources backed by actual science. Our system is badly flawed in Alberta because our Gov issues tags for Walleye over 50 cm and other lakes with retention not requiring tags also are for keeping Walleye over 43 or 50cm. Think Slave, Moose, Cold, Calling etc. Same type of thing with Pike. I have been promoting for a long time now that we should be allowed to keep a modest/limited bag limit of undersized/juvenile fish for the table (eg only Walleye under 43cm) and large fish should be 100% released as they are the brood stock and breeders that will keep producing lots of juveniles for the table. The small ones are better table fare anyways. This article confirms what I have long suspected. If we keep all the large fish the lake will end up with all small fish that never get big. The genetics of the lake gets compromised. Reminds me of Pigeon, South Buck, Long, Slave, and many many more. 10 yrs ago 7-8 lb Walleye were common in Pigeon. Our Gov and fisheries managers have it completely backwards. Everything over 43cm or 50 cm whichever they decide should all go back and allow people to keep some small fish without the need for issuing tags. With a healthy population of large breeding stock and the ability to keep small fish from eating themselves out of house and home many lakes would come back and be in better shape. The forage base would have a chance to come back ie: shiners etc. It’s not a cookie cutter solution necessarily for every waterbody but the science seems to back it up and most lakes would do better and not have to be classified as collapsed for decade after decade. I am so glad I came across this as it reaffirms what I have long believed to be true. Our fisheries will never improve markedly even through complete closures so long as we continue to adopt the same old policies that have already failed now for many years and are proven not to work or improve the fishery. Our Gov is trying to stay on the same failed path again while trying to enhance and expand its ineffectiveness. I didn’t complete the Walleye survey because it was garbage and felt like it did not address the concerns and wants of those of us who utilize the resources. Every other jurisdiction in Canada and the US allow retention of small fish with C&R of all the larger specimens. Why do our experts in this Province continue to want to do exactly the opposite with the same failed results? It only makes perfect sense. I talk to people in other parts of the country who think we are completely nuts out here the way we manage our fisheries and I have to agree. What do you guys think about this?

[cheemo]

Originally Posted by Joe Quiroga

Not saying there's anything illegal going on, just an observation.

I'm okay with it going to catch and release for a while, I think it needs it. Just my opinion though. Obviously I am in the minority on this one heh.

I really don’t think catch and release is the answer. How many caught and released fish are wounded and end up dieing anyway?

[petecatch]

They do have it backwards. It was the typical gong show as usual. Started off telling us they were doing this for public engagement and feedback, now listen to a 1 hour presentation and we'll only allow you to discuss in the forum for 15 mins. Then after that, they wanted to disorganize the group and have them talk on one on ones.

A number of the questions were the typical technique "well we can't answer that now, find us later." in attempt to deflect.

The only way to effect change here is to organize into a group. They're not listening and have an agenda, the public consultation is an illusion to say they have agreement, it was clear at the meeting they obviously didn't, a number of people were vocal and some held them to task when they deflected.

Basically went something like this, start off with a biased survey towards Catch and Release, call it phase 1. Use that survey to conclude the consensus amongst anglers is catch and release and call it phase 2. Tell everybody at the meeting that's what anglers want.

[calgarygringo]

Both on the closure list for keepers coming up.

Originally Posted by Couleestalker

Filling buckets? So do mean they are taking more than they are allowed? Are the van loads of people targeting pike, or maybe they are catching whitefish, burbot, maybe the odd walleye.

Just shows that people enjoy eating fish they catch and its a perfect example of increased fishing pressure on a lake that historically very few people fish due to the mismanagement of all the other lakes and increased closures.

I routinely drive by both Tilley B and Cowoki. There are not that many people fishing these lakes.

[slough shark]

Originally Posted by petecatch

Correct.

Out of the 34 lakes surveyed this year on the new FSI system, Northern Pike are now at risk in 30 lakes, the majority Very High or High Risk, and 60% of these lakes are going Catch and Release and still Walleye lakes are C&R apart from the ones they want to start charging for tags. Tags generate more enforcement revenue.

Are you going tonight?

I didn’t go, perhaps I’m a little to jaded but from what I’ve seen whenever the government holds these “information and consultation sessions” they’re basically telling you what they plan on doing and showing up doesn’t change a thing. I’ve been seeing this coming for some time, I suspect other that trout ponds and perhaps whitefish and burbot and perch southern Alberta will be C&R entirely unless they do tags. The management or our fish and wildlife in our province is a disgrace and heads need to roll but they won’t 😡

[calgarygringo]

Most of the presentation info is online on their website anyways. I was hoping for more specific Southern Alberta conversation but there wasn't much as most of the presentation was in general. There was time to ask the individual guys in the regions and is where I got some info. Here are some looking like they are done for retention for this year so far.

Originally Posted by petecatch

They do have it backwards. It was the typical gong show as usual. Started off telling us they were doing this for public engagement and feedback, now listen to a 1 hour presentation and we'll only allow you to discuss in the forum for 15 mins. Then after that, they wanted to disorganize the group and have them talk on one on ones.

A number of the questions were the typical technique "well we can't answer that now, find us later." in attempt to deflect.

The only way to effect change here is to organize into a group. They're not listening and have an agenda, the public consultation is an illusion to say they have agreement, it was clear at the meeting they obviously didn't, a number of people were vocal and some held them to task when they deflected.

Basically went something like this, start off with a biased survey towards Catch and Release, call it phase 1. Use that survey to conclude the consensus amongst anglers is catch and release and call it phase 2. Tell everybody at the meeting that's what anglers want.

[slough shark]

Originally Posted by Joe Quiroga

Not saying there's anything illegal going on, just an observation.

I'm okay with it going to catch and release for a while, I think it needs it. Just my opinion though. Obviously I am in the minority on this one heh.

It won’t be for a while, when retention returns if it does anytime soon it be on a tag system, Tilley and cowaki get very low pressure, I’ve seen maybe 10-15 guys on any weekend I’ve ever gone out in the winter and when I’ve been there in the summer more often than not I was the only one.

[petecatch]

For Edmonton tonight, here are some of the misinformation and tactics they employed in Calgary last night:

1. Provide the misleading statistic that AB has 300 anglers per lake and SK has 2. Most lakes aren't fished in SK and are way up north.

2. Tell you that the survey overwhelming tells them we support C&R versus retention when the survey was designed to be biased.

3. Tell you stocking only has limited success, but not tell you that they also only stock 1/10th the fish of other provinces.

4. Tell you that slot size limits don't work, that widespread C&R is necessary.

5. Tell you that going C&R will recover the fishery, when 33% of C&R fish caught on bait and 60% of fish deeply hooked do not survive anyway. C&R / Retention (non commercial and slot limits) are about the same on fish stocks. Only closure or stocking recover stocks.

6. Tell you that fish suffer PTSD after being caught a number of times and just die. (which is supportive of closure)

7. Promote their new Alberta made Fish Sustainability Index. The 2 years it's been used has resulted in extensive changes to 0 limits, it's unproven and another experiment with our resources.

8. Dave Park and Bill Patterson (the main decision / policy makers) were present at the meeting last night, but weren't announced, didn't present and were keeping a low profile at the back of the room. These are the people that need to be held to account if you want to effect change, the biologists are just following directive.

Sure, they don't want to listen, they already have an agenda and they wish to give the illusion the fishing community wholeheartedly supports it to get adoption...

but it's the only opportunity as a group to make sure the individuals who have mismanaged our resources hear our views and take them into consideration, many can effect change.

If you still want to keep the occasional fillet or just believe we should go C&R and/or close most of our lakes to fishing, this is your chance to be heard.

[Walleyedude]

Originally Posted by petecatch

5. Tell you that going C&R will recover the fishery, when 33% of C&R fish caught on bait and 60% of fish deeply hooked do not survive anyway. C&R / Retention (non commercial and slot limits) are about the same on fish stocks. Only closure or stocking recover stocks.

To be clear, are THEY presenting the stat that "33% of C&R fish caught on bait and 60% of fish deeply hooked do not survive anyway" and only closure/stocking will recover populations, or is that YOUR opinion regarding C&R?

6. Tell you that fish suffer PTSD after being caught a number of times and just die. (which is supportive of closure)

This seems beyond ridiculous to me.

I think these meetings are 90% a sham, but that being said, with a loud enough voice and some form of a consensus among anglers (good luck with that), I believe it is possible to change how F&W regulates our fisheries.

[petecatch]

Originally Posted by Walleyedude

To be clear, are THEY presenting the stat that "33% of C&R fish caught on bait and 60% of fish deeply hooked do not survive anyway" and only closure/stocking will recover populations, or is that YOUR opinion regarding C&R?

Clarifying: they told us last night that C&R is here for a while until the stocks recover and that there's no choice, and that some lakes will now always be C&R and called "Trophy" lakes.

They don't mention the reality, that sport fishing C&R rarely recovers any stock or that allowing harvest on non-native species like Walleye which are out competing the native fish is a better solution. If they push this through, it's here to stay.

The reality is, if you're a C&R angler you see fish swim away and think they have a happy life and feel ethical about it, but you still kill many fish and potentially more compared to the retention angler who goes home after catching a limit. When you look at the numbers, how many C&R, how many keep, what their fishing goals are C&R and Retention with slot limits (sportfishing only), it comes out equal.

33/60% is not my opinion, that particular stat can be found here: https://wildlife.utah.gov/fishing/ca...eleasetips.php
There's enough studies done on this subject, google is your friend if you want more info on cryptic mortality. You'll find different numbers in different publications, but the that's the general consensus.

And tournament anglers are even worse with delayed mortality rates as high as 52%.

The PTSD thing, yes they really said fish get PTSD from C&R, but anyway, you can resolve that with a bonk (tongue in cheek - my comment).

[chuck0039]

Originally Posted by petecatch

Clarifying: they told us last night that C&R is here for a while until the stocks recover and that there's no choice, and that some lakes will now always be C&R and called "Trophy" lakes.

They don't mention the reality, that sport fishing C&R rarely recovers any stock or that allowing harvest on non-native species like Walleye which are out competing the native fish is a better solution. If they push this through, it's here to stay.

The reality is, if you're a C&R angler you see fish swim away and think they have a happy life and feel ethical about it, but you still kill many fish and potentially more compared to the retention angler who goes home after catching a limit. When you look at the numbers, how many C&R, how many keep, what their fishing goals are C&R and Retention with slot limits (sportfishing only), it comes out equal.

33/60% is not my opinion, that particular stat can be found here: https://wildlife.utah.gov/fishing/ca...eleasetips.php
There's enough studies done on this subject, google is your friend if you want more info on cryptic mortality. You'll find different numbers in different publications, but the that's the general consensus.

And tournament anglers are even worse with delayed mortality rates as high as 52%.

The PTSD thing, yes they really said fish get PTSD from C&R, but anyway, you can resolve that with a bonk (tongue in cheek - my comment).

When prohibition was around everything went underground. I fear the same will happen if they force C & R only on these lakes. People will just keep anyways, they will need to hire a lot more enforcement to ensure this does not happen.
It will be nice to see more enforcement but sad to see lakes on C & R instead of keeping the Class "B" & "C" tags and getting rid of the Class "A" tags.