Paul, first let me state i appreciate you and the department, the work you do, and your excellent communication with the public. I have heard you speak numerous times in both states in various settings with crowds numbering up to several hundred. When compared to other states biologist you, and your office, are a cut above others. A character trait in which I, as a Kentucky sportsman, am very proud.

However, I do remember the informations and facts that you have previously supplied audiences of sportsman. After all discussions i have been present at, you always return to the cyclic spawn of the current spawn and recruitment which gives the numbers of fish available to be harvest. You also stated to sportsman in a meeting in Tennessee, that reducing the limit will not have an impact on the fish due to the very low number of fisherman whom actually habitually catch a limit regardless of the quality of spawns. I cannot remember the percentage given of actual fisherman/fisherwomen whom actually catch a limit. It was very low. I believe it was below 20%. Please correct me if i am remembering falsely. I do not wish to mislead anyone here.

Based on these numerous opportunities to soak in your professional data, I feel limiting the number of poles or reducing the limit will have little to no effect in long term fish management. That is my opinion and I respect all others opinion and do not pass judgement. I also will disclaim that I pull jigs or cranks 85% of fishing time on the water with multiple poles. The remainder fishing time is with spider rig or single pole. I feel that the current creel limit is the correct guideline of regulating catching fish and managing populations. Once it is met, regardless of the number of poles utilized, the angler goes home or then violates. As a 28 year law enforcement veteran, I can tell you with authority a violator will violate regardless of the rules stipulated. Whether its speed limits on a highway or the number of poles in a boat. A violator, violates, unless a authority figure is monitoring. Thus, more game wardens are needed on the water enforcing existing laws instead of pole reduction.

Finally, I become alarmed when individuals, or individual groups, input is weighed on matters where the majority should have input. If weight is given to this sportsman group then in public meetings they should be identified. This group should also be examined to where they have negative views on multiple poles anglers or if they are honestly concerned with over harvesting. I am not stating this is the case and hope this group intentions are honorable. However, crappie fisherman is an army that shoots its own soldiers. Single polers have issues with spider riggers. Spider riggers have issues with longliners and crank bait pullers, etc. etc. We all need to compromise and support these agencies which give us the opportunities we have on the water. If it is a legal means of harvest and the angler is abiding with legal creel limits, smile and congratulate them on their efforts and success.

Paul, if the agency ever goes to a 3 pole limit, I hope there will be public meetings where everyone has the opportunity for input. This will impact retail sales of angling equipment and possible future decisions of out of state anglers coming here to fish. In reality the pressure on crappies is the 60-90 day window of pre spawn, spawn, and post spawn. The rest of the year the is very little pressure on them. Consider this,if the over harvest of the spawn/recruitment class of crappie is a concern, any increased limitation, i.e. pole reduction or creel reduction, should only be applied to this 90 day window. The rest of the year the current regulations remain in effect.

In closing, if my words have offended you Paul or anyone else, you have my heartfelt apology. We need to keep all our local, state, and federal agencies in our prayers. Thx for all you do and feel free to holler anytime