Peter wonders:
Perhaps a PA angler with more information would step forth. Perhaps a
PA angler I know and who I can rely upon to relate factual
information, will confirm or deny the statements made by the original
poster.

um, barring any such reliable source....
Here's the deal, as I see it. Yes, there have been a few recent efforts,
petition and otherwise, to alter the regs on PA's "delayed harvest" waters.
This has dated back over the past 3 years, at least. This is at least the
second such call for a response to this "outrage". If one wishes to dig through
ROFF archives, you will probably locate a rather testy response to a previous,
similar plea by me. Now, to go through some of Peter's questions:
If it is petitioning for what was claimed, what the effects will be?
None, from the fishes point of view. Without a doubt, only a very good bait
angler would succeed at landing most of
the 14 inch plus fish needed for keeping size, most such anglers are good
sportsmen, as are most fly/lure anglers.

What are its chances of success?
PA finds change a slow process, to date.

Are bait fishermans' and fly fishermans' interests actually at
loggerheads in PA?
Not to my mind.


Is the imputed influence of letter writers opposing the petiton
really of consequence
Yes, if said fishermen wish to help reinforce the stereotype of fly anglers as
stuffy snobs who generalize about bait or
hardware anglers. This case would, to my mind, argue strongly for keeping
silent and emphasizing the important regulations already in place. To wit:
littering, poaching
and trespassing laws. One's method of fishing does not dictate one's level of
civility astream. I can show the assembled
ROFF audience plenty of thoughtless assholes with fly-rods in hand, on most any
trout stream in PA. Bait fishing in no way affects that fact.

hope this helps,
Tom
......every bit as empassioned as the next
guy.....BTW, Al, ignore the flames and
come on down to Penn's in May.