Help

[sharkman]

With all the knowledge this board posses I thought I would post this issue with the hope of some possible solutions.  Yesterday I went to take my 3yr old grandson to his favorite fishing spot (under Bayway Bridge St Pete Beach) to our amazement a sign was posted no fishing on or around the bridge. The sign did not look official so I contacted the local authorities to verify.  The county officer checked it out and stated the city posted the sign possibly due to a petition from local neighborhood.  So I contact via websites the local papers explaining. I am in the process of starting a petition to reopen area for fishing.  Any suggestions on format/wording of petition or other options. Tight lines for generations to come.

[Reel 224]

Suggest contacting the news in you area and contacting as may fishermen as possible.

Joe

[foakes]

A little research is necessary -- but not hard.

Instead of the he said/she said/rumors/opinions -- go to the local government jurisdiction in person.

You can in many cases determine where and how many folks were involved in this petition -- specific or big area, response by government officials, etc.

Also, a personal visit to your local Council Person, Board of Supervisors elected rep for that area, or whomever has elected responsibility for that specific area.

Check to see if any other statutes were broken by prohibiting fishing there -- such as Department of Fish and Game laws, County Laws -- if so, you may not even need a petition.

There are many "official actions" that are actually illegal -- but until someone becomes concerned about them -- they never see the light of day to be repealed.

Then with some facts -- you can go forward with either a written petition, or online -- or both.

The original petition could have been based on a public safety issue, or just a specific perceived nuisance issue, or even a private concern with clout on a local level (it is many times who one knows, not what is right or wrong).

Was it signed by 10 people, 25, 500, or more?

Was it ever publicized?

Was it in fact, legal?

Then, after determining the support you may or may not have for your position -- you can go forward, or not.

Here are examples that show how to develop a petition.  And there are many more online --

http://m.wikihow.com/Write-a-Petition

Good Luck!

Best,

Fred

[David Hall]

Interesting.

[sharkman]

Update. After a battle with multiple departments.  The DOT ordered the City Of St Pete Beach to remove the sign.  The DOT stated they owned the right a way and the bridge. Took my grandson fishing there last night and he had a blast. Thanks everyone.

[Reel 224]

That's great! 

[Bryan Young]

Great news.  Glad you stood up for your right to fish.

[Decker]

Great!   There is another board I follow, StripersOnline.com, that has posted cases like these.  Without getting into details, there are laws that protect access to waterways (federal, I think) that local governments try to contradict. Happens in NJ beach communities where resort property owners don't like fisherman hanging around.   It always comes down to the fisherman being respectful in terms of managing trash, keeping noise down, and parking well to keep the residents happy.  The laws tend to favor access to the water, but one successful recourse that the communities have against the fisherman is to restrict parking to a point where they can't get near the spot.  I have never been personally involved, but this is the overall impression I get.

[sharkman]

This area tried the parking restrictions also.  There are three options on parking: open to all; permit parking; or no parking.  The area due to the need to park there own cars chose permit parking. The problem with permit parking is that it does restrict who parks there but only during the hours of 9-5. So they basically created a night time fishing area because permit parking becomes open parking at 5:01 until 8:59 am.

[foakes]

Good job on following through SM --

Many local government agencies try to enact these restrictions -- and if no objections, many times they become enforceable just because no one has challenged the restriction over a set period of time.  It becomes an "assumed" ban -- that many times is upheld in Court.

Not everything is black and white in government -- or life.

Jack Bauer on "24" used to always say when confronted with an issue -- we can ask permission, or forgiveness...let's go with forgiveness. 

Sounds like when a higher authority challenged the local ban -- they backed down, rather than admit they did not have permission or legal authority to enact the ban.

Be careful and alert -- they will be back...

Best,

Fred

[Bill B]

Way to go brother.....glad you got it sorted out.   Bill

[Reel 224]

I wasn't going to share my experience with the members here because it didn't seem to me this was the place for it, But after reading sharkman's post and reading the responses I decided to post my situation.

As some of you my know I have been fishing on a naval pier in NJ for two years as a Disabled American Vet. (DAV). In previous years I fished the same pier with a childhood friend that worked for the government on that post about 35yr's or so.

This year the post commander decided to cut the personnel to those that carry only Tslin ID (100%) Disabled for DAV status cutting all those who are not 100% DAV status out. On top of that he is only letting fisherman on the pier from Fri.-Sunday. Were in the past we could fish weekdays after 16:30 til 0600. and week ends 24 hours.

Hear is a government post excluding all but 100% DAV to fish on a pier that was granted for years. This is our government disrespecting DAV vet's.

I have contacted my local news paper and all but 1 has decided to publish. I have contacted my local Congressman to look in to the situation, but I have been told don't expect much.

I can tell you that when it comes to vets needing help it is a fight getting anyone to listen.   

Joe   

[Shark Hunter]

Good for You Sharkman!
Keep the Faith Joe. Slow and steady wins the race. Don't give up.

[foakes]

Joe --

I would just probably go out there and fish when I wanted to -- if accessible.

Have my hat and Military service card with me -- plus my wife with a video camera, phone, or ipad -- to document them taking you off of the pier -- as this was happening, I would calmly get the exact names and ranks of the military personnel that are enforcing this new ruling -- take the time to ask the exact spelling, ranks, contact information -- as you specifically write it down while being videoed.

Nowadays, what gets attention is video documentation, and facts.  When turned over to the media, and the Veterans groups get hold of it -- it will go all of the way to the Pentagon, or higher.

Stay calm, cool, and smart.

Don't threaten, or get rattled -- or say anything you may regret later -- which is nearly everything, as it can be used against your argument later.

Contact media, a veteran's group attorney, your State Senators, as well as others.

It must be more than you by yourself, it must be others who are concerned and do not want the pier shut down.  Other veterans.  

You could end up getting access 24/7 -- or at least back to what you had before.

Just some ideas...

And this is just what I might do, if there were not other convenient places to fish.

Sometimes you have to pick your battles -- not every one that comes along -- just the ones that are important to you, and others.

And some hills are just not worth dying on.  Life is too short to get all bound up in what is right or wrong.  So just go slow, if important to you.  Planning is everything in any operation.

Best,

Fred

[sharkman]

Sorry to hear Joe.  I second the media advice.