Existing clause 10.3(b)(1)(d) is repealed.

Existing clause 10.3(b)(12)(d) is repealed.

Existing clause 10.3(b)(14)(e) is repealed.

Existing clause 10.3(b)(16)(m) is amended to read as follows:

Existing clause 10.3(b)(17)(k) is amended to read as follows:

Existing clause 10.3(b)(23)(i) is amended to read as follows:

Existing clause 10.3(b)(25)(d) is repealed.

Existing clause 10.3(b)(29)(b) is repealed.

Existing clause 10.3(b)(33)(f) is repealed.

Existing clause 10.3(b)(37)(f) is repealed.

Existing clause 10.3(b)(40)(g) is repealed.

Existing clause 10.3(b)(44)(c) is repealed.

Existing clause 10.3(b)(45)(o) is repealed.

Existing paragraph 10.3(b)(47) is amended as follows:

Existing clause 10.3(b)(47)(a) is repealed.

Existing clause 10.3(b)(48)(d) is repealed

Existing clause 10.3(b)(51)(c) is repealed.

Existing clause 10.3(b)(53)(j) is repealed.

Existing clause 10.3(b)(54)(c) is repealed.

Existing clause 10.3(b)(55)(c) is repealed.

Existing clause 10.3(b)(56)(g) is repealed

Existing clause 10.3(b)(60)(f) is repealed

The original Regulatory Impact Statement, Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, Rural Area Flexibility Analysis and Job Impact Statement, as published in the Notice of Proposed Rule Making, remain valid and do not need to be amended.

As a rule that requires a RFA, RAFA or JIS, this rule will be initially reviewed in the calendar year 2024, which is no later than the 3rd year after the year in which this rule is being adopted.

A total of 41 public comments were received through e-mail. Twenty-seven comments expressed support for the proposals, seven conveyed recommendations or concerns, and seven were general statements or issues outside the scope of the proposal. Comments were grouped into 6 themes. Responses to those themes are included below. Comments in support of the proposals are not included in this assessment.

Theme #1: The statewide minimum size limit for black bass should be higher than 12 inches.

Response: Black bass fisheries throughout the state are doing well under the current 12 inch minimum size limit. This size limit balances resource protection with recreational opportunity by allowing black bass to reach reproductive age (4 or 5 years) before being subject to harvest, while providing anglers the opportunity to take desirable size fish. A higher statewide minimum size limit will unnecessarily limit fishing opportunities. Higher size limits should be reserved for certain waters where additional protection is necessary to maintain or improve bass population structure.

Theme #2: The “any size” regulation for Lake Colby helps prevent an overpopulation of largemouth bass. Personal observation suggests that the regulation increased harvest and helped improve the size structure of the bass population.

Response: The last boat electrofishing effort was conducted in 1993 (28 years ago) with the purpose of collecting juvenile largemouth bass for a transfer program to establish populations in other ponds. There have been no bass population assessment surveys conducted on Lake Colby, and thus no formal evaluation of the “any size” regulation has been conducted. There is no current evidence that this special regulation is warranted.

Theme #3: A 10 inch minimum size limit would provide an opportunity to harvest small smallmouth bass in the Hudson River above Warrensburg.

Response: Bass population surveys have not been conducted on this section of the Hudson River and population characteristics are unknown. There is no current evidence that a 10 inch minimum size limit is warranted. A recent evaluation of 10 rivers with a 10-inch minimum size limit found no differences in bass population structure between these rivers and lakes and rivers with the 12 inch minimum size limit. Also, given that black bass fishing is primarily a catch and release activity, maintaining the statewide 12 inch minimum size is the most appropriate option.

Theme #4: The “any size, any number” special regulation provides an opportunity to harvest small smallmouth bass in Moose Pond.

Response: Bass population surveys have not been conducted on Moose Pond and population characteristics are unknown. There is no current evidence that this special regulation is warranted. Also, given that black bass fishing is primarily a catch and release activity, implementing the statewide 12 inch minimum size is the most appropriate option at this time.

Theme #5: A slot limit would be more effective at managing for larger bass than a blanket minimum size.

Response: A primary motivation for a universal black bass 12 inch minimum size limit is to simplify fishing regulations. Also, black bass fishing is now a primarily catch and release activity. As the success of slot limit regulations is dependent on harvest of bass in allowable size slots, we are not confident that implementation of slot limits would have the desired effect.

Theme #6: Leave stream and river regulations at 10 inches.

Response: A recent evaluation of black bass populations from 10 rivers with this special regulation revealed that there were no differences in the size structures of these populations and those from rivers and lakes managed with the statewide 12-inch minimum size limit. The results of this study suggest that there is no biological justification for maintaining the special regulation. Elimination of this unnecessary special regulation and replacing it with the statewide 12 inch minimum size limit should not affect angler opportunity and will simplify the current suite of back bass fishing regulations.