Jump to content

New site specific regulation in Illinois

Norm M

Recommended Posts

"New regulation for the Kankakee River State Park and here is what it says: Site Specific Regulations #33 "It shall be unlawful to trespass upon a designated waterfowl hunting area during 7 days prior to the regular duck season, or to fish on such areas during the regular duck/goose season except in areas posted as open to fishing.


I took time out from fishing today and went in to talk to Mrs Pangle at the state park .


The folks at the state park don't know anything about this rule , they first became aware when some concerned fisherman sent emails . They have not seen a copy of the rule as they haven't got the 2008 rulebook either .


She is going to check with people within the IDNR to find out what it is all about . When she does she will call me and I'll go back and talk again . This may take several weeks but the process is started .


When I find out more I'll pass it along , if any gets information please email or PM me .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Online version of the 2008 Regulations

Click Here


Norm posted site specific regulation #33.

#19 states-

No fishing within 250 yards of an occupied waterfowl blind (within

the hunting area) on all Department-owned or Department-managed



Kind of contradict each other, don't they??.


My thinking is that if they intend to enforce #33, somebody better get busy posting "Fishing Open" signs, or we're going to assume #19 is the one in effect and trumps the ambiguous #33.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike ,


As of right now it's hard to say what gives . When a regulation is imposed and the people in charge of the area aren't even told about it something is wrong .


I am going to wait for Mrs. Pangle to get back to me with one exception right now . I got together with a guy who had business in Springfield , he is going to talk to some of the legislators about it .



I do have a plan if necessary , I'll tell you about it when I see you .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Dale Bowman did an excellent job tracking this one down:



Chris McCloud, spokesman for the IDNR, e-mailed,


``It was an attempt to standardize the boating/fishing restriction verbiage between the fishing rule (810) and the waterfowl rule (590). No operational changes (public access) from past practice were intended by these rule changes. It will be fixed.''

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a joint effort of many, and you yourself started it all Norm.

I'm really encouraged with what seems to be a fresh attitude among usergroups, in that people are taking the time to write legislators and others when they are displeased.

Maybe we've just gotten so tired of it here in IL all these years...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike ,


A bunch of different people took a bunch of different approaches , everything helped .


Everything from emails from concerned fisherman to lobbying step reps to Dale calling , working thru IDNR channels and people using personal connections .


Many thanks to everyone who did thier part , I'm sure every effort paid dividends in one way or another .


Things have indeed changed from the days when you offered a prize to anyone who wrote in on a conservation issue and had no takers . This and the current efforts to stop the cattle industrial park are very encouraging indeed .


I thought the old warhorse didn't have anything left in him , guess I was wrong .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...