Border Lakes permit

[tjm]

Chief, I have no point to defend, just attempting to help you clarify the regs. If you use the technology argument though, it makes owning and using  that technology mandatory by law and it isn't.

The devil is in the details, fish this long if you are AR licensed and fish that long if you are MO permitted, different numbers too, iirc. So, both states say "impounded waters"; but MO also defines that as "normal pool" and in the James at least has a sign,. If AR defines "impounded waters" to be anything upstream of a dam regardless of elevation, it makes some difference.  The fact that AR exempts WR between Houseman and Beaver Dam makes it look as though without the exemption it would be classed as "impounded". The answer on that side then is found at AGFC. in convoluted language I'm too obtuse to sort out. 

Good luck.

[Flysmallie]

Geez you guys need to get out. I bet nobody cares as long as you got there in a boat from the lake. 

My 15 year old daughter can read a map. I didn’t teach her that. And she’s not a big outdoors person. I think you guys think you are smarter than you really are. 

[liphunter]

That is the question that keeps running through my little brain. Does anyone personally know any who has been fined for a violation,where it wasn’t clearly marked?

[fishinwrench]

4 hours ago, Chief Grey Bear said:

Who knew Wrench would be the voice of reason???

I'm always the voice of reason.  You just rarely are reasonable.  😂

[MOPanfisher]

I do know of people who have fished up the river, above the lake boundary, caught and kept fish that would be legal there (under 9 inch crappie specifically) and then run back down below the lake boundary to the boat ramp, quite a ways below, and then got checked at the ramp and issued a ticket for under under length fish.  Once you cross back into "impounded waters" whatever you have must meet those rules, period.  I do think that marking, with a sign the lake boundary is a good thing, however it is difficult on a lake that can fluctuate several feet.  Easy to identify locations like bridges are ideal, but seldom available in anywhere near the correct locations.  Signs placed high enough not to go under water are difficult to install and maintain.  Most agents are pretty flexible unless the fishermen are in blatant violation.

[BilletHead]

17 minutes ago, MOPanfisher said:

I do know of people who have fished up the river, above the lake boundary, caught and kept fish that would be legal there (under 9 inch crappie specifically) and then run back down below the lake boundary to the boat ramp, quite a ways below, and then got checked at the ramp and issued a ticket for under under length fish.  Once you cross back into "impounded waters" whatever you have must meet those rules, period.  I do think that marking, with a sign the lake boundary is a good thing, however it is difficult on a lake that can fluctuate several feet.  Easy to identify locations like bridges are ideal, but seldom available in anywhere near the correct locations.  Signs placed high enough not to go under water are difficult to install and maintain.  Most agents are pretty flexible unless the fishermen are in blatant violation.

               Correct and spot on. 

  BilletHead

[liphunter]

Well that certainly makes since.

[Chief Grey Bear]

1 hour ago, fishinwrench said:

I'm always the voice of reason.  You just rarely are reasonable.  😂

 Don't ruin a good thing 

O