Task force ends public input - ESPN (http://sports.espn.go.com/outdoors/saltwater/news/story?id=4975762)

I didn't vote for him.

f'in great

If I had a Crystal ball and could see into the future, and saw with certainty that having a closed fishery of all kinds for say 5 years would make the fishing absolutely %$%$%$%$ing amazing, Id hand in all my gear. The problem that I have is that what is happening is all smoke in mirrors... the ocean is about to be taken over by corporate fishing vessels owned by larger corporations. The first step in this plan is to tell everyone that fishing has to stop... the 2nd step is to watch all of the small family owned boats fold and the 3rd is to divide the fish amongst those who are left. I believe we are on step 3 right now. Sector based fisheries managment has set the stage for this. Watch.

If I had a Crystal ball and could see into the future, and saw with certainty that having a closed fishery of all kinds for say 5 years would make the fishing absolutely %$%$%$%$ing amazing, Id hand in all my gear. The problem that I have is that what is happening is all smoke in mirrors... the ocean is about to be taken over by corporate fishing vessels owned by larger corporations. The first step in this plan is to tell everyone that fishing has to stop... the 2nd step is to watch all of the small family owned boats fold and the 3rd is to divide the fish amongst those who are left. I believe we are on step 3 right now. Sector based fisheries managment has set the stage for this. Watch.


Eben - you are exactly right.

Now think about that the next time there is an article or legislation propsed to shut down small scale commercial fishing (Stripers, Tuna, etc) -

- when you so eloquently voice your support for such initiatives, you are part of the master plan.

If I had a Crystal ball and could see into the future, and saw with certainty that having a closed fishery of all kinds for say 5 years would make the fishing absolutely %$%$%$%$ing amazing, Id hand in all my gear. The problem that I have is that what is happening is all smoke in mirrors... the ocean is about to be taken over by corporate fishing vessels owned by larger corporations. The first step in this plan is to tell everyone that fishing has to stop... the 2nd step is to watch all of the small family owned boats fold and the 3rd is to divide the fish amongst those who are left. I believe we are on step 3 right now. Sector based fisheries managment has set the stage for this. Watch.

Agreed, and add to that the interests of the big oil companies and wind farm owners and you can see why they want all of us, e.g. small scale commercials and recreationals off the water. Only thing we can do to atop it is to get Congress involved. Write you congressman and senators now!

Eben - you are exactly right.

Now think about that the next time there is an article or legislation propsed to shut down small scale commercial fishing (Stripers, Tuna, etc) -

- when you so eloquently voice your support for such initiatives, you are part of the master plan.

You did not understand what I am saying- What I mean is that if this legislation was just about the fish, I would not have a problem with it... but its not. And I have a big problem with that.

In regards to small scale fishing like stripers, I dont see any large scale commercial interest in it.... with the exception of farming them.

I understood exactly what you meant -- and the fact is that people that get behind these pieces of legislation, and very vocal about them in the name of conservation, are just being set up for dissappointment.

Large Scale Bass Fishing -- how about dividing that 1 million lbs of Mass Quota among 5 mid-water trawlers? They could easily do that under the guise of "less but better paying jobs" (quoting our new NOAA director here) - and also the claim that fewer boats are more effective to manage in regards to hard quotas and reduction in the black market.

It's not about the fish with these people.

I understood exactly what you meant -- and the fact is that people that get behind these pieces of legislation, and very vocal about them in the name of conservation, are just being set up for dissappointment.

Large Scale Bass Fishing -- how about dividing that 1 million lbs of Mass Quota among 5 mid-water trawlers? They could easily do that under the guise of "less but better paying jobs" (quoting our new NOAA director here) - and also the claim that fewer boats are more effective to manage in regards to hard quotas and reduction in the black market.

It's not about the fish with these people.

Your completely right. :uhuh:

You voted these guys in...YOU wanted "Hope and change" Well, this is what you wanted right? :confused: Didn't expect this did you?


YOU have to vote them OUT. Do your duty every November.

:fury:

Fishing registration was just to get our names .. Expect a knock on the door ,, fishing tackle collectors ..

Eddy the same thing crossed my mind...

Fishing registration was just to get our names .. Expect a knock on the door ,, fishing tackle collectors ..

You voted these guys in...YOU wanted "Hope and change" Well, this is what you wanted right? :confused: Didn't expect this did you?


YOU have to vote them OUT. Do your duty every November.

:fury:
I think you're reading too much into this. The objective of the task force was to capture public input for 60 days...

While I agree the influence of corporate fishing is a long-term threat, I don't see anything here that indicates recreational fishing is going to be restricted in a substantial way. There is the anecdote of bear hunting...but while there's a thin parallel...fish and bear aren't exactly the same thing.

-spence

Fishing registration was just to get our names .. Expect a knock on the door ,, fishing tackle collectors ..

Really makes you think, doesn't it...

I think you're reading too much into this. The objective of the task force was to capture public input for 60 days...

While I agree the influence of corporate fishing is a long-term threat, I don't see anything here that indicates recreational fishing is going to be restricted in a substantial way. There is the anecdote of bear hunting...but while there's a thin parallel...fish and bear aren't exactly the same thing.

-spence

Do you think that WWF, Greenpeace, Defenders of Wildlife, Pew Environment Group and the others are a short or long-term threat?

Do you think that WWF, Greenpeace, Defenders of Wildlife, Pew Environment Group and the others are a short or long-term threat?

did you happen to catch the news clip of the Greenpeace boat that looked like the Batmoblie chasing a whaling ship a little while back and the whaling ship just ran the Batmobile over?...I don't want to see them harpooning whales but i did laugh my @## off at that.....the Greenpeace Batmobile boat was a "short term threat" :rotf2::rotf2:

Fishing registration was just to get our names .. Expect a knock on the door ,, fishing tackle collectors ..

They haven't come to collect anyone's guns yet, and they have had to be licensed for years.

Do you think that WWF, Greenpeace, Defenders of Wildlife, Pew Environment Group and the others are a short or long-term threat?

There are pros and cons with activism, and various levels at that. You simply can't lump it all together...

-spence

There are pros and cons with activism, and various levels at that. You simply can't lump it all together...

-spence

I'm not lumping them together. The article that you're commenting on did. So, will you answer my question?

I'm not lumping them together. The article that you're commenting on did. So, will you answer my question?
I did answer your question, by stating that the threat of activist groups as positioned by yourself was lacking in context to be of much importance.

The article you're commenting on is trying to string you along by sequencing elements in the hope that you'll make the connections by yourself.

A) The Obama Admin closed the window for public comment

+

B) Radical activists will protect animals just because they're cute

must =

C) Obama wants to screw fisherman because that's what liberals do

The author seems to want you to believe that the Administration is out to exact some dubious revenge on the sportsperson, callously striking their input for the record so they can close the doors and work with tree spiking radicals to shut down an entire industry....just like they did in ONTARIO.

This doesn't appear to be true.

-spence

Yeah, well they can take my fishing tackle when they pry it out of my cold, dead hands...:ninja:

On a serious note - and at the risk of making a political statement in the wrong forum - we live in a plutocracy (rule by the wealthy) and serving corporate interests to accelerate that transfer of wealth is a large part of the system. That's what all three branches of government are paid to do (in one way or another) by lobbyists.

I voted for Obama and regret it, but it's not like we actually had a choice

The two parties are basically the same creature with two heads. The point is the same, the only difference is the delivery

Expect the largest contributors to their re-election funds to be the voices heard most clearly, regardless

I did answer your question, by stating that the threat of activist groups as positioned by yourself was lacking in context to be of much importance.

The article you're commenting on is trying to string you along by sequencing elements in the hope that you'll make the connections by yourself.

A) The Obama Admin closed the window for public comment

+

B) Radical activists will protect animals just because they're cute

must =

C) Obama wants to screw fisherman because that's what liberals do

The author seems to want you to believe that the Administration is out to exact some dubious revenge on the sportsperson, callously striking their input for the record so they can close the doors and work with tree spiking radicals to shut down an entire industry....just like they did in ONTARIO.

This doesn't appear to be true.

-spence

Actually, I wasn't trying to position anything. I asked you a question because you commented on corporate fishing, but not the activist groups. I was just curious as to what you thought about the activist groups mentioned in the article. Nothing more, nothing less. But as usual, you tried to use the old end around and not just give a simple answer. Do you ever get tired of thinking up different ways to come off as a blowhard?:rolleyes:

for people who bitch a lot about poor fishing, fishermen sure do fight conservation efforts pretty hard. I'm wondering if there could ever be a conservation effort that a majority of fishermen would support?

Actually, I wasn't trying to position anything. I asked you a question because you commented on corporate fishing, but not the activist groups. I was just curious as to what you thought about the activist groups mentioned in the article. Nothing more, nothing less. But as usual, you tried to use the old end around and not just give a simple answer. Do you ever get tired of thinking up different ways to come off as a blowhard?:rolleyes:
Nothing more, nothing less? You asserted they were a threat.

-spence

Nothing more, nothing less? You asserted they were a threat.

-spence

No, you're wrong. Sometimes I just ask you questions to see what you think. I may not put much stock in your opinions, but I like to hear what you have to say sometimes.:grins: Anyways, I never asserted anything. Not sure where you got that from.

for people who bitch a lot about poor fishing, fishermen sure do fight conservation efforts pretty hard. I'm wondering if there could ever be a conservation effort that a majority of fishermen would support?

limit rec anglers to one bass over 28", I dont think you'd get too many complaints to that.

limit rec anglers to one bass over 28", I dont think you'd get too many complaints to that.

1 over 36 would be better. :love:

I went on the task force's website to read some of the 1,844 comments put in before the comment period ended. Many are from marine biologists, some are save the whales people, some are to protect their stretch of beach, and some are from fisherman. Most of the comments I read were more geared towards stopping pollution in the oceans. Didn't read any from PETA maniacs talking about sea kittens- but I did not read all 1,844.

But then a fisherman from Alabama submitted this comment:

I believe that this is going to be the worst IDEA anyone ever came up with. They think health care protests are bad. They have no idea what this is going to do to the United States of America (remember when this land was called that). Where people were free. Next thing you know you will have to get a bill through congress just to wipe your ASS. Oh- I am sorry, I shouldn't use ASS. Never mind it is in the Constitution under the First Amendment. Remember them? Probably not. Before you decide to change something READ them.

for people who bitch a lot about poor fishing, fishermen sure do fight conservation efforts pretty hard. I'm wondering if there could ever be a conservation effort that a majority of fishermen would support?

This has nothing to do with "conservation" this has to do with your ability to fish, for any species.

They haven't come to collect anyone's guns yet, and they have had to be licensed for years.

I guess you don't live in NYC where they did Exactly that required "assault weapons" to be registered and then the banned them and had a list of everyone who owned one.

I think you're reading too much into this. The objective of the task force was to capture public input for 60 days...


NO! The objective of the task force is to come up with recommendations for "spatial planning" for the inland waters and oceans of the United States. The concern is that their initial draft totally ignored fishing in their proposed plan, hence the assumption that they were ignoring fishermen.

When Apolitical groups like the American Sportfishing Assoc. start sounding the alarms you know there is probably some reason for their concerns.

IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.....PERIOD......

At least GW (you remember that moron) liked to fish......

so if every recreational striper fisherman
suddenly became 100% catch and release
this year..And not a bad idea considering the Pcb's

Wouldn't that totally deflate their position
speaking hypothetically of course?

Then we'd just be called fish abusers i guess. :doh:

also "what Crafty said"

this is not our fathers usa...anymore. they can eff with us in any whichway (they do), but if they eff with our fishing there will be hell to pay - i promise :fence:.

No, you're wrong. Sometimes I just ask you questions to see what you think. I may not put much stock in your opinions, but I like to hear what you have to say sometimes.:grins: Anyways, I never asserted anything. Not sure where you got that from.

And in this case, the question assumed the activist groups were a threat.


Do you think that WWF, Greenpeace, Defenders of Wildlife, Pew Environment Group and the others are a short or long-term threat?

NO! The objective of the task force is to come up with recommendations for "spatial planning" for the inland waters and oceans of the United States. The concern is that their initial draft totally ignored fishing in their proposed plan, hence the assumption that they were ignoring fishermen.

When Apolitical groups like the American Sportfishing Assoc. start sounding the alarms you know there is probably some reason for their concerns.
By objective I mean operationally, not as a deliverable. I could have chosen a more appropriate word.

Is there a proposed plan?

-spence

Fishing registration was just to get our names .. Expect a knock on the door ,, fishing tackle collectors ..

I'll feel sorry for the poor dope who tries to take my gear. It'll be "Game On" and he'll be the kick-off.

Let me add this: All of the Earth's resources are being gathered up by a relatively small group of investers. Just look around. Oil, Energy, Farmland (read food here folks). Everything. We're being corralled for the financial kill.

so if every recreational striper fisherman
suddenly became 100% catch and release
this year..And not a bad idea considering the Pcb's

Wouldn't that totally deflate their position
speaking hypothetically of course?

Then we'd just be called fish abusers i guess. :doh:

also "what Crafty said"

It's not about fish Raven, it's about control and money. We're slowly being moved toward a kind of slavery. Control the food, control the jobs, control the housing, control the people. It's rather insidious.

It's not about fish Raven, it's about control and money. We're slowly being moved toward a kind of slavery. Control the food, control the jobs, control the housing, control the people. It's rather insidious.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh i totally agree Fred....and this is why i have MAJORED
if you will...in both self sufficiency and home food production
ever since i read my first issue of Mother Earth in 1970!
~
I mean there's a way to raise Talapia underneath the growing beds and have the roots dangling there in a semi hydroponic fashion where the fish are shaded and cool where their waste
products actually fertilise the plants above.
~
I plan on retiring to a part of the country where Farming is the life blood and it won't be turned into a megatropolis any time soon.

Don, I have to agree...and i was thinking today... that rather than passively wait for it to be bamboozled upon us we should rize up and get mad dog mean with our representatives.

Basically saying: we are watching exactly how you respond and act when it comes to protecting what we consider to be our Birthrite to fish and we will vote ANYONE out of office that votes against the fisherman in any way, shape, or form.

an idea just popped into my head just now.... :grins:
i always liked the guy who glued a letter to a brick
and then mailed it.

using that strategy.....why could we not send them air.
it's perfectly legal thus far to mail them an empty BOX
with a letter inside suspended by old fishing line.

the post office will even supply them free.

recycle the damned styrafoam peanuts right back to Washington by the billions. Too Bad we don't have a special kind in the shape of those nasty little fish crackers. :yak5:

and No i have not been :smokin:

Hi all, I talked with a freind in California who is a very reputed custom rod builder and surcaster out there. They have been fighting this battle for a bit but it's been call Marine Protection Zones and so on. It started with the gallapogos Islands and has spread to over 20 different areas. Some larger than new England in size. The antis are our problem not our own issues about Striper sizes and catch limits.These people want all of us to just go away even to the extent of making owning or possessing impliments used for fishing or hunting.I've gone to some of their meetings to the point of joining one of them to get on their mailing list. These groups are very dangerous and don't underestimate them .Many of them are run by the same rich types that don't have to work and chase one cause after another for fun at our exspence so they can control what is done by others.
Yrs ago I was open minded about their actions but when the sierra club went after hikers because their colorful clothing was an affront to nature and should be outlawed-colorfull clothes make it easier to find lost people in the woods-to include groups like the Boy Scouts kinda showed me these people don't live nor think in the real world. Ron

I heard, through a friend of a friend, that the Department of Justice has subpoenaed the lists of subscribers to most saltwater fishing magazines.

In addition, a guy I know tells me that the CIA has been at the Narrow River and most RI breech ways affixing transponders to trucks with rod racks.

But.

You didn't hear that from me.

-spence

It's not about fish Raven, it's about control and money. We're slowly being moved toward a kind of slavery. Control the food, control the jobs, control the housing, control the people. It's rather insidious.

You forgot take away the guns ..

this is not our fathers usa...anymore. they can eff with us in any whichway (they do), but if they eff with our fishing there will be hell to pay - i promise :fence:.i'm with ya Don.

Seems like lately, everytime i get on either of the fishing sites i frequent, there's a story or two that bums me out. I take everything to heart and worry too much. It's starting to take its toll on me. It scares me that i might not be able to fish with my son because of this, that and the other thing. I miss the good old days. Man i'm so worried about the future and what's in store for my daughter and son, not just fishing, but life in general. The world i know has changed so much in 10 years.

Well Spence ask anyone who has a plover problem to deal with. They went so far as to try to make it so that people living close to nest were gonna be kept out of their front yards an had to keep their windows closed. I beleive it was the Audobon Association that suggested that. This stuff sounds stupid but it is real and if we don't take it seious well ask how the people feel that can't access all those closed beaches anymore due to a bird nest.Then watch all the do gooders driving by to watch over the birds because they are better than the fishermen and beach walkers that used to be able to use these beaches. Ron

i'm with ya Don.

Seems like lately, everytime i get on either of the fishing sites i frequent, there's a story or two that bums me out. I take everything to heart and worry too much. It's starting to take its toll on me .

Don't worry George .. Probably just a ploy to drive lure prices down on ebay .. We're not at Soylent Green stage yet ,,, See you in Thunder Dome ..

My take from reading that article is that various groups are way ahead of the fishing community on this and if we do not get ourselves organized they will clearly have greater influence on future regulations than the fishing community. As fisherman seem from history a difficult group to organize I wonder why the equipment manufacturers like Penn etc. are up to serving as the focal point for the fishing community's views. Maybe our tackle shops should contact their various reps and tell them of the problem and that we need them to serve as a point for voice of the fishing community.

Well Spence ask anyone who has a plover problem to deal with. They went so far as to try to make it so that people living close to nest were gonna be kept out of their front yards an had to keep their windows closed. I beleive it was the Audobon Association that suggested that. This stuff sounds stupid but it is real and if we don't take it seious well ask how the people feel that can't access all those closed beaches anymore due to a bird nest.Then watch all the do gooders driving by to watch over the birds because they are better than the fishermen and beach walkers that used to be able to use these beaches. Ron
Different issues at play here...

While I think the Plover thing has gotten a bit silly, the issue there is about protecting a bird from collateral human interference rather than a fish species from capture and consumption.

This issue about the Feds trying to restrict recreational fisherman doesn't seem to have any real basis, it's tin foil hat stuff at this point.

Yes, there are marine protected areas, but I don't think anybody (of real influence) is going to argue that fishing should be banned because a fish like the striped bass is threatened. The point of the Administration's effort is to look at the issue of natural resource management from a systemic perspective, taking into account positive factors like economic impact along with the health of the species.

Until I see something of substance, this is all fear mongering based on a blog post on ESPN. Perhaps we should blame Druge.

-spence

Problem is that every time we wait and see we get hit with another sucker shot and it's too late to fix it or do much about it. The people running most of these things don't need to work so they have all the time in the world to do what they plan. we come home from work and find gates locked and beaches closed cause we just waited and didn't see till it was too late. Ron

Does anyone really believe with the billions of dollars spent on this sport, including vacations, gear, charters etc... they would ban it in all federal state and coastal waters...

lay off the pipe. it's making everyone paranoid

Does anyone really believe with the billions of dollars spent on this sport, including vacations, gear, charters etc... they would ban it in all federal state and coastal waters...

lay off the pipe. it's making everyone paranoid

Agreed... The author even says that the "task force has been in lockstep with that position paper [Transition Green]", but that paper stresses the importance of recreational fishing. He then goes on to imply that because they don't mention the benefits of recreational angling in another paper, it's being ignored and "lumped together [with commercial fishing] as harmful to the resource".

Just because it's not mentioned doesn't mean it's going to be outlawed. No way it's going to be banned. This is from an ESPN column, anyway!

Do these groups want heavy limitations on commercial guys, though? Definitely. And that's why they need to be watched. They really have no clue what they're talking about, and if they really have that much influence on management then it's (imho) kinda ridiculous.

I heard, through a friend of a friend, that the Department of Justice has subpoenaed the lists of subscribers to most saltwater fishing magazines.

In addition, a guy I know tells me that the CIA has been at the Narrow River and most RI breech ways affixing transponders to trucks with rod racks.

But.

You didn't hear that from me.

-spence

Those UAV's don't just fly in the Middle East

Gotta fight the Power baby.
:fight:

And in this case, the question assumed the activist groups were a threat.

Wow you're dense, Spence. The question was a question. I asked your opinion and assumed nothing. Why does there always have to be more to everything with you? I actually think you're somewhat bright and I just wanted to know what you thought. No assertions or assumptions on my part. Geez, try for just a minute to get over yourself.:jump1:

The concept of Spatial Planning or "ocean zoning" on it's face "could" be a good thing if all stakeholders actually had some say and voting control of the process. Think of the things recently proposed like, Cape Wind, gas terminal on Outer Brewster, etc. These are ideas driven by BIG $$ that don't really care about other users...only their bottom line. Proper spatial planning could site these type of necessary activities in the appropriate areas. IMO the problem with this is that groups with the $$ and undue political influence will always gain control of the process and fragmented groups like sportsmen will get the shaft. The timeframe for development of this plan is very troubling as is the lack of recognition of the social and financial benefits of fishing. Given what's been happening lately, any fisherman that isn't writing their rep's to give rational input is giving up without a fight and might as well take up golf. Screaming that the POTUS is a communist, muslim isn't going to get anyone a seat at the discussion table....just get us thrown out of the meeting.

Just went through the "Interim report of the interagency ocean policy task force"
Task force ? Cute name, my dictionary definition is " an armed force organized for a special operation"
What a bunch of vague lawyerese dribble. How many more entitled hacks are going to load up on this gravy train. :fury:?

Page 30, had a curious sentence, "It will allow for the reduction of cumulative impacts from human uses on marine ecosystems. "

What does that mean ?

I know it's just me throwing gas on a fire, and I know fishing is not going to be banned.
I just have a real hard time with "This Regime" telling me how to think and act.
:af:

in AMERICA ....

Its time for a regime Change!

and LAWS can be recinded ....

I'm sure i'll be breaking them

A guy posted the following on the Montauk site;

This was issued today by NOAA in response to the ESPN article and ESPN issued an apology which is below.

Statement from Eric Schwaab, NOAA's Assistant Administrator for NOAA's Fisheries Service

The Ocean Policy Task Force has not recommended a ban on recreational
fishing.

The draft reports by the Ocean Policy Task Force do not contain a zoning map and do not establish any restrictions on recreational fishing, nor make any judgments about whether one ocean activity or use is better than another. Instead, the reports set up a policy and framework for effectively managing the many sustainable uses of the ocean while upholding our responsibility to be stewards of our oceans, coasts and Great Lakes.

As a member of the task force, NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco, has said, and I echo her on this, that saltwater recreational fishing is vital to this nation and NOAA is committed to building a strong partnership with America’s saltwater anglers to ensure that Americans have opportunities to fish sustainably for generations to come.

Saltwater recreational fishing matters to me on a personal level as a recreational fisherman, it matters to millions of Americans who enjoy this great sport and it matters to our economy. Our most recent economic report shows it supports a half million jobs and generates $82 billion in sales each year.

NOAA is committed to adopting policies that will ensure that current and future generations have the opportunity to enjoy the great tradition of recreational fishing.





On another note, ESPN Outdoors issued an apology about Robert Montgomery's article stating that it was an opinion piece.


By Steve Bowman
Executive Editor ESPNOutdoors.com
Archive

Firestorms get started in a variety of ways, especially on politicized issues.

ESPNOutdoors.com inadvertently contributed to a flare-up Tuesday when we posted the latest article in a series of stories on President Barack Obama's newly created Ocean Policy Task Force, a column written by Robert Montgomery, a conservation writer for BASS since 1985. Regrettably, we made several errors in the editing and presentation of this installment. Though our series has included numerous news stories on the topic, this was not one of them -- it was an opinion piece, and should have been clearly labeled as commentary.

And while our series overall has examined several sides of the topic, this particular column was not properly balanced and failed to represent contrary points of view. We have reached out to people on every side of the issue and reported their points of view -- if they chose to respond -- throughout the series, but failed to do so in this specific column.

This series started in October and has included several updates on how the creation of the task force and its actions could impact recreational anglers. ESPNOutdoors.com should have made it clear to all readers that this was part of a larger series, and -- even though this was Montgomery's opinion, and those of the sources quoted in the column -- we should have taken more care to fairly represent opposing arguments.

We do feel it is our duty to cover issues surrounding outdoor sports to the best of our abilities, and given the nature of this task force and the potential impact on all fisherman, this was an appropriate topic to address for our audience. We take seriously the tenets of journalism that require we take an unbiased approach, and when we make mistakes in the presentation of a story or a column, it is our responsibility to admit them.

Any confusion on that part rests entirely on my shoulders as the executive editor of this site.

We have appended the original column to note that it was in fact a commentary, and we will institute more rigorous editing safeguards in order to prevent such issues in the future.
__________________

but i will still reserve Judgment as to what is said
By the Task force and the Obamination ADMINISTRATION
in the coming days...

Hi all, I talked with a freind in California who is a very reputed custom rod builder and surcaster out there. They have been fighting this battle for a bit but it's been call Marine Protection Zones and so on. It started with the gallapogos Islands and has spread to over 20 different areas. Some larger than new England in size. The antis are our problem not our own issues about Striper sizes and catch limits.These people want all of us to just go away even to the extent of making owning or possessing impliments used for fishing or hunting.I've gone to some of their meetings to the point of joining one of them to get on their mailing list. These groups are very dangerous and don't underestimate them .Many of them are run by the same rich types that don't have to work and chase one cause after another for fun at our exspence so they can control what is done by others.
Yrs ago I was open minded about their actions but when the sierra club went after hikers because their colorful clothing was an affront to nature and should be outlawed-colorfull clothes make it easier to find lost people in the woods-to include groups like the Boy Scouts kinda showed me these people don't live nor think in the real world. Ron

It was the Catalina islands, the galapagos islands are off the coast of Equador! :devil2:

CSF, RFBC submit comments to White House task force

February 12, 2010 (WASHINGTON, DC) - The Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation, along with its partners in the U.S. Recreational Fishing & Boating Coalition, submitted formal comments Friday to the White House Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force, voicing the concerns of recreational boating and angling interests.

The "Interim Framework for Effective Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning" is the second document released by the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force which was created by President Obama last June to develop a draft national policy and implementation strategy for conserving and managing the oceans, the Great Lakes, and the coasts of the United States.

In the first draft policy report, the "Interim Report of the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force", released on September 17, the Task Force failed to include specific issues of concern to the recreational fishing and boating communities, in spite of a summer meeting with the Task Force and a written submission from the coalition.

The groups' comments, submitted to Ms. Nancy Sutley, chair of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force, clearly define the importance of recreational angling and boating to the national economy and our nation's social fabric.

"Some of the potential policy implications of the this Interim Framework have the potential to be a real threat to recreational anglers who not only contribute billions of dollars to the economy and millions of dollars in tax revenues to support fisheries conservation, but who are also the backbone of the American fish and wildlife conservation ethos," said CSF President Jeff Crane.

Among numerous other concerns is the development a top-down federal approach to ocean management that would impact every sector and every ocean activity. This new structure is built on vague or unspecified statutory authority, without input from Congress, and does not appropriately recognize the role of the states, which have the primary jurisdiction for resident fish and wildlife.

Given the scope of economic, conservation, and social contributions of recreational fishing and boating, it is imperative that any national ocean policy encourage, promote and celebrate recreational activities in the marine and freshwater environments. This can only be achieved if the policy and the implementation of marine spatial planning provide for access to marine areas for recreation and the opportunities for angling.

"There are over 1 million jobs in America supported coast to coast by recreational fishing. The Task Force has not included any accountability requirements in their reports for evaluating or mitigating how the new policies they are drafting will impact the fishing industry or related economies," said Phil Morlock, CSF Board Member and Director of Environmental Affairs for Shimano. "Given that the scope of this process appears to include a new set of policies for all the coastal and inland waters of the United States, the omission of economic considerations is inexcusable."

Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus (CSC) member Rep. Adam Putnam and CSC House Co-Chair Rep. Dan Boren sent a letter to Ms. Sutley in November, urging inclusion of the recreational fishing community in the formation of a proposed new ocean governance structure.

"Inclusion of the recreational fishing community in this effort could greatly assist the task force's stated objectives," said Rep. Boren. "They should welcome the participation of recreational anglers and seek their support in ensuring the conservation, maintenance, and restoration of our nation's oceans and lakes."

Your right it is the Catalinas. The Galapagos you just plain aren't supposed to go near without a special permit. The waters around them are a different type of protection zone. Mixed them up while reading the report form the Autobon Society that i found.It lists a bunch of west coast Isles. Sorry for the mistake. Ron

........and heard a group of guys discusing fishing-regards to huge corporations/trusts/MPAs....one quote was.."time to put away the sluggos and pick up slugs"--can someone explain:confused::fury::smash:he he he

As usual, we are locked in at either end and no one is looking at the middle.

Nowhere in anything I have read so far, is there any suggestion that recreational fishing will be affected. We are reading stories from guys who want to create alarm, it's America as we now know it. It's for the same reasons that Lindsey Lohan's latest lesbian escapade and John and Kate make the first headlines on the nightly news over our country's economic woes--that other stuff is boring and it might be scary. "Oh, pictures of Brangelina's 47th adopted baby--well I have to see this, right after I finish counting the rolls on my overweight American belly!" :wall: Now that's news we can count on and I don't even have to worry about it!


The problem I see is that we (Americans in general) have become so lazy that we can barely feed ourselves anymore (and why would we--people have put so much into making it easier--why not take advantage?), nevermind making up our own minds, because that's hard. We are playing right into the hands of anyone who will take 10 minutes to read the source of any kind of information, regurgitate the lines that best support their argument and then fill in around it with all kinds of alarming wordage. This is the same reason why celebrities have to make public apologies now, do you think Arnold Palmer would have been making a public apology if he pulled the same stunt Tiger did back in 1960? Hell no, but he seemed so sincere, his wife took him back--now what about Nike?

We get our information in tweets and 13 second news spots now--that's all you need now, I love technology. Newspapers and news shows are politically biased and seek to serve their party instead of reporting the unedited truth. No one even reads the newspaper anymore anyway--it's more than 37 characters.

Yes, this thing could become a problem, but do yourselves a favor and read the actual text, you can do it in the time it takes to order and devour a triple cheeseburger, don't read what every idiot with an underlying agenda has to say about it.

The really bad thing about all this though is that no one makes a stand anymore. If it takes more than sending a blanket email with their name typed at the bottom--it's more than most of us can be bothered with. I mean c'mon 24 is on tonight and then Idol until Thursday where are we going to find the time?? :rotf2:

If anyone reads this and gets P!$$ED you either grossly missed my point or you are grossly overweight.

-Dave

As usual, no one is looking at the middle. and it might be scary. Now that's news we can count on and I don't even have to worry about it!


The problem I see is that we (Americans in general) have become so lazy that we can barely feed ourselves anymore .take 10 minutes to read the source of any kind of information, regurgitate


We get our information in tweets and 13 second news spots now--that's all you need now, I love to serve their party instead of reporting the unedited truth.

Yes, this thing could become a problem, but do yourselves a favor and devour a tripper cheeseburger, don't read what every idiot with an underlying rastafarian agenda has to say about it.

The really bad thing about all this though is that no one makes a safe hamburger anymore.

If anyone reads this and gets P!$$ED off you either grossly missed my point or you are grossly overweight from eating hamburgers.

-Dave

i hear ya Dave....loud and clear :grins: :uhuh: :rotf2:

Thanks for reminding me that 24 was on tonight :D
I'll have to park my overweight lap down in front of the tube and relax a bit , I got no time to write to Kerry about health care bill. or was this about fishing:huh: I get all the threads confused, must be watching too much TV :rotf2:

...the adgendas of AR groups, other trust sponsored groups, and greed of resource based corporations are real........to think otherwise is keeping one's head in the sand.........their "cause" is to reduce/eliminate the recreational/commercial utilization of our fishery resources...no doubt some of the targeted practices have merit--but don't be fooled....the trawler guy might be at the head of the list of some groups(trusts, eco's, AR) actions-yea might be good news for the R&R anglers(both comm & rec)for the short run..but/however, this is but one domino at the head of the list)....with the mega corporations targeting the removal of the day/short trip commercial fisherman-and taking over the total commercial landings.........we better pay attention to these real threats......:wall:..part of the solution is/are :strong local rec & comm fishing clubs/org....full participation in local hearings/meetings of fishery management..local, state., and Federal.........all the above real threats to fishing have/are well organized and financed.........:fishin:

...the adgendas of AR groups, other trust sponsored groups, and greed of resource based corporations are real........to think otherwise is keeping one's head in the sand.........their "cause" is to reduce/eliminate the recreational/commercial utilization of our fishery resources...no doubt some of the targeted practices have merit--but don't be fooled....the trawler guy might be at the head of the list of some groups(trusts, eco's, AR) actions-yea might be good news for the R&R anglers(both comm & rec)for the short run..but/however, this is but one domino at the head of the list)....with the mega corporations targeting the removal of the day/short trip commercial fisherman-and taking over the total commercial landings.........we better pay attention to these real threats......:wall:..part of the solution is/are :strong local rec & comm fishing clubs/org....full participation in local hearings/meetings of fishery management..local, state., and Federal.........all the above real threats to fishing have/are well organized and financed.........:fishin:

My point was not to make light of the situation, I only injected some humor to try and stave off the flames that I usually ignite :laughs:

I agree that there are some real things to worry about in all this, but I don;t like to let people read and then write between the lines for me. Too many people take something that has been published as gospel. (I know I'm treading on shaky ground here :rollem: but it's true).

I was poking fun at all of us, on either side of the issue. I watched 24 last night and I can't believe that crazy chick with the white/blond hair (lilly I think?) got eliminated from American Idol! She was awesome!

The other thing to remember with things like this is that there is a whole system of checks and balances that this bill has to plinko it's way through. There must be dozens of congressmen and Senators that fish--I hope they can help.

-Dave

RIGHT AWWWN, Dave!!

America got it wrong when they kept Katie
and let Lilly go. also, Mike lynche is waaaay overrated!

for me, it is about following the money as many have said.
noone wants to follow the science, listen to good conscience,
or be proactive anymore. WHY? there's no money behind doing the
right thing, BEFORE it's too late.

do you honestly think that the Boston Harbor and Charles River had to detirorate to the levels that they were polluted to back in the 60's, before someone realized,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,hey these rivers are polluted???

i think that most of us are for 1 @ 36", FIXING THE FORAGE, and letting the science tell us what we should do next with regard to our estuaries and species. the problem is,,,,,,,,,,,,,,when are we gonna implement any of these measures. i am sure it will happen when it makes some interest group the most money. SUX, but it is where our Capitalistic Society and Corporate Greed has taken us to, imho.

.....gonna go fishing soon..........:soon:........enjoy what you have(did I see this somewhere on here??)........:rotf2:hope a football field size asteroid misses southern New England waters......:fishin::)..."life begins when ya clear the breakwater".......:)

someone sent me this link
Obama fishing ban story spread by Glenn Beck, ESPN needs to fire Robert Montgomery (http://www.examiner.com/x-37128-Charlotte-Fishing-Examiner~y2010m3d11-Obama-fishing-ban-story-spread-by-Glenn-Beck-ESPN-needs-to-fire-Robert-Montgomery)

..check out latest copy of the THE FISHERMAN magazine(New England Edition-the Steve Shiraka memorial cover)..........Al Ristori's Conservation Watch Column........."Tempest About Administration's Attitude Towards Sportfishing"..........nice overview:fishin:

Sorry to bring this topic up again, but interesting to note that NOAA addressed it. Today:

March 23, 2010

Statement from Eric Schwaab, NOAA Assistant Administrator for Fisheries - Announcing Russell Dunn to new position of National Policy Advisor for Recreational Fisheries

Today, I am pleased to appoint Russell Dunn as the NOAA Fisheries National Policy Advisor for Recreational Fisheries and to appoint 22 members of the recreational fishing community from around the nation to a Recreational Fisheries Working Group to provide expertise on saltwater recreational fishing to NOAA’s Marine Fisheries Advisory Committee (MAFAC).

These actions fulfill a pledge made by NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco to the recreational fishing community to put in place the national advisor to help lead NOAA’s efforts to create a stronger and more productive partnership between NOAA and America’s saltwater angling community.

As national advisor, Russell Dunn will work with anglers to address their interests as we build and implement an action agenda to provide for the long-term health of fish stocks and work to protect and enhance the significant social and economic benefits fisheries provide to anglers and to our coastal communities. Russell will report directly to me.

Russell, who begins the job on March 28, brings 14 years of public and private-sector experience in national and international marine fisheries policy. He is respected for his experience and dedication by leaders of the recreational fishing industry. He has been the branch chief of NOAA Fisheries Highly Migratory Species Management Division, served as a policy advisor to the U.S. Delegation to the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, and worked as director of government relations at the National Audubon Society on its Living Oceans Campaign. He also worked for then-Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell. An avid angler, Russell will be based in St. Petersburg, Fla, in the heart of the nation’s largest recreational fishing region. He will serve as the national point of contact for the saltwater fishing community, and coordinate closely with both NOAA Fisheries national and regional staff.

His first duties will include helping Dr. Lubchenco and me to bring together over one hundred recreational fishing constituents and representatives from around the country, including the members of MAFAC’s recreational fisheries working group, to a national summit on April 16 and 17 in Alexandria, Va. At the summit, we will explore issues important to recreational fisheries, and identify priority actions for moving forward.

Russell takes over for Gordon Colvin who has been serving as interim Senior Policy Advisor for the past 6 months. I would like to thank Gordon for his extraordinary service.

Please join me in welcoming Russell to this new and important role.

Eric C. Schwaab
NOAA Assistant Administrator for Fisheries

Worked with HMS, ICCAT. Seems to at least be a step in the right direction, but of course depends on what's done with it. Just good to hear that the voice of a few million pissed off rec fishermen was heard loud and clear...