You forgot take away the guns ..

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

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.

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

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.

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

Gotta fight the Power baby.
:fight:

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:

as it is often SAID
 

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.
__________________

that was NICE Wader DAD
 

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

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

Not exactly your tin foil hat types.
 

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

....was visiting a large retail mega store recently....in MASS
 

........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

LSD found in cheese burgers
 

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 threats are real.........
 

...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.

........now for the real stuff.........hehehee
 

.....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

Nice Summation by Al Ristori
 

..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:

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...