|
I listened to most of the call, from what I heard (and I could have heard wrong). Most of the New England States were for 1 @ 28", the motion for "equivelancy" was pushed by the Chesapeake Bay states and some other Southern States. In the end the motion passed (not all in favor) to include the equivalency part. Again, I could have heard wrong as I had this on in the background while I was working so someone might have more insights.
Also, to bring up my previous post, how can we say 25% reduction for rec when we don't even know what is being harvested by rec (its all a guess because there is no rec reporting system). Comm is straight forward...can anyone provide insights to this and how we can say reduction is 25% for rec on a number that we have no clue what it is?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|