Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman
You guys are freaking hilarious. Who's "we" ??
And who the hell are you to say who deserves what ?
To a lot of you this is become personal instead of about increasing the breeding population.
Truth be told, the rec guys account for a higher percentage of the mortality of these fish then the charter and commercial guys combined.
It's always easier to blame someone else .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
I think Buckman has been pretty clear that it shouldn't matter if it is 2@33 or 1@28, if they are equivalent and therefore achieve the same goal; it shouldn't matter if charters get 2@33 and recs 1@28, if they are equivalent. I actually agree with him from that perspective.
The problem is, the argument that they are equivalent appears bogus to me and apparently, many others. I think there is some validity to the idea that 2@33 for everyone may be equivalent to 1@28, given that most rec guys who would consistently get 1@28, won't consistently get 2@33 and often won't get any @33". If 1 @33 would be a 29% reduction for an entire state, it stands that 1@33 specifically for charters won't be a 29% reduction for charters; the ability for charters to find fish is undeniably better than the average fisherman. That on top of the fact it is a stated 50/50 chance that 25% reduction can be met just isn't good enough. It is management by Russian roulette. I agree with Buckman that it isn't about who deserves what fish and what is fair, it is about management. That is where asmfc is ferhoodled, it is bogus management based on the influence of an economic group that has very few species left that can be targeted.