View Single Post
Old 02-08-2010, 08:34 AM   #36
numbskull
Oblivious // Grunt, Grunt Master
iTrader: (0)
 
numbskull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: over the hill
Posts: 6,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac View Post
My agenda???..."throwing at you again and again"....

Also, in reference to your claim about 52-59% commercial catch (thats diffirent then reports I've seen...)....I think I offered up what was an increase in COMMERCIAL NETTING IN CHESAPEAKE .....it happened several years ago....MA and RI quotas have been static....

........people like you are impossible to reason with....thats why we have both sides fighting each other.......bye
Sorry to be so animated, but it is not "my" claim. It is in the ASMFC report you directed me to in order to gain some "perspective", thank you.

So again, their technical comittee says that using more realistic methods of estimating commercial catch, the commercial take is 52-59 % of the TOTAL coastwide take (unless I misunderstand what they are saying). Sort of shows that graph to be a whole lot of BS. Also suggests the commercial catch (and I note they refuse to include commercial poaching) is one helluva a lot more of an issue than convenient those suggesting the recreational sector is 80% to blame. Do you agree?

Last edited by numbskull; 02-08-2010 at 09:08 AM..
numbskull is offline   Reply With Quote