Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnR
OK, I'll bite.
Funny. I don't recall seeing you at any fisheries meeting over the years. I don't recall seeing you calling for conservation until really late. And I don't recall you making any positive calls for reduction unless it has been to stir the pot.
Short version. Cup or no cup will have no real impact on the problem with the fisheries. As anglers we can continue to argue to make it a game fish or not, and stay divided. We can continue to blame it on the "Bossman" or the this group or that group. We can continue to point fingers at The Other Guy.
OR we can work together to reduce the pressure on the fish through the one single place that regulations are determined - good or bad - the fisheries management councils. I would have liked to see that process happen 2 years ago. It didn't. That process should happen this year in time to impact 2012 regulations. When those meetings happen, I hope to see you at a meeting Chris. (Really, I hope to see you there).
Ahhh, and while I would like to have more fun in the weeds, work beckons.
|
A lot of contradiction in the above post.
So you play by the rules, regardless of whether you think they are good for the fishery because you can? This is the cop out er excuse er solution I should have predicted.Every journey begins with the first step and that step is better late than never.Funny how you claim the reasons for participation are cameraderie but you say next years stock assessments may force you to reconsider your teams participation.But next year will most likely reveal the same downward trend we have been seeing.However if the fisheries management council doesn't forbid participation then the hell with stock assessment.Hypocrisy at its finest.Go Team!