Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
no doubt...
I guess I'd argue that you can't use the 2@33" equivalent as I assume it was arrived at taking into account all rec. users catch and not for for the user group that you are talking about ...you are going to have to come up with an equivalent number that applies to that group and their disproportionate contribution and accounting for the other groups operating under 1@28 if that is what happens....can the group operating under 1@28" for a 25% reduction still achieve that reduction if for hires fishing in the same waters are fishing under 2@33" when the numbers are added together?....
everyone was included to arrive at those numbers...
some are trying to use the same numbers while not including everyone...
|
Can I ask you a question ?
When you fish the ditch or beach are you more likely to catch one at 28 inches or one at 33 inches ? Never mind two at 33 inches .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Threaded Mode