NO MORE FISHING - Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

UserRemoved1 · 03-09-2010, 07:48 AM

Task force ends public input - ESPN

I didn't vote for him.

RIJIMMY · 03-09-2010, 09:14 AM

f'in great

Nebe · 03-09-2010, 09:21 AM

If I had a Crystal ball and could see into the future, and saw with certainty that having a closed fishery of all kinds for say 5 years would make the fishing absolutely %$%$%$%$ing amazing, Id hand in all my gear. The problem that I have is that what is happening is all smoke in mirrors... the ocean is about to be taken over by corporate fishing vessels owned by larger corporations. The first step in this plan is to tell everyone that fishing has to stop... the 2nd step is to watch all of the small family owned boats fold and the 3rd is to divide the fish amongst those who are left. I believe we are on step 3 right now. Sector based fisheries managment has set the stage for this. Watch.

big jay · 03-09-2010, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nebe

If I had a Crystal ball and could see into the future, and saw with certainty that having a closed fishery of all kinds for say 5 years would make the fishing absolutely %$%$%$%$ing amazing, Id hand in all my gear. The problem that I have is that what is happening is all smoke in mirrors... the ocean is about to be taken over by corporate fishing vessels owned by larger corporations. The first step in this plan is to tell everyone that fishing has to stop... the 2nd step is to watch all of the small family owned boats fold and the 3rd is to divide the fish amongst those who are left. I believe we are on step 3 right now. Sector based fisheries managment has set the stage for this. Watch.

Eben - you are exactly right.

Now think about that the next time there is an article or legislation propsed to shut down small scale commercial fishing (Stripers, Tuna, etc) -

- when you so eloquently voice your support for such initiatives, you are part of the master plan.

MakoMike · 03-09-2010, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nebe

If I had a Crystal ball and could see into the future, and saw with certainty that having a closed fishery of all kinds for say 5 years would make the fishing absolutely %$%$%$%$ing amazing, Id hand in all my gear. The problem that I have is that what is happening is all smoke in mirrors... the ocean is about to be taken over by corporate fishing vessels owned by larger corporations. The first step in this plan is to tell everyone that fishing has to stop... the 2nd step is to watch all of the small family owned boats fold and the 3rd is to divide the fish amongst those who are left. I believe we are on step 3 right now. Sector based fisheries managment has set the stage for this. Watch.

Agreed, and add to that the interests of the big oil companies and wind farm owners and you can see why they want all of us, e.g. small scale commercials and recreationals off the water. Only thing we can do to atop it is to get Congress involved. Write you congressman and senators now!

Nebe · 03-09-2010, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by big jay

Eben - you are exactly right.

Now think about that the next time there is an article or legislation propsed to shut down small scale commercial fishing (Stripers, Tuna, etc) -

- when you so eloquently voice your support for such initiatives, you are part of the master plan.

You did not understand what I am saying- What I mean is that if this legislation was just about the fish, I would not have a problem with it... but its not. And I have a big problem with that.

In regards to small scale fishing like stripers, I dont see any large scale commercial interest in it.... with the exception of farming them.

big jay · 03-09-2010, 10:33 AM

I understood exactly what you meant -- and the fact is that people that get behind these pieces of legislation, and very vocal about them in the name of conservation, are just being set up for dissappointment.

Large Scale Bass Fishing -- how about dividing that 1 million lbs of Mass Quota among 5 mid-water trawlers? They could easily do that under the guise of "less but better paying jobs" (quoting our new NOAA director here) - and also the claim that fewer boats are more effective to manage in regards to hard quotas and reduction in the black market.

It's not about the fish with these people.

Nebe · 03-09-2010, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by big jay

I understood exactly what you meant -- and the fact is that people that get behind these pieces of legislation, and very vocal about them in the name of conservation, are just being set up for dissappointment.

Large Scale Bass Fishing -- how about dividing that 1 million lbs of Mass Quota among 5 mid-water trawlers? They could easily do that under the guise of "less but better paying jobs" (quoting our new NOAA director here) - and also the claim that fewer boats are more effective to manage in regards to hard quotas and reduction in the black market.

It's not about the fish with these people.

Your completely right.

Mr. Sandman · 03-09-2010, 11:25 AM

You voted these guys in...YOU wanted "Hope and change" Well, this is what you wanted right?

Didn't expect this did you?

YOU have to vote them OUT. Do your duty every November.

Tagger · 03-09-2010, 11:50 AM

Fishing registration was just to get our names .. Expect a knock on the door ,, fishing tackle collectors ..

UserRemoved1 · 03-09-2010, 11:54 AM

Eddy the same thing crossed my mind...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tagger

Fishing registration was just to get our names .. Expect a knock on the door ,, fishing tackle collectors ..

spence · 03-09-2010, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Sandman

You voted these guys in...YOU wanted "Hope and change" Well, this is what you wanted right?

Didn't expect this did you?

YOU have to vote them OUT. Do your duty every November.

I think you're reading too much into this. The objective of the task force was to capture public input for 60 days...

While I agree the influence of corporate fishing is a long-term threat, I don't see anything here that indicates recreational fishing is going to be restricted in a substantial way. There is the anecdote of bear hunting...but while there's a thin parallel...fish and bear aren't exactly the same thing.

-spence

Moses · 03-09-2010, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tagger

Fishing registration was just to get our names .. Expect a knock on the door ,, fishing tackle collectors ..

Really makes you think, doesn't it...

fishbones · 03-09-2010, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spence

I think you're reading too much into this. The objective of the task force was to capture public input for 60 days...

While I agree the influence of corporate fishing is a long-term threat, I don't see anything here that indicates recreational fishing is going to be restricted in a substantial way. There is the anecdote of bear hunting...but while there's a thin parallel...fish and bear aren't exactly the same thing.

-spence

Do you think that WWF, Greenpeace, Defenders of Wildlife, Pew Environment Group and the others are a short or long-term threat?

scottw · 03-09-2010, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fishbones

Do you think that WWF, Greenpeace, Defenders of Wildlife, Pew Environment Group and the others are a short or long-term threat?

did you happen to catch the news clip of the Greenpeace boat that looked like the Batmoblie chasing a whaling ship a little while back and the whaling ship just ran the Batmobile over?...I don't want to see them harpooning whales but i did laugh my @## off at that.....the Greenpeace Batmobile boat was a "short term threat"

Mike P · 03-09-2010, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tagger

Fishing registration was just to get our names .. Expect a knock on the door ,, fishing tackle collectors ..

They haven't come to collect anyone's guns yet, and they have had to be licensed for years.

spence · 03-09-2010, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fishbones

Do you think that WWF, Greenpeace, Defenders of Wildlife, Pew Environment Group and the others are a short or long-term threat?

There are pros and cons with activism, and various levels at that. You simply can't lump it all together...

-spence

fishbones · 03-09-2010, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spence

There are pros and cons with activism, and various levels at that. You simply can't lump it all together...

-spence

I'm not lumping them together. The article that you're commenting on did. So, will you answer my question?

spence · 03-09-2010, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fishbones

I'm not lumping them together. The article that you're commenting on did. So, will you answer my question?

I did answer your question, by stating that the threat of activist groups as positioned by yourself was lacking in context to be of much importance.

The article you're commenting on is trying to string you along by sequencing elements in the hope that you'll make the connections by yourself.

A) The Obama Admin closed the window for public comment

+

B) Radical activists will protect animals just because they're cute

must =

C) Obama wants to screw fisherman because that's what liberals do

The author seems to want you to believe that the Administration is out to exact some dubious revenge on the sportsperson, callously striking their input for the record so they can close the doors and work with tree spiking radicals to shut down an entire industry....just like they did in ONTARIO.

This doesn't appear to be true.

-spence

Crafty Angler · 03-09-2010, 01:35 PM

Yeah, well they can take my fishing tackle when they pry it out of my cold, dead hands...

On a serious note - and at the risk of making a political statement in the wrong forum - we live in a plutocracy (rule by the wealthy) and serving corporate interests to accelerate that transfer of wealth is a large part of the system. That's what all three branches of government are paid to do (in one way or another) by lobbyists.

I voted for Obama and regret it, but it's not like we actually had a choice

The two parties are basically the same creature with two heads. The point is the same, the only difference is the delivery

Expect the largest contributors to their re-election funds to be the voices heard most clearly, regardless

fishbones · 03-09-2010, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spence

I did answer your question, by stating that the threat of activist groups as positioned by yourself was lacking in context to be of much importance.

The article you're commenting on is trying to string you along by sequencing elements in the hope that you'll make the connections by yourself.

A) The Obama Admin closed the window for public comment

+

B) Radical activists will protect animals just because they're cute

must =

C) Obama wants to screw fisherman because that's what liberals do

The author seems to want you to believe that the Administration is out to exact some dubious revenge on the sportsperson, callously striking their input for the record so they can close the doors and work with tree spiking radicals to shut down an entire industry....just like they did in ONTARIO.

This doesn't appear to be true.

-spence

Actually, I wasn't trying to position anything. I asked you a question because you commented on corporate fishing, but not the activist groups. I was just curious as to what you thought about the activist groups mentioned in the article. Nothing more, nothing less. But as usual, you tried to use the old end around and not just give a simple answer. Do you ever get tired of thinking up different ways to come off as a blowhard?

CaptMike · 03-09-2010, 01:51 PM

for people who bitch a lot about poor fishing, fishermen sure do fight conservation efforts pretty hard. I'm wondering if there could ever be a conservation effort that a majority of fishermen would support?

spence · 03-09-2010, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fishbones

Actually, I wasn't trying to position anything. I asked you a question because you commented on corporate fishing, but not the activist groups. I was just curious as to what you thought about the activist groups mentioned in the article. Nothing more, nothing less. But as usual, you tried to use the old end around and not just give a simple answer. Do you ever get tired of thinking up different ways to come off as a blowhard?

Nothing more, nothing less? You asserted they were a threat.

-spence

fishbones · 03-09-2010, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spence

Nothing more, nothing less? You asserted they were a threat.

-spence

No, you're wrong. Sometimes I just ask you questions to see what you think. I may not put much stock in your opinions, but I like to hear what you have to say sometimes.

Anyways, I never asserted anything. Not sure where you got that from.

RIJIMMY · 03-09-2010, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptMike

for people who bitch a lot about poor fishing, fishermen sure do fight conservation efforts pretty hard. I'm wondering if there could ever be a conservation effort that a majority of fishermen would support?

limit rec anglers to one bass over 28", I dont think you'd get too many complaints to that.

Nebe · 03-09-2010, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

limit rec anglers to one bass over 28", I dont think you'd get too many complaints to that.

1 over 36 would be better.

wader-dad · 03-09-2010, 03:06 PM

I went on the task force's website to read some of the 1,844 comments put in before the comment period ended. Many are from marine biologists, some are save the whales people, some are to protect their stretch of beach, and some are from fisherman. Most of the comments I read were more geared towards stopping pollution in the oceans. Didn't read any from PETA maniacs talking about sea kittens- but I did not read all 1,844.

But then a fisherman from Alabama submitted this comment:

I believe that this is going to be the worst IDEA anyone ever came up with. They think health care protests are bad. They have no idea what this is going to do to the United States of America (remember when this land was called that). Where people were free. Next thing you know you will have to get a bill through congress just to wipe your ASS. Oh- I am sorry, I shouldn't use ASS. Never mind it is in the Constitution under the First Amendment. Remember them? Probably not. Before you decide to change something READ them.

MakoMike · 03-09-2010, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptMike

for people who bitch a lot about poor fishing, fishermen sure do fight conservation efforts pretty hard. I'm wondering if there could ever be a conservation effort that a majority of fishermen would support?

This has nothing to do with "conservation" this has to do with your ability to fish, for any species.

MakoMike · 03-09-2010, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike P

They haven't come to collect anyone's guns yet, and they have had to be licensed for years.

I guess you don't live in NYC where they did Exactly that required "assault weapons" to be registered and then the banned them and had a list of everyone who owned one.

MakoMike · 03-09-2010, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spence

I think you're reading too much into this. The objective of the task force was to capture public input for 60 days...

NO! The objective of the task force is to come up with recommendations for "spatial planning" for the inland waters and oceans of the United States. The concern is that their initial draft totally ignored fishing in their proposed plan, hence the assumption that they were ignoring fishermen.

When Apolitical groups like the American Sportfishing Assoc. start sounding the alarms you know there is probably some reason for their concerns.