TWO BASS FOR RI CHARTER AND PARTY BOATS?

[Slipknot]

Originally Posted by thefishingfreak

You or I will never convince anyone on this site to see it differently. the guys who don't want to or can't, telling the guys who can and do, that they shouldn't. The "everyone gets a trophy" mentality. They would all have themselves using only biodegradable plugs with barbless circle hooks and you wouldn't even be able to photograph the fish because it might stress them.
We're nothing more than Greedy money grabbing cronies with our heads in the sand who are only out to pad our wallets and pay for the boats we cant afford at the expense of a fishery on the brink of utter and catastrophic collapse.

LMAO
Mike we all don't live in Cambridge you know

tell us why you support a 2 fish allowance???

[thefishingfreak]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

LMAO
Mike we all don't live in Cambridge you know

tell us why you support a 2 fish allowance???

1@28" will achieve the exact same outcome as 2@33", a 25% reduction.
Given the choice, I will ask for 2@33".

Somehow that gets me labeled as a blind greedy black market fish monger hellbent on the destruction of the fishery.

[Slipknot]

Originally Posted by thefishingfreak

1@28" will achieve the exact same outcome as 2@33", a 25% reduction.
Given the choice, I will ask for 2@33".

Somehow that gets me labeled as a blind greedy black market fish monger hellbent on the destruction of the fishery.

the so called experts may say it's the same outcome(although I think it is over a longer period of time) but I am not buying into that at all. I don't see how allowing 2 fish is more conservative than 1 fish just because the size limit is raised by 5 inches, big deal , it still kills 2 fish, that is twice as many, granted it protects the population of undersize fish but once they reach 33", they'll be killed too.

I don't know about your label there, but being in the business one would think you would want the bass to be plentiful and sustainable rather than just at the brink of collapse.
I just don't agree with having a choice for s special group, I see no need for it.

I wonder if those fisheries expert scientist or whatever they are take into account all the losses like from predators, disease, starvation, poachers. I think they are tossing out educated guesses and can put the numbers where they see fit.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

the so called experts may say it's the same outcome(although I think it is over a longer period of time) but I am not buying into that at all. I don't see how allowing 2 fish is more conservative than 1 fish just because the size limit is raised by 5 inches, big deal , it still kills 2 fish, that is twice as many, granted it protects the population of undersize fish but once they reach 33", they'll be killed too.

I don't know about your label there, but being in the business one would think you would want the bass to be plentiful and sustainable rather than just at the brink of collapse.
I just don't agree with having a choice for s special group, I see no need for it.

I wonder if those fisheries expert scientist or whatever they are take into account all the losses like from predators, disease, starvation, poachers. I think they are tossing out educated guesses and can put the numbers where they see fit.

Fair enough .
I'm sure the science is seriously flawed . It always is .
That is why putting people out of work needs to be factored in .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device