|
BF- Childish antics...Whatever...I guess when you have no valid arguement other than "IMO" you might as well try to deflect the discussion there. Here's the rub BF...this is very personal to me. I have been commercial fishing for stripers since the 1950's and nothing gets much more personal than someone taking $$ out of your pocket for their own selfish reasons. Now I read your "take,take take...kill, kill,kill" post so I figure you & most of the "anti's" are probably saying I'm just as selfish. Maybe...but here's the difference; I don't have the marine fisheries degree that would qualify me to be making the decisions so I let the pro's (not the pol's) make those decisions. They allow a quota fishery; I'm fishing..they don't, based on actual "best science" management, and I'm not. It's that simple.
"I do not think there should be a commercial striper fishery...is there a problem with that?"
Not at all; again your opinion...but since I don't think you have a PHD in Marine Fisheries, I don't think you are qualified to make that decision for everyone else. I posted somewhere else about the similarities between this SF bill to the Animal Rights agenda driven Question 1 we had shoved down our throats several years back. Big outside $$, fringe science and outright lies, demonize blood thirsty hunters ; then just convince an uneducated public to vote against the professional opinions of DF&W and virtually every other real conservation agency and voila!! We're up to our ears in beaver flooding problems, coyotes are everywhere and if not for the common sense of those making F&G Board appointments, we would have animal rights groups controling our Fish& Game Board. Now I guess an animal rights idiot would say the end justifies the means. Frankly, I can't believe that any sportsman would support this type of political influence peddling.
|
Hybrid Mode
