Quote:
Originally Posted by Slipknot
OK Mike
so maybe it's time for change
|
Of course it's time for a change--but change has to start at the elected official level, because the bureaucrats and hacks aren't going to cut it.
Here's the real problem---numbers. Do you think that people like Barney Frank, and Bill Delahunt, Congressmen from districts with large commercial fishing interests in their constituency, have any freaking clue as to how many recreational fishermen there are in Massachusetts? Or any of the 4 people vying for Delahunt's seat in November. Maybe Jeff Perry might have somewhat of an idea. But they don't know our numbers. They see 30-odd people show up for a hearing, when there should be 350. They have no idea whether there are 3500, 35,000 or 350,000 recreational salt water anglers in the Commonwealth, or whether it's 3.5 million or 35 million nationwide.
I have to laugh. All year long I've heard a lot of you guys piss and moan about the SW license. Complaining about a "new fishing tax", vowing that you'll thumb the nose at the law, saying you'll refuse to put your name in the Federal registry. All over a lousy $10 license--less than the cost of two jigs or an 8 pack of Sluggos. One main objective of the Registry--perhaps its main aim--is to put a number on the noses of fishermen. The one effing thing that politicians know how to do is count noses, as noses = votes. They know how many commercial licenses are in existence, and they sure know how many dollars commercial interests donate to their PAC. They have no idea how many of us are out there, and how many voters they're pissing off by catering to the commercial interests. Yet, when we finally have a means to achieve that, all that many of you have done is bitch about it.
The fact of the matter is that recreational fishermen call the shots in a lot of the states that have existing SW licenses. Redfish are gamefish in every Gulf state and in Florida. Take Florida for example. FCA, the Florida Conservation Assn, is largely responsible for gamefish status for reds and snook. They achieved this with the power of numbers. If you think that Beacon Hill is a hackarama, the back rooms of Tallahassee make the hacks in Boston look like rank amateurs at the corruption game. Once the hacks in Florida saw how many people--voters--held a SW license, things started to change. And then FCA did something else. Again, backed by the power of numbers, they were able to put a question on the general election ballot amending the state constitution to ban inshore netting. That question passed by a vote of 72%. That took away the power of the backroom deal makers to gut any legislative net ban--it's now part of the state constitution, and can't ever be repealed except by another general election question that passes.
We can keep on being unrepresented, or we can put the power of numbers to work to effect changes. But, by all means, keep on bitching about having to fork over the outrageous sum of $10 to maybe get them to look at us as more than just a bunch of Joe Sixpacks with a white bucket who fish maybe 2-3 times a year on our 2 week vacations.
The other problem is that we're worse than disorganized. We're infighting amonst ourselves. The major groups that supposedly speak for us, RFA and CCA, are more interested in fighting between themselves than in speaking with one voice on behalf of recreational anglers. The commercial organizations speak as one. We backstab each other to be the alpha male of the pack. That's why I don't give any money to either group.
Hybrid Mode
