reevesr1 Posted March 9, 2010 Posted March 9, 2010 OK, I didn't really vote for him, because I didn't vote in last years Presidential Election because a vote for a democrat in Texas is somewhat a waste of time. But I would have. And I don't like this! Obama Considering Fishing Ban? Link fixed, thanks Flytyer and headscan! Quote
headscan Posted March 9, 2010 Posted March 9, 2010 http://sports.espn.go.com/outdoors/saltwat...tory?id=4975762 Quote
Jayhad Posted March 9, 2010 Posted March 9, 2010 Fishing ban.... I'd like to see this article as he apparently enjoyed fly fishing with a guide this last summer. edit.. wow can you imagine fishing getting banned.... the Bow would get VERY,VERY BUSY, as would the fraser watershed Quote
Ricinus Posted March 9, 2010 Posted March 9, 2010 Well voting Republican and getting Sarah Palin for VP would be way more scary, so you probably did the right thing. Regards Mike Quote
seanbritt Posted March 9, 2010 Posted March 9, 2010 I think we need time to see how this will play out. As we saw in 2009, he voted in one of the most impressive nature bills in U.S. history, protecting over 1,100 miles in 86 rivers for anglers, rafters, and the public (http://www.americanrivers.org/newsroom/press-releases/2009/president-obama-signs.html). This was known as the historic Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 and designated 86 new Wild and Scenic Rivers, totaling over 1,100 miles in Oregon, Idaho, Arizona, Wyoming, Utah, California, and Massachusetts. Also, the fact that he enjoyed himself on the East Gallatin, in a hole I know very well, shows that he supports our sport! Quote
Ricinus Posted March 9, 2010 Posted March 9, 2010 I reread the article and The only thing that I see is the Public Consultation is over. Anything else is speculation and innuendo. I thought I read somewhere that the proposals were that future management decisions are to be based on scientific studies and not short term political or economic goals. Hope I'm right. Regards Mike Quote
hydropsyche Posted March 10, 2010 Posted March 10, 2010 I thought I read somewhere that the proposals were that future management decisions are to be based on scientific studies and not short term political or economic goals. Hope I'm right. If that is true, he has Gordon Campbell beat by a BC mile. Quote
jack Posted March 10, 2010 Posted March 10, 2010 I'm kind of with ricinus on this, Rick. I reread the article a couple of times looking for the presented facts, but can only find "fears", suspicions, "appears to" and more conjecture. j Quote
canadensis Posted March 10, 2010 Posted March 10, 2010 This; Obama Considering Fishing Ban? Is almost as believable as this Quote
headscan Posted March 10, 2010 Posted March 10, 2010 Via Moldy Chum... http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2...hing.html?cat=9 Quote
reevesr1 Posted March 10, 2010 Author Posted March 10, 2010 Loved the Onion piece. So when I read the ESPN piece, I in no way considered anyone banning fishing outright. It would be political suicide if nothing else. And the article is almost certainly fatalistic. But there has been talk of Fishing Exclusion Zones and Marine Management in the coastal regions for years. In my myopic view, this always mean limited access to the areas I grew up fishing-which are almost always shallow bays and marsh/estuary systems. Exactly the areas, along with fertile reef systems, that would end up getting "managed". In other words, manage the places where the fish are and leave the rest open for the fishermen. That is probably over fatalistic as well, but there is legitimate fear certain areas being closed. Where I grew up, commercial fishermen have been banned from these shallow water systems for years. There is no commercial harvest of the game fish I grew up fishing, and the fishing is much better (and still getting better) because of it. Any new "management" would be totally on the recreational angler. (and again, I am only talking about coastal Texas and Louisiana) Maybe nothing will happen to the rec angler. That would be great. But to say there are not groups involved in this process that are looking to totally get rid of fishing in all forms in totally Pollyannish. I do not think there is any chance of that happening. But anyone who thinks they do not have some political clout is sadly mistaken. And anyone who thinks that this is a science based process is also mistaken. It is political, being carried out in a political arena. And my fear is that any bone thrown to the extremist side would be in the form of exclusion or management zones. I did read the article Marc posted. Appears nice and balanced. But I think the author is burying his head in the sand a bit. He has been fighting the commercials so long (judging by his article) that he cannot see a scenario where what is good for the commercial may be good for him. It clouds his judgment, IMHO, and makes him want to believe that anything bad for the commercial fisherman is good for him. Maybe, but maybe not. Again, I think that there are groups in this fight that see comms and recs as the same thing. The enemy of my enemy and all that. My judgment is probably clouded as well by a fear of loosing my rights. This fear could be unfounded, though I doubt it. I also think "facts" will play a minuscule role in all this. Quote
jack Posted March 10, 2010 Posted March 10, 2010 I have faith that any bill passed by any Congress will be so watered down, so "pork-barrelled", that it will actually not change anything and cost millions of taxpayers dollars to do it. "Managed" can also mean the implementation of common sense regulations for those without common sense. Like anchoring on coral reefs, using drag anchors to rip up vegetation, kill limits, gear limits, select no fishing zones, etc, etc. We have such regs and zones on the Left Coast right now. The only "infringement" is on people's "rights" to poach or act like idiots. I also have faith that professionals in the field of ocean management are actually doing good work, in spite of all the factions who light their hair on fire. j Quote
reevesr1 Posted March 10, 2010 Author Posted March 10, 2010 I have faith that any bill passed by any Congress will be so watered down, so "pork-barrelled", that it will actually not change anything and cost millions of taxpayers dollars to do it. "Managed" can also mean the implementation of common sense regulations for those without common sense. Like anchoring on coral reefs, using drag anchors to rip up vegetation, kill limits, gear limits, select no fishing zones, etc, etc. We have such regs and zones on the Left Coast right now. The only "infringement" is on people's "rights" to poach or act like idiots. I also have faith that professionals in the field of ocean management are actually doing good work, in spite of all the factions who light their hair on fire. j I have faith in the professionals as well. Though most of the changes on the gulf coast commercial fisheries were spearheaded by highly organized rec fishing groups. These groups bring about changes using the political process more than anything else. So I've seen the political process in action. If highly organized fishing groups can force changes, why would I doubt that highly organized, politically hooked up environmental groups can't do the same thing? Quote
Castuserraticus Posted March 10, 2010 Posted March 10, 2010 I have faith in the professionals as well. Though most of the changes on the gulf coast commercial fisheries were spearheaded by highly organized rec fishing groups. These groups bring about changes using the political process more than anything else. So I've seen the political process in action. If highly organized fishing groups can force changes, why would I doubt that highly organized, politically hooked up environmental groups can't do the same thing? The last line does cause the stomach to turn as it touches on a real truth. The environmental groups can always find one or two dissatisfied people who can be used to appeal to emotions over science. Dont' let the facts stand in the way of a good cause. Quote
headscan Posted March 10, 2010 Posted March 10, 2010 http://www.gofishn.com/ned/reports/2619-no...ban-recommended Quote
Ricinus Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 http://www.gofishn.com/ned/reports/2619-no...ban-recommended Well there ya go. Rickr, pour 3 fingers of your favorite and raise a toast to the sane people. Regards Mike Quote
reevesr1 Posted March 11, 2010 Author Posted March 11, 2010 Guess I have nothing to worry about. The sane people always get there way. Quote
jack Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 Guess I have nothing to worry about. The sane people always get there way. We do??? But people always say they doubt my sanity!! j Quote
headscan Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 Looks like ESPN is claiming it was an "opinion piece" now. Maybe they're trying to become more like Fox News. http://sports.espn.go.com/outdoors/saltwat...&id=4982359 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.