Forum Navigation

New Posts

Search

  #76  
Old 01-10-2007, 10:38 AM
Perch Perch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Before Nov. 1999
Location: MA
Posts: 993
Gee Dwbuzzard it isn’t like that at all in the states that have implemented saltwater licenses. Why would you assume it would be so onerous in the Northeast? And, as I’ve stated here many times, the license would doubtless be reciprocal in nearby states--certainly in Mass, Ct, RI, and NY. Finally, you ask “what good could come” from a saltwater license. I certainly feel for Ted Williams and other conservation writers who spend their lives trying to educate the sporting public. The sporting public doesn’t pay attention. They can explain a hundred times that states with saltwater licenses have basically shut down exploitative commercial fishing, and the message still doesn’t get out. If you refuse to read the article I posted, at least read these two non-consecutive paragraphs from it:

“At the recent hearings in North Carolina, the only organized opposition to the recreational saltwater license came from commercial fishermen. "We don't like a license period," their chief lobbyist-Jerry Schill, president of the North Carolina Fisheries Association-told me this past November. But when I asked why he and his colleagues are so committed to conserving anglers' money, he said only that the license had a "bunch of holes in it”….

Schill is not always this long-winded and unintelligible, especially when he is talking to his own people. So tight and terse was his diction in a 2003 statement to The National Fisherman that, in just 55 words, he was able to say everything I've been trying to say up to this point: ‘Look what happened in the other states,’ he declared. ‘Look what the CCA has done with that license when it's been put in place. In some states you've got fish that have been given 'game fish' status, taken off consumers' plates. In other states, gillnet bans. And in Florida, they got the ultimate: a commercial net ban.’”
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 01-10-2007, 10:43 AM
Lurch's Avatar
Lurch Lurch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onshore
Face it. The vast majority of SW fishermen do not want to join anything but love to complain that nobody's doing anything to protect their pet fisheries.

Bill
Bill,
I am sorry but do not force the values of the CCA and RFA or any other organization down the throats of people who do not want any part of it. I agree it MAY be in the best interest of all fisherman to join these groups but if they do not want to get off their assess and do something about the fishery then that is their prerogative.

A license will only allow the CCA and RFA to pound their chests in congress by saying there are X million active members but in reality only 2% of the members care about the fishery. That is too bad the the CCA or the RFA cannot rally the fisherman around their cause, maybe the message is too radical or does not match what the MAJORITY of the fisherman want to hear.

Look at AARP, they send propaganda to everyone who is close to being 55. AARP can say to congress that we do not force our values down the throats of our members by forcing a license like the fisherman lobby because our membership are made up of volunteers who actually car about a cause.

I believe that there are a high number of members of the fishing internet chat rooms like SOL, S-B and reel-time and I am sure many of us here have seen posts about how the Penn reels quality has decreased. Because of the power of the membership and the messages that have been posted from these sites, without fees or licenses, Penn is listening....they may not take all of the advice but some is better than nothing.
__________________
Sleep when your dead! Go fishing!
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 01-10-2007, 11:02 AM
G-Man's Avatar
G-Man G-Man is offline
HoboFly Guy
 
Join Date: Before Nov. 1999
Location: Marlboro, MA
Posts: 1,142
Well, you know what they say about opinions and a-holes.

That's a joke to think a SW license is going to improve SW fishing here in NE.
Just another tax... pure BS.

The only think that could help fishing in NE is to stop the dragging of F'n nets.
Even as bad as things are in NE waters they still drag nets less than a mile offshore everyday. Just scraping everything up still...it's sad.

If a SW license was linked to decreased nets ... I would buy a dozen.

Now, when I visit Florida I'm OK with paying a license. I see conservation efforts there and authorities enforcing things. I have no confidence a SW license in NE would go to the type of efforts I see in Florida.

http://marinefisheries.org/Even_if_Exempt.pdf

Sorry ... I just have no faith that a SW license here would mean any decrease in commercial fishing and any real improvement.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 01-10-2007, 11:56 AM
RIBill's Avatar
RIBill RIBill is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Before Nov. 1999
Location: Rhody
Posts: 695
Kudos to Perch for fighting the fight, and taking a lot of shots. I'm sure Perch has said to himself, "why am I taking on this thankless task?". He could have folded his tent and said the hell with it.

Someone suggested that he sounds like a lobbyist. Others have suggested that he has an "agenda". I'm assuming that he's just a smart and articulate guy who cares about sound fisheries policy. Similarly, Ted Williams "street cred" has been questioned. If you read enough of Williams, and are not one of his targets, you come to appreciate his consistency and his dedication to the environment. Its amazing and discouraging how quickly things become polarized and politicized. Its hard for us to remember our common bond, our love of fishing, when resource allocation and money are brought up.

Anyhow, put me down, now, as in the past, as an advocate of SW licensing.

Perch's responses to Lurch are correct... the reality is that we don't get off our butt unless there is a bite on.

Objections based on the amount of license fee, or pilfering of the monies by state politicians are understandable, but miss the point. If the license regs are well-structured, most or all of the mechanical and logisitical concerns can be addressed. Those who fear big government and more taxes should always embrace a "pay-as-you-go", "user-fee" approach to taxes and services. Ideally, license fees will be dedicated to such local concerns as ramp improvements and enforcement. But, in addition, the license will result in better information and data for regulators and scientists, to the benefit of the fisheries. Most importantly, from my perspective, a license will result in a governmentally-recognized, "tax-paying", constituency. This can only increase our clout.

Lastly, in my view, this is all part of a much larger process. Our oceans are no longer boundless. We have the capacity to plunder fish and habitat and we've proven it. We are moving in the direction of managing a resource, the oceans, that once seemed too big and mysterious to manage. Federal law, science, and common sense all suggest that ocean resources require close management. Whether you buy arguments from Perch or Ted Williams or me, there will be a license. It's just a question of when.

Last edited by RIBill; 01-10-2007 at 11:57 AM.. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 01-10-2007, 11:58 AM
Perch Perch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Before Nov. 1999
Location: MA
Posts: 993
G-Man: Do you imagine it’s just coincidence that all the states that have saltwater licenses don’t have all these nets? And do you imagine it’s just coincidence that they had all these nets right up until the time they implemented saltwater licenses? Lots of strong opinions out there held by folks so busy typing those opinions that they don’t have time to read.
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 01-10-2007, 12:08 PM
Onshore's Avatar
Onshore Onshore is offline
Veteran Reel-Timer
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On the Indian River Lagoon, Melbourne, Florida
Posts: 4,309
Lurch,

CCA and RFA are the only large organizations out there that represent saltwater recreational fishermen and that's the only reason I brought them up. I haven't been a member of either since I left New Hampshire and I'm certainly not trying to shove them down your throat or anyone elses.


You have been raving about all that AARP does. What are they doing for SW anglers?


Do you belong to any saltwater anglers organization that that could possibly represent all SW anglers or wants to ?


Are you planning to start your own group ? Or, are you just blowing off steam about a proposed NH SW license
__________________
XGloucesterman

This and other original paintings and fine art prints of fishing and marine subjects may be seen on my website
http://bill-hubbard.fineartamerica.com/
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 01-10-2007, 12:10 PM
SteepBank's Avatar
SteepBank SteepBank is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Boston Area
Posts: 925
Cool

Good aruguements for both sides, but I dont have much faith in a SW lic either. what if a species is targeted in another off shore state without any regs or retrictions? If there arent any fish to migrate up here it wont make any difference. Its like trying to protect atlantic salmon in maine when they are trapnetting them off the coast of newfoudnland before they ever get that far. The solution possibly lies within having all of the east coast on the same page, not just a state or two. Now you are talking a bill in congress-good luck with that one. I hear ya perch, certainly agree with many of your points but you have more faith in bureaucracy than I grew up with, and thats not neccesarily a bad thing I might add. That certainly doesnt mean everyone stands around with thier hands in thier pockets doing nothing, I just dont know if thats the answer in this case.

just my .02
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 01-10-2007, 12:16 PM
Slappy's Avatar
Slappy Slappy is offline
The truth is out there...
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Arlington MA
Posts: 3,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Man
If a SW license was linked to decreased nets ... I would buy a dozen.
Greg, it was the SW licensed fishermen in CA that got a gill net ban within 3 miles of shore. Inshore fishing changed radically in the next few years.

In the political arena, money and voter counts talk. Those who pay for enforcement of fisheries laws can demand that they are enforced. Look at the discussion of poaching in NY. They don't have the money or resources to address the poaching problems.

You may be right that in MA we will not get the value we need out of a license because of the political environment. But we can change that by the way we vote...
__________________
Slappy the baitshop boy
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 01-10-2007, 12:27 PM
dwbuzzard dwbuzzard is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Fall River
Posts: 48
Perch, I'm sorry if I insulted you by having an opinion. I thought this was a forum to express thought. I don't mind that you have an opinion and share it without reservation after each person posts theirs, I do mind that you now feel the need to start with the inuendo ...we don't read. I did state fact based on the licenses that I now purchase. I do have history on how the Commonwealth of Mass "listens" to LICENSED gun owners, I don't believe fishermen will be held in higher esteem. I read the information that you post and hope that I'm wrong about our politicans, but would you mind sticking to the point and leaving the crap out.
__________________
dwbuzzard
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 01-10-2007, 12:28 PM
soundownsam soundownsam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Ft Lauderdale, fl/ Swampscott. MA
Posts: 937
I think that a very interesting piece of information would be to look at states with and without salt water licenses and see if there is any noticeable increase in promotion of recreational fishing interests in states with licenses.

One example that comes to mind is Florida’s net ban. Did licensing give a louder voice to bring the issue to a point where it was made a constitutional amendment?

Sam
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 01-10-2007, 01:06 PM
sped sped is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Before Nov. 1999
Posts: 198
I read it.....

....and it makes sense......
I don't know if everythings true in the article but I'll assume it is.....imagine spending 10 or 20 bucks a year for a SW license and never see another spotter plane in CC Bay or never feeling like the net boat just came thru the spot where you are casting and swept every living thing up in it.....that kind of stuff was eliminated in just about every other state in the country that has a saltwater license.......as a previous poster stated, "If a SW license was linked to decreased nets ... I would buy a dozen"......That's what would happen, that's what has happened....and all you'd have to buy would be one.......Sped
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 01-10-2007, 01:21 PM
Perch Perch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Before Nov. 1999
Location: MA
Posts: 993
Steepbank: But fish were targeted off other states--ALL the coastal states south of Delaware and around the gulf and up the West Coast. And now they’re not because those states have saltwater licenses. That in itself has been a HUGE benefit for the Northeast. Now a lot of those fish that used to get clobbered by commercials migrate up here. The only coastal states (other than Hawaii) that don't have saltwater licenses are Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey and Delaware. What ails the Northeast?

Dwbuzzard: I was not insulted by your opinion. I was frustrated by it. This is because, after I had posted a piece that reported in great detail all the good that saltwater licenses have done (not opinions but verifiable, historical facts), you asked what good could come from a saltwater license.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 01-10-2007, 01:33 PM
Lurch's Avatar
Lurch Lurch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onshore
Lurch,

CCA and RFA are the only large organizations out there that represent saltwater recreational fishermen and that's the only reason I brought them up. I haven't been a member of either since I left New Hampshire and I'm certainly not trying to shove them down your throat or anyone elses.


You have been raving about all that AARP does. What are they doing for SW anglers?


Do you belong to any saltwater anglers organization that that could possibly represent all SW anglers or wants to ?


Are you planning to start your own group ? Or, are you just blowing off steam about a proposed NH SW license

Bill,
I am sorry that I made it seems that I was implying that you were trying to jam data down our throats, I was not. I should have said that the CCA and RFA should not be trying to shove information down the throats of fisherman who do not want it.

I do not belong to any fishing political group but because of this discussion I will be joining one, or at least donate some money.

I do not think I am blowing off steam because I am seriously against giving any more money to the govt as they will only waste it. However, I will point out that the reason I brought up AARP is because Perch's believes that we need a license to be used for political power. I say that there are other methods of gaining political power with congress without a mandatory license.

So what if everyone is charged for a license and only 20% of the license holders want to change the system, what kind of political power will the license have? There would be waring factions trying to get their agenda pushed through congress. The power of the license would be fractured into multiple groups of opposing views.

Now if the discussion centered around a license GUARANTEEING that the commercial harvesting of bait fish and Striped Bass will be stopped then I believe the line would be out the door with fisherman waiting to get their license.

Lenny
__________________
Sleep when your dead! Go fishing!

Last edited by Lurch; 01-10-2007 at 05:13 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 01-10-2007, 01:43 PM
G-Man's Avatar
G-Man G-Man is offline
HoboFly Guy
 
Join Date: Before Nov. 1999
Location: Marlboro, MA
Posts: 1,142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perch
G-Man: Do you imagine it’s just coincidence that all the states that have saltwater licenses don’t have all these nets?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slappy
Greg, it was the SW licensed fishermen in CA that got a gill net ban within 3 miles of shore. Inshore fishing changed radically in the next few years. ?
Well Guys ... yes ... I am of little faith.
Yet, if you mates really believe the SW license will help bring down the nets, then I'm all for it.
Where can I go buy one.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 01-10-2007, 02:03 PM
SteepBank's Avatar
SteepBank SteepBank is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Boston Area
Posts: 925
Cool

Perch, thanks as I was not aware of those details. My perception was that it worked in CA since they comprise about 80% (guessing as its probably less than that) of that coastline. I dont know why I am so suspicous of this, but perhaps I should look at things in a bit more positive light. The only other thing about this (and I thinks someone posted this) is people coming along on your boat for one day of fishing. (1 day lic maybe?). Maybe also because i fish in three states on a yearly bases (and buy alot of 1 day and season lic) and I have a knee jerk reaction to having to buy a lic to fish in the ocean.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bluefin Tuna Money Clip Raffle sage fly guy Tuna and Offshore 82 10-15-2006 06:23 AM
The Best Form To Make Fast Money!!! macanitos New England 9 02-06-2005 04:59 PM
Trying to buy a Fly Rod surfrod Tackle Forum 15 02-06-2005 02:01 AM
Feds to Gov. Mitt Romney: Show us the money or else salter New England 0 10-08-2003 07:18 AM
Outrage in RI - more money to the bureaucrats! jhurd New England 24 02-11-2002 12:17 PM



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:23 PM.




vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.


Copyright ©1995-2013, Cahill Digital