overfishing has ended according to "Top" scientist

[Chesapeake Bill]

Sandman,

I see your point but I think you are getting caught up in how people use the terminology. The biggest problem we face is the polarity regarding the actions to take. Because of this each side uses the terms to paint the other side as the evil one demanding more than is reasonable. The fact is, our recreational size and creel limits are based on those same "maximum sustainable yields" just like the commercial limits are set on it. We (as in humans not you or I) turn the words to mean something other than what the mandates to government officlas are.

I see it a lot down here in MD where our commercial anglers enjoy some of the largest part of the overall striper quota. My recreational colleagues complain and suggest the commercial quota should be reduced to their benefit. All the while they suggest that their C&R activities in pre-season have no effect on the fishery. We all need to do our part. That might mean reducing the ability for us to fish. I'm willing but I doubt others are. Just suggest that we close fishing in certain areas and see how popular you are...

[Mr. Sandman]

It should not be a popularity event. Stop asking how this effects one user group or the other and simply do what is right for the resource. Let the chips fall where they may. It is not that hard. Simply do the right thing... All we know is what they have been doing, and what they are doing now is not working out for anyone...fish or fishermen.


It kills me when they have a public opinion meeting on a proposed restrictive reg. What do they think is going to happen at these meetings? Then, after years of playing with quotas, tweaking numbers and how everything is computed, they will deem that the fishery is in trouble.

You watch what happens with SB in the next few years...the fishery is in a death spiral.

I'll have to pick this up when I get back....going fishing in the Keys for a few days. Peace.