Mass. weighs tougher protections for striped bass

[Slipknot]

that kind of thing touches nerves Dave

and that kind of thing can never happen as long as we have a Constitution.
This is America, you can't dictate who can make a living a certain way, that is rediculous and every time I hear it brought up I think it is rediculous.

"their fish" come on, the fish belong to all of us , it is a natural resource.

Cowhunter, no need to run away mad, you state your reasoning and others have debated, let's not all get carried away please.

[Canalman]

Missed my point Bruce.

I don't really think of the fish as anyone's fish. Cowhunter is the one who started using the "theirs/ours" reference I was just using his words to make a point.

Originally Posted by Slipknot

that kind of thing touches nerves Dave

and that kind of thing can never happen as long as we have a Constitution.
This is America, you can't dictate who can make a living a certain way, that is rediculous and every time I hear it brought up I think it is rediculous.

"their fish" come on, the fish belong to all of us , it is a natural resource.

Cowhunter, no need to run away mad, you state your reasoning and others have debated, let's not all get carried away please.

[Canalman]

Let's just lay this whole thing out there for everyone.

Cowhunter, Me, Slipknot, JohnR, BackBeach, Jimmy Houston, Fred Arbogast.... and the rest of us began fishing because we love it.

The ins and outs of this argument are just like the ins and outs of arguing about republican vs democrat---which ammounts to F)*^ing impossible.

On the one hand, we have seen commercial fishing cripple or anihilate several species in the past. It's no secret that the professional fishing sect wiped out the codfish south and west of Cape Cod, not too many recs fishing George's Bank.

We have some strange arguments regarding the leagality of commercial fishing for striped bass...

On the one hand Cowhunter wants it and he wants it because he's not doing that much damage (something his avatar might tell otherwise). So in a very strange twist, he's pointing the finger at commericals from down south saying that they are the ones doing a lot of the damage.

This is a fact. But not all of it.

The difference I see is in willingness.

We the recs are willing to whittle our take down, while the comms cry for more. What kind of sense does this make for anyone who started fishing because it was fun.

The next difference is in the kind of damage, many commercials are specialists at taking the largest fish which yield the largest dollar ammouts. They do a huge ammounts of damage to our best breeders, fish in the 25-40 pound class. Why is this so hard to get?

[Nebe]

Treat bass exactly like Florida treats the redfish..

case closed.

[Canalman]

Perhaps a better a plan would be to leave the quota the same and open the season up to 365 days a year. But lower the daily catch limit to say 5-8 fish. This way it wouldn't be worth it for the double-dippers to go out every day. Close it to out of staters and all the better. This would give the true commerical fisherman another option to top off his catch from May through November.

I's still rather see it go away

[Back Beach]

Originally Posted by Canalman

I's still rather see it go away

Me too, with my new condom line soon to be released I won't miss the $300 fishing income much at all...

[Slipknot]

Originally Posted by Canalman

Missed my point Bruce.

I don't really think of the fish as anyone's fish. Cowhunter is the one who started using the "theirs/ours" reference I was just using his words to make a point.

I was referring to your quote here

Originally Posted by Canalman

If all states made it necessary to provide proof that commercial fishing made up more than %50 their income, this debate would be moot.

-Dave

that is a discussion for another thread

It will never happen.