Possible New Rules for Fishing

[mikeymjr23]

Just playing devil's advocate here: What's the huge loss if fishing is prohibited? A huge percentage of fishermen just catch a fish, pose for some pictures, and mount it on the wall. Such a wasteful ending of life for the sake of recreation.

What's the sense in carrying and shooting those commie weapons? You enjoy it! You are probably never going to need them to protect your home or family...yet you still have them.

To lose fishing...would be a HUGE loss. Think of the children that LOVE to go fishing. I know for me, it was a time to get out with Dad and spend time with him.

It is also a great way to providea meal for a family. I actually just ate a bunch of perch fillets...definitely liked them.

Think of the money that the state gains through fishermen. Think of your uncle's store. Bet that would thrive if fishing was prohibited. Think of the people who sell boats with only fishing in mind.

Think...please?

[hunterdeneugene]

I also torture fish by dragging them in on big hooks and then taking them far from home and butchering them. Like kittens.

you know Zen....kitten torture isn't all that bad, and they taste like chicken....

[The Clairvoyant]

You're acting like I stated personal beliefs here. How do you expect to fight this when the fact that I'm playing devil's advocate went over the heads of most of you. What I originally said isn't my argument. It's the argument that's likely being used against you by many higher up governmental officials. What do you guy have to say to it? Mikey has the right idea, although my personal hobbies are irrelevant because I'm not personally advocating the prohibition of fishing.

[doctariAFC]

Just playing devil's advocate here: What's the huge loss if fishing is prohibited? A huge percentage of fishermen just catch a fish, pose for some pictures, and mount it on the wall. Such a wasteful ending of life for the sake of recreation.

Ya know, rather than beat the guy up for "playing Devil's advocate", use this as a lesson in how to protect our sports.

Sport Fishing is a concept by which we sustain our fisheries populations through fair chase and regulation to assure we do not overfish species to elimination from a waterway. It is part of the Conservation principles. And, as we know, conservation is the WISE USE of teh natural resources as to assure their perpetuation FOREVER.

With this very critical fact in mind, sportsmen set up a system by which each state regulates and protects the waterways and fisheries, being funded by the voluntary embracement of sport fishing by people who choose to fish. This USE of the natural resources, with regulations in place based on science, assures the perpetuation of the fisheries wisely (not always, but predominantly).

Each individual that buys a fishing license has helped pay for fisheries enforcement, monitoring, restoration, research, information collection, etc. at the State level. Each person that buys fishing tackle, boats, line, etc, funds on a Federal basis conservation grants that go to each state to perform cleanup, restoration, protection of green space, gaining public access (not just for anglers, either), etc.

But, perhaps the greatest thing recreational sport fishing does is serve as the guardian of our waterways. After all, if the fish in the waters are unhealthy, that means the waters are unhealthy. And we also drink this water, and use the water to irrigate farmlands.

Perhaps better than I can explain, here is an article concerning exactly WHY recreational sport fishing is so important to this Nation. This is from 1974, 36 years ago, and if you're not that old, no wonder you're making an ignorant statement. The gentleman at the center of this artcile is the past President of the Erie County Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs, although, at the time, I believe the name of the organization was the Erie County Conservation Alliance.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vau...95/1/index.htm

Read this article, then come in here and ask this Devil's Advocate question again.....

[hunterdeneugene]

It may have been believeable if it hadn't been for this part....

Such a wasteful ending of life for the sake of recreation.

[doctariAFC]

You're acting like I stated personal beliefs here. How do you expect to fight this when the fact that I'm playing devil's advocate went over the heads of most of you. What I originally said isn't my argument. It's the argument that's likely being used against you by many higher up governmental officials. What do you guy have to say to it? Mikey has the right idea, although my personal hobbies are irrelevant because I'm not personally advocating the prohibition of fishing.

read my post, and read the article that is linked...

EVERYONE

[zenrider]

Well my post was only meant to sound stupid and ridiculous, like the proposal to ban fishing.

[hunterdeneugene]

I read it. I can remember the days when Lake Erie would smell horrible, dead fish littered the shore. It was called a dead sea. It wasn't PETA who got that lake back on the right track. Now it is on par with some of the best steelhead fisheries in the world, the smallmouth fishing is world class ect, ect....

[hunterdeneugene]

Well my post was only meant to sound stupid and ridiculous, like the proposal to ban fishing.

I got ya Zen.....

[hunterdeneugene]

but you were serious about the kitten thing....weren't you?

[zenrider]

Well they are pretty tasty.

[Mostlymuskies]

I can remember going to Washington D.C. with the grandkids a couple summers ago.Standing on the corner near the Washington Monument was a group of Peta.They had signs saying Eat No Beef,Killing Cows Is Illegal and No Cheese! Guess what they all had Ice Cream Cones in each Peta Persons hand! I walked up and told them went Moo! Don't Choke On The Cow Tit Ice!

[doctariAFC]

To everyone in this thread, please use how I have responded to the Devil's Advocate question as a LEARNING tool, or teachable moment.

You're not going to accomplish a single thing for the protection of our sports and heritage by taking the tact that was taken as a knee-jerk reaction by all of you in response.

We are on the verge of having to go to "war" to protect our rights and our resources.

Better learn how to win the war by learning how to fight the battles to win..... And each one of us is an ambassador for the outdoors sports, whether you like it or not, whether you realize it or not.

And, trust me, I will help you all learn how to successfully defend our sports from these ever-mounting attacks.

[doctariAFC]

so where did the Devil's Advocate go? Anxiously awaiting the next "hypothetical nonsense", and the person just went away.

And, Zen, although you may believe it sounds "stupid" to ban fishing, you must not be paying much attention to the conditions "on the ground" and the ideology of the idiot in the WH.

Obama supports the nonsense of Animal Rights, and would love to do what has been done in Switzerland right here in the USA. Fortunately, the Swiss just shot down a proposed amendment to their animal laws. Pray these kinds of things do not happen in the USA, but just because it sounds stupid doesn't mean it cannot happen. Back in the day the notion of supporting people who did nothing was a stupid idea, too. Today that stupidity is called welfare....

http://www.buffalonews.com/2010/03/0...d-animals.html

Read the last couple of sentences in this story and then think long and hard. Although the outcome was a no-brainer, imagine having to hire a lawyer to defend against this nonsense?

[hunterdeneugene]

he's probably outside of Zen's house looking for kitties to rescue.....

[doctariAFC]

he's probably outside of Zen's house looking for kitties to rescue.....

Well that's a great reply. Come on buddy, I know its fun to beat up the anti's, but this thread was meant as a wake up call, not a feeding frenzy to satisfy our own pleasure in knocking down the stupid.

There's a lot going on out there. We have rto sharpen our defense with the truth, with reality, with history, with economics, with all the benefits we deliver to evryone, on our dime, on our voluntary goodness of our hearts, through the pursuit of what we love and enjoy doing.

Imagine after one of them weekends we had on the ice that some pointy headed PETArd served you with papers that you were being sued by a lawyer representing a yellow perch you tried to throw back but it ended up dying and you got accused of animal cruelty. Even though its a bogus lawsuit, the legal bill to defend against the nonsense isn't something to be taken lightly, is it?

[hunterdeneugene]

I would really hope that our legal system is beyond appointing legal counsel to represent the rights of an overplayed fish. How rediculous a concept. But if PETA has it's way, they would probably like to see it happen. I think it's time for groups like Safari Club International, B.A.S.S., IFGA, D.U., Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, the NRA, NSSA....any group with any type of sportsmans interest in mind to bind together as one and fight these fights, because if one wins, all is doomed as the flood gates will open up....

[cwilliams]

Ill keep on fishing no matter what they do. ill fallow the rules untill they get to out of hand to fallow....

[Old School Dave]

ESPN claims Obama is about to ban fishing
March 9, 4:03 PMCharlotte Fishing ExaminerJeffrey Weeks


In what may be the worst example of outdoor sports reporting in the history of America, ESPN has claimed that President Barack Obama is on the verge of banning recreational fishing.

ESPNOutdoors.com writer Robert Montgomery posted an article today claiming that the administration's decision to end the public comment phase of the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force means that Obama is likely preparing to issue an executive order outlawing recreational fishing in America.

As a sportsman who covers fisheries management and politics I do think there are many issues surrounding the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force and its eventual recommendations that all fishermen should be aware of and concerned about.

But to go from concern to suggesting that President Obama is about to ban fishing in America is the most absurd and irresponsible thing I have ever seen a major news outlet publish. There is not even a remote possibility that a standing president of the United States will outlaw fishing in America.

And yet, Robert Montgomery presents his case that it is about to happen as if it is the most likely thing in the world.

ESPN should have to provide some answer for why they allowed this irresponsible article to be published under their logo.

Let me try to walk you through what is happening, and where this crazy ESPN story came from, so that you can see how a legitimate news source could so irrationally let something like this go public.

The Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force was created to study things like fishing and how it is regulated, and how we as fishermen we are managing our interaction with the environment.

To a sportsman like me, this is certainly a cause for attention and concern, as some fringe environmental groups have expressed foolish and extreme ideas about fishing which responsible anglers and sportsmen would certainly like to counter.

Most environmental groups, however, have legitimate concerns which recreational fishing groups can understand and work with to keep fishing open throughout America and still be wise stewards of the resource.

However, the conflicts between commercial fishing groups and environmental groups throughout the country have been much more rancorous, and it is certainly not all the environmentalists' fault.

In state after state for decades commercial fishermen have made poor choices and overharvested species of fish. Meanwhile both recreational anglers and environmentalists have fought to stop fish or other wildlife from being threatened or endangered due to unwise fishing practices.

Instead of attempting to find a compromise, commercial fishing groups have fought these efforts every step of the way. Because of that, the feud between the environmental groups and the commercial fishing groups has become harsh and bitter, filled with ugly, unethical politics on both sides.

What does this have to do with recreational fishermen? Right now, not a lot. In fact, recreational fishermen in many states have long been complaining themselves that commercial fishermen are not following proper and responsible species management procedures.

In fact, recreational anglers have often had to organize efforts like the Florida inshore gill net ban in 1994 to stop commercial fishing abuse, and in doing so environmental groups (far from being the green wackos they are portrayed as) have proven valuable allies to recreational fishermen.

Yes, some extreme groups are not liked by recreational anglers because their agenda really is extreme and, frankly, about as un-American you can get for a responsible southern sportsman like me. PETA is the biggest and best-funded example. I have no love for PETA or its allies. I do, however, appreciate many of the other more mainstream and sensible environmental organizations and support their efforts.

Most environmental groups have demonstrated the understanding that we must retain our nation's outdoors sports tradition while still protecting our natural resources. That is why the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force was created.

Am I going to agree with everything that this task force does? Probably not. Issues like access to fishery grounds and over-regulation of species without sound scientific data are legitimate concerns. However, in no way shape or form is the task force President Obama created about to ban recreational fishing. That is silly. ESPN should be ashamed.

No, it is the commercial fishermen who have much to fear. Many commercial fishermen are fine and responsible individuals, but as a group in state after state they have allowed short-term mismanagement of fish stocks in exchange for short-term profits.

I have been writing about these issues in North and South Carolina for over 15 years and I can tell you without hesitation the worst enemy of commercial fishermen has been commercial fishermen. I have been pleading with them for years to explore compromise on these issues, and they will not.

Now, they are in trouble and commercial groups know in a direct fight against environmentalists they will lose. So they are clinging to an amazingly brazen life line: they have decided to scare recreational fishermen in an effort to get recs like me to fight the environmentalists with them.

It is such a hypocritical stance I can't even begin to express it in words. It goes back to years and years of backroom good old boy politics that kept sensible fishing laws out of many places in the US (my home state of North Carolina is a great example, but there are plenty more).

Now, after attacking recreation fishermen for years and fighting them tooth and nail against any efforts to have responsible fisheries management in this country, commercial fishermen are trying to make us their best friends because they are so scared of the environmentalists.

Well, I'm scared too. I'm scared responsible recreational fishermen are going to get lumped together with irresponsible commercial fishermen. That is exactly what folks like Robert Montgomery want to see happen.

Recreation anglers give commercial fishermen more credibility and respect, because in almost every state responsible recreational fishermen have worked hard at things like reasonable size and creel limits on fish and keeping harmful interaction with wildlife to a minimum. Recs have done exactly what the commercial industry as a whole has not done: be responsible.

But if you lump all fishermen together and recs take on the sins of commercial fishermen then we are in trouble indeed. No, it will not be Obama banning fishing but it will be tougher regulations on anglers, I can assure you.

Many anglers may not understand and may do the same thing ESPN writer Robert Montgomery is doing: blame environmental groups and President Obama for the problem. And the commercial fishing industry will happily encourage them to do so. As recreational fishermen, we need to avoid that at all cost.

I have been fighting with commercial fishermen for years over their lack of responsibility and self-management. To think that I will now be blamed for their actions infuriates me.

But I am not mad at environmental groups or President Obama, I am angry at the people who caused the problems in the first place and now hang like an albatross around a simple recreational fisherman's neck.

No, Obama is not about to ban recreational fishing. We are about to see, however, commercial fishermen answer for past decades of abuse of our natural resources.

I, for one, do not want to see all commercial fisherman lose their businesses. I think they are a valuable and important part of our nation. But I can tell you this (from long experience): the leaders of the commercial fishing lobby are irresponsible and poor stewards of the environment. And they are now playing desperation politics, trying to get responsible recreational anglers to take the bait.

That makes all fishermen look bad, including folks like me who have actually been calling for commercial fishing reform for years.

President Obama may not be about to ban fishing but there are more difficult times for fishermen ahead. Before we start pointing fingers at environmentalists and believing wild conspiracies we need to look at fisheries management history and put the blame for this all where it really belongs.

[The Boat Guy]

Clairvoyant must surely catch some fish, He seems to do alot of TROLLING.