On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 17:21:36 -0400, "*JimH*" wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 21:13:22 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On 3 Jun 2005 13:18:23 -0700, wrote:

While the following press release is primarily addressing commercial
fishing, the phrase "large areas cold be declared off limits to
trawling and other activities" may have some repercussions for sports
fishermen:

Media Advisory

Contact: Kathleen Goldstein, Environmental Defense, 202-841-0295

Pacific Fishery Management Council to Address Critical Fishery
Management Issues

~~ snippage ~~

Is the Pacific Fishery Management Council the agency charged with
regulating, controlling and establishing fisheries quotas or is this
council an invention of the Environmental Defense Fund?

Just for the record, I would buy the Pursuit. I think Grady White,
while a very good boat, is way over priced.

Later,

Tom

Wrong thread Tom. ;-)

Yep...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 17:21:36 -0400, "*JimH*" wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 21:13:22 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On 3 Jun 2005 13:18:23 -0700, wrote:

While the following press release is primarily addressing commercial
fishing, the phrase "large areas cold be declared off limits to
trawling and other activities" may have some repercussions for sports
fishermen:

Media Advisory

Contact: Kathleen Goldstein, Environmental Defense, 202-841-0295

Pacific Fishery Management Council to Address Critical Fishery
Management Issues

~~ snippage ~~

Is the Pacific Fishery Management Council the agency charged with
regulating, controlling and establishing fisheries quotas or is this
council an invention of the Environmental Defense Fund?

Just for the record, I would buy the Pursuit. I think Grady White,
while a very good boat, is way over priced.

Later,

Tom

Wrong thread Tom. ;-)

Yep...


Yep. ;-)

No the PFMC is a Federal appointed board.

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On 3 Jun 2005 13:18:23 -0700, wrote:

While the following press release is primarily addressing commercial
fishing, the phrase "large areas cold be declared off limits to
trawling and other activities" may have some repercussions for sports
fishermen:

Media Advisory

Contact: Kathleen Goldstein, Environmental Defense, 202-841-0295

Pacific Fishery Management Council to Address Critical Fishery
Management Issues

~~ snippage ~~

Is the Pacific Fishery Management Council the agency charged with
regulating, controlling and establishing fisheries quotas or is this
council an invention of the Environmental Defense Fund?

Later,

Tom

On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 22:00:36 GMT, "Bill McKee"
wrote:

No the PFMC is a Federal appointed board.

Thanks.

We had an incident up here last year with Ocean Conservancy in which
they set up an official sounding "board" at URI ostensibly to collect
"public comments" on MPAs and it turned out that the board was a
fishing (no pun intended) expedition to find out what the objections
were and custom tailor their extreme agenda with regard to MPAs.

As a representative of a state club, myself and several others caught
on real fast and left the meeting along with a bunch of commercial
types who showed up. We all met outside the building and came to the
same conclusion - re above.

It would appear that this is legit although if the Environmental
Defense Fund is involved, you can be sure it's not going to do the
recreational fishery any good.

Later,

Tom

Group I belong to has a couple of people appointed to the Stakeholders
advisory board. We also, though out attorney, have thrown a large monkey
wrench in the MLPA workings here in Calif. There was no money for the
studies, etc. required by the MLPA's. A couple of enviro extremists stepped
up with money, and they only give money as the project moves along and seems
to be in their favor. We have threatened to sue, as this is the first case
of direct regulation via purchase in the states history.
Bill

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 22:00:36 GMT, "Bill McKee"
wrote:

No the PFMC is a Federal appointed board.

Thanks.

We had an incident up here last year with Ocean Conservancy in which
they set up an official sounding "board" at URI ostensibly to collect
"public comments" on MPAs and it turned out that the board was a
fishing (no pun intended) expedition to find out what the objections
were and custom tailor their extreme agenda with regard to MPAs.

As a representative of a state club, myself and several others caught
on real fast and left the meeting along with a bunch of commercial
types who showed up. We all met outside the building and came to the
same conclusion - re above.

It would appear that this is legit although if the Environmental
Defense Fund is involved, you can be sure it's not going to do the
recreational fishery any good.

Later,

Tom

On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 02:25:14 GMT, "Bill McKee"
wrote:

Group I belong to has a couple of people appointed to the Stakeholders
advisory board. We also, though out attorney, have thrown a large monkey
wrench in the MLPA workings here in Calif. There was no money for the
studies, etc. required by the MLPA's. A couple of enviro extremists stepped
up with money, and they only give money as the project moves along and seems
to be in their favor. We have threatened to sue, as this is the first case
of direct regulation via purchase in the states history.

Good luck with it.

I'm not against MPAs per se - in fact, I'm sort of for them in a
roaming, targeted sense. I wrote up a detailed revolving resource
protection plan - the short of it was that a series of MPAs would be
set up and rotate depending on ground stock levels and the health of
the general populations. It would be a five year least, ten year max
rotation for marked areas in which it would move on to the next
species or area.

It was actually pretty well received, but the whole study/idea never
got off the ground as the commercial interests killed the whole study.

Later,

Tom

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On 3 Jun 2005 13:18:23 -0700, wrote:

While the following press release is primarily addressing commercial
fishing, the phrase "large areas cold be declared off limits to
trawling and other activities" may have some repercussions for sports
fishermen:

Media Advisory

Contact: Kathleen Goldstein, Environmental Defense, 202-841-0295

Pacific Fishery Management Council to Address Critical Fishery
Management Issues

~~ snippage ~~

Is the Pacific Fishery Management Council the agency charged with
regulating, controlling and establishing fisheries quotas or is this
council an invention of the Environmental Defense Fund?

Later,

Tom

I have been out fishing on Lake Erie with a mass of walleye showing on the
fish finder and close to some nets set up by commercial fishermen. We
caught our limit and returned to the same spot the next day....no fish. We
moved. No fish. We moved again...several times....no fish. Go figure.

Try to take a boat ride from Huron to Cedar Point or Sandusky Bay without
running into commercial nets in the water....they are everywhere.

We need to limit the number of pounds of fish commercial fishermen harvest.
If I recall Canada has not set up any such restrictions on commercial
fishing in the Great Lakes and they are raping our Lake of fish. Without
these restrictions we can kiss any sort of recreational fishing goodbye.

So I welcome any studies and restrictions on fishing limits, most especially
those aimed at commercial fishing operations.

Hehe, "Stakeholder advisory committee", and who pray tell might they
be??
Care to take a wild guess.

If it smells like a fish, Make it a dish!
"If it smells like cologne, Leave it alone!

UD



http://community.webtv.net/capuglyda...inUglyDansJack