"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...
Catch your own fish. Or eat beef. Commercial guys rape the
waters.



I agree.

Jim, can I then assume you don't eat any seafood that doesn't come out
of Lake Michigan?
On the end of your personal fishing line?

No Alaska King Crab, Louisiana shrimp, or even tuna fish for you. :-)
Bummer.


NP Chuck. I boat and fish on Lake Erie, not Lake Michigan.

Just because I eat fish does not mean the commercial fishermen are not
raping the waters. They sure are on Lake Erie.

Lake Erie. duh, of course. Zero points to Gould for geography.

So you agree with NOYB that commerical fishermen are raping the waters,
but disagree with NOYB that everybody should catch his or her own fish.
Thanks for the clarification.

I don't think that everybody whould catch his/her own fish. But curbs
need to be imposed on commercial fishing.

The commercial guys take 89% of the grouper out of the Gulf...yet they
keep reducing the limits for recreational anglers.


That makes no sense.


How about yelling at your elected chumps to stop issuing commercial licenses
NOW, so as the fisherman die or retire, there will be less commercial
pressure? I think I read about that already being done elsewhere.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...

NOYB wrote:
Catch your own fish. Or eat beef. Commercial guys rape the waters.



Hmm. So unless a person is wealthy enough to have an offshore fishing
boat similar to something that might be owned by a dentist down in
Naples, FL and the luxury of enough time to use it, he or she should
not be able to eat fish?

Is Mrs. NOYB's name Marie ("let them eat cake") Antoinette? :-)

Consider this: There would be a lot less infrastructure to support
sport fisheries if the same infrastructure couldn't be at least
partially justified as a support for commerce.

???
Can you cite an example? I can't really think what type of infrastructure
might help both commercial and recreational anglers. The artificial reef
programs are not supported by the commercial fishing industry.

For the most part, the commercial fishing industry (down here anyhow) is
mostly a parasite on the resources without contributing anything of value
back to the economy.

Meanwhile, the recreational anglers created and now support an entire
billiond-dollar industry...namely tackle shops, boat dealers, marinas, boat
mechanics, etc.

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...

NOYB wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...
When inconvenienced by a net set, a field of pots, etc. it might be
appropriate to consider the following statistics from the FEDGOV. To
bring us a fish dinner, commercial fishermen suffer a higher percentage
of on the job fatalities than any other group.

**********

America's Most Dangerous Jobs
Laura Morsch, CareerBuilder.com writer
For many of us, the most dangerous part of the workday is the commute
-- followed closely by teetering on stiletto heels.

Nationwide, most employees have a miniscule chance of being killed at
work. There were just four fatal occupational injuries per 100,000
workers in the United States in 2005, according to preliminary data
from the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics.

That, of course, is just the average. For some workers -- soldiers in
combat, for example -- every day is a life-threatening one. But on the
domestic front, the most dangerous jobs are less obvious.


Presidents:

8 died while in office...4 from natural causes and 4 by assassination.

If you just use the number who have been assassinated, that's 4 out of
43...for a mortality rate of 9,302 (per 100,000 workers).

Average salary: $400,000.

At least it pays well.

I'm surprised you missed the obvious factor in the equation. The
occupational loss of life for the other occupations are on an annual
basis. Regardless of the indivdual holding the office at any given
time, I think most Americans are very thankful that the typical annual
mortality for POTUS is *zero*.

Funny how inflation changes things. An experienced french fry jockey,
aka "assistant manager" at the local fast food joint now makes as many
$$ per year as Abe Lincoln made as President. (Presidential salary was
$25,000). Most white collar middle managers now outearn JFK's
presidential salary, ($100,000, plus a $50,000 expense account which
Kennedy refused to accept). It's doubtful the either the french fryer
or the second tier accountant would think they make enough money to
risk getting shot on the job. :-)

I'd find it hard to believe that there's a more difficult, or more
dangerous job than being President of the United States.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...
Catch your own fish. Or eat beef. Commercial guys rape the
waters.



I agree.

Jim, can I then assume you don't eat any seafood that doesn't come out
of Lake Michigan?
On the end of your personal fishing line?

No Alaska King Crab, Louisiana shrimp, or even tuna fish for you. :-)
Bummer.


NP Chuck. I boat and fish on Lake Erie, not Lake Michigan.

Just because I eat fish does not mean the commercial fishermen are not
raping the waters. They sure are on Lake Erie.


What do commercial fishermen catch on Lake Erie?

Mercury-laden fish.



Speaking of mercury exposure.....nice to hear from you again.

I'm doing my darn'dest to rid the world of mercury...one tooth at a time.
It's composite resin or porcelain crowns only for me.

"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...

NOYB wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...
When inconvenienced by a net set, a field of pots, etc. it might be
appropriate to consider the following statistics from the FEDGOV. To
bring us a fish dinner, commercial fishermen suffer a higher
percentage
of on the job fatalities than any other group.

**********

America's Most Dangerous Jobs
Laura Morsch, CareerBuilder.com writer
For many of us, the most dangerous part of the workday is the commute
-- followed closely by teetering on stiletto heels.

Nationwide, most employees have a miniscule chance of being killed at
work. There were just four fatal occupational injuries per 100,000
workers in the United States in 2005, according to preliminary data
from the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics.

That, of course, is just the average. For some workers -- soldiers in
combat, for example -- every day is a life-threatening one. But on the
domestic front, the most dangerous jobs are less obvious.


Presidents:

8 died while in office...4 from natural causes and 4 by assassination.

If you just use the number who have been assassinated, that's 4 out of
43...for a mortality rate of 9,302 (per 100,000 workers).

Average salary: $400,000.

At least it pays well.

I'm surprised you missed the obvious factor in the equation. The
occupational loss of life for the other occupations are on an annual
basis. Regardless of the indivdual holding the office at any given
time, I think most Americans are very thankful that the typical annual
mortality for POTUS is *zero*.

Funny how inflation changes things. An experienced french fry jockey,
aka "assistant manager" at the local fast food joint now makes as many
$$ per year as Abe Lincoln made as President. (Presidential salary was
$25,000). Most white collar middle managers now outearn JFK's
presidential salary, ($100,000, plus a $50,000 expense account which
Kennedy refused to accept). It's doubtful the either the french fryer
or the second tier accountant would think they make enough money to
risk getting shot on the job. :-)

I'd find it hard to believe that there's a more difficult, or more
dangerous job than being President of the United States.


No you don't. You're just looking for an absurd debate. That, and you failed
statistics.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...
Catch your own fish. Or eat beef. Commercial guys rape the
waters.



I agree.

Jim, can I then assume you don't eat any seafood that doesn't come
out
of Lake Michigan?
On the end of your personal fishing line?

No Alaska King Crab, Louisiana shrimp, or even tuna fish for you. :-)
Bummer.


NP Chuck. I boat and fish on Lake Erie, not Lake Michigan.

Just because I eat fish does not mean the commercial fishermen are not
raping the waters. They sure are on Lake Erie.

Lake Erie. duh, of course. Zero points to Gould for geography.

So you agree with NOYB that commerical fishermen are raping the waters,
but disagree with NOYB that everybody should catch his or her own fish.
Thanks for the clarification.

I don't think that everybody whould catch his/her own fish. But curbs
need to be imposed on commercial fishing.

The commercial guys take 89% of the grouper out of the Gulf...yet they
keep reducing the limits for recreational anglers.


That makes no sense.


How about yelling at your elected chumps to stop issuing commercial
licenses NOW, so as the fisherman die or retire, there will be less
commercial pressure? I think I read about that already being done
elsewhere.

The problem is that the commercials managed to get their very own Manchurian
Candidate on the NMFS council.

Dr. Roy Crabtree is the NOAA Fisheries Service's Southeast Regional
Administrator. He's also a shill for the commercial fisherman, and has
opposed every suggestion to buy out the commercial licenses as they expire.

"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...
Catch your own fish. Or eat beef. Commercial guys rape the
waters.



I agree.

Jim, can I then assume you don't eat any seafood that doesn't come
out
of Lake Michigan?
On the end of your personal fishing line?

No Alaska King Crab, Louisiana shrimp, or even tuna fish for you.
:-)
Bummer.


NP Chuck. I boat and fish on Lake Erie, not Lake Michigan.

Just because I eat fish does not mean the commercial fishermen are not
raping the waters. They sure are on Lake Erie.

Lake Erie. duh, of course. Zero points to Gould for geography.

So you agree with NOYB that commerical fishermen are raping the waters,
but disagree with NOYB that everybody should catch his or her own fish.
Thanks for the clarification.

I don't think that everybody whould catch his/her own fish. But curbs
need to be imposed on commercial fishing.

The commercial guys take 89% of the grouper out of the Gulf...yet they
keep reducing the limits for recreational anglers.


That makes no sense.


How about yelling at your elected chumps to stop issuing commercial
licenses NOW, so as the fisherman die or retire, there will be less
commercial pressure? I think I read about that already being done
elsewhere.

The problem is that the commercials managed to get their very own
Manchurian Candidate on the NMFS council.

Dr. Roy Crabtree is the NOAA Fisheries Service's Southeast Regional
Administrator. He's also a shill for the commercial fisherman, and has
opposed every suggestion to buy out the commercial licenses as they
expire.


You have time and money. Instead of complaining here, how about walking
around the marina with a petition, and sending it to your governor? Then,
follow up with phonecalls until his office gives you an appointment.
Hell...my son and his friends got a defective math teacher repaired in 9th
grade using a petition. You should be able to do it. Ask the local newspaper
for help. They're always looking for stories, especially in backwaters like
Rat Mouth.

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 21:55:07 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On 22 Jan 2007 13:36:45 -0800, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:


NOYB wrote:
Catch your own fish. Or eat beef. Commercial guys rape the waters.



Hmm. So unless a person is wealthy enough to have an offshore fishing
boat similar to something that might be owned by a dentist down in
Naples, FL and the luxury of enough time to use it, he or she should
not be able to eat fish?

Is Mrs. NOYB's name Marie ("let them eat cake") Antoinette? :-)

Consider this: There would be a lot less infrastructure to support
sport fisheries if the same infrastructure couldn't be at least
partially justified as a support for commerce. Commercial and sports
fisheries, properly managed with an eye toward conservation in a
perfect world, should be able to coexist.

The problem is that the commercial's don't want to coexist - they want
it all.

And they want it now.

In the NE, the recreationals are constantly being hammered by the
commercials to the point where recreational quotas are consistently
reduced to maintain the commercial side of any fishery. Seasons are
reduced on the whim of the commercials if their tonnage in any given
fishery is down, size and quotas changed every year on recreationals
without commercial penalty for being over tonnage, the by catch
situation is getting more and more serious with virtual destruction of
the eco system - in particular Narragansett Bay where you can't find
bunker in the summer.

I'll give you a good example of the rape and pillage. ARC Bait out of
New Jersey comes into Narragansett Bay every Spring on a permit from
the RI DEM using spotter planes to "fish" for bunker - menhaden. Guess
what they do with the menhaden?

Sell them back to the recreational fisherman. You can't find menhaden
in Narragansett Bay after ARC Bait finishes and the net result is that
there is less forage resulting in fewer quality fish for recreation.

You can't stop them because they have a commercial permit to catch as
much as they can in a one week period - curiously enough, right in the
middle of the major migration period. It's their "right". Last year
they were caught over quota - $1,000 fine. Big whoop.

Oh, and don't ask the various Eco cops to actually enforce by-catch
laws or enforce quota rules - heaven's to Betsy, we don't have the man
power to do that. Instead, let's measure the fish the recreationals
catch at the boat ramps instead - and fine them - oh, $1,000 or so a
fish if it's 1/16th inch under.

I don't want to hear about commercials.

The same is being done to the bunker in the Chesapeake, except that the
commercials are using them for fertilizer and fish oil. The effect on the
bay is tremendous.
--
***** Have a super day! *****

John H

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...
Catch your own fish. Or eat beef. Commercial guys rape the waters.



I agree.

Jim, can I then assume you don't eat any seafood that doesn't come out
of Lake Michigan?
On the end of your personal fishing line?

No Alaska King Crab, Louisiana shrimp, or even tuna fish for you. :-)
Bummer.


NP Chuck. I boat and fish on Lake Erie, not Lake Michigan.

Just because I eat fish does not mean the commercial fishermen are not
raping the waters. They sure are on Lake Erie.


What do commercial fishermen catch on Lake Erie?

Mercury-laden fish.



Perhaps they were some 30 to 40 years ago. ;-)

They primarily net yellow perch and walleye.

NOYB wrote:


I don't think that everybody whould catch his/her own fish. But curbs need
to be imposed on commercial fishing.

The commercial guys take 89% of the grouper out of the Gulf...yet they keep
reducing the limits for recreational anglers.


That makes no sense.

I would agree that the two facts you present don't seem to make sense
when isolated.

The missing brick in the logic wall would have to be, "What has
happened to the commercial fish limit?" Is it the same as ever, is it
increasing while the recreational fishermen are being cut back, or are
the commercial fishermen experiencing a reduced limit along with the
recreationals? I certainly don't know the answer, but it could be that
a scarce resource is still being distributed about like it always has
been.