NO-BAMA FISHING AND HUNTING BAN!

[ericm337]

has anyone else heard anything on this subject...


http://www.asafishing.org/newsroom/news_pr100509.html


i know someone on this site has something interesting to say about this big problem, lets hear it!:shocked:

[papawd]

why should it matter what people think, they have passed a few others that the country was against. and as long as the country and the people stand to loose jobs who cares,,ALL I CAN SAY IS BE AFRAID ----BE VERY AFRAID

[GreenWave]

After reading this, I sped home, threw the yak on the car and was all set to hustle down to the MRGO rock dam to fill my freezer before the ban goes into effect! But then I figured, "why stop there?" I might as well include a road trip to D.C. to speak my mind to the socio-fascist congress critters sponsoring the legislation. Just a quick google search to identify the culprits...

Imagine my relief/disappointment (not sure which) to learn that no such bill exists. Current fishing related bills include:
H.R. 3749: Recreational Fishing and Hunting Heritage and Opportunities Act, and
H.R. 4914: Coastal Jobs Creation Act of 2010.

Both boring, bipartisan, vaguely pro angling fluff. No hunting ban either. Over in the Senate, those effete pantywaists don't appear to be taking up any hunting or fishing legislation whatsoever!

Executive Order, perhaps? Apparently not, unless it was issued by Glenn Beck, who has been warning of one for months. Those activist judges on the Supreme Court? Nada (although they are taking up an interesting case (http://detnews.com/article/20100423/METRO/4230375/1409/rss36) between Michigan and Illinois over Asian Carp. That has implications down here and might be a good one to follow.)

Sigh. I guess I'll have to put away my pitchfork for now.

Okay, okay, I haven't forgotten our discussion on the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force. There's plenty to keep an eye on there, no doubt. Just having a little fun before they pry my fishing rod from my cold, dead hands. :smilegrin:

[ericm337]

yea it seems like alot of people will be in jail for fishing lol...

bad part about all this; health care plan that just passed had an 80% disapproval, but somehow it doesnt seem to matter which way the votes go anymore. ahhh be afraid of our dictator!

[Hobie1Kenobie]

Don't want to get too political about this, but, we did elect Obama. We are getting what we asked for. Nothing else will ever shock me for the rest of my life.
Oh woe are we.

[Mung]

The sky is falling...
The sky is falling...

[Speck Tackler]

Well I will say we are down to a 2 snapper a day limit so who knows what will come next. I bet not too many people would have seen that one coming. When it comes to the federal government (Dems and Repubs) I do not look for too much good to come out of the DC area.

[RedFinn]

Oh I wish I was in a land forgotten, look away, look away, look away USA!!!!!!!!!!

[MDR]

Don't want to get too political about this, but, we did elect Obama. We are getting what we asked for. Nothing else will ever shock me for the rest of my life.
Oh woe are we.

Not to get too technical, and yes, I understand your point, however "we" did not elect him. "They" elected him and now "we" are paying the price.

[Branch_Office]

Not to get too technical, and yes, I understand your point, however "we" did not elect him. "They" elected him and now "we" are paying the price.

+1

[Yak-a-Lou]

What the hell...

Below is an excerpt from a letter written to the Council on Environmental Quality / Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force in response to the Obama administrations proposal to create marine reserves or no-go zones.

Recommendation: The recreational fishing and boating community strongly opposes a federal effort to allocate space and restrict public access to recreational fishing (i.e., zone) within the ocean or inland environment. Any CMSP should be solely limited to enhancing interagency cooperation in the planning stage of potential uses where conflicts might be unavoidable The Task Force should better define CMSP and indicate clearly whether it is the intent of the Interim Framework to lay out a new federal policy of spatial planning and space allocation, based primarily on top-down federal government decisions on what is and is not a proper use in any given ocean or inland space.

The Task Force should clarify whether it intends to initiate a policy of ocean and inland zoning in the United States or if marine spatial planning will be strictly limited to joint data collection, mapping, and cooperative processes between federal, state and local agencies. Should the Administration initiate an ocean zoning policy, it should be the result of well-documented biological, economic or social needs and subject to vastly more public review and comment and Congressional oversight.

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:l_qccKMkwQwJ:www.joincca.org/media%2520room/Federal%2520Fishery%2520Issues/MSPComments.pdf+%22Coastal+Conservation+Association%22+%22water+access%22+issues&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESicfA6Nwz0vyb_WdKJH73XCfL06Ta6OZsrNm1THyeRI5VmjpeJPhUmrjTLKtRrPXy91Qy201kj5YdRtf3VjuPKeFRfib-anNh9fpFeT9apWtkKKGK4ooUwyJKzqMOnOdAeEV3Wq&sig=AHIEtbTILjVOxZOm28wL8CJlvEqOq_yfMQ


Link might be too long or otherwise jacked up. Google " CCA Council on Environmental Quality Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force " and theright stuff should pop up.

By the way... This letter was signed by Jeff Angers et al, and is backed by the CCA. The CCA fights against zoning (reduced access) on a national level. Evidently some fights for access are OK, while others are not.

I'll note for the record that over-fishing has arisen as a problem almost everywhere on the globe. The Environmental Quality Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force appears to be well-intentioned but the new power they seem to have garnered, creating no fishing zones with little more than the stroke of a pen, seems scary. We'll see what shakes out.

[ericm337]

espn also did an excerpt on this. from what ive heard the main objective of the plan is to make money off the fisheries by having it completely commercial. this way we all have to pay for fish every time we want to eat the fish we ourselves can harvest ourselves.

im guessing mcdonalds is gonna make a pond the size of the great lakes and fill it completely with growth hormones! lmoa!!

who knows but we are sure to find out soon since this is gonna happen sometime around September i believe... pass or not

i just hope the people who have billions invested in wildlife conservation, i.e.; (cca and ducks unlimited) can help us since none of us have the resources to fight this.

[Hobie1Kenobie]

Not to get too technical, and yes, I understand your point, however "we" did not elect him. "They" elected him and now "we" are paying the price.

Valid point. I understand how the electoral college works. I find it difficult to come to terms with the fact, however, that the voting population puts dem's in public office on a local level. The national officials we have in office are a direct reflection of that. Remember, if you will Kathleen Blanco. The "they" you speak of is your neighbor and mine. The "we" I spoke of is our nation as a whole. It was the white male vote that put Barak over the edge, it was the white male vote that reelected Ray Nagin after Katrina, it will be the white male vote that eventually brings us socialism. Aren't we versatile? I toyed with the notion of not responding at all, letting this post die, but I am a political junkie and sometimes can't restrain myself very well.

[Tigerfish]

By the way... This letter was signed by Jeff Angers et al, and is backed by the CCA. The CCA fights against zoning (reduced access) on a national level. Evidently some fights for access are OK, while others are not.



CCA is against this issue because it is a poor method for managing a fishery. It has nothing to do with access.

The Feds are trying to push this forward by saying no-go zones are the only way to save certain fisheries. CCA's stance is that harvesting of fish by people has become an undeniable link in the ecological chain. By removing that link doesn't mean that you will restore the fishery. Actually, the reverse might occur as the ecological conditions that would remain may favor one species over another. The only way to properly manage a fishery is through setting proper limits based on sound information.

There is a difference.


This will be my last post regarding anything about CCA. Y'all can now enjoy my silence.

http://www.orkutpapa.com/scraps/7-8.gif

[Yak-a-Lou]

Luvs ya Tigerfish but it plainly states in the letter: "The recreational fishing and boating community strongly opposes a federal effort to allocate space and restrict public access to recreational fishing (i.e., zone) within the ocean or inland environment."

Not to worry... It's only somewhat inconsistent, not purely hypocritical. There are major differences in the issues here and I'm guilty of slinging a little mud. However, it's true enough that if the feds were to make "no-fishing zones" in inland areas, some rich and powerful people wouldn't be allowed to fish on their own "lands."

I never really pushed for the CCA to pick up the whole access fight anyway. I just wanted them to get behind legislation requiring water-owners to mark their private waterways at all points of ingress and egress so I know where I can and can't go without having to study the imperfect and incomplete maps from the Louisiana Lands Office. When the government makes laws that are nearly impossible for the average, well-intentioned man, to follow, there's a problem. Someone needs to fix it.

[GreenWave]

espn also did an excerpt on this. from what ive heard the main objective of the plan is to make money off the fisheries by having it completely commercial. this way we all have to pay for fish every time we want to eat the fish we ourselves can harvest ourselves.

ESPN has issued one of those lame quasi-apologies for that article. Here it is: http://sports.espn.go.com/outdoors/saltwater/columns/story?columnist=bowman_steve&id=4982359

[Tigerfish]

Luvs ya Tigerfish but it plainly states in the letter: "The recreational fishing and boating community strongly opposes a federal effort to allocate space and restrict public access to recreational fishing (i.e., zone) within the ocean or inland environment."


Luvs ya too Yak.:biggrin:

Context, context, context....The reason they oppose limiting access is the feds saying that limiting access is the only good method for fisheries management. That is what CCA is saying they are against.


I just wanted them to get behind legislation requiring water-owners to mark their private waterways at all points of ingress and egress so I know where I can and can't go without having to study the imperfect and incomplete maps from the Louisiana Lands Office. When the government makes laws that are nearly impossible for the average, well-intentioned man, to follow, there's a problem. Someone needs to fix it.



Now with this....I couldn't agree more. I have no problems staying out of or off of other people's property. Just let me know where that property is.


Damn...oooppps. I was supposed to stay quiet. Haha....guess I owe Yak-a-lou and theoldcaster a beer now. http://www.cksinfo.com/clipart/signssymbols/smileys/set1/smiley-be-quiet.png

[Bighead]

The late, great Ayn Rand once said..."Great men cannot be ruled".

They can do all they want, but brother, if I want to go fish...I'm going.

Bighead

[ijuswannafish]

The late, great Ayn Rand once said..."Great men cannot be ruled".

They can do all they want, but brother, if I want to go fish...I'm going.

Bighead

Well said Bighead. I couldn't have said it better myself.