The original poster didn't bash anyone. Crabslayer jumped in to poop in the punchbowl.
I don't consider stating that you don't belong to the MWA as bashing. Some folks might consider "all you guys are a bunch of jerks" as bashing though.
I also don't consider posting to a public forum as "behind peoples backs", and there was certainly no personal attack. Thin skin there Zam?
Look, you've made it a habit to always disagree with a lot of your fellow recreational fishermen on fisheries issues. You yourself are a rec fisherman, and this is a rec fishing board. If you are constantly at odds with many of the members of Tidalfish, you should expect to be called on it occasionally.
Additionally, no one is trying to stop anyone from posting. Where did you get that? You and those that think like you are entitled to your opinions and have a right to post them
JUST LIKE WE DO. Just don't expect everyone to agree with you, just because you say so.
Yea so ninny ninny boo boo Zam........... and your Mom too.....fool
I guess we'll have to "agree to disagree". I don't feel that you were personally attacked in this thread before you posted. You on the other hand have had a hard-on for the CCA since they became relevant to discussions on this board. Doesn't matter what they say, you will disagree with them. You interject anti CCA rhetoric in many posts where it's uncalled for. (just as some blame watermen when it's not warranted). You most certainly have not always been "kind and respectful" in regards to posts made by CCA members or sympathizers. That's BS.
It's not conservation minded members on this board that start the arguing, whether they be CCA, MSSA or just plain rec fishermen with no group affiliation, it's pro continued harvest, Pro-deplete the resource, Pro-sell that last crab, oyster, yellow perch, menhaden, on ebay crowd - that most often stir the pot. You included.
Zam, you're making yourself sound like a victim. I have news for you. You're opinionated. When you bring an opinion to an internet message board, be ready to defend it. When you bring an unpopular opinion, prepare yourself to be ridiculed.
I don't care to read your posts, but from the ones I've seen, you seem willing to wade into any conservation thread on tidalfish with an unpopular pro-commercial fishing opinion. Thats your call, but don't be surprised when people give you a hard time.
For what its worth, I'm not a CCA member, so please don't lump me in with sweeping generalizations and anti-CCA rhetoric. My view of CCA is primarily a fishing club with lots of decent well-meaning members trying to do things they think are important. That organization may not be working on things that I think are important, but I can say for sure the bay is not being ruined by CCA.
Chum said you sounded like you were channeling Kenny Keene. That's not much of a reach. If you really believe your own statements, you should take that as a compliment.
I said you were not a member of the MWA, but you consistently preach MWA-like sermons. Again, not a stretch of the truth. These are not personal attacks. They are truths as we see them.
Brandons survey asked only one question concerning watermen. What is your opinion of Pound Nets? 32 respondants said "I do not rely on them for a living, but I think as long as they are fished correctly they are OK for the Bay". 14 respondants said "They should be eliminated from the Bay". 46 responses out of how many members? I'd hardly call one question with 46 answers a 2 to 1 endorsement of watermen. That's a ridiculous claim.
Make your own polls. Ask "do you want ghost pots removed from the Bay?". Ask "are you happy with the current state of Oyster Recovery in the Bay?". Ask "Should fyke nets be allowed in the tributaries during the yellow perch spawning run?" Compile your data and bring it on back here for discussion. It's not about hatred towards watermen, it's about preservation of the resource.
Okay, first of all thats a pound net survey not a general waterman survey. Second, I would be wary of surveys with wordy questions. Wordy questions lead to biased results.
Originally Posted by ZAM
I'll try to be open-minded to any reasonable argument, but I'm not sure even the worst criticism of CCA will convince me CCA is ruining the bay. CCA may stand for something you or I don't value, but this group is not ruining the bay. On the other hand we have some longstanding commercial fishing practices that probably are taking a toll on our resource. The oyster debacle is one of the worst examples of fisheries management in our nation. The current crab situation is classic commercial fishery overcapitalization. Some of the local net gear is known to catch indiscriminately, and some commercial net fisheries in the bay remove so much exploitable stock that they significantly devalue product at market and leave unacceptable areas void of biomass and biodiversity. The problems in our commercial fisheries are well documented.
Its not a thing where people hate watermen. Its just that there's too many of them taking too many fish, all well documented. I know your position is 'yeah but what about recs.' Recs bring problems too. Fortunately if we look at some of the most prestigious rec fisheries in this country, we have excellent examples of best practice and good stewardship leading to long term sustainability.
Again, I would try to separate personal issues from historical and scientific ones. People hate the result of having too much commercial exploitation. Historically every example of industry exploiting natural resources ended with industry putting themselves out of business.
Nobody...Pay close attention to that word...Nobody has a right to the fishery...And above and beyond that, nobody has a right to a government subsidized job...DNR, insofar as they can, is trying to balance the interests of various user groups with the long term interests of the Bay, there are obviously disagreements about how this should be best accomplished. No victims, no bashing, no whining, the health of that body of water has been and will be decided in a political world, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the galley...
You tried to use a TF poll to say that recs were pro waterman by a 2 to 1 ratio. I was showing you how that could easily be turned around by asking the right questions. There is a difference between a "Right" and a "Priviledge", as Chum points out. Watermen are priviledged to harvest a public resource, justs as recs are. It is not a God Given Right.
When you've appointed yourself spokesperson for the entire seafood eating constituency, there's no need to support your case with science or history. Just say what you want to say and when truth is introduced into the discussion, ignore the truth. Sorry Zam, I tried. This reminds me of an addage that says something like 'you can't use logic to change a man's mind about an irrational conclusion.'
When you can't support your opinion with anything but more of your opinion, don't cry about being a victim.