I can not comment on MSSA's strategy or next steps. I can only comment on my own belief that nets are not good for the bay and that we do not have a hold on the situation. There are so many conflicts of interest involved it's hard for me to weed through them all. You can count on the fact I will continue my personal quest to get rid of nets in the bay.
Listsen To Capt. Brady. Lead, follow or get outta the way! He knows the game well. I'm not a MSSA member as of right now. I may join if they pick this ball up and run with it. Wait to hear from them......
Capt Brady, I am not sure I see the MSSA as having given up with the actions taken in the bill. I was surprised to see them pursue a task-force through amendments to evaluate the gill net fishery rather than take a summer study out of committee. The amendments introduced require a senate floor vote and pass through the house. The task force would obviously have more "tooth" than a summer study. It certainly was better than not allowing the bill to get out of committee and having the issue die. My guess is that they believe many of their concerns and issues can be addressed through their involvement with the task force. Time will tell. The bill will have to make it through the house now anyhow.
I have a few questions if anyone can help. Does anyone have a cost estimate for the task force? Who pays the bill, comms or recs? Will this task force have more policy making authority than the advisory commissions we already have?
Thank you for your most recent post which I have taken the liberty to quote below. There are some who are confused on my position in this matter as one post one day is seemingly pro-commercial and the next anti. Let me lay it out for all to read, so those readers are not compelled not to wear out their two remaining neurons.
I dislike gill nets and I am willing to tolerate other types of nets, when they are managed, regulated and enforced properly. But that is not to say that I cannot learn to live with gill nets, under certain circumstances. And I think those circumstances are here and now.
In part of your post which I quote as follows, ""my belief that nets are not good for the bay and that we do not have a hold on the situation" is a topic deserving of further discourse if you would indulge me to explain why it is your belief that we do not (now) or will have a hold on the situation. I am inclined to believe that we do have public awareness, agency concern, active law enforcement, and judicial notice of the problem. Yes, we still need more political will and gubernatorial support but it is my belief that it is coming, proportional to the weight that it deserves.
This is a different position than just desiring the banning of gill nets outright, and one which in my opinion is a more pragmatic approach. But I can be persuaded more toward your point of view by good reason. I invite you to do so.
Originally Posted by Brandon