People Keeping Fish Negative Posts

[Gerry Zagorski]

First let me say, I'm a proponent of catch and release but it's a personal choice and seems to be a very emotionally charged issue here with people on both sides of it. We should not be judging people's choices or being negative about it on one side or the other.

I'm growing really tired of the negative posts here and I've got way better things to do then baby sitting these sorts of posts. All are welcome here regardless of which side of this you're on, just keep your opinions to yourself...

Just want to forewarn everyone that these sorts of posts will be removed and if you persist, your posting privileges will be revoked.

[Bluefish]

Bravo!!

[Wilson]

This board has become the Trump - PelosI of fishing.
Sponsors and chest beaters are all that is left....with very few exceptions.
While I am not on any social media sites I hear it's worse there.

Ban me if you want, I quit posting long ago.

[bunker dunker]

agreed Gerry,lets fish and talk about fishing.

[RAMMFISH66]

Gerry, agreed!!! This is a fishing site and not for any political agenda..keep up the good work, Rammie

[SPEARFISH]

One of the reasons I don't bother posting here.

[jmurr711]

First let me say, I'm a proponent of catch and release but it's a personal choice and seems to be a very emotionally charged issue here with people on both sides of it. We should not be judging people's choices or being negative about it on one side or the other.

I'm growing really tired of the negative posts here and I've got way better things to do then baby sitting these sorts of posts. All are welcome here regardless of which side of this you're on, just keep your opinions to yourself...

Just want to forewarn everyone that these sorts of posts will be removed and if you persist, your posting privileges will be revoked.

you have to catch, to release ahhahahahahahaahahahahhahahahahahahaha

[hammer4reel]

While I understand your point of guys complaining about legally kept fish .

Suppressing those guys from saying WAKE UP AND STOP KILLING EGG LADEN FISH is just as bad .

Killing all these bass just WEEKS away from them dropping eggs is stupid .
And those same guys doing it will be bitching a few years from now there aren’t any bass around .

Leave them spawn , then keep the fish .

.
Hopefully the posts of lots off bass being taken does the same thing here as it recently did in VA.

Close the season to all bass over 36” to allow all the more mature larger fish to continue to increase the fishery .

I can already hear the crying when that happens .

.

[bunker dunker]

again its fisher peeps choice.you have your say and you said it.its like shooting that big buck.would it not be better for the heard to have the mature buck alive and shoot a smaller buck????we must let everyone one decide for themselves
and not make peeps feel bad or uneasy about their choice.

[dakota560]

again its fisher peeps choice.you have your say and you said it.its like shooting that big buck.would it not be better for the heard to have the mature buck alive and shoot a smaller buck????we must let everyone one decide for themselves
and not make peeps feel bad or uneasy about their choice.

It SHOULD depend on the health of the fishery or in the case of harvesting that trophy buck, the overall health of the herd. My position and to Gerry's point, people are entitled to keep what the regulations allow and contrarian opinions are just that. Is it ethically correct keeping all these 30, 40 and 50 lb. bass, in lieu of what happened to this fishery in the 70's and 80's, my opinion is no having lived through the collapse of the fishery once already. But that's my opinion, probably not shared by most and either way ethics don't dictate catch, regulations do and for that reason I place the responsibility on the shoulders of fisheries management to adopt regulations that ensure the longevity of these fisheries. BUT once again with another valued fishery that collapsed once we haven't learned from our past mistakes and if changes aren't made it'll collapse again.

Look at the two attached slides concerning bass and if you believe they're directionally correct, it spells tough times ahead for the striped bass stock, in spite of the oceans of fish people are currently posting about. The size of the biomass is a current indicator. The more relevant measure is recruitment, a leading indicator of things to come. Look at the second chart, over 300 million eggs in '04 down to a recent low of approximately 60 million in '13 and then compare that to the catch trend. An 80% decrease in recruitment in any fishery spells trouble and while environmental issues might be contributing, I'd stake my money on the relentless harvest of breeder bass (pre and post spawn) the regulations have allowed for years. Protect the breeders, protect the spawn and you have a sustainable fishery. But just like summer flounder, we harvest the breeders and harvest during the spawn and the results speak for themselves. The regulations in place are not a working formula in any fishery, it's common sense. If NJF&G didn't stock trout for opening day, how many trout do you think would be caught opening day. Same concept, only difference is stocking versus natural reproduction.

If we managed fisheries based on ethics and anglers consciences, we wouldn't need fishery management and there also wouldn't be too many viable fisheries left. I don't blame anglers for keeping what is legally allowed, BUT we're absolutely contributing to this stocks decline since the majority of catch in the case of striped bass is recreational.

BD if the population is healthy, nothing wrong harvesting that trophy buck.

[hammer4reel]

again its fisher peeps choice.you have your say and you said it.its like shooting that big buck.would it not be better for the heard to have the mature buck alive and shoot a smaller buck????we must let everyone one decide for themselves
and not make peeps feel bad or uneasy about their choice.

Here's your choice .

https://www.fredericksburg.com/news/state_region/overfishing-assessment-may-lead-virginia-to-ban-recreational-fishing-for/article_6d9f2e74-3394-50d7-999d-abe30b0d26e0.html




.

[Capt Sal]

Well boys you just drove five hours from PA to go striper fishing.The bite today are all large fish in the 25-35 lb. range.We didn't get many but we landed six bass for six anglers.I know you guys only go two times a year and want some table fare being you spent $900 for the charter and tip for the mate.If you want to keep your fish it is your choice or release it.If you want to keep them here will be my post.-Had a good day no pictures.Case closed. Win win.

[dakota560]

Here's your choice .

https://www.fredericksburg.com/news/state_region/overfishing-assessment-may-lead-virginia-to-ban-recreational-fishing-for/article_6d9f2e74-3394-50d7-999d-abe30b0d26e0.html




.

Dan I couldn't agree more. This is what it's coming down to. ANY stock with a decline in recruitment should have the spawning season closed to ALL fishing and adopt regulations to protect the breeders. Then manage catch levels until the stock stabilizes and liberalize it once it has (the opposite of what happened with black sea bass). To close it to recreational but keep it open to commercial is the absolute worst case scenario and borderline psychotic management behavior. This is where salt water fisheries management reporting up under the Secretary of Commerce is killing stocks along with the recreational community's rights to their fair share.

I'd rather have a fishery to access and enjoy than no fishery at all which is what happened with stripers many years ago and certainly what happened to winter flounder. weakfish, whiting, cod and mackerel more recently.

[bunker dunker]

understood but having seen the striped bass,weakfish,whiting,mackerel,yft
bft and blowfish all take serious hits in my life time.i doubt any of it was caused
by the hook and line fisherman.i understand all points but what is allowed is allowed and thats the fact.oh yea if your telling me you would rather have a one year old buck tending a heard rather than a three to four year old buck,well thats a story for another day.

[hammer4reel]

understood but having seen the striped bass,weakfish,whiting,mackerel,yft
bft and blowfish all take serious hits in my life time.i doubt any of it was caused
by the hook and line fisherman.i understand all points but what is allowed is allowed and thats the fact.oh yea if your telling me you would rather have a one year old buck tending a heard rather than a three to four year old buck,well thats a story for another day.


Lol that buck with good genes is probably the little bucks daddy.
He passed his genes four four seasons before I took him out .

I agree most of our fisheries didn’t meet their demise by hook and line .
Stripers are a different story .

We also put a hurting on winter flounder when fishing was so good it was care free.

.

[dakota560]

understood but having seen the striped bass,weakfish,whiting,mackerel,yft
bft and blowfish all take serious hits in my life time.i doubt any of it was caused
by the hook and line fisherman.i understand all points but what is allowed is allowed and thats the fact.oh yea if your telling me you would rather have a one year old buck tending a heard rather than a three to four year old buck,well thats a story for another day.

Striped bass, weakfish, winter flounder and blow fish were definitely impacted by recreational catch. Whiting, mackerel, cod and ling were destroyed by commercial over-harvest. Commercial hurt bass recruitment by netting the breeders in the southern states. The large tide runner weakfish were hurt by commercial netting in Delaware Bay and purse seiners along the coast during their migration. Those four fisheries however had huge catches by recreational anglers which very much contributed to their declines. I remember guys on the Long Branch pier filling 152 quart coolers to the top with blow fish. Had to be 300-400 fish. People caught and kept 100's a day in Shark River, Manasquan, Highlands and Barnegat and the next year they "mysteriously" disappeared so yes recreational had a big impact on that fishery.

As far as bucks are concerned, you're putting words in my mouth. What I said was if the population is healthy, don't see a problem harvesting a large buck especially since life expectancy is between 3-5 years. Wasn't drawing comparisons between roles of a 1-yr old and 5-yr old buck within the hierarchy of the herd. Don't even see the point of your analogy since the issue Dan was addressing is killing female breeder bass before the spawn and how that hurts egg production which is on a decline. Female breeders can live 30 - 40 years and a 12-yr old fish is said to release ~850,000 eggs. A 50-yr old fish over 4 million eggs. If your point was the dominant buck has a different role than a one year old, I agree. Or if your point was intended to mean stronger more dominant bucks pass on better genes I'd also agree. Just not sure how that relates to the point Dan was making regarding egg production.

[bunker dunker]

if they can say that the hook and line angler is the reason for the decline in striped bass in Virginia and ignore that the state next door is netting the crap out of them without mention,shame on them.our sea bass is back better than ever and the regs are still the same??? i am only saying that if a person wants to keep their legal fish,no one should comment about releasing.if you can tell that a one year old buck has good genetics and is going to be a good deer,you
are in a very small group.i also understand we all have our favorite fish and we want to look out for them.

[tombanjo]

Jeez, can we get back to the global warming debate? :)

[SPEARFISH]

It's OK to post a pic of a pile of seabass, porgies, ling etc... or a limit of fluke, but post a pic of a bass and everyone gets their panties in a bunch. I never could understand it.

[Flygaff]

Every fish I keep, be it Fluke, Sea Bass, Tuna, or Shark is eaten. Nothing is wasted.

[Capt. Debbie]

Yes, but is it cooked PROPERLY is what we need to know! LOL

Every fish I keep, be it Fluke, Sea Bass, Tuna, or Shark is eaten. Nothing is wasted.

[Flygaff]

Yes, but is it cooked PROPERLY is what we need to know! LOL

Fried-Grilled-Steamed & Sushi

[hammer4reel]

It's OK to post a pic of a pile of seabass, porgies, ling etc... or a limit of fluke, but post a pic of a bass and everyone gets their panties in a bunch. I never could understand it.


This fish all take 4/5 years to replace . Most big bass are pushing over 20/25

[reason162]

It's OK to post a pic of a pile of seabass, porgies, ling etc... or a limit of fluke, but post a pic of a bass and everyone gets their panties in a bunch. I never could understand it.

Meat fish vs game fish, what's so hard to understand?

Gerry, your site your rules, but I will log my mild objection for banning even polite expressions of regret over the killing of big breeders. Also, for the chest-beaters...they receive a lot more accolades across social media for releasing big fish...they won't know that if people are forced to only say nice things (or nothing at all) about bloody dock shots.

[bunker dunker]

if you want to let your fish go great,if you don't great.its that simple

[Gerry Zagorski]

Meat fish vs game fish, what's so hard to understand?

Gerry, your site your rules, but I will log my mild objection for banning even polite expressions of regret over the killing of big breeders. Also, for the chest-beaters...they receive a lot more accolades across social media for releasing big fish...they won't know that if people are forced to only say nice things (or nothing at all) about bloody dock shots.

Your mild objection is duly noted... I too encourage catch and release but there are a few issues with voicing opinions on other people's posts and I need to have some cut and dry rules... We know responses to other people's posts causes a flame war here since it is an emotionally charged issue and even a mild encouragement like "you might think about releasing fish for the future" or "was that fish released" solicits emotional responses back and forth and causes a train wreck. I don't care to deal with that here so IMO best to keep it off entirely.

If you want to encourage people, lead by example..... A lot of people here post photos and are careful to say "released to fight another day" or whatever... And yes they do get some well deserved nice responses. However, the people who would have kept that fish aren't responding to those posts with "are you some sort of tree hugger releasing that fish"

I think you're all smart enough to know what I'm up against here and appreciate you all following the rules..

[Rocky]

The only time I will usually chime in is when a person post a pic of a fat cow, lip hung that they said was released.

If you want to keep a legal fish fine but, if you want to release a fish successfully please do your homework and learn how to do it properly. :)

[saltfisherman]

Give it a month or two from now and you’ll see the thread question, why doesn’t anyone post fishing reports? Now you know why, just remember a thread like this and the berating a person receives for posting a report of kept fish.

Regulations are such that the number of fish you’re able to keep continues to decline, be by size limits or numbers of a fish that exists. Now that a person does catch a fish of size that they are able to keep and they get grief.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Give it a month or two from now and you’ll see the thread question, why doesn’t anyone post fishing reports? Now you know why, just remember a thread like this and the berating a person receives for posting a report of kept fish.

Regulations are such that the number of fish you’re able to keep continues to decline, be by size limits or numbers of a fish that exists. Now that a person does catch a fish of size that they are able to keep and they get grief.

Exactly salt..... We want to encourage people to fish and post here, not discourage them....

[hammer4reel]

Exactly salt..... We want to encourage people to fish and post here, not discourage them....


Keep taking fish during the spawn and watch NJ follow suit with all the southern states and CLOSE the season .

It’s time for a little common sense already before we don’t have anything to fish for and hence no reports being made .

IMO. We shouldn’t be fishing for Any fish during their spawn . And no one wants to striper fish as much as I do.

Were only hurting ourselves .

.
I will almost bet in the near future you see a rule change that once a limit is met fishing has to stop for that species .

How many guys will be in business if you get to catch one fish and then have to go in ?

[Rocky]

Keep taking fish during the spawn and watch NJ follow suit with all the southern states and CLOSE the season.

Keeping any breeder fish with questionable stocks during the spawn is idiotic imo!

[hammer4reel]

Keeping any breeder fish with questionable stocks during the spawn is idiotic imo!

EXACTLY.

After they drop have at it

[Inoffshoremikey]

I have to present an important issue being spoken about on the docks concerning the owner of this forum"s opening comments pertaining to this thread. As an individual who works as a consultant within social media circles, website development and modern web practices, the opening comments and declarations posted for this thread are alarming from a professional standpoint.

* This forums owner does not seem to want to allow people the option to post negative comments concerning a highly debatable subject. That is horrific in this day and age and does not comply with modern web based social standards (lucidity, clarity and honest reviews). It does not allow ignorance to be departed from ones consciousness if an individual does not bear witness to the facts presented from both sides of the issue. As we all know, both sides have pros and cons, yet, if there isn't a place within the forum to allow such a discussion, then there will not be any light spread on the subject. If you can't accept the positive along with the negative, then maybe you need someone else to manage the forum for you because the practices the owner is looking to implement is a sure way to drive memebers off of this forum and on to another one that offers a place to discuss such issues.

* Just because something is positive in one persons conceptual reality doesn't mean it is "positive" for all. When I initially read the the last thread that caused this thread to come to the surface, it was immediately clear to me that their would be problems associated with the strong views held by the members posting in that thread. However, the owner/founders response and I quote from the beginning of this thread " I've got way better things to do then baby sitting these sorts of posts." was something that I thought I would never read from any forum owner, especially one that seems to be knowledgeable on the subjects being debated. That's a major issue coming from my consulting work because it is just (basically speaking) an improper way to address members of a forum that contribute and benefit to public awareness generated though dialogue among like minded individuals (people who fish), whether positive or negative.

* In the first page of the last problematic post, the individual members mostly chose a side. Whether ecological, theological, political, or hunter/gatherer, the lines are drawn in the sand and the verbosity begins. As an owner, the proper thing to do is not address individuals as "babys", we are all adults here, so treat us like such. If people have verbal expressions that you feel are 'babyish', well maybe that is because you have chosen a side or your ability to moderate is questionable when it comes to debatable topics. An apology would be appropriate from a social media standpoint. It was a harsh way to address fellow members in a community, whether it be fishing or not.

*Resolve*. It is 2019, not 2001. Threatening individuals by revoking their privileges without providing a standard solution is unacceptable in a any modern social forum. Revoking an individuals privileges who violate the solution is completely acceptable though even though 99% of forums do not do this immediately, not sure why that is being implemented here? In turn, create a debatable topic forum like the rest or the modern world where those issues can be debated and ignorance brought to light in a place where those types of dialogues are acceptable. If those ideas and impositions are brought into a "non-debatable" forum, then the moderator or owner has and should penalize (not immediately remove) the membership from the individual. It should clearly state what is acceptable within that particular thread. This way individuals are clear on the rules and terms herein. Violations are clearly defined by the rules of the thread and violators are punished accordingly through standard guidelines everyone can read, not just the ones the owner decides are the law of the forum for the period the problem is presenting itself.

In a "non-debatable" post, if a member catches and releases, catches and keeps, catches and gives away etc, then questions and comments concerning the catch should not have debatable topics addressed to that thread. Those posts should include theology, ecology, political, and/or hunter/gatherer ideologies and opinions. This is a way to address and correct the verbosity issue members and the owner are having. Telling people "you have better things to do with your time" is a poor way to address your members who are eager to possibly learn more and wish to engage in a thread where such topics are admissible and acceptable as long as they follow the guidelines put forth in that particular thread.

Typical example: Let us say I am a beginning angler and new to NJfishing.co_m and I want to read a post from a member who caught a striped bass. As a beginner, I want to know where the angler was, what time of day it was caught, was the angler on land or on the water(boat) and what bait, lure, tactic or method etc. was used to hook and bring the fish within proximity of the angler.
The consensus is that we do not need to know what another members ideology, philosophy or opinion are concerning the following. A. Ecology. The modern or post modern conservation movement or "natural conservation" as it is called should be labeled under "debatable topics" only due to it's ideology being opposed to Hunter/gatherer school of thought. The debates the ensue are debatable and need to be categorized as such. B. Theology. I understand whole heatedly religion and theology are important to many members of our society. They deserve the right to have their practice and beliefs without imposition of others or government. However, this is neither the time or the place for one's insertion of religious based dialogue into a thread via posting doctrine or beliefs that are theologically based. Clearly this is a "debatable topic" C. Politics. You have the right to your view, and again, we understand this topic is important to you and many others who agree with you. Politics should not be allowed to be posted when trying to understand, as a beginning angler, how I should go about catching a nice striped bass that another member did whose tread I am viewing to gain insight into his methodology. This is a loaded topic and needs to be categorized under "debatable topics". D. Hunter/gatherer ideology. Whether you took the fish or not is *after* the fact of catching the fish and choosing whether or not to land it. The post should allow information exchange up until the landing of the fish within the members that post on that thread. The threads original post should be allowed to display how that member chose to experience the fish. Whether it be lost at the boat, quick release, slow release (live well), brought on board, pictured and released, or harvested for ones dietary needs should be stated as fact and nothing more than an actual historical entry into the forum. The opinions, additions, beliefs or scientific validation etc. via other members should not be allowed within a "non-debatable" thread. If so, then your membership should either be suspended for a specific amount of time or revoked ( I personally think that when the owner of this forum said immediately "revoking" one's privileges was his solution to the problematic individuals posting demonstrated terrible management and an aggressive way to treat members of this site who's opinions he found disdaining to say the least). I can tell you from experience it is always the owner's fault and not the members faults for dialogue problems in a forum. It is the owners responsibility to manage his forum correctly by providing guidelines and clear understandings of what to post where and not the other way around. Using aggressive "revoking' and judgmental "baby" tactics to moderate members is unacceptable in this day and age. Addressing issues in an appropriate manner yields more resolve than threatening to revoke memberships. It doesn't work! I have seen numerous forums get ruined by owners who can't moderate the problems they are creating by not implementing proper procedural guidelines for their members within their own forums.

I hope the owner of this forum addresses these problems in a modern way and demonstrates that he is able to resolve the issues at hand without judging individuals as being babies and threatening to revoke people's memberships who may well have very important philosophies, opinions, ideologies etc. to contribute but are not being directed properly as to where to post them. If the past dictates the present , leaving this unresolved will only bring about a new forum where these things can be discussed.

I enjoy reading these debates, they offer me a chance to learn from both sides and come to my own conclusions. Do I wish to keep reading them? Yes! Do I want to read them in the daily fishing reports? No! The consensus is that others don't want to have to read these posts either in that section of the forum. It is time the owner of this site get to work on this issue or we may loose a great contributor to this site due to he or she being a baby and wasting the owners time. Neither of these can be summed up as clear to everyone. Maybe the owner finds it clear but as a forum/web designer, social media advertising consultant and moderator myself, I find it extremely unclear and is very substandard for 2019 forum management/ownership. It surely does not follow modern compliance as far as forum management and member appreciation is concerned.

[Gerry Zagorski]

I have to present an important issue being spoken about on the docks concerning the owner of this forum"s opening comments pertaining to this thread. As an individual who works as a consultant within social media circles, website development and modern web practices, the opening comments and declarations posted for this thread are alarming from a professional standpoint.

* This forums owner does not seem to want to allow people the option to post negative comments concerning a highly debatable subject. That is horrific in this day and age and does not comply with modern web based social standards (lucidity, clarity and honest reviews). It does not allow ignorance to be departed from ones consciousness if an individual does not bear witness to the facts presented from both sides of the issue. As we all know, both sides have pros and cons, yet, if there isn't a place within the forum to allow such a discussion, then there will not be any light spread on the subject. If you can't accept the positive along with the negative, then maybe you need someone else to manage the forum for you because the practices the owner is looking to implement is a sure way to drive memebers off of this forum and on to another one that offers a place to discuss such issues.

* Just because something is positive in one persons conceptual reality doesn't mean it is "positive" for all. When I initially read the the last thread that caused this thread to come to the surface, it was immediately clear to me that their would be problems associated with the strong views held by the members posting in that thread. However, the owner/founders response and I quote from the beginning of this thread " I've got way better things to do then baby sitting these sorts of posts." was something that I thought I would never read from any forum owner, especially one that seems to be knowledgeable on the subjects being debated. That's a major issue coming from my consulting work because it is just (basically speaking) an improper way to address members of a forum that contribute and benefit to public awareness generated though dialogue among like minded individuals (people who fish), whether positive or negative.

* In the first page of the last problematic post, the individual members mostly chose a side. Whether ecological, theological, political, or hunter/gatherer, the lines are drawn in the sand and the verbosity begins. As an owner, the proper thing to do is not address individuals as "babys", we are all adults here, so treat us like such. If people have verbal expressions that you feel are 'babyish', well maybe that is because you have chosen a side or your ability to moderate is questionable when it comes to debatable topics. An apology would be appropriate from a social media standpoint. It was a harsh way to address fellow members in a community, whether it be fishing or not.

*Resolve*. It is 2019, not 2001. Threatening individuals by revoking their privileges without providing a standard solution is unacceptable in a any modern social forum. Revoking an individuals privileges who violate the solution is completely acceptable though even though 99% of forums do not do this immediately, not sure why that is being implemented here? In turn, create a debatable topic forum like the rest or the modern world where those issues can be debated and ignorance brought to light in a place where those types of dialogues are acceptable. If those ideas and impositions are brought into a "non-debatable" forum, then the moderator or owner has and should penalize (not immediately remove) the membership from the individual. It should clearly state what is acceptable within that particular thread. This way individuals are clear on the rules and terms herein. Violations are clearly defined by the rules of the thread and violators are punished accordingly through standard guidelines everyone can read, not just the ones the owner decides are the law of the forum for the period the problem is presenting itself.

In a "non-debatable" post, if a member catches and releases, catches and keeps, catches and gives away etc, then questions and comments concerning the catch should not have debatable topics addressed to that thread. Those posts should include theology, ecology, political, and/or hunter/gatherer ideologies and opinions. This is a way to address and correct the verbosity issue members and the owner are having. Telling people "you have better things to do with your time" is a poor way to address your members who are eager to possibly learn more and wish to engage in a thread where such topics are admissible and acceptable as long as they follow the guidelines put forth in that particular thread.

Typical example: Let us say I am a beginning angler and new to NJfishing.co_m and I want to read a post from a member who caught a striped bass. As a beginner, I want to know where the angler was, what time of day it was caught, was the angler on land or on the water(boat) and what bait, lure, tactic or method etc. was used to hook and bring the fish within proximity of the angler.
The consensus is that we do not need to know what another members ideology, philosophy or opinion are concerning the following. A. Ecology. The modern or post modern conservation movement or "natural conservation" as it is called should be labeled under "debatable topics" only due to it's ideology being opposed to Hunter/gatherer school of thought. The debates the ensue are debatable and need to be categorized as such. B. Theology. I understand whole heatedly religion and theology are important to many members of our society. They deserve the right to have their practice and beliefs without imposition of others or government. However, this is neither the time or the place for one's insertion of religious based dialogue into a thread via posting doctrine or beliefs that are theologically based. Clearly this is a "debatable topic" C. Politics. You have the right to your view, and again, we understand this topic is important to you and many others who agree with you. Politics should not be allowed to be posted when trying to understand, as a beginning angler, how I should go about catching a nice striped bass that another member did whose tread I am viewing to gain insight into his methodology. This is a loaded topic and needs to be categorized under "debatable topics". D. Hunter/gatherer ideology. Whether you took the fish or not is *after* the fact of catching the fish and choosing whether or not to land it. The post should allow information exchange up until the landing of the fish within the members that post on that thread. The threads original post should be allowed to display how that member chose to experience the fish. Whether it be lost at the boat, quick release, slow release (live well), brought on board, pictured and released, or harvested for ones dietary needs should be stated as fact and nothing more than an actual historical entry into the forum. The opinions, additions, beliefs or scientific validation etc. via other members should not be allowed within a "non-debatable" thread. If so, then your membership should either be suspended for a specific amount of time or revoked ( I personally think that when the owner of this forum said immediately "revoking" one's privileges was his solution to the problematic individuals posting demonstrated terrible management and an aggressive way to treat members of this site who's opinions he found disdaining to say the least). I can tell you from experience it is always the owner's fault and not the members faults for dialogue problems in a forum. It is the owners responsibility to manage his forum correctly by providing guidelines and clear understandings of what to post where and not the other way around. Using aggressive "revoking' and judgmental "baby" tactics to moderate members is unacceptable in this day and age. Addressing issues in an appropriate manner yields more resolve than threatening to revoke memberships. It doesn't work! I have seen numerous forums get ruined by owners who can't moderate the problems they are creating by not implementing proper procedural guidelines for their members within their own forums.

I hope the owner of this forum addresses these problems in a modern way and demonstrates that he is able to resolve the issues at hand without judging individuals as being babies and threatening to revoke people's memberships who may well have very important philosophies, opinions, ideologies etc. to contribute but are not being directed properly as to where to post them. If the past dictates the present , leaving this unresolved will only bring about a new forum where these things can be discussed.

I enjoy reading these debates, they offer me a chance to learn from both sides and come to my own conclusions. Do I wish to keep reading them? Yes! Do I want to read them in the daily fishing reports? No! The consensus is that others don't want to have to read these posts either in that section of the forum. It is time the owner of this site get to work on this issue or we may loose a great contributor to this site due to he or she being a baby and wasting the owners time. Neither of these can be summed up as clear to everyone. Maybe the owner finds it clear but as a forum/web designer, social media advertising consultant and moderator myself, I find it extremely unclear and is very substandard for 2019 forum management/ownership. It surely does not follow modern compliance as far as forum management and member appreciation is concerned.

Let me cut to the chase here and I don't mean to be trite .... If you don't like the way I run this site then there are plenty of others to choose from. Feel free to move on and not visit here... I've run this site for 20 plus years and I think I have a pretty good handle on how to run it and what behavior is acceptable or not.

I could in fact let this forum be a free for all and allow anyone's uncensored posts stand and get much more short term traffic because of the drama... Not what I choose to, may not follow a " modern compliance" but trying to take the long term high road here and do what I feel is right...

I’m not about to spend my time cousleling people individually who in my opinion are offenders..Rather I chose to make hard and fast rules about the people’s conduct on this site on certain issues I know causes problems... If they don’t comply and persist, they are out... If you don't like my choices, no offense but please move on...

[RC.]

I have to present an important issue being spoken about on the docks concerning the owner of this forum"s opening comments pertaining to this thread. As an individual who works as a consultant within social media circles, website development and modern web practices, the opening comments and declarations posted for this thread are alarming from a professional standpoint.

* This forums owner does not seem to want to allow people the option to post negative comments concerning a highly debatable subject. That is horrific in this day and age and does not comply with modern web based social standards (lucidity, clarity and honest reviews). It does not allow ignorance to be departed from ones consciousness if an individual does not bear witness to the facts presented from both sides of the issue. As we all know, both sides have pros and cons, yet, if there isn't a place within the forum to allow such a discussion, then there will not be any light spread on the subject. If you can't accept the positive along with the negative, then maybe you need someone else to manage the forum for you because the practices the owner is looking to implement is a sure way to drive memebers off of this forum and on to another one that offers a place to discuss such issues.

* Just because something is positive in one persons conceptual reality doesn't mean it is "positive" for all. When I initially read the the last thread that caused this thread to come to the surface, it was immediately clear to me that their would be problems associated with the strong views held by the members posting in that thread. However, the owner/founders response and I quote from the beginning of this thread " I've got way better things to do then baby sitting these sorts of posts." was something that I thought I would never read from any forum owner, especially one that seems to be knowledgeable on the subjects being debated. That's a major issue coming from my consulting work because it is just (basically speaking) an improper way to address members of a forum that contribute and benefit to public awareness generated though dialogue among like minded individuals (people who fish), whether positive or negative.

* In the first page of the last problematic post, the individual members mostly chose a side. Whether ecological, theological, political, or hunter/gatherer, the lines are drawn in the sand and the verbosity begins. As an owner, the proper thing to do is not address individuals as "babys", we are all adults here, so treat us like such. If people have verbal expressions that you feel are 'babyish', well maybe that is because you have chosen a side or your ability to moderate is questionable when it comes to debatable topics. An apology would be appropriate from a social media standpoint. It was a harsh way to address fellow members in a community, whether it be fishing or not.

*Resolve*. It is 2019, not 2001. Threatening individuals by revoking their privileges without providing a standard solution is unacceptable in a any modern social forum. Revoking an individuals privileges who violate the solution is completely acceptable though even though 99% of forums do not do this immediately, not sure why that is being implemented here? In turn, create a debatable topic forum like the rest or the modern world where those issues can be debated and ignorance brought to light in a place where those types of dialogues are acceptable. If those ideas and impositions are brought into a "non-debatable" forum, then the moderator or owner has and should penalize (not immediately remove) the membership from the individual. It should clearly state what is acceptable within that particular thread. This way individuals are clear on the rules and terms herein. Violations are clearly defined by the rules of the thread and violators are punished accordingly through standard guidelines everyone can read, not just the ones the owner decides are the law of the forum for the period the problem is presenting itself.

In a "non-debatable" post, if a member catches and releases, catches and keeps, catches and gives away etc, then questions and comments concerning the catch should not have debatable topics addressed to that thread. Those posts should include theology, ecology, political, and/or hunter/gatherer ideologies and opinions. This is a way to address and correct the verbosity issue members and the owner are having. Telling people "you have better things to do with your time" is a poor way to address your members who are eager to possibly learn more and wish to engage in a thread where such topics are admissible and acceptable as long as they follow the guidelines put forth in that particular thread.

Typical example: Let us say I am a beginning angler and new to NJfishing.co_m and I want to read a post from a member who caught a striped bass. As a beginner, I want to know where the angler was, what time of day it was caught, was the angler on land or on the water(boat) and what bait, lure, tactic or method etc. was used to hook and bring the fish within proximity of the angler.
The consensus is that we do not need to know what another members ideology, philosophy or opinion are concerning the following. A. Ecology. The modern or post modern conservation movement or "natural conservation" as it is called should be labeled under "debatable topics" only due to it's ideology being opposed to Hunter/gatherer school of thought. The debates the ensue are debatable and need to be categorized as such. B. Theology. I understand whole heatedly religion and theology are important to many members of our society. They deserve the right to have their practice and beliefs without imposition of others or government. However, this is neither the time or the place for one's insertion of religious based dialogue into a thread via posting doctrine or beliefs that are theologically based. Clearly this is a "debatable topic" C. Politics. You have the right to your view, and again, we understand this topic is important to you and many others who agree with you. Politics should not be allowed to be posted when trying to understand, as a beginning angler, how I should go about catching a nice striped bass that another member did whose tread I am viewing to gain insight into his methodology. This is a loaded topic and needs to be categorized under "debatable topics". D. Hunter/gatherer ideology. Whether you took the fish or not is *after* the fact of catching the fish and choosing whether or not to land it. The post should allow information exchange up until the landing of the fish within the members that post on that thread. The threads original post should be allowed to display how that member chose to experience the fish. Whether it be lost at the boat, quick release, slow release (live well), brought on board, pictured and released, or harvested for ones dietary needs should be stated as fact and nothing more than an actual historical entry into the forum. The opinions, additions, beliefs or scientific validation etc. via other members should not be allowed within a "non-debatable" thread. If so, then your membership should either be suspended for a specific amount of time or revoked ( I personally think that when the owner of this forum said immediately "revoking" one's privileges was his solution to the problematic individuals posting demonstrated terrible management and an aggressive way to treat members of this site who's opinions he found disdaining to say the least). I can tell you from experience it is always the owner's fault and not the members faults for dialogue problems in a forum. It is the owners responsibility to manage his forum correctly by providing guidelines and clear understandings of what to post where and not the other way around. Using aggressive "revoking' and judgmental "baby" tactics to moderate members is unacceptable in this day and age. Addressing issues in an appropriate manner yields more resolve than threatening to revoke memberships. It doesn't work! I have seen numerous forums get ruined by owners who can't moderate the problems they are creating by not implementing proper procedural guidelines for their members within their own forums.

I hope the owner of this forum addresses these problems in a modern way and demonstrates that he is able to resolve the issues at hand without judging individuals as being babies and threatening to revoke people's memberships who may well have very important philosophies, opinions, ideologies etc. to contribute but are not being directed properly as to where to post them. If the past dictates the present , leaving this unresolved will only bring about a new forum where these things can be discussed.

I enjoy reading these debates, they offer me a chance to learn from both sides and come to my own conclusions. Do I wish to keep reading them? Yes! Do I want to read them in the daily fishing reports? No! The consensus is that others don't want to have to read these posts either in that section of the forum. It is time the owner of this site get to work on this issue or we may loose a great contributor to this site due to he or she being a baby and wasting the owners time. Neither of these can be summed up as clear to everyone. Maybe the owner finds it clear but as a forum/web designer, social media advertising consultant and moderator myself, I find it extremely unclear and is very substandard for 2019 forum management/ownership. It surely does not follow modern compliance as far as forum management and member appreciation is concerned.

First, are there Cliff Notes available for this post? For a social media expert, you should realize that you lost most of us simpleton non experts somewhere in the middle... and if it must be that long, use more paragraphs so it's at least readable on a mobile device :)

Second, you are missing the point...there are certainly sites set up to hotly debate the injustices of the world. This is not one. Gerry set it up so we could share some local fishing reports and insight. Simple as that....It would be nice to be able to post an honest report without being harassed and for the owner not to have to constantly referee or babysit.

RC

[Charlie B]

Keep up the good work Gerry. You run this site just fine. If not it would have failed a long time ago. Let the experts start their own site if they want. I am staying here and I guess most others will too...Charlie

[Gerry Zagorski]

So here's a typical post:

- Great day of fishing yesterday, we kept our crew limit of 4 Stripers and played catch and release for the rest of the day.... (insert smiling people holding striped bass)

- Hmmm did you consider releasing those fish....

- Yeah, why keep all those fish?

- Nothing wrong with people keeping fish as long as it within their legal limits.

- You snowflake tree huggers need to get a life.

- Who you calling a snowflake?

- You neanderthals want to kill everything....


Now what we have is a bunch of people getting emotional and even with the best intentions of the original poster and responders, it quickly deteriorates to a name calling free for all....

Could we create an uncensored section of the board and allow people to debate these sorts of topics.... We could but you know what's going to happen? It will quickly turn into a cesspool and would likely spread to other parts of this site.

Believe me I've thought about this a lot... Not the sort of site I intended ours to be and I won't let it become that... Plenty of other sites around that allow this sort of behavior and it's not going to happen here on my watch..

Call me delusional, but I'd like this to be a place where everyone feels welcome, we share knowledge and support each other's passion for fishing not tear each other down.

[dakota560]

[FONT="Microsoft Sans Serif"]I have to present an important issue being spoken about on the docks concerning the owner of this forum"s opening comments pertaining to this thread. As an individual who works as a consultant within social media circles, website development and modern web practices, the opening comments and declarations posted for this thread are alarming from a professional standpoint.

* This forums owner does not seem to want to allow people the option to post negative comments concerning a highly debatable subject. That is horrific in this day and age and does not comply with modern web based social standards (lucidity, clarity and honest reviews). It does not allow ignorance to be departed from ones consciousness if an individual does not bear witness to the facts presented from both sides of the issue. As we all know, both sides have pros and cons, yet, if there isn't a place within the forum to allow such a discussion, then there will not be any light spread on the subject. If you can't accept the positive along with the negative, then maybe you need someone else to manage the forum for you because the practices the owner is looking to implement is a sure way to drive members off of this forum and on to another one that offers a place to discuss such issues.

Shortening this up a bit because truthfully you lost me at "I". Your post strongly recommends allowing members the ability to express opposing positions and then you condemn the owner of the site for expressing his. Alarming perspective from a professional standpoint.

Gerry has overseen and run a great site for many years and been around while many sites have come and gone. That's not luck, it's hard work and effort which the members of the site appreciate. Like any site, it has it's share of contentious discussions which personally as long as they're discussed respectfully I view as positive.

What isn't and shouldn't be tolerated are personal attacks on members, sponsors or in the case of your post the owner of the site. You consider yourself through your commentary an expert in today's social media standards yet have no hesitation calling out the owner publicly who made all this possible. Hard to reconcile those two thoughts.

Just my opinion, today's modern standards of what is and isn't acceptable on social media have caused more controversy and harm than good. It's the definition of a double edge sword. If your comments were intended to be constructive, a call to Gerry or at minimum a pm or email would have been a more effective and thoughtful approach than the verbal equivalent of a public flogging. Again just surprised seeing that from someone supposedly skilled in social media etiquette and modern protocols and in my opinion not justified or appropriate.

[AndyS]

I wish you had been more specific in your original post. People do not mind seeing photos of big fluke, sea bass, tuna or bluefish caught.
I think people are disturbed by the taking of large STRIPED BASS full of eggs in the spring.

[Gerry Zagorski]

I hear and respect you Andy.. There is perhaps no one on this board that has an appreciation for and is a better steward of our fisheries and waterways and you lead by example.

However, let's think this through.... We know we have a very emotionally charged subject here which causes all sorts of issues and divides our community here. We also know that people, although fewer have the same issues with Blackfish and even some with Fluke so where you I draw the line.. As you know, we can't leave any grey area here and say it OK for Stripers and it's not OK for Fluke or Blackfish. It's all or none in order to maintain order here.

Also I could of done a better job explaining myself when I started this post....
I don't mean to say that people should not voice their opinions on this subject, like we're doing here... More pointedly, people should not be forcing their opinions by jumping all over someone else's post who decided to keep fish.... Think of the guy who comes here, puts up an innocent report only to be directly lectured to and the whole post starts to unwind in a name calling match... Is this guy ever going to want to visit or post here again??

If you have an opinion feel free to editorialize it in a separate post... Maybe the same guy you're trying to give advice to reads it and since it's not directed at him, it's more palatable....

Make sense??

[jakesdad]

Having been on the site for many years and a lurker before that, I appreciate Gerry's way of doing business. There is a right way to debate a topic, if the topic deserves debate, but each and every one of us that has the privilege of being able to post to this site needs to respect each other.

Over the years Gerry has rightly deserved the right to cut a post off, and even deny someone the right to post. If you don't appreciate the way he rus this site, you have the right to go elsewhere. Obviously with just 7 posts you have not been around long enough to understand this sites rules.

Gerry keep this site strong, even if Joey outfishes you.

Henry

[Gerry Zagorski]

Having been on the site for many years and a lurker before that, I appreciate Gerry's way of doing business. There is a right way to debate a topic, if the topic deserves debate, but each and every one of us that has the privilege of being able to post to this site needs to respect each other.

Over the years Gerry has rightly deserved the right to cut a post off, and even deny someone the right to post. If you don't appreciate the way he rus this site, you have the right to go elsewhere. Obviously with just 7 posts you have not been around long enough to understand this sites rules.

Gerry keep this site strong, even if Joey outfishes you.

Henry

Thanks Henry, I try as best I can to keep some order around here... As far as Joey outfishing me, I might have a chance if I fished as much as he does... That boy is obsessed!

[fishy]

This site is fine his site his rules. What i don't get is how people glorify fish. Take billfish ever eat it try it you'll kill every one even if it's not worth a million dollars. Then there's the striped bass about the dumbest fish in the water just an eating machine, and the method MOJOS really that's skill OMG :eek::eek::eek:

The only person i ever seen Striper fish with any class is a guy in keyport i pass
on my way out he FLY fishes only i think never seen anything else on his boat.

Fish kill fish as long as it's legal and take a kid fishing