Fluke Compromise idea - lower the fines (win-win)

[Arbutis]

How about this for a compromise (I don't think this has been proposed):
Agree to the 19" 3 bag limit with shortened season,
but reduce the penalty for keeping smaller fish, more fish, or out of season fish to $10 per violation.

Create the law to keep things "official" in the eyes of the state. That way they can feel like they did their jobs and got something passed. But on the flip side make the penalty relatively low with the anglers knowing there is a 'fish at your own risk' ordinance in place. Make the state work for their extra money in the form of fines but make the fines not so bad as to be detrimental to all fishermen - especially those people who only get a handful of chances to go out fishing each season (like me). I am certainly not putting a dent in the overall fish population as to affect the quota - but on the rare times I go fishing, I wouldn't mind risking $10 per fish (should I be checked by the state) if it meant being able to take home a little more fish for my family to eat and enjoy. The state might even find that they make some money this way and people won't mind paying as long as it's not overly excessive. After all, a fluke at the seafood market costs at least 10 bucks.

They could even regulate the fines on a scale that increases after 5 fish or after a certain date - that way they could have slightly more control.

I'm sure this idea is falling on deaf ears because it's so hard to make a dent through the bureaucratic BS unless you are a high ranking official. But you never know. So I thought I'd throw it out there.

Make the law say whatever you want to satisfy the bureaucrats, then bury the fines and implementation of said laws somewhere in the fine print.

[Gerry Zagorski]

How about this for a compromise (I don't think this has been proposed):
Agree to the 19" 3 bag limit with shortened season,
but reduce the penalty for keeping smaller fish, more fish, or out of season fish to $10 per violation.

Create the law to keep things "official" in the eyes of the state. That way they can feel like they did their jobs and got something passed. But on the flip side make the penalty relatively low with the anglers knowing there is a 'fish at your own risk' ordinance in place. Make the state work for their extra money in the form of fines but make the fines not so bad as to be detrimental to all fishermen - especially those people who only get a handful of chances to go out fishing each season (like me). I am certainly not putting a dent in the overall fish population as to affect the quota - but on the rare times I go fishing, I wouldn't mind risking $10 per fish (should I be checked by the state) if it meant being able to take home a little more fish for my family to eat and enjoy. The state might even find that they make some money this way and people won't mind paying as long as it's not overly excessive. After all, a fluke at the seafood market costs at least 10 bucks.

They could even regulate the fines on a scale that increases after 5 fish or after a certain date - that way they could have slightly more control.

I'm sure this idea is falling on deaf ears because it's so hard to make a dent through the bureaucratic BS unless you are a high ranking official. But you never know. So I thought I'd throw it out there.

Make the law say whatever you want to satisfy the bureaucrats, then bury the fines and implementation of said laws somewhere in the fine print.

Hmmmm - 2 things here
1) The law is the law and and if you don't like it get involved and change it or the people representing you...
2) More importantly, this does nothing long term.... Every year we'll be fighting the same battle.... We need to get Magnuson fixed and sweeping changes in the NMFS.

The issue here is not the regulations, they are the symptom... It's the Magnuson Act, and the quotas that are the root cause. Look at Sea Bass... The stocks are rebuilt and yet the NFMS is talking about a closure??

Your a Dentist right?? If someone comes in needing a root canal you don't give them some them some pain killers and send them home, you pull the tooth.

Same thing here.. We need to fight for Magnuson reform and we need changes in the NMFS.. If the people who represent you don't carry that torch then is time to pull them too....

So the question becomes do you as a fisherman want pain pills or do you want to have the tooth pulled. No one wants to hear this but it's a choice of short term pain or long term gain.

No guarantees here either.... Lets face it we've got the environmental groups fighting against us as well as the conversationalists and that seems to be a growing trend....

We need to unite like they do or we don't stand a chance.... Like it or not that's what Democracy and Politics is and has always been about.

If you want a long term solution, get involved in trying to get things reformed. If you want short term relief, take some pain pills, but eventually those pills are not going to work any more and you're going to have to get the tooth pulled.

There is no easy way out of this guys.... If we want a long term solution we need to pull the tooth.

[1captainron]

If your willing to pay a "Fine" then they feel your now ready for a Salt Water license, what's the difference? That license still wouldn't make it legal to keep non-compliant fish, just another tax shoved down our throat.

Big fines are made to DETER people from doing wrong, no way they would cut down on their revenue at this point. Especially when they have to hire loads of new officers to enforce the New regs.

[Arbutis]

No guarantees here either.... Lets face it we've got the environmental groups fighting against us as well as the conversationalists and that seems to be a growing trend....

I could be wrong, but I think you meant conservationists. Although conversationalists could mean all the people talking and complaining but not really taking a stand and fighting for the cause. Either word works I suppose. ;) Liking the dental-to-fishing analogies here Gerry, but pass me some Vicoden for 2017 - they waited until the very last minute to make these decisions - that's what October through March should be for.

The issue here is not the regulations, they are the symptom... It's the Magnuson Act, and the quotas that are the root cause.

I'm don't know exactly what the Magnuson Act is (will look into it further) but when they ALLOW a 'commercial guy' to buy a license enabling him to catch over 150 fluke a day starting at 14" (I read this from another person's post and wanted to puke) and want to restrict a guy who fishes for recreation to a 3 fish 19" limit - something is seriously SERIOUSLY SERIOUSLY wrong with that system. Especially if you're looking at it from a conversationalist point of view. ;) (let's just talk about it)

If your willing to pay a "Fine" then they feel your now ready for a Salt Water license, what's the difference?

The difference is CHOICE. It would be the anglers choice to take the risk of keeping more than the law states, just as it would be the choice of the officers to check your catch. With a salt water license, everyone would be mandated to have one and loads of officers would be needed for enforcement.

If they really wanted to deter people from doing wrong then the fine should be much bigger than $54 per incident. By lowering the fine and writing more citations, they would surely increase their revenue. And people would know their potential risk and cost in keeping extra fish - and have the choice to do so or not.

[frugalfisherman]

It's cheap enough already. If you get caught with six 15-17 inch fluke the fine is $234. Before you say $234 is a lot of money ask yourself what are the chances of being caught? The guys at my cousins marina have being bringing in shorts for years since this nonsense with AFSME started and never saw fish and game. IF somebody was there you get fined and call the other guys still on the water to warn them.

PS. If you pull your boat out at the AH municipal marina don't try this!

[FISHGERE]

fishing use to be fun a sport and relaxing. now its stupid I think government just wants everyone to get your fish at the markets, what has this world come to worrying about 1 or 2 inches, women might. but the sad part is they pay these *******s and fish and game, they are almost making the fisherman sneak a fish or two.