NMFS proposes to reduce the hake possession limit

[Joey Dah Fish]

Originally Posted by fishguy

I think you are saying people "on the dole" should NOT be allowed to vote. I'm not even going there.

America, for all the chest thumping we do about Freedom and Democracy, has a pathetic voter turn out. We love us some Constitutional Rights, baseball and apple pie but as a nation we are terrible at voting. Anything approaching 55% is considered a good turn out. Just over half of eligible voters. How lame is that? And then people complain about the government. Well, you get out what you put in. In my opinion, if you don't vote than you should STFU about anything related to gov't.

That's correct people on the role should not be able to vote period. They have no skin in the game they shouldn't be able to vote for an increase in the pay check they don't work for period. You should have to be a contributing to society citizen period

[Capt Sal]

It should be mandatory that everyone that the right to vote ''must'' vote.

[Joey Dah Fish]

Originally Posted by Capt Sal

It should be mandatory that everyone that the right to vote ''must'' vote.

That's communism. Not freedom.

[fishguy]

Originally Posted by Joey Dah Fish

That's communism. Not freedom.

Umm, I don't think you know what communism is.

Compulsory voting is fairly common in some western democracies. As much as I fear the general stupidity of the average American I think mandatory voting for every eligible voter could be a good thing. Make Election Day a national holiday so nobody has the excuse of having to work.

As for not letting anyone "on the dole" vote, you mean anyone getting gov't assistance, right? So no welfare recipients, anyone getting food stamps, Medicaid, Medicare, social security, unemployment, disability, gov't student loans or tax credits (which might as well be counted as a handout)
Who's left?

[shresearchdude]

Well I had a big rant ready but then got timed out....just as well.

Fishguy nailed it when he pointed out what GW stood for and followed thru on.
Federal budgets continue to shrink. Federal research continues to shrink. If you want more science that is better? well -there are fewer conducting it.

For those that think that NOAA are a bunch of bozos? well that's just a bit wrong. But you have the freedom to say what you want.

[Capt Sal]

Originally Posted by shresearchdude

Well I had a big rant ready but then got timed out....just as well.

Fishguy nailed it when he pointed out what GW stood for and followed thru on.
Federal budgets continue to shrink. Federal research continues to shrink. If you want more science that is better? well -there are fewer conducting it.

For those that think that NOAA are a bunch of bozos? well that's just a bit wrong. But you have the freedom to say what you want.

I do no not think that everyone that works for Noaa is a dumby. There are some very educated people on the staff. A few people taking notes about what the daily catch was will not help.Do you think the science is flawed? Do you think the entire system should be revamped? I am sure the research you do helps but is it used properly? I consider myself a fairly educated individual with some college back ground and I have been to numerous meetings. More politics than science is what I heard. I went to a meeting in NY on bunker. I was told by a biologist the reason for the decline in bunker was the guys throwing cast nets! He was eighty years old and did not know what a bunker reduction vessel was! That's flawed and how did he get the job?

[bunker dunker]

I think what is being said here is that as free Americans we should not be forced to do anything against our will{with in the laws].why dose this always happen when we speak of the limits and laws of our beloved sport.could our
government have some corrupt members???could the government just not care about the businesses that have made a living for 2 or 3 generations in the recreational fishing market????.why are we never heard???why do they tell us that certain fish stocks are in the best shape ever and still cut the limits???

[Gerry Zagorski]

Originally Posted by shresearchdude

Well I had a big rant ready but then got timed out....just as well.

Fishguy nailed it when he pointed out what GW stood for and followed thru on.
Federal budgets continue to shrink. Federal research continues to shrink. If you want more science that is better? well -there are fewer conducting it.

For those that think that NOAA are a bunch of bozos? well that's just a bit wrong. But you have the freedom to say what you want.

John - I hope you don't take all the rants here about NOAA personally. I don't think they are directed at the people like you doing the work. It's directed at the people who are making decisions on the regulations based on flawed science rather then the people who attend these meetings and fish day in and day out.

One blatant example is Sea Bass... The science would say the stock is in decline but you can hardly drop a clam down on any lump and avoid one from taking the hook. Heck, they are so thick a hack like me could easily fill my limit and more

I have no doubt that there are fewer people conducting science as it relates to stock assessments. However, with NOAA having a 2015 budget of $5.5 billion and 12000 employees, you'd think we'd be capable of doing a better job of assessing fish stocks. If not, the money and resources are not being allocated correctly.

[Capt Sal]

Originally Posted by Joey Dah Fish

That's communism. Not freedom.

Joey you are more educated than to make a statement like that. Not even close to communism! I think we are getting off the subject of a government run program with appointed positions in a nation wide travesty.