Ban Gill Netting in the Chesapeake

[Fish Nut]

Originally Posted by Chesapeake Rock

I don't know how that petition could ever be a tool to ban nets. It should be what the majority wants. for instance, there were a quater of a million people that passed through the doors of the Pasedena show and only 800 signed in favor of a ban. Why would the minority ever be able to make a decsion like that?

No not that Many "quater of a million". Actually150 vendors on site and roughly 3500 people entered the doors. In addition, the petition table was stuck back in the corner near the bathrooms Not much traffic past the table. Most people had more urgent problems to deal with. I had a table next to his if he or I had a better table location we would have had a lot more exposure.

[crabby and son]

Originally Posted by Fish Nut

No not that Many "quater of a million". Actually150 vendors on site and roughly 3500 people entered the doors. In addition, the petition table was stuck back in the corner near the bathrooms Not much traffic past the table. Most people had more urgent problems to deal with. I had a table next to his if he or I had a better table location we would have had a lot more exposure.

You don't need to defend this Rob. We have to go into this with a positive attitude and I think the ball is rolling real well now. I think the rock fish are starting to smile!! Good seeing you at the show and look forward to fishing with you and your Dad!.............Gary

[Mark]

Bob, Rich,
All good information and points. I also agree with you to an extent. I'm all for the health of the species but I just find it hard to take away a mans income. I'm sure this is not the intent of the majority, but in my opinion it's a very undesirable consequence. Some people on this board and the other don't seem to care at all which is very disconcerting. I also think that not all but many of these same people would absolutely freak out if they ban planer boards because "they are too efficient a means of catching rockfish.". This is the hypocritical nature of many recs that pisses me off. Could care less about people (other than themselves) losing their jobs, but take away an 18 rod spread and you'll never hear a louder uproar.

Rob, very good data. Thanks for posting it. Shows a lot more netters than I even thought. I really just hope the reaction to illegal netting doesn't lead to 537 men out of work and drawing welfare, creating more crime, people losing their homes, kids not able to eat. That's my only concern with this, and it still won't stop illegal netting which is what set all this uproar in motion in the first place.

[Hockleyneck]

Originally Posted by reds

Do you guys ever read anything you sign?

The petition clearly states "All Nets". All nets doesn't mean gill nets, it means what it says.

The economic impact to Maryland in banning all net fishing, would be in the hundreds of million dollars and around 5000 jobs state wide. The catching of rockfish commercially, for Virginia and Maryland amounts to $93,000,000.

How do you figure 5000 jobs? You must mean part time jobs, these guys do other things besides run nets. if Fish Nuts is correct in the harvest, the $93MM is way over stated as well. Where are you getting your numbers?

[Hockleyneck]

Originally Posted by Mark

Bob, Rich,
All good information and points. I also agree with you to an extent. I'm all for the health of the species but I just find it hard to take away a mans income. I'm sure this is not the intent of the majority, but in my opinion it's a very undesirable consequence. Some people on this board and the other don't seem to care at all which is very disconcerting. I also think that not all but many of these same people would absolutely freak out if they ban planer boards because "they are too efficient a means of catching rockfish.". This is the hypocritical nature of many recs that pisses me off. Could care less about people (other than themselves) losing their jobs, but take away an 18 rod spread and you'll never hear a louder uproar.

Rob, very good data. Thanks for posting it. Shows a lot more netters than I even thought. I really just hope the reaction to illegal netting doesn't lead to 537 men out of work and drawing welfare, creating more crime, people losing their homes, kids not able to eat. That's my only concern with this, and it still won't stop illegal netting which is what set all this uproar in motion in the first place.

I personally do not like to see the waterman losing a source of income, but it would appear they are going to lose it anyway. I was shocked to see the graph that shows rockfish numbers dropping off the cliff and the continued pressure will be unsustainable. The DNR did make changes to the pre season trollings regs, and I think more regs are coming. You can also bet the commercial guys will be pounding on the DNR to get some rec limitations. My money is on more regs for both the commercial and recreational groups are coming, and I am okay with that.

[Mark]

Originally Posted by Hockleyneck

I personally do not like to see the waterman losing a source of income, but it would appear they are going to lose it anyway. I was shocked to see the graph that shows rockfish numbers dropping off the cliff and the continued pressure will be unsustainable. The DNR did make changes to the pre season trollings regs, and I think more regs are coming. You can also bet the commercial guys will be pounding on the DNR to get some rec limitations. My money is on more regs for both the commercial and recreational groups are coming, and I am okay with that.

Im ok with new regs for the groups for the health of the species founded in science. Last years regs were founded in retaliation, and if watermen get pissed off at the recs over this and politically pushes for more restrictions as revenge, and they are enacted with no scientific evidence, we are back to square 1. If recs are selfish, watermen will be selfish, and the giant pissing contest just gets more heated and more ridiculous restrictions get pushed. The pissing spillover creates rec on rec infighting, waterman on waterman issues, and rec on watermen issues We should all work together towards compromise and proper fisheries management or no one wins. I vowed after last year i would not get involved in these issues, and im trying to keep that promise I am not going to post anymore on the subject, but will watch it very closely Just a concerned citizen and fisherman.

[Chesapeake Rock]

I just think that banning nets because of a petition thats is not signed by the majority of tax payers would be unjust. It wouldn't be surprising the way out government is run, but it would be wrong. You can get thousands of people to sign a petition off the internet for any topic. Theres 300 million americans, unless the petition got over 150 million it should be voided

[Chesapeake Rock]

I was thinking about it and I was wrong, since the petition is off the World wide internet and the world population is 7 billion you should need 3.5 billion signatures. good luck

[Hockleyneck]

Originally Posted by Mark

Im ok with new regs for the groups for the health of the species founded in science. Last years regs were founded in retaliation, and if watermen get pissed off at the recs over this and politically pushes for more restrictions as revenge, and they are enacted with no scientific evidence, we are back to square 1. If recs are selfish, watermen will be selfish, and the giant pissing contest just gets more heated and more ridiculous restrictions get pushed. The pissing spillover creates rec on rec infighting, waterman on waterman issues, and rec on watermen issues We should all work together towards compromise and proper fisheries management or no one wins. I vowed after last year i would not get involved in these issues, and im trying to keep that promise I am not going to post anymore on the subject, but will watch it very closely Just a concerned citizen and fisherman.

I did not realize the commercial guys (knew about some charter guys) were behind the trolling restrictions. I agree it is a tinkling contest, but it always seemed to be this way to me. I agree on the compromises, and would support a one fish limit until July 1 and having on C&R until May 15th. This will hurt the charter guys, but we need to change the culture of rockfishing which seems to be stuck in killing all of the fish.

[Southerly]

it's been awhile since civics in high school (and i may not have been there that day) so i'm a little confused about the political process as regards a petition.

i've always assumed petitions either 1) showed intent of 'a bunch' of people to be used as part of some attempt to get the attention of lawmakers, but were not politically/legally binding in any real way, or 2) could be used to get an issue placed on the regular ballot as a process of law.

is one, or other, or something else the case now?