Originally Posted By: eyeFISH
Getting back to my post about the ANTI-CCA assertions.

Read them again, folks.

Please help me out if I am misrepresenting the haters' positions. I just want to make sure I understand what it is they are advocating.

Examine it closely and you will find that the common denominator in the conclusions for 1) and 2) is "more for us".

That's what it really all boils down to for the ANTI's... allocative greed... whatever it takes to maximize the sport share of the take. Even if it means making ridiculous arguments in favor of one of the most biologically destructive fishing methods ever devised by mankind.

I am dumbfounded that any of you can maintain any credibility for being stewards of the resource when you speak in favor of gillnets. And for what? Just to maintain/increase your perceived fair share of the kill?

At some point, I hope that folks finally wake up to the fact that our sport is about so much more than just dead fish in the box.


And some sport fishermen have to take that position because of conflict of interest with their organization being partners with other organizations unfortunately. So all sportsmen aren't on the same page. CCA doesn't have that red tape to muddle through and has the ability to attemt to ban gillnets where other organization don't have a snowballs chance in hell to even think that thought.
_________________________
The world will not be destroyed by those that are evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything.- Albert Einstein

No you can’t have my rights---I’m still using them