Recreational Fishermen Thrown Under Bus by ASA, CCA, IGFA, NMMA, TBF, others

[Fritz]

ADVERTISE HERE

The letter is excellent. They were trying to tell the powers to be to look at the economics surrounding the actual act of catching a fish. Oh, brother. Somebody needs to go back and read it again.

[N2theBlue]

he probably wouldn't understand it even if he did.

[Relentlessfishing]

Take a look at the editorial in this months Issue of Saltwater Sportsman Magazine where the Editor John Brownlee openly supports a CITES listing for Bluefin I will no longer purchase this magazine and I urge anyone else to avoid it as well Talk about misguided information are these guys for real??

[captadamnj]

Yes or no question - would fishing have the same "value" to you if catching fish was not an option?

[Deep C]

Originally Posted by Fritz

The letter is excellent. They were trying to tell the powers to be to look at the economics surrounding the actual act of catching a fish. Oh, brother. Somebody needs to go back and read it again.

Yes the content of the letter is excellent. The verbage at the start though could have been worded better. Again though its a compromise rather than a denouncement of policy as a whole.

[Glenn W]

Capt Adam,
I'm not a member of any of these organizations but the letter you refer to has no subliminal messages, nor are there any hidden agenda, conspiracies, or twisting of words.
The only word twisting is by you and your refusal to read what is clearly written and unmistakably meant--- that being the total economic value of the revenue produced as a result of the recreational fishing experience. The economic value (in addition to the value of catching fish) also includes the [indirect] benefits (value) of revenue generated from expenditures for travel, food, lodging, etc.
The letter may not win a Pulitzer prize, but it ain't communist, anti-fishing propaganda either.

Sorry, but misrepresenting what is written and clearly meant (either as an honest mistake or contrived), will serve no useful purpose in promoting the interests of all fishermen.

[The Machine]

Originally Posted by Glenn W

Capt Adam,
I'm not a member of any of these organizations but the letter you refer to has no subliminal messages, nor are there any hidden agenda, conspiracies, or twisting of words.
The only word twisting is by you and your refusal to read what is clearly written and unmistakably meant--- that being the total economic value of the revenue produced as a result of the recreational fishing experience. The economic value (in addition to the value of catching fish) also includes the [indirect] benefits (value) of revenue generated from expenditures for travel, food, lodging, etc.
The letter may not win a Pulitzer prize, but it ain't communist, anti-fishing propaganda either.



Sorry, but misrepresenting what is written and clearly meant (either as an honest mistake or contrived), will serve no useful purpose in promoting the interests of all fishermen.

Hear! hear! well said
Please read properly before spouting off and if you cannot understand it get someone that does to explain it to you.

[WAHOONBOX]

THIS IS WHY I SAVE THE MEMBERSHIP MONEY TO SUCH ALLIANCES AND BUY MORE BALLYHOO WITH IT INSTEAD OF PROVIDING A SALARY FOR SOMEONE TO HAVE A CUSH' JOB...

[Dave Sikorski]

I know that the current administrations intentions are anything the best for Rec. fishermen, but do not feel these organizations are throwing anyone under the bus.

I am a member of the Sport Fisheries Advisory Commission in MD and I represent the CCA. Here in MD we are working hard to support our fisheries and our fishermen.

I understand where your concerns stem from, and they might be valid, but the letter does not say what you think it does.

More division amongst recreational angling organizations will not do us any good.

-D

[captadamnj]

misrepresenting what is written and clearly meant

Thank you, Glenn, for making my point for me.

As you indicated, it is now written in black and white by the above named orgs that catching fish is of a lesser value. "rather than the actual catching of fish" The words of the letter, not mine, not my representation of them.

You bring to the table the component of "what is meant". The statement may mean little to one person, but mean a lot to someone else. Making a statement such as what is made, as someone posted on another board on which I posted this letter, opens a pandora's box. There are those that can and will latch on to that statement and use it for specific agendas and goals, irregardless of how it was "meant". Lobbing in a softball like that is, imo, being thrown under the bus.

I understand where your concerns stem from, and they might be valid, but the letter does not say what you think it does.

Dave, thanks for replying. Will you be contacting those in your organization to request a letter of clarification so that it can be "clearly written" that most people go fishing with the intent of catching fish?

If that is not the case, I don't understand the whole thing about going to seminars to learn about catching fish, outfitting boats with fishfinders and position indicating equipment to help find fish, using high end tackle that benefits the angler in reeling in fish, or even the use of hooks, because if the experience is the value, then we really don't need any of it.

Yes, the fishing experience is important. Yes, it has value. But not one person on any board I've posted has offered agreement with the idea that the fishing experience would hold the same value if they did not hope/expect to catch a fish.

More division amongst recreational angling organizations will not do us any good.

Agreed. What can you do to help us resolve this issue?