Proposed Stocking Regulations Will Impact California Lake and Pond Fishing

Fisher wrote:its all about money

As almost everything is!

LGHT,
I can sympathize with your frustration and obvious resolve. But I must plead with you to reconsider your position. It is hard to argue with your math but I think the reason we (fisherman) are so heavily outweighed and for the most part ignored, at the polls, meetings, public hearings, etc., etc., is because we have not been good public representatives of our sport. We have not presented ourselves to the voter public with a credible image that would draw understanding or sympathy to our cause. ( I think the fly fishing interests have been the best at this but they do so for their own selfish reasons and are not inclusive of the rest of the fishing population). Throughout the rest of the country outdoor sports, both hunting and fishing are respected as activities that are wholesome, part of our American heritage, and that represent an ancient instinct to pursue and capture (kill?) An inborn need to hunt, to harvest from the environment as a means of survival. The voter population in these states are historically, personally involved, they represent generations of hunters and fisherman. And they protect what has been theirs for generations.
California is a young state, with a transient, population, There are not the generations of hunters and fisherman here. Hell, better than half the people here have been residents for less than 20 YEARS!!! ( Southern California) we do not have a historic culture of fisherman or hunters and yet we have vast and diverse fisheries. We have to represent! We have to convince the 90% We have to change our image, and change their minds.

IF WE WANT TO CONTINUE FISHING !!

bodfish

The discussion seems to be one of cynicism and hope. I would argue that an area of clarity be reached for the sake of future and less versed readers as this thread is a wealth of information and opinion. Both major commentators have an obvious civic as well as moral investment in the sport of fishing and I find that admirable.

Can I get a second on the motion?

I second!!

(moved and seconded, now what?..... Ooooo time for a beer my fingers are raw)

bodfish

I also second it, where else in the world can we have such different opinions and debate our differences and in the end we agree to disagree, and we can still fish together

Ohh yeah I totally agree and wish I had it in me to keep the fight, but after 10 or so MLPA losses that failed miserably I will be honest and say the legal route is probably a fisherman's best chance. The last thing you want is to take a vote and loose by a 95% margin.

Its cool brother, let fish and drink

Good news the mesure did not pass check it out on [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

harptube wrote:Good news the mesure did not pass check it out on [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

This is good news..

Yeaaaaa!!!
I have just one question. What was the motive for the DFG wanting to force private fish hatcheries and lakes to adhere to their EIR regulations? They don't make any money directly from the reports. I'm not sure what the intent was for doing this.

bodfish

harptube wrote:Good news the mesure did not pass check it out on [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Nice

Like I said it is all about California trying to find money by loop holes in the system

Seems like the Commish realized they would be in for a very long uphill legal fight and didn't want to go that route.

The Commissioners instructed the Fish and Game Department to come back to the Commission only if the agency feels it’s necessary and to clarify the DFG’s legal exposure for not going forward with the DFG’s regulations.

“The statute is the statute, and only the Legislature can change that,” Richards said, adding that it’s up to the DFG to go to the Legislature to change the statute regarding the permitting process."

Bodfish like Harptube said it's about $$$$$$$ I spoke to Craig Elliot owner of a hatchery and who runs fishing lakes about this and he said the proposed regulations would require hatchery owners to use their specific environmental survey guides which would require them to use the DFG staff and resources at a fee and at an average of over $100k per survey the DFG would make a substantial profit per study.

We know they will try again and once again using tax payers money and also monies paid for fishing licences this money is supposed to fund the DFG hatcheries!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!