Posts: 1,256
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2002
Reputation:
0
here in New Jersey we belong to the Atlantic states marine fisheries commision (ASMFC) and as recreational fishermen we don't like it here the commision puts commercial fishing interests first and unfairly changes the laws acordingly for instance Winter flounder are not a migratory fish they come into the local bays in the winter and in the spring they go straight out to deeper water they do not migrate up and down the coast now we have a bigger stock here then other states but they just changed the laws here based on a coast wide study instead of an individual state study reducing the season and bag limits on recreational fishing and increasing the commercial quota and we have no say in this because they are a federal commision
[signature]
Posts: 4,244
Threads: 12
Joined: Mar 2003
Reputation:
0
I agree with you on this Archie, why should NJ or Maine be penalized for the poor practices of commercial fishing in CT. We lost most flounder numbers years ago to over fishing and just now seeing the return of decent fluke due to limits. This shouldn't affect other states, becuase of Ct misguided policys.
[signature]
Posts: 9,402
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2003
Reputation:
0
[font "Roman"][green][size 4]Hey there Hutch00 - Who controls the issuing of fishing licenses - your state or the commission?[/size][/green][/font]
[signature]
Posts: 1,256
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2002
Reputation:
0
The state controls the fishing license and the enforcement of the rules and we only have a freshwater license so far no saltwater license yet but they keep trying the freshwater in also not controled by any commisions strictly by the state only saltwater is controled by the ASMFC we keep fighting a saltwater license on thegrounds that the states hands are tied on saltwater regs and the money paid to the state will not help improve the fishery here it will only allow the state to hire more CO's to enforce the laws mandated by the ASMFC
[signature]
Posts: 1,256
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2002
Reputation:
0
we pay an average of $10 a day to get on the beach in the summer months
[signature]
Posts: 26,682
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
0
Most of our beach areas also cost around 10 bucks to get on. Where some of them have amusements parks and refreshments available, it may cost you much more just to get off.[pirate]
[signature]
Posts: 2,968
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2001
Reputation:
0
Wow! Has it changed that much since I was last on the California coast?
[signature]
Posts: 26,682
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
0
I used to pay about $3 to park on the Santa Monica Pier for 24hrs at a time. Now they charge you $12 during the day and an additional 7 buck if you want to park at night.
[signature]
Posts: 1,256
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2002
Reputation:
0
Oh Yeah I forgot about parking we have parking meters it will cost you 4 quarters for a 20 minutes and the meters go up to 10 hours thats alot of quarters
[signature]
Posts: 26,682
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
0
That's almost as bad as parking at City Hall in LA. They charge you 2.40 every 20 minutes with a maximum of 40 dollars per day.
OUCH [pirate]
[signature]
Posts: 2,968
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2001
Reputation:
0
That's why I don't like the cities. I'm a suburb boy. Parking ramps are great if you are in a predicament where you need to pay for parking which happens whenever I go to a concert (which is once every couple of years) and whenever there's an outdoors or sportsman's show.
Anyway, back to the topic on hand. I think the state should be able to govern its own coastline but that they should also pay attention to what the federal commission has to say about their research and deal with things on a migratory species vs. stationary species level.
[signature]
Posts: 23,576
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2001
Reputation:
0
It is bad medecin to give a governing body any more power than they already have, I beleive the fish and game regulations should be a seperate government from the state and federal governments.
there is to much politics that go on, two many people with their hands in the fish and game till. and every time I turn around the state and wild life biologist are blocked from prosicuting people who dump toxic waist.
Thats "My Opinion", (and yes I have been told my opinion sucks [sly])
[signature]
Posts: 4,329
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2002
Reputation:
0
Hi there,
This is a tough issue. I believe in states rights so ........ BUT states that share resources wth another state have gotta work with other entities like it or not!
Look at California ..... the Pacific ocean Canada/states/mexico, Colorado River.....
JapanRon
[signature]
Posts: 58
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation:
0
It should be by the state.
[signature]
Posts: 17
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation:
0
I think it should be the individual states. The Red River between Oklahoma and Texas you need only have your state license to fish on your states side of it, but if you run a trotline across to the other bank then you need an Oklahoma Non-resident license. to go along with your Texas license. Lake Texoma sells a Lake license that you can fish anywhere on the the lake but it's not good for fishing up in the Red River with if your in a boat. Arkansas and Louisianna you can fish on any of the lakes on the boundaries between them and Texas with your Texas, Arkansas or Louisianna license as long as it's valid for your state. I kinda like the way they have it down here and wouldn't want another state trying to tell us what we can catch, how many we catch, and how many fishing poles or hooks we can use. Better off just left to the states. Pay enough taxes and license fees without having a new game commission to fund.
[signature]
][font "Poor Richard"][green][size 3]