Posts: 686
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2002
Reputation:
0
Wrong. If it is your own backyard you can fish it any time you want.
I never expected last years ruling to hold up. The land owners are more passionate about protecting their land than the fishermen are about using it.This will probably keep coming up and cost the state a bunch of money to fight. But now that the landowners are organized, it will be an uphill battle.
I know and have talked to landowners about this, and I must say, I cant blame them for their view. People trash the land. Plain and simple. No matter which side you are on, you cannot deny that there will be bad members of the fishing community that don't care about livestock, gates, garbage and fences.
So even if you and most fisher people are ethical and respect landowners rights, someone will come along that doesnt play nice.
If stream access is ever to be a fair law for everyone, the state would have to set up a fund to repay landowners for damages. Something like a 1.00 fee on fishing licenses to pay for cleaning up trashed shorelines and repairing fences. If that was passed, maybe landowners and fishermen could find a way to work together. Until something like that happens, I would expect the landowners to fight hard to keep private property private.
[signature]
Posts: 136
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2009
Reputation:
0
Obama doesn’t want to ban sport fishing, he wants to manage it.
The greenies and the EPA have already shut down farming in favor of the Delta Smelt, so what keeps them from doing the same anywhere else? Only certain, favored groups will be allowed to fish for sport, and only under certain restrictions (i.e...gave money to the democrat party.)
I don't see a total ban on sportfishing but count on seeing a huge "environmental fee" being tacked onto our fishing license cost in the near future.
The UDWR had better keep the June Sucker population high or Utah Lake and all of its tributaries will be off-limits soon- bank on that.
[signature]
Posts: 2,436
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation:
0
Wrong? Just like that?
What about this law will change anything about those who trash the land? I'll tell you what, there will no longer be any ethical fishers out there to report them.
You outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.
You make it illegal to fish private water, only poachers will fish private waters.
[signature]
Posts: 196
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
Thank you Riverdog for your intelligent input.
[signature]
Posts: 2,504
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation:
1
This may shed some light on this. It may very well be a hoax!
http://news.spreadit.org/obama-fishing-ban/
HB141 wasn't a hoax folks. You guys REALLY did get screwed by your own legislature yesterday.
Carry on with your outrage against phantom threats.
[signature]
Posts: 3,826
Threads: 8
Joined: Feb 2003
Reputation:
0
Wow how funny!!
[signature]
Posts: 2,727
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation:
0
Ocean, I'd agree it's funny except some folks fall for this stuff. I'll repeat my first thoughts when I looked at the issues- pure paranoid speculation. I almost brought up the bluefin tuna fishery. U.S. sets some conservation limits in the Atlantic trying to increase size and numbers while the Mediterranean countries basically don't. Problem is new research shows these extremely valuable fish actually travel back and worth from our east coast to the Mediterranean region. So those countries are not only hurting our efforts to improve this fishery but the only reason it's even maintained at all in their region is because of our efforts. Those fish can be worth thousands or ten of thousands dollars each so our fisherman are getting screwed big time by other countries short sighted approach. Of course the Mediterranian fisherman is just as likely to believe the science and voluntarily act on it as a Texas oilman is going to believe in global warming and voluntarily act on it.
[signature]
Posts: 4,335
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation:
0
haha i read that article in Fly Fisherman and its sitting right here on my desk.... he dident catch a damn thing, and i bet the guide was talking *(^*%* after he left, haha!
[signature]
Posts: 2,396
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2006
Reputation:
0
Obamma himself is a fly fisherman so I highly dought this will effect inland water or local rivers. The bill and panel is geared more toward regulating Commercial Fisherman.
As mention earlier we need to focus on stopping HB141 this will impact you far more than Obammas Bill would .
[signature]
Posts: 3,826
Threads: 8
Joined: Feb 2003
Reputation:
0
Bad enough other countries ruin our fisheries and then we have to suffer but a lot of the problems in our fisheries is created by us the fishermen and then we complain when the officials step in and impose strict rules on our fisheries to help it. Fishermen need to look at themselves and take blame for the damages that are caused by their ignorance.For example do you really need to keep everything you catch and are you going to eat it or let it get freezer burn and throw it away a year later?Fishermen need to change their mentality for example there are a lot of locals i have seen out there fishing and keeping every bass they catch no matter what the size and they teach their kids this and those kids will teach theirs the same thing. I have taught my kids keep what you will eat and if you are not going to eat it within 24 hours let it go to grow and reproduce. My kids understand this i dont know why adults cant figure this out.[pirate] In florida they had banned commercial swordfishing and now look at that fishery one of the best in the world .Also they limited the amount of mackeral and that fishery is awesome now.
[signature]
Posts: 940
Threads: 1
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation:
2
A HOAX? If that's the case what a relief. If it is a hoax what does that say for ESPN's credibility? That's a big OOPS! What media can we trust? I swear there is an industry build to spread as much confusion as possible. Where there is confusion there is vulnerability and opportunity to prey on peoples emotions. Get 'em stirred up so they don't know which way is up. It does seem a little stretched for anyone to take on the fishing industry but we are talking about Obama, the self proclaimed savior of the world!
The posted photo of Obama fishing doesn't mean he's a friend of anglers. It reminds me of the photos of Clinton and John Kerry when they went hunting so they could convince gun owners they weren't on the gun ban bus and we know that was BS to the max. I'd have to see a lot more history of Obama's fishing exploits to believe that one.
[signature]
Posts: 2,841
Threads: 1
Joined: Feb 2009
Reputation:
0
It's funny how some people think any conservation is a bad thing. I hope this administration does manage to get some bills passed that will help the fisheries, they're really getting hammered. One thing that we can do, is to be selective as to which species of fish we buy. Farm raised tilapia and catfish are a lot more environmentally friendly than something like orange roughy. Of course, most people on here would probably prefer to catch their own dinner anyway[  ]
[signature]
Posts: 2,436
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation:
0
Actually I would not call BO a "fly fisher" nor even a fisher. He learned how while on vacatioin in Montana last year, said he liked it and even did catch a fish.
I doubt he owns his own fishing gear though nor that he has fished since his first time.
There is also a pic on google of him "hooked up".
[signature]
Posts: 136
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2009
Reputation:
0
We should all be active conservationists, YES!
However, any time the feds get involved, the rules get really stupid.[:p]
My heartburn with the treaty comes from the fact that the UN has a hand in it. I read the entire report and recommendations and it simply gives too much power to bureaucrats, foreign and domestic.
All I saw when I read it were red flags:
[#ff0000](My comments in red)[/#ff0000]
• Support for embracing science-based decision-making and investing in ecosystem-based science, research, and ocean observations, including comprehensive research on the linkages among ecosystem health, human health, economic opportunity, national and homeland security, social justice, and environmental change, including climate change;
[#ff0000]The DHS has already blocked off some of the best fishing areas on Pineview with NO local input. Check out the buoys near the dam next time you're up there. I read about coastal areas that used to be sportfishing meccas that are now off-limits to sportsmen because some DHS bureaucrat has decided to close them with no sportsmen's input.
I also believe that now that AGW "science" has been proven to be a FRAUD, that this "science-based decision-making" will only further restrict what sportsmen are allowed to access or utilize.[/#ff0000]
• Support for joining the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (the Law of the Sea Convention). [#ff0000]further weakening American sovereignty.
[/#ff0000]
• Water Quality and Sustainable Practices on Land: Enhance water quality in the ocean, along our coasts, and in the Great Lakes by promoting and [b]implementing sustainable practices on land.
[#ff0000]This means eliminating fertilizers for farming.
[/#ff0000]
• Changing Conditions in the Arctic: Address environmental stewardship needs in the Arctic Ocean and adjacent coastal areas in the face of climate-induced and other environmental changes.
[#ff0000]Based on politicized AGW "science".
[/#ff0000]
b. Decisions affecting the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes should be informed by and consistent with the best available science. Decision-making will also be guided by a precautionary approach as reflected in the Rio Declaration of 1992 which states in pertinent part, “[w]here there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation”; and
[#ff0000]I interpret this to mean that the leftist greenies can use junk science to further their causes, regardless of sportsmens wishes.
[/#ff0000]
[signature]
Posts: 2,841
Threads: 1
Joined: Feb 2009
Reputation:
0
Agricultural runoff is a big problem. Did you know that The Bear River used to run clear through Cache Valley and that Newton Reservoir and Clarkston Creek that feeds it used to be full of large trout? Agricultural runoff, erosion from overgrazing, and water use have diminished these fisheries. Now I'm certainly not saying that they should do away with fertilizer completely, (many of my neighbors are farmers) but perhaps some things could be changed to help these areas recover.
[signature]
Posts: 3,535
Threads: 1
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
0
[quote gstott]One thing that we can do, is to be selective as to which species of fish we buy. Farm raised tilapia and catfish are a lot more environmentally friendly than something like orange roughy. Of course, most people on here would probably prefer to catch their own dinner anyway[img]../../../images/gforum/ .gif[/img] [/quote]
I'm one of those who prefer to catch my own, or at least eat wild caught fish. I will never eat a farm raised fish. They're raised in tight quarters using questionable feed and pumped full of antibiotics to try and protect them from the diseases that run rampant in such tight living space. Not to mention wild tastes so much better. I'm not so sure that they are more environmentally friendly at all.
[signature]
Posts: 2,504
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation:
1
Posts: 409
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2007
Reputation:
0
[quote Troll]
Of all the R's in the Senate today only 3 voted to protect your rights to fish all of your water, every one of those liberal Democrats voted to protect your rights.[/quote]
Might want to take a little closer look at the vote there Troll.
As for the arguments of if this law (HB 80 recognizing the public's right to use the water) passed how trashed the streams and rivers would be....go to Idaho and Montana and tell me that happened. It's a joke to even hear that. Sensationalism and blatant lies prevailed with our elected officials. They won't fly with me.
[signature]
Posts: 2,727
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation:
0
Hey Braz,
Thanks for your input, you always seem to have a good understanding of these issues.
Now do you know how I could get a Halliburton sticker and some orange lights for my vehicle? Wyoming is a big open state and I'd like to be able to drive twice the speed limit with impunity as well.
The ESPN apology is a little soft for the worst written articles I've ever read but at least they made an effort.
[signature]
Posts: 1,039
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation:
0
Shoot Riverdog, I think I would start with Bill Clinton, Bruce Babbitt or any other Democrat associated with the DOI from 1993-2001. They were the ones who sold a vast majority of the gas leases in the Pinedale Anticline and Jonah Field that those Halliburton vehicles would have been driving towards.[  ]
There are also several other issues that this panel is considering that could also be an issue for some. The first has somewhat been discussed with the fertilizer. The problem however is with the Phosphate in the fertilizer. However this effects a whole bunch more than farmers or ranchers. Phosphates are in products that every single one of us use on a daily basis such as soap, toothpaste, etc. A majority of the phosphates we use are dispensed in waste water via our sewer systems. If our waste water systems were mandated to remove phosphates from the waste water we would all see our sewer rates drastically increase so our utility operator could install and maintain the technology to do so.
The next issue that I have a concern with would be the elimination of septic systems in rural areas. This is not viable option for many, but may be recommended.
[signature]
|
