View Single Post
Old 05-09-2011, 01:07 PM   #3
kurtfish
Senior Member
 
kurtfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: I work in the little Village of La Jolla
Posts: 139
Thanks for the real world back-up

Awsome job spelling it out for us non-science guys. The MLPA process was so one sided that our good showings of black shirts to try to counter balance the baby blue shirts was not very effective. My son was able to get a few good words in at the meetings and we left the following photos on the BRTF memeber tables but the faulty science fuled the day.

Bob Fletcher and United Anglers continue their tireless work against the MLPA porcess on our behave. One lawsuit vistory so far that focused on the "closed door meetings" that were part of the review process and now the ongoing lawsuit focusing on the Environmental Quality Act which had the audacity to project no economic impact on the Southern California economy if the most restrictive MPAs were imposed. Talk about science without any real data to back it up. If we report no fish landed than cutting down our fishing areas and making us all fish on top of each other really should not impact our lack of sucess. Since we must all be idiots to spend so much time on the water not catching anything than restricting our fishing areas really should not impact our results or the commerical business associated with our fruitless efforts. This is the way the tree huggers think about what we love to do and this is what the scientsts reports allow them to justify with the inaccurate data they have collected.

I am guilty as well as I have reported landings or lack there of many times but never once did I mention how many Macs I released after a cozy afternoon in my bait tank.
Name:  MLPA2red.jpg
Views: 1952
Size:  87.5 KB
kurtfish is offline   Reply With Quote