# HB36 Gamefish Status for Red Drum



## seaweaver (Feb 19, 2013)

Hand wringers for control rejoice.

http://legiscan.com/GA/text/HB36/id/685102

cw


----------



## wharfrat (Feb 19, 2013)

I usually try to stay out of the "politics" of fishing but this is a good thing.


----------



## Capt. TJ Cheek (Feb 19, 2013)

I am all for this bill. I've already sent my letter saying so. No change in limits, just won't allow the sale of Redfish.


----------



## crackerdave (Feb 19, 2013)

Capt. TJ Cheek said:


> I am all for this bill. I've already sent my letter saying so. No change in limits, just won't allow the sale of Redfish.



How can I help?


----------



## Capt. TJ Cheek (Feb 20, 2013)

crackerdave said:


> How can I help?



Just go to www.georgiaredfish.org and follow the instructions. Thanks crackerdave!


----------



## seaweaver (Feb 20, 2013)

And the addition of a tag?

Let me ask this.
Is the fish protected now?



While you are writing...demand no tax and gauge the response.

cw


----------



## seaweaver (Feb 20, 2013)

wharfrat said:


> I usually try to stay out of the "politics" of fishing but this is a good thing.




Those who refrain from engaging  politics will come to be governed by their inferiors- Plato


----------



## seaweaver (Feb 20, 2013)

from the last red fish crisis...


Faced with no data supporting Georgia Red Fish.Org’s fears I searched elsewhere and found an article in Georgia Outdoor News. This article was written by GON staff and heavily quotes Spud Woodward, head of marine fisheries management for DNR’s Coastal Resources Division and a member of Georgia Red Fish.Org. In the article Mr. Woodward mentions hearing of possible violations of the red fish regulations, but he provides no data which is a reoccurring theme throughout my search. He does lament the lack of funding to boat more officers to patrol for violations. He *suspects* that there are fishermen selling unreported catches of red fish from their trucks, but has no data to support it. Mike Duckworth of Brunswick also mentions in this article that the law enforcement section needs to be* fully funded and game fish status would be a valuable tool towards that end.* What does that mean? To my ears, it sounds like a tax to fund those wants. In this same article, there is the notation that CCA of Ga pursued this status once and failed due to lack of data to show it was warranted.


----------



## Bryannecker (Feb 20, 2013)

The impact of this bill may not be as great as anticipated, since I have yet to see any sales of redfish in Georgia!  However, the extension of Georgia State waters to the same as most states in the Gulf of Mexico would have a profound impact on our saltwater fishery here in Georgia.  From a mere three miles to a little over ten would mean that Georgia would be the first state on the east coast to have the opportunity to develop our fishery without the interference of federal regulatory officials in the main thrust of such regulations.  Dr. Watson has my paper of that issue,  but nothing has been done to my knowledge.  In my estimation, the issue of state waters is far more important to Georgia anglers than the ethereal sale of any redfish!
Capt. Jimmy
P/S: Look at the non-compliance of Florida in the Gulf on the Red Snapper season for instance!!!!


----------



## wharfrat (Feb 20, 2013)

seaweaver said:


> Those who refrain from engaging  politics will come to be governed by their inferiors- Plato



I am afraid that I have been governed by my inferiors my whole life...but I think they try to do what's best. What kind of boat does Plato have? Does he have any good fishing spots?

Seriously though, our neighbors to the south and north have had this status enacted for a LONG time and has been very successful. Being that a commercial license only allows for the sale of 5 fish per license the impact on that end is minimal. As far as illegal taking of redfish and illegal sales of redfish, I've seen it first hand. This measure will not stop folks from taking too many, too small, or too large, but will make it a little tougher to distribute them. You are correct in pointing out the lack of man power on the enforcement end. I am not aware of the tag proposal.


----------



## seaweaver (Feb 23, 2013)

wharfrat said:


> I am afraid that I have been governed by my inferiors my whole life...but I think they try to do what's best. What kind of boat does Plato have? Does he have any good fishing spots?
> 
> Seriously though, our neighbors to the south and north have had this status enacted for a LONG time and has been very successful. Being that a commercial license only allows for the sale of 5 fish per license the impact on that end is minimal. As far as illegal taking of redfish and illegal sales of redfish, I've seen it first hand. This measure will not stop folks from taking too many, too small, or too large, but will make it a little tougher to distribute them. You are correct in pointing out the lack of man power on the enforcement end. I am not aware of the tag proposal.



"I am not aware of the tag proposal"
It was in the GON article the last time they brought it up.(desire for more funding/And the posted conversation I had w/ Spud)

"As far as illegal taking of redfish and illegal sales of redfish, I've seen it first hand. "

and you did what? I hear this...but do not hear the reports. You should know the date and it could be checked against records.

"This measure will not stop folks from taking too many, too small, or too large, but will make it a little tougher to distribute them."
as noted in the first two attempts...there is NO evidence. 
former park game and fish Chair Bob Lane even said that he specifically asked where and who is doing this and Redfish .org could not provide evidence.

Bob is in Statesboro..he is easy to look up and ask. He is a nice guy.

"our neighbors to the south and north have had this status enacted for a LONG time "
and do they have Spud Woodward?
more over...do the have the same ecosystem?
no on both accounts.

remember when people (and the media) used to be skeptical of the Government? look around...
what happened?

cw


----------



## Bilge Rat LT 20 (Feb 23, 2013)

I would leave the issue alone.
Change it and you open up the fishery to other interests. The govt. would be in conrtol and could issue commerical permits and set limits and methods.

In Florida commerical fishermen can now take trout with castnets as well as the larger trout. In winter the trout sit in holes and the netter can take out a lot of resident fish.

Now the LEOs have to watch more people with nets spreading enforcement thinner.

Govt. control is not an answer just look at history.


----------



## Capt. TJ Cheek (Feb 23, 2013)

seaweaver said:


> "I am not aware of the tag proposal"
> It was in the GON article the last time they brought it up.(desire for more funding/And the posted conversation I had w/ Spud)
> 
> "As far as illegal taking of redfish and illegal sales of redfish, I've seen it first hand. "
> ...



If you think this isn't happening you are fooling yourself. I've seen it first hand too. Did I report it? No. Why? I'm not a cop. I rather see a bill passed that makes it not worth the risk to sell them so that I don't have to be some jerk on the dock wagging my finger at people.

Even so, I think even if it weren't happening, its good to prevent it from happening.

And if part of the argument against this is the fact that there were only 500 pounds of Redfish sold last year, why do the seafood guys care so much about making sure they can buy/sell them?

I believe these fish have a bigger economic impact for our state as a recreational fish than they do as a commercial fish. Protecting them will only help our coastal economy and improve the fishery.

I bet there were a lot of Bald Eagle hunters that were pretty ticked when that bird got some protection.

"Wise men speak because they have something to say; fools because they have to say something." Plato


----------



## seaweaver (Feb 25, 2013)

_If you think this isn't happening you are fooling yourself. I've seen it first hand too. Did I report it? No. Why? I'm not a cop. I rather see a bill passed that makes it not worth the risk to sell them so that I don't have to be some jerk on the dock wagging my finger at people._

so rather than turn someone in...you would rather chastise them discreetly and create more law to assuage?

_"Protecting them will only help our coastal economy and improve the fishery."_
This assumes...there is NO protection now? or there is seepage...that no one can document nor penalize under current law?

A wise man should be able to see when they are tilting at windmills, or being lead to do so.

If these dragons(...bigfoot) exist...why is this the Third attempt to sell the public the same fantasy?

If you still see bigfoot and do not wish to take a picture... do not wish to document for the state to see, then while proposing to protect redfish from this apparition...DEMAND protection for the citizen as well.

Demand a no taxation amendment...
gauge the reaction to that.


cw


----------



## seaweaver (Feb 25, 2013)

If would contain such a provision...I'd have no issue.
But the idea that it some how protects against some unseen, undocumented boogyman is no different than what is being employed across this nation to serve statists interests and it is embarrassing the ease in which is sold and consumed.

cw


----------



## seaweaver (Feb 25, 2013)

This is a bit extraneous to the topic but lends itself to the "tilting" and I had to revisit...it's not personal.

_"If you think this isn't happening you are fooling yourself. I've seen it first hand too. Did I report it? No. Why? I'm not a cop. I rather see a bill passed that makes it not worth the risk to sell them so that I don't have to be some jerk on the dock wagging my finger at people."_

... is this not the same logic that is being use to threaten our second amendment rights?

...more law will stop those who (supposedly) are breaking the law...designed and already in place...to protect.

We cannot continue to Not think this stuff through. 
We must act responsibly and quit abdicating to the notion that more law is the only solution to real problems as it becomes easy to do the same for trumped up "problems" as well.

cw
cw


----------



## Capt. TJ Cheek (Feb 25, 2013)

seaweaver said:


> This is a bit extraneous to the topic but lends itself to the "tilting" and I had to revisit...it's not personal.
> 
> _"If you think this isn't happening you are fooling yourself. I've seen it first hand too. Did I report it? No. Why? I'm not a cop. I rather see a bill passed that makes it not worth the risk to sell them so that I don't have to be some jerk on the dock wagging my finger at people."_
> 
> ...



To say it is "trumped up" or "supposed" is to call me a liar as I said that I have seen this first hand. 

To ME it is NOT trumped up or supposed, because I KNOW due to seeing it with MY OWN EYES. Therefore I support this bill.

What proof do YOU have that it doesn't happen? You call my allegations Bigfoot, well... where is your "everyone is by the book fairy"???

If you have never seen it, and believe whole heartedly that it doesn't happen, then by all means, exercise your right as an American to speak your mind.

I already have.

And to draw a parallel between the second amendment and a Redfish is absurd.


----------



## wharfrat (Feb 25, 2013)

seaweaver, why would you not want redfish to receive gamefish status?
As far as taxation, there is no proposal for a "tag" or "stamp".

BTW, the ecosystem for the coast of SC, Ga, and N Fl, are almost exactly the same.

If you believe that poaching does not exist in the fishing and hunting communities, I suggest you go through the public records, you will find  quite a few. For the sake of argument. I will say the things I have seen and not reported are bigfoots, along with all other criminal activity that goes undetected or unreported.

I truly hope I am having this discussion with a true fisherman, and not a keyboard fisherman.


----------



## seaweaver (Feb 25, 2013)

TJ...
If it is happening...and you witness it...and it is against the law already...AND YOU DO NOTHING...more law will fix....what?

You said you saw. You said you did nothing. The inference is...someone was breaking a law(see? existing (this means already))...so your logic...is to create more.
(nothing personal here...you are not alone in staying mum on poachers)

If you can see how the crisis is manufactured, how it failed two times already...and further that it lends itself to the Gun Nuts in creating more law will stop criminals who by their nature...ignore law( like those who will not call 1-800-241-4113 or *DNR (AT&T Mobility Customers) when they see it)... you just do not get my point. Don't sweat it any further.

WF
As I noted my fear is the statists in CRD (state and the nation)
I fought his battle last time. Search "Red Fish Crisis" here.
Spud, w/ help from his friend, his bride all have pined that the CRD needs money. Spud himself would not discount this to me.
Demand no tax and see what happens. 

Sorry they ecosystems that have great differences...starting w/ tide range and heat trapped by marshes...
My degree is in Biology from ASC and I also finished out my schooling under Matt Gilligan at Savannah state partly because I wanted to...partly because driving from my island was too long.
Before I left Ga to come to this accursed clay of NC I was a self-employed marine craftsman for 22 years w/ a faimily dock I built on the Wilmington River and 25 boats and 4 rods for each.  I founded Bent Rudder Syndicate 20 years ago, and Chatham Sail Club. I am no armchair lubber.
I was raised a liberal and via my employment became a screaming conservative and I loath Progressives (especially Teddy Roosevelt types) and I see the trend.

The fish have protection. Every Blog that will allow me to post I point this out. The RF.org boys cannot discus the flaw in their rationals on their pages.

Call former Parks Game and Fish Chair Bob Lane (he really is a nice guy), Research why this has failed 2x already. Seek the answer...to the reasoning  behind the whole thing.

It is not because the fish is under protected..
Those ghosts never lead to the light.
Even when we "hear" of violations...then they are violations of what?
existing LAW. 
Those intolerant of current law...will ignore more.(ala gun control)

 Demand taxation exception on this measure. Watch their faces.
They know everything I'm telling you.

There is nothing difficult about any of this so long as we do not let our minds get clouded by the nonsense.
This is nothing but a smaller "sell" of any crisis like the ones we witness on a national level every month.

Demand exception from any  taxation, protect the lawful citizen.

cw


----------



## seaweaver (Feb 25, 2013)

(while stirring spaghetti)
This proposal does not protect the fish, it empowers bureaucrats over us. They have already wrested the control of saltwater away from the Representatives WE could hire and fire.
We are ceding control by hook or crook or crisis or chicken little tactics...to those we cannot control.
No matter how you cut that it is not good.

cw


----------



## Capt. TJ Cheek (Feb 25, 2013)

seaweaver said:


> TJ...
> If it is happening...and you witness it...and it is against the law already...AND YOU DO NOTHING...more law will fix....what?
> 
> You said you saw. You said you did nothing. The inference is...someone was breaking a law(see? existing (this means already))...so your logic...is to create more.
> ...



I am clearly not going to convince you, and even if I did, you wouldn't admit it.

The fact is that until you are out there everyday witnessing the changes in the fishery, you won't understand the urgency or concern.

I hope you have a wonderful time up there in NC where gill netters kill Redfish.


----------



## seaweaver (Feb 25, 2013)

ah...you took it personally.
sorry, you did admit you would not turn in poaches breaking existing law...as I said, you are not alone.

When you get the op to see one again I do hope you call the poaching number...and recall that they must be breaking existing law and another layer they will ignore as well.

cw


----------



## Randy (Feb 25, 2013)

There is no reason not to do this.


----------



## seaweaver (Feb 25, 2013)

what does it protect against?

cw


----------



## seaweaver (Feb 25, 2013)

Trout License

Annual

$5.00

$20.00

what other fish as a breeding program in Ga and no tax stamp?

cw


----------



## Dawgfishin32 (Feb 26, 2013)

Has this passed yet or does anyone know when a final decision will be made on this?


----------



## Bryannecker (Feb 26, 2013)

It appears to have had a second reading on the floor but no vote, yet!  It will not be a panacea and will require enforcement just like any of the other thousands of laws on the books. 
It has been offered and pushed by the CCA for quite a while.


----------



## seaweaver (Feb 27, 2013)

Bryannecker said:


> will require enforcement just like any of the other thousands of laws on the books.



what???....this means there is law in place now....and more will do what to those who ignore?
Perhaps Gun control logic DOES work...



Bryannecker said:


> It has been offered and pushed by the CCA for quite a while.



this is the 3rd time...why the failures before?

even the Author came to the light...

Call Bob Lane in Statesboro and ask him why he passed on it. He will tell you.

cw


----------



## PaulD (Feb 28, 2013)

...It's all the dirty closet doors it opens. Shame to, would love to see fish protected from commercial sell and harvest but can't due to all the stricter programs it brings to the table. shame.


----------



## seaweaver (Mar 1, 2013)

Hey Paul,  I was wondering where you were at.
What's old is new again eh? 
 Just like the last 2 times... the amount of commercial sale is low as is harvest. This is what Bob Lane specifically asked Red Fish .org for conclusive data and they could not provide any. It's a straw man

The CRD (when I got into this last time) said there were fewer than 10 commercial license in the state for harvest.( I swear it was 4...any one not believing this can call  as  did back then)
Much of what I see landing in the coolers in Tbolt are Rec fishermen caught and sold to market.

It is a sky is falling story. Today (March 1st) we are told the sky is to fall due to (sequestration).
 There is no great boogyman...just more leverage into our purse and liberties.



To all keeping up and Pining for this security blanket:
demand no future taxation and see the response you get.
If you can demand MORE law to..."protect the fish", demand protection for legal fishermen.
(You see? it IS like gun control....)

cw


----------



## seaweaver (Mar 1, 2013)

This is the number still on the GS legislature books for Bob Lane who dealt w/ this 2x before as Chair of Parks game and Fish.
He has retired and I do not know if the number is still active...
as I recall it actually is his Business line.
Again, he is a nice guy so be polite.
Bob's Home phone: (912) 764-6813.


cw


----------



## seaweaver (Mar 25, 2013)

Hand wringers for control rejoice.
Thank Jeff Young when the tax comes.

cw


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Mar 25, 2013)

Thanks for your help Chris.

You motivated many to our side.

It passed the House 166-0 the Senate Natural Resource Committee 9-0 and the Senate Floor 38-12 with the 12 being votes coming from democrats who called the channel bass "wide mouth bass".


----------



## seaweaver (Mar 25, 2013)

Lovely...confused as the do gooders behind the bill.
Run out and dance your way down Mathew lane when the Gov signs it.
When the tax comes you can take credit for that too.
cw


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Mar 25, 2013)

There is confusion and thankfully it now resides in Caldwell, NC.

BTW, I'm not taking credit for anything. HB-36 was passed through a concerted effort made up primarily of Charter Captains along the coast who have first hand watched the fishery and indicated that this is something that they wanted and they did the work to obtain this goal.

Again, you did much more than I did. I didn't do anything but watch.


----------



## seaweaver (Mar 25, 2013)

_BTW, I'm not taking credit for anything. _

oh...that is what your PM said. "My Bill " eh?

There is a reason Charter boat capts wanted it...for their business. Sav. is full of Capts that dissuade their sports from keeping the legal limit.
This is a win(if the Gov signs it) for Progressives like Roosevelt. Progressives want Government to be in control and here it will be insulated even more.

No one could once show where in Ga the fish was being hurt by lack of this designation.
Not once.


----------



## bowman13 (Mar 26, 2013)

Question for those of you who supported this bill. 

Once reds are given "Gamefish Status" what is the protocol if the state wants to implement tags or stamps?  It seems like this would become an administrative decision and not have to go through the house and senate again...

Although the bill looks good as written, I sure would hate to have to start buying redfish tags in a couple of years just because the DNR wants me to. Seems like the support for this bill is hinged on not having tags or stamps, it'd be a shame for the gov. to pull the wool over our eyes like that. If someone could clarify this and say I'm wrong, I would sleep a little easier at night. 

Thanks


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Mar 26, 2013)

bowman13, the addition of any type of tag or new license would have to be initiated by the legislature.

DNR doesn't want to make you tag your deer. Do you think they want you to start tagging your fish?

DNR-CRD didn't want you to have to purchase a saltwater fishing license like all of our neighbors due to Federal Mandate so they instituted the FREE SIP program which precludes Georgia from the Federal requirement.

Had they not done that you would now be required to purchase a saltwater license in the $12-15 range.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Mar 26, 2013)

BTW, largemouth bass have game fish status.

Have you tagged one lately?


----------



## bowman13 (Mar 26, 2013)

Mechanicaldawg,

Not sure why you felt the need for a condescending response to my question. I'm on your side man, I am in favor of red fish being protected; I just wanted to see what the law is going to look like in 5-10 years...pretty responsible thing to ask, I think. 

At any rate, to respond to your exceedingly polite post. I wasn't asking what the state IS doing regarding gamefish, I was asking what they are capable of doing under the law. Additionally, your assuming that an organization's past actions will mirror its future actions, especially in politics, is a pretty slippery slope.

Finally, thanks for the response to my initial question. However, I don't think you really hit the nail on the head with that one either. I'm still pretty sure that a tag or permit for fish could be promulgated by the board without going through the legislature- although it could also originate in the legislature. But hey, that just my reading of the law. 

I'd still appreciate it if someone could clear this up, not that it really matters at this point.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Mar 26, 2013)

bowman12, I apologize if the analogy seemed to be condescending.

I assure it was meant to be purely demonstrative.

Tags cost a great deal of money to produce and even more money to administer and it has been my experience that DNR does their best to avoid the hint of them before the Board or the Legislature.

27-2-23.  License, permit, tag, and stamp fees 

Fees for licenses, permits, tags, and stamps required by this title shall be as follows:

 (1) Hunting licenses:

         (A) Resident hunting license              Annual               $ 10.00

         (B) Resident hunting license              Two-year               18.00

         (C) Resident big game license             Annual                  9.00

         (D) Nonresident big game license          Annual                195.00

         (E) Nonresident big game license          Three-day              90.00

         (F) Resident big game license             Two-year               16.00

         (G) Shooting preserve hunting license
                  valid for residents and          Two-year               12.00
nonresidents                                       

         (H) Commercial fox hunting preserve
                  license                          Season                 60.00

         (I) Commercial fox breeder license        Season                 60.00

         (J) Waterfowl license valid for residents
                  and nonresidents                 Annual                  5.50

         (K) Waterfowl license valid for residents
                  and nonresidents                 Two-year               11.00

         (L) Georgia migratory bird license        Annual                  Free

      (2) Hunting and fishing licenses:

         (A) Resident hunting/fishing license     Annual                 17.00

         (B) Resident hunting/fishing license     Two-year               31.00

         (C) Nonresident hunting/fishing license  Three-day              20.00

         (D) Resident hunting/fishing license     Three-day               3.50

         (E) Nonresident hunting/fishing license  Annual                100.00

      (3) Sportsman's licenses:

         (A) Resident sportsman's license          Annual                 55.00

         (B) Resident sportsman's license          Two-year              105.00

      (4) Recreational fishing licenses:

         (A) Resident fishing license              Annual                  9.00

         (B) Resident fishing license              Two-year               16.00

         (C) Nonresident fishing license           Annual                 45.00

         (D) Resident trout license                Annual                  5.00

         (E) Resident trout license                Two-year               10.00

         (F) Resident trout license                Three-day               3.50

         (G) Nonresident trout license             Annual                 20.00

         (H) Nonresident trout license             Three-day              10.00

         (I) Salt-water shore fishing license      One-day                 5.00

      (5) Trapping licenses:

         (A) Resident commercial trapping license  Annual                 30.00

         (B) Nonresident commercial trapping
                  license                          Annual                295.00

      (6) Commercial fishing licenses:

         (A) Resident commercial fishing license   Season                 12.00

         (B) Nonresident commercial fishing licenseSeason                118.00

         (C) Resident commercial crabbing license  Season                 12.00

         (D) Nonresident commercial crabbing
                  license                          Season                118.00

      (7) Fur, hide, and pelt licenses:

         (A) Resident fur dealer license           Annual                295.00

         (B) Nonresident fur dealer license        Annual                415.00

         (C) Fur dealer's agent license            Annual                180.00

      (8) Miscellaneous licenses and permits:

         (A) Retail fish dealer license            Annual                 10.00

         (B) Wholesale fish dealer license         Annual                 59.00

         (C) Resident game-holding permit          Annual                  5.00

         (D) Commercial quail breeder permit       Annual                 30.00

         (E) Scientific collecting permit          Annual                 50.00

         (F) Wildlife exhibition permit            Annual                 59.00

         (G) Commercial shooting preserve license  Annual                150.00

         (H) Private shooting preserve license     Annual                 50.00

         (I) Blanket commercial shooting preserve
                  license                          Annual                500.00

         (J) Commercial fish hatchery license      Annual                 59.00

         (K) Catch-out pond license                Annual                236.00

         (L) Soft-shell crab dealer license        Annual                 10.00

         (M) Resident taxidermist license          Three-year            150.00

         (N) Nonresident taxidermist license       Three-year            500.00

         (O) Falconry permit                       Three-year             30.00

         (P) Commercial alligator farming license  Annual                 50.00

         (Q) Resident alligator hunting license    Annual                 50.00

         (R) Nonresident alligator hunting license Annual                200.00

         (S) Wild animal license                   Annual                236.00

         (T) Wild animal auction license           Seven-day           5,000.00

         (U) Resident bait dealer license          Season                 25.00

         (V) Nonresident bait dealer license       Season                150.00

   (9) The board is authorized to provide by rule for a fee not to exceed $19.00 for resident daily, seasonal, or annual use permits, or licenses; a fee of $38.00 for resident two-year use permits; or a fee not to exceed $73.00 for nonresident annual use permits or licenses to hunt and fish on or otherwise use specially designated streams, lakes, public fishing areas, or wildlife management areas.

   (10) The fees established in subparagraphs (1)(A) through (1)(F), (2)(A), (2)(B), (2)(E), (3)(A), (3)(B), (4)(A), (4)(B), (4)(C), (4)(D), (4)(E), and (4)(G) of this Code section shall be reduced by $2.75 for each renewal transaction made before the expiration date of the then current license or tag. For purposes of this paragraph, the term "renewal transaction" means the renewal of one or more licenses by a licensee during a single telephone call, Internet session, or on-site visit to a store.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Mar 26, 2013)

That list is straight from Georgia Code, uses the words "shall be" and lists the only license fees that may be charged and details what the Board is authorized to do.

Perhaps there is something else in Title 27 that would allow the Board some broad leeway but I haven't been able to locate it.

I do believe the Legislature would have to pass any measure to make such a change-not that I would argue that someone couldn't persuade them to do so.


----------



## gonewild (Apr 11, 2013)

seaweaver said:


> Hey Paul,  I was wondering where you were at.
> What's old is new again eh?
> Just like the last 2 times... the amount of commercial sale is low as is harvest. This is what Bob Lane specifically asked Red Fish .org for conclusive data and they could not provide any. It's a straw man
> 
> ...



There are a couple thousand commercial fishing license holders but there is no license specific to redfish.  You must have misunderstood.


----------



## brailediver (Apr 12, 2013)

Well, I see that Camohead/mechamical dog is spicing things up over here also! Now I see who is feeding you!
 The goal of the progressive mindset is to make laws that control people. 
 There has been no evidence of a black market  for Red-fish.
 Just as no evidence was ever offered up on the massive kill off of Trout or Shrimp that resulted in some of the best Trout fishing we had in years.

"HB-36 was passed through a concerted effort made up primarily of Charter Captains along the coast who have first hand watched the fishery and indicated that this is something that they wanted and they did the work to obtain this goal."

 So we have a group of fishermen that commercially exploit this species ( through sales of fishing trips) mad because other GA anglers, with valid commercial fishing licenses, are making tons of money off of their fish, & raping the population in the process! As a result, they made a law to stop a perceived crisis & allow them to break both arms patting themselves on the back.
 These fish are as common as Sand Gnats! 

What are the benefits of this action to the GA rec angler?

Don't say a healthier fishery. If the biomass gets much larger they will eat through the available food source & crash.

List the benefits of this action to the GA angler.

Stretching  the already thin resources of the DNR?
 That will lead to the need for more funding.
 Where would that come from?
Redfish stamps on your license like Snook?
At what cost?

And now the question that none of the progressive, commercial charter captains & CCA members will not answer.........

What are the benefits of this action to the everyday GA angler?
 It is an honest & simple question....


----------



## Bilge Rat LT 20 (Apr 12, 2013)

Now that the reds have status the feds will notice and put their infinite wisdom into the game.

Rules do not stop anything.
The old guy that lives on the water will still take his church group out once a month and fill the coolers. It's for the church cookout is the excuse!!!

My wife and i ate 6 fat trout tonight that were kept out of 20 or so we caught.
Tried to keep a couple of reds to eat but all we could catch was 16 overslot. 
In the last 2 months we have caught a lot of reds and if we wanted to keep any legal ones we had to catch 6 to have one short enough to be in the slot.

Yep we need more rules.


----------



## ssiredfish (Apr 15, 2013)

The outcry over this is not about protecting Redfish, its about more laws and regulations when they are at their worst.  MOST Redfishermen I know release their catch, myself included, and consider themselves conservation minded.  There will always be those who just don't care, even after this was passed, they still don't care.  The only time I have ever witnessed Redfish exploited was old evidence at the cleanin table or checkin buckets on the pier and most bridges.

That being said, there was already a law in place to prevent this from happening and prevent the illegal sale of marine fish.  A Recreational Sale Permit is available for those who harvest their recreational limit and wish to sell it.  I used to have one, it was cheap.  Therefore if they are selling their legal limit of Redfish without said permit, they are selling their Redfish illegally.  Why improve the law when you cannot improve the enforcement?

If this ends up being advantageous for the Reds in the long run, Im all for it.  If this ends up with DNR closing down the fishery because of some cold weather scare or some other unforeseen "disaster",I fear as though it has reached its intended purpose.  They just haven't given me any reason to show a lot of trust in them anymore


----------



## ssiredfish (Apr 16, 2013)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> ---Quote (Originally by ssiredfish)---
> A Recreational Sale Permit is available for those who harvest their recreational limit and wish to sell it.  I used to have one, it was cheap.
> ---End Quote---
> Is that right?
> ...



Where'd your post go?! That is right.  You have it listed there(6A).  Things have changed a bit since I last had one.  Its grouped under residential commercial liscense and is now an actual permit and not a small book but still costs $12.

I called this morning(Kay: Law enforcement div) and it is still available to any Rec angler *that will allow him to sell their recreational limit*

So there again we already had/have legislation in place to make the illegal sale of Redfish illegal  We didnt need another law.....Chalk this one up to just being uninformed......


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Apr 16, 2013)

Well, I deleted it because it is not worth arguing with someone who reads:

6 (a) resident commercial fishing license $12.00

And sees:

Cheap recreational license that lets them sell redfish.

Why should I waste my time?

Redfish is a game fish (effective 7/31/13).

Next.


----------



## ssiredfish (Apr 16, 2013)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Well, I deleted it because it is not worth arguing with someone who reads:
> 
> 6 (a) resident commercial fishing license $12.00
> 
> ...



I understand completely, I lose interest in argueing when I find out Im misinformed as well......

I also noticed you never said I was wrong so I'll take that as the fact that you see my point.  It might be a moot point now that the bill has passed but it also established that it WAS LEGAL PRACTICE provided you were permitted for it.  If it makes you feel any better I sold less than two dozen Reds in the several years I possesed the permit.  I picked it up to sell my offshore catch to compensate my fuel/tackle expenses.

I'll mention this again, the outcry, mine at least as well as others, is not about the sale of Redfish or any other fish for that matter.  It is about more regulations when we are already over-regulated and redundancy.


----------



## brailediver (Apr 17, 2013)

As is usual, the questions raised in this discussion are answered by more privileged stakeholders with the normal, juvenile answer that we have become accustomed to from the progressive mindset......................
 Why was this legislation needed?
 Because!
 Because why?
 Because we said so!

My conclusion?
What benefit to GA rec anglers?
 None what so ever. As demonstrated by our more privileged brothers to the North & charter boat captains that, again, see rec anglers as a threat to their business.

If I catch a fish, is it mine to do with as I please, or does it belong to the government & businesses that have spent THEIR money to grow this fishery into THEIR living?

 No answers!?


----------



## Bryannecker (Apr 17, 2013)

I'll mention this again, the outcry, mine at least as well as others, is not about the sale of Redfish or any other fish for that matter. It is about more regulations when we are already over-regulated and redundancy. 
__________________
Brother, you nailed it!  Too, Bad some folks do not get it and never will.


----------



## PaulD (Apr 17, 2013)

Bryannecker said:


> I'll mention this again, the outcry, mine at least as well as others, is not about the sale of Redfish or any other fish for that matter. It is about more regulations when we are already over-regulated and redundancy.
> __________________
> Brother, you nailed it!  Too, Bad some folks do not get it and never will.




You got it, but it'll come down to a juvinile internet battle or picking sides or something. It's not even worth discussing on here anymore.


----------

