# Florida Circuit Court Judge Overturns Gill Net Ban



## Mechanicaldawg (Oct 31, 2013)

http://www.bradenton.com/2013/10/24/4789154/florida-judge-overturns-ban-on.html


----------



## pottydoc (Oct 31, 2013)

Been done a couple times already by home town judges. It'll get reversed.


----------



## 4HAND (Oct 31, 2013)

Maybe not. That ban certainly did hurt a lot of coastal families.


----------



## Limitless (Nov 1, 2013)

4HAND said:


> Maybe not. That ban certainly did hurt a lot of coastal families.



No, actually the ban has helped a lot of coastal commercial fishing families.  It may have caused some short term problems, but it forced them to look more long term and hopefully understand that you cant continue to rape a resource.  You keep gilling mullet, Reds, Trout, etc. in massive quantities, sooner or later you'll destroy the fishery.  The nets are indiscriminate in what they kill and the waste alone was impacting the estuaries.

I've watched the gillers set purses around schools of mackerel found by spotter planes in the Atlantic and on the flats in the big bend in huge circles and dump thousands of trout of all sizes on the deck.  In the 70s and 80s it got so bad it was hardly worth fishing.

So those families needed to learn to do something else to make a living.  Nothing lasts for ever - including overtaxed resources.


----------



## Parker Phoenix (Nov 1, 2013)

I hate a fricken gill net, hate a sea bass trap. Behind all the - I AM A POTTY MOUTH -- I AM A POTTY MOUTH - the commercial guys feed the public, they try and hide their reckless forms of fishing. Kinda like, clear cutting a forest, it's just not a good viable stewardship of the resource.


----------



## FishingAddict (Nov 1, 2013)

Limitless said:


> No, actually the ban has helped a lot of coastal commercial fishing families.  It may have caused some short term problems, but it forced them to look more long term and hopefully understand that you cant continue to rape a resource.  You keep gilling mullet, Reds, Trout, etc. in massive quantities, sooner or later you'll destroy the fishery.  The nets are indiscriminate in what they kill and the waste alone was impacting the estuaries.
> 
> I've watched the gillers set purses around schools of mackerel found by spotter planes in the Atlantic and on the flats in the big bend in huge circles and dump thousands of trout of all sizes on the deck.  In the 70s and 80s it got so bad it was hardly worth fishing.
> 
> So those families needed to learn to do something else to make a living.  Nothing lasts for ever - including overtaxed resources.




Well said.


----------



## 4HAND (Nov 1, 2013)

Did you live through it? Why should someone have to change their way of living to benefit sportsman? There were many poor uneducated fisherman who along with their families suffered greatly because of this. 

Some folks were forced into finding other means of employment, changing a way of life some families had participated in for generations. 

Folks talk about how we are losing our freedoms in this country, but when it's something like the net ban, when they think it's going to create more fish to catch recreationally, then they are all for those freedoms being swept away.

Just another piece of Old Florida was stripped away due to the net ban.


----------



## Limitless (Nov 2, 2013)

Yep, I lived through it - on the other side.  I watched the near decimation of too many species, to the point that it almost wasnt worth fishing the gulf in the 70s and 80s.  Things change, so folks adjust and find another way to earn a living.  The reason to protect recreational fishing over commercial rape of the resource:
the value of recreational fishing to the state of Florida is 11 times greater than commercial.  
Many of the "poor uneducated" folks you mention have converted to the rec side and now are doing pretty well in the business as guides, in the bait and tackle biz, etc.  There's just no guarantee that things will always be the same, change happens.  Take a look at the Glades - most all of what used to be  truck farms with vegetables and fruit are now sugar cane fields.


----------



## panfried0419 (Nov 2, 2013)

How is someone from Sandy Springs going to tell someone from Florida "yep I lived through it."


----------



## grouper throat (Nov 2, 2013)

4HAND said:


> Did you live through it? Why should someone have to change their way of living to benefit sportsman? There were many poor uneducated fisherman who along with their families suffered greatly because of this.
> 
> Some folks were forced into finding other means of employment, changing a way of life some families had participated in for generations.
> 
> ...



Amen. I fish for more mullet than anyone on this board and it's worse fishin now than ever. The net ban hurt many folks that I know personally and the by catches were minimal at best and it was way overstated. I've ran a net in my youth and know from firsthand experience.


----------



## Limitless (Nov 2, 2013)

panfried0419 said:


> How is someone from Sandy Springs going to tell someone from Florida "yep I lived through it."



Well Panfried, it's easy.  I do live in Georgia now, but I was born and raised in W Palm Beach (back when it was part of FL) in Loxahatchee.  I have a place on the Gulf and one on the Atlantic so I spend several months in FL still.  I've done my share of hook and line commercial fishing in the Atlantic and spent many, many days fishing the Gulf from Carrabelle to 10,000 islands.  And as I mentioned before I've seen it live as nets were dumped of by-catch, and I've had a purse net boat set around me when I was working a school of Spanish.


----------



## panfried0419 (Nov 2, 2013)

Limitless said:


> Well Panfried, it's easy.  I do live in Georgia now, but I was born and raised in W Palm Beach (back when it was part of FL) in Loxahatchee.  I have a place on the Gulf and one on the Atlantic so I spend several months in FL still.  I've done my share of hook and line commercial fishing in the Atlantic and spent many, many days fishing the Gulf from Carrabelle to 10,000 islands.  And as I mentioned before I've seen it live as nets were dumped of by-catch, and I've had a purse net boat set around me when I was working a school of Spanish.



I'm from Florida too(highpoint);-) and yes it hurt families in the commercial biz


----------



## Limitless (Nov 2, 2013)

High Point -- west of Del Ray??  If so we were neighbors.  I definitely agree it hurt some folks, but it had to happen or everyone would have run out of stuff to fish for eventually.  I had a couple of friends that really had to hustle to get a new gig.  One is now a pretty successful builder.

If your avatar is you kayaking the Hootch, how bout teaching me how to fish that river.  I live really close to it and never catch squat.


----------



## asc (Nov 3, 2013)

Limitless said:


> No, actually the ban has helped a lot of coastal commercial fishing families.  It may have caused some short term problems, but it forced them to look more long term and hopefully understand that you cant continue to rape a resource.  You keep gilling mullet, Reds, Trout, etc. in massive quantities, sooner or later you'll destroy the fishery.  The nets are indiscriminate in what they kill and the waste alone was impacting the estuaries.
> 
> I've watched the gillers set purses around schools of mackerel found by spotter planes in the Atlantic and on the flats in the big bend in huge circles and dump thousands of trout of all sizes on the deck.  In the 70s and 80s it got so bad it was hardly worth fishing.
> 
> So those families needed to learn to do something else to make a living.  Nothing lasts for ever - including overtaxed resources.


Kind of like what you sports are doing to ARS and gag grouper now?   lol

Time for you to pay the piper.


----------



## Limitless (Nov 4, 2013)

asc said:


> Kind of like what you sports are doing to ARS and gag grouper now?   lol
> 
> Time for you to pay the piper.



OK, this has got to be a joke!!  You're kidding . . .  right??
You really think the recs are the reason ARS and Gags are so limited?  So why did the Gulf Council and the Feds just increase the commercial quota and reduce the ARS commercial size limit to 13"?  It's not like deep water traps dont "harvest" Gags, right?!

You gotta be smoking some weird stuff!


----------



## asc (Nov 4, 2013)

Limitless said:


> OK, this has got to be a joke!!  You're kidding . . .  right??
> You really think the recs are the reason ARS and Gags are so limited?  So why did the Gulf Council and the Feds just increase the commercial quota and reduce the ARS commercial size limit to 13"?  It's not like deep water traps dont "harvest" Gags, right?!
> 
> You gotta be smoking some weird stuff!


Traps(except the research traps by FSU) have been gone from the red grouper fishery since feb. 2007.

I was a trapper and my catch was aprox 95% RG.

Maybe it's because y'all overfish your quota each year that rec restrictions are becoming more draconian ARS and Gags.


----------



## Parker Phoenix (Nov 4, 2013)

Limitless, you can't argue with them , because they do it for a living, meaning that in their minds they own the fishery.


----------



## Limitless (Nov 4, 2013)

Right on Parker.  It was a moment of weakness.


----------



## 4HAND (Nov 4, 2013)

Parker Phoenix said:


> Limitless, you can't argue with them , because they do it for a living, meaning that in their minds they own the fishery.



I think that was the mindset of the wealthy lobbyists who pushed the net ban.

When Limitless said, "actually the ban has helped a lot of coastal commercial fishing families. It may have caused some short term problems, but it forced them to look more long term", that makes it sound like maybe these fishing families didn't know what was best for them & needed gov to tell them.

I will agree that some families did find other means of employment that has worked out better for them than if they would have continued fishing, but many families were not that fortunate. Further, all of them should have had the option to continue their honest way of making a living, or seek other employment, not had it stripped away.


----------



## MudDucker (Nov 5, 2013)

4HAND said:


> Did you live through it? Why should someone have to change their way of living to benefit sportsman? There were many poor uneducated fisherman who along with their families suffered greatly because of this.
> 
> Some folks were forced into finding other means of employment, changing a way of life some families had participated in for generations.
> 
> ...



It was a piece of Old Florida, however, back in the day of Old Florida, there were not as many netters as there came to be just before the ban.  Also, netters back in the day were after mullet and rarely caught many reds or trout.  In the end just before the ban, they were raping everything with the nets.  They proved the old adage that pigs get fed and hogs get slaughtered.

The fishery is a natural resource belonging to all and the netters began to take way more than their share.  Their netting was hurting those families how made a living catering to sport fisherman, who brought a LOT more money to their economy than the netters did.

They have only themselves to blame and yes, it is overall better for the region.

I think this judge will be overturned and she might even face disciplinary actions.


----------



## PCB Justin (Nov 5, 2013)

All i will say is if you support different rules for commercial, charter, or recreational fisherman, you my friends are socialist.  If you truly believe in the capitalist system, then why not have the same regs for every U.S. Citizen.  I am not against nets, but in the grand old net days, everybody played by the same rules.  The commercial industry has changed a lot in the past 20 years, everybody has a different set of rules now.  The gov. now pics the winners and loosers.  Im not against nets or commercial fishing, but if you think one person deserves special rights due to their heritage, enjoy your pres obama you voted in AGAIN!  Hahaha this will all be over soon so have fun with it


----------



## 4HAND (Nov 5, 2013)

PCB Justin said:


> All i will say is if you support different rules for commercial, charter, or recreational fisherman, you my friends are socialist.  If you truly believe in the capitalist system, then why not have the same regs for every U.S. Citizen.  I am not against nets, but in the grand old net days, everybody played by the same rules.  The commercial industry has changed a lot in the past 20 years, everybody has a different set of rules now.  The gov. now pics the winners and loosers.  Im not against nets or commercial fishing, but if you think one person deserves special rights due to their heritage, enjoy your pres obama you voted in AGAIN!  Hahaha this will all be over soon so have fun with it



I guess I'm somewhat confused? I never said anyone should deserve special rights due to their heritage, I just feel that the net ban did away with a way of life some families had enjoyed & participated in for generations, mine included.

I guess if one day there is a gun ban, we should happily give them up? We shouldn't be allowed to continue to own them just because our families have for generations, should we?

Let me clarify, I am an ardent believer in "the right to bear arms"! So please don't anyone misconstrue my above statement. I'm simply making a point.

Also, I certainly did not vote for Obama! Never, ever, ever!!


----------



## PCB Justin (Nov 5, 2013)

I know where you're coming from 4hand, i have seen the changes 1st hand in how we have changed as a community.  Weather its better or worse depends on who you ask.  Your analogy is wrong though cause our constitution gives the right to bear arms.  Our state constitution forbids the use of gill nets.  The way I see it is like this.  If we discovered gold on public property, would you be happy if the gov. let one guy mine the gold with heavy eq. and keep 100 Oz. per day and you could only use a shovel and keep 1 Oz. per day?  Our commercial fish harvesting laws are so screwed and crooked.  Unfortunately these are not the good ole days, they are gone.  I would love to have them back as well, my family has been in NW Fl since the late 1800's.


----------



## 4HAND (Nov 6, 2013)

I see your point.

However, our state constitution bans gill nets _since_ the net ban was enacted.

Our U.S. constitution has always given us the right to bear arms, but it is under attack daily.

I am not familiar with the current commercial fishing laws.

My family has been here since the mid to late 1800's as well. My Granddaddy on my mother's side died at the age of 104. He had so many stories to tell. I could sit and listen to him talk for hours. I wish I would have video'd him talking of how things were when he was a child, young man, etc.


----------



## grouper throat (Nov 6, 2013)

Hope y'all know Halsey is on our side (made the cover of the Tally Dem) also so maybe this will stand and we can fish mullet again with an effective net. Good to see a local small businessman standing up for our other small businessmen in his area. 

http://www.apalachtimes.com/news/local-news/judge-rules-against-net-restrictions-1.226887


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Nov 6, 2013)

Has the inshore fishery improved any in the past 18 years?


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Nov 6, 2013)

Appeals court handling the procedings brought by FWC issued a stay. 

FWC is to enforce the net ban until the appeal is final.


----------



## 4HAND (Nov 6, 2013)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Has the inshore fishery improved any in the past 18 years?



In my opinion we really haven't seen a difference in the Big Bend area.

Another thought, if the net ban was effective then why did it take so many years to change the catch limit on Reds? It was only changed to 2 per person last year, I think.


----------



## redneck_billcollector (Nov 6, 2013)

4HAND said:


> Did you live through it? Why should someone have to change their way of living to benefit sportsman? There were many poor uneducated fisherman who along with their families suffered greatly because of this.
> 
> Some folks were forced into finding other means of employment, changing a way of life some families had participated in for generations.
> 
> ...



I grew up in Wakulla County in the 70s and I had a tunnel boat and used to net mullet.  Spent many a cold night (least wise for down there) waiting on the roe mullet to show where I was.  I know it is a piece of old Florida....and I would have no problem with it being done like it was in old Florida....with wooden boats and oars but by the 80s it got down right ridiculus (air boats, and monster nets)....and my attitude began to change. Yeah, it hurt families, no doubt....but (and I say this almost with tongue and cheek) alot of the netters were suplimenting their income by making runs offshore (many could argue also a part of old florida...smuggling)....and it got bad in Wakulla Co. to the point two girls from Albany were found dead on the beach at Alligator Point just off Ochlockonee Bay (just west of Wakulla Co.)' cause they apparently saw something they were not supposed to.  The repeal of prohibition hurt many rural southern families too because putting corn up in jars lost its market.  You want them to bring prohibition back to preseve old florida (arguably one of the states hurt the most by prohibition repeal....rum runners and corn cookers.)  Yeah, netters targeted trout, redfish and pompano and hit them heavy...I did too at times out on the "shoals" just out of the bay (I lived on Ochlockonee bay).  I also fished back then, during the peek of the commercial fishing days down that way....the fishing was no where near as good as it is now but I don't place all the blame on netters....you could sale your catch back then for a nominal license fee ($25 if I recall though I might be mistaken) and everyone was doing it, flounder, trout, redfish, pompano, snapper, grouper, etc....I did it, and so did most of the people I know....there was no real "by catch" because we sold dang near everything we caught (trash fish included), even if it wasn't the target fish and there were no limits on size or number.  There was one netter out of Port St. Joe that would have someone on the beach (cape san blas) watching surf fishers and as soon as they started catching pompano you could hear them on the radio and the netter would show up running a net from right off the beach out 500 or so feet and shut down the fishing for everyone else, those on vaction, etc...That is when I started to have a change of heart....I truely have mixed fillings on this issue now and I quiet frankly prefer it now over then. Oh, I am in my 50s and I ran nets in my teens....you want to blame someone, blame the japanese roe market, everyone got nets....many who never net fished before and then is when it got out of hand.  There is alot of old florida that is gone forever....just like everywhere else, Julia Mae's in Sopchoppy was segretated back then, even had a big sign to let folks know.  Everyone had hounds, stump hunting was frowned upon, and Wakulla Co only had three caution lights, one in Crawforville in front of the Court House, one on 98 by the highschool and one at the bridge going over Ochlokonee bay.  Oh yeah, if I had a nickle for every striped bass (the nigh on rare native gulf coast one) caught and kept with a gill net I would be a rich man.  Don't know how it was on the Apalachicola but on the Ochlockonee it was common.

Oh, the ruling will be reversed, it is a constitutional issue and a local court can't rule on it....only way to get ride of a state constitution issue is the feds say it conflicts with the US Constitution or the voters get rid of it.  And neither one of those things are going to happen......the voters passed it....they will have to revoke it and that aint gonna happen.


----------



## MudDucker (Nov 7, 2013)

Supporting differing controls over a public resource is not socialism.  Supporting different controls over private property might be, but not a public resource.


----------



## grouper throat (Nov 7, 2013)

MechanicalDawg I have not seen a difference at all. The mullet population actually seems less now than it seemed then (I still spearfish, snatch hook, and gig them). As far as helping the trout and reds, well the limit on trout was double then what it is presently so I can't see anyone saying it helped. I still remember the early 90s when we use to catch literally hundreds of legal trout and not have but 2-3 boats around us out of spring warrior or fenholloway. The tons of rec fishermen hurt that fishing if anything. Reds it never seemed to effect in any way IMO. There's no more reds out there now than in '94.

Hey redneck billcollector- you ever read the book of the sandy creek murders (the killings you are describing i think). They were shipping pot in an old shrimp boat and missed their higher tide so they changed plans to exchange it elsewhere. The guy got them all killed by refusing to leave the boat ramp. They threw them in the aucilla sinks (sinkhole) and my buddy's dad and his friend (around 18 yrs old at the time) were diving the sinks looking for indian artifacts and found them. Pretty gruesome details.


----------



## fishinchef (Nov 7, 2013)

http://www.yousign.org/en/netbanpet...&utm_campaign=GoogleTracking&utm_medium=email

Link to an online petition to reinstate the net ban. This was in the weekly sea hag email.


----------



## pottydoc (Nov 8, 2013)

Appeals court reversed the decision yesterday. FWC already told their officers to start enforcing the law again. I hope they take a bunch of netters to jail, and confiscate a bunch of boats, trucks, and nets.


----------



## redneck_billcollector (Nov 8, 2013)

grouper throat said:


> MechanicalDawg I have not seen a difference at all. The mullet population actually seems less now than it seemed then (I still spearfish, snatch hook, and gig them). As far as helping the trout and reds, well the limit on trout was double then what it is presently so I can't see anyone saying it helped. I still remember the early 90s when we use to catch literally hundreds of legal trout and not have but 2-3 boats around us out of spring warrior or fenholloway. The tons of rec fishermen hurt that fishing if anything. Reds it never seemed to effect in any way IMO. There's no more reds out there now than in '94.
> 
> Hey redneck billcollector- you ever read the book of the sandy creek murders (the killings you are describing i think). They were shipping pot in an old shrimp boat and missed their higher tide so they changed plans to exchange it elsewhere. The guy got them all killed by refusing to leave the boat ramp. They threw them in the aucilla sinks (sinkhole) and my buddy's dad and his friend (around 18 yrs old at the time) were diving the sinks looking for indian artifacts and found them. Pretty gruesome details.



You must be a wee bit younger than I am, I remember days of no limits on any saltwater fish nor any license requirements.  Catches of 100 trout for a couple of fishermen were not uncommon on the shoals outside Ochlockonee Bay.  You could net them along with redfish and sale them to the fish houses....we would make extra money during the summer gigging flounder from down near bayside marina on over to Carabelle...once again no limits only needed a (at the time )cheap commercial license to sale them....sold many a flounder to Crums in Panacea.

Lots of folks were running weed back in those days, mullet did not buy all those nice big new 4x4 trucks that started to show up in the 70s down there.  You could unload into a mullet boat and get back in all those creeks that other boats couldn't......If you are familiar with the water ways down that way you know old tunnel boats are what you needed, they would run in an inch of water....At the time Wakulla County was probably the least populated county in the southeast US.....nobody lived there, it had only a sherrif and either one or two deputies and of course....well, nobody got busted.


----------



## redneck_billcollector (Nov 8, 2013)

4HAND said:


> I think that was the mindset of the wealthy lobbyists who pushed the net ban.
> 
> When Limitless said, "actually the ban has helped a lot of coastal commercial fishing families. It may have caused some short term problems, but it forced them to look more long term", that makes it sound like maybe these fishing families didn't know what was best for them & needed gov to tell them.
> 
> I will agree that some families did find other means of employment that has worked out better for them than if they would have continued fishing, but many families were not that fortunate. Further, all of them should have had the option to continue their honest way of making a living, or seek other employment, not had it stripped away.



It wasn't lobbyist that pushed the net ban, it was Florida Sportsmans Magazine.....and it was on a ballot voted on by the majority of florida voters.  The legislature in Tallahassee had nothing to do with it, they actually tried to get laws passed to allow for commercial fishing within the net ban.


----------



## pottydoc (Nov 8, 2013)

Same old story from the net guys. Oh, and just to clear up a point, I'm a 5th generation Cracker, and used to commercial hook and line kings and Spanish, and fished a bandit boat for a long time. I watched the gill net guys on the East coast short stop the kings and the Spanish with more and more boats showing up every year. I watched the hook and line catch go down and down with every year that passed. I was there, I lived it, I personally experienced the net guys wiping out the king and Spanish fishery. The State tried again and again to put reasonable limits on the netters, and was fought tooth and nail every time. Finally, the rec guys got tired of the watching the gill netters wipe out a PUBLIC resource, and got the net ban amendment on the ballot, and passed. It wasn't lobbyist's it wasn't rich guys, it was every day rec fishermen. After listening to the former netters on here crying, it's obvious that their attitude hasn't changed, and they still think they own the pubic resource, and should be allowed to rape it for their own financial benefit. 
Oh, and for the guy who thinks that ARS are endangered, do you actually fish? Or just read Ron Crabtree's garbage?


----------



## pottydoc (Nov 8, 2013)

Limitless said:


> Right on Parker.  It was a moment of weakness.




Limitless, I grew up in the West Palm area in the 70's. Lived there till 2004. When were you there?


----------



## Mako22 (Nov 8, 2013)

redneck_billcollector said:


> I grew up in Wakulla County in the 70s and I had a tunnel boat and used to net mullet.  Spent many a cold night (least wise for down there) waiting on the roe mullet to show where I was.  I know it is a piece of old Florida....and I would have no problem with it being done like it was in old Florida....with wooden boats and oars but by the 80s it got down right ridiculus (air boats, and monster nets)....and my attitude began to change. Yeah, it hurt families, no doubt....but (and I say this almost with tongue and cheek) alot of the netters were suplimenting their income by making runs offshore (many could argue also a part of old florida...smuggling)....and it got bad in Wakulla Co. to the point two girls from Albany were found dead on the beach at Alligator Point just off Ochlockonee Bay (just west of Wakulla Co.)' cause they apparently saw something they were not supposed to.  The repeal of prohibition hurt many rural southern families too because putting corn up in jars lost its market.  You want them to bring prohibition back to preseve old florida (arguably one of the states hurt the most by prohibition repeal....rum runners and corn cookers.)  Yeah, netters targeted trout, redfish and pompano and hit them heavy...I did too at times out on the "shoals" just out of the bay (I lived on Ochlockonee bay).  I also fished back then, during the peek of the commercial fishing days down that way....the fishing was no where near as good as it is now but I don't place all the blame on netters....you could sale your catch back then for a nominal license fee ($25 if I recall though I might be mistaken) and everyone was doing it, flounder, trout, redfish, pompano, snapper, grouper, etc....I did it, and so did most of the people I know....there was no real "by catch" because we sold dang near everything we caught (trash fish included), even if it wasn't the target fish and there were no limits on size or number.  There was one netter out of Port St. Joe that would have someone on the beach (cape san blas) watching surf fishers and as soon as they started catching pompano you could hear them on the radio and the netter would show up running a net from right off the beach out 500 or so feet and shut down the fishing for everyone else, those on vaction, etc...That is when I started to have a change of heart....I truely have mixed fillings on this issue now and I quiet frankly prefer it now over then. Oh, I am in my 50s and I ran nets in my teens....you want to blame someone, blame the japanese roe market, everyone got nets....many who never net fished before and then is when it got out of hand.  There is alot of old florida that is gone forever....just like everywhere else, Julia Mae's in Sopchoppy was segretated back then, even had a big sign to let folks know.  Everyone had hounds, stump hunting was frowned upon, and Wakulla Co only had three caution lights, one in Crawforville in front of the Court House, one on 98 by the highschool and one at the bridge going over Ochlokonee bay.  Oh yeah, if I had a nickle for every striped bass (the nigh on rare native gulf coast one) caught and kept with a gill net I would be a rich man.  Don't know how it was on the Apalachicola but on the Ochlockonee it was common.
> 
> Oh, the ruling will be reversed, it is a constitutional issue and a local court can't rule on it....only way to get ride of a state constitution issue is the feds say it conflicts with the US Constitution or the voters get rid of it.  And neither one of those things are going to happen......the voters passed it....they will have to revoke it and that aint gonna happen.



Four, you forgot the caution light in Wakulla Station


----------



## Mako22 (Nov 8, 2013)

pottydoc said:


> Appeals court reversed the decision yesterday. FWC already told their officers to start enforcing the law again. I hope they take a bunch of netters to jail, and confiscate a bunch of boats, trucks, and nets.



I hope you get locked up for something soon and your truck taken from you!!! In the end these are just regular folks trying to make a living, not criminals!!!!


----------



## redneck_billcollector (Nov 8, 2013)

Woodsman69 said:


> I hope you get locked up for something soon and your truck taken from you!!! In the end these are just regular folks trying to make a living, not criminals!!!!



You are right, they are regular folks trying to make a living....and I don't begrudge them, but it is against the law and everyone can take it how they want to.  Like I said, back in the day, most of the weed runners were regular folks too trying to make a decent living.....it was interesting then, and most folks would be suprised who was all making night runs.......I used to love dropping the staff and hearing the cork floats tapping and feeling a full haul.....but then again, I too made some money the other ways down there.....those days are long gone, same with the nets.  I truely miss "old Florida" just like I miss alot of other aspects of life that have gone by the way.....that is the sad thing about time and progress, you can't stop it and you surely can't turn it back....believe me, I have tried to no avail. Oh yeah, anything I might have done that appears to have been frowned upon by the powers that be, it was over 30 years ago (more like 35) and the statute of limitations has long run....and I am sure all the evidence is long gone.....up in smoke I guess we could say.


----------



## redneck_billcollector (Nov 8, 2013)

pottydoc said:


> Same old story from the net guys. Oh, and just to clear up a point, I'm a 5th generation Cracker, and used to commercial hook and line kings and Spanish, and fished a bandit boat for a long time. I watched the gill net guys on the East coast short stop the kings and the Spanish with more and more boats showing up every year. I watched the hook and line catch go down and down with every year that passed. I was there, I lived it, I personally experienced the net guys wiping out the king and Spanish fishery. The State tried again and again to put reasonable limits on the netters, and was fought tooth and nail every time. Finally, the rec guys got tired of the watching the gill netters wipe out a PUBLIC resource, and got the net ban amendment on the ballot, and passed. It wasn't lobbyist's it wasn't rich guys, it was every day rec fishermen. After listening to the former netters on here crying, it's obvious that their attitude hasn't changed, and they still think they own the pubic resource, and should be allowed to rape it for their own financial benefit.
> Oh, and for the guy who thinks that ARS are endangered, do you actually fish? Or just read Ron Crabtree's garbage?



Not that I am for nets mind you, but for alot of the folks, at least where I spent a good bit of my youth, that was all there was.  You caught mullet, or you worked in fish houses....wasn't much else to do legally to make money if you grew up in places like Panacea.  I got caught up in the leghold battles in florida back in the 70s between the houndsmen and the trappers....there aint as many houndsmen now and the coyotes are taking over but alas, there are still no trappers to catch the yotes.

Like I said in an earlier post, when the japanese mullet roe market took off, you had people coming out of the wood work gill netting, unfortunately they are what led to the amendment and it did hurt 4th and 5th generation watermen who lost their means of earning a living.  Another group that is about to be hurt are the oystermen over Apalach way, the stocks there are down due to the drought in GA and the lack of freshwater making its way down.....Ironically, it is metro Atlanta that is killing that industry.....


----------



## Redbow (Nov 9, 2013)

Many commercial's from Florida moved to NC when they banned nets down there. Its still legal and always will be to continue raping the fishery here in the good ole Tar Heel state !


----------



## pottydoc (Nov 9, 2013)

Woodsman69 said:


> I hope you get locked up for something soon and your truck taken from you!!! In the end these are just regular folks trying to make a living, not criminals!!!!



If they continue to net, they're  breaking the law. In other words, poaching. That's not "just regular folks trying to make a living". If those regular folks had not fought every limit and regulation the state tried to put in place, the net ban would have never happened. It all boils down to a group of commercial fishermen wanted unlimited access to a public resource. It really irritates me  when you guys try to compare yourselves to farmers. Farmers have to own/rent/lease their land. They have to prepare it for planting. They have to plant the seed, irrigate, fertilize, keep bugs and other pests out, and then finally harvest. Netters just go out and catch fish. Not even close to the same. Like I posted earlier, I've been there, done that from the hook and line side, so don't tell me how tough it is to make a living fishing. I know from experience. I also know from watching it happen what the gill net industry did to the fish populations in Florida.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Nov 9, 2013)

Redbow said:


> Many commercial's from Florida moved to NC when they banned nets down there. Its still legal and always will be to continue raping the fishery here in the good ole Tar Heel state !



I wouldn't bet on it.


----------



## grouper throat (Nov 9, 2013)

Well it lasted all of a day. I was just hoping my daughter could one day help me take mullet out of a net like I did as a kid. My parents actually voted for the ban, as we were big on rec fishing then (and still are). 

I saw a few federal wildlife officer trucks down 98 yesterday. I bet money they were watching boat ramps just for netters.


----------



## asc (Nov 9, 2013)

redneck_billcollector said:


> You must be a wee bit younger than I am, I remember days of no limits on any saltwater fish nor any license requirements.  Catches of 100 trout for a couple of fishermen were not uncommon on the shoals outside Ochlockonee Bay.  You could net them along with redfish and sale them to the fish houses....we would make extra money during the summer gigging flounder from down near bayside marina on over to Carabelle...once again no limits only needed a (at the time )cheap commercial license to sale them....sold many a flounder to Crums in Panacea.
> 
> Lots of folks were running weed back in those days, mullet did not buy all those nice big new 4x4 trucks that started to show up in the 70s down there.  You could unload into a mullet boat and get back in all those creeks that other boats couldn't......If you are familiar with the water ways down that way you know old tunnel boats are what you needed, they would run in an inch of water....At the time Wakulla County was probably the least populated county in the southeast US.....nobody lived there, it had only a sherrif and either one or two deputies and of course....well, nobody got busted.


Smuggling? Not every mullet fisherman was a smuggler....
( DELETED)

You are reaching man... Good fishermen could make 25-40k back around 1980 WITHOUT resorting to Miami Vice fantasies.

Good money back then for that era.

I'll find some trip tickets from the east cost for one mackerel strike that totaled 40K plus..
A good crewman could earn 3-5k in a couple of days back then..

no weed imported either.


----------



## Parker Phoenix (Nov 11, 2013)

Woodsman69 said:


> I hope you get locked up for something soon and your truck taken from you!!! In the end these are just regular folks trying to make a living, not criminals!!!!



Your out of your mind wishing that on anyone.


----------



## redneck_billcollector (Nov 11, 2013)

asc said:


> Smuggling? Not every mullet fisherman was a smuggler....
> (DELETED)
> 
> You are reaching man... Good fishermen could make 25-40k back around 1980 WITHOUT resorting to Miami Vice fantasies.
> ...



Never said every mullet fisherman in Wakulla Co was a smuggler......but there were plenty of them (along with nonfishermen too) that did haul weed or unload it and if you don't think that was happening in the unpopulated areas of FLA in the 70s you weren't in those areas.....I was talking about one County in FLA. Wakulla, and at the time it was one of the least populated counties in FLA, and ironically it was the Wakulla Co fishermen who brought the suit that is the subject of this thread.   I also bet you think no one was smuggling weed in Everglades City at the same time....we all know none of those fishermen were. (what was it, 3/4 of the fishermen there were busted? no, it was almost 80% of the adult male population)  I don't think I knew anyone under  the age of 30 down there in the mid to late 70s who did not smoke weed.......if you smoke it, you are already half way there to thinking it should be legal and don't have a problem with bringing it in. The weed smuggling down there pretty much came to a halt after the two college girls got murdered because they stumbled on to it....not saying mullet fishermen killed them either....but the law did start looking down there.

You are talking about the east coast of FLA, I don't know what local you are talking about, but I do know, there is really nowhere on the east coast comparable to Wakulla Co when it comes to the economy or population, especially in the 70s Wakulla Co was one of the poorer communities in the southeast US and also one of the least populated counties. I can not recall a single yankee living there, though I do recall a greek by the name of Pete...the biggest town was Crawfordville and back then there were probably less than 500 voters there (Crawfordville), in other words it is not like a single east coast county with the exception of maybe Nassau back then.  And weed was a big business, just as in another poor florida community ....Everglades City.


----------



## asc (Nov 11, 2013)

I fished out of Everglades City, Crystal River,and Marathon thruout the years, still fish out of CR.

Yeah, I know it was Ronald Fred Crum and the FFF group that has brought on the lawsuits.

I know a little bit about a lot of nothing.


----------



## Snook Snatcher (Nov 15, 2013)

Ya'll seem like pretty good folks here. 

I happened to be born in and grew up in the Everglades of S. Florida during the 70's and 80's. I also helped to make Sandy Springs, GA. a city (That took a few years) from 1998 - 2006, so I know the best and worst of both worlds. 

I also happen to be a mullet fisherman and a sport fisherman. But first and foremost I am an American. What they (lobbyist) (Big Business) (Un-educated Voters) have done here is simply wrong IMO. If anyone believes that the net ban was a great thing they are simply a bit under informed. 

I agree 100%, Ban folks who abuse the resource. Just like driving, you abuse it you lose it! Don't ban the nets of folks doing the right thing. If it is/was truly about the environment and natural resources as all of these net ban supporters say, I would encourage each and every one of them to take the following link click on it and fill in the blanks and report back in a public forum their honest results. Not one will do it as the result of their personal shame!

The first person that has less impact on the environment than I do, they are more than welcome to ask me to do a better job in preserving our natural resources! The first person to see me abuse the right to make a living fishing has the right to demand my nets be taken away. 

But to put every single person in one category and punish us all for the bad behavior of some in my mind is communistic.

Until then I will keep fishing (with nets), while I watch the tourists plow over the manatees in the no wake zones and beyond (severely damaging them or killing them, I will watch the tourists throw everything but the kitchen sink at the dolphins in an attempt to get their attention and chase them down in boats often to the dolphins demise. I will drive by Sea World and think about all of those creatures caged up for the all mighty dollar. I will continue to wonder how the Corp. of Army Engineers is allowed to destroy the Everglades and to now do it all over again funded by the same Government that is throwing people in jail for catching the wrong fish, at the wrong time, with the "Wrong Gear"?

If folks believe that I am a bad person, I will have to politely tell them to look in the mirror!

Here's the link folks http://myfootprint.org follow it fill out the form and think about - I AM A POTTY MOUTH -- I AM A POTTY MOUTH -- I AM A POTTY MOUTH - you are telling other people to do!

When and if you would like to compare results please just let me know and we shall see just who is destroying the world we are living in!

I have yet to be challenged on this! I am patiently awaiting the first. Not politicians, not law men/women, not "conservationist", not one famous/infamous outdoor writer. Not one person that had a whole mouthful of bad things to say about us "Bad Boyz (Net Fishermen), not one news anchor, none!


----------



## pottydoc (Nov 15, 2013)

Snook Snatcher said:


> Ya'll seem like pretty good folks here.
> 
> I happened to be born in and grew up in the Everglades of S. Florida during the 70's and 80's. I also helped to make Sandy Springs, GA. a city (That took a few years) from 1998 - 2006, so I know the best and worst of both worlds.
> 
> ...



I got news for you, the voters were not un educated. Both sides ran advertisements, talked to voters, were written about and quoted in newspapers, the list goes on. The voters new exactly what they were voting for, and your side lost. I'm sure if the vote had gone the other way, you would have done nothing but talk about how smart the voters were. Gill nets, along with fish traps, are indiscriminant killers of fish. They are both totally non selective of what size or species they catch. And they both pretty much kill anything that gets in them. I've seen (along with 1000's of other folks) it with my own eyes too many times. Your stubbornness, along with that of your fellow netters, who fought every regulation, limit, and restriction that the State tried to put on you is why the ban came about. You insisted on being able to slaughter a public resource with no regard to what was happening to the population, and it cost you your way of making a living.


----------



## grouper throat (Nov 15, 2013)

If memory serves me right, I remember pictures of a dolphin and turtles entangled in what were obviously abandoned nets they used as propaganda. As normal, the sloppy netters were to blame. 

You don't need a gill net to get a limit of mullet this time of year anyhow.


----------



## 4HAND (Nov 15, 2013)

Snook Snatcher said:


> Ya'll seem like pretty good folks here.
> 
> I happened to be born in and grew up in the Everglades of S. Florida during the 70's and 80's. I also helped to make Sandy Springs, GA. a city (That took a few years) from 1998 - 2006, so I know the best and worst of both worlds.
> 
> ...



Well said, Snook Snatcher.


----------



## Nicodemus (Nov 15, 2013)

grouper throat said:


> If memory serves me right, I remember pictures of a dolphin and turtles entangled in what were obviously abandoned nets they used as propaganda. As normal, the sloppy netters were to blame.
> 
> You don't need a gill net to get a limit of mullet this time of year anyhow.




Fine mess of fish right there!


----------



## asc (Nov 16, 2013)

pottydoc said:


> I got news for you, the voters were not un educated. Both sides ran advertisements, talked to voters, were written about and quoted in newspapers, the list goes on. The voters new exactly what they were voting for, and your side lost. I'm sure if the vote had gone the other way, you would have done nothing but talk about how smart the voters were. Gill nets, along with fish traps, are indiscriminant killers of fish. They are both totally non selective of what size or species they catch. And they both pretty much kill anything that gets in them. I've seen (along with 1000's of other folks) it with my own eyes too many times. Your stubbornness, along with that of your fellow netters, who fought every regulation, limit, and restriction that the State tried to put on you is why the ban came about. You insisted on being able to slaughter a public resource with no regard to what was happening to the population, and it cost you your way of making a living.


Yep, I especially liked the rec ad with the UGA research boat "BULLDOG" testing TED's (turtle excluder device) in Ga. waters trying to catch turtles. FCA(now CCA) protayed it as Florida netters destroying the resource.

I guess for you pottidoc, the end justifies the means, even flat out lying.


----------



## Snook Snatcher (Nov 16, 2013)

pottydoc said:


> I got news for you, the voters were not un educated. Both sides ran advertisements, talked to voters, were written about and quoted in newspapers, the list goes on. The voters new exactly what they were voting for, and your side lost. I'm sure if the vote had gone the other way, you would have done nothing but talk about how smart the voters were. Gill nets, along with fish traps, are indiscriminant killers of fish. They are both totally non selective of what size or species they catch. And they both pretty much kill anything that gets in them. I've seen (along with 1000's of other folks) it with my own eyes too many times. Your stubbornness, along with that of your fellow netters, who fought every regulation, limit, and restriction that the State tried to put on you is why the ban came about. You insisted on being able to slaughter a public resource with no regard to what was happening to the population, and it cost you your way of making a living.



Thank you for making my point exactly.... you hit the nail right on the head and hard....... You drove it home in one swing!

"Gill nets, along with fish traps, are indiscriminant killers of fish. They are both totally non selective of what size or species they catch. And they both pretty much kill anything that gets in them. I've seen (along with 1000's of other folks) it with my own eyes too many times."

Guns don't kill people, people kill people!
Outlaw guns and only outlaws will have guns.
ROFL communist!

I have yet in all my years seen a net or a trap kill a fish or crab. I would pay millions to see it because I know for a fact it does not exist.

People kill fish and crabs not nets or traps..... now click on the link and post your results!!!!

See ya, wouldn't want to be ya!


----------



## 4HAND (Nov 16, 2013)

Interesting to me how passionate some folks are (including me) about the net ban all these years later. 

I wonder, is it simply because nets were banned, or is it because we are slowly seeing our freedoms in this great nation being stripped away?


----------



## asc (Nov 16, 2013)

4HAND said:


> Interesting to me how passionate some folks are (including me) about the net ban all these years later.
> 
> I wonder, is it simply because nets were banned, or is it because we are slowly seeing our freedoms in this great nation being stripped away?


Both and a lot has to do with the lies and the outright deception the CCA used to spin it in their favor.

I get a kick now when I hear them complain about what the feds are doing with the reef fish in the GOM.


----------



## Snook Snatcher (Nov 16, 2013)

LOL, YOU PEOPLE CRACK ME UP! Would you the person who started this post please take a moment and follow this link, fill in all of the information and come right back here and publish the results ... I triple dog dare you to do so.

http://www.myfootprint.org

For the rest of you who so much hate the nets or voted for the net ban please do the same.

Now to my point! If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns!

You/They have outlawed nets and now most of what you see are outlaws with nets. I did see one comment on here that said the gentleman has a buddy who is a "law abiding" commercial fisherman. I can only imagine the crap/harassment that this gentleman has suffered thru since the net ban, just trying to make a living or feed his family! The net ban has done nothing to stop the outlaws, not a - I AM A POTTY MOUTH -- I AM A POTTY MOUTH -- I AM A POTTY MOUTH -- I AM A POTTY MOUTH - thing. I have seen thousands of them pass through the revolving doors of justice to no avail. They are everywhere destroying everything in their path just as they were prior to the net ban. The law abiding fishermen who were able to make a living with larger nets and still respect the environment/resource have been punished for the acts of criminals and the criminals are still criminals. How would you like having your car/truck searched every time you are trying to go to work or come home? This is simply communistic on the part of those enforcing this law and as well of those who voted for it against those who were abiding by the laws of mother nature and the laws of man that were being followed to the letter. IMO



WOOOOOO HOOOOOOO ....... good thing we passed that net ban! GO GET'M BOYZ! WE ARE GOING TO PUT THEM ALL IN JAIL just as soon as someone calls us, NOT!

(You have ruined the lives and livelihood of generations of law abiding and resource respecting friends and families! Thanks but no thanks...)

With regard to the FWC the problem is and has always been a lack of funding/resources for as far back as I can remember and beyond. As my father was a FWC officer since before I was born, my brother a FWC Lieutenant and my sister a FWC Captain have told me all the - I AM A POTTY MOUTH -- I AM A POTTY MOUTH -. So don't sit around and fuss about this issue as it has always been and will always be there as far as I can tell. Just keep voting in laws and restrictions on law abiding citizens to the point that there are so many laws that it would take 4 of the smartest computers in the world to keep track of and HOPE for CHANGE!

I'm out! I'm going net fishing to feed my kids and if you would like to challenge me to a "sport fishing" tournament any day I've got a Benjamin on it!

See ya, wouldn't want to be ya! 

 OMG I had forgotten all about the O'l turtle excluder devise scene... Just sick!


----------



## rhbama3 (Nov 16, 2013)

Gentlemen, I know some of you are very passionate about the topic of this thread, but please refrain from the TAC/profanity. If it continues, this thread will be deleted.


----------



## 4HAND (Nov 16, 2013)

Ok Snook Snatcher, I took the quiz.

According to the results,"if everyone on the planet lived like my family we would need 6.56 earths"

Not putting a whole lot of stock in it.


----------



## shallowminded (Nov 17, 2013)

3.55 earths, footprint 137.63.  Who cares.... what is your point. Stop wasteful killing of sealife.  We can farm cows and chickens - a little tougher to farm sealife. If your livelyhood is banned, go do something else for a living. I have had to re-invent my life many many times and do not whine about it. I have to put food on the table and pay bills so I go do it and focus on the future. It's tough but no one is entitled to a paycheck.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Nov 17, 2013)

You really know how to pick your causes "snook snatch".

Center for a Sustainable Economy? You support a petty, festering pile of liberalism.

I clicked on your link, saw the polar bear on the little floating block of ice, threw up in my mouth a little and closed the page. 

I'll leave that bogus hocus pocus to you liberal-minded folks.


----------



## 4HAND (Nov 17, 2013)

Hey Grouper Throat, did those mullet have any roe? One of them looks pretty full.


----------



## grouper throat (Nov 18, 2013)

Yes most of them did but you could tell they weren't totally full of roe just yet. The white/red roe ratio was like 4:1. They were so dense that you could throw anywhere and snatch one but went back out of the river once it warmed up on Friday.


----------



## pottydoc (Nov 18, 2013)

Snook Snatcher said:


> Thank you for making my point exactly.... you hit the nail right on the head and hard....... You drove it home in one swing!
> 
> "Gill nets, along with fish traps, are indiscriminant killers of fish. They are both totally non selective of what size or species they catch. And they both pretty much kill anything that gets in them. I've seen (along with 1000's of other folks) it with my own eyes too many times."
> 
> ...



Is this post supposed to make some kind of sense? You are trying to compare a net ban to the 2nd Amendment? That's a pretty far reach there buddy. No one took away your right to fish. Just one type of the gear you use to do it. There's all kinds of restrictions on firearms, the whole reason for the net ban was because people like you didn't want ANY type of gear restrictions or limits or anything other than being allowed to kill all the fish, of any kind, any way you chose.


----------



## pottydoc (Nov 18, 2013)

asc said:


> Both and a lot has to do with the lies and the outright deception the CCA used to spin it in their favor.
> 
> I get a kick now when I hear them complain about what the feds are doing with the reef fish in the GOM.



I keep seeing you guys post about the CCA (of which I am not, have never been, and never will be a member) and all the "lies and outright deception" they supposedly used. How about you post some of it up. Not what you think they said, but actual links to quotes that you can prove were lies. Put up or shut up. If there are as many as you keep saying, it should be real easy to link a few.


----------



## pottydoc (Nov 18, 2013)

Hey Snook, just wondering, what was your score on your little greenie test?


----------



## asc (Nov 21, 2013)

http://www.southeasternfish.org/Documents/commfish.htmlThe net ban proponents had one basic ad showing a shrimp boat dumping a net full of fish and an upside down turtle on the deck of the shrimp boat with a booming voice urging the voters to stop this wasteful practice. The film used by the net ban proponents was actually a film of a turtle excluder device (TED) study conducted in Cape Canaveral in the 1970's by a research vessel from the University of Georgia. The TED test was not anything like the shrimping activities to be impacted by the net ban. The television stations who ran this ad after being notified in writing that it was fraudulent are now being sued by an industry group for using that particular video.[47]


----------



## asc (Nov 21, 2013)

I can find more, but I've proved my point.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Nov 22, 2013)

asc said:


> I can find more, but I've proved my point.



What point? That you can cut and paste a 20 year old twisted statement by a pro-commercial website?

That's the only point you've made.

Gillnets are indiscriminate. 

Now THAT is a point that does not require proving.


----------



## bhdawgs (Nov 22, 2013)

The bottom line is that the inshore fishery on the Gulf Coast was almost wiped out before the ban was put in place... no other argument needs to be made.   Recreational fishing is the lifeblood of countless guides, hotels, marinas, etc, in Florida.


----------



## pottydoc (Nov 22, 2013)

asc said:


> I can find more, but I've proved my point.



No, you haven't proved anything. I personally have seen the roller net guys on the east coast use spotter planes to locate king and Spanish schools, then surround them and wipe out the whole school. I've seen it dozens of times. I know the same thing happened on the west coast with breeder reds offshore. The voters knew exactly what they were voting for. Your side lost buddy. You've lost every round since then. You're gonna lose this one, and every other one from now on. Get over it, and get on with your life.


----------



## asc (Nov 22, 2013)

pottydoc said:


> No, you haven't proved anything. I personally have seen the roller net guys on the east coast use spotter planes to locate king and Spanish schools, then surround them and wipe out the whole school. I've seen it dozens of times. I know the same thing happened on the west coast with breeder reds offshore. The voters knew exactly what they were voting for. Your side lost buddy. You've lost every round since then. You're gonna lose this one, and every other one from now on. Get over it, and get on with your life.


Then you probably watched me... lol


----------



## asc (Nov 22, 2013)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> What point? That you can cut and paste a 20 year old twisted statement by a pro-commercial website?
> 
> That's the only point you've made.
> 
> ...



It's not twisted it's a fact. 
I could probably dig a little deeper and find the actual ad(might have the vhs at the house as well as the Rally in Tally protest where the MFC promised all stakeholders that we would all reap the bounty when redfish recovered) and the ad showing western US tuna purse seine boats being portrayed as Fl. boats.

Hooks are indiscriminate too.

Been at this a long time son...

ain't my first rodeo, likely not my last..


----------



## asc (Nov 22, 2013)

bhdawgs said:


> The bottom line is that the inshore fishery on the Gulf Coast was almost wiped out before the ban was put in place... no other argument needs to be made.   Recreational fishing is the lifeblood of countless guides, hotels, marinas, etc, in Florida.


Commercial fishing was the lifeblood of coastal towns for decades.
 Problem is two user groups competing for the same fish as water quality issues and habitat destruction take their toll.

So, you win, for a little while.

But you won't in the long run.


----------



## asc (Nov 22, 2013)

pottydoc said:


> No, you haven't proved anything. I personally have seen the roller net guys on the east coast use spotter planes to locate king and Spanish schools, then surround them and wipe out the whole school. I've seen it dozens of times. I know the same thing happened on the west coast with breeder reds offshore. The voters knew exactly what they were voting for. Your side lost buddy. You've lost every round since then. You're gonna lose this one, and every other one from now on. Get over it, and get on with your life.


When you are ready, I'll sell you some ARS or Grouper shares..

Super discount for you...


----------



## 4HAND (Nov 23, 2013)

asc said:


> Been at this a long time son...
> 
> ain't my first rodeo, likely not my last..


----------



## pottydoc (Nov 23, 2013)

asc said:


> It's not twisted it's a fact.
> I could probably dig a little deeper and find the actual ad(might have the vhs at the house as well as the Rally in Tally protest where the MFC promised all stakeholders that we would all reap the bounty when redfish recovered) and the ad showing western US tuna purse seine boats being portrayed as Fl. boats.
> 
> Hooks are indiscriminate too.
> ...



MFC? You mean that supposed neutral committee that was supposed to be unbiased in the decisions it made? The one loaded with people that were commercial fishermen, or owned fish houses, or had family in the commercial business? They're one of the biggest reasons the net ban was over whelming passed by the voters of Florida.


----------



## Kawaliga (Nov 25, 2013)

Any of you Waukulla county guys remember Skeebo Ross?


----------



## asc (Nov 28, 2013)

pottydoc said:


> MFC? You mean that supposed neutral committee that was supposed to be unbiased in the decisions it made? The one loaded with people that were commercial fishermen, or owned fish houses, or had family in the commercial business? They're one of the biggest reasons the net ban was over whelming passed by the voters of Florida.


I remember the one that was heavily tipped to the FCA side.


----------



## pottydoc (Nov 30, 2013)

asc said:


> I remember the one that was heavily tipped to the FCA side.



I'm sure you do. Just like you remember that net fishing never hurt any fish populations, shrimping doesn't kill 5times (or more) by catch than shrimp, or damage the bottom in any way, fish traps only catch targeted species, and long lines never hurt the swordfish population in the Florida Straits.


----------



## Limitless (Dec 1, 2013)

Yeah, those fine upstanding commercial netters do no harm to sports species!

_ENGLEWOOD - The Sheriff's Office's Marine Patrol Unit cited two local men Monday in the Coral Creek area of Placida when they found both undersized snook and a tarpon on their boat. Neither man had a Tarpon Kill tag.
At about 7:45 pm on November 25, Marine Patrol officers saw Ronald Lamar Cole, 44, of Cole Brothers Road in Placida, and Stuart Ray Middleton, 36, of 7121 Regina Drive in Englewood, on a commercial mullet skiff docked at 3 Cole Brothers Road.

When the deputies first met with them, they were apparently culling fish from their seine net.

While they were talking, the deputies noticed what appeared to be an undersized snook and a small tarpon dead in another net on the boat. Cole and Middleton finished clearing their seine net and a total of four undersized snook and the one tarpon were found.

The men did not have a Tarpon Kill tag onboard the boat.

Both Cole and Middleton were cited for Possessing or Killing a Tarpon without a Tag, four counts of Possession of Undersized Snook, Possession of Snook over the Bag Limit and Taking Snook by Net. Both men were also warned against commercial net fishing inside the Coral Creek area, a criminal violation.

While they were investigating this situation, the deputies learned that Middleton had an outstanding warrant out of Lee County for Failure to Appear on a charge of Possession of Undersized Cobia.

He was transported to the Charlotte County Jail where he was released on a $2,600 bond.

http://www.nbc-2.com/story/24096319/...y#.UppzpVso7b2_


----------



## asc (Dec 1, 2013)

Why don't we pull up the FWC's weekly reports and count the # of commercial violation vs recs?

BTW potty, My fish traps targeted red grouper, gags don't seem to like traps.
I'd catch 35 -40,000 lbs of RG every summer and maybe 1k of gags.
Caught a few grunts, seabass , and pogies too but not in any real #'s.
Maybe it's because they don't bring much money and I'd rather not waste valuable time messing with them.
Seem pretty easy and specific to me.


I don't shrimp or swordfish so I can't make an informed comment on either...

How bout you? You must be a well rounded individual to have all this expertise in the various fisheries.


----------



## grouper throat (Dec 2, 2013)

Seems some rec fishermen tend to get very greedy and forget about how the vast majority of regular folks in the US enjoy their saltwater commercial catches (fish, shrimp, crabs, etc). Bad apples in every group. No different than the peeps who keep those 13" trout, too many, or red snapper out of season.


----------



## bowandgun (Dec 4, 2013)

First I am a ex florida native heavily involved in the net ban.  There was a time when the Indian River was basically trout and redfish free.  the only ones you caught were yearlings, if lucky.  Once the net ban was put in place the sea trout flourished.  also the pompano and snook came back in earnest.  This was one of the most beneficial laws for fishing ever.  This was the will of the people, not the will of the Commercial fishing industry.  Their high dollar influence could not stop us.  i went around and got petitions signed and made calls to get it passed.  

The beauty of our country is the people can make changes.  yes our government is full of rules we do not need.  This one happens to be a good law.


----------



## pottydoc (Dec 4, 2013)

asc said:


> Why don't we pull up the FWC's weekly reports and count the # of commercial violation vs recs?
> 
> BTW potty, My fish traps targeted red grouper, gags don't seem to like traps.
> I'd catch 35 -40,000 lbs of RG every summer and maybe 1k of gags.
> ...



I'll tell you what, let's use the FWC numbers of violations in a percentage and see what happens then. Since there are 1000's more recs than commercials, obviously there are gonna be more rec violations in plain numbers than commercials. I'd be willing to bet that the numbers would be way different in we could get a percentage number on commercials vs rec guys. AS far as traps go, I've watched a pile of them getting pulled over the years, and watched a pile of very dead tropicals, grunts, and assorted other fish get "released" and float away. The damage by shrimp trawl nets to the bottom, and the amount of by catch are well documented. The shrimping industry  admits to the 5-1 number, the actual one is probably higher. As for swords, I've fished them for years in the Straits, and watched the numbers vastly increased when the longliners were stopped. Since the buoy guys have been allowed to fish there, and a number of daytimer deep droppers who back door the swords, the population has gone down again. The same with the numbers of sharks there. As far as this subject goes, thanks for the compliment, I am pretty "well rounded" on this subject. Watching first hand the roller net guys decimate the king and Spanish mack population on the East coast showed me everything I needed to know to be once and forever against any type of entanglement net.


----------



## pottydoc (Dec 4, 2013)

bowandgun said:


> First I am a ex florida native heavily involved in the net ban.  There was a time when the Indian River was basically trout and redfish free.  the only ones you caught were yearlings, if lucky.  Once the net ban was put in place the sea trout flourished.  also the pompano and snook came back in earnest.  This was one of the most beneficial laws for fishing ever.  This was the will of the people, not the will of the Commercial fishing industry.  Their high dollar influence could not stop us.  i went around and got petitions signed and made calls to get it passed.
> 
> The beauty of our country is the people can make changes.  yes our government is full of rules we do not need.  This one happens to be a good law.



B&G, thanks for your work on the net ban amendment. No matter what the commercial guys like to claim, it was folks like you, me, and a whole bunch more plain old guys that talked it up, and explained it to our friends, fellow employees, relatives, and perfect strangers that got it passed. It was the same folks who signed petitions, wrote letters and called the FWC that got this new attempt stopped too.


----------



## asc (Dec 5, 2013)

bowandgun said:


> First I am a ex florida native heavily involved in the net ban.  There was a time when the Indian River was basically trout and redfish free.  the only ones you caught were yearlings, if lucky.  Once the net ban was put in place the sea trout flourished.  also the pompano and snook came back in earnest.  This was one of the most beneficial laws for fishing ever.  This was the will of the people, not the will of the Commercial fishing industry.  Their high dollar influence could not stop us.  i went around and got petitions signed and made calls to get it passed.
> 
> The beauty of our country is the people can make changes.  yes our government is full of rules we do not need.  This one happens to be a good law.


Another couple of year the IRL will be trout and redfish free again.

Can't blame it on the nets this time...


----------

