Was talking with some friends the other day remembering the “good old days” of catching black sea bass this time of the year. Then of course the conversation turned into the closures and why it is the way it is. What no one can figure out is why would you close and make it illegal to harvest the most abundant fish in the ocean? It makes no sense. Then I starting thinking about it and then it hit me. It makes total sense! We all know that the SAFMC does not want anyone fishing or keeping any fish. We know the ultimate goal is to completley end recreational and commercial fishing. So the best way to do this is to let a closed species overpopulate and become so abundant that it will be almost impossible to catch anything else. This way fisherman will become so frustrated catching mostly sea bass and having to throw them all back they will no longer go fishing. It really is a brilliant idea. They know that passing laws that ban fishing would cause public outrage, so this is the next best thing. If they can take away the incentives, then no one will go fishing. It is kind of like telling a hunter it is legal to go hunting, but illegal to kill anything. Why go hunting? I hope I am wrong, but it is the only logical explaination as to why you would make it illegal to keep the most abundant fish in the sea 9-10 months out of the year. The goals of SAFMC have nothing to do with coservation and sustainability, but everything to do with getting you off the water. The bsb closure is just an indirect way of doing so.
You should email Jesse Ventura.
Semper Fi
18’ Sterling
115 Yamaha
Big Ugly Homemade Blue Push Pole
A few years ago,I listened to an interview on PBS with Dr. Sylvia Earle, the co-author of a book called “The World is Blue”. I am pretty certain her work was sponsored by National Geographic. She stated that she had eaten lunch with then President George W. bush. She spent about two hours with him,virtually One on One, She said Bush had no idea that the fish populations of the oceans were in such bad shape,and indicated his administration would do all it could to help her cause.She supported closing vast areas of all oceans within U.S. jurisdiction to fishing. I hoped PBS would air an opposing opinion,and went so far as to call the S. C. Director to ask if that would be done. I never heard the rebuttal, but I have noticed that PBS is heavily sponsored by the Pew foundations. Enough said.