It seems silly

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by seahunt on October 21, 2003 at 19:14:10:

In Reply to: Re: Why do recreational fishers pay so much more than commercial? posted by Sonke on October 20, 2003 at 18:59:11:

I think the proportions of money spent on gear and support costs for the sport verses commercial fishing activities would follow similar proportions or more. That makes for taxes. Sport fishers spend a fortune on gear and travel per pound of fish. I would think that the F&G would be well to support sport fishing over commercial any day. Not only that, sport fishers don't wipe out fish populations like commercial fishers. If the commercial fishers didn't hammer on the bottom fish (and abalone), the restrictions on the sport fishers wouldn't be needed and I'll bet there would be far more revenue coming to the F&G, profits to the sport industries as well as taxes to the state.
The history of fishery management, like the management of most wild crops in the US, has unfortunately been a history of mis-management. Are the squid going to be the next fishery to go?
F&G should be able to do a better job.
Enjoy, seahunt

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]