Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
norcalkat

One win for Stripers in the West Coast!

Rate this topic

24 posts in this topic

The California Fish & Game Commission just voted down the anti striper regulations! This fight isn't over...I'm sure there are lawsuits coming. But this is good news! Way to go F&G Commission!

 

Thanks to everyone who sent there letters and emails and put forth the effort to make sure out fishery for stripers stays alive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup... it was quite an interesting day in Sac. I'm glad it's partially over... but like it was stated, there is still a long road ahead.

 

I for one know that I am looking at the products I purchase and seeing where they are coming from.

 

Keeping up the good fight though!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Good stuff today. I enjoyed seeing this part of the process, and of course joined in on the applause when they unanimously decided not to proceed to publish notice on these changes to the F&G Code. This case is dead... Woohoo!!! Here are some quite lengthy notes/thoughts I have on what I saw and heard today...



 



The Commission had 3 options before them today:



1) Publish notice of intent to proceed with intent to amend striped bass regulations. (This wouldn't have changed the regs today or even next year. They would just invoke the CEQA process which would mean more studies and more public review process).



2) Proceed with amendments.



3) Reject/do not proceed with DFG's proposed amendments.



 



They chose "reject/do not proceed" unanimously, with a few Commission members abstaining. Voting to reject were CFGC President Jim Kellogg and Commissioner Daniel Richards. The rest abstained from the vote to reject (if my notes are correct... I dunno, my notes look like hieroglyphics).



 



- The place was packed as you'd expect. I got there after it started, so I missed DFG's presentation but got to see some horrible science presented by the plaintiffs/water user's biologists (norcalcat: where did they get those numbers? They converted striped bass abundance indices to total number of striped bass, then used that to show how many pounds of salmon that stripers eat. What the fluck? Not sound science, not at all.)



 



- NMFS and USFWS Regional Directors were allowed to speak even though they do not usually do so for state fishing regulation changes. They were both strongly in favor of the proposed changes even though they both admitted much uncertainty in its outcome. The NMFS Regional Director liked the proposal because it had a good monitoring plan associated with it. Huh? $$$?



 



- 37 people spoke during the public comment period. Only 4 of them spoke in support of the changes. Three of them were attorneys or representatives of water alliances/users (no shocker there). The other one in support represented a group that wanted to allow spearfishing for stripers if the regs were changed... lol.



 



- Noticeably absent, either for or against, were mainstream national or statewide environmental groups. It was fishing groups against big time water users, with one notable exception... a farmer from the south valley that was against this proposal. He was touching and gave an emotional speech. He said that this lawsuit and proposal is a smokescreen hiding larger problems, and was disappointed that we [fisherman] are being uprooted by water users. He thinks there are better solutions out there, and he gave me the overall impression that he is a good man that is saddened by all of this nonsense.



 



- The past mayor (now city councilman) of Oakley and Chamber of Commerce members from Rio Vista spoke on the economic importance of striped bass and strongly urged against this plan. A few other charter boat captains and bait shop owners did as well, but Alan Fong had some good numbers to back the economic importance. He said that he lost 10% of his business when salmon season was closed for a few years, and that striped bass fisherman accounted for 40% of his business. If striper fishing comes to an end as this proposal would in-effect lead to, there goes 40% of his business and 40% of his license sales (which in turn is revenue lost by DFG).



 



- One guy representing the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) was a complete arsehole, and of course in favor of the proposal. He used the word "opine" in a sentence, then turned to the crowd of 95% fishermen, and said, "Sorry to use big words like that." He got a few moans and boos from the crowd as he should have. Fluck you arsewipe!



 



- After public comment, the Commissioners discussed the options before them (proceed, proceed with amendments, or reject). One of them asked, "So if we reject it today, is that it with this case and proposal?" An attorney for the Coalition then interjected, in a somewhat threatening way, "No, if you reject this, it will go back to court and lawsuits will be filed." Soon after that the Director of Fish and Game, Chuck Bonham said something like this, "That's not entirely true. This particular case and proposal will be dead. We get threatened to be taken to court and sued all of the time, but this case will be dead if you [Commissioners] reject now. If they want to sue us later, they can, but it will be a different case and a different lawsuit." Props to him for clarifying that for the Commission.



 



- CFGC President Jim Kellogg seems to have a great understanding of it all. He understands the biased science, and as a delta resident himself, gave some examples of the greater problems facing our fisheries, notably water diversions and introduced/exotic invertebrates (and I agree). He understands that stripers and salmon have co-existed in California for over 130 years, and he knows they're not much of a problem. As his last act as CFGC President (he stepped down today), he somewhat jokingly declared striped bass as a native species in California... lol, he can't do that but it was a great gesture.



 



The theme of the day was that this is treating the symptoms and not the disease, and that this is obviously a smoke and mirrors show. I'm glad the Commission sees that and had the nads to reject what their DFG brethren proposed to them.



Whew, I'm long-winded... beer time. beers.gif


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yup... it was quite an interesting day in Sac. I'm glad it's partially over... but like it was stated, there is still a long road ahead.

I for one know that I am looking at the products I purchase and seeing where they are coming from.

Keeping up the good fight though!!

 

Early this week I was at a deli on the coast that carried Fuji water. I asked them if they would be willing to remove the product from their shelves. He asked why and I explained how the billionaire who owned the brand was trying to destroy the striper fishery and his company was part of the destruction of the salmon and Delta.

he said he had no idea and said that not only would he remove them he would tell the distributor that he would not carry anything from that supplier and the reason why.

Wait till this kind of information hits Resnick.

If you see their products in a store you frequent, talk to the owner. He if he understands his customers will realize you don't carry products your customers are boycotting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

for those who couldnt make it but still want to see what was said...

 

mms://media.cal-span.org/calspan/Video_Files/CFG/CFG_12-02-02/CFG_12-02-02.wmv

 

copy this link and paste it in a new browser or media player.

 

 

coverage of todays meeting starts at 1hr34min

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shwew...

Damn that was a bit too close to home for me...

 

Thanks guys for the update, and summary of the day. Were it not for work, I would have liked to witness the process. If it was anything like the first meeting, I can imagine the tension was very high.

 

Now let's hope our finned friends recognize us, for saving their butts, with a banner year... :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- One guy representing the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) was a complete arsehole, and of course in favor of the proposal. He used the word "opine" in a sentence, then turned to the crowd of 95% fishermen, and said, "Sorry to use big words like that." He got a few moans and boos from the crowd as he should have. Fluck you arsewipe!

 

Wow he must be proud. He used his word of the day from his word calender that his mom gave him.

:shock:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Used in a sentence you would have got it, as you now know it's just the root and verb version of "opinion". For example: "In an earlier post in this thread, cabbagehead opined that the dude from ACWA is an arsehole."  biggrin.gif


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Used in a sentence you would have got it, as you now know it's just the root and verb version of "opinion". For example: "In an earlier post in this thread, cabbagehead opined that the dude from ACWA is an arsehole."  :D

 

 

Wait so its like slang as in calling San Francisco, Frisco ? He loses points here because we think of higher intelligence when some one can use words with three syllables or more. Not when they cut a word up.

 

LOL He needs to go back to his farm and pick his nose.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Winch...Glad you posted the companys Resnick owns...Stopped purchase at The Millbrae Safeway when I read Paramount Farms...Will try & talk to purchasing agent at Safeway.... Besides Pistachios aren't good for you anyway.......Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.