Kingfisher06

Look into Blackhorn 209 powder for next season. Website has a great Q&A section. Takes the hassle out of cleaning. After cleaning my CVA Wolf it is necessary that I pop a cap before loading up. If I load up without popping a cap it will not fire.

Don't call me a misinformed idiot!!!!!!

Is this place a knitting circle or what?

Soft-minded is polite, respectful terminology. I can offer up synonyms that are disrespectful to prove my point, but won't. Has it ever crossed your mind that maybe, the stance you are taking can be frustrating, and anger folks as much or more so than harsh words. I did offer a persuasive stance; that mollycoddling a certain set of folks one way deteriorates a blind justice system, but you cannot get beyond being called soft-minded or feeling bashed to address that. You simply wish to reinforce a politically correct granny vernacular that stifles good debate.

Reply in the form of a prayer, amen.

The polarization is a result of the soft-mindedness you display. Rather than hold a blind justice system accountable, it seems from your post you'd like a justice system to bend to your relative opinion that certain groups have a reasonable basis to be excused from responsibility. And if we don't adhere to your whimsical reasons, well, then we are on our way to Sharia Law or whatever you're getting at with your reference to the Middle East. It is important to present logical, historical, lawful precedence as a means to debate and change people's errant opinions. That discourse is crucial, even if you are scared someone's feelings will hurt.

There is no place better. Im all about American exceptionalism and believe in the Constitution. I have no shame in sticking up for it either. An by the way Sk8man, youre the one that has had to go back and edit your posts toconceal your true feelings on entrepreneurial profit that certainly flew in the face of any charter business, guiding service, hunting lease, or trapping endeavors.

The point of this discussion is deeper than does overfishing have an impact on the quality of fishing in a given body of water. Nobody is arguing that overfishing a species cannot happen for goodness sake, try to keep up Ric666. This is a debate regarding what someone ought to be allowed to do with their own fruits of labor. Personal property brought into possession by legal means through work or earnings is a private matter. New York is continually getting into the private matter of what you can and cannot do with your private property/business/earnings. The income tax is an unconstitutional levy against the trade of labor for pay. A good example of how far gone this country is and how ignorant its citizens are. This is a question of liberty. You are either for or against this sort of meddling. A meddling that is born out of envy of the entrepreneur’s success. Whether it be the preposterous Safe Act, egregious NYS Family Court racket, or bloated and ever-expanding tax code, etc. etc.; it all results in a more powerful, controlling, and unaccountable government. I have already explained that you cannot regulate greed. It is a human trait that does not magically get cured by being elected to office or being hired into a bureaucratic position. In fact, through the protection of elected office it runs rampant and infects the market place. Unelected positions that impose their ideologies that impart control feeds a greedy ego that lusts for power. Ordinary citizens who wish to impart unfair control are simply offering the state a means to this end. Once they sycophantically appeal to the state to achieve this, they are culpable too. It is reprehensible when this is done in a targeted manner to a minority of law abiding citizens. In essence, by trying to solve the problem of greed you create a far larger, more uncontrollable, greedy monster by utilizing the state to do so. The free market is the only fair system that can impart the fear necessary to curtail greed. I’ve given examples of the road you wish to go down and the blatant unaccountability the state has in its partial ownership of private property. Liability is extremely rare in government. Because that is what you are wishing for; partial state ownership/control of food in your freezer. I wonder if I am allowed to barter deer meat for gasoline down at the local gas mart, or firewood, or perch, honest question. If commercial selling of fish is prohibited can I trade a bucket of filets for a voucher to my favorite restaurant who wishes to trade? Can I sell that voucher? How about bitcoins for perch? My point being, you cannot regulate the bad guys, they will always find a way and in trying you strip the masses of liberty. Concerning some diehard fisherman on Otisco fishing within their legal means or Hookedups observations on Seneca. Why not make fair changes across the board rather than give the state partial control/ownership of what is in your freezer? If a lake can be proven to be overfished then lower the limit for all. If you did outlaw commercial fishing, what then if you realize the same guys are out there on Otisco and it turns out they are just loading up their extending families freezer and simply love fishing to no end? Do you wish to impose further draconian laws where a person can only visit a lake a certain amount of times in a season? How low do you want to go? I promise the state will go as low as you want to go, because another paragraph in the law books is just the extra weight they want to bonk you over the head with.

Sums up my thoughts. Super busy this weekend or I'd reply in my normal fashion...

How many tickets from folks who sell fish have been issued for over harvesting? Please tell me you have some sort of quantifiable data. How about tickets from just over harvesting perch by anyone from Seneca? Come on, don't tell me you haven't done your homework again and this is another knee-jerk no different than the Safe Act knee-jerk. No standards, but the double, again, I'm sure...

When I take a fish out of a lake it becomes mine and no longer a public resource. You pander like there is some big theft going on and there is not. Rather than the notion of lowering a daily limit on a given body of water you feel requires it for sustainability, which would be fair to all, you wish to target one select group and get into their private affairs by telling them what they can do with their property! When you say anecdotal, blanketed hogwash like ‘up until 50 years…’ without any data, I’m sorry, but you deserve deaf ears when it comes to big boy decisions that affect an entire community. The aim or philosophy of common property is to provide equal access and sustainability of important resources. What pollution in particular do you speak? What is the source and why is it not regulated? The Clean Water Act, surely has jurisdiction, why not track that down. The E.P.A. and its fines have real teeth. You wish to ignore the simple fact that big business can lobby for exemptions to pollute common property and at the same time root on a bunch of children to lobby the state to further dictate what a man can do with his own personal property. It’s crazy! You are a fabricator to cast doubt over the sustainability of statewide fisheries from hook and line selling. If my children are not allowed to go down to the creek each spring and catch a pal of bullheads, clean them and sell them, to save up for something they’d like, then I don’t know, what a stupid thing you’ve rooted for. Maybe they ought to learn to bully, rob and be deceitful to just keep up.

Good luck Billy

Remember, the premise of this thread is a statewide ban to solve one lake's perceived issue. I don't understand the empirical issues of Seneca Lake, but hypothetically, I would employ an educational campaign to stimulate the use of best management practices within the watershed. A strong public backing reinforced with readily available scientific literature could bring economic pressure upon large operations that do not implement sound land practices. Identifying significant sources of pollution is not that hard. Stabilizing the environment provides a cleaner canvas to then find understanding. I would utilize existing scientific studies that offer causal relations to perch declines and test if it is applicable to that body of water and rally public support around that, e.g., cormorant egg oiling. Can you promise me that outlawing the selling of fish will restore the fishery from 30 years ago? Of course not, that is a silly goal. Rather, tell me what the introduction of gobies on other perch waters has done to populations and behavior as a starting point for understanding this perceived decline. What is the relationship? On similar bodies of water where some science has stacked up, what can be learned, how can it be applied and what are the gaps of understanding. What has worked elsewhere and is it truly relevant? Upon finding a better understanding I would suggest Seneca Lake specific guidance if it is truly grounded in sound science.

Not true, just the only idea the LOU brain trust can propose, which is the lowliest, easiest, laziest hanging fruit.