Jump to content

Sale of FIsh

Recommended Posts


Ric66 that looks like some good solid information thanks.

SK8man If you think that statement supports your position you should reread what it actually does say. Do not extrapolate from it what you would like it to say.



Every lake and every species is different but there is no doubt in my mind that commercial sale of angler caught panfish can and does impact the quality of fishing in many waterbodies across the state.


Ahab,  unless I am missing something this statement from the DEC seems to indicate exactly what Sk8man's point was. I am sure many people never thought the oceans could be over fished.....now we know different. The DEC is not likely to do any study on the impact of commercial fishing on perch, but if we wait that long, maybe is will be too late. The best thing we fishermen can do is when we see changes going on and we aren't catching as many fish as we used to,  let the DEC know about it. With all the changes that have taken place on Seneca, it may be virtually impossible to know which ones are having the most impact. One more point I want to make is the DEC wouldn't put size and creel limits just for fun. They do it to try and keep the fishing viable. Maybe the 50 perch limit needs revising, at least for some bodies of water.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised you are still living in the United States after all that :lol:

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.

Edited by Kingfisher06
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only things I edit in my posts are misspellings, omissions. or if I think things may be unclear to others in the way I have stated them. I  don't have to "backpedal" on anything and for the record many of my positions regarding big brother, the Constitution, and governmental intervention are similar to yours but I don't use the perch issue to get on a soapbox to espouse my views on that.  I took an oath to uphold the Constitution when I joined the military in 1963 and I continue to this day to believe it to be the best document ever written.

Edited by Sk8man
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Looks like some good solid information and the region 8 fisheries manager's personal opinion at the end.

I can appreciate knowing what is on his mind as well as the rest of you.

 You should not assume that he thinks the impact is bad and should be acted on.

 You should not assume that his idea of what quality fishing is is the same as yours.

It appears to me (I presume) that the fisheries manager has and will continue to manage the fishery based on the good solid information and not his or any one persons assumptions or personal opinions. If reg changes are found to be in order based on the facts, I'm all for them.

 You are missing what should be more than obvious. Some people feel that this issue (and the effect of a change in the reg) is about more than being able to catch a big slob perch.

Edited by Ahab
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

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
  • Create New...