Kayak Fishing Adventures on Big Water’s Edge - View Single Post

Matt · 03-16-2009, 06:46 AM

I am not sure how you could get more of a conflict of interest than what Mr. Sutton has, it is akin to being the one and only judge in a beauty contest that your wife is in.

I have gotten to the point where I have very, very, little faith in the belief that the whole damn coastline where I currently fish won't be closed entirely thanks to the MLPA. I just wonder how they justify closing down all that area which will directly affect all the businesses related to fishing in the midst of a recession? And how they can justify affecting our community in such a negative way and hurting our own local economy even more than it already is.

All these points have been made before and I am begining to agree with both Aquachico and Dorado50 in regards to the decisions already having been made in backrooms without any of the stakeholders group being involved at all and that the meetings are simply a "feel good" move to "con" everyone into thinking we actually had a chance at keeping our fishing grounds open.

I have yet to see any decisions based on real-time scientific evidence, if you judge by the recent squid bite activity I would hardly say that yellowtail have been impacted by our "evil" fishing. Judging by the summer squid bite I don't think it could be said that the level of WSB's has decreased in recent years, I would actually say they have increased in numbers significantly. If anything perhaps we should put a stop to the seiners, squid boats, and introduce smaller limits on all species of fish, and perhaps tighten up on the seasonal rockfish and ling seasons. Of course I am suggesting this and I am fairly certain that it already has been suggested by our friends involved in the stakeholder groups.

But as to the issue at hand in regards to Mr. Sutton, it seems to be very similar to a certain Mr. Cheney and his ties to contractors in Iraq. Which once again lends itself to me thinking that I should sell a great deal of my fishing and lobster gear as I currently do not believe we will have a fair shot at keeping our fishing grounds open. What I would like to know is, is the final decision of the BRTF/MLPA truly a final decision or are we going to be able to take a legal approach and file an appeal on it in a state court and argue these points in a legal forum before an impartial judge? And if we will be able to pursue legal action should we start a legal fund now and gain representation via our gentleman on the stakeholder's group? I am fairly certain every angler I know would be more than willing to donate some amount to such a fund. I know I certainly could and would gladly donate money to any of the stakeholders representing our interests in the stake holders group or for a legal action against the possible MLPA decision that would doom our local fishing grounds.

So I guess what I am really asking here, Steve, is what is the worse case scenario course of action? Would raising money help you guys? Whether it be for travel and gas money just to ease some of the burden that you guys are taking on to protect all fishermans rights, or for retaining a lawyer and starting an apeal process(if that is even possible?) agains the possible impending decision of the BRTF/MLPA. It does seem Mr. Sutton has a very huge conflict of interest in being part of this process and maybe that can work to our advantage if we will be able to legally appeal the decision in front of an impartial judge.

Mr. Sutton is definitely flirting with, if not all out crossing a line in being involved with so many "anti-fishing" groups, it certainly makes me question the validity and fairness of the MLPA process. Also, how can a fair decision be made if the entire process is being funded by groups all with an objective of closing down fishing versus our state, which is broke, and supposedly impartial? Makes you wonder.....all these concerns have been raised before I am sure at some point, but I really am starting to wonder about the legal process due to what seems to be a very one sided decision making process which Mr. Sutton seems to be at the very core of, and definitely being heavily influenced by.

I have not derived any sense of positivity in the decision going in the way that all the fisherman I know are hoping for. "Our guys" on the stakeholder board aren't even allowed to criticize the process without fear of being kicked off of the stakeholder's group, at least that is my understanding of the situation, isn't that in itself a violation of freedom of speech? And everytime I have asked anyone who is involved they get that look of a the little kid who just got his skateboard stolen by a bully. So somehow I think we as a group need to start possibly looking at ways to protect our rights as fisherman.

So to summarize, yes I absolutely feel Mr. Sutton needs to be removed with much haste.

Rant off.

03-16-2009, 06:46 AM	#5
Matt Support your local pangas Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Lj Posts: 976	I am not sure how you could get more of a conflict of interest than what Mr. Sutton has, it is akin to being the one and only judge in a beauty contest that your wife is in. I have gotten to the point where I have very, very, little faith in the belief that the whole damn coastline where I currently fish won't be closed entirely thanks to the MLPA. I just wonder how they justify closing down all that area which will directly affect all the businesses related to fishing in the midst of a recession? And how they can justify affecting our community in such a negative way and hurting our own local economy even more than it already is. All these points have been made before and I am begining to agree with both Aquachico and Dorado50 in regards to the decisions already having been made in backrooms without any of the stakeholders group being involved at all and that the meetings are simply a "feel good" move to "con" everyone into thinking we actually had a chance at keeping our fishing grounds open. I have yet to see any decisions based on real-time scientific evidence, if you judge by the recent squid bite activity I would hardly say that yellowtail have been impacted by our "evil" fishing. Judging by the summer squid bite I don't think it could be said that the level of WSB's has decreased in recent years, I would actually say they have increased in numbers significantly. If anything perhaps we should put a stop to the seiners, squid boats, and introduce smaller limits on all species of fish, and perhaps tighten up on the seasonal rockfish and ling seasons. Of course I am suggesting this and I am fairly certain that it already has been suggested by our friends involved in the stakeholder groups. But as to the issue at hand in regards to Mr. Sutton, it seems to be very similar to a certain Mr. Cheney and his ties to contractors in Iraq. Which once again lends itself to me thinking that I should sell a great deal of my fishing and lobster gear as I currently do not believe we will have a fair shot at keeping our fishing grounds open. What I would like to know is, is the final decision of the BRTF/MLPA truly a final decision or are we going to be able to take a legal approach and file an appeal on it in a state court and argue these points in a legal forum before an impartial judge? And if we will be able to pursue legal action should we start a legal fund now and gain representation via our gentleman on the stakeholder's group? I am fairly certain every angler I know would be more than willing to donate some amount to such a fund. I know I certainly could and would gladly donate money to any of the stakeholders representing our interests in the stake holders group or for a legal action against the possible MLPA decision that would doom our local fishing grounds. So I guess what I am really asking here, Steve, is what is the worse case scenario course of action? Would raising money help you guys? Whether it be for travel and gas money just to ease some of the burden that you guys are taking on to protect all fishermans rights, or for retaining a lawyer and starting an apeal process(if that is even possible?) agains the possible impending decision of the BRTF/MLPA. It does seem Mr. Sutton has a very huge conflict of interest in being part of this process and maybe that can work to our advantage if we will be able to legally appeal the decision in front of an impartial judge. Mr. Sutton is definitely flirting with, if not all out crossing a line in being involved with so many "anti-fishing" groups, it certainly makes me question the validity and fairness of the MLPA process. Also, how can a fair decision be made if the entire process is being funded by groups all with an objective of closing down fishing versus our state, which is broke, and supposedly impartial? Makes you wonder.....all these concerns have been raised before I am sure at some point, but I really am starting to wonder about the legal process due to what seems to be a very one sided decision making process which Mr. Sutton seems to be at the very core of, and definitely being heavily influenced by. I have not derived any sense of positivity in the decision going in the way that all the fisherman I know are hoping for. "Our guys" on the stakeholder board aren't even allowed to criticize the process without fear of being kicked off of the stakeholder's group, at least that is my understanding of the situation, isn't that in itself a violation of freedom of speech? And everytime I have asked anyone who is involved they get that look of a the little kid who just got his skateboard stolen by a bully. So somehow I think we as a group need to start possibly looking at ways to protect our rights as fisherman. So to summarize, yes I absolutely feel Mr. Sutton needs to be removed with much haste. Rant off. __________________ Thanks Matt F.