Kayakfishermen/spearos/fishermen are intimidating and violent--The new enviro tactic - Kayak Fishing Adventures on Big Water’s Edge

Fiskadoro · 06-08-2009, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zenspearo

We see this latest coordinated effort increasing in tempo and volume at the June 4, 2009 BRTF meeting and subsequently online. Person after person, RSG members and non-RSG members from the enviro side, come up to the BRTF and allege generalized "intimidation" by fishermen and then spread the same message online. This is despite the fact that out of over 200 spearo/kayakfishermen/fishermen showing up at the meeting, not a single incident can be cited.

Though I did not see it first hand, I figured when I saw them return at the end of the meeting that that was going to be their strategy. They intentionally abandoned the general comment section in order to come back later and play the intimidation card.

When you have the votes you go with the votes. When you don't have the votes you blame the process or claim someone is trying to intimidate you and keep you out of the process.

It's like the applause thing. No-one applauded until the enviros applauded for several of their speakers. The Next fishing speaker got massive applause and then suddenly applause was a problem, and we were told not to applaud.

bellcon · 06-08-2009, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Ok, someone yells at me or spits on me,I'll be sure to ignore it and calmly come ond get you to handle the situation for me. Thanks for that....

Dave,
your post almost always make me smile

"Excuse me Chris... I dont mean to interupt... but that Peta lady just yelled at me... and then Spit on me...Can you help a bother out...Please"

now back to the good points made by this post...
Thanks zenspearo!

zenspearo · 06-08-2009, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bellcon

Dave,
your post almost always make me smile

"Excuse me Chris... I dont mean to interupt... but that Peta lady just yelled at me... and then Spit on me...Can you help a bother out...Please"

now back to the good points made by this post...
Thanks zenspearo!

That's exactly what you do. Okay, may be not in the exact language, but that's the smart play.

They have a lot of fanatics and end-justify-means people. Jim Day had been in the environmental movement in his past and can tell you. Do you want to get tangled in an assault lawsuit pressed by a fanatic who is angling to be a martyr for the cause?

Ideally, one of us will get the DFG. One of us will keep track of the person assaulting, and we'll work together to get the person arrested and get the incident on record (and preventing you, in your insanely pissed-off mood, from getting yourself in trouble just like they hope you would--just don't swing at us

).

Matt · 06-08-2009, 03:08 PM

Hmmmm....dirty tactics...false accusations...lying...kinda makes ya feel like they think they might lose eh????

I think we all know who we are and I must say I have attempted to try and be nice to the enviros who in turn stare at me with hateful eyes!! Oh well so much for goodwill and a fair fight!

fryguy · 06-08-2009, 04:31 PM

maybe we should have an extreme side....

you know, so we can have a better picture of where the "middle ground" is.....

hell, we should accuse them of everything they accuse us of

dsafety · 06-08-2009, 04:52 PM

I suppose there must be a fine perceptual line between someone who appears to be intimidating and one who is simply mad as hell. From my perspective, I see nothing wrong with letting everyone know that we are upset at the prospect of losing something that is very precious to us.

We are defending our rights here. Sure we must avoid unreasonable behavior but I see nothing wrong with showing a little outrage and righteous anger under the circumstances. If this is considered to be intimidation by some, so be it.

Am I missing something here?

Bob

Tman · 06-08-2009, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsafety

We are defending our rights here. Sure we must avoid unreasonable behavior but I see nothing wrong with showing a little outrage and righteous anger under the circumstances. If this is considered to be intimidation by some, so be it.

Am I missing something here?

Bob

Unfortunately, yes. When you have 100+ people that feel the same as you, then if even 1/2 of them react in the fashion you mentioned, showing a little outrage, therein lies the intimidation claim and rightly so...

Remember, some people will try anything to further their cause...even if it comes to lying...

jflyfysh · 06-08-2009, 05:51 PM

[quote=Jim Day;39843]Though I did not see it first hand, I figured when I saw them return at the end of the meeting that that was going to be their strategy. They intentionally abandoned the general comment section in order to come back later and play the intimidation card.

When you have the votes you go with the votes. When you don't have the votes you blame the process or claim someone is trying to intimidate you and keep you out of the process.

told not to applaud.

[/quotIt's like the applause thing. No-one applauded until the enviros applauded for several of their speakers. The Next fishing speaker got massive applause and then suddenly applause was a problem, and we were e]

06-08-2009, 03:08 PM	#4
Matt Support your local pangas Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Lj Posts: 976	Hmmmm....dirty tactics...false accusations...lying...kinda makes ya feel like they think they might lose eh???? I think we all know who we are and I must say I have attempted to try and be nice to the enviros who in turn stare at me with hateful eyes!! Oh well so much for goodwill and a fair fight! __________________ Thanks Matt F.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

06-08-2009, 04:31 PM	#5
fryguy Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: san diego Posts: 33	maybe we should have an extreme side.... you know, so we can have a better picture of where the "middle ground" is..... hell, we should accuse them of everything they accuse us of

06-08-2009, 04:52 PM	#6
dsafety Olivenhain Bob Join Date: May 2008 Location: Olivenhain, CA Posts: 1,122	I suppose there must be a fine perceptual line between someone who appears to be intimidating and one who is simply mad as hell. From my perspective, I see nothing wrong with letting everyone know that we are upset at the prospect of losing something that is very precious to us. We are defending our rights here. Sure we must avoid unreasonable behavior but I see nothing wrong with showing a little outrage and righteous anger under the circumstances. If this is considered to be intimidation by some, so be it. Am I missing something here? Bob

06-08-2009, 05:51 PM	#8
jflyfysh Junior Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 3	[quote=Jim Day;39843]Though I did not see it first hand, I figured when I saw them return at the end of the meeting that that was going to be their strategy. They intentionally abandoned the general comment section in order to come back later and play the intimidation card. When you have the votes you go with the votes. When you don't have the votes you blame the process or claim someone is trying to intimidate you and keep you out of the process. told not to applaud. [/quotIt's like the applause thing. No-one applauded until the enviros applauded for several of their speakers. The Next fishing speaker got massive applause and then suddenly applause was a problem, and we were e]