- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 6/22/16 at 6:49 pm to Whatafrekinchessiebr
I don't speak entitled narcissistic dumbfrick (END), but I'll do my best to decipher this rabble.
Translation:
We spoke earlier and I disagree with you.
Translation:
Personal profit and greed are values of mine, and are the only explanations for not endorsing my gospel.
Translation:
It is harassment when I do not get what I want when I want.
Translation:
Family weekend hobby of lynching was shut down 5 generations ago, and we are still bitter.
Translation:
Rec fishermen currently have %51 of the quota, but I am entitled to more because no one owns the red snapper. I am accustomed to having all of what I want, and more than half is simply not enough for my group.
Translation (paraphrase due to lack of fluency in END):
You rightfully questioned my integrity, so I will spew unfounded speculation in an attempt to sway others to champion my cause.
A few notes:
1) Purchasing snapper fillets at a seafood market one time is my only connection to the commercial fishery.
2) If the bill allowed for a 9.9% reduction per annum in the rec sector (just like the commercial sector), I would have less issue.
3) The Country Club Anglers clowns should let up on the verbiage and say what they really mean. I think it'd go something like "GIMME THAT IT'S MINE!"
4) Spoiler alert. I will disappear from this thread. Judging by the timing of your post activity, you do not have a job that requires you to do actual work. Again, we differ here. Also, I have a very rewarding and fruitful home life, and ultimately give zero fricks about a dumb fish that is too easy to catch and mediocre table fare.
quote:
I remember you from the last snapper thread where you put your foot in your mouth
Translation:
We spoke earlier and I disagree with you.
quote:
How exactly do you (or possibly someone close to you) profit off the fishery?
Translation:
Personal profit and greed are values of mine, and are the only explanations for not endorsing my gospel.
quote:
I can guarantee most who read that statement feel like Melancon is harassing them personally with this bs.
Translation:
It is harassment when I do not get what I want when I want.
quote:
I think it's harassment for Melancon to shut down a hobby that 3 generations of my family enjoy together on the weekends.
Translation:
Family weekend hobby of lynching was shut down 5 generations ago, and we are still bitter.
quote:
I do think that I am entitled to equal access to a fishery that is a public resource that should be shared by all citizens.
Translation:
Rec fishermen currently have %51 of the quota, but I am entitled to more because no one owns the red snapper. I am accustomed to having all of what I want, and more than half is simply not enough for my group.
quote:
I intend on saying my piece when a few wealthy Individuals utilize morally bankrupt and possibly corrupt politicians to forcibly steal the resource.
Translation (paraphrase due to lack of fluency in END):
You rightfully questioned my integrity, so I will spew unfounded speculation in an attempt to sway others to champion my cause.
A few notes:
1) Purchasing snapper fillets at a seafood market one time is my only connection to the commercial fishery.
2) If the bill allowed for a 9.9% reduction per annum in the rec sector (just like the commercial sector), I would have less issue.
3) The Country Club Anglers clowns should let up on the verbiage and say what they really mean. I think it'd go something like "GIMME THAT IT'S MINE!"
4) Spoiler alert. I will disappear from this thread. Judging by the timing of your post activity, you do not have a job that requires you to do actual work. Again, we differ here. Also, I have a very rewarding and fruitful home life, and ultimately give zero fricks about a dumb fish that is too easy to catch and mediocre table fare.
Posted on 6/22/16 at 7:10 pm to Tuco Pacifico
Damn you mad
Posted on 6/22/16 at 7:16 pm to gaetti15
quote:
The most important part of the stock assessments for snapper are commercial by-catch, indices of abundance from vertical and bottom longline surveys, as well as fishery independemt age-sex-length compositions.
I just don't see why you feel this is so cost prohibitive when we're talking tens of millions in potentially generated tax dollars. Realistically, how many full time biologists and vessels do you feel it will take? Also, the last I heard commercial vessels are required to pay for their own monitoring if they meet certain specs. I have a hard time believing the federal government is currently dumping this presumed mountain of money into stock accessments when it's so drastically off the mark.
Posted on 6/22/16 at 7:39 pm to TheDrunkenTigah
If it was a huge crazy number like he keeps implying I have a feeling the comms would be shouting it from the rooftops. If the research is being done now someone should have a budget somewhere. You can also assume whatever the Fed's are spending is going to be extremely bloated and there will be room for cuts. The least he could do is provide a ballpark figure since it's his only argument.
Posted on 6/22/16 at 8:49 pm to Whatafrekinchessiebr
quote:
The least he could do is provide a ballpark figure since it's his only argument.
I don't claim to know the budget.
All I know is that they do a lot of offshore sampling over long distances and the cost of boat usage and shite is expensive enough given our current financial crisis in the state.
Posted on 6/22/16 at 8:50 pm to gaetti15
I'm also saying that the states should figure this out but apparently the haven't yet given the comments by Melancon
Posted on 6/22/16 at 9:01 pm to gaetti15
Weren't BP oil spill dollars allocated to the research data collection efforts too? Guess they can disband the office and use that revenue to play with JBE's pet programs.
Posted on 6/22/16 at 9:16 pm to mylsuhat
I don't fully understand the situation and won't take the time to read all of this but Ive known CM for >25 years. Don't always agree with his politics but know him to be a sportsman. Never had a doubt about his integrity He is a good guy
Posted on 6/23/16 at 2:05 am to 90Delmore
quote:
Never had a doubt about his integrity He is a good guy
He deinitely helped my family out during Katrina. Dude is a good guy, but this is typically what happens in politics. People get bitter over the man and pretend he's not a regular human being.
I'd imagine sportsmen in his position would have many different opinions on the information he's gathered since January.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 6:15 am to TheDrunkenTigah
quote:
Damn you mad
And full of shite, says he doesn't give a frick yet spends time in the thread commenting. Then acting like he's taking the high road by making that his last response. So full of anger and contradictions.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 8:15 am to Scrowe
good thread guys. I'm gonna get some more insight this weekend with some of my buddies who live for this shite and I'll hopefully have a chance to comment. I've been real busy and not really following as closely as I'd like
Posted on 6/23/16 at 9:22 am to gaetti15
quote:
He deinitely helped my family out during Katrina. Dude is a good guy, but this is typically what happens in politics. People get bitter over the man and pretend he's not a regular human being.
What does his personal life have to do with it? I don't hate the man, I just would like him to stick to his guns politically. I don't even think this is a position he wanted to take, it reeks of higher LA politics, especially considering JBE's recent comments over the budget. His go-to move seems to be hold things people care about hostage until they pay for things he wants.
I can't say it enough, everyone involved should have known years ago that the feds weren't going to pay for something they couldn't control. To act like that's some new revelation and a deal-breaker is shortsighted and a thinly veiled attempt to seize the Saltwater Fish Research and Conservation Fund. Melancon's comments undermine the entire bill, and could legitimately cause it to fail. Once it does, there's no need to set aside that money for data collection, and it will just quietly be shifted to other parts of the state budget.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 9:34 am to TheDrunkenTigah
I'm thinkin that you should call your buddy Garret Grave's and ask him about the budget necessary for this to work 
Because for a a state that is having budget problems now idk how they would come up with money to suddenly take over the research and management of a species, and the also get teams of individuals to perform the stock assessment
Because for a a state that is having budget problems now idk how they would come up with money to suddenly take over the research and management of a species, and the also get teams of individuals to perform the stock assessment
This post was edited on 6/23/16 at 9:37 am
Posted on 6/23/16 at 9:51 am to gaetti15
quote:
I'm thinkin that you should call your buddy Garret Grave's and ask him about the budget necessary for this to work
Because for a a state that is having budget problems now idk how they would come up with money to suddenly take over the research and management of a species, and the also get teams of individuals to perform the stock assessment
You seem to have this whole notion of government backwards, and it's exactly that attitude that has gotten us here. Recreational fishing is a huge economic engine in this state. The budget problems you're alluding to weren't caused by fishing, in fact fishing has been at least part of what has paid to fix these problems over the years. It's not Graves's responsibility to pay for this, it's the entire state government's if the people who elected these representatives decide it's what they want. That's the basic function of government. I've posted numerous economic reports in this thread showing that opening the red snapper fishery will yield a positive return on any money spent. This bill will pay for itself. The fundamental issue is that our governor doesn't want to incur the short term financial burden to gain a long term financial benefit, because he would like to spend that money on something else. People have a right to be upset about that.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 9:54 am to gaetti15
quote:
idk how they would come up with money to suddenly take over the research and management of a species
Good thing we are not relying on you to fix the problem. How many times are you going to restate this without providing anything to back it up?
Posted on 6/23/16 at 9:56 am to Tuco Pacifico
quote:
Translation:
Rec fishermen currently have %51 of the quota, but I am entitled to more because no one owns the red snapper. I am accustomed to having all of what I want, and more than half is simply not enough for my group.
100% bullshite. They can claim we get 51%, but we get 9 days and the only planned weekend was a rainout.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 10:04 am to TheDrunkenTigah
quote:
it's the entire state government's if the people who elected these representatives decide it's what they want.
The state government sucks doh bro.
You plan on that ever getting better ?
You believe in miracles
Posted on 6/23/16 at 10:16 am to Whatafrekinchessiebr
quote:
ood thing we are not relying on you to fix the problem. How many times are you going to restate this without providing anything to back it up?
here's the best that I can find.
NOAA Budget Blue Book.
LINK
Page 7 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News