Extend State Waters

I read this on another forum and thought I'd pass it on.



"I posted this on the other thread. I'm trying to get a petition put together and extend Alabama's state waters out to 9 nm. It's the first step in getting the state to break from the feds and manage their own fisheries. The way I'm reading it right now, in June 2013 you will only be able to keep 1 red snapper. Triggers, ajs and grouper will be closed, I think. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that is the proposal. And if NMFS continues, either 2013 or 2014 will have a snapper season that starts and ends in June. Let's see if we can get some changes made. It's a small step, but we have to get started somewhere."

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Save-o...59330284159838

http://www.pensacolafishingforum.com...waters-135703/

Here's the direct link.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/906/168/410/

You'd think there would be more people wanting to discuss this, that or its already been :horse: on here?

Anyways, thanks for the link, I signed it.

Hmmm, the expression "snowball's chance..." comes to mind ::) ;) :D

From what I've heard, La has made pretty good progress on the issue. Whether it'll stand may be another deal.

Do we want the State of Alabama controlling our own fisheries? If we give them control, all they will do is give commercial fishermen more rights, and mirror federal laws for the rest of us.

Seems Alabama is to beholden to the commercial fishermen for me to trust them.

im with ^^^^ bubba on this one :poke1:

I can see where y'all are coming from, but I still agree with extending the state waters. Whether the boundary is at 3 or 10 miles, the commercial fisherman will still do their thing.

I think anytime a state can take can take control of something, especially when it pertains to natural resources they should. The Feds have their hands in enough stuff as it is, and it's only going to get worse.

You have WA state and CO that the people of those states choose to legalize the recreational use of Marjuaina although it's still illegal under federal law. The attorney general and Feds do not intend on enforcing it. The Feds chose not to take action when medical use was started. So my point is, individual states should stand up for it's own people. As long as the federal government keeps putting their hands into things, the outcome will be the same.

La proposed last year it's state waters be extended out to 10+ miles and was passed. This includes fisheries and energy exploration which is a huge step forward.

What else does it mean, it's means gill nets, seine nets, and trammel nets cannot be dropped until they're out state waters.

Just my opinion but I think it would be a good thing, that's assuming the state can manage it's own.

Not saying this won't happen, but is this just another President Davis fantasy?

How often do people complain about the net-boats cruising the beaches? And you want those regulators to have more territory to regulate poorly.

When I tried to go to the petition site I wound up at a butterfly site......see embedded like above by Purplle and Gold.

[quote author=oldfisherman link=topic=2297.msg21313#msg21313 date=1353016862]
When I tried to go to the petition site I wound up at a butterfly site......see embedded like above by Purplle and Gold.
[/quote]

I clicked on the link in my previous post, brought me to the petition site.

[quote author=PurpleNGold link=topic=2297.msg21317#msg21317 date=1353020872]
[quote author=oldfisherman link=topic=2297.msg21313#msg21313 date=1353016862]
When I tried to go to the petition site I wound up at a butterfly site......see embedded like above by Purplle and Gold.
[/quote]

I clicked on the link in my previous post, brought me to the petition site.
[/quote]
[size=12pt]Me too Sam, worked fine[/size]