|
|
| You are making apples to oranges comparisons there. You will allow SI/DI and allow FFS for other fish but not musky. Sorry, without any study, comprehensive data, that is an arbitrary decision. If you were to ban all electronics, SI/DI included, no problem. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1279
| I think the apples and oranges are the difference between U.S. and Canada. With the wording of that Federal Canadian fisheries act, it seems to give very broad powers at the Federal level. I think NO8 is correct for the U.S., as pretty much all non-migratory laws are at the state level, which is a huge difference. Plus, even on the state level, I don't think there is any legislation that mirrors the broad powers of that Canadian Act. Basically, Canada has legislation that specifically says they do not require scientific proof or data. We don't have anything close to that, that I am aware of. |
|
| |
|
| TCESOX - 9/3/2024 5:28 PM
I think the apples and oranges are the difference between U.S. and Canada. With the wording of that Federal Canadian fisheries act, it seems to give very broad powers at the Federal level. I think NO8 is correct for the U.S., as pretty much all non-migratory laws are at the state level, which is a huge difference. Plus, even on the state level, I don't think there is any legislation that mirrors the broad powers of that Canadian Act. Basically, Canada has legislation that specifically says they do not require scientific proof or data. We don't have anything close to that, that I am aware of.
In the U.S. there can be emergency regulations but anything long term requires data, and at the state level public input is often required. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 571
| Heard it said on this podcast, https://backlashpodcast.podbean.com/ that Chase Gibson took live scope off his boat. Glad to hear it. Some consider him as one of the pioneers for FFS and maybe now he is rejecting this technology. |
|
| |
