MLPA

[Silbaugh4liberty]

Originally Posted by Saba Slayer

I just heard this and it seem to fit here...
"Teach your children to value the outdoor experience. Because what they don't value they won't protect and what they won't protect they will lose!

This reminds me of an article I just read today. .......


http://m.naturalnews.com/news/048652...m_tyranny.html

[PapaDave]

MLPA??? What's that?

[bolocop]

Questions:
1. Which one is legal?
A. You catch a fish fair but the current takes you across the line by the time you reel up your fish.

B. You catch a fish in MLPA but peddle/paddle fish across line and reel up in fair territory.

Don't know the answer but I would think one is good ethically and one is good law-wise. Tough to explain to DFG on A if only watching at the end. Tough to explain to DFG on B if watching the entire time.

[YakDout]

[QUOTE=Saba Slayer;219069]I just heard this and it seem to fit here...

"Teach your children to value the outdoor experience. Because what they don't value they won't protect and what they won't protect they will lose!



With this quote by itself, it is unclear to me whether you support the MLPAS or not. Seems the quote could go either way. When you say the word protect do you mean protect our fishing rights? Or protect the fish by implementing MLPAs??

[momo fish]

Dam! .. First post since joining in 2005?

Originally Posted by jerryg

One may argue that MPLAs represent only a small percent of the overall marine environment but there is a lot of truth to the old saying that 90% of the fish live in 10% of the water. It's a fact that 100% of MPLAs exist within that 10% of the water. MPLAs impact the distribution of fishing pressure that once existed. Anglers are left with fewer options the areas that remain open are receiving more angling pressure..As fishing declines in these areas due to increased pressure fishing will be blamed for over fishing the open areas which will fuel the argument that more closures are necessary.. Closures may have very well led to the decline in marine life but we will stand to lose more ground.



Thus far any significant benefit to the fisheries that exist outside of protected zones remains to be proven... Instead of enforcing a conservation initiative that restricts the rights of the people to fish public waters we should be focusing on conservation initiatives that been successfully proven. We need to protect fish when they are most vulnerable (when they are spawning). This has helped improve our WSB and rockfish fisheries. Reduce limits and impose special restrictions for fisheries that are at higher risk. No one wants to see our fish stocks rebound more than recreational anglers. The fishing community should have more say in how our fisheries are managed.

[Zed]

Originally Posted by bolocop

Questions:
1. Which one is legal?
A. You catch a fish fair but the current takes you across the line by the time you reel up your fish.

B. You catch a fish in MLPA but peddle/paddle fish across line and reel up in fair territory.

Don't know the answer but I would think one is good ethically and one is good law-wise. Tough to explain to DFG on A if only watching at the end. Tough to explain to DFG on B if watching the entire time.

A is legal until you cross the line then it becomes illegal. B is never legal.

[cabojohn]

I support mlpa too...mostly because the fishing is fantastic and the crowds are usually thin.


I also support IPA's.

[Iceman]

MLPAs were the answer to a problem, just the WRONG answer! Regulate our fishery don't close it!

[Silbaugh4liberty]

https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/20...3/18756161.php

Can't even make this shit up!

http://m.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDay...ad-fish-awards

Conclusion, MLPA is a big f#$@ing money scam in my opinion. When they outlaw fishing, I'll just have to pack on the yak, lol

[Mahigeer]

Originally Posted by Silbaugh4liberty

M.L.P.A= More Liberal Policymaking Assholes.

Not so much so.

You can actually thank Republican governor, Arnold who signed it to law.

[Silbaugh4liberty]

Originally Posted by Mahigeer

Not so much so.

You can actually thank Republican governor, Arnold who signed it to law.

Just because someone is a Republican doesn't mean they're conservative. Most establishment republicans are Liberal as hell.

[LSmoot]

Many great comments above that I agree with, but couldn't agree more with Silbaugh4liberty. Republican does not mean conservative (although democrat definitely means liberal). The MLPA is what happens when bureaucrats try to make themselves useful. I'll leave it at that.

I wish there were a “like” button. Some of these comments are right on.

[Saba Slayer]

Come on...who are you trying to kid?
" Republican does not mean conservative (although democrat definitely means liberal)"

[Nic D]

Originally Posted by Ilikebigbutts

I just wanted an educated responses on MLPA

Let me educate you in English... It's either


I just wanted an educated response on the MLPA's

or

I just wanted educated responses on the MLPA's

[MattRabasco]

English.

[bubblehide]

Originally Posted by MattRabasco

English.

LOL

[Sir LJ]

Originally Posted by Mahigeer

Not so much so.

You can actually thank Republican governor, Arnold who signed it to law.

The republican party would've probably not wanted Arnold to get elected because hes very liberal for a republican. Arnold got elected because he won a RECALL election and a recall election in California is basically a popularity contest.

[Silbaugh4liberty]

Originally Posted by Sir LJ

The republican party would've probably not wanted Arnold to get elected because hes very liberal for a republican. Arnold got elected because he won a RECALL election and a recall election in California is basically a popularity contest.

I wasn't a California resident when that happened. Matter of a fact, I was in Okinawa when that happened.

[Sir LJ]

Originally Posted by Silbaugh4liberty

I wasn't a California resident when that happened. Matter of a fact, I was in Okinawa when that happened.

yea when California was founded they wanted to be super democratic, so when a governor is recalled anybody is allowed to run for office as long as they have enough signatures and pay the fee. There were all kinds of people running at that point, such as porn stars and others that don't come to mind. Probably not one of California's brightest ideas

[Silbaugh4liberty]

Originally Posted by Sir LJ

yea when California was founded they wanted to be super democratic, so when a governor is recalled anybody is allowed to run for office as long as they have enough signatures and pay the fee. There were all kinds of people running out that point such as porn stars and others that don't come to mind. Probably not one of California's brightest ideas

Crazy. At least the last actor California had as governor before Arnold, went on to be President. That'll never happen with Arnold, even if they change the law allowing foreigners to run.

Then again, people could lie and/or hide/manipulate birth records!