Dave FFF VP,

It appears CCA's work in Florida is far from complete if gillnets that take 2% in bycatch have been replaced with gillnets that take 98% in bycatch. If CCA is the best thing since sliced bread, I'd like to read that CCA's efforts have resulted in the complete removal of gillnets in Florida, resulting in a 100% elimination of bycatch.

If you're going to post on a sport fishing BB like this and discuss any merits whatever of a gillnet fishery, you would better serve your interest by establishing the social and economic benefits of said gillnet fishery and why another use of those resources IS NOT a higher and better use to society. You see, most of us are not against commercial fishing, and some of us aren't even opposed to gillnetting, provided it is consistent with conservation, with conservation meaning "wise use," where recreational angling is generally recognized as the higher and better use of fish resources due to the greater social and economic benefits derived to society. So if the fish you catch in your gillnet might be taken by recreational fishing, most of us regard that fish as being allocated to a lower social and economic benefit to society overall, even though it may benefit your and your customer chain. If you can establish that your gillnet fishery is indeed the higher and better resource use, you just might find a little sympathy here.

As for your crusade in behalf of Constitutional rights, that is a separate subject, and would be more effectively discussed separately. Otherwise you appear as a fool by apparently aggregating your anti-CCA, pro-gillnet, and Constitutional rights in the same crusade.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.