Why should the buck stop with the taxpayer? Why should the non-fish-consuming taxpayer be so unjustly burdened?

If the state is going to head up this project it ought to be funded directly by the user group that put the stinkin' nets there in the first place!

Every other major resource-extracting industry is held accountable for its environmental footprint. Why isn't the commercial fishing industry that profits from a publicly held resource held to the same standard?

There ought to be a big fat-a$$ annual tax or surcharge levied on every gillnet permit to generously fund a reserve account ear-marked specifically for the retrieval of derelict gear. Charge the active permits twice or three times as much as the the non-active ones, but ALL should be made to pay. Failure to pay would result in forfeiture of the permit... that would help to weed out all the inactive permits. No gear can be deployed for the season until the tax is paid in full.

Now don't accuse me of bringing financial ruin to an active permit holder. The netters could defray these expenses by merely passing them on to the consumer. That way the market price of the fish would reflect the true costs associated with their harvest. Economic forces would eventually bring the industry to a viable equilibrium that would allow a sustainable, efficient and responsible commercial fishery instead of the destructive overcapitalized monster we are cursed with today.

Big John... feel free to bring this idea/concept to the next CCA board of directors meeting.