With all the discussion about the CCA, I have a question about the CCA's success in the south. I know they were successful in creating a good fishery for Reds and other fish in the gulf.

Why were they so successfull? Could it be that they were financed by big oil? If they created a sustainable fishery in the gulf, the oil industry could then show that their drilling had no impact on the fishery, and they could drill more. I may be way out there, but the more I think about this and read all the threads, trying to educate myself, this theory (question) keeps coming up in my head.

I would like factual information to get myself and other educated on the CCA.

I was searching Google, and found a video on youtube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6THD4oySILU

which then led me to the following website.

http://fishingforfreedom.net/The-CCA-Redfish-Their-Symbol-Exposed

http://fishingforfreedom.net/CCA-Helps-R...dustry-s-Throat

Pretty interesting, I don't know much about the fishing for freedom site or the people behing it, but they seem to be pretty politically active for the recreational fisherman.

If you take the time to look around the web sites a bit, the commercial hand in it is very obvious.........sorry looks like you are in left field with this one..........When have commercials ever looked out for sport fishermen......

I too thought the video was poorly produced and the pitch they were trying to make really seemed like they were grasping at straws in desperation.

Big Oil = CCA is a pretty big stretch.

Do they expect us to believe BIg Oil funded all of the CCA efforts along the eastern seaboard as well?

Gee, if Id known that, I would not have sold my oil stock. Guess I dont have anyone to call now. Boo hoo.


There are 53,000 members in Texas. They have no trouble raising money.
Are oil workers allowed to fish on the weekends? Probably should ban oil workers from fishing. Get back to work and drill more oil wells on the weekend to increase the supply and bring down oil prices so it cost me less to drive to the river. Slackers. Where the hell is JR Ewing when you need him.

Yeah, I'm thinking thats why the local "players" are getting pissy. Just like the backwater sheriff when the Feds arrive.

Big oil paying millions as an insurance policy "just in case" of liability. Wow that would make a great movie but I think the shareholders would have a huge problem with it... And the misconceptions continue....

Are you a shareholder of Big Oil? Is the chip on your shoulder about Big Oil or CCA?

They seemed to be a little far out there, and slanted way to the commercial side of things. Thanks, aunty I will read the links you provided.

LB, read my post again if it still does not make any sense then read it again.

I have a real problem with the misconceptions that people continue to expound about CCA. If CCA were to get any money from big oil it would not exonerate them from any liability of just in case....

i just asked a question for a little clarification. I read just fine.
If you have a problem with cca, I suggest that you take it up with the board or the E.D. Most members havent been to the board meetings or served on committees and they get information on a quarterly basis in a newletter that is 12 pages long and six of that is advertising. They frown on detailed discussions simply because they like to win. loose lips cost more money and its an invitation to losing a battle. Youve been around long enough to have read the usual suspects line of questions. They're always fishing for more info.

Since you haven't given us an explanation about what misconception, you think we collectively have, I cant comment. As to the assumed protection earned by a donation to CCA, I would say, that most people would have to be on drugs for several days to come up with that connection. CCA is not the department of ecology nor do they offer protection. There is tremendous pressure on oil companies to put their profits to work in the community and develop greener forms of energy. Carbon credits are pretty valuable, if you pollute. Most large companies, including Boeing have a list of companies that qualify for matching donation between the company and its employees. CCA is on Boeings list and probably other lists.

Perhaps companies that donate to cca, consider it a good investment to restore sealife or habitat, that most businesses do not have any expertise. The very same reason Warren Buffet donated Billions of dollars to the Gates foundation. Besides being friends, they have similar humanitarian interests and Buffet likes to spend his money wisely. It wasnt necessary for him to duplicate the efforts of the Gates foundation.

What is this anti-capitalist nonsense?
It's strange how liberals seem to think folks who earn their living in any
industry that they deem evil don't fish,hunt,contribute money and time to
improve habitat and conditions.
If the goal is to get rid of the nets, who cares if some money comes from
industries that the leftists don't like?

LB, the misconceptions I am speaking about are the ones denouncing CCA. As a former east coaster I have supported CCA since its inception here in the Pacific Northwest and have been asked on more than one occasion to be a chapter president, but since I am VERY involved with the Everett PSA chapter and represent my chapter at the state board level I felt that doing one thing well would be best instead of doing several things mediocre.So to re-iterate I am Pro CCA and the misconceptions are with those that continue to paint CCA as the corporate shill or won't cough up $25 bucks while advertising here for their own gain. Which by the way I just took that $25 bucks that I would have spent on some shiny spinners and re-upped with CCA for another year. I will not give money to those that work against me........

Brian, whatever will help the fish and hope they're smart enough to work and leverage the local talent, I mean "backwater sheriff" who knows the crime scene.

Today's lesson- Remember it's easy to send in the check and wait for something to happen, if you do that you will be solely disappointed with the outcome no matter who does the work.

Something,

Next time, lets skip to the final post. We have no arguement.

DH,

Nobody, myself included, would ever argue that it isn't beneficial to check in with local groups that have been fighting for the fish for years to get the "lay of the land".

Nor do I question the value of what the WSC has done, which was landmark in coordinating the public fight for protection of our favorite gamefish. That learning thing, of course, goes both ways. Maybe the WSC can learn a thing or two about how to conduct themselves in the political arena?

Just as the WSC deserved the benefit of the doubt when they were formed (even thought many in the local Fish Politics arena wrote them off as a bunch of elitist flyfishermen ), so too do the CCA. If for no other reason than their abundant successes on the East Coast, Florida, and Texas.

What irritates me the most are those that trash a group publicly before they even have a chance to get established!!! Remember the early debates within the WSC on whether they should oppose or accept the use of bait in fishing for steelhead?? Or what stance they'd take on hatcheries???

I do -and am also aware of those that left en masse when the WSC went in a direction they didn't agree with. It's never easy going thru this process, and it takes time. Just something to keep in mind.

As well, I'm of the opinion (and you know about opinions - they're as many of them as there are posterior orifices) that there are many roles in a good organization. Financial contributors, those who donate their time and skills, and friends lend a voice in times of need should all be valued. Demanding more only alienates those on the fringe instead of drawing them into the process.

Just my .02,

Brian

Brian, No disagreement here,
Aunty thanks for the support.

Lead Bouncer, ease up on the Kool-Aid bro.... Your combative attitude does not shed a very positive light on your CCA affiliation.

It's going to take a lot of working together to accomplish anything that benefits our anadromous fish, and our sportsfishing opportunities in the Northwest. Attacking anyone that even comes close to disagreeing with the group you support is not conducive to co-operation.

As a wise man once said... "Peath out."

Welcome to the Hit List, LD...as a not very wise man once said...

"Yer either wid us, or yer agin us"

Fish on...

Todd

I joined the CCA, quite awhile ago actually. Shelling out the $25 didn't really make me feel entitled to judge anyone that hasn't.... But that's just me.

It does make me hope that other "members" of CCAPNW act like adults when discussing fisheries and conservation issues, or at least like civil persons of whatever age class they happen to occupy. A certain fly/honey reference comes to mind.....

Sometimes it's fun to take the high road.