Legislation this week would allow commercial trade perch for walleye permits in Saginaw Bay

Discussion in 'Saginaw Bay and its Tributaries' started by mrbreeze, Nov 30, 2020.

  1. mrbreeze

    mrbreeze

    Messages:
    606
    Likes Received:
    650
    A proposed amendment this week proposed by Senator McBroom in the Senate Natural Resources Committee will move walleye to the allowable commercial netting list, and provide an opportunity for existing Saginaw Bay walleye netters to exchange perch netting licenses for new walleye netting licenses. The amendments to bills 4567, 4568 and 4569 will be discussed in Senate committee on Wednesday. If passed, they will then be introduced to the Senate for approval.
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2020
  2. Trophy Specialist

    Trophy Specialist Banned

    Messages:
    10,812
    Likes Received:
    8,667
    Location:
    Arenac County

  3. Bay BornNRaised

    Bay BornNRaised Banned

    Messages:
    5,180
    Likes Received:
    8,700
    Location:
    Bay City
    A whopping 4 sentence paragraph UNDER PERCH. As it says NOTHING SIGNIFICANT. Unbelievable
     
  4. Trophy Specialist

    Trophy Specialist Banned

    Messages:
    10,812
    Likes Received:
    8,667
    Location:
    Arenac County
    McCbroom is a total tool. His family owns the farm where more crop damage deer were shot than anywhere else in the U.P. the same farm where one CWD deer was mysteriously found, the only one in the U.P. He managed to block DNA testing on that deer so it was likely a plant from Wisconsin. He is pushing for the decimation of the deer herd in that area now. No surprise that the netters bought this corrupt, Jack wagon.
     
  5. mrbreeze

    mrbreeze

    Messages:
    606
    Likes Received:
    650
    The amendments are a mess to read because of the strike-throughs and references back to the original bills. I do see that the "pay to play" provision is included, which includes a "payment" to the state of up to 10% of the market value of commercial fish kept. For example, if walleye were allowed to be caught commercially, the netter has to pay 10% of the market value of the catch to the DNR. I can see a lot of problems with a deal like this.
     
  6. Bay BornNRaised

    Bay BornNRaised Banned

    Messages:
    5,180
    Likes Received:
    8,700
    Location:
    Bay City
    Numbers caught, amount of $ made off per species have and NEVER Will add up. I forsee lots of extra problems bought to happen.
     
    garyb likes this.
  7. Bay BornNRaised

    Bay BornNRaised Banned

    Messages:
    5,180
    Likes Received:
    8,700
    Location:
    Bay City
    Thanks Mike, for saying it nicely.
     
    Horseshoe likes this.
  8. CrawlerHarness

    CrawlerHarness

    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    1,092
    Location:
    Chicago
    I appreciate the summary and the linked "proposed" amendments.

    Is there someone that can help us take it a step further? Perhaps a summary on where we are at with a Sportsman response? Is there a petition being circulated opposed to them? Should we organize emails to the politicians with our strong opposition? Should we be negotiating/countering with eliminating all commercial fishing in the Saginaw Bay?

    I have to read some of the other previous thread(s) to see where we are at.
     
    garyb likes this.
  9. Trophy Specialist

    Trophy Specialist Banned

    Messages:
    10,812
    Likes Received:
    8,667
    Location:
    Arenac County
    I'm just sick and tired of that two faced hack claiming to support us while knifing sportsmen in the back at the same time. Mcbroom is an embarisment to the Republican party which I vote for more times than not.
     
  10. Bay BornNRaised

    Bay BornNRaised Banned

    Messages:
    5,180
    Likes Received:
    8,700
    Location:
    Bay City
    You dont have to explain or justify your frustration to me. Fully understand. I am on board and Beyond trying to stay civil. In All honesty IMO its not really any political(both sides pay eachother off)disgrace its more of a Morel Duty to us and our resources kind of thing that GREED continues to pay others to look away/play along. Things will become very interesting come next soft water season.
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2020
    PerchPatrol, Butch-eye, TK81 and 2 others like this.
  11. TheCrawdad

    TheCrawdad Premium Member

    Messages:
    2,619
    Likes Received:
    3,342
    Location:
    Clio
    Trade perch for walleye? They haven't let up on the perch even when the population dropped significantly. It's pretty obvious that $ speaks louder than conservation. Why can't they see that ruining the sport fishery could cost the economy billions?
     
    d_rek, "Big Tuna" and Bay BornNRaised like this.
  12. garyb

    garyb

    Messages:
    491
    Likes Received:
    278
    Location:
    fowlerville
    they keep electing him ,i think the sportsmen just don't have enough leverage on these issues as we should.
     
  13. Bay BornNRaised

    Bay BornNRaised Banned

    Messages:
    5,180
    Likes Received:
    8,700
    Location:
    Bay City
    Very obvious! Thing is most are not grasping is they lowered the limits on rec anglers, never lowered or put in place ANY quotas/limits on netters. Netters cried wolf there is no lomger the perch numbers and say barely worth netting.(finacial wise) LIARS. I can personally put anyone interested in contact with Dana Serifan and another individual that if Dana still got the balls to brag he will admit again that last couple years for PERCH has been his best in years. We are only to blame for being Fooled by these Fools.
     
  14. garyb

    garyb

    Messages:
    491
    Likes Received:
    278
    Location:
    fowlerville
    i don't get it sometimes, we the sportsmen put more money in the state revenue than all the commercial fisherman do ever thought about we are the backbone of the dnr . you would think they would treat us with a little dignity instead of a bunch of fools , this has to change .