Coastal Fishing Forums: AllCoast banner
1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,021 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Please remember to vote for Bill Morrow on April 11th. He is running to replace Duke for Congress in California's 50th district. This is an election that will have a very low voter turnout and one that that fisherman and hunters can make a difference in. We must encourage all of our friends to vote on April 11th!
Bill is an avid fisherman and hunter who understands our issues. And he doesn't just talk the talk. He has a 14 year track record serving in the California Assembly and Senate (he is currently serving in the California Senate), and has carried legislation favorable to outdoorsmen time and time again. He also voted against the MLPA and will continue to fight in Congress to make sure we don't lose our rights to fish and hunt. He is in this fight not only because he cares about us, but he has a vested interest in these issues. He wants his son to have the same freedom to fish and hunt that he had when he was growing up!

Bill Morrow is endorsed by the Sportfishing Association of California, the California Rifle and Pistol Association, the California League of Off-Road Voters, the California Off-Road Vehicle Association, the Off-Road Business Association, the San Diego Rifle and Revolver Association and the South Bay Rod and Gun Club.

Please visit Bill's website to learn more about him and see his full list of endorsements at www.billmorrow.com.

Remember to vote for Bill Morrow on April 11th!!!

Dr. Gary B. Myers OD

I am a disabled Viet Nam Vet and he has done a lot for us as well. Here is something from Bill:
As Chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs, I am committed to supporting the interests of the men and women who have sacrificed to defend the lives and liberties of all Americans. That is why I introduced Senate Bill 764 in 2003.
More on Sen Bill Morrow:
http://republican.sen.ca.gov/web/38/
Don
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,160 Posts
Hey YO . . . . . YO read this.

http://www.allcoastsportfishing.com/forum/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=315&topic_id=142306&mode=full&page=

What'sa matta fa you?

What next, VOTE for George W?
I should say not!

John.
Parker 2320 'FloMar'.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,021 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Thanks John;
I put it here and on the main board because we only have a few days until the election and I want everyone to see it.
He is a good man and an avid angler and hunter. We need people like that.
Also he is an advocate for Vets rights. I am a disabled Viet Nam vet and he helped get us big discounts on Calif property taxes.
For more info:
http://republican.sen.ca.gov/web/38/
Don
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,019 Posts
I hope that some of these people advocating blanket endorsements for Republicans because they support fisherman will keep in mind that it's the Republicans in power now that have destroyed our salmon season.

The current administration sided with Big Agribusiness $$$$$ when it came to water issues, so key rivers did not have enough water for successful salmon runs/spawns for several seasons.

Lower water flow, the resulting poor water quality led to bad spawning runs which mean less fish. So now we fisherman are facing a total closer of Salmon fishing.

We didn't cause the problem why are we getting the penalty?

What's the point of Republicans saying they support fishing if they won't support the conditions necessary for spawning? A few more seasons like the last two and there won't be enough salmon to fish.

This issue is not a dam issue, you don't have to destroy all the dams to keep a healthy salmon population, you just have to make sure enough water flows through them during the spawning run.

So far the Republican side is more concerned with allocating water to ADM and other big agribusiness then keeping enough water in the rivers for a healthy spawns, so I ask again:

What's the point of saying they support your right to fish for fish that are not there?

Get your candidate to give me a good answer on that one and maybe he'll get my support.


Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,160 Posts
I have a slight enhancement to your signature picture.
Let me know if you're interested in seeing it.

John.
Parker 2320 'FloMar'.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,019 Posts
>I have a slight enhancement to your signature picture.
>Let me know if you're interested in seeing it.



I don't know....where exactly did you stick that sardine. I just hope we don't have another "Brad and the Mackeral" incident. ;-)


Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,160 Posts
Good memory . .

Man I'll never live that one down!
Neither will my daughter who swapped the photo names as a joke.

I'll never forget when Brad called me on that.
Poor guy opened it with his wife standing there too.

I just added a few words to give YOUR picture more meaning.
No need to stick the sardine somewhere . . !

What do you think?



John.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
I wouldn't vote for a Republican to save my life. A bigger bunch of incompetent, lying hypocrits you won't find. Bush/Rove are directly responsible for the Klamath fish kill and Bush and the Republican controlled Congress have made about a big a mess of all issues, domestic and foreign, as anyone could.

The idea that anyone who stills calls themselves a Republican after this administrations fiasco is enough to lose my vote. They are totally against environmental protections and anyone who thinks that we are going to have healthy fisheries without environmental protection is foolish.

Sheesh!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,172 Posts
I wouldn't recommend a blanket endorsement of anything. Bill Morrow has been 100% on our side of the issues affecting us, including voting against the MLPA's. If there are other issues more important to you than outdoor and environmental and you disagree with him on those, fine. I have fished with him, shot with him,spent Christmas dinner with him, photographed his weddinng, and even hug his mother in law. He is the most straight forward politico I have ever meant. He swore 14 years ago that he would never vote for a tax increase or a budget that had a tax increase. He has only voted three times for a budget since taking office. He is also the one responsible for keeping the aerial tankers stationed in San Diego 12 months a year. The CDF was mothballing them for the winter up north. Bill promised them legislation that would legislatively mandate keeping them here and they capitulated. There was not one word in the papers about it. The only reason I knew was that Bill asked me to check off and on to see if they were still there.Bill gets things done and doesn't go around looking for a camera to announce it.

There are 4 real contenders in this race:

Roach: He is self funding and has no background. No one knows what he believes or stands for because he is a nobody. The only thing we know is what his mailers put together by political consultants say.

The other is Brian Bilbray. He served several terms in Congress in the 90's. He was in a moderate district in San Diego and had to vote with one eye looking over his shoulder and the other towards the next election. He got an F rating with the NRA because we went against them 10 times. He voted the politics of his district, not his convictions. Now he is coming up to the North County and wants to be a born again gun nut. He has spent the past few years lobbying in Washington.

Howard Kaloogian is the third candidate. I have known Howard almost as long as Bill Morrow. When Howard was running for the Assembly I took both of them shooting. Howard cannot handle a big bore revolver. Howard tends to be more of a bomb thrower which is great if you are an activist and need to get people motivated. It didn't serve him well in the Assembly as he couldn't get any legislation through. Being up close in this race, Howard is not running a clean principaled campaign and there are a number of endorsements Howard said he had that he later had to retract.

Bill Morrow is as I said above. He has an A+ raiting with the NRA and has carried legislation for them. 14 years serving in California and there is NOTHING negative to be said about him, unless it is that you don't like conservative viewes. His character and integrity is impeccable. Something we sorely need in Washington.

If you don't agree with my assessment of the candidates please feel free to opine!

dr.Gary
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,515 Posts
I don't know the entire story behind the salmon and low water flows, but from what I've read, bad decisions were made and it shouldn't be repeated IMO. That being said the salmon are on 5 to 7 year cycles and with some tight restrictions on both fishing and water flows the fishery should come back quickly!

That being said, liberal Democrats have supported and funded the groups behind the MLPA's.

Keep voting Democrat, you can buy goldfish at Walmart and put them into the bait tanks of your $100,000 boats and talk about the good old days when you could actually go out and fish while you're sitting in your driveway!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
Here's the story on the salmon kill.

http://www.onrc.org/programs/klamath/coallfactsheet2.html

Read that and then tell me if you think the republicans are good for fishing.

Keep voting for these righties and you deserve to keep getting bent over the table. Hey, I think the Dems stink too but this right wing extremism is ruining this country, and we are going to be stuck with the clean up from this mess (economically and environmentally) for the rest of our lives and our kids lives.

I went to Morrows web site:

Endorsed by David "right wing wacko" Horowitz.
"Pro" life
"No new taxes" (shades of George "read my lips" Bush Sr.)
"effort to take our conservative message straight to the voters"

Sounds like your basic right wing extremist to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,515 Posts
Mike,

When talking about fishing and hunting liberal Democrats are against both of these activities. I'm not arguing that mistakes were made in managaing water flows, it happened, let's fix it and not let it happen again.

I do have a couple of questions though?

If everyone is SO pissed about the salmon counts why are so many folks fishing them, seems to me if the counts are low we might want to pass on fishing them this year to help out, or do sport fisherman have the opinion "I know the population is low but I'm going to kill my share because it's legal"!

Can someone please give me the name of a liberal Democrat in office or who is running for office who publicly supports fishing and hunting?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,309 Posts
I agree with you across the board, Kid.

There was (and still is) a man-made water-flow issue that evolved into the decimation of two consecutive salmon runs. That problem is being learned from and resolved... hopefully. Meanwhile, what remains of these two decimated salmon runs are now mature and can either be allowed to return to rebuild their own stocks. Or they can be further killed off...and replaced with farm-raised.

I think that its more the commercial salmon fishermen (which includes the salmon party boats), rather than the recreational fishermen, who are pushing so hard against this years salmon season closure. The recs can survive financially without them for a year, or probably two, if that's what it takes to help the salmon rebound due to what happened 4-5 years ago by inept management. But the commercials want "theirs" without worrying about the future of the runs.

The arguement of "the politicians caused the deaths of the salmon so why should we have to stop fishing for the few that remain" is about as idiotic as they come.

Those who are most boisterous against the possibility of the season being closed are also the ones who gave us blanket "boat limits" for all species of fish.

IMO the recs are being treated as mindless sheep on this specific temporary closure issue.

HEY GARY. what does Bill have to say PUBLICLY about this issue?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
Kid,

One thing is for sure, the republican administration in it's current form does not give a rat's ass about rec or commercial fishing as is easily demonstrated by their blatant mismanagement of water flows in the Klamath (probably to the benefit of their big bucks buddies in big agri-business). It should be noted that the big fish kill was back in 2002 and Bush still hasn't restored the water levels. Obviously, the fishery is not a big priority for the Rebublicans. Any 'republican' candidate that does not come forward and renounce Bush and his policies is obviously not going to go against Bush so you can therefore expect more of the same. If you want more of the same then go ahead and vote in another republican.

Heck, ol' Duke Cunningham was good, right? Oh yeah, they're having this election because he was a corrupt SOB. Wait, wasn't he a republican? How surprising.

But hey, Cheney's good on "GUN CONTROL" (NOT!)

We need to start looking for and demanding better candidates, no more business as usual or we will just get more of the same.

I love to fish and also believe that Americans have a right to own firearms. I also vote pro-environment because, as we saw at Klamath, when the big money politicians put private profits (i.e. big agri-business) ahead of public commonwealth (i.e. the environment and healthy fisheries) then the fishery will suffer, PERIOD. NO ENVIRONMENT = NO FISH.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
Wils,

I agree with you that the recs (who aren't the problem) are always given the short end of the stick.

As far as how he stands on the Klamath fish kill, who knows.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,515 Posts
>Kid,
>
>One thing is for sure, the republican administration in it's
>current form does not give a rat's ass about rec or commercial
>fishing as is easily demonstrated by their blatant
>mismanagement of water flows in the Klamath (probably to the
>benefit of their big bucks buddies in big agri-business). It
>should be noted that the big fish kill was back in 2002 and
>Bush still hasn't restored the water levels. Obviously, the
>fishery is not a big priority for the Rebublicans. Any
>'republican' candidate that does not come forward and renounce
>Bush and his policies is obviously not going to go against
>Bush so you can therefore expect more of the same. If you
>want more of the same then go ahead and vote in another
>republican.
>
>Heck, ol' Duke Cunningham was good, right? Oh yeah, they're
>having this election because he was a corrupt SOB. Wait,
>wasn't he a republican? How surprising.
>
>But hey, Cheney's good on "GUN CONTROL" (NOT!)
>
>We need to start looking for and demanding better candidates,
>no more business as usual or we will just get more of the
>same.
>
>I love to fish and also believe that Americans have a right to
>own firearms. I also vote pro-environment because, as we saw
>at Klamath, when the big money politicians put private profits
>(i.e. big agri-business) ahead of public commonwealth (i.e.
>the environment and healthy fisheries) then the fishery will
>suffer, PERIOD. NO ENVIRONMENT = NO FISH.

Rift,

You better go read todays L.A. Times page B2 (lower right hand corner for the libs that graduated from the LA Unified School District), in 1992 when the Clinton guy was in office, only 12,000 salmon returned to the river, about 1/3 of what was counted this year, three years later the fish rebounded to 160,000 fish. I guess it was all the hard work that Clinton did, right!

Have you ever heard of cycles?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
Hey Kid,

I thought we were talking about the 2002 Klamath Fish Kill which is well documented. I don't think even the most die-hard Bush apologist would try to argue that Bush/Rove were not directly responsible for the 60-70,000 estimated salmon that suddenly died and washed up on the banks of the Klamath(or whatever huge number it was). I don't call that a "cycle". C'mon!

The point is people like yourself argue that the righties are good for the fishery. I say BS to that because their policies DIRECTLY harm the environment and that obviously (as we saw in Klamath,etc.) is BAD for the fishery.

In your post above you say that we should VOLUNTEER to not fish for salmon since the fishery is in bad shape. Hell, Bush screws it up and now I'm supposed to do my part and not fish. Why do I pay the price? Then you say closures (MLPA) are bad but at the same time you seem to be advocating for us PBers to not fish until this "cycle" comes back around.

I really don't know where you are coming from but if you like what you are getting from the righties go ahead and bend over and get some more poor management of the habitat, fish kills, lying us into Iraq, no Katrina reponse,etc.

But I don't want to hear any complaints for the rest of your life and your kids lives while you are paying to clean up this mess that the right wing is making.

PS- I didn't vote for Clinton but overall he did a WAY better job than Bush. That is not even close.

PPS- To sum up (if we believe your and my generalities) with the Dems you get healthy habitat (enviros) and lots of fish but you can't go fishing but with the Reps the environment is trashed and all the fish are dead but, hey, you can fish all you want. Personally, I'll take the Dems. I want to have something let over for my son to enjoy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,309 Posts
so you acknowledge that there was a massive die-off before the spawn but you want to go ahead and kill off the few that made it. I dont care whether that attitude is right or left; it still means depleted fisheries for the environmentalists to point their collective fingers at when they present their arguement for full closures.
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Top