Will you continue to Support CCA?

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by southern151

While I agree with you on very few of the things we often debate here, this really does point out the hypocritical ways of some of our governing bodies.

Now, back to more of "Do you support the CCA?"

I don't think I can.

I applaud their efforts to improve habitat by reef development and deployment.

But manipulation of political process by pseudoscience to criminalize honest and reasonable sporting and commercial harvests of abundant and available resources earns my disdain.

This is not 1970 or 1980 any more. Conservation groups should be able to foresee how the misuse of governmental power toward ends which seem quite measured and reasonable at the time can set dangerous precedents for more exhaustive and totalitarian power grabs later on.

I recommend Mark Levin's book "Liberty and Tyranny" for documentation and descriptions on how past conservation efforts lead to current and future power grabs.

[AceArcher]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

I don't think I can.

I applaud their efforts to improve habitat by reef development and deployment.

But manipulation of political process by pseudoscience to criminalize honest and reasonable sporting and commercial harvests of abundant and available resources earns my disdain.

This is not 1970 or 1980 any more. Conservation groups should be able to foresee how the misuse of governmental power toward ends which seem quite measured and reasonable at the time can set dangerous precedents for more exhaustive and totalitarian power grabs later on.

I recommend Mark Levin's book "Liberty and Tyranny" for documentation and descriptions on how past conservation efforts lead to current and future power grabs.

MG the problem with what your stating here remains the same, If we use a flood of anger to defund CCA and nothing is around to "take the reigns" on the good that they do. The net is going to be a huge loss. I think it's very very fair to say that the lobbying work the CCA does to prevent commercial interest's taking hold of gamefish populations like they did 15 years ago, is worth it's weight in gold.

I have always lived a good bit away from the coast so to me it's only a few times a year that i get to come see what the fun really is like in south LA. But i know i have heard many people say that when the Blackened Redfish Craze took over and commercial harvesters kicked it into high gear.... there were some times before CCA started up where redfish became somewhat of a rarity.

(if i am wrong on that someone please correct me) (I lived far away during said time period and only have heard the stories)

Therefore the only viable options are to find some way to get CCA to sing the correct tune.... or to start another organization to do it for them.

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by AceArcher

MG the problem with what your stating here remains the same, If we use a flood of anger to defund CCA and nothing is around to "take the reigns" on the good that they do. The net is going to be a huge loss. I think it's very very fair to say that the lobbying work the CCA does to prevent commercial interest's taking hold of gamefish populations like they did 15 years ago, is worth it's weight in gold.

I have always lived a good bit away from the coast so to me it's only a few times a year that i get to come see what the fun really is like in south LA. But i know i have heard many people say that when the Blackened Redfish Craze took over and commercial harvesters kicked it into high gear.... there were some times before CCA started up where redfish became somewhat of a rarity.

(if i am wrong on that someone please correct me) (I lived far away during said time period and only have heard the stories)

Therefore the only viable options are to find some way to get CCA to sing the correct tune.... or to start another organization to do it for them.

I understand the possible dilemma, but I'm not convinced it's real. Consider some imperfect analogies: I'm a life member of the NRA, but in recent years I've sent more money to GOA and JFPO. However, I think my more enduring contributions to RKBA will be through my individual efforts which include:
1. Voting.
2. Training my children, not just in the shooting sports, but also in teaching them the key critical thinking skills to spot political trickery.
3. Bringing my children to Project Appleseed events.
4. Supporting my brother's efforts to use GI Bill funds (through the VA) to train veterans to be NRA instructors.
5. Debunking the bad science behind computerized ballistic identification systems and mandatory registration of ballistic ids (I was a peer reviewer)
6. Raising awareness (at the grassroots level) that the expansion of governmental power at all levels invites tyranny and endangers liberty.

By analogy, I think that organizations that complement CCA and compete for their funding base may well help keep them honest. But real political power still rests predominantly with the voters, so my proposed plan would focus instead on:
1. Voting
2. Training my children, not just in the angling sports, but in critical thinking skills to spot the political trickery.
3. Bringing my children to events that include a great time fishing but also incorporate fundamental aspects of preserving the heritage of fishing for future generations without trampling on the rights of others in the process.
4. Debunking bad science that is used to manipulate environmental and conservation regulations.
5. Beyond this, I am open to suggestions and discussions.

Why do you think an organized group is essential to success? I think most elected officials really fear what the NRA membership will do at the polls more than they fear what the NRA will say about them.

Is the clout of CCA really how they influence regulatory decisions or the fear politicians have about what anglers (including the CCA membership) will do at the polls?

There is one theory that NRA does not really want the Supreme Court to rule in a final and definitive way on the 2nd amendment, because that would deplete their membership and rob their power. Might it be possible that CCA is more interested in the exercise of political clout than in the conservation principles it espouses?