Thank You

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by ifsteve

W

To say that since there is no scientific data, and I will take your word for that since I have no reason to believe otherwise, you are a fool, from a scientific perspective to say that there should be no limit.

Triple tail stocks have thrived very well in Louisiana waters without any limit.

Why is one suddenly a fool for thinking that a policy that has succeeded for decades will continue to succeed?

Where is the scientific data showing that the stocks are threatened if a limit is not imposed?

Is one a fool for suggesting other species do not need a limit? Should we impose a limit on hardheads? Gafftops? Croaker? White trout?

Does every species need an arbitrarily set limit?

Species whose stocks can reasonably be shown to be in likely danger from fishing pressure can and should have limits. Species whose stocks have been healthy for decades with no limit and are likely to continue to be healthy for decades are not in need of arbitrarily imposed limits. Determining the health of a stock (in order to impose a limit) should include a quantitative stock assessment and evaluation of all the available data.