LOGIN | REGISTER

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 59
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by nynj View Post
    There is plenty of cod off Cape Cod... In the NE we've had strict fishing regs for years. There's plenty of fish out there. When I was a kid you had to know your sh*t to cath a bass, now any schmuck can catch'em... There's no flounder, but that's because they're the favorite meal for seals... See the cycle. There's more fish than there has been in years, from small to giant.
    maybe you're thinking of it this way
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaps...st_cod_fishery

    In November of 2006, Fisheries and Oceans Canada released an article suggesting that the unexpectedly slow recovery of the cod stock is due to inadequate food supplies, cooling of the North Atlantic, and a poor genetic stock due to the overfishing of larger cod.[15] During the summer of 2011, a study was announced to show that recovery of East Coast cod stocks around Nova Scotia showed promises of recovery, despite earlier thoughts of complete collapse.[16] It was found that initial stages of recovery began around 2005, though more time and studies were needed to study the long-term stability of the stock increase.

    then they added this that I guess you miss on your own investigation.

    In addition in 2010 a study by the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization found that stocks in Grand Banks near Newfoundland & Labrador had recovered by 69% since 2007, though that number only equates to 10% of the original stock.[16]

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    A State of Confusion
    Posts
    1,507
    Forget shooting, use dynamite.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by seldom seen View Post
    Again, I'm aware of the GENERAL physical phenomena that will occurr when a bullet hits water. But I'm never convinced when I hear general statements like "I've seen it done", etc. Who would sit calmly at the bottom of a pool while someone else fires 30 caliber rounds into it? I know I wouldn't. And for the record, I'm not anti gun, I'm a gun owner and was raised around them. The mentality that we should go get the bad shark that ate the human is the same one that allowed wolves(although I hate to compare sharks to wolves b/c sharks clearly prey on us occasionally whereas wolves eat our retarded livestock and pose minimal threat to us) to be pushed to the point of extinction, moutain lions, etc. Sometimes people get attacked by animals, sometimes we die. And who's going to fund these shark lynchings when someone gets it around here? We want the govt. off our asses when it comes to replenishment, ticketing you poor guys in Jersey, protecting us from ourselves essentially, so will we want them to do it?
    There is a difference between seawater and water in a pool. Ocean water is more dense.

  4. #24
    Agree with not killing the animal, even if it did kill a human. It's easy to see how infuriated some people may get, but, to reiterate, we are in their turf when we choose to go out in the ocean and assume responsibility for whatever occurs.

    Using only common sense and cause-effect relation, I've devised a theory. We know that most attacks on humans are due to murky water, mistaken identity, sharks being hungry, etc etc. With that in mind, how many great whites have attacked and killed humans on the east coast? (I realize a guy was bitten by one in Cape Cod last summer, but there's reasonable explanation for that considering a growing seal population.) If these sharks were going hungry, half of us on here would be dead. The Atlantic is still teaming with enough life to keep these sharks fed...We need to keep the fish population in our parts thriving, prevent overfishing, and do our part to keep our oceans as clean as feasibly possible, or we will be in the same boat as New Zealand. Just my $.02. I ain't 'fraid of no sharks!

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Turtle Island
    Posts
    3,658
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by MFitz73 View Post
    There is a difference between seawater and water in a pool. Ocean water is more dense.
    8 ft of seawater then.

  6. #26
    [QUOTE=Koki Barrels;157524I ain't 'fraid of no sharks![/QUOTE]
    I concur. It's blue fish that are the demons of the deep.

  7. #27
    Maybe we should embed magnets in our stringers. This wikipedia article references several peer reviewed papers that show there is some validity to the concept. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_shark_repellent But the jury seems to be split on the usefulness.

    It might not stop 'em all but as long as the other guys don't have them you're good to go. Just paddle in before no one else is left floating.

    I wonder if the magnets would need to be larger for bigger sharks??? I mean a hot pepper is still a hot pepper and burns your mouth whether your a bean pole or if you need to lift your gut to take a pizz.

    Someone could make a small fortune getting soccer moms to buy fins with magnets in them for their kids boards. That plus costco foamies with special shark repelling "Rare Earth Magnets" embedded in the foam. Definitely would be worthy of a RS price tag too $$$$$$$$

  8. #28
    Good info... Guess there is a bit o a cod chortage up there... I was incorrecet sir.
    I fish off Long Island so so my info is more accurate for that area.. I just know that when I've gone on cod trips out of MA it's been great.

    Quote Originally Posted by chicharronne View Post
    maybe you're thinking of it this way
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaps...st_cod_fishery

    In November of 2006, Fisheries and Oceans Canada released an article suggesting that the unexpectedly slow recovery of the cod stock is due to inadequate food supplies, cooling of the North Atlantic, and a poor genetic stock due to the overfishing of larger cod.[15] During the summer of 2011, a study was announced to show that recovery of East Coast cod stocks around Nova Scotia showed promises of recovery, despite earlier thoughts of complete collapse.[16] It was found that initial stages of recovery began around 2005, though more time and studies were needed to study the long-term stability of the stock increase.

    then they added this that I guess you miss on your own investigation.

    In addition in 2010 a study by the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization found that stocks in Grand Banks near Newfoundland & Labrador had recovered by 69% since 2007, though that number only equates to 10% of the original stock.[16]

  9. #29
    Im a fisherman in mass and there is plenty of fish up here. All of the good fishing grounds have been closed for years and are loaded with fish. Laws are so strict up here that there are fish everywhere except for the shoal water off of the cape. The fish wont go in there anymore because the seal population is so out of control.

  10. #30
    just think how many fish would be there if they stopped it until it was 30% of original stock. I know it's about jobs, but what happens when it goes beyond the point of no return? you got to get another job anyway. Like logging. once the timber hasbeen depleted, whatcha gonna do? cut grass I guess.