---

CES, It was unclear to me that you were addressing "extremist" environmentalists in your post as around here the term "tree hugger" is just another derogatory adjective for someone who is pro environment, and it appeared as if you were painting with a broad brush placing the blame on environmentalists in general. So when you opened your post with the words "Stinkin' Tree Huggers" it seemed to merit a potent response. It's clear to me from your reply that you, Tim, and I have similar views on respect and use for the environment, this I could not discern from your first post. My sincere apologies.

There has been talk for many years that the waters off the coast of my state here on the east coast have been overfished, and I have no doubt it's a real possibility that similar legislation will be in the news before long as we usually follow the lead of CA on many issues related to the environment. I'm not for limits for people like us, and I think if you took every member of WC and had them fishing off the coast for a week, our catch would be a mere fraction of what the big guys take in on a average day. Clearly we're not the problem. And I'm not sure the extremist environmentalists are the problem either. It seems to me what's happened is that the issue of large scale overfishing has been known about but left unaddressed for so long that it's reached the point where it's become significantly troubling enough to have given them a leg to stand on in regards to legislative influence. Had it been addressed sooner, efficiently and effectively, the cries of the extremists would be baseless and the need for legislation would be moot.

Anyway, I hope that helps to clarify where I'm coming from.