Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 44 of 44

Thread: UCIDA federal lawsuit

  1. #41
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington
    Posts
    1,163

    Default

    Nerka - Publishing your name attached to your moniker associated with this BB was unfortunate. And it's inconsistent with the rules on this BB. I would not have done that for the reasons you stated.

    But Craig didn't post on this BB. He put it in his own article. That would not be inconsistent with journalistic ethics. Indeed, if he had published your strongly worded comments without identifying the source, his ethics could be called into question. Journalistic ethics are different than scientific ethics. And Craig is not a scientist. He's a journalist.

    The fact remains that you posted your comments on a hotly debated topic that is also subject to a high profile lawsuit that questions State management of some Pacific salmon stocks in Alaska. And they were good comments. They were well supported, strongly worded, and backed by substance. I'm not surprised they were picked up by someone interested in writing about this subject. And I'm not surprised you received some unwanted publicity because of it. Unfortunate, but not all that surprising.

    As I stated earlier, this is a good reminder of the importance of what we write on this BB, especially by those participants who posses a deep understanding of the issues.

  2. #42

    Default

    Nerka I sympathize and understand your point. The bottom line is anything you say can and may be used.

  3. #43
    Member Derby06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    433

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cohoangler View Post
    We can always disagree with the author’s point of view. That’s fair. But a personal attack crosses the line. Craig wrote about a complex issue with differing views and conflicting agendas without stooping to a personal jab at you or anyone else. Ideally, we can do the same on this BB.
    Sorry, but that was a personal.
    I paraphrased to delete his name on this board

    The latter claim touched off retired state fisheries biologist that once managed the Cook Inlet commercial fishery. He was involved in the over-escapement studies. And he has long been eyed suspiciously by Alaska anglers and personal-use dipnetters as an ally of commercial fishermen.
    But some of the claims now being made by UCIDA struck a nerve and he lashed out on an Alaska Outdoors Directory forum where he posts as “Nerka.”

  4. #44
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    4,871

    Default more and more...

    Greed has no boundaries. As you point out, more enemies is exactly what the UCIDA needs about now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arcticwildman View Post
    Whether they address allocation or not, it was a pretty stupid move IMO to bite the hand that fed them for so many years. The Feds could easily defer to the current management system with a few minor tweaks and leave it up to ADF&G to run the show. I doubt very many folks at F&G look on UCIDA in a favorable way at this point which could hurt them down the road.
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •