Home Southwest General Fishing & The Outdoors

FWC to ban jig fishing in BGP

13468969

Replies

  • Jirvin70Jirvin70 Posts: 92 Greenhorn
    If anyone wants to read the complaint PM me and I will send you a .pdf version. It is a garbage lawsuit and it is questionable whether any of the counts succeed in alleging a cause of action.



    LGI wrote: »
    Just found it, filed in Sarasota Circuit Court. Looks like the complaint was 235 pages long and it can not be viewed online.

    I guess STT doing some damage for the PTTS to file suit. I would like to read it, but can't see how the PTTS has a case.

    It will be like the Schnitt v. Bubba suit, a bunch of lawyers billing hours that goes nowhere. I also bet it will help STT raise a bunch of cash.
  • GetnBusyLivnGetnBusyLivn Posts: 50 Greenhorn
    ScottK couldn't catch a ladyfish on the flats let alone a tarpon in the pass.

    Keep trying though.

    You might get lucky with a sail cat or 2.


    Scott keep those sail cats. If we get tired snagging tarpon in the Pass we can go gut hook some up the river like the guys who know what they are doing.
  • GetnBusyLivnGetnBusyLivn Posts: 50 Greenhorn
    It's been about 9 months since I logged onto the FS Forum. Reading this "soap opera" confirms why it's a joke. We have the barely literate "power broker, his current or wanna-be butt buddy, and others who try to engage the idiots.
  • ScottKScottK Posts: 216 Deckhand
    Scott keep those sail cats. If we get tired snagging tarpon in the Pass we can go gut hook some up the river like the guys who know what they are doing.

    Will do Mark. :thumbsup
  • Joey ButtonsJoey Buttons Posts: 11,849 AG
    It's been about 9 months since I logged onto the FS Forum. Reading this "soap opera" confirms why it's a joke. We have the barely literate "power broker, his current or wanna-be butt buddy, and others who try to engage the idiots.


    Saltlife dude
  • GetnBusyLivnGetnBusyLivn Posts: 50 Greenhorn
    Saltlife dude

    LOL ..... you have the sticker or tattoo?
  • LGILGI Posts: 348 Officer
    LOL ..... you have the sticker or tattoo?

    Now who is engaging the idiots.....
  • AlwaysAbuAlwaysAbu Posts: 476 Deckhand
    I read the commentary response from savethetarpon.com website related to this filing. First, I think anyone has a right to boycott or make petition to governing bodies when they feel something is wrong. That is American.

    Something that stands out to me in the response was a quote by the savethetarpon Chairman...

    “They refused to listen to the voices of those whose only goal was to preserve, protect and grow this storied fishery,” McLaughlin said.
    http://savethetarpon.com/ptts-claims-500000-boycott-loss-wants-court-to-silence-save-the-tarpon/

    In another press release introducing Lew hastings as the administrative leader for savethetarpon he is quoted in saying "Save The Tarpon, he says, has been effective at “calling out those who show indifference to ethical methods or those who blatantly abuse the resource. I’m extremely privileged to help Save the Tarpon move forward and grow into an organization that promotes sustainability through education and research. It’s my hope Save The Tarpon becomes a model for other communities facing similar challenges to their resources.”
    http://savethetarpon.com/hastings-takes-the-reigns-at-save-the-tarpon/

    I am not intending to parse quotes but the group is called "save the tarpon" and the 2 main leaders of the group have both clearly stated the mission is to opposing unethical methods, abuse to the resource, and protecting the fishery.

    But if FWC has studies finding the mortality rate is no different jig vs live bait how is opposing jig fishing "protecting" the resource anymore than opposing live bait fishing?

    If FWC has biologists that have stated tarpon are attempting to strike the jig and are often foul hooked because of the way they eat but are not being snagged, how is using a jig unethical method? Until someone can definitely prove it is purely snagging a fish that otherwise was not eating, how can it be deemed unethical? I have caught trout on mirrolures that were tailhooked from smacking the bait, and caught several snook on mirrolures consecutively all in one night all hooked outside of the mouth and in the face which was obviously a consistant way they were all hitting the lure. So it definitely happens with other species not always being hooked in the mouth on artificials.

    Again, I support the right of anyone to voice their opposition to something they disagree with, however, if science offers no basis for the position, and in fact proves otherwise at what point does it become just slanderous or intimidation?

    The other part that troubles me in the quote by Hastings is the part that says "...It’s my hope Save The Tarpon becomes a model for other communities facing similar challenges to their resources.”[/I]
    Tarpon are a migratory fish and the resource does not belong to ANY single community. And if Savethetarpon is only focussed on "saving the tarpon of BGP", I would have to question what they are tuly trying to save...tarpon, or a tradition. Nothing wrong with wanting to preserve a local tradition, but call it saveBGPtradition and not make this a fishery conservation issue.

    I have to hope that FWC will go by the science and any new information that any new studies reveal without political intervention. And once it is conclusive, there is reason to go along with science.
  • LGILGI Posts: 348 Officer
    I have never been a fan of the Save the Tarpon name, for similar reasons. I don't think their main goal is saving the Tarpon, and I'm not even sure there is any proof that any Tarpon need saving. I think what they really want is to save tarpon fishing in Boca Grande Pass. On that I agree for reasons that have been posted a hundred times by myself and others.

    Whatever their goals are they have the right to set up their site and post what they like as long as it is not libelous. They also have the right to call for a boycott of whatever businesses they like. I have not given SST a dime, but this B.S. suit makes me want to cut them a check. I'm guessing I won't be the only person who thinks the same.
  • Joey ButtonsJoey Buttons Posts: 11,849 AG
    LGI wrote: »
    Now who is engaging the idiots.....

    Looks like you are.
  • CalusaCalusa Posts: 11,881 Officer
    One or two jiggers are ok to be around. But get a bunch of jiggers together and they show their true colors ...
  • AlwaysAbuAlwaysAbu Posts: 476 Deckhand
    Looks like you are.

    Only if he responds to your post.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,144 AG
    Looks like the PTTS has upped the ante.

    Sure would love to get a look at the suit.
  • Joey ButtonsJoey Buttons Posts: 11,849 AG
    Tarponator wrote: »
    Looks like the PTTS has upped the ante.

    Sure would love to get a look at the suit.

    Call your buddy Ingman and I am sure he will tell you what it is about.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,144 AG
    Why do you feel the need to lie? He is not my buddy. I have never spoken with or done business with him in my life.

    That said, I'm having the suit sent to me today. I will figure out a way to host and post it....Mike
  • Joey ButtonsJoey Buttons Posts: 11,849 AG
    Tarponator wrote: »
    Why do you feel the need to lie? He is not my buddy. I have never spoken with or done business with him in my life.

    That said, I'm having the suit sent to me today. I will figure out a way to host and post it.

    Lie is strong word.

    I thought you guys were friends the way you defend the PTTS.

    Sorry for the confusion.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,144 AG
    I see you are easily confused. Let me make it crystal clear so even you can understand:

    There's a difference between calling out the bullcrap being used by one side of the argument and "defending" the PTTS.

    I have not and never will support the PTTS. I do not agree with their methods of fish handling. I have been a long-standing critic of them going back many years now.

    However, just because I don't agree with someone doesn't give me license to make crap up. For instance, to infer someone is buddies with another because of my own ignorance, or to suggest jigging is snagging without a shred of hard evidence to support it.

    After all, it's only fair we be truthful in our arguments, and if the shoe were on the other foot I would hope to be afforded the same defense.

    Thou shall not bear false witness, Joey.....Mike
  • CaptainBlyCaptainBly Posts: 2,317 Captain
    Thanks Mike. When you find the cliff notes version, please post that as well...My ex-wife is a lawyer and I won a bunch of lawyer buddies in the divorce but wow...that is a lot of stuff to chew on for a math/science guy....Although the documented statements by STT are interesting when you see them in a list many pages long....

    For me, I am heading down there tonight with a few other misfits that have been posting on here and will hopefully catch a few tarpon tomorrow and Saturday. Tight lines to you...
    In Loving Memory of James Zielske, January 19, 1957-July 5, 2013
  • LGILGI Posts: 348 Officer
    CaptainBly wrote: »
    Thanks Mike. When you find the cliff notes version, please post that as well...My ex-wife is a lawyer and I won a bunch of lawyer buddies in the divorce but wow...that is a lot of stuff to chew on for a math/science guy....Although the documented statements by STT are interesting when you see them in a list many pages long....

    For me, I am heading down there tonight with a few other misfits that have been posting on here and will hopefully catch a few tarpon tomorrow and Saturday. Tight lines to you...

    I am on my way as well...
  • LGILGI Posts: 348 Officer
  • Joey ButtonsJoey Buttons Posts: 11,849 AG
    Hope you guys get on the fish!

    Good luck!
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,144 AG
    You guys get to have all the fun. I'll be writing up a business case tonight and working on the boat this weekend.

    Hope you slay 'em....figuratively speaking, of course....Mike

    p.s. I'll read it in detail tonight or over weekend and try and summarize. My quick skim suggests the PTTS is seeing an emergency injunction using the basis that many in the STT, who run other tournaments and guide businesses, compete with the PTTS and the STT "have published multiple false statements regarding the PTTS with reckless disregard to the truthfulness of the statements in an effort to shut down the PTTS" which has caused the PTTS to suffer damages (e.g. pulled sponsorships). The emergency injunction is to stop the STT from continuing to do so while the base case, "On April 26, 201 3, PTTS filed a Complaint ("Complaint") with attached exhibits. The Complaint seeks injunctive relief against the Defendants for tortious interference in contractual relationships, tortious interference with business relationships, civil conspiracy and defamation." works its way through the courts.

    p.p.s. In short, it appears the PTTS lawyers didn't take any more kindly to "making crap up" than I did. ;)
  • ScottKScottK Posts: 216 Deckhand
    Oh, so now I'm a misfit. This thread has cut me no breaks.

    Thanks for the link Mike, interesting.
  • RobARobA Posts: 55 Deckhand
    The PTTS has very little chance of prevailing on any of the causes of action it has alleged. It will be interesting to see if the Complaint can survive a motion to dismiss. I imagine that the strategy here is not to win the lawsuit, but to drag STT into a costly legal battle and force them into some sort of settlement that requires them to shut up.
  • Joey ButtonsJoey Buttons Posts: 11,849 AG
    I think PTTS will have a hard time winning the case.

    They are butt hurt because the sponsors are dropping.

    I dropped Ingman as the company that services my boat.

    I went with San Carlos Marine and saved about $400 on the last service.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,144 AG
    RobA wrote: »
    The PTTS has very little chance of prevailing on any of the causes of action it has alleged. It will be interesting to see if the Complaint can survive a motion to dismiss. I imagine that the strategy here is not to win the lawsuit, but to drag STT into a costly legal battle and force them into some sort of settlement that requires them to shut up.

    Very interesting observations. I find myself agreeing with you on all counts, but we shall see....

    In the event your last sentence is accurate, I wonder who will end up having the deeper pockets here and how that might affect the results.

    Said a bit differently, will the deep pockets of a local boat distributor and TV show win out over the not-for-profit, or will this incite some to come to the aid of the STT?

    It will be interesting.....
  • capeanglercapeangler Posts: 586 Officer
    Tarponator wrote: »
    Very interesting observations. I find myself agreeing with you on all counts, but we shall see....

    In the event your last sentence is accurate, I wonder who will end up having the deeper pockets here and how that might affect the results.

    Said a bit differently, will the deep pockets of a local boat distributor and TV show win out over the not-for-profit, or will this incite some to come to the aid of the STT?

    It will be interesting.....

    Of the 20,000++ STT supporters (And growing), there are many with deep, if not very deep pockets. I can't say the same for the PTTS; certainly their tournament anglers are all working men & women. The main benefactors at PTTS are obviously the principals, and nobody else. Ingman with the deeper pockets out of the bunch. PTTS does not now, ever, nor will it ever generate the revenue that Gary’s dealership generates. The PTTS indirectly feeds his business through brand and dealership recognition. I imagine all of the bad press has restricted the flow of new sales and service clientele. At the end of the day, Gary and his puppets will have to make a business decision; “How much money do we want to continue to invest in the legal battle, to preserve X revenues us and the PTTS (Really Ingman Marine)”. I’m sure he concluded, any more money than “X” for legal fees, is best appropriated toward more productive and less costly marketing and advertising campaigns for his bread and butter, the dealership. Joe probably spent all his money on weight loss programs, GTL and escorts, and Rodney, well, from what I hear, he’s not flush either. I don’t think you are going to find too many supporters (From what they have left), that will write checks to support their greedy cause.

    The STT on the other hand..……..that’s a different story. It’s very easy to raise capital for a good cause. I don’t see this going too much further. It’s nothing but a Poker Game and PTTS is shortstacked.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,144 AG
    I have no doubt there are some deep pockets on the STT side. There has always been big money behind the BGFGA, and many of the same individuals are presumably involved here.

    The question in my mind is just how much of that money will be given to the STT, and will it arrive fast enough to make a difference....because, and perhaps unlike you, I've seen many "good causes" wither on the vine for lack of support.

    Looking past that, you raise an interesting point -- what happens to the PTTS if Ingram decides to bail.
  • CaptainBlyCaptainBly Posts: 2,317 Captain
    ScottK wrote: »
    Oh, so now I'm a misfit. This thread has cut me no breaks.

    Thanks for the link Mike, interesting.

    You always wanted to be #1 at something....now you are...
    In Loving Memory of James Zielske, January 19, 1957-July 5, 2013
This discussion has been closed.