Sonny.Barile Posted December 3, 2011 Report Share Posted December 3, 2011 Walmart is using a commercial for their prescription drug sales showing an old guy fishing with his grandson. Makes me sick to know that they are donating all that money to anti-fishing groups and eliminating the tackle sections in the stores. They lost me for life. Even if they change their ways I wont go back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark poulson Posted December 3, 2011 Report Share Posted December 3, 2011 Me, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordon Posted December 7, 2011 Report Share Posted December 7, 2011 Strange - they still Sponser FLW?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juice780 Posted December 7, 2011 Report Share Posted December 7, 2011 Yeah I was wondering the same thing if there so anti fishing why are they such a big sponsored of the flw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nova Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 (edited) I know this is not PC correct but...............Isn't Wally World run by the founder's daughter. lol Edited December 8, 2011 by nova Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blazt* Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 . Makes me sick to know that they are donating all that money to anti-fishing groups and eliminating the tackle sections in the stores. Sounds interesting. Are they handing money to PETA or something? Do you have an article or some info you can post? What stores have they pulled tackle from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammy01007 Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 I love fishing like everyone else, but reading an article it looks like Wal-Mart may be sponering the conservation of fish, not simply against fishing. "the Walton Family Foundation announced investments totaling more than $71.8 million awarded to various environmental initiatives in 2010, with over $36 million alone handed over to Marine Conservation grantees including Ocean Conservancy, Conservation International Foundation, Marine Stewardship Council, World Wildlife Fund and Environmental Defense Fund (EDF)." "According to the release, the Walton Family Foundation “focuses on globally important marine areas and works with grantees and other partners to create networks of effectively managed protected areas that conserve key biological features, and ensure the sustainable utilization of marine resources - especially fisheries - in a way that benefits both nature and people.” After decades of over fishing, it is hard NOT to see the decline in local fisheries. I use to fish for Cod off the cost of MA. Listening to the stories of the old timers who have whiteness the decline in large fish first hand should motivate everyone to preserve our fisheries. This is a global problem, from the USA to the Amazon River Basin. If Wal-Mart is against fishing, then I am against Wal-Mart. If they are pushing for the much needed conservation of fishing populations, then there is nothing wrong and I applaud them. I will need to do more research to determine my exact stance, but from this quick search, I can't say I am totally against what they are doing. http://www.tradeonlytoday.com/home/515815-recreational-fishing-alliance-organizes-wal-mart-boycott http://www.fishska.com/2011/reform_article/wal-mart_gives_36_million_to_anti-fishing_groups/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayburnGuy Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 The bad thing about these so called conservation areas is that they end up being banned to recreational as well as commercial fishermen. Some of these groups operate under the guise of conservation when what they truly want is a ban on all fishing and hunting. Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonny.Barile Posted December 9, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 (edited) Here are a few of the things I read... http://bassjunkiesfi...on-to-anti.html http://nlpc.org/stor...dom-don’t-mix http://njsaltwaterfi...02755;topicseen http://www.lake-link...hing-OrgBoycott! http://forums.florid...-Fishing-Groups Just do a google on Walmart Antifishing You will get a load of stuff. I am done with them. Edited December 9, 2011 by Sonny.Barile Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammy01007 Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 The bad thing about these so called conservation areas is that they end up being banned to recreational as well as commercial fishermen. Some of these groups operate under the guise of conservation when what they truly want is a ban on all fishing and hunting. Ben I understand what you are saying Ben, and it is difficult to create the perfect balance between environmental sustainability and accessibility for economic and recreational demand. Experts (which I definitely am not) will battle both sides, providing numerous facts that support their claims. However, without strict conservation, commercial and recreational fishermen alike will deplete and destroy this natural resource. Unfortunately a lot of sport fishermen, I feel, fail to see the role they play. For example, the weekend fisherman that keeps a couple Stripers that are undersized, or a couple trout over the bag limit (this angers me to no end), to the drag nets that destroy hundreds of Cod fish nests and eggs. Conservation is a need. And although some organizations take it to the extreme, I feel those organizations just balance the equation for those groups who fight for the abolishment of all regulation. The unfortuante thing is America does not have the resources in place to patrol and prosecute current offenders. Therefore, adding additonal laws does not really solve the problem. The first step would be to readily enforce the laws that already exist. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordon Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 It sounds like this got blown out of context if what they are doing is sponsoring conservation projects, as afisherman I am all for conservation. The "Anti" part comes from the talk of closing some areas to all fishing. This was prcaticed with great success in a few reef areas around New Zealand, the then fisheries minister was a bit of a pioneer in this area. Reefs rebounded very quickly to former natural stocks. It is a sad reflection on the state of some of our formerly great fisheries if this now has to be considered. It is also a shame that the recreational angler gets caught up with this. In the UK where I am from, I have witnessed a Charter Skipper force an angler to throw back a 20lb plus cod, becuase he would face a $30,000 fine if caught with it on his boat. We all knew the cod was dead as it had been winched up from the deep, we all watched it as it floated away on the tide. We have had many Cod bans and bans on catching sea bass too. I still don't see why the pleasure angler has to get cought up in this though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark poulson Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 I chimed in with a "me too" too quickly, without reading enough about what was actually going on. I'll take a lot of heat from my fishing friends for saying this, but I think WalMart is being responsible in what they're doing. I grew up in the '50s, in Venice, CA, when the Santa Monica Bay was alive with fish. The bay used to be full of sardines, anchovies, and huge schools of bonita and barricuda, which preyed on the bait fish. I remember when white sea bass were almost trash fish. Then they were overharvested to the point where, without the stocking programs the state instituted, they would have been gone from our waters. Fortunately, both the white sea bass, and the squid they feed on, have made a strong recovery. But commercial fishing, especially with drag nets, and mostly foreign commercial fishing more recently, had decimated our rock fish stocks. It is a shame that, once again, the many have to suffer due to the sins of the few, but closing the sea in coastal areas is the only way to insure the rebound of the fisheries. Quotas and voluntary compliance just haven't worked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diemai Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Looks like over there in the States you're starting to head into the same issues we European anglers are already used to face ! greetz , diemai Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayburnGuy Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 The problem I have with closing areas for fishing, hunting or any outdoor sport is that the way our government works once it is closed it is closed forever. And it's only going to get worse if the U.N. is allowed to get involved in the management of our coast line and waterways. I'm not saying all conservation groups have the same agenda, but there are those out there that will say or do anything to stop all hunting and fishing nation wide. They care nothing about the rights of others. All they want is to have the things they want forced upon all of us. How many of this type of activists actually contribute money to the construction of habitat or to fisheries management that helps with restocking damaged waters due to over fishing or natural disasters? I'm betting the taxes we pay as hunters and fishermen have done more to help the wildlife in this country than any environmental group. Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sambennett Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 We've seen successes here in Illinois where the DNR closed water for a few years before re-opening them. -Sam 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MR KNOW IT ALL KIND OF Posted December 10, 2011 Report Share Posted December 10, 2011 Do what I do. Shop at Target the mom's are hottier their anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
repair Posted December 10, 2011 Report Share Posted December 10, 2011 I live in Boynton Beach, Florida. I don't buy my gear at WalMart for that reason. The place I use to shop use to sell fishing license, they have a sign up at their sporting goods counter for the for the last 8 months that the machine that prints the license is broke, and that department has shrunk to 1/4 of what it was. I have Basspro, Dicks, and Gander Mountain in the area to get my stuff plus lots of Mom & Pop bait and tackle shops to go to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayburnGuy Posted December 10, 2011 Report Share Posted December 10, 2011 Do what I do. Shop at Target the mom's are hottier their anyway. Tater, I can just see you wandering around Target asking all those hot moms if they know where you can find a "Hoochie Mama". Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonny.Barile Posted December 11, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2011 There is alot more to this that would take to long to explain. I have been reading up on fishing polotics in NJ for years. Some of the people behind this "political movement" (and it is a political movement) are key members of anti-fishing and hunting groups such as PITA. They have closed some coastal areas in NJ (my state) for no apparent reason. Thay have expanded some of the existing ones without so much as a peep to the public. These same people were against the artificial reef program here and are dead set against all forms of hunting. ....and like Rayburn said, they dont put their money where there mouth is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim45498 Posted December 11, 2011 Report Share Posted December 11, 2011 In my area, Wal-Mart supports bass fishermen...therefore I support Wal-Mart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayburnGuy Posted December 11, 2011 Report Share Posted December 11, 2011 There is alot more to this that would take to long to explain. I have been reading up on fishing polotics in NJ for years. Some of the people behind this "political movement" (and it is a political movement) are key members of anti-fishing and hunting groups such as PITA. They have closed some coastal areas in NJ (my state) for no apparent reason. Thay have expanded some of the existing ones without so much as a peep to the public. These same people were against the artificial reef program here and are dead set against all forms of hunting. ....and like Rayburn said, they dont put their money where there mouth is. This is exactly the sort of thing I was talking about Sonny. And just because some group has the words conservation or environment in their name doesn't mean they are actually trying to help fish stocks or improve wildlife habitat. To them conservation means only one thing and that's to ban all hunting and fishing. And just because you see or hear about WalMart donating to some conservation or environmental group doesn't mean they're trying to help the wildlife. Sometimes you have to dig a little deeper to get the whole story. A lot of these groups know they can't win a straight up fight where both sides are aware of what the other is doing so they prefer to hide behind these so called eco friendly names so they can accomplish their goals without alerting anyone but the most vigilant. The question has been brought up as to why WalMart would sponsor one of the premier tournament trails and still donate money to people trying to put an end to all hunting and fishing. While I can't answer that question it doesn't surprise me in the least to think they would do this. How many times has one corporation donated money to both sides in an election? They don't care who wins. They just want to have their hooks into whichever side does win. The coast line seems to be where most of the effort is being placed right now, but once they get what they want on the coast do you actually think they will stop there? I personally don't think they will. It's ours to win or lose. I just hope that future generations will still have a place in the outdoors to learn to fish and hunt. Ben 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braided Line Posted December 12, 2011 Report Share Posted December 12, 2011 Their store here carries a lot of fishing stuff. Plus, if they have what you need, you can`t beat the price. I`ll give you this ,some stores are better stocked then others. I think it`s the location more than anything. J s/n. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blazt* Posted December 12, 2011 Report Share Posted December 12, 2011 You know what it sounds like we need in a desperate way? A watchdog group. One that puts good, strong PA ads in fishing and outdoor magazines so that sportsmen will know. Before this thread, I was not aware of this sort of thing. Sooner the better, it sure seems. And if these organizations have usurped by proxy public lands, in a way that is weasily, it seems they should get the same underhanded pitch thrown back at them. And make it a fowl. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark poulson Posted December 12, 2011 Report Share Posted December 12, 2011 The cure for overfishing is to eliminate people. That'd probably cure global warming, too. Sometimes simple answers are the best. At least, I can understand them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blazt* Posted December 12, 2011 Report Share Posted December 12, 2011 A simpler solution might be to eliminate the fish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
