Take a look at this. Seems like bad news to me.

http://www.stripersforever.org/Home/S006F4899-006F48D5.0/2005%20stock%20status.doc

Been saying this for 3 years , We can Not take take and TAKE..............

Been saying this for 3 years , We can Not take take and TAKE..............


I agree Mr. Habs...

I guess Brad Burns now knows more about stripers than the scientists at the ASMFC?

Striped Bass Stock Assessment Indicates Healthy Stock
Total Abundance, Female Spawning Stock Biomass and Recruitment Remain High


Scientific advice presented to the Commission’s Atlantic Striped Bass Management Board today indicates that striped bass management under Amendment 6 to the Interstate Plan continues to be a success. The resource remains at a high level of abundance at 65.3 million pounds, 10 percent higher than the average stock size for the previous five years. Female spawning stock biomass (SSB) is estimated at 54.8 million pounds and is well above the SSB target and threshold levels of 38.6 and 30.9 million pounds, respectively. Recruitment of young fish (age 1) at 12.7 million is close to the average recruitment observed since the stock was first declared recovered in 1995.





The stock is not overfished and overfishing is not occurring, with 2004 fishing mortality estimated at 0.40, below the Amendment 6 threshold of 0.41. Total catch has risen to 5.2 million fish, a 33 percent increase since implementation of Amendment 6 in 2003. Recreational harvest and discards accounted for 72.5 percent of the total mortality, with the majority of fish harvested by anglers in Virginia, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Maryland and North Carolina. Commercial catch has risen slightly to 1.42 million fish, with Maryland commercial fisheries accounting for half of the harvest.

Based on the advice of the Technical Committee, the Board maintained the states' management programs at status quo. The Technical Committee will continue to monitor the status of the stock and refine stock assessment methodology as necessary. The next peer reviewed stock assessment is scheduled for 2007.

Copies of the stock assessment will be available on the Commission website (www.asmfc.org under Breaking News) by mid-November. For more information, please contact Lydia Munger, Fisheries Management Plan Coordinator, at (202)289-6400 or <lmunger@asmfc.org>.

i the the question is if if striper stocks are healthy then were are the fish?nobody i know seems to be able to find them on a consistant basis, recs as well as commercial. are there that many fish that we as fishermen never see.but than maybe the people i know just don't know how to fish.

Mako Mike,

The question is: did the ASMFC change the method this year to predict population as Burns cites and if they used last years method would the mortality be deemed "overfished"?

This comment kills me...he has got to go:
Paul Diodati of MA suggested that since the stocks appeared to be healthy, that maybe the stocks could be fished harder than originally thought, and that the overfishing threshold could therefore be raised.

Sandy,
No question they changed some of the variable that go into the VPA, but that begs the question which is, which methodology is a better estimate of the population. The technical committees of the ASMFC don't have any political axe to grind, so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt, and say that they thought the changes would produce a better estimate. The peer review will ultimately tell the tale, but even if it supports the TC I don't expect Burns to get down off his soapbox.

If the over fishing threshold remained .41 and they tweaked the model and it now comes in at .40 where the previous model would predict .6 or more it begs to ask what is the error of the prediction. (All scientific measurements and predictions should have a formal error analysis. Results should some % confidence band.)

Moreover, if that is really the case (they change the model as Burns cites) That implies that in past several years that we have been way over fishing and it appears to me they the formula was conveniently tweaked to meet the sub .41 limit. It does smell a little fishy...

i the the question is if if striper stocks are healthy then were are the fish?nobody i know seems to be able to find them on a consistant basis, recs as well as commercial. are there that many fish that we as fishermen never see.but than maybe the people i know just don't know how to fish.

While I tend to believe that ASMFC changed its methods to do as Sandman stated - make it "appear" that things are OK when they are really not, I lack a sound factual basis upon which to conclude this.

However, I agree 1000% with John (and Hab's) that from a fisherman's point of view and from the point of view of most of the guys I talk to on occasion things out there in the surf are not as consistent as they should be. This alone leads me to believe there is a problem.

I guess Brad Burns now knows more about stripers than the scientists at the ASMFC?

Striped Bass Stock Assessment Indicates Healthy Stock
Total Abundance, Female Spawning Stock Biomass and Recruitment Remain High


I agree I would lean towards a sceintist, Not the radicals.....

Just based on anecdotal evidence... I grew up vacationing in a little community of cottages on the upper Chesapeake. In the ninety's (starting maybe around 1992) a competition started for biggest fish of the year for people in the cottages. Not alot of big fish in that area of the bay in particular, so 33-34 inches usually won. However, there would be tons of fish in the 24-30" range caught from september until late november. I believe the competition has stopped as the last few years there have been so few fish and the ones they have caught are small (18" is a keeper). Add in phisteria, the bunker problem, water quality issues and the fact that mortality is either 0.4 or 0.6 :behead: .

Coastwide 1 fish 24-28" or bust (xcept for Chesapeake and Hudson as they are a bit different).

Simple Fix: Stop looking at bass management as an us -v- them mentality and spread the conservation, slash commercial and recreational takes by 33%, ban netting in known bass transit times/areas (ie Greast South Channel NOW!!!), implement a slot limit, establish 10 year moratoriums of any commercial take of herring / menhaden / mackeral within three miles of coastline. Problem will be fixed in no time, well, 10 years anyway...

Not so simple fix: Everything we do these days...

Well said John! All factors have to be weighed to establish what a sustainable fishery should/will be- not just a simple head count. I also agree with everyone that bases their concern on 'feet in the water' observation- something seems amiss, the gamefish and bait seemed kinda scattered this year (when I could get out).

a simple solution MAKE STRIPED BASS A GAMEFISH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

a simple solution MAKE STRIPED BASS A GAMEFISH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And this will do nothing to fix the problem. All it does is reallocate the problem. IF, IF you were to reduce pressure on the fish as a GAMEFISH you might actually have MORE fish to feed without enough forage. Im not trying to yell but to impress the importance of not counting noses of bass. It's not how many bass there are but how many bass in what age classess and how the hell are you gonna feed them as well as every other fish in the food chain - FORAGE FISH is the most important problem AND the most important item that needs to be addressed... As for allocation? I'm for both sectors losing a third...

Sandy,
All I can say is that the scientist doing the work do not have any agenda. They could care less what the results are, its up to the management board and the entire ASMFC to deal with their findings. Brad Burns OTOH does have an agenda. So i'm much more likely to believe the scientists. which one of us is right will be proved by the findings of the peer review, I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

wow all this and the striped bass is fine............... More out there than ever

OH NO JESUS MAKE STRIPED BASS A GAME FISH!!! WHY DO ANYTHING THATs COMMON SENSE!!!!.stoping comercial fishing would be one less factor for the fisheries mangers to be influened from outside sources with a agenda!!. before the white man came to the new world there was only fishing by natives seems like the fish had pleanty food with next to no fishing for them.

Stripers Forever tricked me into signing up at a fishing show
and said it was free, then tried to sell this and that to me.
I just asked them to be removed from there email list because
I was tired of reading there crap. I think they are 99% bullcrap
and 1% fact. don't believe everything some group tells you. I
also think that Brad Burns has a private agenda and it has to do
something with his fly fishing

I don't pretend to know the scientifics of this species. I do think that a major problem is the bait fish. I saw tons of sand eels this year but not many large bunker or even squid. However the bass still had fish to eat.

Since we have a bunch of guys here who fish fairly reguarly.

From a personal observation stand point would you say you caught more than normal this year? or less? small fish? large fish?

I would have to say I caught more fish this year than last year. I caught more consistantly and larger fish too. In my personal experience I thought things were looking up

Stripers Forever tricked me into signing up at a fishing show
and said it was free, then tried to sell this and that to me.
I just asked them to be removed from there email list because
I was tired of reading there crap. I think they are 99% bullcrap
and 1% fact. don't believe everything some group tells you. I
also think that Brad Burns has a private agenda and it has to do
something with his fly fishing
well said ! Bravo :btu: :btu:

Been saying this for 3 years , We can Not take take and TAKE..............
Ya got that right, aint nothing for free. If we're gonna manage the "herd", then let's manage it like we wanna keep it large and healthy.

they should also manage gamefish and forage as a whole this means restricting menhaden,mackerel and squid fishing

Sorry-

I just can't believe that things like:

- the decimation of the population in the Chesapeake with tiny size limits,

- the decimation of the big wintering bass off North Carolina,

- the huge bycatch & kills reported floating dead offshore from all the draggers (especially the recent reports) that happens WAY more than we think,

- the annual increases in commercial quotas because they tell us things are "better",

- the slow increases in the recreational size & number limits from 1 at 36" just a few years back to now 2 at 28",

- decimation of main bait sources,

- etc., etc.


are not putting a really big and damaging dent in Striper stocks.

Again like Habs said, can't just keep taking & taking & taking from all over.

There is DEFINITELY a problem.

i was unable to down load the article , but i caught more fish this year then any 3 years put together , not large but tons of fish 22-32 inches some days i would only fish for an hour or two because i caught so many fish . almost all on single hook barbless lures , fish kept this year none

I fully agree that there is too much take happening on the biomass. The amount of "take" is not a comm or rec problem, it is the total impact on the fish. But making stripers a gamefish for recs will not solve the problem. I say cut everything back by a third BUT you will now need to feed these fish too. I feel that SF's efforts, while probably well intentioned, are misdirected and don't tackle the whole of the problem.

I am not a commercial fisherman or a comm bass guy. I don't have a dog in the comm fight. However, the ongoing comm -v- rec debate dilutes the focus on mananging the inshore ecosystem / food chain as a whole. IMO - SF dilutes the overall focus or at least misdirects the effect that they could have on the management process...

I am not any sort of pro-commercial guy, but I get really annoyed how often I hear someone excuse the 2 guys they saw with 7 huge stripers because "it is the commercial guys that wipe em out." Rec's take most of the fish dangit :rocketem: 70 some percent by the rec's is good with me -- but we allgotta take less overall.

Wanted to comment on evaluation of ecosystem health as opposed to species focus- I think practically every scientist would agree that it is the only way to effectively manage aquatic resources. But I don't think its going to happen very fast if ever. Start talking about mpa's, try to limit companies like Omega protein and the other fisheries conglomerates and the politics completely over-rules the science. Even try to get the rec community to agree on how many stripers we should be allowed to keep or the status of the population is immpossible. You get some who rarely or never keep a fish and others who keep their limit each time they get it and would take 10 fish if allowed. I beleive overall the latter group is much bigger than some might think.

Zimmy - I hope eco system based management is possible and soon and I hold a little higher hope. Unfotunately, on some issues like MPAs, often the directive, even among scientists and pro env groups, is political. Shutting down permanently vast areas in the name of science is far different than doing it scientifically or to support a need or goal. If an area needs to be shut down to a certain gear type - do it. If it needs to be shut down to all, OK provided that there are reasonable, pre-defined triggers to open it up.... Ooops - sidetracking...

I agree - recs take most of the fish and all groups can reduce their take.

As for the size - probably is a lot bigger than we think and probably more offshore than we think but if we are always focusing inshore we are likely losely consistant with the data on a year to year basis...

I see the bird watchers are out again. :yak :yak:

All I can catch is little ones.