New proposed tuna regulations for 2007 will allow each vessel to take3 bluefin tuna per day. One fish can between 27" and 47", then the other two must both be over 47".

Is this an indication that the feds thinks the species biomass is healthy? This is an increase from last year.

Thoughts? Comments?

wow seems like a lot , everything i read and see on tv says stocks are at there lowest and dropping ?:huh:

good ....hope they come back.... one sm fish per day is plenty..

Those rules sound good to me, 1 fish is plenty, mmmm :drool: tuna steaks :drool:

Any word if the dates will be longer than a month? Wasn't last years window late august to late sept ? ..

The reason the recreational bluefin retention limits were so tight last year is a result of how the mortality on these small fish is assessed at the international level. The U.S. must keep its level of harvest on the smaller fish at or below a certain level over a 4 year time-period. Last year was the 4th, thus the books had to be balanced. Where 2007 is the first year in a cycle the limits don't need to be quite as restrictive. As far as the health, the last few years have been the worst on record in the commercial fleet, as far as landings go. Hugh concerns in regards to the stock here domestically, but at the international level it is a different story.

could the records be skewed becasue fuel was $3 a gallon and less folks were making the run to fish em?

Unfortunetly, I still think the mortality on those SBFT's caught on light tackle is higher than people think!

I'll go 'all in' saying, There is alot more fishing than catching, and I really don't think rod and reel put much of a dent.

You see a pod of fish, how many fish are under the few breaking 20 - 50 - 100's and maybe 1 or 2 boats will hook up out of all the visuals made.

I'll go 'all in' saying, There is alot more fishing than catching, and I really don't think rod and reel put much of a dent.

You see a pod of fish, how many fish are under the few breaking 20 - 50 - 100's and maybe 1 or 2 boats will hook up out of all the visuals made.

The only fishing on less than giant bulefin tuna is by rod and reel. So all of the fishing mortality is by Rod anbd reel, so whatever "dent" is put on the fihs, it is all as a result of R&R fishing.

The only fishing on less than giant bulefin tuna is by rod and reel. So all of the fishing mortality is by Rod anbd reel, so whatever "dent" is put on the fihs, it is all as a result of R&R fishing.


interesting view. I hadn't thought of it that way. Maybe us SBers should ban together and only take 1 fish per day even though we would be allowed more. If we do decide to do this we should let it be known what we are doing so others will follow.


oh ya, and you don't have to worry about me, I can't catch anything.

Other than charter boats, I don't believe the average Joe fishermen is keeping their daily allotment on a regular basis. The amount of money being spent on 'not catching' these fish is unbelievable.

The only fishing on less than giant bulefin tuna is by rod and reel. So all of the fishing mortality is by Rod anbd reel, so whatever "dent" is put on the fihs, it is all as a result of R&R fishing.


That is a pathetic way of looking at the fishery and is very skewed. Especially since most of the small fish damage is done overseas. The USA R&R small BFT fishery damage is next to nil compared to comm fisheries any place in the world and you know it. I know you have seen photos of those tiny (almost bonito size) BTF caught overseas for comm reasons.

The problem with the tuna is it swims all around the world and we have little to no control over what other countries really do. IMO we will never stop them from fishing until there are no more fish for them to kill. For anyone to say its the weekend fishermen in New England (who probably gets out a few trips each year) and is doing all the fishery damage...is a an outright distortion IMO.

I hope that is the new reg. I wrote them a letter last season telling them their approach last year was too complicated with seasons regions and fish limits. A consistent size and bad limit throughout the year is the way to go.

im pretty sure there was a huge article in last months national geographic on this topic which does site overseas fishing guys as a big cause of the problem.

Im also under the impression us new englanders are a miniscule (sp?) part of the problem. Last years tuna bite seemed to last 3 maybe 4 weeks from what people were posting, the rest of the year was 1 here and there, and from what i saw the one time i did go out was a frickin parking lot, with only 2 reports of hook ups... (us being one) :)

Thanks ronnie ;)

US regulations on tuna don't even make a difference if they're not coordinated with all of the other countries that stake a claim on these highly migratory fish. It's like being the one person out of ten thousand who rides their bike to work instead of taking the Suburban. It doesn't really matter unless we all work together. We just have to wait for the Mediterranean tuna fisheries to entirely collapse and for there to be no commercial fleet to confound conservation measures; then, when there are barely any fish left, some decent regulations will surface.

That's also pretty pathetic.

Lets first be honest, The GBFT fishery is dead on the east coast. Let me say it again it is DEAD. Without a consistent supply of bait i.e. herring due to over fishing for them by the trawlers they wont be caught in huge numbers like before. Secondly until the population of tuna and the ocean is looked at as ONE ecosystem and one cohesive population to protect, the fish (tuna) will continue to be raped by other countries who either dont have stringent rules or who dont care because of the financial windfall they might reap by over harvesting these fish. Look what goes on over in the Mediterranean. The farming and killing of juveniles and the spawning sized fish is horrible and irresponsible. Penning fish to fatten them up and then sell for big $$$ leads itself to overfishing and should be outlawed.
The fishery has changed due to the above reasons and other factors but tuna fishing is now a RECREATIONAL game and one we should be careful on how we manage this resource. Personally I think the regs are NOT conducive to sustaining a healthy population. Why wouldn't we want a strong year class to develop to 47" which is considered by the experts sexually mature and reproduce? I wish the regs were 50" and one per day. 27" is nuts. How much meat is that 27" fish really going to yield? I understand that only 5% of all the boats catch and that the recs dont really have much if any of an impact on the population but are the regs shortsighted? I hope not. My greatest wish for these fish is to be able to see the giants return in the numbers of a decade ago or even more and ensure that my daughter will be able to fish for these fish when she is old enough.

To my knowledge there is no science that states a 47" BFT in the Western Atlantic is sexually mature. Some relatively recent papers are even suggesting upper 90's. Maybe in the med, but not on our side of the pond, i.e., spawned in the Gulf of Mexico. It is also common that if a stock is stressed enough the averages age at maturity can be decrease.

SM,
There is new findings that at 47" they are sexually mature and also that the "old" belief of two distinct groups of bft might actually be one and the same. There is evidence of "mixing" as some scientists call it. Some tagged fish from our waters have been recaught over there in the Meditteranean. National Geographic sheds some light on the increasing issue at hand.

KR,
Could you share where you are getting the size at maturity information/findings?

I understand the two stock theory, and lets just note that it is just a theory, and with the deployment of pop-up satellite tags the level of mixing in far greater than previous estimated. I am also aware that the studies in otolith microconstituent analysis that can used to determine geography of spawning, ether Med or GOM are making great strides in shedding some light on the stock theory.

Also, the National Geographic article in primarily focus on the Eastern Atlantic Stock (The med), and does not get into the same level of detail for the West. Great article, just comes up shy of who the forces are behind the effort being deployed there.

A lot of that information can be found at the UNH tuna lab where I tag juveniles for them. Also any information given to the public that will help the tuna and their sustainablity (NG article) is a good thing. The fishery for juveniles has always been around but who wanted to fish for them when you could target giants and make some $$$$$$. In the 80's and 90's you would see pod after pod of sbfts all over the place in much greater quantities than present day.

Perhaps I missed one of Molly's papers, or miss interpreted some of her findings. Do you happen to know the specifc paper that eludes to the 47"? Thanks.

I agree with you that any/all attention that is shed on this issue is essential to the general public. A few 'Plant Earth' type documentarys, been a while since any were dedicated to BFT, would be a great follow-up to the NG article.

I will find the info for you. Nuno I believe had some input on that if memory serves me right. Molly I thought was putting pop up tags on the giants with Cookie Murray instead of focusing on the babies. In either case the more the info the better the situation is for the fishery. Mismanagement has led to the collapse of other fisheries and that everyone will agree on. Let the small grow up and let the largest of the fish breed because once the large are removed from the population the life cycle pyramid erodes on all sides. If the little ones are removed the process is just advanced that much quicker.

Whoever decided it's okay to have a "keeper" Bluefin smaller than a "keeper" Bass, really needs to step back and rethink the process.