Forget the one good year (2011) spawning class of Chesapeake stripers! :wall:

According to the articles linked below the Chesapeake fishery leaders in Maryland plan to increase the Striper harvest next year by more than a million pounds, a 14 percent jump from 2013.

http://www.capitalgazette.com/sports/other_sports/outdoors-striper-increase-irks-anglers/article_d2e0f131-a3fd-5b41-80a3-73709c57d703.html

OR

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2013-12-10/features/bal-bmg-anglers-object-to-increasing-rockfish-catch-20131210_1_striped-bass-tony-friedrich-rockfish-catch

I understand in Maryland you can take stripers down to 18" depending on the time of year and area of the Chesapeake.

I may be stirring that same pot again. :devil2: This all sounds like short sighted management at best or a greedy grab at the one good spawning year at worst. IMOHO

Do you think Maryland's decision was bad management or just a temporary harvest of a good year. :fishin:

you sir, are exactly correct. Maryland DNR is grabbing fish while they can- and the rest of us can shove it. it is greedy, slimy, underhanded move to bolster their local fsih count and the health of the overall stock can be dammed

Utter bull#^&#^&#^&#^&.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Frack

well it hasn't happened yet
so maybe there 's still a solution :huh:
it would be great if the fishery was that good

When I hear info like this I have to wonder if I'd be better off not giving a #^&#^&#^&#^&.

:wall::mad::mad:

Anybody who killed a large bass in the canal this past year has nothing to complain about. Md is just doing the same as we have been.

The ASMFC has seen the numbers of large fish dropping steadily but has avoided and delayed action to allow continued recreational and commercial harvest of the remaining fish because the large 2011 year class will eventually salvage the situation. Such action has made the slaughter we see at the canal or at Chatham legal and popular.

The 2011 year class is now reaching harvest age for the Chesapeake. This is the size fish they fish for since the larger fish migrate out of there. They want access to those fish just the same as we will want access to the same fish when they are larger.

Killing large bass last year and complaining about MD killing small bass next year under the same legal guidelines has no credibility. They, I'd suspect, are equally disgusted with what we do when the fish get here.

One of these days we will hear on the news of a well intentioned bespectabled angler gone rogue at the canal. It will be a morning in late May with a beautiful sunrise and breaking tide. A disheveled man with no bicycle will emerge from the tracks with an uzi and will introduce himself to jubilant anglers with a shopping cart full of ammo for their consumption.Ala Michael Douglas in the movie Falling Down.Thirty pounders will line the banks and people will attempt to swim for their lives to escape the hero of Morone who has a cape on and the letter N emblazoned on the front.

One of these days we will hear on the news of a well intentioned bespectabled angler gone rogue at the canal. It will be a morning in late May with a beautiful sunrise and breaking tide. A disheveled man with no bicycle will emerge from the tracks with an uzi and will introduce himself to jubilant anglers with a shopping cart full of ammo for their consumption.Ala Michael Douglas in the movie Falling Down.Thirty pounders will line the banks and people will attempt to swim for their lives to escape the hero of Morone who has a cape on and the letter N emblazoned on the front.

While I agree w/George..... that's some funny S*&^!

While I agree w/George..... that's some funny S*&^!

yes humorous, and I agree with George too, but I bet Chris thinks the same way as well.


it's like every man for himself with this crap
the squeaky wheel gets the grease, but really? not always.
it's truly a shame to see what is happening with the population of stripers

Anybody who killed a large bass in the canal this past year has nothing to complain about. Md is just doing the same as we have been.

The ASMFC has seen the numbers of large fish dropping steadily but has avoided and delayed action to allow continued recreational and commercial harvest of the remaining fish because the large 2011 year class will eventually salvage the situation. Such action has made the slaughter we see at the canal or at Chatham legal and popular.

The 2011 year class is now reaching harvest age for the Chesapeake. This is the size fish they fish for since the larger fish migrate out of there. They want access to those fish just the same as we will want access to the same fish when they are larger.

Killing large bass last year and complaining about MD killing small bass next year under the same legal guidelines has no credibility. They, I'd suspect, are equally disgusted with what we do when the fish get here.

Holy crap, we actually agree on something! :rotf2:

Guys are taking a 1 at 32 pledge and then you hear stuff like this

Stock up on blue gill lures :)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

it seems for every conservation minded person there are 100's who think otherwise. 2011 will save the day- blah, blah, blah...I guess I'm greedy that I want to target (and catch) large now and in the immediate future. a lot of us will be old and decrepit when that 2011class is ready, if they don't kill them all first. I forsee a day when i'll be building muskie, rooster, and lmb plugs :(.

One of these days we will hear on the news of a well intentioned bespectabled angler gone rogue at the canal. It will be a morning in late May with a beautiful sunrise and breaking tide. A disheveled man with no bicycle will emerge from the tracks with an uzi and will introduce himself to jubilant anglers with a shopping cart full of ammo for their consumption.Ala Michael Douglas in the movie Falling Down.Thirty pounders will line the banks and people will attempt to swim for their lives to escape the hero of Morone who has a cape on and the letter N emblazoned on the front.

Great post Chris

yes humorous, and I agree with George too, but I bet Chris thinks the same way as well.
it's like every man for himself with this crap
the squeaky wheel gets the grease, but really? not always.
it's truly a shame to see what is happening with the population of stripers

I met a guy out in the bay last year and asked him if he practiced C&R. his response was "why should I? No one else does and anything I put back someone else will catch and kill."

As I said before it's not one group or one state its a coast wide problem that can only be solved by game fish status.

I met a guy out in the bay last year and asked him if he practiced C&R. his response was "why should I? No one else does and anything I put back someone else will catch and kill."

As I said before it's not one group or one state its a coast wide problem that can only be solved by game fish status.

How would "gamefish status" change that mentality?

How would "gamefish status" change that mentality?

Mike, I'm sure it wouldn't with that guy. What it would do is put an end to the slaughter that's taking place at Oregon Inlet.

What??? You don't think the Striper stocks are getting depleted again?

- Gamefish status would take the $ off the fish's head.
- Make it much easier for enforcement to target black markets
- Will educate recs to the benefit of C&R and conservation
- Provide the public with at least some degree of confidence that the fishery managers are serious about conservation
- Together with a steep rec limit it will remove personal greed from fishing (this ..."I have to get mine now before those other guys take my fish" belief has to stop.)
- As for that guy he spoke to on the water who kept everything...it would force to him comply or face steep penalties. Rewards should be given to whistle blowers as well.


It disturbs me that you and other fishery folks don't see the benefits of gamefish status. All you have to do is look down south to see what has happened there. Why is this such a problem for you guys?

Let me ask you a question...How would game fish status hurt the SB population?

-


It disturbs me that you and other fishery folks don't see the benefits of gamefish status. All you have to do is look down south to see what has happened there. Why is this such a problem for you guys?

Let me ask you a question...How would game fish status hurt the SB population?

What are the "benefits"? IMHO it would hurt the management of the species. In case you haven't noticed all of the scientific efforts in this country are directed at the commercially important species, without that science we would be back to faith based fishery management. We probably wouldn't even have gotten the latest stock assessment if there wasn't a commercial value to the fish.

I'll ask you a question. Why haven't you been more proactive in making the fish a "gamefish" in your state? There is currently a bill that would do just that in your legislature, yet I have seen almost no discussion of it here on this board.

99.9% of the time I'm releasing, and I haven't kept a fish over 25lbs in three years, so I definitely have conservation in mind when I'm out there, no questions asked. That being said, is it really the recreational anglers that need to be chastised for keeping fish, regardless of the size? Why would the average angler feel guilty about keeping a trophy fish (or any legal fish for that matter) when they've been given the OK to do so? Although there are some that don't even know the meaning of conservation, each person has a right to keep what the law allows. Feeling that everyone should harbor the belief that's it's wrong to keep bass is like hoping that people will stop driving cars because of global warming. Instead of attacking the little people, maybe focus on the bigger issue-- those who put these regs in place, both recreational and commercial. Do I think it's a good idea to keep a 40-pounder for the hell of it? No. But until the regs change, that's how it's going to be, and people are going to continue to take what they've been given the right to.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

IMHO it would hurt the management of the species. .

That is entire idea!!!! Management has screwed this fishery up twice now IMO. The fact that is even approaching a threshold is very disturbing and the lack of action as we approached it drives me nuts, esp with all the public outcry. We need to get this out of managements hands altogether.


I was pretty active during the first SB meltdown, went to lots of meetings in several states and spoke out passionately at several public meetings. Frankly I have given up with fishery management in the US (and worldwide for that matter) as I figure by the time they fix anything I will be long gone and I would be better off just enjoying what I can from the water and not get my blood pressure any more worked up then it already is. The bottom line is public hearings are nothing more than a part of the mandated management procedure and as long as I have been around they have rarely influenced any policy. Their minds are made up as to what is going to happen loooong before any public meeting.

I try to practice good sportsmanship and conserve whenever I can. I figure if most try to do that we all would be much better off.

All they have to do is protect and grow the population...but all they have proven they have done to date is show they can decimate the population...

So we should just go back to the old days? No size limit, no bag limit? Kill as many as you want at whatever size you want?

One a day in the mid 30 inch range worked before. I assume it'd work again if need be. I personally only keep a few a year. My folks like bass for some odd reason. So many other things from the sea I'd rather eat.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No sale. (gamefish status will do this) and it should also crush the bulk of the black market or at least make it much easier to enforce.

1 @ 36 possession rec limit ( and perhaps some seasonal limit via tags) This will limit rec take but allow the local economy related to fishing to continue

A real serious push to restore forage fish. For example: If the states were serious, herring would be fully restored by now, but they are not...herring only live a few years, yet they can't seem to restore them and several generations have passed since the moratorium. Why? It's because they stopped the rec guy from taking his dip net to the runs but little else. Comm fisherman take more in a by-catch in a day than what recs did all season. These managers have to be either stupid or naive or on the take from comm fishing entities. You tell me which it is. You need to STOP comm fishing for forage fish period, (and rec fishing if necessary) and RESTORE habitat in a meaningful way until forage fish become a problem, then you open it up to commercialization. None of this has happened and probably will not happen. So I have given up on you fishery people. You all are playing in a sandbox and have no idea what you are doing, they have proven this more than once. It feels good to them as they tag what they are doing with a "science" basis but then dilute it with political, public and user group opinion so in the end nothing effective actually happens. Sorry, this is just the way I feel. Fishery departments are not constructive, they are destructive, they need to build up fish stocks across the board. Not just SB.

This all has to happen coast wide not statewide. That is why a US gamefish status would bypass all this state by state crap. Look at how it worked the west coast

Agree.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

1@ 34-45" plus a single trophy tag per year that is over 50".. of course there are hundreds of dirt bags that will not honor the one a year thing, but it would give the super cows a change to breed, so that the smaller fish do not dominate the breeding.. it is proven that if you always kill the big fish, the genetics of smaller fish are allowed to prosper.

Look at how it worked the west coast

yeah look how well it worked, they are trying to extirpate the striped bass on the west coast!

. it is proven that if you always kill the big fish, the genetics of smaller fish are allowed to prosper.

Where is this proven?? So, when a small fish that was born from a big fish spawns, its genetics are not passed on? Or do they change as the fish gets bigger?