Meat hunting techniques.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

reminder how many different perceptions of and views regarding the same resource there are as it's battled over how it should be managed....you've been busy...need to get over there before next week for some Christmas shopping...the candy canes are fantastic!

I'm there every day except Sundays. And yes, there are many ways to skin a cat when fishing for bass. It boils down to the definition of angling vs fishing. Or art vs craft , but I digress
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't really see the enjoyment in snapping wire or dragging umbrella rigs.

sorry...couldn't resist :wave:

X2 but that's the traditional charter method . 6 guys casting fly rods gets dangerous 😊
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Wow - been gone for a few days and this thread exploded. Some good discussion here. Based on this I think its VERY important that every one attends or makes there feelings known at upcoming meetings. The following quote sums it up for me and is why I support a one fish bag no matter how the numbers are crunched:
More dead fish equals less fish to catch.... No matter how long a persons response on here
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Maybe I'm giving the RI for hire industry too much credit in thinking they could easily get two fish per client at 33? I mean most are professional guides with some of the best equipment and knowledge and readily note those facts on their websites/advertisements. And they get to fish one of the last consistent good bite areas around Block Island.
I feel those in the for hire industry that support a single fish are trying to be responsible stewards of the fishery. There are ways to get your clients more fish - gift the clients the extra fish for the capt and mate bag. For example a four person charter would get 6 fish vice four. Be creative in your ad - "We'll even give you fish from our crew". And if you're a R&R comm also - give them your fish.

There are ways to get your clients more fish - gift the clients the extra fish for the capt and mate bag. For example a four person charter would get 6 fish vice four. Be creative in your ad - "We'll even give you fish from our crew". And if you're a R&R comm also - give them your fish.

Respectfully disagree

Every time a poll is placed in the public it is made clear most citizens feel that a recreational angler is a recreational angler regardless of the fishing platform (for hire vessel, private vessel or shore). What you propose here is MUCH WORSE that a conservation equivalency. This is straight up more fish for someone just because they are fishing on a for hire vessel.

One of the comments I will be suggesting to the MSBA Executive Board is that if a conservation equivalency is adopted that MSBA that a captain and crew be prohibited from legally "gifting" fish to clients.

You set a hard line Patrick - and I like it. My suggestion was more a compromise position and something which probably occurs already at times.

Meat hunting techniques.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Agreed.

When I had a boat (which was before we had kids), my favorite thing was drifting the south side of Fishers Island, in 10 feet of water or less, throwing eels with light spinning gear. If that didn't produce, and often it didn't, we'd troll tube & worm on lead core, and if that didn't work, and if either I was hungry for a bass or had someone on board who had never caught one, I'd break out the wire.

In my opinion, snapping 300 feet of wire with a parachute jig on the end, must be very much like serving time on a chain gang, banging rocks with a sledgehammer. But it works. Or at least, it worked when there were fish around.

I don't like that way of fishing, but I'm happy to do it twice a year when 6 of us get together, and it's more about catching up with longtime friends, than about the fishing. The comraderie is one of the very, very special things about fishing, in my experience.

I just hope we see some improvement. Southeastern CT, including the Race, was awful in 2014.

Coming from a younger person, I do not keep any fish. I know the majority of the people I cast with that are also in my generation, do not keep fish. The one and only time would be if the fish is not going to survive after release (gut hooked). Stripers have been over fished, plain and simple. I support what Dennis is doing. Having a group of conservation minded charter boats is a good thing. Push back on the greedy ones.

Coming from a younger person, I do not keep any fish. I know the majority of the people I cast with that are also in my generation, do not keep fish. The one and only time would be if the fish is not going to survive after release (gut hooked). Stripers have been over fished, plain and simple. I support what Dennis is doing. Having a group of conservation minded charter boats is a good thing. Push back on the greedy ones.

Keep in mind that some fish that are released will eventually die. Can't always tell by looking at it. This by-product likely doesn't have a big impact on what we're seeing, but catch and release doesn't have a 0% mortality rate.

What does have a 0% mortality rate is something I routinely partake in, which is getting skunked.

Keep in mind that some fish that are released will eventually die. Can't always tell by looking at it. This by-product likely doesn't have a big impact on what we're seeing, but catch and release doesn't have a 0% mortality rate.

What does have a 0% mortality rate is something I routinely partake in, which is getting skunked.

I too, partake in getting skunked more often than not. Perks of being a noob. Stand on rocks all night with no bumps...

I understand what your saying about the mortality rate. You are right.

I hope there is a fishery when I have children and when I am retired. At 28, i'd say that will be in about 30-40 years. :wall:)

can't we just make this simpler by just saying "everybody (and that means EVERYBODY) gets one fish per day"......?

I don't really see the enjoyment in snapping wire or dragging umbrella rigs.

sorry...couldn't resist :wave:

Absolutely a last resort for us....
We have actually contemplated going golfing when thinking about pulling out the wire. After the hit, hand off the rod.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I too, partake in getting skunked more often than not. Perks of being a noob. Stand on rocks all night with no bumps...

I understand what your saying about the mortality rate. You are right.

I hope there is a fishery when I have children and when I am retired. At 28, i'd say that will be in about 30-40 years. :wall:)

It's not that bad IMHO . Just don't try to make a living at it 😊
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Love snapping wire...it produces big fish, great upper body exercise and when you go tight, the hand line feeling is great...reeling in isn't as fun though and in a few years when I'm older I might have a different opinion...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[QUOTE=Piscator;1059149]Love snapping wire...it produces big fish, great upper body exercise and when you go tight, the hand line feeling is great...



reeling in isn't as fun though and in a few years when I'm older I might have a different opinion...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device[/QUOTE


That's what Electramates are for.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

can't we just make this simpler by just saying "everybody (and that means EVERYBODY) gets one fish per day"......?

Stop making sense this is a great discussion

Respectfully disagree

Every time a poll is placed in the public it is made clear most citizens feel that a recreational angler is a recreational angler regardless of the fishing platform (for hire vessel, private vessel or shore). What you propose here is MUCH WORSE that a conservation equivalency. This is straight up more fish for someone just because they are fishing on a for hire vessel.

One of the comments I will be suggesting to the MSBA Executive Board is that if a conservation equivalency is adopted that MSBA that a captain and crew be prohibited from legally "gifting" fish to clients.

Where the hell is that poll?
I do agree that gifting is cheating .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What's going to happen when the person leaves the charter with 2 fish in his car ?? Rec limit is 1 fish and he has 2.

This is utterly ridiculous and if this passes, it only shows the level of corruption in fisheries management.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What's going to happen when the person leaves the charter with 2 fish in his car ?? Rec limit is 1 fish and he has 2.

This is utterly ridiculous and if this passes, it only shows the level of corruption in fisheries management.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The crew/mate on the few for hire boats I've ever been on cleaned the fish on the way in or at the dock - is this not common practice anymore? Customer then leaves with fillets or steaks.

I just got word from Charles Witek from NY who is monitoring what NY fisheries folks are doing about 2015 regs. His response below:
{Right now, the states are negotiating together, trying to reach agreement on common regulations.
New York regulators favor one fish. However, if other states--and this is being driven by the Rhode Island Charter and Party Boat Association--adopt a 2-fish bag for their for-hires, New York will go along in order to keep the competitive playing field level.}

Anybody aware of this? Not sure how I feel about negotiating behind the scenes without public input.

See. CORRUPTION
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Just confirmed - there was a meeting in RI this morning.

Much more likely to catch one over 33" than under 33" from the beach last season. The size of larger fish being caught isn't a problem it's the overall numbers being caught and the lack of smaller fish. Having a few big fish around and not much else doesn't make for a healthy fishery.

This... The lack of smaller fish in the last three years is scary. I honestly can't remember the last time I ran into a school of fish under 25-26 inches.

Does NY really believe people are going to drive all the way to RI for the chance at a second fish? I don't think many people from CT would even do that. If the differential was 5:1 then maybe people would make the drive, but 2:1 ratio the expenses of the additional travel eliminate the competitive advantage.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Just confirmed - there was a meeting in RI this morning.

Dennis, any word on results?

Dennis, any word on results?

I know two people who attended but they won't say anything to me until tomorrow night.

Was this a public meeting w a posted agenda?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Was this a public meeting w a posted agenda?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If it was I missed it.

I wish I had gone to the meeting I would have worn I still tip shoes and make sure everybody goes home with orthodontics braces
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I just got word from Charles Witek from NY who is monitoring what NY fisheries folks are doing about 2015 regs. His response below:
{Right now, the states are negotiating together, trying to reach agreement on common regulations.
New York regulators favor one fish. However, if other states--and this is being driven by the Rhode Island Charter and Party Boat Association--adopt a 2-fish bag for their for-hires, New York will go along in order to keep the competitive playing field level.}

Anybody aware of this? Not sure how I feel about negotiating behind the scenes without public input.

I've heard this from several sources--

If RI gets 2 fish for their charter fleet, then NY (and likely other states) will all flollow suit.


the RISAA guys NED TO GET ON THIS- they changed their official stance when the vote was coming due in October due to the sentiment of their members- NOW IS THE TIME TO MAN UP again.

let the committee members know their membership wants one fish per day for everyone

Tell me. Who sits on these panels anyway? Charter captains??
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I swear i have practically zero faith in any sort of process anymore. This is so depressing to watch what is clearly happening. The fact that this is even a tough decision for some states is blatantly obvious that they are putting profit before maintaining a healthy resource ( which leads to sustainable profit anyways!!)
Anything less than a drastic cut in killing bass across the board is a corrupt back-room joke. Seriously... Tell me im wrong, and i'll show you a shortsighted person who is playing checkers with the resource and his pay instead of chess.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Tell me. Who sits on these panels anyway? Charter captains??
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Fox guarding the hen house.

Charter captains and comercial fishermen
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Tell me. Who sits on these panels anyway? Charter captains??
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm sure there are some . They are pretty proactive guys . FYI We are all on the same team.
Everybody's trying to reach the 25% reduction . I think that's a good thing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No you are not on the same team. 1 dead fish vs 2 dead fish is not a 25% reduction.

That's like bill Clinton saying that a blow job doesn't count as "sexual relations".
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No you are not on the same team. 1 dead fish vs 2 dead fish is not a 25% reduction.

That's like bill Clinton saying that a blow job doesn't count as "sexual relations".
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Well that's a WTF analogy.
I'm amazed you havent been able to follow along in this conversation at all. Just because you're allowed to take two fish doesn't mean you will anymore than you being allowed to take one means you will catch one .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No you are not on the same team. 1 dead fish vs 2 dead fish is not a 25% reduction.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's like banging one chick that's a 10 vs 2 chicks that are both 5's...same thing :)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's like banging one chick that's a 10 vs 2 chicks that are both 5's...same thing :)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Much better analogy!!!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

the RISAA guys NED TO GET ON THIS- they changed their official stance when the vote was coming due in October due to the sentiment of their members- NOW IS THE TIME TO MAN UP again.

let the committee members know their membership wants one fish per day for everyone



I agree.

I'm sure there are some . They are pretty proactive guys . FYI We are all on the same team.
Everybody's trying to reach the 25% reduction . I think that's a good thing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
If we are all on the same team we should have the same recreational reduction across the board. Charters (recreational) should not have separate guidelines than (non charter) recreational. If we are all on the same team we should follow the will of the people who overwhelmingly supported a recreational reduction based on 1 fish a day.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

FYI We are all on the same team.
Everybody's trying to reach the 25% reduction . I think that's a good thing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Why do i get the feeling that you think the reduction is a good thing strictly contingent upon being allowed 2 fish per day?
Your continued opposition to 1 fish, and strong support of being allowed to continue killing 2 per day does not put you and me on the same side...
I'm on the side of killing less so there are more fish alive in the ocean... You seem to be on the side of killing more so there's no interruption of money in your pocket. You just cant have it both ways.
The asmfc made that clever little conservational equivalency "menu" yet they forgot the fine print that says " selecting certain options leads to less fish in the ocean"
All those options were created so the asmfc can pass the final decision off to the states in a crappy attempt to make everyone happy without looking like the bad guy... All while sitting pretty under their window-dressing vote of " look! We passed 1@28" and we did our job".
Buuuuulllll shhhhhhhhh you did!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

We need to find out the results of the meeting. Facts first.

The didn't pass 1@28"
They passed 25%.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Much better analogy!!!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No it's not . Don't get him started
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I am following along. There was a meeting in RI today and we have no information. DZ is on the SB committee and he has no information either.

Two fish over 33" a day for every client including mate and crew isn't going to happen and any captain that tells you he can do it day after day is full of crap .
A lot of experts here but nobody really understands marketing. It's all about the perception and then sell the experience. Nobody's going on a six pack charter with the anticipation and excitement of catching 1/ 28 inch bass .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

From the ASMFC press release;

The coastal recreational fishery harvest will be reduced by implementing a one fish bag limit while keeping a 28” size limit. Under Amendment 6, states may use conservation equivalency to develop state-specific measures that are different than a one fish bag limit and 28” size limit for their coastal fisheries but still achieve a 25% reduction in harvest.

So the reduction was set at 1 @ 28 by ASMFC.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

A lot of experts here but nobody really understands marketing. It's all about the perception and then sell the experience. Nobody's going on a six pack charter with the anticipation and excitement of catching 1/ 28 inch bass .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I have been on 6 pack charters before and didn't care about how many fish I caught. Many people go on 6 pack charters for the experience, so to say no one would go on a charter w 1@ 28 is blatantly false
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

^^^ couldn't agree more ^^^
No one in the history of fishing has ever said if I don't catch fish I'll never fish again.

Also there is nothing stopping anyone from catching a limit and still targeting the same species. If you are an owner/ operator and your business model is to limit out then drive your fares back to the slip, then your business model is flawed with greed alone.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

^^^ couldn't agree more ^^^
No one in the history of fishing has ever said if I don't catch fish I'll never fish again.

Also there is nothing stopping anyone from catching a limit and still targeting the same species. If you are an owner/ operator and your business model is to limit out then drive your fares back to the slip, then your business model is flawed with greed alone.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That isn't what I said . Reread
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Buckman... Your arguments are always about whats best for charter captains financially.

The majority of our arguments are about whats best for the bass population.

When my car starts making a strange noise, i dont turn up my stereo to fix the problem.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Buckman... Your arguments are always about whats best for charter captains financially.

The majority of our arguments are about whats best for the bass population.

When my car starts making a strange noise, i dont turn up my stereo to fix the problem.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

My argument is about being able to accomplish both the targeted reduction and helping charter boats survive a nearly impossible hand they have be dealt through no fault of there own .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Did you happen to glance over towards block island this past summer?
Charter boats couldnt make the round trip with a new group fast enough.
No fault of their own? I have photos of the racks a single boat dumped at a launch this summer in 2 trips that made even my immigrant meat- fisherman father sick.
I gotta take a break and stop arguing the obvious before my blood pressure gets any higher
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Did you happen to glance over towards block island this past summer?
Charter boats couldnt make the round trip with a new group fast enough.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That's not what we have in our area and not the way every charter I know operates . It's either half day or full day . Limit or not
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

A lot of experts here but nobody really understands marketing. It's all about the perception and then sell the experience. Nobody's going on a six pack charter with the anticipation and excitement of catching 1/ 28 inch bass .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Have to disagree with you on that one.
I know the reductions in daily limits have killed the green harbor cod business (hurt us too - at one time we spent March and April at Taylors running trips for Bigfish), but Striper charters are a different beast. Customers that take bass charters are generally not meat fisherman that travel up from NJ in white vans and try to justify their trip based one the pounds of fillet they take home with them. I find most of our clients want to take home fillets, but that's not the sole purpose of the trip (like Cod guys).
I really believe this, and its not like I'm some fly-rodding fish hugger - I'm normally on here explaining why commercial harvest is a good thing.
And for background, we're booked for bass trips 7 days a week all season. As long as the states stick together on 1 fish, we won't see a decline in charters.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

As long as the states stick together on 1 fish, we won't see a decline in charters.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thank you big jay!!! Exactly!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Much better analogy!!!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I sort of meant that the end result is you banged a 10... Just got there different ways...like the equivalency argument...just lighting up the thread a bit..now banging two 7's vs one 10 is a completly different ball game :)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Have to disagree with you on that one.
I know the reductions in daily limits have killed the green harbor cod business (hurt us too - at one time we spent March and April at Taylors running trips for Bigfish), but Striper charters are a different beast. Customers that take bass charters are generally not meat fisherman that travel up from NJ in white vans and try to justify their trip based one the pounds of fillet they take home with them. I find most of our clients want to take home fillets, but that's not the sole purpose of the trip (like Cod guys).
I really believe this, and its not like I'm some fly-rodding fish hugger - I'm normally on here explaining why commercial harvest is a good thing.
And for background, we're booked for bass trips 7 days a week all season. As long as the states stick together on 1 fish, we won't see a decline in charters.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Obviously you have marketed well and provide a great experience for your charters . One thing often done too is to combine shark or tuna with striper on full days .
However there obviously are quite a few captains that feel this could really hurt them and if it won't hurt the recovery , which I believe it won't , then why gamble with their livelihood ? I guess I'm just a compassionate guy
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Two fish over 33" a day for every client including mate and crew isn't going to happen and any captain that tells you he can do it day after day is full of crap .
A lot of experts here but nobody really understands marketing. It's all about the perception and then sell the experience. Nobody's going on a six pack charter with the anticipation and excitement of catching 1/ 28 inch bass .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Reread, and you are right. No one wants to keep a 28" bass and especially just one. It's small and doesn't yield much meat.

But it's a greater than 28" scenario, and it has been done before.

The unfortunate perception of the non fishing public is that the industry delivers 2 fish. The sentence that follows that statement which is unknown by the public is that it is ecologically sound to do so.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I sort of meant that the end result is you banged a 10... Just got there different ways...like the equivalency argument...just lighting up the thread a bit..now banging two 7's vs one 10 is a completly different ball game :)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Ahhhhhh since you put it that way 👍
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by buckman
"A lot of experts here but nobody really understands marketing."

Buckman, imagine what a marketing expert you will have to become if the population continues to decline...

I'm not taking any pleasure in arguing with you, i just want to try to get you to see beyond your next season of charters.

a healthy bass population with customers catching fish, having fun, taking photos, and still taking a keeper each home to eat is a much better marketing strategy than trying to spin multiple skunkings because the population has been hammered into minimal numbers.

When fish are present to be caught, everyone wins. Clearly, people go fishing for the experience first and foremost... the meat is the bonus... I mean, who pays hundreds of dollars for 4 fillets??? its the experience they primarily went out for!

its foolish to ignore the decline of the bass population because you are worried about captains who cant figure out how to make a day of fishing appear fun to attract customers.

Big Jay hit the nail on the head...

Imagine what would have happened if the charter captains and the pin hookers got their way in the 80's and there was no moratorium. We might be arguing about bluefish instead. No more bass.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Stop trying to put me out of business and help protect my right to continue to eliminate the very source of my income"

- a charter captain

Imagine what would have happened if the charter captains and the pin hookers got their way in the 80's and there was no moratorium. We might be arguing about bluefish instead. No more bass.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Easy with the cheezy rhetoric Eben - there were as many Charter Captains and PinHookers that made sacrifices back then as anyone.
Heck, all the guys that wax nostalgically about the good old day, even the ones that are now ardent conservationists sold fish back then.

(Wouldn't want people to think I'm going soft).
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Stop trying to put me out of business and help protect my right to continue to eliminate the very source of my income"

- a charter captain

Very dramatic but way off base.

Here's where I see how the differences in opinion lie .
1) I believe two fish at 33 inches will result in significantly less fish killed by charterboats
2) I believe, at least in my area, that going to one fish at 28 inches will result in a significant loss of business.
3) I believe the targeted 25% reduction will be attained and will significantly improve the health of the striped bass population.
4) I don't believe the doom and gloom outlook on the future of the striped bass if the targeted 25% reduction takes place.
5) I believe in figuring peoples livelihoods and their families into the equation .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Nobody's going on a six pack charter with the anticipation and excitement of catching 1/ 28 inch bass .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


That is simply NOT true



I understand that if it is decided to allow 2 @33" then there is no sure bet that clients will get to catch 2 over 33" since it might be a bit more difficult to catch the larger size bass all depending on so many factors, location, weather,bait in the area, structure etc. but being on the water daily has it's advantages. It also is going to be harder to find the concentrations of bass seeing how there are fewer than there were just 5 years ago and that is a fact not an argument here.

I was at the meeting where almost unanimously 1 fish was voted on, only one guy was for 2

I thought there was another large meeting where it was decided 1 fish 28" coastwide but that was not final. Are they somehow going to flip now? pathetic

Again, going to 1 fish for all recs is NOT going to put anyone out of business
we all participated in the decline, we all need to participate in recovery. I am not buying that conservational equivalency crap, that is scientific voodoo bull.

The didn't pass 1@28"
They passed 25%.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I know they passed the 25% reduction, but the other part of how they get there I thought was determined or is that how they are going to screw this up? I think there were a lot of people that saw this coming. I say fire them all.

My argument is about being able to accomplish both the targeted reduction and helping charter boats survive a nearly impossible hand they have be dealt through no fault of there own .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


right, sure no fault of their own. ?????
well they certainly were participants in the fault of everyone, year after year of 2 fish limits has put a strain on the bass population there is no denying that so you are wrong again, unless your words are being read wrong. Did spence take over your keyboard? ;)

Does NY really believe people are going to drive all the way to RI for the chance at a second fish? I don't think many people from CT would even do that. If the differential was 5:1 then maybe people would make the drive, but 2:1 ratio the expenses of the additional travel eliminate the competitive advantage.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

For most New Yorkers the trip to RI is about the same as the trip to Montauk.

right, sure no fault of their own. ?????
well they certainly were participants in the fault of everyone, year after year of 2 fish limits has put a strain on the bass population there is no denying that so you are wrong again, unless your words are being read wrong. Did spence take over your keyboard? ;)

I was talking about the other species such as cod not stripers .

They can't take another hit this year .
That's why they are asking for a different option , that will achieve ghe same objective but not hurt business .
Which I believe 1@28 is likely to do .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Obviously you have marketed well and provide a great experience for your charters . One thing often done too is to combine shark or tuna with striper on full days .


Can't do it, unless you save the striped bass fishing for the end of the day. Its illegal to possess striped bass in Federal waters.

^^Pretty typical in our area Mike. Troll Bluefin in the morning on Stellwagen or P-Hill, and then swing inside to P-town for the afternoon tide.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

WELL i,VE BEEN KINDA JUST WATCHING THIS POST .............. IMO no matter what you use as numbers or percentages ..................... 1 & 1 is two // 2 / to more dead bass

as far as 2 @ 33 that will be business as usual to the charter fleet at the block ................how often do they catch fish UNDER 33"

Once they finish the fish kill at the Block .will it really matter by then ..................... where will they go to keep on killing . they will just speed up the end to their business .................................. OH BTW that doesn,t matter to [some] of the them ............like the head of the charter association ........who is really pushing for the two fish ..............this is is part time job for him along with selling the catch .he does have a commercial R&R license ........................he has a full time job with great benefits

&& no chance of a layoff or going out of business when its the WFD ><><><:hidin::gorez:

best post of the thread, Clammer.

1 fish is 1.
2 is 2.

2>1

The rational behind the conservational equivalency is questionable at best.

More fish will be killed if they allow 2 @ 33. Is there anyone is this thread that disagrees with that?

best post of the thread, Clammer.

1 fish is 1.
2 is 2.

2>1

The rational behind the conservational equivalency is questionable at best.

More fish will be killed if they allow 2 @ 33. Is there anyone is this thread that disagrees with that?


I do
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Lets not forget that the AMSFC did not account for ANY by-catch or "black market" fish (lots of dead fish) and their numbers are more then 2 years old..

Due to this, their percentage reduction chart is probably grossly underestimated.

We need to do as much as we can and as soon as possible.

More fish will be killed if they allow 2 @ 33. Is there anyone is this thread that disagrees with that?
[/B]

I do.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I do.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ZacS is probably thinking about the block island charter slaughter zone at the southwest corner. A fishery that has remained somewhat the same while inshore areas have been devoid of schools of bass. This is also why NY might be following RI's lead because so many montauk boats fish southwest ledge.. The average fish caught here is 30 pounds and this is why 28" or 34" makes no difference. It's one fish killed vs 2 fish killed 2 to 3 times a day per paying customer.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I do
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I do.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The only way less fish will be killed is if you guys don't put your charters on fish over 33". Just wondering - are most of the fish your charters catch under 33"?

The only way less fish will be killed is if you guys don't put your charters on fish over 33". Just wondering - are most of the fish your charters catch under 33"?

They can be .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ZacS is probably thinking about the block island charter slaughter zone at the southwest corner. A fishery that has remained somewhat the same while inshore areas have been devoid of schools of bass. This is also why NY might be following RI's lead because so many montauk boats fish southwest ledge.. The average fish caught here is 30 pounds and this is why 28" or 34" makes no difference. It's one fish killed vs 2 fish killed 2 to 3 times a day per paying customer.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm not talking BI only. I'm talking coast wide.

I would hope that any charter capt worth their salt, spending almost every day on the water, with usually a network of other guides that share intel, would be putting at least 12@33 on the deck... on a majority of days...

Comms in mass seem to be able to do it no prob?

AND IF YOU CAN'T then the fishery is probably in worse shape than I thought, and we should push for immediate moratorium.

ZacS is probably thinking about the block island charter slaughter zone at the southwest corner. A fishery that has remained somewhat the same while inshore areas have been devoid of schools of bass. This is also why NY might be following RI's lead because so many montauk boats fish southwest ledge.. The average fish caught here is 30 pounds and this is why 28" or 34" makes no difference. It's one fish killed vs 2 fish killed 2 to 3 times a day per paying customer.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

This is one reason I am surprised that more of the charter fleet that doesn't fish BI isn't fighting against 2@33" or whatever two fish option with a higher size limit is on the table.

If a customer who is in it for the meat has the option of fishing an area where they might get a few fish over 33" which the Mass charter guys seem to claim is the case in their areas and I know is the case for charter boats working LIS much of the season, or driving to RI where they can get 12 (or likely 16) fish averaging 30 pounds or better what are they going to do? To me 1@28" would kind of level the playing field for the boats that don't have easy access to BI or Montauk. I could see 2@33" making fishing on either the BI or Montauk boats the only viable option for the guys in it for the meat of looking to illegally sell their catch.

I'm not talking BI only. I'm talking coast wide.

I would hope that any charter capt worth their salt, spending almost every day on the water, with usually a network of other guides that share intel, would be putting at least 12@33 on the deck... on a majority of days...

Comms in mass seem to be able to do it no prob?

AND IF YOU CAN'T then the fishery is probably in worse shape than I thought, and we should push for immediate moratorium.

So you cleverly phrased your statement so that either way you're right. However it's a simplified statement and does not take into account the fact that fish move inshore and offshore .
There were plenty of days around Race Point when commercial guys did not take the limit . I believe Chatham was the same. On those days we pushed out a little bit and unfortunately the fish with more than 3 miles out.
I guess we suck because we can't guarantee a limit of 33 inch fish let alone a limit of 28 inch.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So you cleverly phrased your statement so that either way you're right.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't think I am all that clever. Either way I am right. you can't have your cake and eat it too.

Either:

A) Professional fishermen will follow fish inshore, offshore, east & west, to fill their 2 fish limit on most days, be it 28", 33" or probably 36"

B) There are not enough fish left for professional fishermen to find their 2 fish limit per guest of fish 33"+ on many days, either inshore or offshore, or anywhere legally fishable.

If the answer is B, then would you not agree that we have a SERIOUS SERIOUS issue, and take even more drastic measures??

I personally think the answer is A. So if you let charters take 2@33, all you are doing is doubling the amount that the charter fleet will take in 2015. How could that be good for the health of the resource? Use all the fisheries mgmt math you want, taking twice as many fish CAN NOT BE THE SAME.

I’ve been keeping out of this.... But F IT!
Here’s the little gem of knowledge people conveniently keep missing.
EQUIVALENCY ONLY WORKS IF IT IS APPLIED ACROSS THE ENTIRE POPULATION EQUALLY!!!

Either ALL fisherman get 1@28 or ALL get 2@33.

Let me break it down for you like you are a 6 year old...

A. If the limit for EVERYONE is 1 @28 then shmucks who can’t fish KILL SLIGHTLY Less. (Cause they aren't very good). Better Fisherman (CHARTERS) will KILL MUCH LESS (1/2 as much likely)

B. If the limit for EVERYONE is 2@33 Shmucks will KILL MUCH LESS, because they can’t catch fish that big. Better fisherman (CHARTERS) will kill SLIGHTLY less.

C. If the limit for Shmucks is 1@28 They kill SLIGHTLY LESS, If the limit for better fisherman (CHARTERS) is 2@33 they kill SLIGHTLY less.

A 25% reduction can be achieved (if you believe the science) with A and B. The difference being WHAT users group takes the bigger hit. C Does not work as NEITHER group takes a BIG ENOUGH reduction.

I work with statistics day in and day out and know more than I care to about applying statistics across populations and sub populations.

Anyone who says that you can have 2 sets of different rules for 2 VERY different populations is either incompetent or deceitful

A pertinent question for our local authorities on the subject would be; If the recreational anglers were to also adopt an option of 2 fish larger than 33" do you also consider that to be beneficial to the striped bass fishery?
In other words, is this doing our part in helping to restore the species?

This should be good....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I would hope that any charter capt worth their salt, spending almost every day on the water, with usually a network of other guides that share intel, would be putting at least 12@33 on the deck... on a majority of days...

Comms in mass seem to be able to do it no prob?

AND IF YOU CAN'T then the fishery is probably in worse shape than I thought, and we should push for immediate moratorium.

That is exactly what I was going to get to.

A pertinent question for our local authorities on the subject would be; If the recreational anglers were to also adopt an option of 2 fish larger than 33" do you also consider that to be beneficial to the striped bass fishery?
In other words, is this doing our part in helping to restore the species?

This should be good....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

But that is not what is being proposed. They want special rules for a sub group of anglers.:biglaugh:

I don't think I am all that clever. Either way I am right. you can't have your cake and eat it too.

Either:

A) Professional fishermen will follow fish inshore, offshore, east & west, to fill their 2 fish limit on most days, be it 28", 33" or probably 36"

B) There are not enough fish left for professional fishermen to find their 2 fish limit per guest of fish 33"+ on many days, either inshore or offshore, or anywhere legally fishable.

If the answer is B, then would you not agree that we have a SERIOUS SERIOUS issue, and take even more drastic measures??

I personally think the answer is A. So if you let charters take 2@33, all you are doing is doubling the amount that the charter fleet will take in 2015. How could that be good for the health of the resource? Use all the fisheries mgmt math you want, taking twice as many fish CAN NOT BE THE SAME.

You can't follow the bass offshore .
It's called fishing not catching
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

A pertinent question for our local authorities on the subject would be; If the recreational anglers were to also adopt an option of 2 fish larger than 33" do you also consider that to be beneficial to the striped bass fishery?
In other words, is this doing our part in helping to restore the species?

This should be good....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes and less fish would be caught.
However a good shore fisherman worth his salt... yada yada yada
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You can't follow the bass offshore .
It's called fishing not catching
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

OK, so anyway, you follow them wherever they are legally caught.

I don't know you personally, but I get the feeling you are probably just playing devil's advocate to try to stir the pot a little. Which is fine with me, I do it all the time.

I think the vast majority of comm/rec/charter fishermen would agree that 2@33 will basically double the take of the charter fleet vs. 1@28... and is just about status quo vs. 2@28.

I feel that is a bad thing. I guess you and a few others don't. Only time will tell....

I’ve been keeping out of this.... But F IT!
Here’s the little gem of knowledge people conveniently keep missing.
EQUIVALENCY ONLY WORKS IF IT IS APPLIED ACROSS THE ENTIRE POPULATION EQUALLY!!!

Either ALL fisherman get 1@28 or ALL get 2@33.

Let me break it down for you like you are a 6 year old...

A. If the limit for EVERYONE is 1 @28 then shmucks who can’t fish KILL SLIGHTLY Less. (Cause they aren't very good). Better Fisherman (CHARTERS) will KILL MUCH LESS (1/2 as much likely)

B. If the limit for EVERYONE is 2@33 Shmucks will KILL MUCH LESS, because they can’t catch fish that big. Better fisherman (CHARTERS) will kill SLIGHTLY less.

C. If the limit for Shmucks is 1@28 They kill SLIGHTLY LESS, If the limit for better fisherman (CHARTERS) is 2@33 they kill SLIGHTLY less.

A 25% reduction can be achieved (if you believe the science) with A and B. The difference being WHAT users group takes the bigger hit. C Does not work as NEITHER group takes a BIG ENOUGH reduction.

I work with statistics day in and day out and know more than I care to about applying statistics across populations and sub populations.

Anyone who says that you can have 2 sets of different rules for 2 VERY different populations is either incompetent or deceitful

Great post Joe. This is exactly the issue that a lot of people seem to be either missing or simply choosing to ignore. You can not have each group pick whatever works best for them from the list of options and achieve the 25% reduction. The reductions are based upon regulations being applied evenly across the recreation sector (including the for hire boats).

Do you guys feel that one at 33 inches would result in maybe half as many fish kept as one at 28 inches?
I think it would be close
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Do you guys feel that one at 33 inches would result in maybe half as many fish kept as one at 28 inches?
I think it would be close
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How do you figure half if going from 2@28 to 2@33 is only supposed to give us around a 25% reduction?

I don't think it would result close to a 50% reduction. Most of the fish I caught that were over 28" last season were also over 33" so had I wanted to keep a fish the extra 5" would have made no difference and I could have kept the fish either way. In the boat fishing areas that I am familiar with most keeper sized fish are over 33". For hire boats should have no issues putting their clients on 6 fish at either 28" or 33". Where it would have an impact is on inexperienced guys or guys that don't fish often but they aren't getting very many keepers at 28".

I actually think there is good chance charter boats, in our area at least ,would bring home more fish if it was 1 at 28 then if it was 2 at 33.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

12 pages of this?
As a charter boat I say 1 fish at 28 OR 33" is the way it should have always been! In addition, 50% of the "traditional commercial harvest" should have been the desired target from the beginning. As they were cranking up the volume (the commercial poundage) over the years I began to protest louder and louder and the answer I got back from "fishery managers" was something like: Well we are only going to kill what was traditionally harvested before". When I asked "wasn't it those TRADITIONAL HARVEST LEVELS that wiped them out the last time"? With that they become speachless.
Fishery management does not work because they "manage" for "maximum yield" instead of "abundance". Plus they are (for the most part) all corrupt. They get really nasty when I use the "C-word" but that is what lobbiests and special interest groups are doing: "buying" influence to push their agenda. Our government has legalized this kind of corruption by allowing the existance of lobbiests. They need to go!...JC

I actually think there is good chance charter boats, in our area at least ,would bring home more fish if it was 1 at 28 then if it was 2 at 33.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So there would be at least a 50% reduction in your area. The 2014 2@28" regs -> 2015 1@28" regs
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So there would be at least a 50% reduction in your area. The 2014 2@28" regs -> 2015 1@28" regs
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I suppose when you put it that way , true .
And therefore two at 33 inches would result in my opinion and at least a 25% cut .

Btw, A lot of the local charter boat captains are up in Gloucester tonight fighting the closure of 55 square nautical miles of Stellwagen .
These guys are taking it from all sides .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I suppose when you put it that way , true .
And therefore two at 33 inches would result in my opinion and at least a 25% cut .

Btw, A lot of the local charter boat captains are up in Gloucester tonight fighting the closure of 55 square nautical miles of Stellwagen .
These guys are taking it from all sides .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You can't legally fish for/keep striper on Stellwagon anyways!

I actually think there is good chance charter boats, in our area at least ,would bring home more fish if it was 1 at 28 then if it was 2 at 33.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm sure that holds true in some areas. I have heard captains who fish long island sound say the same thing and most of them actually seem to favor keeping it at 1@28 because getting a 33" fish can be difficult at certain times of the year so with 1@28 the charters can at least provide their clients with some fish to take home.

The problem with 2@33" is that is does nothing to slow down the killing of all of the big fish that takes place every summer around Block and off of Montauk. The average fish they catch is 20+ pounds and when the fishing is good the boats are often running multiple trips a day and limiting out each trip. On an average day there are easily 50+ boats out there doing this. That's not sustainable and going to 2@33" does nothing to slow it down.

I'm sure that holds true in some areas. I have heard captains who fish long island sound say the same thing and most of them actually seem to favor keeping it at 1@28 because getting a 33" fish can be difficult at certain times of the year so with 1@28 the charters can at least provide their clients with some fish to take home.

The problem with 2@33" is that is does nothing to slow down the killing of all of the big fish that takes place every summer around Block and off of Montauk. The average fish they catch is 20+ pounds and when the fishing is good the boats are often running multiple trips a day and limiting out each trip. On an average day there are easily 50+ boats out there doing this. That's not sustainable and going to 2@33" does nothing to slow it down.

I fully understand what you are saying . I'm speaking strictly about my area . I don't pretend to know anything about down there and I have been debating the pros and cons based on my area .
I too have winced at the large amount of huge bass taken down there .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You can't legally fish for/keep striper on Stellwagon anyways!

I'm pretty sure I realize that Phil :)
I wasn't saying that nor was that my point.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The problem with 2@33" is that is does nothing to slow down the killing of all of the big fish that takes place every summer around Block and off of Montauk. The average fish they catch is 20+ pounds and when the fishing is good the boats are often running multiple trips a day and limiting out each trip. On an average day there are easily 50+ boats out there doing this. That's not sustainable and going to 2@33" does nothing to slow it down.

:humpty: 100% on target. Same for Jersey, NC, VA. Those boats are on schools of primarily big fish and the last 15 years of them pounding those breeders has certainly done it's part getting us where we are. That doesn't mean bass are extinct or can't be caught anywhere, but by asmfc's best guesses there are maybe 50% as many fish as at the peak.

I think the attached graph indicates a problem that I suspected might exist. As fish ucket pointed out, there are plenty of guys finding a fish or two to kill. 19 million for recs according to his numbers. Regardless, the decline in releases in the Mass fishery are puke bucket worthy and that data is 2 years dated. Appears that gone are the days of a dozen fish released for each fish kept. Though maybe he is right and it is just me.

Legal (or not), while you argue 1 vs 2:

Legal (or not), while you argue 1 vs 2:

step 1. Know your enemy

step 1. Know your enemy

Canal scene is a disaster at times too, but 1 fish takes a big bite out of both problems.

Legal (or not), while you argue 1 vs 2:

They have their quota based on the same science as the rec quota.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

They have their quota based on the same science as the rec quota.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

As much as that picture might make you want to puke, their (comm) quota is actually documented...rec quota isn't...we have no clue how much the recreational sector take is...all guess work but no actual count and that's a problem...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Rhode Island update: This is all second hand from someone who attended. Meeting was held on Tuesday and attended by ASMFC RI state commissioners and a limited amount of representatives from RISAA, RI Party & Charter Association, and state fisheries biologists. Discussion revolved around CE (Conservation Equivalency). Although it was supposed to be a small meeting of just a few reps from each group the word got out to RIPCA and they “filled the room” with their members, not my words.

For hires are convinced 1 fish bag will severely impact their business and are pushing for a 2 fish bag. Majority of other rec groups are pushing to maintain a 1 fish bag. State Biologists seem to prefer 1 fish.

What will probably happen next: Rhode Island and other states will hold public hearings in January on the issue of CE. These meetings must be completed by the mid-winter (Feb 3-5) meeting of ASMFC where the issue of Conservation Equivalency will be discussed. These state hearings will obviously be very important. If you have an interest in the future of striped bass it is imperative that you show up at these meetings or write letters to your state commissioners.
A link to state commissioners:
http://www.asmfc.org/about-us/commissioners

. The average fish they catch is 20+ pounds and when the fishing is good the boats are often running multiple trips a day and limiting out each trip. On an average day there are easily 50+ boats out there doing this. That's not sustainable and going to 2@33" does nothing to slow it down.


at the height of this summer's massacre out there, I counted better than 130 boats from where I was....

at the height of this summer's massacre out there, I counted better than 130 boats from where I was....

I'm sure most of them were not charters . Strange for all those fish for the taking from a biomass on the verge of collapse . Huge schools offshore .
Perhaps the good news is things are not so bad
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Rhode Island update: .

For hires are convinced 1 fish bag will severely impact their business and are pushing for a 2 fish bag. Majority of other rec groups are pushing to maintain a 1 fish bag. State Biologists seem to prefer 1 fish.

What will probably happen next: Rhode Island and other states will hold public hearings in January on the issue of CE. These meetings must be completed by the mid-winter (Feb 3-5) meeting of ASMFC where the issue of Conservation Equivalency will be discussed. These state hearings will obviously be very important. If you have an interest in the future of striped bass it is imperative that you show up at these meetings or write letters to your state commissioners.
A link to state commissioners:
http://www.asmfc.org/about-us/commissioners

I cannot emphasize how important this is.......

the battle was not won back in October- ASMFC left the door open (obviously- we've been talking about it here for weeks) to continued over-exploitation despite the appearance of making meaningful reductions. (in this case, the only ones taking any true reductions are the commercial guys.....)

SO KEEP PAYING ATTENTION.... the fun is yet to come

I'm sure most of them were not charters . Strange for all those fish for the taking from a biomass on the verge of collapse . Huge schools offshore .
Perhaps the good news is things are not so bad
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I guess you haven't been reading all the threads this year, pretty sure there is a consensus here that things are in fact really bad. Having a good school or two of large in a couple offshore locations and nothing inside isn't any indication things aren't in bad shape. Acres and acres of bunker going unmolested suggests otherwise. Spring spots for schoolies, which year after year loaded up every May and June as they migrated north, dramatically shrinking in size with the passing of each year suggests otherwise.

Actually, the presence of two huge schools in localized areas, and little to none everywhere else, is as good a sign of being on the brink as there is.

I guess you haven't been reading all the threads this year, pretty sure there is a consensus here that things are in fact really bad.

Just because that is the consensus HERE, it's not a tell tale of the fishery.
This place has all but forcefully evicted anyone who dares to differ with the opinion of the masses. Just look at this thread and the negative comments. Anyone who has a different opinion is greedy, corrupt, ignorant or all of the above.
Used to be Friday nights you couldn't keep track of all the threads on here. Today your lucky if there's 2 posts over the weekend. The reason the masses here all believe the same thing is that anyone who dares to differ, doesn't even bother to post anymore.

Soon there will be 100% agreement on This board.

I don't think the decreased traffic on here has anything to do with "the masses believing the same thing" at all.....

this place has evolved. a lot of topics have been covered (many have been repeated and repeated again....) in full detail.



that- and the fishiing really kinda sucks. not much to talk about there.

and I disagree with you that there is no room for dissent on here- this is by far the most reasonable site for open discussion that I've found. are most of the folk on here like-minded, conservation-motivated types? Sure. but the comm guys still have a voice and their opinion is respected (at least from my standpoint......)

Soon there will be 100% agreement on This board.

Mike

I 100% agree with you!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There is some, limited, justice!

http://www.wboc.com/story/27654367/tilghman-island-man-sentenced-in-fish-poaching-case

Good luck collecting the fine.
After a very short stretch in the pen.
That tobacco chewing good old boy will more than likely be kicking back with his feet up on his porch rail. Reaping the liberal benefit system courtesy of the people who put in an honest 40 to 50 per week.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Good luck collecting the fine.
After a very short stretch in the pen.
That tobacco chewing good old boy will more than likely be kicking back with his feet up on his porch rail. Reaping the liberal benefit system courtesy of the people who put in an honest 40 to 50 per week.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile deviceAnd the didn't even get the ones who bought the illegally caught fish. If they bought on the black market once then they'll do it again, so until they are caught nothing will change just the names. Ron

What I noticed this year in my corner of the bay:

Tons of spring squid
I caught stripers all season (my best year ever from kayak and shore)
Black Sea Bass (most I've seen in a while)
Fluke (was very good as well)
Tog (amazing amount of huge tog)
Large Scup (were thick and everywhere)
the only fish I saw a decline in is Blues (only caught 5 all year).
Due to pier closure was not able to see the fall squid.

On here "there are no fish" usually means the fish are biting, but now with this topic I think you guys might be serious, but I am not 100% sure.

I can't help but wonder "Is the sky really falling?"

Just because that is the consensus HERE, it's not a tell tale of the fishery.
This place has all but forcefully evicted anyone who dares to differ with the opinion of the masses. Just look at this thread and the negative comments. Anyone who has a different opinion is greedy, corrupt, ignorant or all of the above.
Used to be Friday nights you couldn't keep track of all the threads on here. Today your lucky if there's 2 posts over the weekend. The reason the masses here all believe the same thing is that anyone who dares to differ, doesn't even bother to post anymore.

Soon there will be 100% agreement on This board.

Amen... almost seems like a requirement when posting a picture to add "swam away to fight another day".
Killing and eating your fish is almost sure to get you the stink eye with a lot of folks here. I am thankful to what I catch and I am careful when filleting my catch to not waste any of the fish my family greatly enjoys eating.

I have no problem with a stimulating debate and while I didn't catch a single keeper this year; doesn't mean I wouldn't bleed it and eat it. I'd prefer to eat tog or black sea bass, but have no problem with anyone taking their legal limit or posting pictures of fish coming home for the table. I also have no issue with charters, promoting trips that will allow clients to bring a legal limit home, although I would applaud those that promote catch and release.

I think we have a pretty diverse crowd in here, from NH to the South Shore of RI, with boaters, surfcasters and yakers. So when I suggest that the majority on this board seem to agree that for a number of years the bass fishing is really declining, it seems to be coming from a large sampling of fishing styles, states and age groups. Certainly there are exceptions, buckman and the freak may be fishing waters that have yet to see the decline, or possibly as piemma suggests, those waters may be some of the last strongholds of summering stripers.

We all collectively control our own fate, but when I see channel 5 highlighting the fates of the fishing community with new regulations, I question whether if we the recreational fisherman would ever be given that same voice. Seems the commercial voice gets the news spots, I have yet to see anyone questioning on TV why we continue to over fish our waters and subsidize those that can't make it a viable living.

Imagine the charter business everyone would have if we made that fish a game fish and really regulated those that would deplete the bunker or other baitfish populations they rely on. Not everyone can or wants to own a boat; there would be serious money spent to get in on that action. I know I'd love to experience it again some day, been far too long since I've been in on a big fish blitz.

So will ignoring all the warning signs and supporting 2 dead fish get me off the closed minded list?
. I'm a close minded bully because i my opinion differs from yours?
Ridiculous.
People are sticking to their position out of passion for fishing, and hopes of protecting the very source if their most treasured past time. No one is trying to mess with your paycheck... But if the stocks collapse, business wont be slow, it will be non existent.
Why fight against erring on the side of caution? Whats good for the fish is good for business... And vice versa
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I find the debate constructive but this is probably why it seems one sided on this site. It mirrors the big picture during the ASMFC hearings:

92% of all public comments favored one year implementation
87% of all public comments favored a one fish bag limit option (Option B)
The great majority of public that attended the ASMFC public comment hearing came out in support of one fish bag limit
Fishing groups representing perhaps tens of thousands of anglers came out in support of a one fish bag limit:
RFA came out in support of one fish bag limit
NY Sportfishing Federation came out in support of one fish bag limit
NYCRF came out in support of one fish bag limit
Numerous surfcasting clubs and organizations came out in support of one fish bag limit.

People are sticking to their position out of passion for fishing, and hopes of protecting the very source if their most treasured past time. No one is trying to mess with your paycheck... But if the stocks collapse, business wont be slow, it will be non existent.
Why fight against erring on the side of caution? Whats good for the fish is good for business... And vice versa
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device



exactly.

I find the debate constructive but this is probably why it seems one sided on this site. It mirrors the big picture during the ASMFC hearings:

92% of all public comments favored one year implementation
87% of all public comments favored a one fish bag limit option (Option B)
The great majority of public that attended the ASMFC public comment hearing came out in support of one fish bag limit
Fishing groups representing perhaps tens of thousands of anglers came out in support of a one fish bag limit:
RFA came out in support of one fish bag limit
NY Sportfishing Federation came out in support of one fish bag limit
NYCRF came out in support of one fish bag limit
Numerous surfcasting clubs and organizations came out in support of one fish bag limit.

And don't forget that if you disagree with someone who wants a special exception and different rules so it benefits themselves, "you're jealous".
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Actually, the presence of two huge schools in localized areas, and little to none everywhere else, is as good a sign of being on the brink as there is.

Exactly. Same thing happened in the late 80s except it was more a shore thing at the Block. Ask DZ. He wrote a book about the huge fish in the late 80s at the Block. At the same time, if you read any of Frank Daignault's books you will see the Back Beaches were devoid of fish.

Actually, the presence of two huge schools in localized areas, and little to none everywhere else, is as good a sign of being on the brink as there is.

Who said 2 ? That's pretty dismissive .
To be honest ,you guys have spent more time on this then I . We tuna fish a lot and the damn stripers just become a nuisance ;)
My concern is that an emotional overreaction is going to hurt families
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It is nice that a few dissenting voices are able to state their opinion and receive feedback in a respectful manner. They certainly exhibited the courage and fortitude that will enable them to drive the species to the brink. It is a shame that hurt feelings will make these brave souls go elsewhere to seek acceptance and agreement. I saw no name calling,nobody getting shouted down,just differing opinions. What does one expect when an unpopular stance is taken in a passionate topic like this? People don't have to agree,I think if it is taken personally then it is time to walk away for a bit without any drama. It is not the fault of anyone here that the alleged facts were not able to sway the opinion of the masses.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"My concern is that an emotional overreaction is going to hurt families"


And my concern is that regulations based on what is finacially best for charters will hurt the remaining fish population.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm sure most of them were not charters . Strange for all those fish for the taking from a biomass on the verge of collapse . Huge schools offshore .
Perhaps the good news is things are not so bad
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You haven't seen anything til you have seen a party boat in the middle of all the charter boats hammering bass,over the fence at 0 dark thirty!

That is why this group fights tooth and nail to keep the kill numbers high.they care about the future of the species, it is all about making a buck today.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think DZ makes the most telling point-

the reason "the masses" on here are in favor of a one fish limit is that THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THE FISHING PUBLIC also support a one fish limit.....

again- I'm sympathetic to the guys that may feel some hardship if their business suffers as a result of bad reductions.


But- this is a democracy, right?

I think DZ makes the most telling point-

the reason "the masses" on here are in favor of a one fish limit is that THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THE FISHING PUBLIC also support a one fish limit.....

again- I'm sympathetic to the guys that may feel some hardship if their business suffers as a result of bad reductions.


But- this is a democracy, right?

Well that's a good sign that that many Rec fisherman and shore fishermen are so involved. After all they are responsible for the majority of dead stripers. Both harvested and dead discards .
I'd be willing to bet some of you guys that fish every day and release the majority of your fish still kill more than we do on our boat in a year.
Perhaps you should change species :)
We are all in agreement that striped bass could use a little help. But we don't agree on is whether the math that is been calculated will achieve the same result.
I believe it does . Even in a democracy sometimes the majority does not get to drive the minority out of business over pettiness .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Even in a democracy sometimes the majority does not get to drive the minority out of business over pettiness .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I really think you have missed the point.

No one is advocating driving anyone out of business. Look at it this way, if the charter boats don't buy into 1 fish per angler per day, they will put themselves out of business because, eventually, there will be no bass left to catch.

...SNIPPED But we don't agree on is whether the math that is been calculated will achieve the same result.
I believe it does . Even in a democracy sometimes the majority does not get to drive the minority out of business over pettiness .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Please go back and either READ or RE-READ my post and tell me you still believe that the math makes sense when you apply 2 VERY different rules to 2 VERY different populations. That is the lynchpin you have consistently avoided to address.

And just for the record: I AM IN FAVOR OF 1 FISH.

HOWEVER: I accept that IF I believe the math for A, then I accept it for B. So I ACCEPT either option will work IF APPLIED EQUALLY ACROSS THE POPULATION.

Look, either way, some groups are going to get hit harder than others. It sucks, but that's the way it is. I have ZERO sympathy for the "My job is going away" argument. A few years ago, my industry went mostly to india. I saw the writing on the wall and adapted. Was I happy? no. But I adapted. If charter guys don't see that they are in for a tough haul and make changes them they will not survive. period. Does it suck? sure. Would I be happy? no. Your position IS no different than mine WAS. Did I cause outsourcing? nope. Did the gov't help me? nope.
Was i PISSED? you better believe it. But you adapt. I hope you can do the same.

If it gets to a moratorium, the charters would then be losing more than a little business, I would think they would see the writing on the wall and agree that while this might hurt some; it's better than the alternative in a year or two.

Even in a democracy sometimes the majority does not get to drive the minority out of business over pettiness .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Especially when the elected officials ignore what the will of the people is and do what the lobbyists are telling them to do.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Especially when the elected officials ignore what the will of the people is and do what the lobbyists are telling them to do.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


like x 1000.

I'm starting to think that THOSE who vehemently oppose 1 @ 28" may more concerned about the bass they won't be able to keep and sell than sending joe sport home with one more 28" fish.....am I wrong thinking like this?

I'm starting to think that THOSE who vehemently oppose 1 @ 28" may more concerned about the bass they won't be able to keep and sell than sending joe sport home with one more 28" fish.....am I wrong thinking like this?

Dunno Don...

Like everything in life it's likely a mix:
A. Guys who think there is no problem
B. Guys who think there IS a problem but want all they can while it lasts.
C. Guys who could care less.
D. guys who TRULY believe 2@33 for charters is = 1@28.

I honestly believe guys fighting for 2@33 ON THIS SITE are in group D.

Dunno Don...

Like everything in life it's likely a mix:
A. Guys who think there is no problem
B. Guys who think there IS a problem but want all they can while it lasts.
C. Guys who could care less.
D. guys who TRULY believe 2@33 for charters is = 1@28.

I honestly believe guys fighting for 2@33 ON THIS SITE are in group D.

That's where I fit . But I also believe that even if it's not exactly the same it's close enough to be a vast improvement that should accomplish the targeted reduction and still give the charters in my area a chance at surviving .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Please go back and either READ or RE-READ my post and tell me you still believe that the math makes sense when you apply 2 VERY different rules to 2 VERY different populations. That is the lynchpin you have consistently avoided to address.

And just for the record: I AM IN FAVOR OF 1 FISH.

HOWEVER: I accept that IF I believe the math for A, then I accept it for B. So I ACCEPT either option will work IF APPLIED EQUALLY ACROSS THE POPULATION.

Look, either way, some groups are going to get hit harder than others. It sucks, but that's the way it is. I have ZERO sympathy for the "My job is going away" argument. A few years ago, my industry went mostly to india. I saw the writing on the wall and adapted. Was I happy? no. But I adapted. If charter guys don't see that they are in for a tough haul and make changes them they will not survive. period. Does it suck? sure. Would I be happy? no. Your position IS no different than mine WAS. Did I cause outsourcing? nope. Did the gov't help me? nope.
Was i PISSED? you better believe it. But you adapt. I hope you can do the same.

Of course it works .
2@33 for charters and 1@ 28 for recs will absolutely reduce overall mortality by at least 25%.over last year . Most here I believe feel it's not enough.
We differ on your last statement . It's not about me BTW.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I can understand your angst. I've been a commercial electrician for almost 35 years. There's been good times and bad times for the industry over that stretch, due to factors out of our control.
When it's slow it sure sucks, the dog would eat better than me.
But that's when you either put on the big boy pants and buckle up and do whatever it takes to get by or go on the dole.
Going on the dole ain't in this punk from Southies blood. Kinda wish it was. I know enough people on it, every day is Sunday.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Here is an excerpt from a Zach Harvey article about forward thinking Charter Captain Al Anderson. Full article linked afterwards.

{While I’ve long understood some of the bad blood between other captains and Anderson, I’ve more recently come to see and understand Anderson’s perspective. Where sportfishing communities in other parts of the country seem to have been much more receptive to key aspects of conservation, the overwhelming majority of ports in the Northeast have long been meat-fishing legacies — few places more so than Anderson’s home port of Point Judith, R.I. Charter fishing there has long been understood as an investment in filleted freezer ballast as much as an exciting day on the water.

Anderson, whose charter rates are more than double what many of his competitors charge, has for years refused to trophy-hunt except on occasions when he knows big fish will be tagged and released, and actively discourages clients from keeping as much as regulations permit. These are policies that have cost him clientele and led many of his competitors to dismiss him as arrogant.

What I think has been widely misunderstood about the man is that his singular, Ahab-grade commitment to fish tagging and conservation is not a gimmick or publicity stunt. Again, Anderson is a man who has made policy of principles, even when many of those principles run against the main current of the community around him. The world rarely embraces such men in their own time, but it surely needs them and seldom forgets them.}
Zach Harvey is fishing editor for Soundings.


April 2014 issue

http://mobile.soundingsonline.com/home/blogs_columns/291904

In times of drought and water shortages, people are asked to not water their lawns, not wash their cars, and take shorter showers because there is a limited and dwindling supply of water left.
Some of the arguments here are like a carwash owner that simply refuses to cut his carwash time from 6 minutes to 4 minutes in times of drought because they are convinced "no one is going to pay for a 4 minute carwash and I'm going to go out of business!"

Well, in the end, what's a carwash to do when the water runs out?

You guys are so dismissive it's comical. First of all I didn't say this was about me as a matter fact i said this isn't about me. I've never been out of work a day in my life . But there of been plenty of times I've had to fight for my job against overzealous regulators . I'm not a fisherman for a living .
The bottom line is a lot of you guys are taking this to the extreme . It doesn't have to be that way .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Of course it works .
2@33 for charters and 1@ 28 for recs will absolutely reduce overall mortality by at least 25%.over last year .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

please explain to me how this will work given the different catch percentages between the two groups. An example would be great. How does "of course it works" address the following issues:

A. Charters (as a population) catch MORE/BIGGER fish per capita. (otherwise they would quickly be out of business).

B. NON-charters (as a population) catch smaller/less fish per capita.

You are giving group A the choice that will in aggregate kill more fish FOR THAT GROUP.
You are giving group B the choice that in aggregate will kill more fish FOR THAT GROUP.

explain to me how this will hit the 25% target?

Here's an EXTREME example to prove my point:
Group A - no one catches fish > 30 No one catches 2 fish"
Group B - No one catches fish < 33"

1. LIMIT coast wide 1@28. group one goes unpahsed. group 2 takes a hit. NET RESULTS -REDUCTION in KILL
2. LIMIT coast wide 2@33 group 1 gets screwed. Group2 is unphased - NET RESULT - REDUCTION in KILL
3. Limit for group 1 1@28, group 2 2@33 .... BOTH GROUPS ARE UNAFFECTED NO REDUCTION IN KILL.

Now that is an extreme example to prove a point. But it in UNDENIABLE that the 2 different limits you ask for will have LESS affect than either limit enforced across the entire population. There is currently NO science that has been presented that quantifies what that difference is. If you have it, I'd LOVE to see it.

B. NON-charters (as a population) catch smaller/less fish per capita.


Do you have any data that backs this up? Not so sure this is really true....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Do you have any data that backs this up? Not so sure this is really true....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

In aggregate? seriously?

Evidence, no. But anecdotally (which I agree is crap) absolutely. It's pretty well accepted that the minority of fisherman catch the majority of the fish. And look at it another way. i couldn't catch a cod to save my life. Put me on a charter on the fish.... different story.

And from a logical point of view.... whose gonna shell out $$$ to catch LESS fish than they otherwise would? If charters did not provide access to BETTER fishing the business model would not exist. If you can find ONE charter that Advertises "Spend More Catch Less!" I will concede that the folly of my ways...

MAKAI I love your last sentence ..........toooo bad there are far tooooooomany that believe that ,s what,s lifes about &&&&&&&&& ride it all their lives :af:

Priority #1 right now should be what is best for the fish population... PERIOD.

Those who vehemently oppose the idea that bass stocks are in trouble most likely have views that are motivated by money.
We are playing Russian Roulette with an entire fishery.
If the bass population never collapsed in the past, then maybe you can stick to a "no way... never gonna happen" mentality... but it did, and it seems that some just refuse to accept the idea that bass are in any trouble at all.

please explain to me how this will work given the different catch percentages between the two groups. An example would be great. How does "of course it works" address the following issues:

A. Charters (as a population) catch MORE/BIGGER fish per capita. (otherwise they would quickly be out of business).

B. NON-charters (as a population) catch smaller/less fish per capita.

You are giving group A the choice that will in aggregate kill more fish FOR THAT GROUP.
You are giving group B the choice that in aggregate will kill more fish FOR THAT GROUP.

explain to me how this will hit the 25% target?

Here's an EXTREME example to prove my point:
Group A - no one catches fish > 30 No one catches 2 fish"
Group B - No one catches fish < 33"

1. LIMIT coast wide 1@28. group one goes unpahsed. group 2 takes a hit. NET RESULTS -REDUCTION in KILL
2. LIMIT coast wide 2@33 group 1 gets screwed. Group2 is unphased - NET RESULT - REDUCTION in KILL
3. Limit for group 1 1@28, group 2 2@33 .... BOTH GROUPS ARE UNAFFECTED NO REDUCTION IN KILL.

Now that is an extreme example to prove a point. But it in UNDENIABLE that the 2 different limits you ask for will have LESS affect than either limit enforced across the entire population. There is currently NO science that has been presented that quantifies what that difference is. If you have it, I'd LOVE to see it.

The charters are a much smaller segment of the overall population of Recreational fishing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The charters are a much smaller segment of the overall population of Recreational fishing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So... That has no impact on my argument. Unless they are statistically insignificant. Which I do not believe they are.

So... That has no impact on my argument. Unless they are statistically insignificant. Which I do not believe they are.

They are statistically less significant. And once again, in my area, which is the Cape Cod Bay ,Racepoint area, two at 33" will result in less fish being killed. Significantly less. IMO
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm starting to think that THOSE who vehemently oppose 1 @ 28" may more concerned about the bass they won't be able to keep and sell than sending joe sport home with one more 28" fish.....am I wrong thinking like this?
Absolutely no doubt.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Bottom line there was a public comment period 95% of those who commented decided that a 1@ option would be the best option for recreational anglers. If charter fares are recreational anglers they should abide by those rules. The opportunity to express an opinion otherwise was prior to x date. Now that the board has made a decision the state managers are saying we have heard from many voices that for hire vessels will be hurting if they can not continue with 2 per fare??? Let's explore CE. Ok so where were these voices and why were they not on record. It wasn't even close. Now we are dealing with this end around Monday Morning QB BS. The masses that followed the guidelines spoke their mind and supported one stance or another are now being told hey eff you we are going to do what the hell we feel like. If charter fares want a different limit then they need to be classified as something other than recreational. Their fish need to be counted and the numbers need to be applied to the overall quota in a different manner.

For every guy that is running two a day three a day trips with 6-10 fares there is also the big fleets running two or three with 3 mates a captain and 50 heads. It adds up to a s$&t ton of dead fish. Not saying shore and boat anglers don't take a ton either. I am simply saying everyone needs to play by the same rules if they are to be considered the same type of angler.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i read a update in a paper this morning but I don,t know how to transfer it ..:fishslap:

i read a update in a paper this morning but I don,t know how to transfer it ..:fishslap:

WHAT THE F(**(&^ !!!!!

Where's Clammer????? No way would he write a clear sentence.... NO WAY.

In aggregate? seriously?

Evidence, no. But anecdotally (which I agree is crap) absolutely. It's pretty well accepted that the minority of fisherman catch the majority of the fish. And look at it another way. i couldn't catch a cod to save my life. Put me on a charter on the fish.... different story.

And from a logical point of view.... whose gonna shell out $$$ to catch LESS fish than they otherwise would? If charters did not provide access to BETTER fishing the business model would not exist. If you can find ONE charter that Advertises "Spend More Catch Less!" I will concede that the folly of my ways...

The spend more catch less agument above is exactly why the charter guys want customers to have to opportunity to catch 2 Fish I suspect......

There is Rec and Charter guys and then there is comm guys (many of which go back to Rec or Charter when Comm season is over) there are some great Comm guys and some that are horrible...there are some great rec guys and some that couldn't catch a cold...anyone can go get a charter license, but not all of them can be consistently good..I have many rec friends that can outfish charters...in fact, i have a few rec friends who get calls from Chaters asking them where the fish are....the good ones stay in business for the moat part but the bad ones don't, they just circulate through and try to make it, then drop out for a new one to come along...especially bass charter where you don't need a huge boat way offshore...

Off topic I know....but I just think we need to be cautious when making big generalizations with facts....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

From 1900-2010, freshwater fish species in North America went extinct at a rate 877 times faster than the rate found in the fossil record, while estimates indicate the rate may double between now and 2050. The reason is spelled very simply MAN.

What's happening in the Marine environment?
As of January 2011, 113 marine species and sub-species were formally listed as being at risk or vulnerable to extinction, including:
56 birds
37 fish
15 mammals
3 invertebrates
2 reptiles

Pretty much the same for marine, spelled the same too; MAN.

Hope stripers don't go the way of the doto bird.

Just some random thoughts; take them for what they're worth (not much?).

I was mate on a charter boat during the mid-80's. We did not target striped bass, but we did catch a lot of blues. The charters usually had us keep all of the fish, but when we got back to the dock, they did not want all of the fillet. This makes sense, right?

Same charter boat; we spent 6 weeks primarily targeting giant bluefin, per customer request. They would sign a release before the trip that the boat would own any fish caught. Fishing for no meat, just for the opportunity to battle a bluefin. Want to know how many days we went out and did not even have a bait hit? And the customers always tipped me, fish or no fish. I guess they had a good time spending their cash and catching nothing.

Limits are for honest anglers. Look through the police reports (RISAA newsletter makes it easy) and look at all of the dishonest anglers that are unlicensed keeping a variety of undersized fish and more than their limits. Do you think that they even care that there is a regulation?

Why not explore making recreational fisherman (that are honest!) be required to have a tag to kill a bass and bring it home? You'd have to buy them at the beginning of the year, when all of us honest guys buy our fishing licenses. I'd probably buy 2 for my family of 3. If I had a desire to eat more than that, I could buy fish at the market. If I didn't keep 2 fish during the year, oh well. More money in that "earmarked" fund for the state that gets funnelled into the general budget. At least with this kind of system, we could start to get an idea of how many dead fish honest fishermen would like to bring home in a year.

Yeah, I know. There is no budget to enforce any of it. I have encountered 2 environmental officers in the past 5 years. One on an October night at a popular beach location and once on a rainy October day at a Connecticut launch ramp. I had not kept any fish on either occasion, so they didn't have much to check.

Beat me up as you wish. I have thick skin.

The charters are a much smaller segment of the overall population of Recreational fishing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That may be true but they are:

1. More mobile as they are in boats and

2. More skilled at what they do because it's their business and they have the best technology available.

Therefore I don't buy the statement that they have less effect on the fish populations. There were more 50# fish caught at the Block this summer by the charters than all of the Surfcasters have caught in the last 40 years.

The charters are a much smaller segment of the overall population of Recreational fishing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Then they should abide by the 1@28 rec limit. If your 2 fish loophole passes, whats to stop anybody that wants to keep 2 fish illegally from saying they were on a charter if caught?

[QUOTE=Got Stripers;1059570]From 1900-2010, freshwater fish species in North America went extinct at a rate 877 times faster than the rate found in the fossil record, while estimates indicate the rate may double between now and 2050. The reason is spelled very simply MAN.

What's happening in the Marine environment?
As of January 2011, 113 marine species and sub-species were formally listed as being at risk or vulnerable to extinction, including:
56 birds
37 fish
15 mammals
3 invertebrates
2 reptiles

Pretty much the same for marine, spelled the same too; MAN.

Hope stripers don't go the way of the doto bird.[/

Man that's a reach
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If recreational regs are 1@28" and you are a recreational angler before you step on a charter boat, then you are still a recreational angler once aboard a charter boat.
A charter boat is not a magic portal to special rules that allow you to still kill 2 fish.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If recreational regs are 1@28" and you are a recreational angler before you step on a charter boat, then you are still a recreational angler once aboard a charter boat.
A charter boat is not a magic portal to special rules that allow you to still kill 2 fish.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

This will blow your mind then. They don't need a license either .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I know... Because they are covered under the umbrella of the boat
. A license doesnt kill or save fish, so If you are equating the license special treatment to the reg. special treatment, they are not equal.
Why? Because a license is not going to result in more or less dead fish. I made my point before that i dont care about dollars of ANY kind in this equation ( be it state license fees, charter income, whatever). All i care about right now is protecting fish that have no option to protect themselves from being wiped out.

Do you think the 2nd dead bass on board gives a crap if the guy has a license or not? The extra fish getting killed is the issue... I dont care one bit if i paid for a license and another guy didnt... I care about protecting bass right now.
Its all about the fish...

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Its all about the fish...

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And there you have it ! That is where we differ . I think people can also be figured into the equation .
We are not talking about White Rhino here .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

People can be figured in as population shows signs of recovery Sorry if that sounds cold, but 1@28" still allows you to operate. Adjusting in creative ways to sell the experience is not that hard.
If we have a 1980's repeat, people will be the only factor in the fishless equation.
Simply ignoring the decline and saying " aaahhhhh i'm not convinced there is even a problem" just seems crazy to me. Im not a charter captain, but i was able to think of half a dozen very creative and enticing marketing strategies that i would implement that would draw customers attention as well as my competitors. As a charter business, you need to know how to adjust to catch customers... Not just fish.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think 1 @ 28" or greater achieves that balance
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Buckman, we are just not going to agree, and i accept that. I respect your opinion, and i just pray that years from now you were right and i was wrong.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Buckman, we are just not going to agree, and i accept that. I respect your opinion, and i just pray that years from now you were right and i was wrong.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's been a spirited debate . I think fish will be just fine .
25% should help immensely.
🍻
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's still just another commercial grab for more of the resourse at the expense of the fish.No matter what the numbers there.s always some group trying to grab more no matter how bad the fishing gets. Why do some of you guys think they're working to shut down recreational and part of commercial cod fishing. Nobody stopped till it was too late.We are the problem as we don't work together till it's too late. 1 fish 2 fish 3 fish it don't matter. The fishing is gettin worse no matter how deep the hole you stick your head in. Gamefish will help. Cut backs n limits will help. But we need to stop cheating to get more at the expense of the fish.

Why do some of you guys think they're working to shut down recreational and part of commercial cod fishing. Nobody stopped till it was too late.We are the problem as we don't work together till it's too late. 1 fish 2 fish 3 fish it don't matter. The fishing is gettin worse no matter how deep the hole you stick your head in.

Cod were doing just fine on Stellwagen Bank until Jane Lubchenco and her brilliant Catch Share system allowed draggers to completely rape the bank of Cod...that is a fact. It wasn't the charters and wasn't the recs, it wasn't rod and reel...it was the draggers and although I don't have a charter business those charter guys and us rec guys got a bum deal with that...so all the blame for Cod is not on Recs or Charters, it's on mid water trawlers, sector boats etc being allowed by the government to come up here and wipe out Cod...many of these boats aren't even from anywhere near hear and their ports are far away...blame catch shares, Jane Lubchenco and the government for. that...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Catch shares sounded really good on paper. Far less discards. But I see why it failed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Its doing a number on the winter Fluke off of RI .we are starting to see the results :soon:

It's been a spirited debate . I think fish will be just fine .
25% should help immensely.
🍻
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Buckman, I also respect your opinion but I too do not think the bass are going to be fine and it's not about us. It's really about what's happening, as we speak, at Oregon Inlet. Chesapeake Bay, Virginia with trawlers.
Hell, I'm 67 and have caught more fish than I probably had a right to. I want to save the fish for the future generations but I really don't have much hope. For every fish we C&R in New England some a ssh ole in Virginia or DE or NC kills.

Why do some of you guys think they're working to shut down recreational and part of commercial cod fishing. Nobody stopped till it was too late.We are the problem as we don't work together till it's too late.


Is this a joke ???

So what will be different. Two fish will push us further towards a collapse. Even the scientists who will ultimately have to review the "state" requests will tell you the original 2 @ 28" has only a 50 % chance of success. The charter, headboats and private boaters kill most of the breeders and there's no denying that. So I ask..If you were standing in a firing squad lineup with Joe Blow, just 2 of you, and the shooter had one round, would you like your chances ? Stop the political and greed based BS and get back to being concerned with the resource. No one is going to pay $600 to go bluefishing or chasing fluke on a sustained basis.

Sorry ..that 1@28".

No one is going to pay $600 to go bluefishing or chasing fluke on a sustained basis.

What he said. After the bass are all gone, I guess you could take them cod fishing, oh, wait…….

So what will be different. Two fish will push us further towards a collapse. Even the scientists who will ultimately have to review the "state" requests will tell you the original 2 @ 28" has only a 50 % chance of success. The charter, headboats and private boaters kill most of the breeders and there's no denying that. So I ask..If you were standing in a firing squad lineup with Joe Blow, just 2 of you, and the shooter had one round, would you like your chances ? Stop the political and greed based BS and get back to being concerned with the resource. No one is going to pay $600 to go bluefishing or chasing fluke on a sustained basis.

It's just not that bad . Geeez
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So when I sat in at a bunch of the ASMFC dog and pony meetings the last few years, I wish I had your anecdotal evidence to shoot back at their scientist.
Where they get off telling us the female spawning biomass coast wide has been declining since 2006 is beyond me. And all these hypoxic zones the fingerling fish are having great difficulty dealing with is flawed science at best.
Nobody mistrust the government more than I, So I pray all your evidence to the contrary is true and the halcyon days of yore are just around the corner.
Because I sure miss those times !
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

that's the biggest bummer of all this from my point of view....

I'm 49 years old-

I just hope like hell (!) the fishery recovers before I get too old to enjoy it again......

I cant stand winter, snow and cold weather.

when people ask me why I dont just move down south,
the one and only thing that keeps me in the Northeast
is my love for surfcasting for striped bass and everything that
goes with the outing.
If the striped bass fishery ever collapses, as it did in the 80's
I would seriously consider moving down south in pursuit of
warmer temps and a wider range of fishing opportunities
( at least when I retire)

i don't get the new math.....more equals less.

just thinking out loud here ( dangerous thing to do ). what if the charters sports got to keep 2 @ 28" but the capt and crew can't keep and/or sell any? the charters get their clients and the clients get their meat going by their argument for 2@ 28".

I cant stand winter, snow and cold weather.

when people ask me why I dont just move down south,
the one and only thing that keeps me in the Northeast
is my love for surfcasting for striped bass and everything that
goes with the outing.
If the striped bass fishery ever collapses, as it did in the 80's
I would seriously consider moving down south in pursuit of
warmer temps and a wider range of fishing opportunities
( at least when I retire)

I am retired and there are only a couple of things keeping me around here. My fishing friends, family and Stripers.

just thinking out loud here ( dangerous thing to do ). what if the charters sports got to keep 2 @ 28" but the capt and crew can't keep and/or sell any? the charters get their clients and the clients get their meat going by their argument for 2@ 28".

It's not one of the available options.
According to the asmfc's math in order to keep above the 25% reduction, with 2 fish, the minimum size must increase to 33"
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y250/thefishingfreak/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_2014-12-11-16-49-14_zpsbi5frcos.png (http://s6.photobucket.com/user/thefishingfreak/media/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_2014-12-11-16-49-14_zpsbi5frcos.png.html)

It's not one of the available options.
According to the asmfc's math in order to keep above the 25% reduction, with 2 fish, the minimum size must increase to 33"
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y250/thefishingfreak/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_2014-12-11-16-49-14_zpsbi5frcos.png (http://s6.photobucket.com/user/thefishingfreak/media/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_2014-12-11-16-49-14_zpsbi5frcos.png.html)

If the numbers are correct for the 2011 year class, this option while allowing for harvest of 2 fish per angler does offer some protection of the 2011yoy. But it does allow for the same amount of removal of fish larger than 33", which includes the current SSB.

Just out of curiosity, those that fished the cow party at block, was that body of fish predominantly 40# fish? 50#s? 60#s? Smaller? Mixed sizes? Similar sizes? Mostly one size with few larger ones mixed in?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That might be part of their reasoning? Or fuzzy math?
Going to 33" totally removes all year classes under that size from the equasion
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Just a few comments:

Science tells us that, although bass populations have declined from their peak, the stock is in pretty good shape, they are not overfished and overfishing is not occurring.

It also tells us that the decline in populations is due to poor spawning success which totally related to the weather (not global warming), which we cannot control.

History shows us that when we get weather that is favors spawning success, the stock will recover.

I also agree that conservational equivalency, as it was used by the ASMFC is only a valid statistic when applied to the general population of recreational anglers. Theoretically there should be a conservational equivalency for the charter/party subgroup of recreational fishermen but we have no idea of what those numbers would be.

The charter/party fleet has a history of using conservational equivalent regs. for other species, scup, sea bass and tautog immediately come to mind.

So if any state adopts separate regs for the charter/party fleet, they should be restrictive enough to insure that they are the conservational equivalent of a 25% reduction. Maybe 2 at 36inches? I don't think the tables the ASMFC provided give us a true idea of what a 25% reduction for the carter/party fleet would be. All of the states can enact regs that are stricter that the ASMFC guidlines.

Just a few comments:

All of the states can eneact regs that are stricter that the ASMFC guidlines.

thats how this whole discussion got started in the first place.... the charter guys are pushing for MORE fish than the everyday, joe-taxpayer angler.... and they are pressuring their states' delegations to give them more.

not very likely that any state is gong to enact more restrictive regs in the face of that kinda pressure, right??

thats how this whole discussion got started in the first place.... the charter guys are pushing for MORE fish than the everyday, joe-taxpayer angler.... and they are pressuring their states' delegations to give them more.

not very likely that any state is gong to enact more restrictive regs in the face of that kinda pressure, right??

No, that is not correct. 1st of all it has nothing to do with RI's delegation to the ASMFC, its up to Janet Coit as head of the DEM.

2nd, Its my understanding that they are NOT pushing for more fish, just different regs for the charter/party fleet.

Charter/party boats already have different regs for scup, sea bass and tautog and it seems to work out pretty well. I don't see why it couldn't work for stripers, but I don't think that 2 at 33 is the right number.

Different regs for tuna also
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Public hearings have been scheduled
1. Striped Bass Management (322 CMR 6.07)

a. Commercial

i. To comply with recent changes to the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s Striped Bass Management Plan, DMF will reduce the commercial quota by 25%; and

ii. To address the unlawful sale of striped bass retained on closed fishing days, require commercial fishermen fishing on closed fishing days to mark striped bass that meet the commercial minimum size by removing a pectoral fin and prohibit fish with a pectoral fin removed from entering commerce.

b. Recreational

i. To comply with recent changes to the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s Striped Bass Management Plan, DMF is proposing to reduce the bag limit from 2-fish to 1-fish and maintain the existing 28-inch recreational minimum size; and

ii. Accept comment on adopting alternative measures for anglers onboard for-hire vessels to allow a 2-fish bag limit at a higher minimum size. Options include:

1. 2-fish bag limit with a 33-inch minimum size; or

2. 2-fish bag limit with one fish between 28 and 36 inches and one fish of at least 40 inches.



Public Hearing Schedule




Start Time: 10:00 AM

Wednesday, January 14, 2015

Katharine Cornell Theater

Tisbury Town Hall

54 Spring Street

Tisbury, MA 02568



Start Time: 6:00 PM

Wednesday, January 14, 2015

Admiral’s Hall

Massachusetts Maritime Academy

101 Academy Drive

Buzzards Bay, MA 02532


Start Time: 12:00 PM

Thursday, January 15, 2015

Nantucket Community Room

4 Fairgrounds Road

Nantucket, MA 02554

Start Time: 6:00 PM

Tuesday, January 20, 2014

DMF Annisquam River Station

30 Emerson Avenue

Gloucester, MA 01

thanks Mike

Option two for the charters may be a decent compromise. Still wouldn't slow the BI slaughter [if it happens again].

ONE FISH

Option two for the charters may be a decent compromise. Still wouldn't slow the BI slaughter [if it happens again].

Especially since those are proposals for Mass, not RI or NY. ;)

I guess we shall see if all the new england states adopt similar limits for the for-hire fleets so their fleets aren't at a disavantage.....

the CT charter guys were adamant about keeping 2 fish avaialble for their clients

Has CT scheduled any public hearing as of yet?

I guess we shall see if all the new england states adopt similar limits for the for-hire fleets so their fleets aren't at a disavantage.....

the CT charter guys were adamant about keeping 2 fish avaialble for their clients
Many I have spoken with directly have since changed their tune and want the limit to stay at 28 inches even if that means a 1-fish bag limit as they feel it is easier in CT waters to regularly put their clients on a 28-inch fish than a 30-something-inch fish. I was told that the CT Party & Charter Boat Association submitted a recommendation to the DEEP in favor of a 2-fish limit, but this does not appear to have been the consensus of the organization but instead that of a minority within the ranks. This was told to me by a member of the association after a recent meeting.

Has CT scheduled any public hearing as of yet?

Not at this time and I have a feeling that we may not have one.

I would hope that CT schedules some sort of meeting or comment period. If a 2 fish exemption (emphasis on IF) is granted to charters without any public input; the level of faith most people in CT have in the process would take a huge hit.
I am glad to hear a section of the CT Charter captains feel positive towards the 1 fish limit. It would be great to convince them to make their opinions known
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

http://www.myeasternshoremd.com/news/kent_county/article_80650a64-680e-5bc2-8395-9a112851af29.html

$ave the Blue Crabs!!

The only reason the bass are targeting crabs is because Omega has killed half the bait in the entire estuary. And to say that there are more Rockfish in the system than we have seen in our lifetime is BS. There is no science attached, not to mention that they will be busy killing the vaunted 2011 YOY this year, before they get to spawn !
What is so hard about 1 fish, good for all and a straight forward % reduction for commercials ? Conservation Equivalency is stupid and was lobbied into place so the slaughterhouse guys could keep doing what they are doing with a new set of smoke and mirrors.
I'm at the point where I hope they screw it up so that the ASMFC has to go into "OOPs...we messed up" mode and put a moratorium in place for more than a couple of years. Remember that the original proposal was estimated ( as in WAG ) to have only a 50% chance of success. Do we really believe all of the goofy proposals coming from NJ, RI, MD and Mass will make a difference ?

Well, just about every other SB site member has tossed in their $.02
on this. Having been a shore, kayak, and charter boat fisherman over the last 25 years or so, including the moratorium, I have seen it from many angles. So here's my take on this.

1. Two at 33" for charters won't work. Guys, the charter guys are good. Their clients want BIG fish to take home, and they know how to get them. I usually caught multiple keepers of 36" or more every time I went out. Two at 33" won't stop them any. It may even make things worse, because now they would be taking home bigger breeders who can produce more eggs. It would have to be closer to 36" or 37" to make any impact, and even that may not be enough.

2. There are other fish out there. During the moratorium, I caught a lot of blues (which unfortunately are also lacking now too). The charter guys are going to have to realize that catching stripers is a privilege, not a right, as we knew back then. There is other stuff to fish for; blues, togs, scup, black sea bass, fluke, winter flounder, albies (sometimes), weakfish (coming back in RI). The charter guys are going to have to accept the situation, and try to promote combined trips where they catch other stuff out there along with stripers in order to bring customers in. That's just the way it is. They'll have to realize it's less now or nothing later, like it is for the rest of us.

I say if there is to be 2 fish for charter, there has to be a trophy fish as a second. 1@28 and the 2nd at 50 plus inches. That will keep the fires burning after the first fish hits the icebox
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I say if there is to be 2 fish for charter, there has to be a trophy fish as a second. 1@28 and the 2nd at 50 plus inches. That will keep the fires burning after the first fish hits the icebox
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Agreed. If the charters win the privilege of a second striper, it truly has to be a trophy fish, not just another fish from the breeding pool.

Agreed. If the charters win the privilege of a second striper, it truly has to be a trophy fish, not just another fish from the breeding pool.

2nd fish at trophy size would be fine as far as im concerned but 50 inches is absurd !
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

48 inches + = trophy
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yeah, I think we're about getting a good proposal here. I'd say 1 at 28,
1 at 40. The 1 at 28 will usually mean the sport will take the first keeper they catch, regardless of size, which will protect the bigger breeders some. 1 at 40 would make a trophy hard to catch, but not impossible; sometimes they would get one, often they wouldn't (I never
did more than 39" on any of my charters). That would give the sports a small, but not unrealistic, chance of taking home a real trophy, while protecting breeders in the 28" to 40" range, similar to the Maine regs. And, as we know from the moratorium the last time, it's the smaller fish, who may have years of breeding left in them, that need to be protected.

Agreed. If the charters win the privilege of a second striper, it truly has to be a trophy fish, not just another fish from the breeding pool.

Weren't you guys bitching about all the huge bass caught off block island ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If it has to be 2 fish for charters, I would much rather have 1 @ 28" and some sort of trophy as the second than 2 @ 33".
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Agreed. If the charters win the privilege of a second striper, it truly has to be a trophy fish, not just another fish from the breeding pool.

funny when you think about it and read the descriptions here of the average charter/party boat type..then realizing that the only people that will have the "privilege" of keeping two fish and the opportunity to chase that second "trophy" fish if an accommodation is made probably don't even fish that much or live locally and therefore have little stake in or reason for concern for the fishery, probably don't purchase a license or even know what the regulations are and might not even fish if they can't have at least the perception of being able to kill two bass and take some meat home....working really hard to accommodate these folks it seems :rotf2:

This is B.S. one at 28. Fair is fair. We went to the meetings one at 28 was the general consensus at both of the meetings I attended. Now a special interest group is lobbying for a bigger piece of the bass pie. It's not right. I feel bad that the one at 28 will effect your business. However I have concerns about the viability of your business if killing two fish is a requirement to stay in business. All charters do not have to kill basd to survive. I know many charter guys who emphasize catch and release, taking few bass back to the dock during the season. Furthermore , if your bussiness has to have special rules to Survive Mabey you should consider changes or find a new occupation. I don't think it's the governments job to design the rules to keep you in bussiness. I know it sounds cold, but I can think many bussiness that no longer exist. The governs ment should provide for the same rules for everyone not adapt the rules for the benefit of special interest groups.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

In the end, one @ 28 will likely wind up winning. If the charter guys
get more, there will be too much uproar from the regular sportfishing guys about it. But I do think it's sort of sad that the regular sportfishing guys can't see the difference. The typical captain has all the various bills to pay, and needs to keep charter customers happy. The typical sport plops down $200+ for his one (or maybe two) days a year out fishing, and that's his likely only chance at a keeper. A lot of the guys on this board are out 3-5 nights a week all summer, and may catch 20-30 keepers easily each season. Does it really seem fair for the charter guy to miss his one chance of the year at more than one, when others take home 10 times that many each year? Sigh. Life isn't fair, is it? It doesn't matter; no matter what they do, no one will like it.

Sigh. Life isn't fair, is it?

agreed but the rules should be fair and applied equally if you want to avoid all of this unhappiness...if you want to compare anglers and time spent on the water as a reason for an exception you should also apply that to boats too....the average for-hire spends far more time on the water and with many more people on his boat than the average rec boat fisherman and as a result kills many more fish throughout a season, applying your logic does it seem fair that one boat on the water nearly every day should be able to keep twice as many fish per person as another boat that is on the water on an occasional weekend on what might be their only opportunity to keep fish that day/week/month?

"Does it really seem fair for the rec boat guy to miss his one chance of the week at more than one, when others take home 10 times that many each week?"

agreed but the rules should be fair and applied equally if you want to avoid all of this unhappiness...if you want to compare anglers and time spent on the water as a reason for an exception you should also apply that to boats too....the average for-hire spends far more time on the water and with many more people on his boat than the average rec boat fisherman and as a result kills many more fish throughout a season, applying your logic does it seem fair that one boat on the water nearly every day should be able to keep twice as many fish per person as another boat that is on the water on an occasional weekend on what might be their only opportunity to keep fish that day/week/month?

"Does it really seem fair for the rec boat guy to miss his one chance of the week at more than one, when others take home 10 times that many each week?"

Omg you're a closet Liberal 😀
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Omg you're a closet Liberal 😀
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

haaaaa...

this is such a boat-centric argument, I'm still wondering if the guides and clients of shore guides/kayak fishing guides etc. will/should get a two fish exception based on the same rationale and the fact that the fishing is probably even tougher

To be honest , this might have been posted before but I found it informative .
http://www.reel-time.com/articles/conservation/striped-bass-really-seeing-decline/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Does it really seem fair for the rec boat guy to miss his one chance of the week at more than one, when others take home 10 times that many each week?"[/QUOTE]


Who are the "Others"
Charter crew or clients ???
Most charter clients go fishing 1 or 2 times a year.
Recs (as you say) go 1 time a week.

Who are the "Others"
Charter crew or clients ???
Most charter clients go fishing 1 or 2 times a year.
Recs (as you say) go 1 time a week.



I was talking rec boat vs. "other" boat(boat for boat)....get's convoluted when you start talking about fairness and everyone is operating under different rules doesn't it?....we're talking about mortality reduction...how many dead bass hit the decks of that rec boat fishing maybe 1 time a week and how many hit the deck of the for hire boat....where's the reduction ?

the fairness issue is interesting....

if three brothers are in town for the weekend for their "1 time" fishing for the year...

one chooses to hire charter a boat and can keep two bass

one hires a shore guide and we don't know how exceptions would apply or fishes from a friend's boat and can keep one bass

one fishes the shore by himself, can keep one bass

fairness and the reduction .....and what makes the three brothers different that they are treated differently?

I was talking rec boat vs. "other" boat(boat for boat)....get's convoluted when you start talking about fairness and everyone is operating under different rules doesn't it?....we're talking about mortality reduction...how many dead bass hit the decks of that rec boat fishing maybe 1 time a week and how many hit the deck of the for hire boat....where's the reduction ?

the fairness issue is interesting....

if three brothers are in town for the weekend for their "1 time" fishing for the year...

one chooses to hire charter a boat and can keep two bass

one hires a shore guide and we don't know how exceptions would apply or fishes from a friend's boat and can keep one bass

one fishes the shore by himself, can keep one bass

fairness and the reduction .....and what makes the three brothers different that they are treated differently?

Life isn't fair… Deal with it
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

buckman: You are right, life isn't fair. If the guides can not earn enough from their sports with 1@28" then maybe they should find another job; like many of us has had to do. The guides can complain all they want but it won't do them any good just like everyone else who has complained about hard times; you just have to suck it up and move on.
Ron

funny when you think about it and read the descriptions here of the average charter/party boat type..then realizing that the only people that will have the "privilege" of keeping two fish and the opportunity to chase that second "trophy" fish if an accommodation is made probably don't even fish that much or live locally and therefore have little stake in or reason for concern for the fishery, probably don't purchase a license or even know what the regulations are and might not even fish if they can't have at least the perception of being able to kill two bass and take some meat home....working really hard to accommodate these folks it seems :rotf2:

BOOM! Way to go Scott. This is the issue in a nutshell.
Do we really want to permit paying clients, most of who don't give a rats ass about the striped bass fishery, wouldn't even know the current regulations, many don't even have or even need a fishing license if on a charter in RI or Mass, the privilidge of killing two bass? These people are the last ones who DESERVE a second fish.

BTW I just heard from a Marine Bio from RI who mentioned that there will be a pre-ASMFC meeting(date not yet announced) that we will be held so that RI commissioners can interact with the public before going to the ASMFC meeting in early February.

buckman: You are right, life isn't fair. If the guides can not earn enough from their sports with 1@28" then maybe they should find another job;

That isn't fair, "there are very few species left for the charters to target." :fishslap:

BOOM! Way to go Scott. This is the issue in a nutshell.
Do we really want to permit paying clients, most of who don't give a rats ass about the striped bass fishery, wouldn't even know the current regulations, many don't even have or even need a fishing license if on a charter in RI or Mass, the privilidge of killing two bass? These people are the last ones who DESERVE a second fish.



I saw Scott's post and was going to reply with basically the same thing you just said.

My prediction is .the 6 pack boats get the two fish they want .in RI . Why ??.RI is totally politically infulenced & controlled ........................I quit going to meeting because for the most part they are f #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&g joke :sspam:

ASMFC striped bass technical committee meets on Jan 8-9 in Hanover MD. Agenda not yet posted, but they are supposedly going to be reviewing state conservation equivalency proposals for Addendum IV at those meetings.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I heard RI proposed a 25% reduction... Let the charters keep 2 fish. On Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays, Fridays, and Saturdays

Sounds good to me
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

BOOM! Way to go Scott. This is the issue in a nutshell.
Do we really want to permit paying clients, most of who don't give a rats ass about the striped bass fishery, wouldn't even know the current regulations, many don't even have or even need a fishing license if on a charter in RI or Mass, the privilidge of killing two bass? These people are the last ones who DESERVE a second fish.

.

You guys are freaking hilarious. Who's "we" ??
And who the hell are you to say who deserves what ?
To a lot of you this is become personal instead of about increasing the breeding population.
Truth be told, the rec guys account for a higher percentage of the mortality of these fish then the charter and commercial guys combined.
It's always easier to blame someone else .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You guys are freaking hilarious. Who's "we" ??
And who the hell are you to say who deserves what ?
To a lot of you this is become personal instead of about increasing the breeding population.
Truth be told, the rec guys account for a higher percentage of the mortality of these fish then the charter and commercial guys combined.
It's always easier to blame someone else .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"We" are the majority view Buck. We're not blaming you (the for hire industry) for anything.

Buck its the attitude of the charter guys that they entitled to special regs is the problem. For at least four years I have seen the fishing sour. Responsible striper fisherman have reduced or curtailed keeping fish. Yet some but not all seem hell bent on keeping as many as legally possible. Look at the pictures of dead fish that many for hires put on their advertising materials. I see pictures of limits of dead bass and I am angry. Look at the pictures of the party boat out of Montauk fishing block island last year. What do you expect people to feel, we all know the fish are in trouble yet you lobby for a bigger cut of the pie and kill more fish than you need. note this rant does not include all for hire guys. There are many responsible captains out there that are respectful of the resource.

Life isn't fair… Deal with it
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Ain't that the truth !
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You guys are freaking hilarious. Who's "we" ??
And who the hell are you to say who deserves what ?
To a lot of you this is become personal instead of about increasing the breeding population.
Truth be told, the rec guys account for a higher percentage of the mortality of these fish then the charter and commercial guys combined.
It's always easier to blame someone else .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think Buckman has been pretty clear that it shouldn't matter if it is 2@33 or 1@28, if they are equivalent and therefore achieve the same goal; it shouldn't matter if charters get 2@33 and recs 1@28, if they are equivalent. I actually agree with him from that perspective.

The problem is, the argument that they are equivalent appears bogus to me and apparently, many others. I think there is some validity to the idea that 2@33 for everyone may be equivalent to 1@28, given that most rec guys who would consistently get 1@28, won't consistently get 2@33 and often won't get any @33". If 1 @33 would be a 29% reduction for an entire state, it stands that 1@33 specifically for charters won't be a 29% reduction for charters; the ability for charters to find fish is undeniably better than the average fisherman. That on top of the fact it is a stated 50/50 chance that 25% reduction can be met just isn't good enough. It is management by Russian roulette. I agree with Buckman that it isn't about who deserves what fish and what is fair, it is about management. That is where asmfc is ferhoodled, it is bogus management based on the influence of an economic group that has very few species left that can be targeted.

I think Buckman has been pretty clear that it shouldn't matter if it is 2@33 or 1@28, if they are equivalent and therefore achieve the same goal; it shouldn't matter if charters get 2@33 and recs 1@28, if they are equivalent. I actually agree with him from that perspective.

The problem is, the argument that they are equivalent appears bogus to me and apparently, many others. I think there is some validity to the idea that 2@33 for everyone may be equivalent to 1@28, given that most rec guys who would consistently get 1@28, won't consistently get 2@33 and often won't get any @33". If 1 @33 would be a 29% reduction for an entire state, it stands that 1@33 specifically for charters won't be a 29% reduction for charters; the ability for charters to find fish is undeniably better than the average fisherman. That on top of the fact it is a stated 50/50 chance that 25% reduction can be met just isn't good enough. It is management by Russian roulette. I agree with Buckman that it isn't about who deserves what fish and what is fair, it is about management. That is where asmfc is ferhoodled, it is bogus management based on the influence of an economic group that has very few species left that can be targeted.

Thank you !
I don't think it's a 50-50 shot if the reduction will be met I think it's a guesstimated 50-50 shot if it will bring the stock back as quickly as some would like.
Those that accuse the charter guys of being greedy and then are asking for the stripers to be listed as " gamefish " are hypocrites.
They want the fish to themselves.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Priority #1 right now should be what is best for the fish population... PERIOD.

Those who vehemently oppose the idea that bass stocks are in trouble most likely have views that are motivated by money.
We are playing Russian Roulette with an entire fishery.
If the bass population never collapsed in the past, then maybe you can stick to a "no way... never gonna happen" mentality... but it did, and it seems that some just refuse to accept the idea that bass are in any trouble at all.

Nailed it. Just like Nero fiddling while Rome burned.
1 @ 32 for all and 25% commercial. Note that 25% commercial does not have the same impact in every state, as in NY for example, it actually results in an increase over 2013 catch. I believe it's near 10%. Let's worry about the fish.

One of the problem with having different limits for the charters is it does not match any of the options put forth by ASMFC. You can not say for sure that 1 at 28 for Recreational and one of the other options such as 2 at 32 for the charters meets the 25% reduction. I would guess the state would have to take this back to ASMFC for approval. This may be why Virginia went with the 1 at 28 since their season is currently in progress and then they will look to change it next year.

buckman's statement "Those that accuse the charter guys of being greedy and then are asking for the stripers to be listed as " gamefish " are hypocrites.
They want the fish to themselves."

Just shows his ignorance to what is being said. If it was a game fish it would still be available to commercial fisherman and the charters. Just on a totally equal basis to everyone else. Everyone would have the exact same limit. Most of the people here are just asking for all recreational fisherman to have the same limit, not for game fish status. Most are looking for a one fish limit to protect and increase the fish numbers which in the end will help both the charters and commercials if the numbers increase.

One of the problem with having different limits for the charters is it does not match any of the options put forth by ASMFC. You can not say for sure that 1 at 28 for Recreational and one of the other options such as 2 at 32 for the charters meets the 25% reduction. I would guess the state would have to take this back to ASMFC for approval. This may be why Virginia went with the 1 at 28 since their season is currently in progress and then they will look to change it next year.

buckman's statement "Those that accuse the charter guys of being greedy and then are asking for the stripers to be listed as " gamefish " are hypocrites.
They want the fish to themselves."

Just shows his ignorance to what is being said. If it was a game fish it would still be available to commercial fisherman and the charters. Just on a totally equal basis to everyone else. Everyone would have the exact same limit. Most of the people here are just asking for all recreational fisherman to have the same limit, not for game fish status. Most are looking for a one fish limit to protect and increase the fish numbers which in the end will help both the charters and commercials if the numbers increase.

Pardon my ignorance ... I'm pretty sure " gamefish status " would mean no commercial fishing or sales of striped bass.
Am I wrong ? No you are
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You guys are freaking hilarious. Who's "we" ?? "we" :cheers:
And who the hell are you to say who deserves what ? "we"

To a lot of you this is become personal instead of about increasing the breeding population. not seeing this
Truth be told, the rec guys account for a higher percentage of the mortality of these fish then the charter and commercial guys combined. charters are recs....unless they're comm fishing with their charters which I guess also occurs...playing numbers games...if you want to look at it individually...no...man for man ....boat for boat...I'd disagree....as a group...of course/ maybe...the numbers regarding for-hire portion of the rec take seem to be constantly changing, at least here in RI to suit their needs.. and I think I cited numbers from NY that showed for-hire take as an enormous percentage of the overall rec take...but as a group recs will, in many cases, see a 50% reduction per angler per trip starting next year, true comms will see a 25%(supposedly)....and the rec-comms and for hire fleets will see ?....the illegal harvest will probably not see a reduction
It's always easier to blame someone else . starting in 2015...if a user group or region is still fishing at 2 fish and the decline continues...who gets the blame? :o
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

any two fish exception is nothing more than an accommodation for the 1 or 2 times per year "anglers"(as described previously and not by me) who you and others claim likely wouldn't fish if they can't keep that second fish...

this is the ONLY reason tendered as a rationale to allow clients of for hires(and I forget, are the captains and mates getting two fish too?) to keep "or to at least have the perception of the ability to keep two fish"....it's an odd sort of rationale when you examine it...probably jealousy :bl:

still want to know if shore and kayak for-hire clients get two fish under the same rationale...


Buck, you made a great point earlier I think, that those here fish more than the average angler and have a different view of the fishery...regarding rec/comm etc...consider....most average recs are not much of a threat to any bass...in the three brothers example that I offered...the guy hitting the beach on his own is unlikely to catch a bass never mind a keeper or even two....the guy fishing on a friend's boat or hiring a shore guide, again, not likely to catch...maybe one, if lucky...a keeper....put any of those three on a boat with an experienced captain that has been tracking the fish all season with the latest technology and they are suddenly a much more efficient "angler" and more likely to take two fish...I listened to and watched guys all summer who would struggle to hook up on their own in local waters make the trek to BI and land one 30-40+ pound fish after another and much of it facilitated by for hires day after day....your average rec has to work and might make that trek on an occasional weekend. Now, BI is an exception but everywhere up and down the coast that the bass show on schedule the for hire guys will sit on top of them for as long as they are there....not everyone jigs the canal all night, night in and night out and most boat owners that I know don't get out on their boat that often to great lament....it's funny each year when a thread starts about how the season was and despite all the pics and stories the consensus seems to be that most haven't fished that much or caught that much, even here where guys fish more than most....not surprising and as such most probably don't feel their impact on the fishery to be that great...juxtapose that against a desire by some of the most efficient people on the water thanks to experience and technology, who enable otherwise fairly inefficient people, wanting keep more bass simply over some perception which has likely been perpetrated over time by the for-hires own advertising and claims(the image of a bass for each fist)....it takes a lot of "average" anglers quite a few trips to do what the average for-hire can do in just one trip with a lot of "below average" anglers....not saying it's right or wrong... just trying to add perspective...it's not hate...or jealousy....just how it is....

[QUOTE=scottw;1060876]any two fish exception is nothing more than an accommodation for the 1 or 2 times per year "anglers"(as described previously and not by me) who you and others claim likely wouldn't fish if they can't keep that second fish...

this is the ONLY reason tendered as a rationale to allow clients of for hires(and I forget, are the captains and mates getting two fish too?) to keep "or to at least have the perception of the ability to keep two fish"....it's an odd sort of rationale when you examine it...probably jealousy :bl:

still want to know if shore and kayak for-hire clients get two fish under the same rationale...


Buck, you made a great point earlier I think, that those here fish more than the average angler and have a different view of the fishery...regarding rec/comm etc...consider....most average recs are not much of a threat to any bass...in the three brothers example that I offered...the guy hitting the beach on his own is unlikely to catch a bass never mind a keeper or even two....the guy fishing on a friend's boat or hiring a shore guide, again, not likely to catch...maybe one, if lucky...a keeper....put any of those three on a boat with an experienced captain that has been tracking the fish all season with the latest technology and they are suddenly a much more efficient "angler" and more likely to take two fish...I listened to and watched guys all summer who would struggle to hook up on their own in local waters make the trek to BI and land one 30-40+ pound fish after another and much of it facilitated by for hires day after day....your average rec has to work and might make that trek on an occasional weekend. Now, BI is an exception but everywhere up and down the coast that the bass show on schedule the for hire guys will sit on top of them for as long as they are there....not everyone jigs the canal all night, night in and night out and most boat owners that I know don't get out on their boat that often to great lament....it's funny each year when a thread starts about how the season was and despite all the pics and stories the consensus seems to be that most haven't fished that much or caught that much, even here where guys fish more than most....not surprising and as such most probably don't feel their impact on the fishery to be that great...juxtapose that against a desire by some of the most efficient people on the water thanks to experience and technology, who enable otherwise fairly inefficient people, wanting keep more bass simply over some perception which has likely been perpetrated over time by the for-hires own advertising and claims(the image of a bass for each fist)....it takes a lot of "average" anglers quite a few trips to do what the average for-hire can do in just one trip with a lot of "below average" anglers....not saying it's right or wrong... just trying to add perspective...it's not hate...or jealousy....just how it is....[/

I'm not sure how many shore guides or kayak guides they're out there Scott. I've never heard of one
But if bass experts on this site ( and I mean that as a complement )are not catching any fish from shore I can't imagine these guys would still in business . Besides that would be a whole different ballgame. They are fishing with little to no expense.
I look at charters as the most economically beneficial way to use the fishery. They simply generate more dollars for the economy per fish then any other fishery.
If you guys want it to be fair for everyone then you are against commercial fishing period.
And that's just selfish
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Ha!!! I love hearing someone with financial interests calling someone who is looking out for the fish stocks selfish...

Take a good long hard look in the mirror Buckman.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[QUOTE=scottw;1060876]

I'm not sure how many shore guides or kayak guides they're out there Scott. I've never heard of one didn't ask if you believed in their existence, just wondered if they should be treated the same based on your rationale

But if bass experts on this site ( and I mean that as a complement )are not catching any fish from shore I can't imagine these guys would still in business. might be hard to imagine but you can have a great time fishing on a fishing trip without killing two bass

Besides that would be a whole different ballgame. They are fishing with little to no expense. soooo is there a dollar threshold that you need to reach in terms of expenses in order to get that second fish for your client(s)?



I look at charters as the most economically beneficial way to use the fishery. no doubt

They simply generate more dollars for the economy per fish then any other fishery. which means if they can only kill one fish per client they would only contribute half as much to the economy? I think I've got this now...but I'd argue that the charters benefit as much from the local economy as the economy benefits from them in many cases....many charters fish because they are in town on vacation and decide to go fishing and not necessarily in town to fish...not sure how much day trippers spend, my last charter out of town I spent money locally on some ice, might have gotten gas and a couple of power bars...

If you guys want it to be fair for everyone then you are against commercial fishing period. don't got this however, makes no sense


And that's just selfish damn...meant to say...it's not hate...or jealousy...or selfishness
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

love ya man....

Ha!!! I love hearing someone with financial interests calling someone who is looking out for the fish stocks selfish...

Take a good long hard look in the mirror Buckman.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Didn't I see you on Whale Wars ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Without green peace and other people looking out for the whales, THERE WOULD BE NO MORE WHALES LEFT!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Scott,
Most of the fishing up our way is done by fisherman who travel for the fishing. The attitude that charter clients are no talent tourist , proves how little the people commenting on how this will effect charter business know.
Yes I have a stake in this financially but I have a full time job.
I'm not concerned about me. We are losing charter boats left and right on our harbor . True pioneers of the business . Now that may just be tough nuts to some here , but it's unnecessary in my mind .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Without green peace and other people looking out for the whales, THERE WOULD BE NO MORE WHALES LEFT!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thank God for them. 😣🔫
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If you guys want it to be fair for everyone then you are against commercial fishing period.
And that's just selfish
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


Buckman, you essentially admit here that commercial regulations are unfair and benefit from special exceptions.

You want to talk about selfish??? you care more about next years paycheck than you do about protecting the very source of your income for the long term. That is shortsighted and self serving. Every point you argue is about what's best for charter incomes, and not for the fish.