actually, RISSA didn't even send a rep, I believe because they felt they'd made themselves very clear to the committee regarding their and their members stance on the issue as have countless others on many occasions and the next meeting will afford a larger public comment forum...this meeting was a formality to confirm or announce the recommendation going forward...the SB portion of the meeting lasted all of 15 minutes and most of that was Jenks and DZ jumping in...not sure a room full of shore recs/privates would have made any difference...glad those guys got their 2 cents in though....got some priceless looks from the members:D

Ok. I thought this was the same format as the Mass meetings.

Still, good for you guys to go and speak for what you believe in.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

thanks Jay...I think there's a sledding party down the street tonight:cheers2:

I was disappointed but not surprised with the turnout. Been going to these things for a LONG time. I've known most all the players for just as long and consider Robert Ballou who ran the meeting and Dave Borden friends. It was good to let them know we're not going away and there are still different viewpoints. I think our letters will create some discussion amongst the state commissioners. I was impressed that Peter Jenkins and the SWE were able to gather quite a few RI Tackle Shops to support the one fish bag limit. I was kind of puzzeled when Ballou mentioned that the reason for the ASMFC recommended CE mode split regulation was to make it easier for every state have the same regs. To me the easiest solution to get that result would have been to have each state stay at one fish bag so that no state would have a benefit over the other, all the the for hire industry would have been on an even playing field. The end result has been to open a can of worms or eels in this case.
I basically paraphrased and submitted what I wrote here:
The Newport County Salt Water Fishing Club would like to go on record supporting Option 1 for all Rhode Island recreational user groups because:
It has the highest probability of achieving the 25% mortality reduction;
It will result in fewer fish killed, especially larger breeding females;
It will be the easiest for environmental police to enforce.

The small state of Rhode Island once again has the opportunity to make a real difference for the future of striped bass management. Much like during the 1980s our state waters within 3 miles of Rhode Island’s coastline hold what may be the last areas in the entire northeast where larger bass can be caught with any consistency. Because of this RI waters are now under increasing pressure by not only RI recreational fishermen, but fishermen from Connecticut, New York, and Massachusetts. If Rhode Island stays at a conservative one fish bag limit for all including the for hire industry it will have a compound effect by also limiting all fishermen from other states to one bass in possession while in RI waters even though their home state may have a two fish bag limit. Many of us also feel that allowing a two fish bag for customers of the RI for hire industry would basically allow those customers, many who do not even purchase (or even need to purchase) a fishing license, and who generally don’t even give a damn about the fishery, the privilege of keeping two bass! Why are we even taking non-licensed for hire clients into consideration when discussing regulations? Where were they during the entire public comment period?

The conservation equivalency action by ASMFC has further resulted in the concerned public losing any trust they had in ASMFC and a majority of recreational fishermen are now disillusioned and have lost faith in the ASMFC regulators. ASMFC still has the chance to do the right thing and act in the best interest of the striper stock based on this public input. Please support a one fish bag limit for all of RI recreational fishermen, including the for hire industry.

Disappointed I didn't make it and that we did not have more of a showing.

I totally spaced on last night.

per Dennis..."Feb 16th is the RIMFC meeting to institute any 2015 regulations based on what the ASMFC meeting approves. It will be our last chance to convince RI regulators to go one fish."

probably wouldn't hurt to bombard the deciders with emails and letters over the next two weeks, pre-meeting...a few things are very clear....the mode split option reportedly achieves a 29% reduction...greater than the 25% required but less that the 31% that was originally intended and the bulk of that reduction is achieved through shore rec./privates fishing at 1@28, which I think many shore rec./private are happy and willing to participate in.....I don't believe 2@32 will result in much reduction for the for-hires and definitely not for those for-hires and their clients fishing the BI summer resident bass population...

we will have the spectacle of a BI life long resident out there in a small Whaler restricted by law from taking one than more bass from his home state waters as a behemoth boat from New York steams up with 150 residents of NY and elsewhere and collects two fish per charter plus the captain and mate(s) presumably.....this would make a great cartoon if anyone had some artistic ability.

for-hires may take all of this as another "attack"...but honestly....there were comments added by the for-hire contingent regarding Striped bass long after SB had been addressed following reporting of some of the other species that they were concerned with the other night....these comments indicate to me that the sector..or at least those that were in attendance from the RI for-hire sector have no willingness or intention in participating in any reduction, in fact, the comments indicate that they feel they are "entitled" to continue to do business as usual...which, ironically, was exactly described as their attitude would be by a commercial interest in the room...

the mode split is in reality carving out an exclusion for a select number of Rhode Islanders and their clients, many of those clients, by their own admission are NOT Rhode Islanders....and to add insult to injury, it allows out-of-state interests and their out-of-state clients the same benefit....

there is still time to affect the decision and there have been some encouraging post-meeting words and signs for various quarters who's sentiment summed up is....."keep up the pressure"

Its so blatantly obvious that 1 fish across the board no exceptions is best for the poulation right now, and it is also obvious that the asmfc never had the balls to say "no" to charter guys. This has been proven, evidenced by C.E.
I fear that the back room conversations, deals, and decisions have been made, and the big loser here is the striped bass. If we wipe them out, we all lose.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

there is a multiplier effect at work here too...the shore recs bump into smaller fish on average ..... the for-hires aren't throwing Zoom Flukes at schoolies...they are targeting larger fish.....those BI fish are in the middle of their life cycle and at their most productive years if I'm reading the literature correctly...each time a client takes two of those fish they're taking a considerable amount of eggs out of the equation and think about how many times this occurs throughout the season on each of these boats...cutting that in half would seem to me to be a very productive thing to do.....unlike the commercial folks, they have an option when a fish comes to the boat whether or not to keep it and I believe the tendency is to return to the dock with the largest fish...

I have yet to hear of any meetings scheduled in CT to go over C.E. From the documents I read CT indicated 1 fish at 28" for all anglers as the "preferred" option. The second option for CT is contingent on RI approving the exemption for the for hire industry (2@32"). If that option in RI fails then CT will only have the 1@28" plan left as an approved reduction plan.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

pretty sure CT will recommend the mode splits now that RI has indicated that they will be recommending the splits...Mass too I imagine

understand that "for-hire financial hardship" was never mentioned as a reason or rationale for recommending the mode splits the other night...

two reasons were given after pointing out that Mass and Ct we both considering the splits and that CT was most likely watching to see what RI was going to do and then follow suit...

uniformity of regulation between states was the first reason.....stated "we don't want boats fishing side by side with different regulations..."competitive advantage""(later stated they should have said "within modes")

sorry but this makes no sense for two reasons....SW fishing regulations from state to state currently vary both in size and bag limits and regarding length of "seasons" as well

while you might address the uniformity "within the modes" state to state...you create an even bigger issue of non-uniformity between modes within the state as well as state to state by establishing the mode split.....geez

this is/was strictly an "accommodation" for some of the special interests that some of them are beholden to who have decided that they have no interest in participating in any reduction willingly...

the second reason that followed was that enforcement would be easier with uniform regs state to state...

HUH??? for the above reasons coupled with the fact that it's well known that enforcement barely exists as it is...little or no enforcement of Fed waters fishing and inshore/onshore as well ....the illegal harvest and sale of stripers and other species is rampant.....striped bass is on the menu in restaurants throughout the state during the season and very little of it is bought through legal fish merchants....one of several worst kept secrets in RI....


bottom line is that their stated rationale for recommending the mode spits was very weak.....we should let them know this through letters and emails....I'll post a comprehensive list tomorrow of all of the folks that should be bombarded....hopefully after the "BIG GAME" and during the next storm tomorrow folks will have time to fire off a note .....

Correct, that NJ started the ball rolling. But no one in Ct, RI or Mass could make that "other state 2 fish" argument if NY went 1@28.

Great job new jersey... Disappointing but not surprising.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The New Jersey Marine Fisheries Council unanimously voted to support a two fish bag limit for striped bass beginning sometime in 2015, with one fish at 28 to less than 43 inches, and a second fish equal to or greater than 43 inches.

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) recently mandated a 25% or better reduction by all coastal states on striped bass harvest beginning in 2015, with ASMFC technical committee members approving New Jersey's proposal of one striper at less than 43 and one striper at 43 or greater as meeting that 25% reduction goal

they (NJ) seem to be more entitled i guess :huh:

fish just under 43" are the most prolific breeder's apparently.

Entitled to what?

*ASMFC technical committee members approving New Jersey's proposal as meeting that 25% reduction *

we can't do much about NJ, they'll have to live with their decision, we can still affect the decision(s) here and choose to lead....between now and Feb 16th you need to make your voice heard by the local folks who will make the ultimate decision, i'll post the RI names, numbers and physical/email address that need to be contacted later today and a form letter with bullet points for a consistent message if you'd like to use it....it's important to remind them over the next two weeks as well as to, if you possibly can, get to the meeting on the 16th...many of the clubs are meeting this week and next week, please remind and encourage your friends and fellow members