![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
If there were a slot, neither those boats nor the recs would have been out there decimating schools of big fish the way they been for 20 years. We probably would be talking about plugs vs eels and not a potential moratorium. |
Quote:
So all the boats in all the states I mentioned only account for 5% of the total mortality? I don't believe that for a minute. I live here. I see what is happening. I totally get that VA and MD and NC at the Oregon Inlet account for a lot of tonnage. That's why I believe gamefish status is the only viable solution for the survival of the species. My feeling are not self-serving as I sold the boat and haven't fished for Bass in 4 years. I care about the future. |
I agree...the charts and numbers cannot account for the poaching which is super out of control...same as the black market crap that goes on.
Regarding the Canal. Throw enforcement at it. Special regs. Minimum fine for poaching or wanton waste is between a 1 and 10K fine. Like you can get fined if you release a fish that floats. Catch and keep is a counter intuitive regulation. If the Canal was a catch and keep only fishery that was strongly enforced. Most of the facebook yahoos would disappear. Once you catch your limit no matter the size you have to stop fishing. If its a legal fish you can get fined for releasing it. You would need a lot of enforcement but in my eyes...it would generate revenue for the state...keep the tackle shops in business and really cull the misbehavior. It is also easy to for me to make this suggestion because it is not my home water....but just wanted to throw it into the pot as another idea. |
Good thoughts!
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Anyway, the statistics show that in 2017 the entire charter party fleet was responsible for 5% of the mortality. I didn't run the numbers for the prior years but I believe they would be in the same neighborhood. Feel free to query the database, its pretty easy to do, and let me know if I'm wrong. As far as slot limits go, the general consensus at this point among us wonks, is that it will only work if the limits are continually adjusted to protect the few big year classes we have coming into fishable sizes. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Who is to blame is never been something i get too hung up on. Both rec and coms poach and have impact on the fishery. I totally understand the government really cares little about the resource as they do nothing to enforce and protect it. Anyway...i will crawl back into my hole and hope for a miracle....hahaha. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
What in the post you quoted from me says that a lot less people will fish if there is a slot limit? Also, what on Earth were you talking about when you replied to a post about a moratorium and a coast wide slot and said it didn't work last time? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Lies, damn lies and statistics.
Textbook. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
WAIT!!!...maybe I do have the answer...shut it down for 6 - 8 years.
During that time, people can talk about WHY it was shut down and perhaps that'll drive us to be more responsible...again. I mean, we did get a little smarter since the last moratorium, I thought :eek5: ....let's just keep reliving the cycle, There's definitely science to prove that...:hihi: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The point of moratorium now would be to take the pressure off all the year classes to reduce the need for a moving slot. Yes we can just set the table and wait for mother nature, but sometimes mother nature doesn't cooperate. The whole business of maximum sustainable yield got us where we are. The stock is twice as large as when the last moratorium occurred, but the total pressure from recreational and commercial fisherman is multiple times larger than the pressure in the 60's and 70's that precipitated the moratorium. |
Understood....and I'm glad you didn't take my post personally...no one's at fault here, we're just sharing opinions. That system may just be the closest assessment process possible for the Rec. sector.
However, it's severely flawed (IMO) and when I read about %'s on the rec. side, I always shake my head. It just makes matters worse when I see people standing behind those numbers like they're actually scientific facts/data. They're not...they're estimates based on peoples' "reportings" :rtfm: Interview a "yahoo" who wants attention to begin with, and what do you think he's going to report, that he got skunked or that was the only fish he caught? :scratch: I doubt it. Seems like a lot more people are looking for a soap-box nowadays and that leads to false information ___________________________ I can just hear them now, during a moratorium at the Canal...."I wasn't trying to catch a striped-bass, I was after that one bluefish that I saw jump in the middle of that mass of Bass"...:fishslap: The CCC must rank high for locales with the highest mortality rates in the NE for SB. But it's easy to forgive yourself when you toss or even carefully release that striped-bass back in the water...he's out of sight and out of mind. You don't realize the damage done because he's only going to wash up further down in an eddy, or simply float out into one of the Bays. As much as it pains me to say this, because I too am guilty (if I can call it that) of fishing the CCC, but they should probably shut down fishing altogether in that place. Some will say, the CCC is but a grain of sand along the entire E-coast, but the impact caused to large schools (of the perfect mating class) at one given time is pretty impressive. For every conservative advocate, there are 1K who don't give a dam. :huh: |
Quote:
As much as you'd think it's great that more people are fishing then ever before (which equates to cha-ching for the economy)...these people only know the "now"...they've nothing to compare it to. AND, if things do go awry, they'll just pick up their golf bags like Paul did and hang up their rods until this "fad" returns for them. When I've taken friends or family out on the boat with me, they often ask.."why can't we just fish right here?" There is a mind-set out there, where many people see this ginormous ocean and think there are fish everywhere. :huh: very misleading to those who don't really care or know as some do. |
Quote:
The striped bass stock is NOT managed for MSY, its managed for abundance, check out the ASMFC FMPs and pay particular attention to the reference points. MSY is a substitute for "Optimum Yield" in the MSA and the MSA does NOT apply to he ASMFC. If mother nature doesn't cooperate, there is almost nothing we can do to recover the stock. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
"After about 3 years, at the juvenile stage, the females begin to migrate to the ocean where they mature. The males tend to remain in the estuary longer than the females." I will read the details of how abundance targets vary from msy. Pretty sure they come from the same nest. |
Quote:
Here is how the reference points (BRP's) you reference... come from TOR #5 is “Update or redefine biological reference points (BRPs; point estimates or proxies for BMSY, SSBMSY, FMSY, MSY). Define stock status based on BRPs by stock component where possible. (these are all relative to maximum sustainable yield) When you say it is managed for abundance, that is sort of like saying the amount of people is measured by how many there are. All of these things are measures of levels of abundance. You are correct that they are explicitly saying the goal is MSY, but in the 2018 plan, there are some key questions some might find interesting: Does the Board want to manage the stock to: – Maximize yield – Maximize catch rates – Maximize the availability of trophy fish What is the acceptable level of risk when it comes to preventing stock collapse? and... The Board has raised concern that the current BRP’s are too conservative for various biological, ecological, and socio-economic reasons and may be restricting fishing unnecessarily. That should give us all confidence in the process :doh: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
From:https://chesapeakebay.noaa.gov/fish-facts/striped-bass And this: Kohlenstein (1981) showed that approximately 50% of the 3-year-old female striped bass in Chesapeake Bay, and a smaller percentage of 2- and 4-year-old females, moved to the coast to join the migration annually. In contrast, few males of that age were migratory." Fromhttps://www.nwrc.usgs.gov/wdb/pub/species_profiles/82_11-008.pdf |
I wish I had the same faith in the ASMFC as you do mike (in thinking they will act to rebuild the species). I don't think their actions and decisions are based on whats best for the health of a fishery as their first priority... They may be acting in the best interest of a group... but it's probably not a group of fish.
|
Quote:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:12 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com