I do give credit to MakoMike for his efforts to actually participate in the fishery management. As Numby is demonstrating it is a thankless job for the most part,and it can be particularly difficult when an educated and frustrated angler minimizes your efforts regardless of your intentions.To criticize in such instances when doing nothing of consequence to support the species besides target them could be construed as self-serving.I interpreted MMs input as discussion and informative rather than gloating and self-serving.

My recollection is that those changes were judicially mandated as part of a settlement the government agreed to when sued by conservation groups. Certainly the vast majority of fishery restriction over the last 20 years has been judicially driven.

Note also how it prioritizes the fishing industry rather than all user groups.

As for the reliance on best available "science", that has been corrupted into the best available "data", which gives fishery managers (and politicians beholden to the industry) full leeway to decide what data is "best" and what data is best, or most conveniently, ignored.

The scientists do not determine fishery policy, not by a long shot. They provide information that is manipulated if at all possible by the managers to fit an agenda influenced heavily by commercial interests (although greed driven recreational interests are complicit).

It is a system that does not work and screws most of us, including the fish buying public.

I'll accept that. But I am past the point where anything done for striped bass will have any effect in my remaining lifetime. The fish I want to catch in the years I have left are out there swimming now, and disappearing by the millions of lbs each year.

Yes, I'm plenty bitter about it. Yes, my bitterness is ineffectual, but I make no apology for it.

Anybody who thinks the striped bass fishery has been well managed since the last collapse does not share any perspective I admire. Indeed, we all would have likely been better off if such a person had stayed out of fishery management.

I appreciate your perspective and I am hopeful the "management" improves in time. George,perhaps you should be grateful to the fishery and all the great memories it has provided you. Like most things,it will never be the same as it was.If somebody with your passion and smarts had chosen to dedicate a career to the fishery management perhaps things would be different.

Thanks, I needed that. :)

No other to put it, other than to say your recollection is WRONG You can go back and look it up if you like, but that language about "science' was inserted as part of the MSA reauthorization in 1996. But don't let facts get in the way of your emotions.

Where does it say that? Optimum yield is for all user groups.

The Scientists control the catch, its really that simple. The Science & statistical committees set the ABC, ACLs etc. The rest of the management structure has to abide by their determinations, no if ands or buts about it. But again, don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant.

The management of the striper fishery has been dominated by the catering to the party boat industry. I used to go to the meetings in the late 90's and despite the near collapse of the fishery just a decade before , the meetings were a joke. There would be 60 fisherman there. 45 recs and 5 coms and 10 party boat owners. The whole meeting then became the 10 party boat guys yelling and trying to intimidate the lone rec guy with the balls to speak up. Then the committees got overloaded with com and party boat supporting members and we ended up with 2 fish at 28". What a ridiculous limit! All so the party boat customers could be all but guaranteed to take home a fish thus making sure the party boat owners would fill their boats with stupid fisherman who cared zero about the sport or the fishery.

So now the science looks bad for the fishery and despite the science we are still at the party boat friendly limit of 2 at 28. What a ridiculous limit! You don't need to be a scientific genius to know that is a ridiculous limit..

So anyway , I stopped going to the meetings so I wouldn't be put in the position of having to punch the lights out of some party boat loudmouth who was getting in the face of anyone who said the limit should be reduced.

Yes I know this finger pointing at party boat owners (and coms and the politicians they support) is always labeled as divisive and how we should work together to solve the over fishing but you know what , its all a lie. The people who care about the fishery are always going to be bullied at meetings and talked down by the boisterous people who are in the game for money. At the bottom of it all is that as long as there is money to be made on striper fishing , the fishery will be in danger. Money and fisheries management simply don't mix. Get the money out of striper fishing and there will be instant fishery management targeted at a thriving stock , not at keeping every money grubber along the coast in greenbacks.

Oh , did I say 2 @28" is a ridiculous limit?

So go ahead and call me whatever you want. I won't respond because anybody who has been in the sport since the limit was 1@36 knows that behind every argument against conservation is a guy who is making money off the fishery.

Gee, Mike, it says it in your quote of the law above. The bit about optimizing yield specifically for the United States' [B] fishing industry [B].

I apologize for using such an unreliable source, however.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The "fishing industry" includes both commercial and recreational fishing. IOW it includes your local tackle shop as well as your local fishmonger.

No, Mike, my recollections are correct and I am sure you know it.

The Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 that forced the MSA reauthorization of 1996 (just like with the more recent 2006 reauthorization) was entirely the result of legal action and legislative pressure by the Pew trust and other environmental orginizations. The fishing industry fought it tooth and nail until the fisheries were so damaged they had nothing left to lose. You go look it up. The US Judicary site has a nice summary if you are so interested.......which I'm sure you're not (I'd link it for you but don't know how from an iPad).
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Right, Mike (finally), the law caters specifically to those with an economic (i.e., commercial) interest in the fishery. It ignores entirely those of us with a recreational interest in the fishery. You can be very sure that phrasing was inserted under the lobbying pressure of economically interested parties while us recreational schmucks worked our usual jobs oblivious to the screwing we were getting (although obviously the act was concerned with far bigger issues than striped bass and recreational fishermen). A real good argument for gamefish status it seems.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Using your "logic" here Numby, would it be fair to blame you for Obamacare?

Didn't think so....but get it off of your chest.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I've had to kind of chuckle.In 95 we had loads of nice fish in Maine. MSA adopted. Numbers were changed to meet a figure dirived mostly from the charter industry as like back in the 70's an 80's nothing from the sportsfishermen was valid as we had no documentable data. All tourny an derby data was aneckdotal to ASMFC as they stated when it was brought forward each time.One thing that was promised though was a periodic reveiw of the process to tweek it so as all user groups were treated fairly.As sportsmen have caught up with sata entry things dissapeared from the process,commercial rod n reel became more entrenched and we saw a steady decline of fish in Maine.As the northern reps tried to get the accesment figure proces modified as it was beleived rightfully to be flawed and too high. Wider spread declining fish landings and fewer large migratory schools being found were. showing a familiar trend.Being screamed at by greedy types wanting to still chase the gold rush during hearings and meetings became more like the 80's. Today the decline is coastwide.Catch numbers are way down. Mirgration schools at both ends of the season are almost gone . Name calling by those that want it to stay the way it is for self interest that is usually conected to the pocketbook is starting to get like it was way back.The process can and will be changed. Steps are underway away from the name callers so that all the data right n wrong is being looked at to make changes in the process so the fish will benefit.
The stupedist part of the arguement is that we all have a vested interest in the fish stocks improving. When they do we all will benefit as there will be more fish. Wether they be comms,sport,tounement of for just to see an enjoy the economic benefit will be for all plus the system will be tweeked so as it works better and the fish stocks will be better and healthier.
The thing to do is stop wasting time with the loud nay sayers and get in touch with all those you know away from the shouters an name callers to work towards fixing the broken process. Talk to the club reps an have them contact the other clubs with whats wanted and needed to get this process doing as the MAJORITY wants and not the minority. I'm selfish I'd like there to still be catchable fish when I'm 90. Oh it's been very interesting the response when I asked how many comms paid taxes on the fish sold under their permits. Seems some of it doesn't jive with the catch numbers.

Yes Mike I've been on the phone and computer talkin with a load of people.

Yes, Chris, it would be fair....although I'm not sure I follow your agenda.

Using your example, however, then very definitely cost inflation driven by physician charges and test ordering behavior, of which I am certainly a part and a beneficary, is a major factor necessitating healthcare reform. That means my opinion on the matter is biased and worth challenging.

By the same token, anybody who has been supporting the management process that has
resulted in our current fishery mess, particularly while profiting from that process, is biased and worth challenging.

Enough said
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Remember the 16" limit? I do. What was the science behind that?

So with the idea that the difference between an optimist and a pessimist is that the pessimist is better informed. I'm trying to dig a little into how the data is gathered regarding the " science " numbers. Tub trawls, seine halls , etc.
From the looks of it rec numbers are derived from phone surveys and intercepts of people fishing.
Really ? Talk about looking at the world through a drinking straw.
No wonder it's at best a guess.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Just remember this guys, when all is said and done the future of striped bass depends on one factor no one can control, the weather. Best the managers can hope for it keep the egg production up (maintain SSB) and pray for good weather.

everyone agrees the "science" has been crappy- until now. StripedBass have undergone the most extensive benchmark stock assessment in the history of fishery management-
is it a "perfect study"? no-

is a perfect study possible? I don't think so- between monetary constraints and the logistic impossibilities of being able to monitor the fishing public, (how many of you actually see another human when out fishing at night?) there are many reasons why the science is kinda $hitty.... so like it or not, these are the numbers that are available- anything else really is pure guesswork. accept it- this is what we got

I remember when they correlated the production to sunspot activity...really!

that is partially true. but we can control what i believe is the ultimate factor- we ALL have to stop killing as many breed stock fish as we do thus more eggs. cut rec take and comm take in half for starters.

In fact it is exactly why we are trouble now. It is the gambling approach to fishery management. Preserve some level of spawners and hope for a banner year. And it worked. They got their banner year in 2011, and that means more of the same.

The better way is to ensure a much larger spawning stock so that even mediocre years contribute meaningful fish to the population. Twice as many spawners mean twice as many offspring and double a YOY result, which goes a long way towards turning a bad year into an average year. Unfortunately, those spawners are worth money dead. So we manage with the goal to kill most of them and hope for the weather to save us by generating a banner year once every generation. Brilliant.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Hope and change.
More Fn hope and change !
Hope, isn't a plan.
Just pollyanna thinking.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sorry but it just don't work that way. There are plenty of eggs being laid every year, just look at 2011. The problem is that, given the wrong weather pattern very few of those eggs turn into fish.

Read this and then get back to me: http://www.bayjournal.com/article/li...ahead_for_fish

If you like, I have the URL for the scientific paper published by Martino, but I think it costs $25 to access it.

I'm no authority on any of this, I just know what I have seen over the years growing up but to me, stripers are an uncommon and sometimes rare fish to catch (boat are not) depending on the year. I always thought something was wrong.

To me, wouldn't it make sense to just make Stripers a catch and release only type fish? This way the fisherman can still fish them and they still have the chance to grow. Wouldn't the mortality rate of foul hooking be much lower than what we see now along with the select population of idiots keeping the fish until they get slammed with a fine?

Are you serious?

No matter how bad the conditions, some percentage of the total eggs laid turn into fish every year. If you double the number of eggs laid (by doubling the number of breeders) that same percentage results in twice as many YOY unless there is a severe limiting food shortage......which is hard to believe since larvae are very small and eat plankton.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Good weather and low rainfall keeps the insecticides and bug chemicals out of the spawning areas when the eggs are hatching for both stripers and what they feed on. Bob Pond proved this fact time an again. The process needs tweeking so that it works not completely scrapped. Incomplete data and ruling out what doesn't agree with what the controling interest wants is a major part of the problem. Benchmarck for max sustainable yeild only works for the smallest group that makes money out of it not the bulk of the users.
The only reason I don't agree with having someone dictate management without public comment is that the controling interest doesn't take care of the fish.Take care of the fish and everyone will benefit .not just any one user group.

The reasons for the sharp decline in the striped bass harvest during the 1970s and 1980s are complex. Scientists determined that overfishing caused the striped bass population to become more susceptible to natural stresses and pollution. (The principle gear used in the Chesapeake Bay commercial striped bass fishery included pound nets, haul seines, and drift, anchor and stake gillnets.) In particular, fluctuations in water temperature in spawning grounds cause significant natural stress. But this is not the only stressor.
Low dissolved oxygen (DO) in the deeper water of the upper Chesapeake Bay and in other areas has eliminated much of the summer habitat of adult and juvenile striped bass.
Acidity and contaminants in spawning habitats may have influenced the mortality of striped bass larvae in the Choptank, Nanticoke and Potomac rivers. Research indicates that highly acidic rain reacts with aluminum in the soil, causing it to dissolve in the water, which is lethal to newly hatched stripers.
Salinity, turbidity, light, temperature and pH also affect the survival of striped bass in their habitat.
Larval striped bass are also susceptible to toxic pollutants such as arsenic, copper, cadmium, aluminum and Malathion, a commonly used pesticide.
Other hypotheses for the decline of striped bass in the Bay include starvation of larvae, unfavorable climatic events, changes in water use practices, competition with other species for food and space, and poor water quality due to agricultural runoff and sewage treatment practices.
Despite these threats, the striped bass stocks continue gradually to increase in the Bay. Because the Bay remains the main spawning and nursery area for 70 percent to 90 percent of the Atlantic stock, restoration efforts remain critically important to the future of the striped bass in the Chesapeake Bay

http://www.stripers247.com/Spawning-Stripers.php

The article state that the most successful survival group of hatching stripers are those that have come from eggs with large yolk sacks. This happens when the females are about 10 years old or older. a look at an age vs length chart will show that these best breeding females with eggs that have large yolk sacks happens at a length of about 35 inches. They certainly do produce eggs that hatch successfully before this but at about 10 years old/35 inches , the survival rate of the hatched eggs goes way up do to the availability of the food in the well developed yolk sacks. Also this size female produces many more eggs as well as the more well developed eggs.

This single fact alone says that the "keeper" size limit for maximum spawning success should be somewhere in the 35 inch range , give or take some for average vs high and low lengths vs age.

You ass-U-me that some percentage of the total eggs will turn into fish. We don't know that, for all we know doubling, tripling or quadrupling the number of eggs will increase the YOY index by zero. We don't know what causes the failure to turn eggs into fish. But by your logic we should shut down all fishing on the hope that it will somehow increase the YOY incises.

Sorry I'm not willing to deny the pleasure of striped bass fishing to millions of fishermen, on some untested and unscientific theory.

Did you read the article? That is the exact opposite of what the scientists found. High rainfall is the event that causes increased survival.

High rainfall causes more current which help to keep the eggs suspended in the current rather than sinking to the bottom where they suffocate. In this sense , high rainfall helps survivability.

However....high rainfall increases the amounts of chemicals in the runoff from the watershed. This is a particular problem in the northern watershed of the Chesapeake which extends way up into central Pennsylvania. This area has many small farms where the farmers use large amounts of fertilizer and insecticide to maximize yield from their relatively small acreage. The more rain , the more these farming chemicals run off into the Chesapeake Bay from that area of the watershed. It further causes the ph of the runoff and bay waters to the acidic size which results in the leaching of metals like copper and aluminum from the soil. These metals leaching into the Bay are lethal to hatched eggs.

This info jives with what Bob Pond used to tell me over the years when I would frequently go to the Atom Factory which was 15 minutes from my house.

Mike, I've got copies of all that stuff. I watched Bob beat his head against commercial interest for decades so that the money would keep flowing. He all but put ATom under using it to fund research with one goal. Keep the striped bass viable for all interests not just sportfishing.His research was irefutable but because he didn't have PEW funding or large corperate and big name political backing-Kennedy-it was ignored and shot down . Many of use helped and did the grunt work. It was a real eye opener.The moratorium helped the fish to rebound. things were going better till by-catch and commercial take pushed by more sportfishermen started things to reverse.Now the numbers are dropping faster. Things will get changed for the better.Your name calling and insults just show your interest are self serving to the point you could care less as to what happens to the fish.A load of us feel different. Catch n release and sportfish status will all be determined in the next year.A huge anti fishing lobby is just waiting for the chance to shut it all down. If you wish to keep being part of the problem fine. Year after year retorick like yours gets less and less prevolent and conservation mindedness increases as our feelings towards a fish change.that's a positive . Yes like i said i'm selfish. I want my grand kids to be able to catch stripers even if it is just to throw them back.Not to line my pockets.

You are losing it, Mike, when you need to resort to insults and wild ridiculous distortions and extrapolations.

You are also losing it when you pull out the same old tired "the science isn't good enough so we shouldn't change a thing" BS......particularly after you have made such a strong claim that the entire fishery management is based on science ( which it is not).

Your postulate that more eggs will not result in more YOY is totally ridiculous unless the YOY number is determined by a single absolute limiting condition such as food supply. It is not and you should know that. Egg survival is dependent on a whole host of factors that destroy a large percentage of eggs laid.....some years more than others. Lay more eggs then more eggs make it to adulthood FOR ANY GIVEN MORTALITY RATE.

You should be familiar with all this. It is exactly what you are doing with self-serving misinformation. Spout more of it and more of it will stick.

Your agenda here is to support commercial fishing and the management process that is beholden to it. You made it clear you don't fish for bass any more, yet you are neck deep in an argument about their management on a board populated by recreational fishermen. Your bias is clear, as is ours, leave it at that rather than creating lame lies, false claims, and childish insults to cover your tracks.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

O.K. I'll say it one more time and then I'm done with this thread. THE LAW requires that the stock be managed using the best available science and attempt to reach optimum yield (MSY) If you don't like it, work to get the law changed, until then the managers will do what they are directed to do. Gamefish status is an individual state matter, as the law stands now the ASMFC would be violating the law if they attempted to make stripers a game fish.

:wall:
time to buy another flyrod
:wall:

maybe basic patrick can clue us in on upcoming meetings and lawmakers so we can get the law moving in the right direction, hope and change, ya that's it

Look at the ASMFC site Slip and find the part on the appeals process. i've been on the phone with some of the northern reps to see if that might be the way to go to fix some of the problems due to the economic impact of the lower numbers of fish landings coast wide.Appeal specific parts of the process with specific changes to improve things for the fish.Fix the fish problem and everyone including the fish benefit.

I am going with the sunspot theory...:)

I don't know about you Jim but before the internet and cell phone we caught way more fish.LOL Might have something to do with it LOL.Way too easy for people. we normally had to find our fish on our own.LOL