Our clients for the most part are fisherman and not ignorant of the laws . Neither are we . But they lack a boat or the free time to toss plugs in the canal every night . They like to eat fish so the book a charter , feed the family fresh fish and have fun at what they enjoy .
Doesn't sound unreasonable .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm old enough to remember Sabatowski, and others, where you got to take home one fish at the end of a charter. Sabby had no trouble being fully booked through the season. Granted, they sold the rest of the catch, but the point is, people still paid and showed up knowing they'd only get to keep one fish.

what the 17 foot skiff, back bay light tackle specialist telling the 6 pack charter fleet they can't have 2 fish per customer because that's not what HE wants, or caters HIS business to?

BINGO

this is a fish grab! This isnt about 'no one will book a charter with us if it goes down to one fish'... its 'we are going to get a lot more bookings if its 2 fish!!!"


FISH GRAB!!!! :smash:

How are we (I) jealous?

And how would that imply a "begger thy neighbor attitude"? I don't make $ off of fish.

I think most clients don't care how many bass they can take home and are willing to take home other fish. If they wanted to take get their monies worth in fish, they would be better off going to a fish market in most cases. Most charters are there for the experience - whether it is with the family or friends.

As I've discussed with friends, I think charter captains do a lousy job of "selling the experience" and instead focus on the meat. If I was a charter captain, I'd have a good digital camera on board and I'd either email the charter pictures of the day or have pictures developed and sent to them within the week.

I've had friends call me the night before they were going on a charter asking about the regs. bc they had no idea what they were. They were going out either with their kids or with friends.

nail hit on head.

Yup, well said on his part.

I might be reading it wrong but aren't you doing the same thing you accuse him of doing?

Fish grab for who, the charter clients or the capt ?






QUOTE=Nebe;1058579]this is a fish grab! This isnt about 'no one will book a charter with us if it goes down to one fish'... its 'we are going to get a lot more bookings if its 2 fish!!!"


FISH GRAB!!!! :smash:[/QUOTE]
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

:claps::claps::claps:VERY WELL SAID Dave Peros!!! I applaud you

I don't detect any jealousy there, just truth
if you can't see it, then his point is made

EXCELLENT!!! glad to hear it

Lots of resentment, it seems, from the 6 pack guys. Do you really, genuinely believe that bookings will take a meaningful drop if the limit is 1 fish per angler? I'm no expert on the clientele of 6-packs. All I know is my college friends and I go once a year for a reunion, we keep our limit. If the limit is cut in half, it would never even cross my mind not to go.

I am sure there are SOME clients who won't go if it's 1 fish. Is it a meaningful number? And how many clients will you get if the stock collapses and you get skunked half the time? This fall, we almost didn't go because the captain ( a very honest guy) told us how lousy the bass fishing was, so we fished for sea bass most of the day.

Looks to me like everyone wants to get as much cash as they can before the well is dry.

I can't see why someone on a charter boat has a right to more fish than the recreational guy in his own boat. I just can't see how anyone justifies that.

that's fine but show me a more valid reason charters should be able to allow 2 fish per customer.

:hihi: LMAO
Mike we all don't live in Cambridge you know :)

tell us why you support a 2 fish allowance???

thank you, I did too


as far as jealousy, you're entitled to your opinion
I think most of us see the writing on the wall and spend enough time on the water on waters' edge to see history repeating itself and want to do something about it instead of squeezing every last dollar like some seem to, that's all

I haven't seen a valid reason they shouldn't . Some of you guys sound like the same people closing beaches for Piping Plovers 😊
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

maybe where you live but that's not true around here

I used to make a decent enough living working hard in construction of new homes as well as remodels, then comes the mortgage crisis because of some greedy individuals and it all went to hell, guess what? you adapt, do something else or get creative, supplement your lost income, cut back on expenses. the strong survive, just like the ones on the Cape will survive supporting one fish. I am not going to feel bad for any charter biz here in Mass or in RI or anywhere else that thinks they need 2 fish per day limit, no pity from me and I am not from stripersforever, never been to their site nothing like that. Suck it up and live with it all of us!

well so what, if one fish isn't enough there is an alternative if you need more food, go to the store like everyone else

1@28" will achieve the exact same outcome as 2@33", a 25% reduction.
Given the choice, I will ask for 2@33".

Somehow that gets me labeled as a blind greedy black market fish monger hellbent on the destruction of the fishery.

one good spawning year is not enough to sustain the population in my opinion
better to err on the side of caution then risk more bad years of spawning, you never know how long it will take to recover the bass to where it should be. Like MakoMike said, weather has a lot to do with it and also I believe water quality as well so fertilizers and other polution may contribute.

How about this, we have all those freaking meetings all over again and vote again but make it 2 fish coastwide at 34" or 36" whatever will yeild the same amount of conservation? does that seem right.

I don't know why they even came up with this option, I guess they have strong lobbyists in New Jersey or something

Jim, They see it as a BOOM for business if it is 2 fish, because there will be a reward if you book a charter as opposed to going by yourself... if you go by yourself off the rocks, you can keep 1, but if you pay the piper and go on a charter, you can keep 2! Or, better yet for the captain, he can still sell his paying fare's unwanted catch on the commercial market or black market just the way he has been for years. .



This is corruption at the core.

I guarantee you all that this issue is not about wether the charter fleet will loose money, its the prospects of making more money and the black market has a strong influence here as well.. That is where the real money will be lost.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


That's total BS and shows the disdain you have for charter captains

In the case of the Stellwagon guys , there is little left to fish for . Catch shares crushed the cod , and they don't have scup, sea bass, etc .
This is about surviving not boosting business .
You don't have a clue
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

the so called experts may say it's the same outcome(although I think it is over a longer period of time) but I am not buying into that at all. I don't see how allowing 2 fish is more conservative than 1 fish just because the size limit is raised by 5 inches, big deal , it still kills 2 fish, that is twice as many, granted it protects the population of undersize fish but once they reach 33", they'll be killed too.

I don't know about your label there, but being in the business one would think you would want the bass to be plentiful and sustainable rather than just at the brink of collapse.
I just don't agree with having a choice for s special group, I see no need for it.

I wonder if those fisheries expert scientist or whatever they are take into account all the losses like from predators, disease, starvation, poachers. I think they are tossing out educated guesses and can put the numbers where they see fit.

Fair enough .
I'm sure the science is seriously flawed . It always is .
That is why putting people out of work needs to be factored in .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Charter boats have historically had special regs on many different species of fish from seabass & scup to tuna. This is nothing new
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

LOL here's the problem 25% reduction is a joke. Sad as it sounds the science is flawed as no one listens to those out there fishing. You want to really see the Charter line go look at the Pic galleries an see for yourself. we are the problem. Everyone wants as much of the pie as they can get. No matter the consequences. Look at the Cod. MMMM They're talking no recreational take at all. Why do you think a lot of the Charters want to have more fish. During the moritorium there were still a load of charter boats out there. How many Charters keep every fish that come's on board? Most go back in.Many dead. I don't know the perfect answer but whats goin on now isn't it. Look at the Tuna,cod,monk fish,tommy cod,kilie fish,harbor pollack an so on. Oh mackeral now added.We are the problem. We spend too much time tryin to undermine any posetive action for selfishness. Yup SAD. If we did what needs to be done-Whats best for the fish- things would get better across the board.

I think the problem is I have too much of a clue, as I know people who work on charters and have taken charters and see this stuff happen.

1 fish will not hurt the industry. People will still pay to fish.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Clearly this is a heated topic and I'd be a fool to suggest I truly understand all the science, but what I do know is this is the first season since I've fished for striped bass where I didn't catch a single keeper. Now I need to qualify that statement, because about 8 years ago I changed the way I fished, but I still think my experience is just as valid a sampling as any other. Why, because I'm fishing the same waters I've always fished, with primarily the same tactics I've always used and my days for 8 years all have pretty much started the same way. I'd launch in Westport with the sun just about to pop up and I'd fish a milk run of ledges with plastic to see if I could catch some bass before the sun came up and I switched over to deeper water to drift and jig for eaters.

Ten years ago, I'd catch several dozen stripers, with multiple keepers each and every morning I'd go out; all before the sun got to high in the sky. At the end of the day, I could absolutely count on hens and chickens ledge to give up as many more smaller fish as I felt I had the energy to catch. Each and every year since, I've seen a dramatic decline in the numbers of fish and specifically those 28-36 inch keepers, which would routinely clobber my plastic in between schoolies.

I suspect I'd have to work long days and target only stripers to even have a chance at even catching a third of what I did ten years back. There were a few years around 2006 to 2008, where I could have filled my boat with keepers and schoolies; I'd catch them all day long while jigging and drifting for black sea bass off Gay Head and the sound. Those couple of years were such fun, one drift your nailing 30-40 lb stripers, then the 12-15lb blues would move in, with black sea bass and fluke in between. That same offshore structure for the past 4 years hasn't given up a single day that even comes close.

Catch them to make a living, catch them until they are gone, then go get a job in the trades. Certainly I'm not saying charters are to blame, everyone targeting and harvesting stripers is to blame, we all collectively own the responsibility to turn it around or we can all continue to rape the resource until we have a moratorium.

I know people depend on charters for a living and I feel for them. I know fishing is a long tradition in New England and trust me having just finished Fatal Forecast by Michael Tougias, I understand it's a hard tough life and to see restrictions put on how you can support your family makes it tougher. If I were in the business I'd be looking at other means of making the boat make money, because I see the writing on the wall and proactive measures are far better than reactive ones.

I plan to make my contribution by not harvesting bass, I hope others will do the same. I can't control the weather, the black market for fish, the fact that other cultures couldn't give a rat's ass about our regulations or that the politicians are listening to anyone without deep pockets; but I can do my part.

Tight lines to all, but many species are a lot of fun with the right gear.

You don't know what you are talking about. what Jane lubchenco did to the cod in the Gulf of Maine allowing huge draggers to decimate the local cod is just easy for you to point fingers at. Why is there a large limit on cod south of ptown, georges bank and Rhodeisland? Is it Corruption? Or maybe a thriving fishery?
Mackerel? Harbor pollack? Tuna? Again you don't know what you are talking about.
They just increased the tuna quota. Obviously that was corruption also. The mackerel are from one end of the bank to the other and there are so many harbor pollack on jeffreys you cant get to the bottom.
the rod and reel permit for macs is 3 thousand pounds a DAY and pollack is 10 thousand pounds a DAY. Flawed science, Corruption and greed there? Or maybe just MAYBE another thriving fishery?

you are the ones who won't listen to the ones who are actually out there fishing every day.---->US.
you blame your lack of success on us instead of changing your tactics. No different then setting up a tree stand in the walmart parking lot and then complaining there are no deer there. because you refuse to go in the woods.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thinking on this some more.......maybe there could be a trophy slot for charter boats. 1 fish 28 plus and one at 60 inches plus.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I would support that as a compromise.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Lets not forget those Seals and all the fish they need to eat to sustain themselves...their numbers continue to increase and there should be a culling of the heard on them too...lots of human and environmental impacts...some kind of human reduction appears to be needed and we can imapct that with some form of reduction (that we may all not agree on). Very hard to change the weather but we can make an impact to the habitat in the spawining areas as well as the number of gorging seals...politically there isn't anyone out there with enough balls to challenge the seal issue so until that is recognized it will also continue to be a big impact...they are everywhere these days...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So, one of the scenes of the biggest slaughter has been Block Island, RI, MA, CT and NY boats. How many of those fish are between 28" and 33" that would be released, and reduce the mortality?

My issue here is that it is a nominal reduction, but 2 @ 33" for most charters is the same mortality as 2 @ 28". I am not opposed to some of the splits; tautog in the fall in RI has been split regs for a while now, scup as well.

My guess is a lot of these commercial anglers with the big boats would be looking at the dock if it weren't for the customers willing to subsidize their hobby. And in reality it is a hobby for most here but they act like they are Gloucester.'s finest. I know there are folks out there trying to make a go of earning their keep just fishing with today's regulations. Tough future I would guess.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Actually I agree with that . I'm one of the above but my son makes his living at it and a lot of seasoned guys that have seen more then most are hurting bad .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

the problem is that we are eroding the likelihood that the regs will actually attain the necessary reduction with every stinkin' loophole that gets added in to the mix. and by the time anything gets re-evaluated to see how the regs have worked, it'll be YEARS TOO LATE (kinda like this whole friggin mess is already.....)
I'm sympathetic to the challenge that headboats face, but this is the bed we've made for ourselves- now EVERYBODY has to adapt to the changes that are needed


or go extinct

First off, congratulations to the Cape Cod Charter Boat Association for supporting the one fish at 28-inches regulation; it is clear that their membership is comprised of enlightened individuals who understand the need for everyone to do their part when it comes to striped bass conservation.
As far as the numerous inflammatory and derogatory comments tossed about in this thread by what appear to be charter captains and/or supporters of the industry, it really is getting old. I have been to the hearings and am growing tired of the intimidation tactics and name calling used by individuals and groups with economic interests in order to get their way. When an "industry" stubbornly adheres to methods that are not sustainable and/or harm the common good, then the principles of economics will cause some of those businesses who won't adapt to fail. On the other hand, those operations that do adapt will survive and even thrive.
I've seen it happen with local charter captains who sail out of ports along the southside of the Cape; when they saw that bass fishing was hurting, they elected to encourage their clientele to focus on other species such as sea bass and bluefish. Some even realized that the experience of catching mainly bass smaller than the legal limit for possession is enjoyable for their charters and a number adjusted their tactics to heighten the experience of fishing, as opposed to just catching and killing.
I suspected that once my original post was out there, I would hear the usual "stuff" about fly fishermen and Stripers Forever (which I am not a member of and have no intention of ever becoming). If you read it carefully, you will see that I do not single out those charter captains who feel the need to "max out" as the sole folks responsible for overfishing, but include recreational anglers who have to kill their limit each time they are on the water and the vast majority of "commercial" striped bass anglers who have no interest in stepping up to the plate and dealing with the realities faced by small boat fishermen who have dedicated their lives to working on the water as their sole source of income.
It is true that most of bass that remain in the Chesapeake are small males after the larger females and males join the coastal stock in the spring, but the much anticipated bumper "crop" of bass from the 2011 year class is already in harm's way since states such as Maryland and Virginia allow recreational and commercial fishermen to harvest 18-inch or larger stripers - which is what a large percentage of the 2011 population taped out at last year and those numbers will obviously increase in 2015.
The science has proven that the late fall and winter conditions in any given year in the Chesapeake definitely are a major factor in terms of the quality of that season's spawn - but controlling the weather is certainly not something humans can do to guarantee a healthy striped bass biomass.
But we can help to maintain the health of the striped bass stock in one way - and that is by killing less of them. Folks are realizing that they were snookered by the ASMFC Striped Bass Management Board this fall with their apparent decision to do just that. The commitment to a 25% reduction in the take of bass from the coastal stock was applauded by one and all, but the board was holding a trick card in the form of "conservation equivalency" that would allow deviation from the one at 28-inch pledge. While it may be true that a two fish at 33-inches bag limit will be somehow equivalent to the smaller limit in terms of numbers of fish killed, the chances of succeeding in meeting the primary goal of boosting the overall health of the stock are not equal.
In the end, the essence of "greed" is believing that it is OK for any single user group to harvest more fish to the detriment of the common good, meaning that the ASMFC has once again failed in its duty by allowing any consideration of different regulations for the charter fleet.

probably good to remember when talking about these reductions and arguing for exceptions that..according to the managers reports the agreed to reductions only have a 50% chance of achieving the intended results which is why many were working toward the 33% reduction given that this will not be revisited for 3 years.....

 If total harvest is reduced by 25% starting in the 2015 fishing year, there is a 50% probability1 F will be at or below its target level within one year.


 If total harvest is reduced by 17% starting in the 2015 fishing year, there is a 50% probability1 F will be at or below its target level within three years.

A 50% probability was the minimum recommended by the TC - a higher probability of being at or below the target
would require more restrictive management measures that achieve a higher reduction than the projections estimate is needed