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

Fox guarding the hen house.

Charter captains and comercial fishermen
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

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

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

I agree.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thank you big jay!!! Exactly!
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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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.

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? ;)

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