EEZ-zone
 

Where exactly is the EEZ zone?

It's where the 3 mile state territorial waters end and the waters under federal jusrisdiction being. In most places it begins 3 miles from the shoreline and ends at the 200 mile limit. But, there are places where it bulges to include offshore islands in state waters, like Nantucket. If you're more than 3 miles offshore, you can't really know for sure whether you're in the EEZ without a chart.

Federal Regulations more or less permit only American fishing vessels to commercial fish in the EEZ unless a foreign company is part American owned or partnered.

Some species, such as stripers are only allowed to be fished for in state waters and not in the EEZ, rec or comm. There is some talk about opening up striped bass fishing in the EEZ to comm and rec for the entire EEZ or the EEZ out to 12 miles.

Some areas have wierd rules such as a triangle that extends around Block Island to Pt Jude and areas like the Long Island Sound and around Fishers.

A large part of the issue is that some very large stripers winter in the EEZ. The commercial dogfish fishery catches some as bycatch, but must release them. They want to keep the bycatch bass, since they are worth much more per pound than dogfish. This sounds good on the surface, especially since many of these bass die as the nets are hauled in, but there's a problem with it. If they're allowed to sell those bass, they'll profit more by "dogfishing" in areas that have high concentrations of bass, and more will be taken. The line between "bycatch" and directed fishery becomes blurred.
These large bass produce huge numbers of eggs, and they also contain the genetics for producing large offspring. From a biologist's point of view, they shouldn't be removed from the breeding stock. As we keep more and more large fish, those that breed at a small size become more prevalent in the population. The average bass will get smaller and smaller.
Before you decide that this is unsubstantiated hypothesis, you should know that there is plenty of support for this idea gathered from research on several other species.
Those large offshore stripers should be left alone as a genetic reservoir against future problems with the striper fishery. It's kind of like having an ace up your sleeve. They should be kept safe from either the direct opening of the EEZ currently proposed, or even from the allowable bycatch that has frequently been proposed over the last decade or so.
I love catching stripers as much as anyone, that's why I frequent this message board. But...I'm willing to accept the fact that fisheries management is most effective when it bases its decisions with the greatest emphasis on proliferation of the managed species, and does not put it second in line, behind the wishes of us fishermen.
If we are to err, let it be in favor of the fish. Then they will be more likely to outlast us, and provide us and future generations with great sport. If we err in our own favor, we may lose them and thus, life would really suck. I don't want to ever be tempted to turn in my graphite Lamiglas for a graphite-shafted golf club.

EEZ
 

Thanks

Very well put Baldwin, thanks

That is a total crock. 1st of the commercial stiped bass harvest is set by the ASMFC and it is reached each and every year, so any "bycatch" that is allowed to be sold will count toward the commercial quota and result in LESS striped bass being killed. Secondly, every state that has a commercial striped basss fishery either has or could implement a limitation on the amount of licenses. In those states that already don't permit new license those "dogfishers" could get a commercial stripe bass license. Thirdly, there almost no boats that any longer target dogfish, since the feds and ASMFC put severe landing limits on the doggies, it just doesn't pay to fish for them anymore. The vast majority of striped bass bycatch today comes from guys targeting cod in the great south channel in the fall.

What are you talking about John? There is no such triangle, look at any chart that show the demarkation of the states waters and you'll see that there is indeed federal waters between Pt Judith and Block Island. That is the reason why the only federal waters where it is legal to possess striped bass is in Block Island sound.

Let's think about it for a minute. If those stripers taken as bycatch count toward the quota, they still count as striped bass, and do not result in LESS bass taken. Same amount is more likely.
Secondly, those very large bass not only produce more eggs, but those eggs are larger and more viable, resulting in more young developing and surviving, and contain the genetics necessary to produce bass with the potential to reach those large sizes. Read my posting again about the effects of removing the largest fish before criticizing it. My posting was based on scientific evidence, not opinion and conjecture.
Also, the poaching problem is already rampant. I know this, because I have spoken with people who admit doing it. Opening the EEZ, which extends to 200 miles offshore, would create a nightmare in regulating that fishery. It's already impossible to keep a watchful eye on the industry, this would make it even more difficult.
If a certain catch quota is allowed by ASMFC, that quota would still be filled no matter which states allowed commercial harvest and which ones didn't. It would just change the proportions allowed to each state, and not decrease the amount of bass taken.

That is not logical. If a quota is for 1,000,000# and bycatch of 50,000# does not count, the total bass killed is 1,050,000. If the bycatch counted toward the quota, the total is only 1,000,000#. That's fewer bass killed, not more.

As far as the argument that the EEZ harbors proportionately bigger fish than the populations commercially targeted inshore, I'd like to read some of that science if it's not too much trouble. That's the first I've heard of it.

If the quota is 1,000,000 and bycatch counts toward it, the quota will still be 1,000,000. Same number, not raised, not reduced. Just taken from different areas.

current bycatch numbers are NOT taken into account when counting up striped bass mortality and quotas for different states. if they were incorporated, the quotas would still be reached, only with less bycatch. there would still be bycatch recorded after the seasons.

Baldwin,
Maybe an example will help, lets say that the current commercial quota is 1,000,000 pounds of stripers and the current bycatch is 20,000 pounds. So now we are killing 1,020,000 pounds of bass, since bycatch is not landed and doesn't count against the quota.

Now lets assume that somehow, someway, the bycatch is made legal and is allowed to be landed (this really has nothing to do with opening the EEZ). Total commercial landings will still be 1,000,000 and bycatch will be zero.

To put it into your own words "If the quota is 1,000,000 and bycatch counts toward it, the quota will still be 1,000,000. Same number, not raised, not reduced. Just taken from different areas." that is ture what you are missing is that the bycatch is now counted in the quota so was are only killing the 1,000,000 where before we were killing 1,000,000 plus the bycatch. Get it?

As far as you argument about removing the larger fish resulting in a small population, I am vary familiar wiht the "science behind that assertion, are you? The science was an experiment where they put 100 spearing in a tank and allowed them to breed. After each spawn they would remove a dozen of the biggest fish. They kept doing thsi for a number of breeding cycles and found that the resulting offspring 20 or so cycles later were, on average, smaller than they ones they started off with. How you can extrapolate that to millions of not billions of striped bass living and spawning in the wild is completely beyond me.

Now I see what you mean about the bycatch and quotas thing. Thanks for the clarification. About the thing about removing the largest bass: Yes there are millions of striped bass out there, but how many are out there reaching the size potential of the species? People, in general, are more apt to keep those that are exceptionally large, as opposed to releasing them and allowing them to breed. There were millions of swordfish and cod out there at one time too, reaching much larger size than we usually see today.
People have different views and needs, scientific reports are imperfect, and a lot more research needs to be conducted. I have attended many ASMFC public hearings on the issue in the past, and have read up on the issues.
Again, I restate that if we are to err, I would rather it be on the side of conservation and in the fishes' best interests. By doing so, we also serve the best interests of the fishermen.

I think that reflects the attitude of most fishermen.:cheers:

The problem is determining where to draw the line, and getting good information out there so that people can make informed decisions.

OK, a little ambiguous, so here: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/state_f...tripedBass.htm

Dumb question but I have to ask.
The tip of Monomoy is way over 3 miles from the Chatham shore?
Where does the eeezzzz start ?
vb

I'd have to check the chart to be sure, but I believe it is three miles of Monomoy Island.

3 miles off of Monomoy except for the SW shore. There it's about 6 miles because of a tiny dot of land on Hankerchief shoal that might be uncovered on some tides.

Also, most of cape cod bay is eez as is most of the western part of block island sound (from 3 mi east of Montauk and north) even though these have areas far more than 3 miles from shore.

Charts are downloadable from NOAA.