Anybody else notice?, that in every single . . .
 

. . . saltwater fishing magazine/publication that I read, every one has an article or something on the plight of just about every species of fish. I spent the winter reading every single saltwater fishing magazine at the bookstores, free of course, and the number of articles that spoke about how much in decline the states of the various fisheries are just all look so very bleak. There is so much about closures, limits, low catches, almost no fish has been spared.

The short list of things that are in trouble, have been in trouble or are doomed;

Flounder, I used to catch these things from every Cape Cod bridge back in the 70's and 80's and now no more. Did there used to be party boats in Lynn and Salem and all over that area that would actually take people out and catch fish? Was Quincy once the Flounder capitol of the world?

Cod, none from shore, limits have been raised, a guy in the tackle shop asked me just last week, "What are you fishing for?" "Cod." "You can't fish for those right now." and he proceeds to pull the pamphlet of the 2006 regulations where in print it says that the limit was 10 all year long at 22", I'm not sure what his point was to show me the paper.

Then there is the talk of the flounder, the fluke, even scup and in Florida the Grouper are now off limits, fewer bluefin tuna and all tuna and all the billfish along with sharks, then of course the herring and menhaden with an article in the in-fisherman about RI and the menhaden/pogies, Salmon, where does it all end?

Sometimes I wonder why I even bought a new boat, to catch the last fish maybe? I wonder if anyone else puts it all together and wonders . . .

Just don't tell the wife that, she won't see the point in you going out on the boat with such dismal prospects! But seriously, you're right. Our fisheries aren't in the best shape. Just a random fact: National Marine Fisheries Service is a branch of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association, which is overseen by the Department of Commerce. Thus...the Department of Commerce oversees our fisheries, with emphasis on maximum harvest.

I don't want to sound like an alamist or a fatalist or even like Chicken Little in that "The sky is falling, the sky is falling . . . " however, I can't help but get depressed when all I read about in every magazine, month after month after month and how there are just less and less and less fish. They are becoming much like the land based examples of the Native American or the Buffalo.

I had read one fine Philosopher who was quoted in OTW way, way back, he said "I would fish, even if there were no fish." I'd probably be the same way.

If you're really concerned about the state of the fisheries, go "hookless" on all your plugs.
That way you can experience the thrill of the bump and know you could have caught fish, if you had hooks on.

Check out the Book "The Fishes of the Sea" by Dave Preble, one fishery after another driven into the ground

So help me out here. If the magazines DIDN'T tell you that various fish species are in trouble and we could all go along on our merry ignorant way, what do you think people would say about that?

I can't wait to eat the next fish I catch.

Part of it is because an article about conservation that is not alarmist in nature is exceedingly boring. Conservation measures are slow to produce results and editors don't like slow. That, and the fact that the magazines are part of the recreational side of the continuing rec vs comm battle.

I'm not saying that there have not been declines and collapses in many fisheries, but an article about the incremental gains of the groundfish fishery, complete with indices and charts, is not going to sell many magazines.

I certainly hope you're wrong on that count, since I just wrote one! :bl: I suspect that its also driven by the unfortunate fact that bad news sells more magazines than good news. How many articles do you see about the come-back of the striped bass, or the fact that summer flounder populations are at an all time high? Did you know that of the 19 or so species that make up the New England Groundfish complex all but 2 or 3 species are fully recovered? Would you buy a magazine to read about that?

:rotfl:

We can't be ignorant of the facts anymore. We have to be conscious of how we can wipe out what there is. I too remember when there was a ton of flounders, all over. But I also remember back in the 70's when the bas were almost nil. We just have to be aware, we're not in this alone.:kewl:

Sure, go hookless. Like suggesting a hunter go and take a picture instead of an arrow or a bullet, "I could have shot it but I have a picture."