I agree with every syllable of what Patrick said (perhaps a first for me FPRIVATE "TYPE=PICT;ALT=").
I agree with most of what Patrick is saying as he does know a lot about what he speaks of. Based on a few more years of experience.
I went to at least 4 fishing websites and posted the announcement for the hearing well in advance (if it wasn't already there). After the hearing, I went back to these same posts and replied "Just curious, did anyone on this forum attend?" Out of all the forums, I think that the forum with the most attendees was three.
In the past, I enjoyed coming to striped-bass.com because it was the one place that I could count on for a "common man's" perspective on fishing. Indeed, there once was a time when this was the one fishing site that anyone could turn to without reading page after page of whining drivel from misinformed / uninformed elitists. Unfortunately, things have changed. I can't even post a herring report here without being "cautioned" for taking prespawning fish. This, despite the fact that I get my herring at the best managed run in the state. Yet somehow the folks here seem think they know better? Please! Give me a break!
Mike - I'm excited that you have learned all there is to know about fisheries management in the whole 2 years you've been following it - kinda sounds like you are the expert now - and now can lead the masses into proper fisheries management. I think that is amazing cause I see people that have been going for years that will admit that it is not easy to follow and always a challenge. But now we have you, the defender of the common man (What the Hell is the "Common Man" anyway??) Well, fortunately this place is where you DISCUSS amongst other anglers the ying and yang of fishing, state of the fisheries, how to catch the dang fish AND release it if so choses, or who will win the playoffs. That's what happens in a community (usually) like this. People can climb up on top of their soap box - I do it from time to time myself. You certainly can be found on the highest Soap Boxes all over the place. But I degress. Apparently we need to whine and drivel.
I can't even post a herring report here without being "cautioned" for taking prespawning fish. This, despite the fact that I get my herring at the best managed run in the state. Yet somehow the folks here seem think they know better? Please! Give me a break!
You think that taking a herring before is spawns makes no difference than taking them when they are dropping back? Ever hear how mommy fish make baby fish (in this case lots of baby fish) and that this fosters GROWTH in a fishery? YOU may be taking these fish from the best managed herring run in the world but you can't tell me that taking fish that have yet to spawn is no different than taking fish that are dropping down. This is purely a case of you filling your freezer because its cheap at the expense of the fish. But WTH, if you don't do it someone else will and that just aint right, eh? Since it's LEGAL, better you stock up on them before they spawn then someone else does. And it's not like you were leaving the run and feeding these fish to hungry bass because they weren't there 3 weeks ago. Hey since it's legal maybe I should keep every 28.5 " fish I barely manage to keep whenever I get 2, that will show me that I'm a great angler. Hi honey I'm home! Got Dinner! Just because it's legal doesn't make it right or better.
Now somehow I'm a greedy fishgrabber if want to keep 2 keeper bass a day - even if the best available science says that it is OK for me to do so. Huh? Newsflash folks: Before it was called "sportfishing", it was just called plain old "fishing".
Did the best science change in 4 months? Did the best science state that if the commercial allocation was increased by a third and the recreation believed "take" was increased by nearly a third, it would have no impact on the fishery? Did best available science, which as of a few months ago intimated that there might be a closed season if we took nearly a third more fish - change? And that other drastic measures would need to be considered if triggers are hit in following years because things turned too hard on the fish? Were the numbers crunched often enough that eventually it was determined OK? Personally I think that you need to allow for a good cushion as the scientist don't always like to admit that their numbers are not based on hard fact but are based on educated guesses. These educated guesses are than weighed and factored against other educated guesses, all the while the cirular error or probability gets wider and wider. It's informed and well thoguht out gueswork Mike. How do you ruin a fishery that's becoming stable? You open it up another third.
I blows my mind how so many folks who do not participate in the process have so much to say against the outcome.
Thankfully we have the defender of the "Common Man" doing this for us. Now I'll be honest, I do respect and appreciate that you go to most of these meetings, forward the bazillion e-mails that you forward on everything from local issues to the feelings of sea scallops in the East China Sea, post the thousand messages all over the net, I do appreciate the dedication you bring to the table. And you are right that a lot more people should be involved but get off your high horse a little when you do it.
It also disturbs me when folks have such a knee jerk reaction to any relaxation in fishing regs. Just check out the title of this thread and consider that its author didn't even attend the meeting yet he has no problem portraying the outcome as doom and gloom. It may surprise the many folks here who weren't at the meeting that going to 2 @ 28'' does not equate to a 100% increase in the real take but only a 21% increase.
The "author of this thread" did not attend this meeting as the wife of "the author of this thread", living in another state I might add, had to go home to watch the son of the "author of this thread" so the wife of the "author of this thread" could go to class. Now pehaps I could have left work even earlier, drive the 65 miles from work thru Boston and Providence, picked up my son, drive the 55 miles back to the club and drive back home before his 7:30 bedtime. All for a fisheries meeting in another state. Flaherty - get your head out of your butt and know what you are talking about please.
Van, I love ya man, but actually 3 out of the 4 fishing clubs in attendance voted for the 2 @ 28'' option.
- Plum Island Surfcasters (2 @ 28'')
- Marblehead Surfcasters (2 @ 28'')
- Cape Cod Salties (2 @ 28'')
- Massachusetts Striped Bass Association (1 @ 28'' plus 1 over 40'')
Van - grats on the 1000th post 
Yes, there were several individuals who got up and advocated for the "1 @ 28'' plus 1 over 40'' option (including myself). But let's face it, most of those folks were also MSBA members and it is somewhat redundant to also include them in the count since their (our) position is largely accounted for in the formal MSBA position. Don't get me wrong. There is something to be said about the inherent passion it takes for there to be a physical body present and speaking to the comission in one's own words. However, number-wise, the total number of folks who supported option "C" is somewhat skewed due to the forestated reason.
See above
Check out the audio at the following link. John and Slipnot, I suggest that you particularly listen to the last sound bite where Paul Diodati and Tom Smith discuss "pre-crash" take limits and then ask yourself again if this is "responsible management of a species" or not "taking the lead".
http://www.basspond.com/cgi-bin/ib/...act=ST;f=8;t=50
When I have the oodles of time - perhaps tonight if I get chance to reinstall a sound card - I'll go over and listen to it...
While I too didn't get the outcome that I had hoped for, I can certainly live with it. I personally find saltwater fishing to be a feast or famine endevour and I get skunked more often than not. It would be nice to take 2 fish home on the days when they are really biting, but only if the science supports it - which it does. By-the-way, the commission's vote was unanimous.
I'm glad you can live with it. I'm glad that in the 2 or so years since you've gotten into saltwater fishing and have become an expert on all things saltwater - feast or famine or not - that you can live with this. I remember an inkling of what it was like 25+ years ago, I remember filling 5 gallon buckets of 18" fish (and it was "legal" then too) I'm glad the science supports it. I'm glad that I can attempt to debate this with you here and that there are people to debate it with. I'm glad of all the things we discuss here other than I will be greatly pi$$ed if this fishery is run aground again.
All this said, I am all done with trying to get folks from websites interested in these hearings because I am now convinced that all it will do is negate my own view. In other words, I want take limits to be decided by looking at the best available science and not by the babble of a bunch of whining, doom and gloom, elitists. That goes for all of the fishing forums out there since there doesn't seem to be a dime's worth of difference between any of them anymore.
Mike - show us the way to this panacea of knowledge that you must posess. Us Doom & Gloom Elitists need a leader such as yourself. We're obviously would rather babble about it. Otherwise toss away an avenue to correct the situation and don't let the door hit you in the ass
Actually, now in hindsight Patrick, I have to say that there is something about your post that I do disagree with. You say that it is a "damn shame" that those complaining here do not show up to be a part of the process. I disagree. I say don't bother trying to get them involved. It's not a shame at all that they don't come to the hearings. Let them all continue to talk amongst themselves here where they will have no real impact on the process. We would all be better served by input from those who don't look at these fish as toys, but rather, look at them as chowder and fillets.
Mike it is a "dam shame" that more people are not involved or show up to meetings of follow the newsletters and brochures but I also think I smell a case of meeting elitism on your part. And I think you are suffereing from mild acute optical rectumitis if you think we should view these fish purely as food. Not everything should be looked at as food. I personally feel that you need to look at all the ways - food, income to the individual and community, god forbid look out a little for the fish, the forage, and yes the, uhh, what is it - sport.
I really wish I could spend more time reading this and responding my son wants to play and I'd rather do that than follow up further on this "elitist drivel". If you don't like it, the door is there, if you want to participate in a constructive manner you are encouraged to do so, if you want to charge windmills with a toothbrush you can do that too.
And speaking only for myself - do not EVER question my desire to go to these meetings. Do not EVER question my decisions to forgoe a meeting when my wife or son is sick - EVER. Going to a meeting in Danvers near where you work or to a meeting near your home is significantly easier for a guy such as yourself -v- a guy that lives on the Cape -v- a guy that lives on an Island -v- a guy that lives in another state.
So get off your high horse and stop screaming at people for not being involved and find a way to encourage people to go. If you want to yell at me, yell at me for spending more time at Mass fisheries meetings (my home state) than those of the state I currently reside in, Rhode Freakin Island.
You and I need to have a nice little chat when we see each other...
Sincerly, the elitist babbling webmaster ...
John