here's the state by state proposals as reported in OTW
http://www.onthewater.com/states-wei...-options-2015/
you can see that RI can be the key to a 1@28 all modes consistency from Maine to Connecticut...a good showing on Monday would send an effective message...
here are some bullet point and an additional address to submit your thought s and feelings prior to the Monday workshop and meeting...Connecticut residents should be aware that their state will lean in favor of what ever RI decides and should feel free to contact the RI folks above and below, Mass residents should also remind these folks that Mass is leaning toward 1@28 all modes and RI expressed a need for consistency state to state as a rationale for offering a mode split option....the best option for consistency for MA,RI CT will be 1@28 all modes...let the NY boats fish their own abundant waters
Bullet Points
-ASMFC Enforcement Committee pleaded for “simple and consistent regulations for all recreational modes” and stated that “mode exemptions, narrow slots and on board filleting and are all difficult to enforce”
- ASMFC Technical Committee (TC) made it clear their data confidence is negativly impacted by complex and differing regulations by state.
- ASMFC Chief closed the session stressing the need for “simple and consistent regional regulations”
-TC only ever provided options with >50% likelihood of success.
- All CE 2015 analyses by TC assume 100% angler compliance
-Massachusetts: The Mass DMF has basically rejected the idea of special limits for the “for-hire” fleet and is recommending a daily limit for striped bass of 1 fish, 28″ or larger.
-Connecticut has indicated they will likely align with RI’s regulations.
Questions for RIDEM Director regarding mode splits….
-What evidence has been presented to establish the potential negative impact to the for-hire industry caused by a 1 fish per client kill limit regarding bass? There is no % reduction of fishing, only killing of a species in documented decline.
-Why create an exception which benefits primarily out of state residents?
-Why promote the continued plundering by out of state vessels in RI waters that provide zero economic benefit for RI? The 1 @ proposal would keep them in their own waters reducing pressure on RI waters, it’s summer bass population and on already stretched RI enforcement officials.
-What constitutes “for-hire” and “clients”?…there are many captain’s licenses granted, is any “captain” with a vessel and those on board his/her vessel granted a 2 bass mode split exception(clients paying full fare, partial fare, friends, family, fellow fishing club members)? Shore guided clients?...kayak guided clients? Other? How can/will this be enforced?
-At a time when anglers, organizations, clubs, industry publications as well as many “for-hire’s” are recognizing the need for conservation and reacting, even without changes in the regulations, to lessen their impact and promote stewardship, why would we create a 2 fish “exception” for those who are admittedly(out of state visitors) the least likely to have a long term interest in the species?
-How does the economic hardship claim by some “for hire’s” align with the fact that many have already successfully become largely catch and release or reduced their impact without changes in regulations and the support of organizations such as the Cape Cod Charter Boat Association’s support of a 1 bass all modes?
-How is a mode split exception consistent with requests of the ASMFC committee’s requests and the RIDEM’s own “LEAN” initiative?
INSTRUCTIONS FOR WRITTEN COMMENTS:
Written comments concerning the proposed regulations may be submitted to
Peter Duhamel, Division of Fish and Wildlife Marine Fisheries office, 3 Fort Wetherill Road, Jamestown, RI 02835 peter.duhamel@dem.ri.gov
no later than 12:00 Noon on February 16, 2015. A copy of the proposed regulation(s) will also be available on the DEM website at the following web address:
http://www.dem.ri.gov/programs/bnatr...d/pn021615.htm.
Hybrid Mode
