NY Goes 1 fish @28 - Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

DZ · 03-10-2015, 02:28 PM

Hearing reports on social media that NY went 1 @ 28 for all at todays meeting. Haven't confirmed yet.

DZ · 03-10-2015, 02:43 PM

Confirmed from Ross Squire.

tlapinski · 03-10-2015, 02:50 PM

Connecticut just came out officially with 1@28" across the board as well.

DZ · 03-10-2015, 02:54 PM

This puts just a "little" more pressure on Rhody.

Clammer · 03-10-2015, 03:07 PM

Rhody,s too corrupt

WTF are they going to do when there is no STRIPERS & its the state fish ????

iamskippy · 03-10-2015, 04:46 PM

Rhode will be the ahole in it all and come out at 5 @ 10"
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

scottw · 03-10-2015, 05:29 PM

if RI goes 2 fish now it would indicate a serious lack of competence among our fisheries managers and a lack of leadership among those who oversee them.....be hopeful they'll do the right thing...which is also the most obvious thing...not always a fan of giving credit for doing the most obvious right thing but in this case it would be appreciated and celebrated

Nebe · 03-10-2015, 07:29 PM

Way to go NY !!!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

dannyplug1 · 03-10-2015, 07:36 PM

Time for some truth. Let's see how much power the for hire/ commercial sector has in RI. I say commercial/ for hire for a reason. I would love to have a list of RI commercial bass permits and for hire operators. Don't know for sure but I would guess a lot of the names would be on both lists. I can't help but think that he second bass and most of the dead fish you see on some of the for hires web sites are destined for market. Don't know the whole story just my guess. Any way it's time to see if RI will do the right thing or be exposed
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

DZ · 03-10-2015, 07:43 PM

The NY and CT moves give Janet Coit an escape hatch and allow her to save face.

buckman · 03-10-2015, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dannyplug1

Time for some truth. Let's see how much power the for hire/ commercial sector has in RI. I say commercial/ for hire for a reason. I would love to have a list of RI commercial bass permits and for hire operators. Don't know for sure but I would guess a lot of the names would be on both lists. I can't help but think that he second bass and most of the dead fish you see on some of the for hires web sites are destined for market. Don't know the whole story just my guess. Any way it's time to see if RI will do the right thing or be exposed
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I would bet just about all maintain as many permits for as many species as the can . I'm not sure how it works in RI but in Ma if you dont renew on time your out .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ivanputski · 03-10-2015, 07:47 PM

So when will RI make a final decision? Out with it already
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Rappin Mikey · 03-10-2015, 07:51 PM

Good job ny
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Nebe · 03-10-2015, 07:52 PM

Janet was head of the nature conservancy before the DEM. I can't imagine that she would screw this up.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

dannyplug1 · 03-10-2015, 08:19 PM

Janet Coit must be under extreem pressure. At the last meeting in RI the DEM wouldn't even make a recommendation in regard to which option to choose. I think the people at RI DEM are really backed into a corner.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Linesider82 · 03-10-2015, 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dannyplug1

Janet Coit must be under extreem pressure. At the last meeting in RI the DEM wouldn't even make a recommendation in regard to which option to choose. I think the people at RI DEM are really backed into a corner.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Unsure to do the right thing? There is no applause to choose the 1@ option, there are repercussions to do split modes. Both to the environment and to business, mostly bad.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Green Light · 03-10-2015, 08:35 PM

NY and CT 1 @ 28...WOW!

Rob Rockcrawler · 03-10-2015, 11:54 PM

Im betting it will be 1 @ 28 for all in RI, if not i will be mighty disappointed.

scottw · 03-11-2015, 06:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob Rockcrawler

Im betting it will be 1 @ 28 for all in RI, if not i will be mighty disappointed.

lots of irony here...the rationale used when RI offered the second option is now gone......the will be no competitive disadvantage(unless RI goes 2 bass for hires) and the only way that boats will be fishing side by side under different regs is if RI goes with a mode split...pretty funny as RI was claiming it would be other states forcing us to go to "2" fish for for hires to avoid this

RI had the opportunity to attempt to influence neighboring states having voted first but had dragged out the final decision and now it's possible that neighboring states will be influencing the RI decision

RI Charters that are upset with RI anglers and other charters supporting 1@ all modes are now trying to figure out who to direct their anger at...RI 1@'s were largely ignored by the fisheries managers as the vote was very lopsided....RI Charters supporting mode splits now find themselves at odds with neighboring states who, they were pretty confident, would be supporting and enhancing their position

buckman · 03-11-2015, 06:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scottw

lots of irony here...the rationale used when RI offered the second option is now gone......the will be no competitive disadvantage(unless RI goes 2 bass for hires) and the only way that boats will be fishing side by side under different regs is if RI goes with a mode split...pretty funny as RI was claiming it would be other states forcing us to go to "2" fish for for hires to avoid this

RI had the opportunity to attempt to influence neighboring states having voted first but had dragged out the final decision and now it's possible that neighboring states will be influencing the RI decision

RI Charters that are upset with RI anglers and other charters supporting 1@ all modes are now trying to figure out who to direct their anger at...RI 1@'s were largely ignored by the fisheries managers as the vote was very lopsided....RI Charters supporting mode splits now find themselves at odds with neighboring states who, they were pretty confident, would be supporting and enhancing their position

They won't have a disadvantage if the go to 1@ but they will have a obvious advantage if they go to 2@ 33"
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

afterhours · 03-11-2015, 06:42 AM

Kudos to CT and NY! I'm embarrassed for RI the littlest biggest corrupt state in the union. WTF are these clowns thinking? A few special interest lugs pulling the strings again i'm sure. Maybe it's time to replace those making the calls, it's about time.

JohnR · 03-11-2015, 06:55 AM

Good Job, Mass, CT, and now New York

Now at bat: RI

scottw · 03-11-2015, 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buckman

They won't have a disadvantage if the go to 1@ but they will have a obvious advantage if they go to 2@ 33"
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

correct...they look a little hypocritical supporting 2@ after arguing about the disadvantage they'd suffer if they were fishing 1@ while other and neighboring states for hires were fishing 2@

buckman · 03-11-2015, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scottw

correct...they look a little hypocritical supporting 2@ after arguing about the disadvantage they'd suffer if they were fishing 1@ while other and neighboring states for hires were fishing 2@

I'm curious Scott. I know why I think it would be an advantage but why do you now think it would be an advantage if RI charter boats have 2@ 33 inch? Especially given all the arguments saying that it would not hurt charter business if they are allowed 1@28"
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

zimmy · 03-11-2015, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buckman

They won't have a disadvantage if the go to 1@ but they will have a obvious advantage if they go to 2@ 33"
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Can you explain how 2@33 is an advantage? The harvest should be about the same whether it is 1@28 or 2@33? Isn't that the argument for equivalency? Is the advantage that people will go on the charter with the chance that they will take home two fish, even though the odds say in most cases they will only get one fish. Or is it that 2@33 for a charter really isn't equivalent to 1@28?

Sea Flat · 03-11-2015, 12:55 PM

At least the 30-32" fish would get to reproduce, but still, it's silly. C'mon RI

buckman · 03-11-2015, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zimmy

Can you explain how 2@33 is an advantage? The harvest should be about the same whether it is 1@28 or 2@33? Isn't that the argument for equivalency? Is the advantage that people will go on the charter with the chance that they will take home two fish, even though the odds say in most cases they will only get one fish. Or is it that 2@33 for a charter really isn't equivalent to 1@28?

Yes it's about the perception.
I guess it's different in Rhode Island but in our area we may try to get our clients a limit and give them the option to take it home but in most cases they don't.. And at 2 fish at 33 inches rarely will they take home the two fish
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

JoeG@Breezy · 03-11-2015, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zimmy

Can you explain how 2@33 is an advantage? The harvest should be about the same whether it is 1@28 or 2@33? Isn't that the argument for equivalency? Is the advantage that people will go on the charter with the chance that they will take home two fish, even though the odds say in most cases they will only get one fish. Or is it that 2@33 for a charter really isn't equivalent to 1@28?

Most people I have talked to believe that Equivalency was never about the fish and provided a math exercise to disguise the weight of the argument on economics of the for hire industry. i believe the ASMFC in NY addressed that. Hope you guys get it right, then we can all march on NJ.

ivanputski · 03-11-2015, 08:03 AM

How can rhode island go forward and enact regs that they themselves argued would be unfair to neighboring states? I guess they are only unfair when they benefit others, but when it benefits you, life is good.

I am optimistic, but I am also a realist ... Its tough to un-shake backroom handshakes, and it's tough to refund backroom lobbying. If Rhode Island goes for 2 @33 now, it will be plain as day that deals were made, no question.

DZ · 03-11-2015, 12:58 PM

I've been pondering the following thought: It appears all other states that share a border with RI have now gone to one fish bag in their for hire modes - wouldn't it be refreshing to see the Rhode Island Party and Charter Association change their stance to support a 1 fish bag to keep everything equal? It would definitly take the heat off of Director Coit and IMO place their industry in a more favorable light with the public. Thoughts?