MAKE STRIPED BASS A GAMEFISH!

[Mr. Sandman]

You CAN help! Join this group (no cost), visit this site and send an email or two to your political leaders! (info and sample letters on site)

http://www.stripersforever.org/Home/

[Mr. Sandman]

Live in Mass? Fish for striped bass? You got to read this:
http://www.stripersforever.org/Home/...r%20fishin.doc

[JohnR]

I think we would be better served if we were able to keep commercial & rec bass fishing at status quoe AND more importantly, significantly enhance the protection of the forage species. That would do more for the bass than the game fish status as with less pressure from comms the current stocks could collaspe from lack of food.

[Fly Rod]

JohnR you are on the right track!!!! Commercial fishing at this time are allowed 800 thousand lbs. It is a small dent in the number of stripe bass.RECREATIONAL fishermen catch 2.5-3 million lbs. per year in Mass. with a one fish limit. Lets not be greedy recreational fishermen. You are going to be allowed 2 fish per person per day. Just think that you will be catching 4-6 million lbs. of fish compare that to the 1 million lbs. the commercial guys will be catching. Also keep in mind that most commercial fishermen also are recreational fishermen. Have you caught fish with slime on them??? That is a sign of to many fish in an area. There will always be plenty of fish as long as a disease does not come into the equation which has already taken place in the Chesapeak from over population.

Mr. Sandman please open your eyes Don't believe everything you read.

[Mr. Sandman]

Your missing the point completely. My eyes are open alright...I just don't like what I see. You can read all about it later in the fall.
See you on the water.

[Fly Rod]

I'm not missing the point! ! ! I see so called sports fishermen catching and taking home schoolie and or bigger fish UNDER 28". Aparrently so called sports fishermen down your way are all law abiding fishermen. Illegal fishing doesn't exsist. I just read where on this forum where a half a dozen people were taking herring illegally they had to be SPORTMEN
the commercial season isn't opened

Mr. Sandman have a GREAT SEASON ! ! !

[Raven]

ok lets say that this year the striped bass becomes the new gamefish
then what will its status be. No taking any fish by anyone
commercial or recreation fisherman alike or what?

[Mr. Sandman]

Fly Rod, your starting to tic me off...gimmie a Friggin break! Don't blame the lack of forage fish on sports fishermen...it wasn't they who wiped out the bunker and are trying to take every last mac, squid herring and sardine in the sea. How come you don't see regulators moving to stop that? Like I said...I don't like what I see, and you ARE missing the point because you have $ in your eyes.

The commercial SB fishery is set up to benefit the few self appointed fisherman who think they can make a fast buck here, nothing more...why else would they limit the amount of SB licenses now? Don't more licensees generate more $ for regulators? It is a quota system...it should not matter how many fishermen there are. What they don't want is everyone running to get a cheap license so they can take 40 fish a day too...pushing the price down and hitting the quota sooner...."lets just keep this for ourselves"...the guys who showed up first should keep all the fish?.... but it is a public resource and it would help the job market, heck a raffle system is fairer then what they are doing now.....
If commercial sb fishing is such an important food source, they open it up to the recs....keep the quota the same. It’s such a scam it’s laughable. Just shut it down.


I don't deny that some uninformed sport people take an undersized fish...Its wrong and I condemn that, this should be better controlled by enforcement and education.... but it is not. I think most sport fisherman care a lot more about this fish then commercial fisherman. I think that for every sport fellow who takes and undersized fish there are many more pure catch and release guys...But please don't make the commercial fisherman out to be the good guy here...the commercial black market here is huge and unaccounted for, not just for bass. And the bad apples involved commercial fishing have done far more harm then the sport angler who fishes a half a dozen times a year and takes one schoolie home.

There have been studies done that show that sport anglers *contribute* over $600 /lb of fish they catch to the economy (in terms of boats, fuel hotels, travel, fishing gear ect. Not to mention the millions and millions of positive social things that come from sport fishing which are priceless.... take a kid fishing for the fist time and you will know what I mean. Inshore Commercial fishermen do far more harm then good esp. for such a special fish as the striped bass. If you can't see that then I feel sorry for you .

Raven, making striped bass a game fish would take the price off the fishes head...there would be no commercial taking of striped bass country-wide. It would be a regulated sport fish. Meaning you may fish for it and it would be regulated (size and take limits) you just can't sell it. Also, it would stop the black market..Resturants would be fined if it were found on their menu. For example, sailfish is a game fish.

IMO this is the best way to fight commercial striped bass fishing, make it a game fish, overpower these state by state games with some fed action. ...And I think it is actually do-able if you get the right political power behind it. There are FAR more rec voters and people who have in interest in rec's fishing then on the commercial side...the political types can clearly see that. The commercial side just has a louder voice at the moment and many have self-appointed themselves to some position of power only to put $ in their pocket. This will change.

Over fishing is just one variable in the striped bass equation, you need food for them to eat and clean habitat for them to spawn and grown in. The SB can give us some great memories that will last forever while providing enormous benifits to socity, why sell that off for less then 2 bucks a pound? Its not about how much you catch...commerical types don't understand that.

[Mr. Sandman]

Originally posted by Fly Rod
I'm not missing the point! ! ! I see so called sports fishermen catching and taking home schoolie and or bigger fish UNDER 28".

You saw this? Do you know these people? Have you ever done anything about it? If so, I applaude you, if not, you're part of the problem too.

[JohnR]

Fly Rod - the "sportsman" mentioned taking those illegal herring were CT Lobstermen, not "sportsmen". And yes, some people are greeding and keep shorts and believe it or not - even the commercial fishermen are known to not exactly follow the letter or spirit of the law. Gasp, they've even been found to blatantly break the law! Golly Gee, who woulda thunk it . So don't blame this on recs keeping shorts by any long shot.

As for the whole rec -v- comm argument on bass, who SHOULD have more allocation?

The 2 million recs that contribute FAR more to the economy on the most sought after salt fish in the country or the limited amount of comms that either dip into the bass fishery to cover expenses or dip in when one of the other species is off or closed. Hmmm - I'm thinking that allocation benefits the rec sector... Nobody makes a living off of selling bass - it's all suplemental income.

[schoolie monster]

This is my new line about this debate. 40/1

1 commercial fisherman-40fish 1 recreational angler-1 fish

this is the commercial view of fair and equitable. As a commercial fisherman, what is your reasoning for why you are entitled to 40 times more of a public resource than the next guy. Answer that question without some spin or BS and maybe I'll listen. No, don't say commercial take vs. rec take... I'll throw up.

Economics don't work for the comm side... anyone that denies that recreational fishing DWARVES commercial fishing in terms of economic benefit is clueless. It is so lopsided, its silly... and that's commercial fishing as a whole. Comm fishing for striped bass has to be even more lopsided since its all rod and reel. You don't wipe out everything and everything that the nets touch and bring up thousands of fish.

There certainly is no environmental benefit for commercial fishing. And please don't tell me about the diseases, etc. due to lack of forage, because that argument fails coming from the comm side since commercial fishing has wiped out the forage fish. Can't be the cause and the answer.

Should the rec take = comm take? No. There are countless more recs than comms so the rec take should far exceed the comm take.

1 fisherman = 1 fisherman
one man, one vote
one man, one fish
get what I'm sayin'? fair? equitable? equitable for all of us, not what's best for a few people? needs of the many outweigh needs of the few, or the one...

any of this make sense to anyone

[Fly Rod]

Sandman- Show me where I in any of my corespondence said that I was blaming the recreational fisherman for the lack of forage fish. Don't quote me of saying what was never said. I know all to well the cause of the depletion of the forage fish such as the herring; mackeral and don't forget the pogie.

Yes I do agree with you that there are a few self righteous fishermen that want to limit the license. I think that anybody that wants a stripe bass license in Mass. should be intitled to one just like it is now. To me the old system wasn't broken so why fix it. As far as 40 per day very few people get that many fish per day everyday.there are days when those same people don't catch 20 a day.
the taking of illegal S B is rampert. The Enviromental Police up here out number our local police. They try there best but they also have other duties.

And I have read what the sports fishery contributes in $ $ $ $. motels restaurants clothing chartering. Just think what 4 of my charter customers coming from California must be spending for a day of STRIPE BASS FISHING in Massachusetts.

Were your finger tips sore mine are

JohnR- How do you know that they were lobstermen??? why would a commercial lobsterman take only a few fish??? you need a tote to bait about a 100 traps.

Rec-V-Comm who should have more allocation?In Massachusetts
Recs keep 2.5- 3million lbs. with the one fish limit.

One last thing. Here in Gloucester and Essex it is illegal to use a bait net, dip net or any other means to catch herring or alwifes in the streams or brooks that lead to there sponning ponds Years ago the lobstermen use to net them by the 55 gal. barrelsand almost depleted the species.

Hope ya catch a record breaker

my finger tips are bleeding

[flatts1]

Mr. Sandman (and everyone else),

Be very leary about blindly supporting any club that will not answer fundamental questions directly asked of it.

For more information, check out...

http://reel-time.com/forum/showthrea...threadid=30642

The first post there is mine (username = flatts1). It is quite long and best read from the ground up.

To be fair, I did get a response from someone claiming to be involved with SF (I have no reason to doubt him). However, his reply to me was largely his own opinion and he didn't speak for the group.

I have yet to be told where/when this organization holds their E-board meetings. If you were a member, wouldn't you want to have some say in the direction of your org?


Later,
Mike Flaherty

[schoolie monster]

spin

Flyrod, why tell me what the rec take was? Again, you are implying that the comm take and the rec take should be comparable.

It should not be comparable. The rec take should be far more b/c there are many, many thousand times more recreational fishermen.

And whether this comm or that comm can or cannot catch his limit is totally irrelavent. Their are plenty of recs that probably don't catch a keeper all year... does that play into this argument?

I'm not trying to be j@ck@$$, but we went 'round and 'round about this last year and the year before (and its argued all over the place) and the gentlemen on the commercial side continually compare the "rec take" vs. the "comm take". Inherent in that type of arguement is the assumption that the two should be equal. It is so ridiculous

Your take should be equitable to my take... bottom line.

Fly rod and schoolie monster... equal number of fish for each. That is fair.

I am not totally against commercial fishing for striped bass as long as it is managed as a sustainable resource. Sure, I would selfishly love to see striped bass become a gamefish, but I think that a rod & reel commercial striped bass can be maintained. And I wouldn't have a problem with a system where anyone can get a commercial license, a comm can harvest something reasonable, like 5 fish per day, and that quotas and laws were strictly enforced.

Unfortunately, enforcement sucks and the management sucks, it serves the commercial interests despite overwhelming economic evidence that rec fishing pours many millions more into the economy than commercial fishing does, and it doesn't address the real problems. You can't manage a single species independently of the 100's or 1000's of other species and the habitat that the original species, our favorite striped bass, depends on to live its life.

I was trying to limit my point to the "rec take vs. comm take" that really drives me nuts.

[Mr. Sandman]

I think Flatts is worried already! This will be shut down in the next couple of years. Its gonna happen. You watch.

As far as the rec vs comm take: A sb fisherman is a sb fisherman...comm or rec. If the state really thinks having a comm sb market is important then so be it. Let *anyone* sell their fish until the quota is met. Not some select few who buy a cheap ticket and fish for 5 weeks a year and call themselves comm fisherman and have the influence to keep it all themselves and not let others comm fish as well.

I am exhausted talking about this. You can't change my mind on the subject. I'm going fishing......

[Mr. Sandman]

I heard this slauter was going on last winter....this letter is from an eye witness. This has got to stop at once.

http://www.stripersforever.org/Info/...CSlaughter.pdf

[MakoMike]

H'mm, coming to this thread late, but from what I read no one is concerned about the bass. Stripers forever doesn't want fewer fish killed it just wants them all killed by recreational fishermen. Where's the equity in that?

[JohnR]

Wow - missed this thread for the past two months... Sandman - that's a scary letter but its a repeat of what I've heard going on year after year down there. Dropping tide, open nets at the inlet...

Flyrod - there are a lot of dollars raised by the charters in New England - bass. cod, and all. There are truly huge numbers of dollars that go into the economy raised by recs fishing stripers - far more than commercial or charters

[Hooper]

You know, I agree with Mako Mike here...

Stripers Forever wants the fishery for themselves, and their interests, simply put. I cannot see how this striper fishery, both commercial and recreational cannot coexists together with a proper management.

My view on it is this should be strictly a rod and reel take fishery. Haven't we learned anything from the total collapse of the northeast groundfishery? Nets completely decimate fish stocks, be it trawls, gillnets driftnets, whatever... They are indiscriminate methods for killing whatever happens by.

But, if responsible commercial limits are set and then harvest is allowed only by rod and reel, it seems there could be a balance. Many commercial codfisherman that I know have said that if it were a hook and line world only we'd never overfish the oceans. While I may not go quite that far and say never, I tend to agree that selective harvest of fish by hook and line is far better than other more harsh methods.

Thanks, Hooper

[JohnR]

Hoop - I agree, maybe limited netting but for some stocks (pure R&R for bass) but a major reduction in pressure is needed. The cod guys rod & reeling it should not be penalized not should the recreationals... This new crap about a SW license for the EEZ and beyond for Rec Groundfish is stupid too. Maybe if you throw a license at the recs they'll redirect their efforts and take them out of the fight.,..

[beachwalker]

I had those guys pushing their rhetoric down my throat and didn't like the taste of it.

I am with John. Work on protecting the forage species (just look at this years success for proof) and try and reduce the commercial impact by LOWERING quotas, not eliminating them.

Does anyone recall the drop in price of a bass per/lb this summer once the supply reached capacity/maximum ?

Scallopers have similar issues here. We want more harvest but it doesn't mean when there is more available that the stock harvest should be increased. I was, and still am, blown away that they raised both this past year (rec and comm.). That just made NO sense at all.

Anyone have any new input without getting upset ?

[deputydog]

The last few posters sound as though they just might have commercial permits tucked into their waders. I haven't heard anyone who doesn't have a dog in the fight;ie is, was, is married to, related to, lives next to, or is being held hostage by a commercial fisherman, who thinks that stripers shouldn't be exclusively reserved for personal use anglers. Now of course that excludes the fine folks at the ASMFC, the NMFS and the various Departments of Marine Resources all of whom have been in lock step with the commercial interests for other reasons.

[beachwalker]

Isn't one commercial left on my local pond and let's try and smooth the diction a bit in our posts for the future.

Whenever I here someone commenting about commercial they use words like: Kill, slaughter, decimate, etc.

When it is recreational it is: catch, whack, tag, pound, etc.

The commercial vessel with the nets is "catching" fish too. Yes, he is decimating the stock but he is catching and the killing is something we ALL do. Not every bit of his bycatch dies in the net.

That is like me assuming that ALL power boat owners are idiots because MOST of the ones I know are. Just doesn't add up when one wants to talk as oppose to vent.

I am all for reduction, if not abolishment of a commercial Bass harvest. If it isn't economically viable and the Wampanoags (god forbid) don't lay claim to some ceremonial right then why keep it going.

I am still waiting for a response to my statement concerning supply/demand and the effect it had on pricing last summer.

WHEN IS THE NEXT FISHERIES MEETING THAT WILL DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE ? We need to be there and be there in numbers.

[Mr. Sandman]

<begin rant>

I just have a problem with commercial taking of SB, sorry. The way it is run it has converted rec's into commercial fisherman for 4-5 weeks in the summer months. Is this what you want? 4000 guys suddenly taking 40 fish per boat all summer long? Quota's today are already above pre crisis days and have been increasing each year.

I am all for forage fish concerns, but that is a separate issue, IMO the SB is not NEEDED as a commercial fish for ONE month in the summer. We survived just fine during the moratorium days without it.

You will never get fair management because the management is biased by commercial interests, and has been for years. This EEZ thing will fly. (good or bad), quotas will increase year after year, just as they have ...for what? A few guys doing this as a summer job? Gimmie a break, its plain dumb.

When I see things like " this stripers forever group just wants the fishery form themselves"...huh? Other then a more populated fishery what do they have to gain? It’s more like they want more sportsmen to enjoy the species. Unlike the comm crowd, who wants as much $ as they can extract from the fishery and every year they will demand more. There is no commercial (OR PERSONAL) interest to be gained with this org , this is more of a conservation measure. This us vs. them thing and the division into "various user groups" has got us into this mess.

Also, there is far more economic benefit derived from the SB sports fisherman then the SB commercial group and it benefits far more people, not just the elite few who were grandfathered in with a SB lic.

Lastly, this needs consistent (UNBIASED) management...not state by state boards of charter and comm fisherman looking to make more $ each year. A no-commercial status would make it a game fish. The problem with new Englanders is that they resist change...good or bad, they don't care...their attitude is "this is the way is was and always will be, leave it as it is". As I said, we got past slavery I think we can overcome commercial SB fishing. I am not an activist of stripers forever but they seem to be gathering a head of steam and if they can deliver a game fish status for this prized species I support their efforts. The politcal route they are taking is the one that can circumvent these state by state boards all having conflict of interests to some degree.

I hope you all took notice of the BS going on with illegal selling of SB this past year in RI. And the LAME penalties that went along with the crime. Comments (near quotes) from the lawbreakers included "no big deal, it is just the cost of doing business" when asked about the fine. How about 20 years in prison? (Yeah I am really serious) This is just the TIP of the illegal iceberg and a lot of people know it. When I see guys buying 25-50 doz eels after the bass season is closed you have to wonder....

Current inforcement is a joke. How many people were arrested for illegal bass (beyond the RI dudes) ? More enforcement is not possible, esp. with a fishery that only lasts a month, The law breakers know this and the most logical solution is to shut it down altogether and have a single UNBIASED body making the rules coast wide. The rules may vary from state to state (season, and/or limits) but AT LEAST there is some continuity to the management plan. Right now the attitude is "If we don't take our max the other guys in the states will and that is not fair to us" ...this kind of thinking is PLAIN STUPID. Do what is right for the fish, and enough with the greed already.

<end rant>

[beachwalker]

Well said (for a rant )

[MakoMike]

First of all, I don not have and no one related to me has a license to sell striped bass, in any way shape or form. Yet, contrary to some believes I still support a commercial atriped bass fishery. I'd like to correct some misstatements;
1) the recreational striped bass fishery is economically more important than the commercial fishery.
That's true, but only on an overall basis, because the recreational fishery kills far more bass than the commercial fishery. On a fish by fish basis the commercial fishery has to be more economically important, if the commercials are fishing rod & reel they have to spend roughly the same amount as the recreationals, for bait fuel, etc. plus there is the economic activity generated by the sale of the bass.
2) 40 fish per day vs 1 fish per day. Would recreational fishermen be happy if their limit was also 40 fish per day but the entire fishery was shut down once a quota was met? Of course not! Look at the facts, recreatinal fishermen catch 4 times the amount of fish as the commercials, its just that the commecials catch all of their fish in a shorter period of time.
3) Stripers forever is some sort of pure organization that has no self serving interest. Who do you think gives stripers forever the big money? Sportfishing businesses that's who. You really think they are getting by on $25 donations, I have a bridge to sell you Its all about money, its just that on the recreational side the money goes to the business that sell stuff to the recreational fishermen, while on the commercial side, most look at the money the fishermen themselves make.
4) constantly increasing commercial quotas. that's pure bull. Look at the facts, the commercial quota has increased ONCE, since the stock fully recovered and that increase only brought the commercials back to where they were before the original restrictions were put in place. If you look at the long term the commercial quota hasn't increased in the last 20 years.
5) The fish are a public resource. True, so why should the 99.9% of all american that don't fish for striped bass be deprived of the ability to enjoy them on the table? From an economics point of view all the commercial fishermen are doing is providing a service for the non-fishing public by catching the fish and deliverying them to their table. So now tell me why .1% of the population should be entitiled to 100% of a public resource?

IMHO the recreational catch should be subject to quotas just like the commercial catch is. It should be measured and the fishery shut down if the recreational catch exceeds the quota.

[Slipknot]

Originally posted by MakoMike


IMHO the recreational catch should be subject to quotas just like the commercial catch is. It should be measured and the fishery shut down if the recreational catch exceeds the quota.

I can see your point with everything you said MakoMike except for above.

Saying that the rec. catch should be measured is one thing, actually doing it is another and imposible in my opinion. I don't go along with estimates either, there is no possible way all the fish caught recreationally can be counted.

I have nothing against a comm. bass season either even though I don't have a license either.

[Mr. Sandman]

OK, Here we go....

Originally posted by MakoMike
First of all, I don not have and no one related to me has a license to sell striped bass, in any way shape or form. Yet, contrary to some believes I still support a commercial atriped bass fishery. I'd like to correct some misstatements;
1) the recreational striped bass fishery is economically more important than the commercial fishery.
That's true, but only on an overall basis, because the recreational fishery kills far more bass than the commercial fishery. On a fish by fish basis the commercial fishery has to be more economically important, if the commercials are fishing rod & reel they have to spend roughly the same amount as the recreationals, for bait fuel, etc. plus there is the economic activity generated by the sale of the bass.

Not so, It has been estimated that recs spend and PUT INTO THE ECONOMY $600 PER LB of bass caught... The comm market lasts for 3,4 or 5 weeks and serves a VERY small percentage of the general public. Any economic benifit to general public is so small it can't even be measured by comparison. Sure a few "comm" sb fisherman make a couple bucsk during the summer but the harm to the local sb population is not worth it. There was an interesting article in the paper not to long ago about wholesalers who are closeing their doors forever because "this is no longer a viable buisness". One in Particular was in Menemsha. There is little money in the fishing business anymore.

Originally posted by MakoMike
2) 40 fish per day vs 1 fish per day. Would recreational fishermen be happy if their limit was also 40 fish per day but the entire fishery was shut down once a quota was met? Of course not! Look at the facts, recreatinal fishermen catch 4 times the amount of fish as the commercials, its just that the commecials catch all of their fish in a shorter period of time.

Lets be sane about this. If there was NO cash available legal or illegal for the striped bass, what rec would WANT 40 fish? I am geared up to catch, store and consume fish, probably far more then most. I have 3 big stand alone freezers (2 chests and 1 stand up) in my home. I eat and give away to family and friends A LOT of fish and frankly I doubt I it take home 40 bass per YEAR, no less per day. Most fisherman just enjoy fishing and takeing a few home, some don't even do that.

Originally posted by MakoMike
3) Stripers forever is some sort of pure organization that has no self serving interest. Who do you think gives stripers forever the big money? Sportfishing businesses that's who. You really think they are getting by on $25 donations, I have a bridge to sell you Its all about money, its just that on the recreational side the money goes to the business that sell stuff to the recreational fishermen, while on the commercial side, most look at the money the fishermen themselves make.

"Who do you think gives stripers forever the big money?"...Big money?, you are way off the mark here....these guys are BROKE they have NO BIG MONEY, they sell some decals for a few bucks to developme web sites and alike, this is not big money organization...unlike commerical fishing and political lobbies.
THIS IS NOT ABOUT MONEY FOR THEM...they HAVE NO MONEY and WILL NOT GET MONEY IF THEIR GOALS ARE REACHED.
In a word, this is about taking the price off the bass's head and KEEPING the fish around FOR ALL PEOPLE TO ENJOY RECREATIONALLY. Not for a few to put 20-30K in their pockets during 5 weeks in the summer.

Originally posted by MakoMike
4) constantly increasing commercial quotas. that's pure bull. Look at the facts, the commercial quota has increased ONCE, since the stock fully recovered and that increase only brought the commercials back to where they were before the original restrictions were put in place. If you look at the long term the commercial quota hasn't increased in the last 20 years.

Not so, the qouta went up something like 42% last year and it went up the year before that...and they are seeking a larger quota this year as well as opening up more area to fish. Smells like greed to me. True last years quotas are now "finally" back to the PRE-CRISIS days and they think they are being shortchanged.
During the PRE-CRISIS days I think the rec limits were 16" size and unlimted take...you want to head in that direction?

Originally posted by MakoMike
5) The fish are a public resource. True, so why should the 99.9% of all american that don't fish for striped bass be deprived of the ability to enjoy them on the table? From an economics point of view all the commercial fishermen are doing is providing a service for the non-fishing public by catching the fish and deliverying them to their table. So now tell me why .1% of the population should be entitiled to 100% of a public resource?

I guess it depends on your perspective. I see the .1% as the commerical sb fisherman and I ask you: "why .1% of the population should be entitiled to 100% of a public resource?"

There are PLENTY of other OFFSHORE species that can provide food for the masses. The 99.9% of the people are not all lined up at the store waiting to buy the tasty sb...it aint that good. The small population that is served sb during the 23 days in the summer when it is for sale are for some vacationers who could just as well be eating a scup or a swordfish. What pains me is while in a fancy resturant in VA recently I had ordered a seafood entre that included rockfish. A 9" sb with the skin on was put in front of me. I could not eat it. This was a 9" commerically caught striped bass. It made me sick even to see that. We need COAST-WIDE regulation not this biased state by state crap that is doing little.

Originally posted by MakoMike
)IMHO the recreational catch should be subject to quotas just like the commercial catch is. It should be measured and the fishery shut down if the recreational catch exceeds the quota.

IT IS and it HAS BEEN! That is why they a) have limits and b) have shut it down in the past. I also think the rec take numbers are WAY WAY off as most fishermen I see release fish. That number is SO subjective and week it can't be used.

Bottom line: IMO this world does not NEED sb as a commerical fish. It provides more benifit to ALL as a sport fish. Just because you can take them does not mean you should.


Mark my words, in my lifetime, SB WILL become obtain game fish (or some non-commerical) status. This is really gaining steam now and it will happen via a politcal move squashing these biased boards which currently favor the haresting of bass to the max.



Now...all that said, I actually have a SB comm lic. I have not sold a sb since 1981 but I have a lic to do it. (I buy it for several reasons...policing support is one of them)
I think the states and the comm biased boards are providing an incentive to convert rec's to comm sb fisherman by offering cheap lic's and "easy money" for a few weeks at the expense of a great fish, so that they can get what they want passed with LITTLE OR NO POLICING EFFORTS. Most of these guys out there comm fishing are guys that never comm fished for anything in thier lives don't know a friggin thing about it and just want to take a lot of bass and and help pay for their boating expenses. This is wrong.
With reguard to policing: How many arrests were made and what were the penelties. Very FEW and very Little is the answer. If you are going to have a comm industry you better police it.

I am trying to show my kids the beauty of the fish and its surroundings and the great memories that are created with family and friends when one lets them go to catch again some day. It is not about how many and how much!

Sorry about al the typos..I type fast and don't look back on these boards...esp when I rant!!
Peace!

[deputydog]

MakoMike, if you're not a commercial fisherman, I assume you run a delicatessen, because you sure know how to serve up the baloney! I wouldn't bother to respond because I really don't care what you think, but I don't want to let anything you say in your last post pass as accurate or meaningful.

1.) the recreational striped bass fishery is economically more important than the commercial fishery.

Your first two words are the only part of your argument that is important:

That's true

. The numbers aren't even close. The rest of your statement is babble.

2.) 40 fish a day. You must be referring to Massachusetts, which has a 40 fish per day limit for commercials. The only problem with that scenario is that 76% of commercial permit holders in Mass report selling no bass. None, not one, zilch, nada.
Those guys can still catch 40 a day (for personal use, don't ya know). I'm not saying they do, but that's a whole bunch of folks whose catch is not measured or estimated. So the commercial quota was filled by less that 25% of the licenced commercial fishermen. Would a rational person think that just maybe the commercial quota was exceeded? Yup.

3.) I'll come back to this one.

4.) I don't know who said quotas were constantly increasing for stripers. No one I know did. What I do know is that the commercial fishing industry has gotten the fisheries managers to accept the fact that commercial harvest is the quota (if filled) plus a fairly miniscule mortality number. Illegal harvest and bycatch are just about non-existent according to the numbers given and used. In the words of Santa, "Ho, ho, ho........"

5.) The truth of the matter is that approximately 1% of the U.S. population actually fish for striped bass. 99% of the remainder couldn't tell a striped bass from a walking catfish either in their hand or on their dinner plate.

Now, let's go back to 3#.

3) Stripers forever is some sort of pure organization that has no self serving interest. Who do you think gives stripers forever the big money? Sportfishing businesses that's who. You really think they are getting by on $25 donations, I have a bridge to sell you Its all about money, its just that on the recreational side the money goes to the business that sell stuff to the recreational fishermen, while on the commercial side, most look at the money the fishermen themselves make

Stripers Forever has received a total of zero dollars and zero cents from the sport fishing industry. I'm not saying we'd turn it down, but the truth is, we don't need much money. We have no salaries, we don't ask for expense money. We do what we do because it is time and it is right. We don't have dues, we don't have meetings, we're not a fishing club, we're allied only with the rights and interests of 3 million recreational anglers who have watched the fishery for the most popular saltwater fish on the East coast be trashed once, and are determined not to let it happen again.
It has nothing to do with money. It has nothing to do with trying to get the commercial allocation assigned to recreational fishermen. If anything, we'd advocate that the recreational harvest be trimmed until the results of the higher than expected fishing mortality just now being announced are fully assessed.
So MM, just back off and, next time, try to contribute to a topic you know something about.

[flatts1]

Sandman wrote:

" Not so, the qouta went up something like 42% last year and it went up the year before that...and they are seeking a larger quota this year as well as opening up more area to fish."

Sandman, I presume that you are referring to Massachusetts. In which case, it is my understanding that the commercial quota did go up last year but it was held constant for several years prior (about 6 straight years (or more) I think). What is your source for this information

Also, where have you read that commercial striped bass fishermen are looking for more quota for next year. I am not doubting you, I am just interested where you found this information.

Nonetheless, the commercial quota is a fraction of what recreational fishermen take.

DeputyDog wrote

2.) 40 fish a day. You must be referring to Massachusetts, which has a 40 fish per day limit for commercials. The only problem with that scenario is that 76% of commercial permit holders in Mass report selling no bass. None, not one, zilch, nada.
Those guys can still catch 40 a day (for personal use, don't ya know). I'm not saying they do, but that's a whole bunch of folks whose catch is not measured or estimated. So the commercial quota was filled by less that 25% of the licenced commercial fishermen. Would a rational person think that just maybe the commercial quota was exceeded? Yup.

DeputyDog, I recognize your above quote as the mind numbed rhetoric spoon fed from an article on the SF website titled "A Fraudulent Fishery" I find nothing "rational" or even reasonable about what Stripers Forever advocates. The reason why they have any support at all is bececause they target a very gullable demographic who are simply eternal pessimists that are easily pursuaded with fear and not facts.


Allow me to share some of a discussion that I had with SF president Brad Burns.

I wrote:

Mr. Burns,


As you suggested, I read the your piece titled "A Fraudulent Fishery". May I suggest that you rename it to "A Fraudulent Premise". All you have done is correctly point out that there are many more folks who are licensed to catch striped bass commercially than there are who have actually sold them. You then leap to the conclusion that certainly this is evidence of illegal/under the table sales.

The truth is that it is not uncommon for there to be WAY too many fishermen in a any given fishery. For example, an article by The Boston Globe titled "Latest plan to reduce N.E. fishing fleet seen falling short", published on February 14, 2003 (page B3) reported the following...


************************************************** *********************

Congress is expected to finalize a new $10 million program to get New England fishermen out of the business, but the money will only retire a tiny fraction of the boats that analysts say need to leave the fishery forever.

National Marine Fisheries Service Director Bill Hogarth said yesterday that New England will only be able to support 300 to 400 boats to catch cod and other groundfish, even after the region's fish populations fully rebound. There are currently 1,700 boats that have permits to catch the bottom-dwelling fish, although many of the permit holders are not actively fishing now.

''Capacity is a major problem, I don't know how to stress that enough,'' said Hogarth. ''We need to solve it.''

************************************************** **********************

The same can be said of the commercial striped bass fishery in Massachusetts; there are too many folks chasing too few fish. This is because although there are loads of marketable striped bass available, their supply is artificially cut short by an imposed hard quota. The result is a market glut on day 1 when the commercial season opens straight through until it closes. As a result, many folks who buy a commercial striped bass license in the beginning of the season find that the opportunity cost does not make commercial fishing viable. In the end, less experienced fishermen don't even bother.

The commercial sector is all too well aware of this problem and you'll note that Mr. Abdow makes repeated mention of it at an Amendment 6 hearing. At a separate hearing in Braintree, MA this past April, many commercial folks were suggesting a variety of options to help fix the problem of a flooded market. The ideas ranged from lessening the number of days allowable to fish, to smaller bag limits, to actually kicking non-residents out of the MA comm fishery (determined illegal). Indeed, it was the commercial folks themselves calling for further restrictions on the fishery.

Now I don't doubt that a certain degree of illegal activity is going on in the striped bass commercial fishery. However, the bottom line here is that the high number of unused licenses means that fisheries managers are simply issuing too many licenses. Jumping to the conclusion that folks are illegally selling bass based via unused licenses is very irresponsible.

To be sure, the high number of licenses issued in a fishery that clearly can not support them is the fault of fisheries managers - the Mass. DMF in this case. However, to their credit, the DMF is now looking at ways to cut back on the number of licenses issued. The following is an excerpt from a DMF Press release on May 2, 2003...


************************************************** **********************

6) Emergency action (effective May 2, 2003) was taken to adopt a May 1, 2003 control date for the commercial striped bass fishery after which any person issued a new commercial fisherman’s permit endorsed for striped bass fishing will not be assured of future access to or participation in this fishery if a management regime is developed and implemented that limits the number of participants in this fishery.

See:
http://www.basspond.com/cgi-bin/ib/i...ct=ST;f=8;t=51

************************************************** **********************

Folks, in the time since SF has been formed, I have yet to see anyone from this group represent this organization in any capacity at any striped bass hearing - at least in Massachusetts. That's pretty sad when you consider all of the criticism that Stripers Forever has directed toward the Mass DMF and yet they don't have the courage to actually show up at public heaings to express their concerns face to face with those who write the regs. Rather, they offer nothing but pot-shots with misleading emails.

Doesn't SF have any members in Massachusetts who are willing to describe themselves as such in public and go on record as supporting and explaining what Stripers Forever advocates?

Even CCA has enough faith in their convictions to at least show up and make a statement. I often disagree with their message but at least I can respect them for taking the time to get involved where it really matters - at public hearings where folks can scrutinize positions face to face with those who are advocating them.

Then again, Stripers Forever is free and I suppose its members are getting what they are paying for.

Folks, before you send any donations to Stripers Forever, ask yourself, what does this group actually do other than maintain a website (at a cost of $4000 which is a rip off {who paid for that}) and send emails filled with misinformation?

Sure, SF claims that they are only interested in gamefish status for striped bass. But ask yourself, what does that mean. They want the EEZ to remain closed but a closed EEZ is closed to recreational fishermen as well as commercial fishermen. What else does federal gamefish status mean? It is my understanding that true gamefish status means catch/release ONLY. Is that where we are headed? I hope not.

I suggest to anyone truely interested in what is best for the striped bass resource that you get informed by actually attending any public hearing on striped bass. You will learn more information there than in any post on any internet website. But don't expect to see SF there, at least not in Massachusetts.

Then decide for yourself if commercial fishermen are the single greatest threat facing striped bass today. I think you will be surprised.

I know that it is blasphemy in many recreational circles to say the following but I believe that there is now and always has been plenty of room in the striped bass fishery for both recreational and commercial fishermen.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not calling for more commercial quota but if recreational fishermen can take a reasonable number of fish (currently 2/day) and that figure does not exceed the target F rate, then I have no problem with commercial folks harvesting the difference. That's what sustainable fisheries are all about. Of course that goes both ways too though. In other words, if more recreational fishermen enter the fishery which results in a F rate that approaches the target rate, then I say commercial folks should still get the difference but it will of course be lessened.

The way I look at it, recreational fishing encompases EVERYONE WHO WANTS TO FISH, whereas commercial fishermen encompasses EVERYONE WHO WANTS TO SELL FISH. With regard to striped bass, I think there is room for everyone so long as "the public has first crack at the resource", as a local outdoor writer, Ed Nowak, puts it. By the public, I (and Mr. Nowak) am referring to those who are willing and able to go fishing and who may or may not take some home. Even when the commercial striped bass season closes, there is nothing that stops the same fishermen from enjoying a day out striped bass fishing - or even running a charter service for others to do so.

Later,
Mike Flaherty
Quincy, MA