Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Today's Posts Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating » Main Forum » StriperTalk!

StriperTalk! All things Striper

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 11-09-2013, 07:05 AM   #1
Slipknot
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
Slipknot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middleboro MA
Posts: 17,125
Very nice piece from SJ Blog on Striped bass and ASMFC

I am posting the latest Blog from Surfcastersjournal.com that I found very well written and very informative, Zeno gave me permission to copy and paste it.

It is pretty long but well worth reading


Striped Bass: Where do we go from here? …by Charles Witek
Posted on November 7, 2013 by zhromin — 8 comments
Editor’s note #1

Surfcaster’s Journal Magazine if offering one day “24 hour free pass” to the magazine till Friday 4 pm. Go to the subscribe page and pick free access option

Editor’s note #2

This is a special contribution to the SJ Blog by Mr. Charles Witek

Striped Bass: Where do we go from here?

By now, most of the folks on the striper coast have heard something about what happened at last month’s ASMFC meeting. Unfortunately, the news coming out of the meeting was a little confused, and if you weren’t paying really close attention, you might not have completely understood what happened and what may—or may not—happen in the future.

There was good news. The majority of the commissioners on the Striped Bass Management Board clearly recognized that there are problems with the stock, believe that harvest levels have to be reduced and have begun the process of making that happen.

There was also bad news. The Management Board, in a decisive vote, decided to do nothing to prevent overfishing from occurring next season, some commissioners made it clear that they had no intention of supporting the harvest reductions that biologists believe are needed, and there is plenty of time between now and next August, when new regulations would probably be finalized, for those dissenting commissioners to derail the current process.

To understand where we’re going, we should probably take a quick look at where we’ve been. According to the best available data, the striped bass female spawning stock biomass—the abundance of mature female fish—peaked in 2004, then began a steady and at times steep decline. Striped bass anglers up and down the coast noticed the decline, which seemed particularly severe in northern New England; by 2007 or 2008, calls for additional restrictions on striped bass harvest began to be heard at ASMFC’s Striped Bass Management Board. In March 2011, after a motion made by Paul Diodati of Massachusetts and seconded by Gene Kray of Pennsylvania, ASMFC began to move forward with an addendum that would respond to the decline in abundance by reducing coastwide harvest. That addendum would have been released to the public after the August 2011 meeting; however, a motion by A.C. Carpenter of the Potomac River Fisheries Commission, which was seconded by Pat Augustine of New York, postponed such release until November, when a stock update would be available to the management board. However, when the November meeting rolled around, Pat Augustine of New York moved to take no action on such pro-conservation addendum until after the benchmark stock assessment was released in the second half of 2012. Mike Johnson of North Carolina seconded Augustine’s motion and, on a 9-6 vote, the motion to delay any harvest reduction was adopted by the management board.

The benchmark assessment was released to the management board in August 2012. That assessment confirmed what so many striped bass anglers feared, that the population was truly in a serious decline. Female spawning stock biomass had already fallen below the biomass target, and there was a good chance that it would also fall below the biomass threshold—meaning that the stock would, by definition, be “overfished”– by 2015 or 2016, unless managers adopted meaningful restrictions on harvest. The assessment also confirmed what many of us had been arguing since the stock was declared “recovered” in 1995: The current fishing mortality reference points were too high, and the current 2 fish bag limit and 28” minimum size imposed on the coastal fishery by ASMFC allowed too many fish to be killed. Under the current fishery management plan for striped bass, the fishing mortality target, F=0.30, allows the removal of about 26% of the adult population each year, while the fishing mortality threshold, F=0.34, defines “overfishing” as removing more than about 29% of that population. The latest stock assessment determined that the fishing mortality target should be reduced to F=0.180, about a 40% reduction in the allowable kill, which would result in roughly 16% of the adults being harvested in any year, and that the overfishing threshold be set at F=0.219, equivalent to the removal of about 19% of the adult population—well below what had previously been the target mortality level. Further, the assessment predicted that, unless current harvest levels were reduced significantly, it is a virtual certainty that the striped bass stock will be overfished in 2014.

The conclusions contained in the stock assessment quickly spread throughout the striped bass fishing community, resulting in a host of reactions. Most serious striped bass anglers recognized the problems being faced by the stock, and supported a harvest reduction that would take effect as soon as possible. However, there was some disagreement about how any such reduction should be structured; some proposed specific changes in the current rules (e.g., adopting a coastal standard of 1 fish at least 32 inches in length), others argued for a slot limit to protect the big females while others raised the perennial issue of conserving bass by ending commercial harvest (which, in some anglers’ minds, included harvest by party boats and perhaps other for-hire vessels). In making such recommendations, many anglers missed a very important point: Before we could intelligently discuss changing regulations, we had to first convince ASMFC’s Striped Bass Management Board to incorporate the new fishing mortality reference points in the striped bass management plan. Until that was done, all of the other discussions were purely academic. And we could be sure that there were people out there who would do their best to prevent any harvest reduction from taking place.

The meeting of the management board took place on October 29, and played out in the manner that most seasoned ASMFC-watchers expected. The conclusions contained in the stock assessment were taken seriously by a majority of the board. That majority was led by representatives from New England, who have long borne the most serious impacts of the current decline, and clearly supported conservation measures. However, the pro-conservation majority was opposed by a minority, predictably featuring Tom Fote, a governor’s appointee from New Jersey who has a long history of opposing any conservation measures that reduce the recreational kill. But Massachusetts salt water fisheries director Paul Diodati handily dismissed the anti-conservation zealots by observing, in effect, that anyone who couldn’t understand the problems besetting the striped bass stock probably shouldn’t be sitting at the management board table. That was undoubtedly an accurate observation, although it was probably lost on the anti-conservation crowd.

Diodati made a motion that directed ASMFC to initiate an addendum which would incorporate the new fishing mortality reference points into the striped bass management plan, and would also have reduced harvest for the 2014 fishing year by cutting the recreational bag limit to one fish, retaining the 28 inch minimum size and imposing proportionate reductions on commercial landings. His motion was seconded by Richard White of New Hampshire. However, the idea of imposing interim restrictions on the 2014 harvest met with substantial resistance. As a result, Pat Augustine of New York, seconded by Roy Miller of Delaware, successfully moved to separate Diodati’s motion into two parts, one dealing with a new addendum incorporating the new fishing mortality reference points, one addressing interim rules for 2014. The first motion passed easily; the second failed by a vote of 2 for, 12 against. Thus, there is reason to hope that striped bass harvest will be reduced in the future, but there is also reason to expect that rebuilding will take just a little longer, due to the overfishing that will take place next year.

A lot of responsible anglers were disappointed that needed harvest reductions won’t occur in 2014, and a lot of angry comments have been made. But in truth, such an outcome should have been expected. ASMFC’s actions aren’t prescribed by law; there is no equivalent to the Magnuson Act that imposes an enforceable legal mandate to prevent overfishing, rebuild stocks within a time certain, etc. ASMFC can, for the most part, do as it pleases, regardless of the ultimate result. If striped bass were managed under Magnuson, a section of that law, which requires that managers “establish a mechanism for specifying annual catch limits in the plan (including a multiyear plan), implementing regulations, or annual specifications, at a level such that overfishing does not occur in the fishery, including measures to ensure accountability” [emphasis added], would have required that Diodati’s proposed harvest cuts, or something very like them, go into effect for 2014. But ASMFC is bound by no such provision; as a result, both those who oppose needed conservation measures and those who just want to take a slower, more calculated approach to eventual harvest reductions opted to do nothing, and accept the probability that overfishing will occur. That’s the way that ASMFC usually works.

So, as I asked in the title, where do we go from here?

I’m happy to report that, wherever we eventually end up, right now, we’re headed in the right direction. At the February ASMFC meeting, the Striped Bass Management Board will finalize a draft addendum for public comment, which will propose adopting the new, lower fishing mortality reference points into the management plan. We won’t know just how that draft amendment will look or what it will contain; the most likely scenario will see it offer two options—either 1) remaining at status quo, and keeping the current reference points of Ftarget=0.30 and Fthreshold=0.34 or 2) adopting the reference points contained in the latest stock assessment, Ftarget=0.180 and Fthreshold=0.219. Hearings on the addendum will probably be held in March and April, and there will be at least one hearing in each state on the striper coast. All interested anglers should make it a point to attend at least one of those hearings and argue for the lowered reference points, because you can be sure that the folks who don’t want to see their kill reduced will be turning out in force.



that is the first part
see next reply for the second half

The United States Constitution does not exist to grant you rights; those rights are inherent within you. Rather it exists to frame a limited government so that those natural rights can be exercised freely.

1984 was a warning, not a guidebook!

It's time more people spoke up with the truth. Every time we let a leftist lie go uncorrected, the commies get stronger.
Slipknot is offline   Reply With Quote
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com