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

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

DZ · 03-11-2015, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buckman

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

Buck - I'll try and answer that. At the RI meetings the RI For hire captains were adamant that if RI went one fish and Mass and NY went two, then they(RI Boats)would be at a SEVERE disadvantage and their customers would go to Mass or NY to vacation and fish. Now using that same argument, RI boats would now have the advantage in recruiting back those customers if they get a two fish bag.

buckman · 03-11-2015, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DZ

Buck - I'll try and answer that. At the RI meetings the RI For hire captains were adamant that if RI went one fish and Mass and NY went two, then they(RI Boats)would be at a SEVERE disadvantage and their customers would go to Mass or NY to vacation and fish. Now using that same argument, RI boats would now have the advantage in recruiting back those customers if they get a two fish bag.

I agree totally with what you say but in your reality is it an advantage or disadvantage?
I have argued that it's clearly an advantage. Most here have argued that it is not a competitive advantage.
I think Rhode Island will surprise you guys and go with one fish .
But if Rhode Island instead played the game and tried to create an advantage for their boats ..then it's plan worked .
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

zimmy · 03-11-2015, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buckman

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

Alright, but for me that makes it even less of a valid reason for 2@33. The discussion has centered around why would a client pay a grand for a couple of fillets. 2@33 makes it so the client is willing to gamble that they will get more than a couple fillets, although they generally won't get 2 fish. That is alot to gamble if it is about fillets. I guess the charter can mislead them into thinking they will leave with 2 fish even though they won't. That can't be good for business anyway.

buckman · 03-11-2015, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zimmy

Alright, but for me that makes it even less of a valid reason for 2@33. The discussion has centered around why would a client pay a grand for a couple of fillets. 2@33 makes it so the client is willing to gamble that they will get more than a couple fillets, although they generally won't get 2 fish. That is alot to gamble if it is about fillets. I guess the charter can mislead them into thinking they will leave with 2 fish even though they won't. That can't be good for business anyway.

we all fish for the challenge and we all fish in the hopes of catching something bigger and better than we have in the past.
Charterboat clients know it's fishing not catching
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.

JoeG@Breezy · 03-11-2015, 05:09 PM

On another note, I can't help noticing that RI takes credit for being the most corrupt ( unofficially on the web ). I have lived in NJ for many years, and was raised and worked in NY and currently live there for as many. I will argue all day long that Albany and Trenton own the corruption title, even if Buddy made a RI return.