MENHADEN ADVISORY PANEL MEETING

[afterhours]

Rhode Island Marine Fisheries Council's
MENHADEN ADVISORY PANEL

will meeting tomorrow night
THURSDAY, JANUARY 6
6:00 PM

at URI Bay Campus, Coastal Institute
Hazard Room, South Ferry Rd, Narragansett

AGENDA

Review & discussion of FSC's proposal to close the Providence River to
commercial menhaden fishing.

ALL RIMFC ADVISORY PANEL MEETINGS ARE OPEN TO THE PUBIC.

Here is Google map & directions
Google Maps

[Clammer]

JUST TO GIVE YOU HEADS UP ;;

ark bait came with a few proposals /

all are going to be recommended by the advisery commitee /

one will be giving them the ok to fish ...from quonset to middletown south & all of the saconkett river / in the fall ;;

f uck the rec guy ><><

[JohnR]

I'm not making this one (Cub Scouts) but would be greatly interestd in first hand accounts / results.

[piemma]

I am not going this year. Arc Bait comes with a strong following and it doesn't matter what the recs want. The money guys win.

[afterhours]

Originally Posted by piemma

I am not going this year. Arc Bait comes with a strong following and it doesn't matter what the recs want. The money guys win.

...if you put all the rec's money together- we are the money guy . every voice counts.

[piemma]

Originally Posted by afterhours

...if you put all the rec's money together- we are the money guy . every voice counts.

I agree. The powers that be do not.

[Thumper]

Is there anyone we can contact if we can't make it?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[MakoMike]

Originally Posted by Thumper

Is there anyone we can contact if we can't make it?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Write to the RIMFC about it, they'll take you comments into account before they vote on it.

[Thumper]

Originally Posted by MakoMike

Write to the RIMFC about it, they'll take you comments into account before they vote on it.

Thanks Mike
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[RIJIMMY]

Guys - I never chime in on these threads because Im one of the folks Clammer is reffering to. What I dont know is, what is my argument on this? Would I stand up and say -
"Im a guy who fishes a few times a week, likes to live line bunker and hates searching all over the bay for them"
So what? Is that an argument against guys trying to earn a living? i would think the argument would be that taking the bunker is hurting the bass population, but I cant say that it is.
nothing make my fishing days happier and more productive than a billion bunker loaded in wickford harbor, but I have a hard time arguing in my favor.

[afterhours]

where are all the peanuts? been three years since i've seen a decent amount... as long as there's one pogey left i'm sure that arc will be trying to net it. just being there to show support for the pogeys is a great help, we're not all orators. personally i don't use bait at all, but i've noticed a direct coralation between pogey stocks and the condition of our fisheries. remember the pogey stocks of the 70's? acres upon acres....

[zacs]

one thing I never understood, if you don't get up and speak your piece, how does anyone that matters know who or what you are supporting. I never understood the "just go to show support."

And I saw more peanuts all late summer and early fall in New Bedford. Way up to 195. My office was right on the water and it was insane watching them all day. so thick you could walk on them. hadn't seen something like that in RI in several years... there for weeks.

[afterhours]

zac...i guess all is well with the peanuts, they just moved to new bedford. i'm glad people who attended civil right rallies and anti war rallies did'nt have your mindset- i believe most attended to show support.

[zacs]

Originally Posted by afterhours

zac...i guess all is well with the peanuts, they just moved to new bedford. i'm glad people who attended civil right rallies and anti war rallies did'nt have your mindset- i believe most attended to show support.

don, you misunderstood my point. (both of them actually)

At a meeting like this, you can attend to show support for either side, right? so... how does the advisory panel know you are there to support decreased menhaden take in the bay vs. a comm guy there to support increased take in the bay??

Or is it just Ark against everyone else, and anyone there is assumed against the take of pogies in the bay?

I am not against going to the meetings, I just never understood how they judge the "attendance" off the meeting if those in attendance don't speak up...

and my point was about how there were a complete lack of peanuts in the bay (where the pogie boats have been vacuuming out adult pogies every summer for the last three years), but in other areas in MA where they are not completely raping the resource there is an abundance of peanunts.......

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by zacs

one thing I never understood, if you don't get up and speak your piece, how does anyone that matters know who or what you are supporting. I never understood the "just go to show support."

It's like people that don't vote and then try to complain to me about the government. I tell them, if you won't make the effort when your opinion counts (whether I agree with it or not) then you're not allowed an opinion at all.

I can't go, so I'll send an email and try to make a phone call.

[afterhours]

this meeting was to review both arc's and the club federations proposals for the purpose of determining which if any proposals would be brought to the fisheries council meeting on feb. 22.

random observations.

nobody can agree where the menhaden actually spawn. some say the bay, others say the open ocean. this is a biggie.

arc bait being a small private entity sure has a lot of influence. they seem to be in a postion to play give and take with the state?????

a few members of the advicsory council cared only about how many menhaden they could kill per day if certain restrictions were approved. and arc seemed to be angling toward a monopoly. seemed like many at the main table were only concerned about what they could harvest...not the well being of the stock.

[MakoMike]

Originally Posted by afterhours

where are all the peanuts? been three years since i've seen a decent amount... as long as there's one pogey left i'm sure that arc will be trying to net it. just being there to show support for the pogeys is a great help, we're not all orators. personally i don't use bait at all, but i've noticed a direct coralation between pogey stocks and the condition of our fisheries. remember the pogey stocks of the 70's? acres upon acres....

Yeah, and remember the striped bass fishing in the 70s? Nada, that's when the limits went to 36 inches and some states had moratoriums. I wouldn't use that argument.

[RIJIMMY]

Zac,

I got your point on this and agree. Im also applaud those that are taking action. To restate my earlier post, Don - you're a non bait fisherman who believes the more bunker around, the better health and abundance of striped bass. thats a perfect argument and one worth making.
From what I see on other sites (web) and to some extent here, is the angle that if arc bait takes all the bunker, then I cant snag them and use them for bait. Truthfully, thats my angle, however its a selfish one. I cant make that argument. I've seen elsewhere that one proposal is to ban the take in the prov river, but open up areas south. I think that benefits some guys who fish in that area and they want easy access to the bait. Well...WTF, that screws me. Take all you want in Prov, I want them in wickford, greenwich, etc. Saves me $$$ in gas and time. So whats my argument? My argument is a selfish one. I want bunker for my own use. Before the bunker showed up in hordes the last 6 -7 years, we still caught plenty of bass in RI. Guys in MA did well this year without any big schools of bunker. So is there really a correlation with bass and bunker? I have no clue.
I applaud folks taking action and I hope Arc doesnt touch one pogey in the bay, but my reason for that is because it makes my fishing easier. I actually had to cast this year instead of of plopping a live fish over the side of the boat.....

[Adam_777]

I found out last minute about the meeting and sent an email.

Here's what it read.

To whom it may concern,

I will not be able to attend the meeting.I would like to pass

some information along and hope it reaches the right people.The past

couple years DEM's plan with the quota, fly overs and estimated biomass

has been nothing short of a joke to anyone who actually fishes in our

bay.The Menhaden start to trickle in and DEM opens the season for these

bait boats.They exploit the regulations any way they can.They wiped out

almost the entire bay for the last two years.The fishing in the bay has

been horrible to non existent for the last two years.When the fishing is

poor the tackle shops lose money and they suffer.Fishing can draw in

revenue if the resources are managed properly.As of now these resources

are not and it is a shame.Now we are being charged to fish in our bay

and after the last couple seasons poor fishing I know many people in

todays economy are factoring whether or not it's worth getting a license

or even fishing this bay.Many people who came from out of state are

staying home and not purchasing licenses.What does this have to do with

menhaden ? Menhaden are not only filter feeders but they are also bait

for Striped Bass and Bluefish.Two of the fish most recreational bay

fisherman target.So besides the obvious benefits from them filtering our

waters they attract these other fish.When the bay has menhaden people

buy from the tackle shops,licenses,boats,gas for the boats,slips etc

etc.What do these big bait companies do for the state or the bay ? They

take and take and when it's all gone they go somewhere else and ruin the

fishing in that area until there are none left.Take all of the RI

recreational saltwater licenses and show them this letter.They will all

agree.The fact that I had to search a while through DEM's website just

to find a contact for info on this meeting means the state is trying to

keep it quiet or doesn't care much about the peoples opinion who live

here and actually fish the waters.I personally would like to see these

boats out of the bay for good.We don't need them, they need us and our

bay.They profit from our resources and we allow it.It makes no sense

from any angle to allow them to come in and do what they do.



Adam


They replied first....

Dear Adam,



I just wanted to let you know that I received your email and have passed your email on to Jason McNamee who is the staff person for the Menhaden Advisory Panel. If you need to contact him in the future he can be reached at jason.mcnamee@dem.ri.gov or at 423-1943.



Thank you,

Nancy Scarduzio


Then.....

Hello Adam. I would encourage you to make your proposal during the public hearing process which will open up after January 22nd. If you submit your proposal during the public comment time period (beginning January 22nd and ending February 22nd with the actual public hearing) we can submit it as public comment for the record. As well, you are welcomed to voice your opinion at the hearing, and/or at the subsequent meeting of the RI Marine Fisheries Council.

We offer a listserve service where all meeting notices will be emailed directly to you so that you don’t have to hunt for meeting info in the future. You can sign up yourself at the following website by clicking the buttons on the bottom of the page: RIDEM/Marine Fisheries Topics Page

Or just drop me a line and I would be happy to sign you up on this end. You will also find a host of other material on the site that you may find useful, such as summaries from past menhaden advisory panel meetings (click “advisory panel agendas and minutes” on the left hand side, about ½ way down). Last nights meeting will be posted within a week.

All of the meeting info I noted above will be sent out on the listserve and will also be posted when available on the website (link provided above).

-Jason McNamee


So basically this guy Jason got my email but is deleting it because it's not made at a public hearing proposal.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Adam:
Jason is one of the good guys. cut him some slack.

[Adam_777]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Adam:
Jason is one of the good guys. cut him some slack.

Never said anything negative about the man.I'm thinking about taking his advice.I put this experience up here so it could be seen.If anyone thinks an email is enough this should prove that it is not.I apologize if I offended anyone.

[jmac]

Jason is one of the good guys. cut him some slack.

[RIROCKHOUND]

OK. you worded it as' he got my email and deleted it'

Just wanted to clarify, he is not in an easy position. we see it from the rec side, they are trying to manage it best for everyone. not easy with barkers on both sides!

[Adam_777]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

OK. you worded it as' he got my email and deleted it'

Just wanted to clarify, he is not in an easy position. we see it from the rec side, they are trying to manage it best for everyone. not easy with barkers on both sides!

What I wrote is what I felt when I read it.That it all.The email is going no where and if I want anything to be put on the table I have to show at a meeting.As stated earlier it was put out for anyone who thought emails help in this instance.Was never a personal attack.

I wrote this

So basically this guy Jason got my email but is deleting it because it's not made at a public hearing proposal.

[MakoMike]

If you want to lay the game you have to follow the rules. There is a public comment period prior tot he issue coming up at a RIMFC meeting, that's when you can make comments that wind up on the public record and therefore have a chance at influencing the outcome. You write outside that period your just pissin into the wind.

[Adam_777]

Originally Posted by MakoMike

If you want to lay the game you have to follow the rules. There is a public comment period prior tot he issue coming up at a RIMFC meeting, that's when you can make comments that wind up on the public record and therefore have a chance at influencing the outcome. You write outside that period your just pissin into the wind.

So I pissed in the wind and that entire meeting the other night was pissfest 2011 into the wind .Since you seem wise to this system let me ask you this.Does this statement have to be spoken at a hearing or can it be written for it to be entered into public record ?

[MakoMike]

Originally Posted by Adam_777

So I pissed in the wind and that entire meeting the other night was pissfest 2011 into the wind .Since you seem wise to this system let me ask you this.Does this statement have to be spoken at a hearing or can it be written for it to be entered into public record ?

It can been written and it will become part of the public record.

[MakoMike]

Pay attention to what it says about menhaden biology:


Every year, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) publishes an annual State of the Bay report, which grades the health of the bay on a variety of ecological factors while raising awareness of its most pressing issues. The recently released 2010 report, however, features a short section on Atlantic menhaden that includes vague and misleading language, which many scientists feel necessitates clarification. Menhaden management is the subject of this week’s (Jan 11-13,2011) meeting of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s (ASMFC) Atlantic menhaden technical committee.

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) -- Jan. 10, 2011 -- The larger a population, the better chance it stands to produce future generations, according to conventional wisdom. But that wisdom is inapplicable when it comes to the anomaly that is Atlantic menhaden, a small, oily fish more likely to be found in a medicine cabinet than on a menu.

Used to make fish oil and fishmeal, menhaden boast the evolutionary edge that enables females to produce enormous numbers of eggs. The success of those eggs, scientists say, is far more dependent on environmental conditions -- weather, water quality and atmospheric pressure – than on anything else, including restrictions on commercial fishing

“Intuitively, it makes sense that less fishing means more menhaden,” says National Marine Fisheries Services biologist Joseph Smith. “But it doesn’t work that way. Based on years of data, there doesn’t seem to be a very good relationship between the number of spawners and the number of juveniles.”

Nonetheless, the CBF’s 2010 State of the Bay Report offers the conclusive and unsubstantiated claim that “the fishery must be managed conservatively so that large numbers are left in the water to benefit both the Bay and mankind.”

At issue here is how the ASMFC will conduct its stock assessment and determine appropriate approaches to manage the fishery. The CBF would like to see more conservative management, and, for the last several years, has been pushing the ASMFC to adopt a broader ecosystem approach.

Presenting a case for more conservative management, the CBF’s report states:

For many years, fisheries scientists, including those at CBF, increasingly have been concerned about declining numbers of menhaden and the impact the commercial fishery has on the menhaden population. Consequently, the [ASMFC] capped the Bay’s menhaden harvest at 109,020 tons in 2006 and extended the cap again in 2009, pending further study. A 2010 ASMFC analysis concluded that the population of Atlantic menhaden has fallen to historically low levels, having been overfished routinely for decades.

In fact, the 2010 assessment uses data only through 2008, with data from this last year showing that fishing mortality level barely above the overfishing limit. For menhaden, assessments consider two major factors: fishing mortality, which is the ratio of fish harvested to the total estimated population size; and biomass, which, in this case, is expressed as the number of mature eggs produced by the population. As reference points, fisheries assessments use targets (to represent the ideal level) and limits (to represent levels not to exceed). Scientist found the fishing mortality estimate for 2008 was barely over the limit (by 0.4 %), meaning that slight overfishing occurred in 2008. On the other hand, the biomass/egg reference point was right on target, suggesting that plenty of eggs were produced. Also, in the nine years prior (1999 – 2007), scientists concluded that overfishing did not occur at all. The CBF’s claim that menhaden have been “overfished routinely for decades” is a gross misstatement.

If there is justification to readdress management approaches to the fishery, it will not be based on the legitimacy of CBF claims. Its 2010 State of the Bay report includes other statements on menhaden that, although quoted in at least one news source, several fisheries experts repudiate on grounds that they are misleading or are simply too vague.

For instance, the report says that “Atlantic menhaden are among the most important creatures in the Chesapeake Bay,” and are “prodigious ‘filter feeders,’ swimming in large schools with mouths agape to consume plankton … thereby helping to maintain a balance of microscopic life in Bay waters.”

But Robert J. Latour, who head the ASMFC’s menhaden technical committee and conducts research at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science says, “recent scientific evaluations of the ecological role of menhaden have indicated that these fish may not be as important for improving water quality as originally thought, but a thorough assessment of their role has not be conducted and CBF did not comment on the level of importance. The report does state that menhaden help to ‘maintain a balance of microscopic life in Bay waters.’ This statement is not necessarily misleading, but it is somewhat uninformative since it is unclear what is meant by ‘balance’. Plankton communities are continuously in flux throughout Chesapeake Bay, and the mechanisms controlling the composition and abundance within these communities are complex and not well understood.”

The CBF’s report also mentions that “Menhaden are also essential prey for many important Chesapeake Bay species, including striped bass, bluefish, weakfish, ospreys, herons, and marine mammals.”

Indeed, menhaden, like numerous other prey species, are an important part of the food chain, but their presence in the diet of other species like striped bass is not as great as some believe. Conducted by the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, the Chesapeake multi-species monitoring and assessment program found that menhaden represented only about 8 percent of striped bass food in the Chesapeake Bay, with a variety of other species accounting up the balance.

Finally, concluding its rationale on the ecological importance of the fish, the report invokes author H. Bruce Franklin’s claim that menhaden are “the most important fish in the sea” – a curious assertion from an English professor with expertise in science fiction.

This week (Jan 11-13, 2001), the Atlantic menhaden technical committee of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission will meet to examine alternate approaches to setting reference points in preparation for the next fishery assessment, slated to begin in early 2012. Clearly, the CBF is of its own mind already. The section on menhaden in its 2010 State of the Bay report concludes that, “Further action by ASMFC to establish more sustainable harvest limits is expected. Because of menhaden’s critical ecological value up and down the food chain, CBF supports this likely action. The fishery must be managed conservatively so that large numbers are left in the water to benefit both the Bay and mankind.”

Yes, such a conclusion sounds like common sense. If only it were bolstered by science.

[Adam_777]

Originally Posted by MakoMike

It can been written and it will become part of the public record.

Thanks for the information.After reading that article above I've come to the conclusion that the scientists really have no idea and they say that in the way it's worded.The scientific data is not adding up.I'm going to start looking into the backgrounds of these scientists and see what organizations they are tied to or funded by.I'm looking for a can of worms.