Striper meeting rant.

[soups]

I would have too agree with AFTERHOURS. I'm a new tackle shop owner, and I cannot tell you how many people came up to me this year who were asking about what has happened to the stripers. We all had different ideas, but the same theme came back over and over again about the over killing of the bass. The proposed regulations will help, but it will be some time before we see the stock where they need to be.

[afterhours]

Originally Posted by MakoMike

Don, you really think that striped bass fishing is worse today than it was just before the moratorium years?

I'd say on par mike.

[MakoMike]

Originally Posted by afterhours

I'd say on par mike.

Then we'll just have to agree to disagree. My experience is that it was much worse during the mid 1980s when I was still fishing out of Montauk.

[iamskippy]

Originally Posted by JohnR

One fish for recs is estimated between 25% and 31% reduction

Its actually a 50% reduction in rec fish taken(from 2 to 1), which is a larger hit compaired to the 25 % commercial if you want to put it into compartmentalized perspective. I feel the tightening around the rec will make the biggest impact with this proposal however i feel they are missing the big picture with all the bass kills down south....

Just my 2 cents.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[hardcore from shore]

You have until 5PM today to email the ASMFC your comments about the proposed striped bass regulations.

Send them to: mwaine@asmfc.org

Subject should be: Draft Ammendment IV

Here is what I sent:

I am a Massachusetts resident and an avid salt water angler. I especially target Striped Bass on Cape Cod, and also throughout New England from Maine to Rhode Island. I am a past President of the Massachusetts Striped Bass Association. I consider myself a strong environmentalist and a conservationist and a steward for our natural resources.

I have fished regularly for striped bass for the last 15 years and have seen some peaks and valleys to my observed population. As such I am concerned by the current decreased stocks and especially your data showing the SSB to be declining.

Your data mirrors my observations of stock depletion. The stocks are not gone but they do seem under pressure. As such I support the following

1) Use the 2013 data for the F reference point (let's use the latest data we have).

2) Lets shoot to meet the target in 1 year, not 3 years (the stocks cannot afford to wait)

3) I vote for a 25% reduction in the mortality of the stock and as such agree with the proposal for 1 fish at 32 inches.

4) The commercial quota should be cut 25% just like the recreational mortality.

5) There should continue to be no quota sharing across states.


I have tried to keep my observations and recommendations brief but truly am concerned for the striped bass and prefer somewhat extreme action now versus waiting for more data or doing minor reductions.

Regards,

Bill Prodouz
BProdouz@gmail.com
617 694 0723

Pocasset, Ma 02559

[DZ]

Originally Posted by MakoMike

Then we'll just have to agree to disagree. My experience is that it was much worse during the mid 1980s when I was still fishing out of Montauk.

Correct Mike - you couldn't find a bass under 10 pounds for two seasons. Was much worse.

[MakoMike]

Originally Posted by iamskippy

Its actually a 50% reduction in rec fish taken(from 2 to 1), which is a larger hit compaired to the 25 % commercial if you want to put it into compartmentalized perspective. I feel the tightening around the rec will make the biggest impact with this proposal however i feel they are missing the big picture with all the bass kills down south....

Just my 2 cents.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No it is NOT! For it to be a 50% reduction it would mean that everyone who fishes for striped bass takes home two fish every time they go out. We all know that isn't happening.

[iamskippy]

Originally Posted by MakoMike

No it is NOT! For it to be a 50% reduction it would mean that everyone who fishes for striped bass takes home two fish every time they go out. We all know that isn't happening.

And that means every com guy,limits on every outting.

The only difference is comm is regulated by weights, rec is based upon a fish limit not a weight.

There for you are allowing rec guys to only take a max of 50% less fish.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[niko]

Of the comm guys that are fishing every available day, 3/4 are limiting out every trip. The other 25 percent are doing 3/4 limit. Then there are the comms who just fish local and casual and don't really get after it. Your thinking is flawed skip, no offence
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[iamskippy]

Originally Posted by niko

Of the comm guys that are fishing every available day, 3/4 are limiting out every trip. The other 25 percent are doing 3/4 limit. Then there are the comms who just fish local and casual and don't really get after it. Your thinking is flawed skip, no offence
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

None taken that is why its ok to agree to disagree. Untill you force rec guys to report catches the logic is sound.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[niko]

I've wanted recs to report for a while. I say so at meetings on a regular and get no where. If recs saw what they killed as a group they would #^&#^&#^&#^& themselves
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[iamskippy]

Originally Posted by niko

I've wanted recs to report for a while. I say so at meetings on a regular and get no where. If recs saw what they killed as a group they would #^&#^&#^&#^& themselves
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I agree with you whole heartedly, no argument there what so ever. I would report my 1 28" fish per year with pride cause that's all i catch.

To take this possibly off topic, they should impose stricter punishment on rec guys that take shorts and take over limtes across all species let alone unlicensed. We pay for,licenses now for for both waters there us no reason the green boys are not crawling all over certain places....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Rob Rockcrawler]

Having enforcement for both com's and rec's that is tough enough to make everyone's cheeks pucker up is what we need. Up and down the coast if people know there is a good chance they will get caught and get more than a slap on the wrist (fines, confiscation of gear/vehicles, revocation of licenses, jail time) then at least part of black market/illegal catch will be reduced. Having penalties that are just a cost of doing business is not enough.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by iamskippy

Untill you force rec guys to report catches the logic is sound.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I understand what you are getting at, but from a perspective that looks at actual numbers of fish killed, it is in reality not a 50% rec reduction. The goal of the regulation is not a 50% reduction in rec harvest. The actuality is the critical part from a perspective of re-restoring the stocks. When you say it is "actually a 50% reduction in the rec fish taken" that is factually not true, logic and opinions aside. Example, if no rec ever kept 2 fish, changing the regulations from 2 fish per day to 1 fish per day would have zero effect, not 50%. What needs to be done is real and actual reductions in the number of bass killed.

[ivanputski]

A substantial reward ($500-1,000) for reporting restaurants who buy illegal bass
would quickly get these restaurants all busted.

Dont think for a second that a dishwasher, bus boy, waiter, making peanuts wouldnt secretly rat out his boss for an easy $1,000

[Piscator]

How about recs who use ultra light gear and fight a fish for a long time and release the fish that eventually dies, or target small fish on blitzes that may have post mortality (most comms wouldn't waste time on the small blitzing fish). What about a comm who trades up for bigger fish after they have a limit, or a comm who gaffs a fish that's an inch or two short and "releases it" lots of moving parts here and finger pointing. EVERYONE who fishes has an impact (some more, some less) even guys who are 100% catch and release have an impact with foul catches, post mortality etc). We need to get past the finger pointing, look at the facts and look ourselves all in the mirror to find something that works for everyone and makes everyone accountable. Most experienced anglers don't use trebles, most inexperienced recs use them a lot.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[MakoMike]

Originally Posted by iamskippy

And that means every com guy,limits on every outting.

The only difference is comm is regulated by weights, rec is based upon a fish limit not a weight.

There for you are allowing rec guys to only take a max of 50% less fish.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No, but on an overall basis the commercial sector catches all of its quota every year (or almost all of its quota). How the commercial quota is doled out varies from state to state, but all states now require commercial fish to be tagged, so the accounting for the commercial quota is pretty good.

On the recreational side, the MRFSS statistics are what generated the 25-31% reduction for a one fish limit, because we all know that not everyone limits out, every time out. Now you may or may not believe the MFRSS statistics, but that's all we have. No matter how you cut it a reduction of the recreational limit from two fish to one fish cannot be a 50% reduction in mortality.

[ThrowingTimber]

Originally Posted by niko

I've wanted recs to report for a while. I say so at meetings on a regular and get no where. If recs saw what they killed as a group they would #^&#^&#^&#^& themselves
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I agree 100%
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[niko]

the asmfc says the rec harvest is at 26.4 million pounds annually. and the comm harvest 2.87 million pounds

[dannyplug1]

Commercials say what you want. Your whole purpose is to make money by killing the big breeders. As a rec I can and have changed my methods and style to reduce accidental mortality as I don't keep fish. As a commercial you can make no such claim. Furthermore, there is an issue of fairness. The commercials are a far smaller group than the recreational sector in terms of numbers. Right? Why is it fair that such a small number of people are allowed to take so many fish. I don't get it because you shell out for a commercial licence you are entitled to take many times my two fish in mass. It a public resource no one person should be entitled to a bigger share of it than another individual. What do you do to justify you share of the resource? Look at a logging company. Atleast when they clear cut a stand of trees they replant seedlings. What do you guys do? Your right I am bitter. I am sick and tired of people who people who continue to destroy a resource that we should conserving.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by niko

the asmfc says the rec harvest is at 26.4 million pounds annually. and the comm harvest 2.87 million pounds

How many comms are there and how many recs are there?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[dannyplug1]

Point is why is one com entitled to take more fish than one rec fisherman? Just because it's legal dosent make it right.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[niko]

so by that logic there should be no commercial fishing for any species because they are the peoples fish. and I don't have a right to utilize a resource and earn a portion of my livelihood doing so. and as far as changing my methods to reduce accidental mortality - I've switched to using circle hooks exclusively. i participate in beach cleanups, herring counting, run cleanups, and planting eel grass. so don't sit there and tell me I don't do anything but use up the resource because I do. I live it and do more than most. I comm fish for 2 species and rec fish for just about everything that swims in the new England salt and consider myself a responsible steward of the sea. I support the 25% reduction and voted for it at the last msba meeting because I think there is a problem and this is our chance to help turn it around but no I do not think the bass stocks are on the verge of collapse

[Cohenfishin]

Originally Posted by dannyplug1

Point is why is one com entitled to take more fish than one rec fisherman? Just because it's legal dosent make it right.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Last time I checked we live in a free country and it's our free will to choose what we do for a living or part of a living. Some of us become doctors and lawyers and some of us become fisherman. With that being said, I agree 100% we need regulations to protect our resource so the sooner we get our heads out of our asses and realize were both part of the problem the better off we'll all be.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by niko

the asmfc says the rec harvest is at 26.4 million pounds annually. and the comm harvest 2.87 million pounds

Is this just in MA ? because i doubt rec guys are taking 26 million pounds with out reporting data in Mass alone ? are they counting paid charters as rec's . just license guys? I am not against either group but as we point fingers at each other whos to blame nothing changes for the better

Comm 2013 Quota: 997,869 pounds 2014 Quota: 1.15 million pounds whats 2015 going to bring

look at herring rec guys cant get them but Commercial boats can
because of a word game ocean and river 2011 they took 200 million pounds same fish For the 2013-2015 fishing seasons, the Commission set the ACL at 237.7 million pounds, an 18% increase from 2010-2012 limits

I am for commercial slot limit 33in to 42 over that mandatory release and rec 28 42 over that mandatory release as well Nation Wide

unless your a lobbyist with deep pockets public hearings are a farce
just an illusion to make the common man or women fell relevant and that they have a voice in the process . I wish I felt different but its how I see it . show up or send an email they both carry equal weight (NONE)

[niko]

those are coastwide numbers wdmso. no one can take river herring though the large trawlers do get some river in the mix. the comm bass quota I believe has been the same for the last 20 years - 1.15. if we go over 1 year it gets deducted off the next season - which is why 2013 is at 997. I think a lot of guys lump rod/reel comms into the same category as draggers, gill netters, purse seiners etc. which I don't believe is an accurate portrayal. rod/reel is a relatively "clean" fishery with very little bycatch

[MakoMike]

Originally Posted by wdmso

look at herring rec guys cant get them but Commercial boats can
because of a word game ocean and river 2011 they took 200 million pounds same fish For the 2013-2015 fishing seasons, the Commission set the ACL at 237.7 million pounds, an 18% increase from 2010-2012 limits

Just to be clear, river herring (alewife and blueback herring) are a different species than Atlantic herring. And rec guys can and do catch Atlantic herring from boats and shore. During the winter there isn't much else to fish for from shore.

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by dannyplug1

Commercials say what you want. Your whole purpose is to make money by killing the big breeders. As a rec I can and have changed my methods and style to reduce accidental mortality as I don't keep fish. As a commercial you can make no such claim. Furthermore, there is an issue of fairness. The commercials are a far smaller





group than the recreational sector in terms of numbers. Right? Why is it fair that such a small number of people are allowed to take so many fish. I don't get it because you shell out for a commercial licence you are entitled to take many times my two fish in mass. It a public resource no one person should be entitled to a bigger share of it than another individual. What do you do to justify you share of the resource? Look at a logging company. Atleast when they clear cut a stand of trees they replant seedlings. What do you guys do? Your right I am bitter. I am sick and tired of people who people who continue to destroy a resource that we should conserving.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Don't hate the player
Hate the game
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[bassballer]

Originally Posted by Piscator

Most experienced anglers don't use trebles, most inexperienced recs use them a lot.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

???????????

[Piscator]

Originally Posted by bassballer

???????????

I'll rephrase, "Most comms don't use trebles, most inexperienced recs use them a lot."

Point is what impact does this have to released fish. Although a Rec using trebles might be releasing a fish, the gear used could end up increasing post mortality in the end...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device