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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-11-2014, 12:44 AM   #1
Dave Peros
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Dave Peros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 66
First off, congratulations to the Cape Cod Charter Boat Association for supporting the one fish at 28-inches regulation; it is clear that their membership is comprised of enlightened individuals who understand the need for everyone to do their part when it comes to striped bass conservation.
As far as the numerous inflammatory and derogatory comments tossed about in this thread by what appear to be charter captains and/or supporters of the industry, it really is getting old. I have been to the hearings and am growing tired of the intimidation tactics and name calling used by individuals and groups with economic interests in order to get their way. When an "industry" stubbornly adheres to methods that are not sustainable and/or harm the common good, then the principles of economics will cause some of those businesses who won't adapt to fail. On the other hand, those operations that do adapt will survive and even thrive.
I've seen it happen with local charter captains who sail out of ports along the southside of the Cape; when they saw that bass fishing was hurting, they elected to encourage their clientele to focus on other species such as sea bass and bluefish. Some even realized that the experience of catching mainly bass smaller than the legal limit for possession is enjoyable for their charters and a number adjusted their tactics to heighten the experience of fishing, as opposed to just catching and killing.
I suspected that once my original post was out there, I would hear the usual "stuff" about fly fishermen and Stripers Forever (which I am not a member of and have no intention of ever becoming). If you read it carefully, you will see that I do not single out those charter captains who feel the need to "max out" as the sole folks responsible for overfishing, but include recreational anglers who have to kill their limit each time they are on the water and the vast majority of "commercial" striped bass anglers who have no interest in stepping up to the plate and dealing with the realities faced by small boat fishermen who have dedicated their lives to working on the water as their sole source of income.
It is true that most of bass that remain in the Chesapeake are small males after the larger females and males join the coastal stock in the spring, but the much anticipated bumper "crop" of bass from the 2011 year class is already in harm's way since states such as Maryland and Virginia allow recreational and commercial fishermen to harvest 18-inch or larger stripers - which is what a large percentage of the 2011 population taped out at last year and those numbers will obviously increase in 2015.
The science has proven that the late fall and winter conditions in any given year in the Chesapeake definitely are a major factor in terms of the quality of that season's spawn - but controlling the weather is certainly not something humans can do to guarantee a healthy striped bass biomass.
But we can help to maintain the health of the striped bass stock in one way - and that is by killing less of them. Folks are realizing that they were snookered by the ASMFC Striped Bass Management Board this fall with their apparent decision to do just that. The commitment to a 25% reduction in the take of bass from the coastal stock was applauded by one and all, but the board was holding a trick card in the form of "conservation equivalency" that would allow deviation from the one at 28-inch pledge. While it may be true that a two fish at 33-inches bag limit will be somehow equivalent to the smaller limit in terms of numbers of fish killed, the chances of succeeding in meeting the primary goal of boosting the overall health of the stock are not equal.
In the end, the essence of "greed" is believing that it is OK for any single user group to harvest more fish to the detriment of the common good, meaning that the ASMFC has once again failed in its duty by allowing any consideration of different regulations for the charter fleet.
Dave Peros is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2014, 04:51 AM   #2
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Peros View Post

In the end, the essence of "greed" is believing that it is OK for any single user group to harvest more fish to the detriment of the common good, meaning that the ASMFC has once again failed in its duty by allowing any consideration of different regulations for the charter fleet.
probably good to remember when talking about these reductions and arguing for exceptions that..according to the managers reports the agreed to reductions only have a 50% chance of achieving the intended results which is why many were working toward the 33% reduction given that this will not be revisited for 3 years.....

 If total harvest is reduced by 25% starting in the 2015 fishing year, there is a 50% probability1 F will be at or below its target level within one year.


 If total harvest is reduced by 17% starting in the 2015 fishing year, there is a 50% probability1 F will be at or below its target level within three years.

A 50% probability was the minimum recommended by the TC - a higher probability of being at or below the target
would require more restrictive management measures
that achieve a higher reduction than the projections estimate is needed
scottw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2014, 06:18 AM   #3
buckman
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
buckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
probably good to remember when talking about these reductions and arguing for exceptions that..according to the managers reports the agreed to reductions only have a 50% chance of achieving the intended results which is why many were working toward the 33% reduction given that this will not be revisited for 3 years.....

 If total harvest is reduced by 25% starting in the 2015 fishing year, there is a 50% probability1 F will be at or below its target level within one year.


 If total harvest is reduced by 17% starting in the 2015 fishing year, there is a 50% probability1 F will be at or below its target level within three years.

A 50% probability was the minimum recommended by the TC - a higher probability of being at or below the target
would require more restrictive management measures
that achieve a higher reduction than the projections estimate is needed
Well at least we know they can do simple math 😀
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
buckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2014, 06:56 AM   #4
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman View Post
Well at least we know they can do simple math ��
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I guess the point was that as we argue these scenarios, the solutions proposed and now adopted are only given a 50/50 chance of achieving the target and changing the direction of the stocks and that is as we become more efficient with each passing year at targeting and taking fish from the stock, seems there is a lot banking on a single year class to rebound the numbers at this point coupled with the possible change in the current trend with a reduction...this may be why some bristle when some argue for an exception....that simple math doesn't portend well for the near future under any scenario

hey....can/should shore guides(for hires) get the exception too and their clients be allowed to keep two fish....just something I've been wondering....
scottw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2014, 07:30 AM   #5
thefishingfreak
"Fishbucket"
iTrader: (1)
 
thefishingfreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bahston Hahbah
Posts: 6,588
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
hey....can/should shore guides(for hires) get the exception too and their clients be allowed to keep two fish....just something I've been wondering....
Ask for yourself
paul.diodati@state.ma.us

thefishingfreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 08:14 PM.


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