TWO BASS FOR RI CHARTER AND PARTY BOATS?

[Dick Durand]

Originally Posted by Nebe

I say if there is to be 2 fish for charter, there has to be a trophy fish as a second. 1@28 and the 2nd at 50 plus inches. That will keep the fires burning after the first fish hits the icebox
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Agreed. If the charters win the privilege of a second striper, it truly has to be a trophy fish, not just another fish from the breeding pool.

[Raider Ronnie]

Originally Posted by #^&#^&#^&#^& Durand

Agreed. If the charters win the privilege of a second striper, it truly has to be a trophy fish, not just another fish from the breeding pool.

2nd fish at trophy size would be fine as far as im concerned but 50 inches is absurd !
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[buckman]

Originally Posted by #^&#^&#^&#^& Durand

Agreed. If the charters win the privilege of a second striper, it truly has to be a trophy fish, not just another fish from the breeding pool.

Weren't you guys bitching about all the huge bass caught off block island ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by #^&#^&#^&#^& Durand

Agreed. If the charters win the privilege of a second striper, it truly has to be a trophy fish, not just another fish from the breeding pool.

funny when you think about it and read the descriptions here of the average charter/party boat type..then realizing that the only people that will have the "privilege" of keeping two fish and the opportunity to chase that second "trophy" fish if an accommodation is made probably don't even fish that much or live locally and therefore have little stake in or reason for concern for the fishery, probably don't purchase a license or even know what the regulations are and might not even fish if they can't have at least the perception of being able to kill two bass and take some meat home....working really hard to accommodate these folks it seems

[DZ]

Originally Posted by scottw

funny when you think about it and read the descriptions here of the average charter/party boat type..then realizing that the only people that will have the "privilege" of keeping two fish and the opportunity to chase that second "trophy" fish if an accommodation is made probably don't even fish that much or live locally and therefore have little stake in or reason for concern for the fishery, probably don't purchase a license or even know what the regulations are and might not even fish if they can't have at least the perception of being able to kill two bass and take some meat home....working really hard to accommodate these folks it seems

BOOM! Way to go Scott. This is the issue in a nutshell.
Do we really want to permit paying clients, most of who don't give a rats ass about the striped bass fishery, wouldn't even know the current regulations, many don't even have or even need a fishing license if on a charter in RI or Mass, the privilidge of killing two bass? These people are the last ones who DESERVE a second fish.

BTW I just heard from a Marine Bio from RI who mentioned that there will be a pre-ASMFC meeting(date not yet announced) that we will be held so that RI commissioners can interact with the public before going to the ASMFC meeting in early February.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by DZ

BOOM! Way to go Scott. This is the issue in a nutshell.
Do we really want to permit paying clients, most of who don't give a rats ass about the striped bass fishery, wouldn't even know the current regulations, many don't even have or even need a fishing license if on a charter in RI or Mass, the privilidge of killing two bass? These people are the last ones who DESERVE a second fish.

I saw Scott's post and was going to reply with basically the same thing you just said.

[Clammer]

My prediction is .the 6 pack boats get the two fish they want .in RI . Why ??.RI is totally politically infulenced & controlled ........................I quit going to meeting because for the most part they are f #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&g joke

[buckman]

Originally Posted by DZ

BOOM! Way to go Scott. This is the issue in a nutshell.
Do we really want to permit paying clients, most of who don't give a rats ass about the striped bass fishery, wouldn't even know the current regulations, many don't even have or even need a fishing license if on a charter in RI or Mass, the privilidge of killing two bass? These people are the last ones who DESERVE a second fish.

.

You guys are freaking hilarious. Who's "we" ??
And who the hell are you to say who deserves what ?
To a lot of you this is become personal instead of about increasing the breeding population.
Truth be told, the rec guys account for a higher percentage of the mortality of these fish then the charter and commercial guys combined.
It's always easier to blame someone else .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[DZ]

Originally Posted by buckman

You guys are freaking hilarious. Who's "we" ??
And who the hell are you to say who deserves what ?
To a lot of you this is become personal instead of about increasing the breeding population.
Truth be told, the rec guys account for a higher percentage of the mortality of these fish then the charter and commercial guys combined.
It's always easier to blame someone else .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"We" are the majority view Buck. We're not blaming you (the for hire industry) for anything.

[dannyplug1]

Buck its the attitude of the charter guys that they entitled to special regs is the problem. For at least four years I have seen the fishing sour. Responsible striper fisherman have reduced or curtailed keeping fish. Yet some but not all seem hell bent on keeping as many as legally possible. Look at the pictures of dead fish that many for hires put on their advertising materials. I see pictures of limits of dead bass and I am angry. Look at the pictures of the party boat out of Montauk fishing block island last year. What do you expect people to feel, we all know the fish are in trouble yet you lobby for a bigger cut of the pie and kill more fish than you need. note this rant does not include all for hire guys. There are many responsible captains out there that are respectful of the resource.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by buckman

You guys are freaking hilarious. Who's "we" ??
And who the hell are you to say who deserves what ?
To a lot of you this is become personal instead of about increasing the breeding population.
Truth be told, the rec guys account for a higher percentage of the mortality of these fish then the charter and commercial guys combined.
It's always easier to blame someone else .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think Buckman has been pretty clear that it shouldn't matter if it is 2@33 or 1@28, if they are equivalent and therefore achieve the same goal; it shouldn't matter if charters get 2@33 and recs 1@28, if they are equivalent. I actually agree with him from that perspective.

The problem is, the argument that they are equivalent appears bogus to me and apparently, many others. I think there is some validity to the idea that 2@33 for everyone may be equivalent to 1@28, given that most rec guys who would consistently get 1@28, won't consistently get 2@33 and often won't get any @33". If 1 @33 would be a 29% reduction for an entire state, it stands that 1@33 specifically for charters won't be a 29% reduction for charters; the ability for charters to find fish is undeniably better than the average fisherman. That on top of the fact it is a stated 50/50 chance that 25% reduction can be met just isn't good enough. It is management by Russian roulette. I agree with Buckman that it isn't about who deserves what fish and what is fair, it is about management. That is where asmfc is ferhoodled, it is bogus management based on the influence of an economic group that has very few species left that can be targeted.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by zimmy

I think Buckman has been pretty clear that it shouldn't matter if it is 2@33 or 1@28, if they are equivalent and therefore achieve the same goal; it shouldn't matter if charters get 2@33 and recs 1@28, if they are equivalent. I actually agree with him from that perspective.

The problem is, the argument that they are equivalent appears bogus to me and apparently, many others. I think there is some validity to the idea that 2@33 for everyone may be equivalent to 1@28, given that most rec guys who would consistently get 1@28, won't consistently get 2@33 and often won't get any @33". If 1 @33 would be a 29% reduction for an entire state, it stands that 1@33 specifically for charters won't be a 29% reduction for charters; the ability for charters to find fish is undeniably better than the average fisherman. That on top of the fact it is a stated 50/50 chance that 25% reduction can be met just isn't good enough. It is management by Russian roulette. I agree with Buckman that it isn't about who deserves what fish and what is fair, it is about management. That is where asmfc is ferhoodled, it is bogus management based on the influence of an economic group that has very few species left that can be targeted.

Thank you !
I don't think it's a 50-50 shot if the reduction will be met I think it's a guesstimated 50-50 shot if it will bring the stock back as quickly as some would like.
Those that accuse the charter guys of being greedy and then are asking for the stripers to be listed as " gamefish " are hypocrites.
They want the fish to themselves.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by buckman

You guys are freaking hilarious. Who's "we" ?? "we"
And who the hell are you to say who deserves what ? "we"

To a lot of you this is become personal instead of about increasing the breeding population. not seeing this
Truth be told, the rec guys account for a higher percentage of the mortality of these fish then the charter and commercial guys combined. charters are recs....unless they're comm fishing with their charters which I guess also occurs...playing numbers games...if you want to look at it individually...no...man for man ....boat for boat...I'd disagree....as a group...of course/ maybe...the numbers regarding for-hire portion of the rec take seem to be constantly changing, at least here in RI to suit their needs.. and I think I cited numbers from NY that showed for-hire take as an enormous percentage of the overall rec take...but as a group recs will, in many cases, see a 50% reduction per angler per trip starting next year, true comms will see a 25%(supposedly)....and the rec-comms and for hire fleets will see ?....the illegal harvest will probably not see a reduction
It's always easier to blame someone else . starting in 2015...if a user group or region is still fishing at 2 fish and the decline continues...who gets the blame?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

any two fish exception is nothing more than an accommodation for the 1 or 2 times per year "anglers"(as described previously and not by me) who you and others claim likely wouldn't fish if they can't keep that second fish...

this is the ONLY reason tendered as a rationale to allow clients of for hires(and I forget, are the captains and mates getting two fish too?) to keep "or to at least have the perception of the ability to keep two fish"....it's an odd sort of rationale when you examine it...probably jealousy

still want to know if shore and kayak for-hire clients get two fish under the same rationale...


Buck, you made a great point earlier I think, that those here fish more than the average angler and have a different view of the fishery...regarding rec/comm etc...consider....most average recs are not much of a threat to any bass...in the three brothers example that I offered...the guy hitting the beach on his own is unlikely to catch a bass never mind a keeper or even two....the guy fishing on a friend's boat or hiring a shore guide, again, not likely to catch...maybe one, if lucky...a keeper....put any of those three on a boat with an experienced captain that has been tracking the fish all season with the latest technology and they are suddenly a much more efficient "angler" and more likely to take two fish...I listened to and watched guys all summer who would struggle to hook up on their own in local waters make the trek to BI and land one 30-40+ pound fish after another and much of it facilitated by for hires day after day....your average rec has to work and might make that trek on an occasional weekend. Now, BI is an exception but everywhere up and down the coast that the bass show on schedule the for hire guys will sit on top of them for as long as they are there....not everyone jigs the canal all night, night in and night out and most boat owners that I know don't get out on their boat that often to great lament....it's funny each year when a thread starts about how the season was and despite all the pics and stories the consensus seems to be that most haven't fished that much or caught that much, even here where guys fish more than most....not surprising and as such most probably don't feel their impact on the fishery to be that great...juxtapose that against a desire by some of the most efficient people on the water thanks to experience and technology, who enable otherwise fairly inefficient people, wanting keep more bass simply over some perception which has likely been perpetrated over time by the for-hires own advertising and claims(the image of a bass for each fist)....it takes a lot of "average" anglers quite a few trips to do what the average for-hire can do in just one trip with a lot of "below average" anglers....not saying it's right or wrong... just trying to add perspective...it's not hate...or jealousy....just how it is....

[buckman]

[QUOTE=scottw;1060876]any two fish exception is nothing more than an accommodation for the 1 or 2 times per year "anglers"(as described previously and not by me) who you and others claim likely wouldn't fish if they can't keep that second fish...

this is the ONLY reason tendered as a rationale to allow clients of for hires(and I forget, are the captains and mates getting two fish too?) to keep "or to at least have the perception of the ability to keep two fish"....it's an odd sort of rationale when you examine it...probably jealousy

still want to know if shore and kayak for-hire clients get two fish under the same rationale...


Buck, you made a great point earlier I think, that those here fish more than the average angler and have a different view of the fishery...regarding rec/comm etc...consider....most average recs are not much of a threat to any bass...in the three brothers example that I offered...the guy hitting the beach on his own is unlikely to catch a bass never mind a keeper or even two....the guy fishing on a friend's boat or hiring a shore guide, again, not likely to catch...maybe one, if lucky...a keeper....put any of those three on a boat with an experienced captain that has been tracking the fish all season with the latest technology and they are suddenly a much more efficient "angler" and more likely to take two fish...I listened to and watched guys all summer who would struggle to hook up on their own in local waters make the trek to BI and land one 30-40+ pound fish after another and much of it facilitated by for hires day after day....your average rec has to work and might make that trek on an occasional weekend. Now, BI is an exception but everywhere up and down the coast that the bass show on schedule the for hire guys will sit on top of them for as long as they are there....not everyone jigs the canal all night, night in and night out and most boat owners that I know don't get out on their boat that often to great lament....it's funny each year when a thread starts about how the season was and despite all the pics and stories the consensus seems to be that most haven't fished that much or caught that much, even here where guys fish more than most....not surprising and as such most probably don't feel their impact on the fishery to be that great...juxtapose that against a desire by some of the most efficient people on the water thanks to experience and technology, who enable otherwise fairly inefficient people, wanting keep more bass simply over some perception which has likely been perpetrated over time by the for-hires own advertising and claims(the image of a bass for each fist)....it takes a lot of "average" anglers quite a few trips to do what the average for-hire can do in just one trip with a lot of "below average" anglers....not saying it's right or wrong... just trying to add perspective...it's not hate...or jealousy....just how it is....[/

I'm not sure how many shore guides or kayak guides they're out there Scott. I've never heard of one
But if bass experts on this site ( and I mean that as a complement )are not catching any fish from shore I can't imagine these guys would still in business . Besides that would be a whole different ballgame. They are fishing with little to no expense.
I look at charters as the most economically beneficial way to use the fishery. They simply generate more dollars for the economy per fish then any other fishery.
If you guys want it to be fair for everyone then you are against commercial fishing period.
And that's just selfish
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

[QUOTE=buckman;1060878]

Originally Posted by scottw

I'm not sure how many shore guides or kayak guides they're out there Scott. I've never heard of one didn't ask if you believed in their existence, just wondered if they should be treated the same based on your rationale

But if bass experts on this site ( and I mean that as a complement )are not catching any fish from shore I can't imagine these guys would still in business. might be hard to imagine but you can have a great time fishing on a fishing trip without killing two bass

Besides that would be a whole different ballgame. They are fishing with little to no expense. soooo is there a dollar threshold that you need to reach in terms of expenses in order to get that second fish for your client(s)?



I look at charters as the most economically beneficial way to use the fishery. no doubt

They simply generate more dollars for the economy per fish then any other fishery. which means if they can only kill one fish per client they would only contribute half as much to the economy? I think I've got this now...but I'd argue that the charters benefit as much from the local economy as the economy benefits from them in many cases....many charters fish because they are in town on vacation and decide to go fishing and not necessarily in town to fish...not sure how much day trippers spend, my last charter out of town I spent money locally on some ice, might have gotten gas and a couple of power bars...

If you guys want it to be fair for everyone then you are against commercial fishing period. don't got this however, makes no sense


And that's just selfish damn...meant to say...it's not hate...or jealousy...or selfishness
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

love ya man....

[ivanputski]

Originally Posted by buckman

If you guys want it to be fair for everyone then you are against commercial fishing period.
And that's just selfish
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Buckman, you essentially admit here that commercial regulations are unfair and benefit from special exceptions.

You want to talk about selfish??? you care more about next years paycheck than you do about protecting the very source of your income for the long term. That is shortsighted and self serving. Every point you argue is about what's best for charter incomes, and not for the fish.