The Fisherman magazine throws some fishermen under the bus

[MakoMike]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

I feel the goofy regulations are what are doing the fishermen a disservice. 10 cod is a generous bag and my guess is most would agree. Bsb are impossible to escape and have a small bag. Same with tautog. I can't imagine who loses if the cod limit were reduced to a less impactful number. I say this as somebody who fishes out there on party boats as well as my own.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The short answer to your question is that everybody involved in the fishery looses. From charter/party boats, to bait and tackle dealers, to the guys who go out and might catch more than 10 legal size cod. (its not difficult to do, even outside of spawning season).

You're thinking of State sea bass bag limits, the federal limit is 15 fish, and there are no federal limits on tautog!

IMHO it unconsionable for a magazine that caters to recreational fisherman should suggest more restrictive bag limits for some fishermen, especially when they are avocating for loosening bag limits on other recreational fishermen, and all on the same species.

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by MakoMike

The short answer to your question is that everybody involved in the fishery looses. From charter/party boats, to bait and tackle dealers, to the guys who go out and might catch more than 10 legal size cod. (its not difficult to do, even outside of spawning season).

You're thinking of State sea bass bag limits, the federal limit is 15 fish, and there are no federal limits on tautog!

IMHO it unconsionable for a magazine that caters to recreational fisherman should suggest more restrictive bag limits for some fishermen, especially when they are avocating for loosening bag limits on other recreational fishermen, and all on the same species.

Mike,I didn't have a question but I do see the point that you are trying to make. Like it or not,a more practical limit benefits all involved in the fishery. Shortsighted folks like yourself do nothing for future generations of anglers and for some reason($) some people fail to recognize this. Hogs get fat,pigs get slaughtered.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[MakoMike]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

Mike,I didn't have a question but I do see the point that you are trying to make. Like it or not,a more practical limit benefits all involved in the fishery. Shortsighted folks like yourself do nothing for future generations of anglers and for some reason($) some people fail to recognize this. Hogs get fat,pigs get slaughtered.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You assume that 1) the fish that are not caught due to tighter bag limits will be left in the water and 2) the recreational/commercial shares of the TAL are set in stone. Those assumptions may very well be untrue. There is already some talk about rexamining the shares of the ACL for Georges Bank cod due to the fact that the recreational sector hasn't caught its share of the ACL in years, maybe never. Rexamining allocations is on the priority list for NEFMC 2018 actions.

The commercials haddock guys also have a problem with cod being a choke species and they would love to get more of the cod ACL to enable them to continue to fish for haddock. Add in more restrictive regs on the recreational sector which will insure that the recreational sector can't catch its share of the ACL, and you may as well guarantee that the commercial share of Georges Bank cod will go up and the recreational share will go down. If that happens future anglers will get no benefit and current anglers will loose.

Believe it or not, the rexamination of the repesctive shares of the ACL may benefit recreational anglers in the Gulf of Maine. When the council set the recreational share of the ACL back several years ago they ignored discards. It's only recently that GARFO has begun to count dead discards against our share of the ACL. You can bet that everyone on the RAP, me included, will be pushing to have the council set the recreational share of the ACL at a higher number to take dead discards into account. If that happens we may once again have a recreational cod season in the Gulf of Maine.

But either way, tighening the recreational regs is, at this point, not scientifically justified and is likey, IMHO, to lead to a reduction in the recreational share of George's Bank cod, and thus hurt everyone involved in the recreational fishery.

Toby knew, or should have known all of this before he wrote the words I quoted in my original post. He took the time and trouble to talk to people who are knowledgeable on the subject, yet he still chose to throw us "southern cod fishermen" under the bus.