I am SOTS: MAKE STRIPED BASS A GAMEFISH!

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by BasicPatrick

Some thoughts:

The problem is not the amount of Striped Bass but where they are located.
and
The problem is not that the fish are not here but that they are wicked hard to catch because they are transitioning to forage that is hard to mimic.

How can you know that? Consistently, it seems as though scientists' estimates on biomass are terrible at best. A couple of large schools of fish in CC Bay and a couple of other areas doesn't make up for what seems like a lack of fish in many other areas.

I completely agree with you that cutting the rec take to 1 @ 28" would be ineffective. That's why I think at a minimum, both the commercial take should be reduced (instead of the nonsense opinion by ASMFC that it should be increased) along with the Recs being limited to 1 @ 34".

On these boards and especially during the SF bill, you harped on the idea that we should trust ASMFC and that they will make the right decisions when it comes to managing Striped Bass. However, they have consistently demonstrated and continue to demonstrate that they either manage through the best interests of the commercial industry or are completely incompetent.

If ASMFC approves an increase to the commercial bass quota, it should be the final nail in the coffin of confidence in ASMFC ever effectively managing any species. Should that occur, MSBA should really re-evaluate their support of the regulating body, else there won't be any more stripers to have an association for.

[dannyplug1]

I am at the point where I say uncle. The commercials you know the ones who kill everything they can will eventually kill the striper. Literally every fish that has been commercially fished for is in bad shape. Look at the halilbut: up untill the late 1800's when had halibut on the east coast that were bigger than Alaskan halibut.... gone. Money wins over whats right finish off the bass and go on to the next species. Pretty soon we will be like england fishing for sand sharks and conger eels if any of them are left.

[BigFish]

Last I checked if you cut the daily rec take from 2 fish at 28 inches a day to 1 fish at 28 inches a day (1 @ 34" would be better) that equates to a half???????No???? If I put up 2 fingers.......and then put down one of the fingers......then I have half as many fingers as I did before?????

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by BigFish

Last I checked if you cut the daily rec take from 2 fish at 28 inches a day to 1 fish at 28 inches a day (1 @ 34" would be better) that equates to a half???????No???? If I put up 2 fingers.......and then put down one of the fingers......then I have half as many fingers as I did before?????

The problem is Larry, while you are trying to be funny, most people don't take 2 fish anyways, either don;t need or can't catch two. so dropping it from 1 to 2 at the same size reduces it by some % less than half.... up the size.
1 @ 36", keep the comm open but crack down on enforcement.

[BigFish]

Most of the people I see do in fact take all they are allowed every time they go out! You may not be seeing it but I do! I can gaurantee the folks slaying fish earlier in the week at a certain spot were all taking their limit!

[numbskull]

Larry, I believe that the majority of the recreational take is attributed to assumed/estimated catch and release mortality.
That won't change even with a 1 fish limit.

[BigFish]

Everyone has their "theories"! If you keep it at 1 fish......then that is ALL they will take.....legally! If you keep it at 2 fish......many will take them both....not all but many! If the limit is one I do not see how you could possibly not see that as making a difference????

[Eric Roach]

Spots in NH & ME that have held small schoolies since the recovery have been disturbingly quiet the past few years. To catch small fish is notable -- especially in abundance.

Our fall blitzing activity up here has really been minimal the past three seasons...There haven't been enough fish around to drive any widespread, sustained surface feeding.

Conservative measures are needed. Even if exactly what's going on is uncertain, wouldn't taking a conservative stance on striped bass mortality make sense?

One major concern is the Gulf oil spill. With a collapse of that region's fisheries, striped bass will be more valuable than ever. Think it's a tough fight against the $$ now? It'll get worse.

[Surf Caster]

Originally Posted by Eric Roach

Spots in NH & ME that have held small schoolies since the recovery have been disturbingly quiet the past few years. To catch small fish is notable -- especially in abundance.

Our fall blitzing activity up here has really been minimal the past three seasons...There haven't been enough fish around to drive any widespread, sustained surface feeding.

Conservative measures are needed. Even if exactly what's going on is uncertain, wouldn't taking a conservative stance on striped bass mortality make sense?

One major concern is the Gulf oil spill. With a collapse of that region's fisheries, striped bass will be more valuable than ever. Think it's a tough fight against the $$ now? It'll get worse.

taking the conservative route would make way to much sense.... so you can count that out...

unfortunately, it feels like nothing substantial will be done about this until its too late.

[BasicPatrick]

Johnny,

I do not know what science you are referring. Biomass estimates are down, they are not "terrible at best". Is there a reason to be concerned...yep. Does that mean close the fishery...nope. If the arguements/theories in this thread were carried over we should all be argueing to close Tuna Fishing period, or at least demand Tuna are Gamefish.

ASMFC has taken no action as of yet. They are considering an action and just like before, this action will fail. Sure it's a PIA but that is what we get when we have a democratic system. Just because there is a proposal does not mean the sky is falling

One thing for sure is that if this was a legislative decision (ie...SF proposal) we would have already lost so I stand by all that I argued for in the S-F debate.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by BasicPatrick

Johnny,

I do not know what science you are referring. Biomass estimates are down, they are not "terrible at best". Is there a reason to be concerned...yep. Does that mean close the fishery...nope. If the arguements/theories in this thread were carried over we should all be argueing to close Tuna Fishing period, or at least demand Tuna are Gamefish.

ASMFC has taken no action as of yet. They are considering an action and just like before, this action will fail. Sure it's a PIA but that is what we get when we have a democratic system. Just because there is a proposal does not mean the sky is falling

One thing for sure is that if this was a legislative decision (ie...SF proposal) we would have already lost so I stand by all that I argued for in the S-F debate.

What I meant by "terrible at best" is the way in which they estimate the stock and mortality. As you said, biomass estimates are down and there's a reason to be concerned, yet ASMFC has a proposal to increase the commercial take?? How does that even make sense?

Let me try and understand... biomass estimates are down and we should be concerned, but the problems people are having with catching fish aren't because of the number of bass around, it's because of the bait? 2 + 2 just doesn't = 4 for me here.

If this were a legislative decision, who exactly would have lost - recreational fishermen, rod & reel commercial, charters? In my opinion all of us (as in everyone that fishes for SB) and the striped bass population will lose completely if ASMFC is allowed to continue its reckless management of the species.