Quote:
|
They are given special exception with the regs, make money because of the fish and, as such, should be in a regulatory category of their own
|
That is what some ASMFC delegates have advocated in the past. But it is a sticky situation to address because it is recreational fishermen who catch/kill the fish...also, because of the economcs of the charter industry, I believe that there has been lobbying against that option.
Then the whole other problem is if they are designated their own category, where does it come from?? The commercial representation will fight against a portion of their quota being lowered by the charter industry, because it has been a traditional recreation-based fishery. Should a portion of the "recreational quota" (which isn't hard capped) be set up for the charter industry, by reducing the estimated catch numbers by lowering rec bag limits?..Then what happens when the charter industry reaches their quota (maybe in the winter, by NC/VI/MD boats)..what do the captains do-stop fishing and move to other species (like R&R comms do)..I am sure that will go over big with the Pt. Jude/Montauk/Chatham fleet....as has been stated many times, everybody is out to protect their own interests, because of the increased socio-economic pressure on the fishery.
The plan in place (Ammendment 6)...may not be perfect, but it is the best we got....
Because no matter what people may think the striped bass is a recovered species....
as indicated below (taken from the ASMFC website)-
"The most recent stock assessment for striped bass was completed in 2009. The update assessment indicated that striped bass are not overfished and overfishing is not occurring. Since 1982, the striped bass population has increased from less than 9 million fish to over 70 million fish in 2004. While abundance has declined some since then, spawning stock biomass (the metric for determining if the stock is overfished) remains well above the threshold and target levels. "
Threaded Mode