Good news for Herring and Bass

[MakoMike]

Sad day when some people can applaud the loss of 140 jobs, just because it make thing a little better for their hobby.

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by MakoMike

Sad day when some people can applaud the loss of 140 jobs, just because it make thing a little better for their hobby.

Very saddened by the loss of jobs.

Isn't reduction in herring pair trawls better for the fish? Regardless of the hobby?

Disappointed with fisheries management in general, and politicians in particular.

[blondterror]

Yes no one is pleased to see the loss of 140 local jobs but the BIG PICTURE is more important...

Trawling is akin to strip mining of the ocean.. take a read thru some of these links and see what the true cost of trawling has on the marine ecosystem.

The fishery will be much improved for all types of fishing with the elimination of trawling... I think it was a mistake to allow any type of trawling in the FIRST place

---------------------------------------------------

Devastation of Trawling Visible from Space | LiveScience

Impacts of Bottom Trawling — Alaska Marine Conservation Council
JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Effects of trawling on seafloor habitat and associated invertebrate taxa in the Gulf of Alaska
EarthTrends: Feature - The Impact of Global Trawling: Mapping our Footprint on the Seafloor

[blondterror]

This is a better link that details pelagic pair trawling which is what the New Bedford operation does for mackeral...

Bottom trawling - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[MakoMike]

Originally Posted by blondterror

Yes no one is pleased to see the loss of 140 local jobs but the BIG PICTURE is more important...

Trawling is akin to strip mining of the ocean.. take a read thru some of these links and see what the true cost of trawling has on the marine ecosystem.

The fishery will be much improved for all types of fishing with the elimination of trawling... I think it was a mistake to allow any type of trawling in the FIRST place

---------------------------------------------------

Devastation of Trawling Visible from Space | LiveScience

Impacts of Bottom Trawling — Alaska Marine Conservation Council
JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Effects of trawling on seafloor habitat and associated invertebrate taxa in the Gulf of Alaska
EarthTrends: Feature - The Impact of Global Trawling: Mapping our Footprint on the Seafloor

Even if I believed all that drivel, these boats weren't bottom trawling, they were midwater trawling, like the squid boats.

URI has done some whey interesting studies on the impact of bottom trawling on the marine bottom, but you won't hear about it on the tree-hugger websites because the news isn't sensational.

The "big picture" is only important when its not your job they are eliminating.

[JackK]

Yep... Strip mining is way too harsh... Draggers work established fishing grounds, they just don't go anywhere they please. Unknown grounds = hangups, which can result in loss of expensive gear and at worst a vessel capsizing. Most of these grounds have been fished heavily for over fifty years- not like they're doing additional damage (although one can argue that the damage was reprehensible in the first place).

And some studies have shown that fish activity is increased in areas that are dragged... much akin to rototilling a field to seed, the actions of the trawlers stir up benthic invertebrates, and many fish move into the area to feed.

I'm not saying it's zero-impact: Far from it, that's for sure. But it's far from the 'strip mining' and 'destroying coral reefs' that Kurlansky and much of the media would have you believe.

But like MM said, these are pelagic trawlers, so it's apples to oranges... On NORPEL, sad to see the loss of so many jobs to hard working people, but glad to see the baitfish get a break.

[MAKAI]

Originally Posted by JackK

Yep... Strip mining is way too harsh... Draggers work established fishing grounds, they just don't go anywhere they please. Unknown grounds = hangups, which can result in loss of expensive gear and at worst a vessel capsizing. Most of these grounds have been fished heavily for over fifty years- not like they're doing additional damage (although one can argue that the damage was reprehensible in the first place).

And some studies have shown that fish activity is increased in areas that are dragged... much akin to rototilling a field to seed, the actions of the trawlers stir up benthic invertebrates, and many fish move into the area to feed.

I'm not saying it's zero-impact: Far from it, that's for sure. But it's far from the 'strip mining' and 'destroying coral reefs' that Kurlansky and much of the media would have you believe.

But like MM said, these are pelagic trawlers, so it's apples to oranges... On NORPEL, sad to see the loss of so many jobs to hard working people, but glad to see the baitfish get a break.

Not sure, but I think "Globally " bottom draggers are like bulldozing the forest to catch the squirrels. Effective but perverse.

[MakoMike]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Very saddened by the loss of jobs.

Isn't reduction in herring pair trawls better for the fish? Regardless of the hobby?

Disappointed with fisheries management in general, and politicians in particular.

Maybe, the problem with the herring trawlers was twofold, or maybe threefold.
1) They caught too many fish (really the managers fault, but they got blamed)
2) They were also catching blueback herring, not only the Atlantic herring they were allowed to catch. And
3) They were also catching Juvenal Haddock, and there is no room to give them more of a haddock allocation. That is (was) a great example of a "choke species" that closes a fishery down well before it can catch it alloted quota.

I wouldn't be surprised if they did open back up again, on a more limited basis once the season opens. They might fish for a couple of week until they fill their haddock quota and then ship the boats out.

[JFigliuolo]

Originally Posted by MakoMike

Sad day when some people can applaud the loss of 140 jobs, just because it make thing a little better for their hobby.

Really? How sad is it that commercial interests have decimated near shore species? How sad is it that I can only IMAGINE what fishing was like 40-50 years ago? How sad is it my IT job went over to India? Still crying there not making fabrics on your local river?
economies change. It's life. no one is guaranteed a job just because their heritage was in the trade.

[MakoMike]

Originally Posted by JFigliuolo

Really? How sad is it that commercial interests have decimated near shore species? How sad is it that I can only IMAGINE what fishing was like 40-50 years ago? How sad is it my IT job went over to India? Still crying there not making fabrics on your local river?
economies change. It's life. no one is guaranteed a job just because their heritage was in the trade.

First of all these guys weren't fishing anywhere "near Shore." they were fishing in federal waters and most the time faaaar out in federal waters.

Secondly, near shore species decimated? I know what it was like 40 years ago, and for almost all "inshore species" fishing has NEVER been better. Tautog is one exception, but that fishery is 90% RECREATIONAL Same goes for stripers, better now than 40 years ago and even if you disagree the fishery is 80% RECREATIONAL If you want to blame someone for poor fishing on "inshore species" you had better take a look in the mirror.

If we were talking 20 years ago I might have agreed you, at least with respect to some species, but today, with the rebuilt populations of almost every "inshore species" no way.

[Rockport24]

Originally Posted by MakoMike

First of all these guys weren't fishing anywhere "near Shore." they were fishing in federal waters and most the time faaaar out in federal waters.

Secondly, near shore species decimated? I know what it was like 40 years ago, and for almost all "inshore species" fishing has NEVER been better. Tautog is one exception, but that fishery is 90% RECREATIONAL Same goes for stripers, better now than 40 years ago and even if you disagree the fishery is 80% RECREATIONAL If you want to blame someone for poor fishing on "inshore species" you had better take a look in the mirror.

If we were talking 20 years ago I might have agreed you, at least with respect to some species, but today, with the rebuilt populations of almost every "inshore species" no way.

I don't know enough about this issue to comment, but this statement about the inshore fishery being better than 40 years ago is really in stark contrast to what we hear about on this and other sites day and day out. I know fisherman like to tell stories, but are they all just full of it? I know everybody has different experiences and your experience back then could be drastically different, but us younger fisherman just have this impression that it was just a LOT better back then. I'm not saying you're lying, it would just be nice to get the truth on this issue at some point! this is kind of a hijack though, so I apologize.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by MakoMike

First of all these guys weren't fishing anywhere "near Shore." they were fishing in federal waters and most the time faaaar out in federal waters.

Go down to Scarborough in the early winter. Nebe's got the photos.... they were all around the blackfish grounds a couple of seasons ago.

Kevin:
On mud and sand, probably true about minimal impact, although I wouldn't say 'retilling', sandy surfaces in particular are often resurfaced either by wave or tidal currents, but the effect draggers have is pretty sever on Cobble bottoms...

[MakoMike]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Go down to Scarborough in the early winter. Nebe's got the photos.... they were all around the blackfish grounds a couple of seasons ago.

You sure about hat Bryan? If its true I would be very surprised that DEM wasn't all over then as they probably don't have RI principal effort licenses. Also I doubt they were herring fishing, or pair trawling for that matter that close to shore. Pair trawlers need a lot of room to work setting and retrieving the net.

I'm not saying they weren't there, I'm questioning what they were doing there. I have a picture of the Hanna Bowden leaving the harbor of refuge, but that doesn't mean she was swordfishing in RI.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by MakoMike

You sure about hat Bryan? If its true I would be very surprised that DEM wasn't all over then as they probably don't have RI principal effort licenses. Also I doubt they were herring fishing, or pair trawling for that matter that close to shore. Pair trawlers need a lot of room to work setting and retrieving the net.

I'm not saying they weren't there, I'm questioning what they were doing there. I have a picture of the Hanna Bowden leaving the harbor of refuge, but that doesn't mean she was swordfishing in RI.

Mike I know when I see two boats pair trawling on east to west runs < 1 mile south of Washington ledge. they were there.

[fish4striper]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Go down to Scarborough in the early winter. Nebe's got the photos.... they were all around the blackfish grounds a couple of seasons ago.

Kevin:
On mud and sand, probably true about minimal impact, although I wouldn't say 'retilling', sandy surfaces in particular are often resurfaced either by wave or tidal currents, but the effect draggers have is pretty sever on Cobble bottoms...

The mid water trawlers were right off Nauset also last fall catching herring and dumping bass as usual.