Mass Slot Limit?

[Mr. Sandman]

I think there is plenty of room for more then one 36" fish. Again, I think the problem is with the commerical side and not the average sport guy who probably fishes 10 days a year for bass and catches fish half the time. You have to look at the numbers.

That said, there is no reason to take a lot of fish for sport, esp if you can't sell them.

I would be willing to limit sport catch to 1 fish but I want to eliminate commerical fishing for bass. If you are going to allow commerical fishing...then the sport guys should be allowed to take more as well. However...what is best for the fishery?.. I don't know if you have ever attended some of these meetings but it is a "me me me" fest. I can tell you the comm guys do not care if they wipe out the bass as long as they get to catch as much as they can. They honesty don't care.

I have not kept up with the very latest in the last few years...I just got tired of it...but the bottom line is

1) If you wiped out sport fishing for bass completely and allowed commerical fishing to continue...the fishery could get wiped out again.

2) If you wiped out commerical fishing for bass yet allowed sport fishing even without limits... the fishery would thrive.

If you look at the fiscal impact, the charter fishing business purduces more income then the netting and does less harm to the species as well, so (2) has less fiscal impact.

The netting of entire schools of fish (tons) does significant harm to the population of year-class fish. Sport fishing no matter how intense does not do nearly the damage.

IMO all striped bass that is sold in stores should be farm-raised.


All you have to do is take the price off the fish and keep the water clean and they will thrive.

What we want to aviod going back to these days...

[Jersey_Jim]

If there is a slot for 2 fish, then many many of the 28's that go back in now in anticipation of the "big one" will be kept (read killed). Vote FOR the slot if you want to support the non sportsman ( you know the guy who brings anything home so he can get the big white hunter look from the family). I think a lot more more fished will be killed with a slot.

[MAC]

No slot, make the Striped Bass a game fish, negate commercial fishing and make size limit 36" minimum with 1 fish limit

[JohnR]

Newell Guy - welcome to S-B...

I'm tossed on whether to game fish or not. I do think that too many are taken commercially every year and that economically, there is no contest on which, comm -v- rec is more importamt dollar wise to the economy.

I just think that there should be effective sharing between groups. Now seeing that effective sharing is not likely to happen, then if pushed, I would push for game fish...

[Backwater Guide]

I heard a report this morning concerning a study conducted at the Stoneybrook Institute in NY by a Fisheries Management specialist. The report found that when larger fish are kept, the avarage size in the remaining stocks decreases over time. By removing the larger fish from the gene pool, we are thus staging the future for more smaller fish. The study also showed that the removal of smaller fish from the population had the opposite affect. By removing smaller fish, there was a substantial increase in the numbers of larger fish. Also, it was observed that the fish achieved much greater growth rates and appeared to produce more offspring.
Why do we need to keep a large fish anyway. What is wrong with bringing a camera, taking a picture, and letting it go. Who wants to eat the large fish anyway. I have worked for the Department of Environmental Protection for a few years testing striped bass fillets. These large fish in the 36+ inch range are not healthy to eat. Fish of this size are in the 12-13year+ class and have bioaccumulated more heavy metals than anyone in thier right mind should really care to consume.
So, if keeping a smaller fish is beneficial for more larger fish and a healthier stock, and smaller/younger fish are much healthier to eat,.....what is the problem??? It really doesn't seem too hard to figure out. Think about the slot.(20-26")

[DRM]

Frank Daignault discusses genetics in several of his publications and its always a keystone of his striper management arguments. I believe his analogy says something to the effect of what farmer would slaughter his finest brood stock and save his runts? Yet another reason the slot is the way to go. Don't forget that half of those smaller fish are males. Fisheries management in freshwater lakes has proven that slots help to grow healthy populations with large fish. If a trophy category is to exist, make it a real trophy category with fish of say 48 inches or so for the taxedermist.

[Mr. Sandman]

Stocks are up to the point now, breeding numbers were never higher. If every fish were to be able to spawn at least once before they could be caught the fishery would continue to grow. (do the math) This results in a 4 year old fish or about 28 inches.(more or less) I am in favor of a multi fish (2 or 3) 36" limit (allowing each fish to spawn several times). But IMO the commerical aspect has to stop completely. The REAL HARM comes when the undersize fish die in nets or are tossed back dead because they can't be sold. These fish NEVER get the chance to spawn and this results millions of potential fish each year that never swim and far exceeds the entire annual sport catch.

This is really just a big political problem, everyone knows what *should* be done, just knowone has the balls to do it.

it simple:
1) No commerical market for bass
2) sport catch size limit such that each fish spawns at least once before caught be caught. (36" allows for several spawnings,)
3) keep the water clean
4) allow for a reasonable catch limit (2+)
5) push catch and release
6) make it a coast wide law. <-------- this is the tough one because you need the feds to do it and they think it is a states problem. The states will never agree.

IMO, If this was in force, there would be a sustainable population of bass forever, the sport catch would be insignificant and the population would grow at an amazing rate. Neary every fish born would spawn 2 or more times, the growth rate (of the fishery)would be amazing now that there is a substantial breeding stock.

I understand that the big fish have many more eggs then the smaller fish but I but my faith in the numbers. I would rather have 10 fish spawning 10,000,000 eggs then 1 fish spawning 10,000,000 eggs. There is safety in numbers, that is why fish swim in schools :-)


With regard to the NY study... I take issue with a few of statements. Genetically the fish is not changed when you take a 36" fish, that is absolute nonsence, anyone with a science background will see through this.
Further, the heavy metal situation is no where as bad as it was in the 60's, you should be more concerned about eating frank perdue's hormone laced giant chickens (which IMO have caused young girls to over develop at an early age) (chickens are not suppose be 15+ pounds with 90% of that breast meat!)
Further still, one can make a good argument that you don't wnat the larger "heavy metal contaminated" fish breeding (with regard to long term genetic problems). I would like to see ALL fish breed a few times prior to catch.

Back on track....
Sorry for all my opinions but I am convinced that by eliminating the commerial catch and keeping the waters as clean as possible, the problem will be 95% solved. How do you get from here to there is the question.

[MightyMouse]

I think that the idea of of a two-fish limit seems a bit, well, funny, seeing how we've gone so long with the one-fish deal. I like the idea of allowing one trophy over 40," because they'll probably have a couple of more spawns than the 36" fish. When it comes to the 28" fellas, it seems that no matter what you write down on paper and stamp with a government seal, there are alway going to be people taking shorts, or more than one fish, or worse, both.

Guess I'm just a one-per-trip kinda guy.

Just my $.02, Not gonna jump on anybody elses opinion.

[JohnR]

MM - welcome to S-B... Yeh, I also like the high trophy size. Would I keep one? Probably if it's over 50 pounds, the first one. Release the rest? Probably, maybe all... I don't know what I'll do and I really can't say until the time comes...

[fishweewee]

I eat 10 times as many blue claws as I do stripers in any year. Just kidding Bloo.

Seriously, what's wrong with a coastwide standard of one fish 36 inches and larger? That should help the aforementioned stocks/classes, and it eliminates the confusion for anglers who cross state lines to enjoy their favorite pastimes.

In any case I'm 100% catch and release with stripers now, unless my family wants me to bring some fish home. I think there are better tasting white meat fish. Like blue crabs. Oops, I gotta stop doing that.

-FWW

[TheSpecialist]

I think that no matter what is done, it should be coast wide. That would make enforcement easier.

[Backwater Guide]

To Mr. Sandman,

Apparently you don't know anything about heavy metals in the ecosystem. They don't leave or metabolize. So if you think heavy metal levels in fish are better now than in the 60's, you are seriously mistaken. Fish are higher in heavy metals more than ever. Heavy metals bioaccumulate in fatty tissue. This means, as a fish feeds and increases with age, the level of contaminants increase over time. This same idea works with you. As you eat the fish, the contaminants that built up in the fish, bioaccumulate in you. Whether or not you care about the levels of heavy metals in your body is up to you. But, for someone like me who would eat a fish once a year and would like to have children some day, a fish much smaller than 36" would be much healthier for me and my future child. That is why some states have allowed fisherman to keep their one fish under 26". It is much healthier from a consumer standpoint. In Maine, we have consumption advisories specific to certain species and locations to inform people on how many meals are considered healthy to consume.

As for your genetics comment, Yes- If you remove large fish from the gene pool, you are eliminating large genes from the gene pool. If you are removing large genes from the gene pool, you are left with fish that do not have the genes to become large. That means the remaining fish overall average length is smaller.