ASMFC Striped bass board winter meeting minutes

[WoodyCT]

Limit entry to MA commercial fishery. 6

Utilize a tag system to reduce MA black market. 9

Use GPS monitoring to keep comms out of MA EEZ. 10

5 words left....

Boycott Virginia and North Carolina !!

[PRBuzz]

Originally Posted by WoodyCT

Limit entry to /MA/ commercial fishery. 5

Utilize a tag system to reduce /MA/ black market. 8

Use GPS monitoring to keep comms and charters out of /MA/ EEZ. 11

6 words left....

Boycott Virginia and North Carolina fishing!!

see embedded comments, removed MA since all striper populations are inter-related.

[trapperpierre]

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[sokinwet]

"Cut out the 'recreational commercials' by limiting entry to the FEW who do rely on bass for a significant portion of their income"

This is my "favorite". I asked this before when one of the "anti commercial fisherman" crowd posted a similar line of "logic" and got no answer.....So WoodyCT...I'll ask you this time since you brought it up. How many fish in a million lb. quota if it's caught by 100 guys as opposed to 1,000 guys? Open book...and you're allowed to get the other "select few" who deem themselves worthy of making economic decisions for everyone else to help.

[WoodyCT]

If your family has historically been involved in commercial fishing and can demonstrate, through financial records, that the sale of striped bass has provided $X to your family over the last X years then you are considered to be dependent on the fishery and grandfathered a license.

Who is not a true commercial fisherman? All the weekend warriors out there with a $65 license to kill who are using the fish to pay for their expensive hobby are most certainly not.

As for the quota, let the true commercials who depend on bass for a significant % of their income catch as much of that 1 million pounds, or whatever is eventually determined to be a sustainable quota, as they can based on whatever bag limit and minimum-maximum size limits the managers determine best protects the spawning stock biomass. Once it is reached they are done on bass for the year.

[sokinwet]

"No brainer"
"As for the quota, let the true commercials who depend on bass for a significant % of their income catch as much of that 1 million pounds, or whatever is eventually determined to be a sustainable quota, as they can based on whatever bag limit and minimum-maximum size limits the managers determine best protects the spawning stock biomass. Once it is reached they are done on bass for the year."

So I guess it's not about the "fish" it's about who you decide should profit from the fishery?

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by sokinwet

So I guess it's not about the "fish" it's about who you decide should profit from the fishery?

It's about take. Cull out the licenses that aren't being used and there is less opportunity for abuse. We all know that there are people who utilize their commercial permit to keep more than 2 @ 28". I met a handful at the canal this past July.

Then, a reduced quota has less effect on the fishermen that are true commercial fishermen, as opposed to being utilized to fund a hobby and buy a new Tiagra 80.

[Sashamy]

well i hope you reported guys in June in the canal keeping more than two...cuz their license isn't good til July 12 in most cases!

om top of that there is no law against someone bringing home 30 to eat....during the season if they have a license and they are 34"

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Sashamy

well i hope you reported guys in June in the canal keeping more than two...cuz their license isn't good til July 12 in most cases!

om top of that there is no law against someone bringing home 30 to eat....during the season if they have a license and they are 34"

Bah. You're right - July.

I don't know a lot of details on the specific regs for comms. But I know I'd be pissed if I were a career fisherman and some weekend warrior is holding a license so that they can take extra fish home for their freezer.

I think this is the bloated portion of the quota which could be reduced without affecting the career fisherman and as such, a compromise is made - the quota is reduced and career fishermen aren't affected.

[Mr. Sandman]

Originally Posted by Sashamy

om top of that there is no law against someone bringing home 30 to eat....during the season if they have a license and they are 34"

Are you sure about this? I thought that those fish caught commercially had to be sold to registered dealer. Clearly, if you get stopped on the water with 30 fish on board, you will claim you are commercial fishing with the intent of selling the catch to a registered dealer, if you take them home and put them in your freezer you are not commercial fishing. At some point the story changed. I think there was a guy busted in RI a couple years ago at his home because of this.

Next time you get stopped with 20 or 30 fish on board, tell the officer...I am just going to take these home to eat and see what he says.

Do you know how the quota is computed? They add up all the pounds of fish that were sold to the registered dealers every few days. If you took 30 fish home, then, they never made it to the dealer and therefore are not part of the quota. I am sure this is not legal because it defeats the entire quota purpose.

There are too many gray areas that can not be policed and ways to extend the season by avoiding the quota in this fishery. This is just one of them that the comm's exploit.

Regulations should be about the fish and not about the fishermen. Again, game fish status is a big step toward fish protection in that it takes the user groups out of it as well as the bickering of who has the right to kill them. Is it perfect, no, but it provides a good amount of protection while they figure out how many fish there and what is causing the problems with the decline in population disease control and destruction of their food sources and habitat which will take a number of years IMO.

[sokinwet]

"I don't know a lot of details on the specific regs for comms."
There's a revelation! And I see we're back to the all commercial bass guys are poaching crooks.......and I guess all rec's are lying BS'ers who make up little canal stories to suit their arguement.

[WoodyCT]

We're back to the 'revelation', to use your own words, that some folks aren't capable of seeing both sides of the issue, just their side, which leads to an 'all or nothing' mindset which will lead to nothing except another moratorium. Do you really think commercial bass fishing will survive a second ASMFC bass crash? Think about it.

Here we have several recreational guys who can see that this isn't a good vs. evil issue. It's an issue affecting many many people, all of which need to make concessions and work collaboratively to refine the system before the system screws them all.

Another no brainer.

[sokinwet]

You know you'e right Woody...some folks can't or won't see both sides of the issue, but as Sashamy stated above it sure isn't "us" on the attack. Just look at the posts on this subject and see who's calling who, poachers, crooks, greedy...then we've got the MSBA, DMF, etc. bashers.... and those opinions are derived from what? Years of education in marine fisheries, collection and study of data...no just a bunch of internet whining & IMO's. Frankly I prefer to let fisheries managers make "informed" decisions; not me...or you...or a collection of self appointed fisheries experts.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by sokinwet

"I don't know a lot of details on the specific regs for comms."
There's a revelation! And I see we're back to the all commercial bass guys are poaching crooks.......and I guess all rec's are lying BS'ers who make up little canal stories to suit their arguement.

I mean on the specifics like what Sashamy said about being able to take fish home for personal use, requirements in caring for the catch and such. I've never stated that all commercial bass guys are poaching crooks, but I'd bet that everyone here knows some that are.

Those fisheries managers making "informed" decisions have already allowed the stocks to completely crash once.

To paraphrase something Makai said in an earlier post, "The regulators won't act until their hand is forced." By then, it'll be too late.

[intrepid24]

I want to say that I do not appreciate the reference toward comm. guys poaching. If one is doing something against the rules/law, they are in their own category, please do not stereotype this activity as comm. objectivity is warranted here.

[MakoMike]

WHATS THE DIFFERENCE TO THE POPULATION IF TEN GUYS TAKE THE COMMERCIAL QUOTA OR 1,000 GUYS TAKE THE SAME QUOTA? sorry for the caps. If you guys really think the ASMFC is going to let the population crash again, I have a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in purchasing.

[MAKAI]

Originally Posted by MakoMike

WHATS THE DIFFERENCE TO THE POPULATION IF TEN GUYS TAKE THE COMMERCIAL QUOTA OR 1,000 GUYS TAKE THE SAME QUOTA? sorry for the caps. If you guys really think the ASMFC is going to let the population crash again, I have a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in purchasing.

I think the point may be that a thousand pissed off guys will have no problem with ten pissed off guys. The rec bashing may awaken a sleeping giant.
In the end it's gonna come down to who wants it more, the many or the few.

Really, are there not more important things to want to someone over ?

I can make a long list before I get to a Fish.

[WoodyCT]

Originally Posted by MakoMike

WHATS THE DIFFERENCE TO THE POPULATION IF TEN GUYS TAKE THE COMMERCIAL QUOTA OR 1,000 GUYS TAKE THE SAME QUOTA? sorry for the caps. If you guys really think the ASMFC is going to let the population crash again, I have a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in purchasing.

That's the best part- Lower the quota since 990 recremmerials will no longer be fishing on the striper stocks. Leaves more fish to spawn.

[sokinwet]

Well maybe all rec's aren't lying BS'ers....but I bet everyone on here knows some that are!! ;-)

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by sokinwet

Well maybe all rec's aren't lying BS'ers....but I bet everyone on here knows some that are!! ;-)

Haha... very true.

Like the ol' proverb says: "Believe nothing of what you hear, and only half of what you see." So all of this is only academic anyway, because I don't believe anything that any of you are saying - even the people I agree with.

[MAKAI]

Man don't you guys ever get tired.
When action has to taken, probably when it's most grim.
Money and votes will decide who the players will be.
Because our government does such a bang up job in everything they touch, we will all be happy again.

[Sashamy]

No actually if it is a comm day and u get checked they don't ask what you intend to do with your fish, they just make sure they are of size and that you have not exceeded your limit. I do though really find it to be a stretch to think that a mlot of guys are bringing these fish home to eat, but if they did weigh and record them than what is the problem? Guys with fluke licenses do it all the time...Simply put this whole bill was started by SF and M Patrick as a power grab, they attacked an industry that is done with a rod and reel not a net for their own personal gain and in my opinion that is not the way to get any mgt of a fishery done.

Secondly there has been a lot of accusations about greedy fishermen...Whether we are talking about stripers or cod yu have to know that we fishermen can only what NMFS/ASMFC allows us to catch, so why would a fisherman not complain about restrictions? It does make him greedy it makes him a business man like any other business owner. We all complain about taxes and regulation changes in any business...NMFS is too blame for allowing the raping of most species not the fisherman himself.

[sokinwet]

Speaking of "Patrick" has anyone seen his latest? Now he's going after the tuna with another bill! Yea...let's have MA manage the international pelagic fisheries.....someone needs to tell him MA waters extend to 3 mi......then dope slap him a few times!!

H764 An Act relative to conserving bluefin tuna.

Summary:
Creates a commission to study the existing bluefin tuna fishery and the interaction of commercial and recreational bluefin fisheries, to promote the viability and restore the population of the species, to examine the economic and biological impacts of various fishing techniques, and analyze historical data of bluefin taken in Massachusetts waters.

The Public Hearing is scheduled tomorrow Wednesday @ Noon before the Joint Committee on Natural Resources.

[Sashamy]

No it is Kocot not Patrick...but from the 1st Hampshire District??????? Why?????????

[MikeToole]

Originally Posted by Sashamy

Secondly there has been a lot of accusations about greedy fishermen...Whether we are talking about stripers or cod yu have to know that we fishermen can only what NMFS/ASMFC allows us to catch, so why would a fisherman not complain about restrictions? It does make him greedy it makes him a business man like any other business owner. We all complain about taxes and regulation changes in any business...NMFS is too blame for allowing the raping of most species not the fisherman himself.

NMFS is just bowing to the pressure put on them by fisherman. NMFS may to guity of not doing their job but it is being caused by fisherman. What is this big fisherman march RFA and other groups are doing down in Washington all about. It's to put pressure on ASMFC and NMFS, not in the interest of fish, but to protect jobs by slowing down recovery time lines. Fisherman are the number one group to blame and then comes ASMFC and NMFS for bending to fisherman pressure.

[sokinwet]

My bad...shouldn't have posted without all the facts; I picked this up 3rd hand from a post by a knowledgable guy fighting the good fight re: tuna. Nevertheless...a good dope slap for 2 seems in order.

Sashamy...you don't seem busy today...think I'll go "offshore" and stir up the "baby killer" pot! Care to join me......just kidding...I have enough enemies for now!

[jmac]

Those fisheries managers making "informed" decisions have already allowed the stocks to completely crash once.

To paraphrase something Makai said in an earlier post, "The regulators won't act until their hand is forced." By then, it'll be too late.

The fisheries managers did not let the stocks crash once...The stocks have "crashed" throughout history, i.e., the turn of the 19 century (plenty of history on the Cuttyhunk, Newport, Sakonnett bass stands empty and dilapidated because of the lack of fish).....

I believe what you refer to is the late 70's, early 80's. There was only one regulation then around here (to the best of my memory)...16" minimum length (I believe the limit was 12" for the Chesapeake netters back then)...otherwise no other regulations (bag limit,etc).
ASMFC started managing stripers because of the lack of fish then, and because of all the work we did back then (COMMERCIAL AND REC-I know, I was there at the mtgs as a R&R commercial) to get rules and regs to safeguard the fish.
Regarding ASMFC, as quoted from the ASMFC website-
"The Commission has managed striped bass since 1981. Amendment 6 to the Fishery Management Plan provides the current guidance to the states from Maine through North Carolina."
That is why I believe that any precipitous drop in the biomass will never reach the point it did back then; too many safeguards are in place.

[numbskull]

Originally Posted by jmac

That is why I believe that any precipitous drop in the biomass will never reach the point it did back then; too many safeguards are in place.

If the ASMFC worked objectively and the science was better you would be correct.

But the ASMFC includes many people with agendas. There is no democratic representation, to reflect actual numbers of people using the resource (and no valid way to create such since the fish eating public deserves some level of representation), and most importantly the whole purpose of the ASMFC is to ensure maximal sustainable utilization of the resource, which they take to mean maximal yield of dead fish.

Hence, the ASMFC is always pushing the limit to kill more fish. Since the science is inexact, and their is substantial pressure from those with a financial stake in the species, the ASMFC errs on the side "seeing the best case scenario".

When people with this mindset become convinced something can "never" happen, you can be damn sure it not only can, but is made more likely by a false sense of security.

The real issue is that species abundance (and quality sized fish) is the goal of most recreational fishermen. It is not, however, the goal of the ASMFC (their goal is maximal safe utilization). I don't think it is that big a goal for most commercial fisherman either (An easy supply of fish drives down price and allows less skilled fisherman compete successfully with them).

That, I think, is where the recreational/commercial divide begins. We want lots of large fish so we can catch them easily and feel good about ourselves, they're happy with a more restricted (but sustained) population to keep prices up and competition down.

The current management system may very well ensure the species is not wiped out, but it also may ensure that the species is kept at a population level/size distribution that leaves the largest user group frustrated and angry. That does not represent sound fishery management.

[MarshCappa]

Man i need a nap after slogging through these 4 pages. Sad thing is, I still don't know what is going on!

[WoodyCT]

and up until now that has been the commercial lobby because it has the funds to donate to reelection campaigns. In the past recs had virtually no voice while commercials stuffed pockets and packed meetings to ensure that the gravy train kept rolling.

It is only very recently that a somewhat strong and vocal recreational voice is beginning to be heard up and down the coast, and that voice is SF. After watching the first crash and moratorium folks decided never again was too soon and began spreading their message- preserve sportfishing for bass by making it a game fish throughout its range. Some states have done so, others have not, nor has the federal government gone so far.

I can't blame SF for being fed up with the status quo, who isn't!, and reaching for the ultimate protective measure- gamefish status.

However, I believe that if managed properly the stock can support a thriving recreational fishery, and all the related economic injections it brings, as well as a tightly controlled and strictly monitored commercial fishery.

Comms want all the fish so they can earn a living. Recs want all the fish so they are protected and can be enjoyed. Eventually compromise will be reached and the bass can be shared.

It appears that the threat of a resource grab by SF is just the thing to get everyones attention and begin some meaningful dialogue as we are doing here.