Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
JonC

NOAA Recreational Catch Numbers for MA

Rate this topic

12 posts in this topic

From the NOAA site, a little more to support what we all know.

JC

 

Your Query Parameters:

 

Query:

MRIP CATCH TIME SERIES

 

Year:

2006 - 2011

 

Wave:

ANNUAL

 

Species:

STRIPED BASS

 

Geographic Area:

MASSACHUSETTS

 

Fishing Mode:

ALL MODES COMBINED

 

Fishing Area:

ALL AREAS COMBINED

 

Type of Catch:

TOTAL CATCH (TYPE A + B1 + B2)

 

Information:

NUMBERS OF FISH

 

 

Estimate Status

Year

Common Name

Total Catch (A+B1+B2)

PSE

FINAL

2006

STRIPED BASS

8,124,766

10.2

FINAL

2007

STRIPED BASS

5,646,880

12.6

FINAL

2008

STRIPED BASS

4,027,374

11.7

FINAL

2009

STRIPED BASS

2,627,003

10.6

FINAL

2010

STRIPED BASS

2,012,483

11.1

PRELIMINARY

2011

STRIPED BASS

1,323,156

14.6

 

Decrease from 2006 to 2011 is 6,802,000 fish, a decrease of 83.7%

Decrease from 2010 to 2011 was 690,000 fish, a decrease of 34%

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those are some terrible numbers (but my wife's an accountant, I've learned to never fully trust numbers)

Lets be sure that it's an apples to apples annual comparison.

Have there been any changes to the law over that stretch, lower commercial allowances, changes to fish size, net or mesh size (if allowed), increase in fee's lowering the number of commercial fishermen targeting bass................................... ??:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can tell you this much - some of the guys at work are keeping everything they catch for the freezer and to give away filets to those not catching. One guy is out there trolling several nights per week with his son and a buddy and he talks about bringing home multiple fish a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the numbers are close to reality. What they don't show is what NOAA calls "fishing effort", which is a measure of how many people are fishing and how often. Since 2008 the "effort" has declined. This may be due to the recession or maybe guys are just getting discouraged.

 

I think a better measure is the catch rate, or how many fish per hour are caught. This takes into account variations in the effort.

 

I've been keeping a detailed log since 1996 and I use this measure to compare seasons. The log has 1,340 trips and 14,140 stripers, so I believe the data is reasonably useful. For comparison purposes, these are my "Stripers per Hour" numbers for the same years.

 

2006 - 7.0

2007 - 6.7

2008 - 4.7

2009 - 3.3

2010 - 2.5

2011 - 2.6

 

The decline is real.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sad part is we recreational fishermen have been saying this since 2007 and the NOAA reports call us crazy.......... BS!!!!! We know the time and effort we put in on the water and the net results and we did not become clueless anglers over night after doing this for several decades. Personally I have stopped fishing saltwater locally along the DE beaches. When experience surf fishermen are having conversations about their yearly take and feel good about only 2 keepers all year it's time to re-evaluate how one spends his recreational time and money. I did fish several times up north last summer from RI to ME and if my fishing down here was like yours up there I would be going down to my DE beaches near nightly during the week.

 

I don't need any government agency twisting numbers to tell me that along our DE beaches Striper fishing is dismal at best. Shorebound beach anglers may have maybe at most 15 good days per year during migrations for the opportunity at a quality fish. That is it, period! 15 stinking days out of 365 days .... sickening! Wonder why I went to the freshwater locally? Pretty obvious to me if one defines fishing as catching more than casting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those numbers are dismally correct in substantiating what we already knew in Mass. Has anyone done same comparison for RI, Conn and NJ to see if percentages are approximately the same? Why can't the decision makers see this trend or are they so deep in the pockets of non recreational fisher interests that their heads are buried somewhere that the sun doesn't shine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah- and NMFS just voted to keep the regs the same since they can't seem to find amy evidence that the fish are in trouble

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.