Angler #1

Making the Canal a Real Recreational

Rate this topic

303 posts in this topic

2 hours ago, bob_G said:

I realize  everyone is fishing to a quota. But I allowed my commercial license to lapse over 15 years ago  I felt it was disingenuous to kill these magnificent fish for a few bucks. :shrug:

If more people thought like you then there would be a hell of a lot more fish around. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 mins ago, TimS said:

It wasn't for lack of effort, I'm sure - it's a lack of fish to kill. Wouldn't shock me at all if it happened again this year.

I for one would be surprised, I expect that the MA DEC, or whatever they call it up there will liberalize the season to make sure it gets caught in 2019.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 mins ago, z-man said:

If more people thought like you then there would be a hell of a lot more fish around. 

 

That my friend is a gross misstatement. There will always be people willing to kill fish for money, if some people decide to retire from the field their catch will be more than compensated by those that remain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 mins ago, TonyO said:

Sounds like you changed your tune by trying to eliminate canal commercial fishing. Rod and reel shore guys already took a 80+% cut for no good reason a few years ago. The MA command fishery has always been a small boat fishery, has always been very common for guys to hit the canal on bad weather days or when there boat was in repair. Kind of a shame they can only keep 2 now, 

No Tony I have not changed my mind , I continue to believe that if you are a true commercial fishermen that you should have the legal right to catch what ever the laws allow you to catch . You know as well I do that the main reason they decided to make it only a two day catch for shore bound fishermen was because of all the poaching that was going on in and around the canal . At least that is what I was told , is that what you heard as well. ?

It was felt since they did not have the means to supply enough law enforcement to enforce the present law and where by many were actually buying fish to resell them and many were hiding them in the bushes [that has been posted by many here that I suppose witness it] So many fish were being stacked on the off day that it reduced the quality of the meat and presented another problem they were not equipped to handle. Like some who were buying fish from others that did not have a permit and keeping them in coolers with no ice and then the day of selling they put some ice on the fish . All of these points I have mentioned is on those who practiced these types of fishing I do not know about last year, but in years prior a few commercial holders were given warning and loss of fish at the selling point for such practice

 

Had all of these folks actually been following all of the laws in place that may well may never had a two fish limit [just a guess on my part given some of the conversation I had over the past year in regards as to why they only allowed the 2 fish limit. 

I admit that the posted title indicates only a recreational user area , where only one fish is allowed to be taken per day in order to help reduce what I believe is a far more serious problem of taking our local marked fish closer to a place they can not recover from . Understanding that you commercially sell fish , does not preclude any one from discussing other wise in order to reduce some mortality of fish I feel are more important to the resource if they swim here.

The discussion here could have transcended to another level where non of the users would be affected, including every one concerned and you of all people know My main focus is on the resource and has always been why I chose to fish with my young friend , because among all said and done he has all of the commercial permits , unlike the day trippers and he follows every regulation and takes care of the fish he catches so that when he takes it to the market place it is prime . He is one of the most ethical fishermen I have fished with  and since I am unable to fish the canal like I once did .  It has allowed me to remain active in something I like to do as you know. 

Did you see where Mike is selling the shop?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes saw Mike selling. I heard different  bull**** about why they changed limit. I also believe the amount of comm poaching you go on and on about is grossly exaggerated.  How many man hours did the EPOs put in this year, targeting these comms  ?  You would think there would have been a substantial amount of busts if what you say is true. Only heard of a tiny amount. The major amount of poaching is done by the recs. Still never saw anyone try and buy fish from anyone, neither have any friends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Changing it from 15 fish to 2 fish for shore guys was nothing more than a quota grab for the boat guys who were jealous of the guys showing up at the truck with more fish than they had.  If you think the poaching on the canal compares to the boat fishing poaching you are nuts.  Shore guys stacked fish and boat guys stacked fish and there were a lot more boats doing it covering hundreds of miles of shoreline.  Nevermind the miles of dead 32'' gaffers from Nauset down to Monomoy.  Do not try and convince yourself this had anything to do with the shore guys poaching fish from all the saints on boats.  You are smarter than this Carl and you have seen it out there yourself in Chatham, Race Point, and Sandy Neck.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also don't understand why TimS keeps saying he does not see the hypocrisy in all this.  Angler can feel the way he wants to but that does not make it not hypocritical.  To say you want to eliminate commercial fishing on the canal to protect the local resource in one breath and then hop on a boat in the canal and catch these exact fish leaving the canal and contribute to the sale of these same fish you want to protect is possibly the most hypocritical sceanrio I can think of.  The real question I have for Angler would be this?  Is it a quota grab for your buddy you want or is to prevent people you may not see eye to eye with anymore practicing in a fishery you know that they have for a long time?  Seems personal as it clearly is not about protecting the resource.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TimS said:

That's the thing, he was proposing 7 miles of shoreline be closed to commercial fishing. He wasn't suggesting the elimination of any resource users. I must be looking at this from more degrees of separation than you, that certainly happens and is one reason why I keep trying to better understand someone's position.  Hypothetical situation:  Let's say John Doe has commercially striped bass fished for years - one day he starts a discussion suggesting we should impose more strict regulations on commercial striped bass fishing. Is he a hypocrite? I killed a lotta bass in the early 90s for friends and family - later when the population got hammered by the hundreds of thousands of new bass fishermen, I stopped killing them and started trying to educate others as to why it's important to release them. Does that make me a hypocrite?

 

 

I never said he was trying to eliminate resource users. As for the hypothetical question as asked, no, he is not a hypocrite.

 

Now for another hypothetical situation. John Doe commercially fishes for striped bass from "Tribe A". John Doe believes "Tribe A" is in serious danger of being exterminated. John Doe fabricates a plan to limit another user groups access to "Tribe A" to prevent extermination. Under John Doe's plan he would continue to harvest "Tribe A" at current rates, his access would continue unchanged. John Doe still gets his piece of the pie. Is this classic, "Do as I say, not as I do", hypocrisy?    

 

I have killed my fair share of bass too, and will again, I also do my part to educate when the opportunity arises. I think I have kept one and a half bass in the last 5 years, maybe less. For the record, I commercial fished for a few years when I was in my 20's. (but, I never held the license so don't call me a commercial fisherman!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MakoMike said:

That my friend is a gross misstatement. There will always be people willing to kill fish for money, if some people decide to retire from the field their catch will be more than compensated by those that remain.

More tragically, there will always be recreational anglers that think they need to justify the cost of their 32' Yellowfin by killing everything they catch every time they fish. (**It should be noted that I love fishing from a boat or kayak...for everything but bass...I'm no boat hater)  I think folks that mostly fish from shore don't understand how many fish guys in boats kill every trip they go out. It's an unsustainable mentality.  People cringe when I explain to them that surf fishing for striped bass could release every single bass they catch and it wouldn't make a meaningful difference to the striped bass population. Private recreational boats kill the overwhelming majority of striped bass every year. It's not commercial fishing, it's not party boats, it's not charter boats - it's the guy and his five buddies filling the cooler every time they can because the boat cost so much and gas is expensive and the slip costs money, etc, etc.

 

This is from 2017 (https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st1/recreational/queries/ )

Shore -                          3,008K  #

Part Boat -                     182K #

Charter Boat -               3,601K #

Private/Rental Boats - 31,293K #

 

Boats combined - 35 million pounds

Shore - 3 million pounds

 

I think commercial landings are around 5-6 million annually.  If they closed the canal completely to fishing it wouldn't make even the slightest difference to the striped bass and their present decline. The boats that kill the vast majority of fish annually would be unaffected.

 

TimS 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MakoMike said:

That my friend is a gross misstatement. There will always be people willing to kill fish for money, if some people decide to retire from the field their catch will be more than compensated by those that remain.

Thanks captain negative. We all might as well just kill every fish we catch. If we don’t do it someone else will right?  Sounds like a great plan. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

regardless of how well or how bad the stocks are weather had quite a bit to do with the filling of the commercial quota.many of the Monday and Thursday openings were a bust because the boats couldn't get out.2 other factors were the amount of smaller fish that were around and the other was that the larger fish were beyond the 3 mile line more than not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 mins ago, l.i.fish.in.vt said:

regardless of how well or how bad the stocks are weather had quite a bit to do with the filling of the commercial quota.many of the Monday and Thursday openings were a bust because the boats couldn't get out.2 other factors were the amount of smaller fish that were around and the other was that the larger fish were beyond the 3 mile line more than not.

This is the real story about the commercial season, i.e., especially "the amount of smaller fish that were around and the other was that the larger fish were beyond the 3 mile line more than not"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, TimS said:

More tragically, there will always be recreational anglers that think they need to justify the cost of their 32' Yellowfin by killing everything they catch every time they fish. (**It should be noted that I love fishing from a boat or kayak...for everything but bass...I'm no boat hater)  I think folks that mostly fish from shore don't understand how many fish guys in boats kill every trip they go out. It's an unsustainable mentality.  People cringe when I explain to them that surf fishing for striped bass could release every single bass they catch and it wouldn't make a meaningful difference to the striped bass population. Private recreational boats kill the overwhelming majority of striped bass every year. It's not commercial fishing, it's not party boats, it's not charter boats - it's the guy and his five buddies filling the cooler every time they can because the boat cost so much and gas is expensive and the slip costs money, etc, etc.

 

This is from 2017 (https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st1/recreational/queries/ )

Shore -                          3,008K  #

Part Boat -                     182K #

Charter Boat -               3,601K #

Private/Rental Boats - 31,293K #

 

Boats combined - 35 million pounds

Shore - 3 million pounds

 

I think commercial landings are around 5-6 million annually.  If they closed the canal completely to fishing it wouldn't make even the slightest difference to the striped bass and their present decline. The boats that kill the vast majority of fish annually would be unaffected.

 

TimS 

Tim that is great data.  Seeing it helps understand the problem in scope of big picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, MakoMike said:

Just for the hell of it, I tried to look it up. While I couldn't find any definitive map of the land the ACOE controls, It does appear that you are correct, thy control a more than just the canal itself. All of the town parks along the canal are leased to the towns by the ACOE. I'd wager at this point that the ACOE controls all of the land up to the roads that parallel the canal.

 

You would win that bet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, l.i.fish.in.vt said:

regardless of how well or how bad the stocks are weather had quite a bit to do with the filling of the commercial quota.many of the Monday and Thursday openings were a bust because the boats couldn't get out.2 other factors were the amount of smaller fish that were around and the other was that the larger fish were beyond the 3 mile line more than not.

There’s never been bad weather or small fish in any previous year...ever? Weather certainly could have been a factor - but the reduced biomass no doubt factored into the weather affected guys not being able to find fish from shore...or find their 15 fish on days they could fish.  

 

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.