Angler #1

Making the Canal a Real Recreational

Rate this topic

303 posts in this topic

21 mins ago, bob_G said:

 

 

Am I the only one that's bewildered by this? :confused:

Are you suggesting that there's a large stock of native breeding stripers that live in our waters, year-round?  

What current evidence do you have to substantiate this theory? Or is it anecdotal? :)

He's been saying it over and over and over again in the canal thread, how could you have missed it?

Share this post


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

I agree...even though they have done nothing yet, talking about doing something is definitely a good first step :th:

 

I’ll admit I skimmed it, I bet the charter guys will lose there SH$& over it with the amount of business they would probably lose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/12/2019 at 5:50 PM, john1234 said:

I’ll admit I skimmed it, I bet the charter guys will lose there SH$& over it with the amount of business they would probably lose.

They haven't done anything, nobody is going to lose business. What these businesses are going to be learning the hard way if they DON'T sack up and encourage the ASMFC to reduce striped bass mortality is that people aren't willing to hand them a bunch of money to fish for fish they can't find. Screw the speculation around how many they should be able to keep, nobody is going to pay them to drive around the bay and look for fish that aren't there. They WILL lose business if something isn't done soon. 

 

It's time for the "charter guys" to start thinking for themselves, tell their industry advocacy representation that something needs to be done to REDUCE striped bass mortality before the fishing gets bad enough that people stop paying them. Also, the sooner actual reduction in mortality begins, the LESS restrictive the regulations will have to be. The longer the industry advocacy businesses try to delay this reduction in mortality, the HARDER these businesses will be hit when those reductions are no longer optional. And then they'll scream about draconian measures and how unfair - even though they themselves LEAD the fight every time to fight reductions in mortality.

 

People are getting smarter, they are starting to understand how these businesses that are paid to fight against regulations, even when they are necessary, are having an enormous negative effect on the fisheries we enjoy. People are going to stop supporting businesses that align with or hire those type of 'advocacy organizations' - they will start using businesses that come out AGAINST the harvest heavy industry advocates. We all need to start paying attention - we need to hold the people steering management decisions responsible for their words and actions - and we need to start holding the businesses that pay these groups responsible for the damage these organizations are doing to every fishery they can affect.  The businesses paying them are doing so with money YOU are providing them. Stop providing it...they'll stop hiring those groups...and the fish will get a chance to recover. It's pretty simple...but it's going to require folks to pay attention - to be able to tell when "they" are feeding you lies and propaganda - and to express your displeasure with them VERY publicly :read:

 

TimS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TiM, did or did not some where it has been declared that Charter Boat fishermen are considered commercial takers of fish and that may well make some changes to this whole business to begin with.? if that is true

Share this post


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

TiM, did or did not some where it has been declared that Charter Boat fishermen are considered commercial takers of fish and that may well make some changes to this whole business to begin with.? if that is true

Not on the Atlantic coast. What you are talking about is called "sector separation" and it has been done in the Gulf of Mexico, But even there the charter boats are NOT considered "commercial takers" but rather a subset of recreational fishermen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 mins ago, MakoMike said:

Not on the Atlantic coast. What you are talking about is called "sector separation" and it has been done in the Gulf of Mexico, But even there the charter boats are NOT considered "commercial takers" but rather a subset of recreational fishermen.

Thanks Mike . So this" sector separation" will not have any affect on the charter boats along the new England coast line. I thought  I had read or heard that they were talking about changing how they would be looked at? Calculating some of the commercial quota into more of a commercial take, then recreational? It sure gets more complicated in this whole process of who is what any more.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 mins ago, Angler #1 said:

Thanks Mike . So this" sector separation" will not have any affect on the charter boats along the new England coast line. I thought  I had read or heard that they were talking about changing how they would be looked at? Calculating some of the commercial quota into more of a commercial take, then recreational? It sure gets more complicated in this whole process of who is what any more.   

Charter boats harvesting striped bass are not nearly the problem private boaters are when it comes to striped bass. The commercial quota also is not the problem. It's us, Carl - it's recreational anglers, mostly on their boats or their friend's boats, killed far too many bass up and down the east coast.

 

TimS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 mins ago, Angler #1 said:

Thanks Mike . So this" sector separation" will not have any affect on the charter boats along the new England coast line. I thought  I had read or heard that they were talking about changing how they would be looked at? Calculating some of the commercial quota into more of a commercial take, then recreational? It sure gets more complicated in this whole process of who is what any more.   

Well, I usually never say never, but it is IMHO highly unlikely in the case of striped bass on the Atlantic coast that charter boats will be treated any differently than other recreational anglers. Now, having said that there is some precedent for some individual states to treat charter boats differently than the rest of the recreational fishermen, such as in NY where for some time the creel limit for most recreational fishermen was one fish, but for those fishing off a licensed charter boat it was two fish.

Share this post


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

Charter boats harvesting striped bass are not nearly the problem private boaters are when it comes to striped bass. The commercial quota also is not the problem. It's us, Carl - it's recreational anglers, mostly on their boats or their friend's boats, killed far too many bass up and down the east coast.

 

TimS

Tim understanding the increased number of recreational pressure that has been placed on the striped bass resource by one user group is an unfortunate result of the recreational users not having other resources available to fish on . It is my opinion that we all make some contribution to the kill rate each year and  as long as the recreational folks do not have other resources that they can enjoy to fish on, it will be the striped bass that feels the brunt of this situation. The answer is complicated to say the least, however we have made the striped bass an easy quarry in some locations especially where law enforcement has not performed the best job to stop the poaching. Allowing gaffing of fish from boats both in recreational and commercial . I have never said that all of the responsibility  goes to the commercial side of the road way to survival of this resource.

 

I will state once again that my early proposal was to see if any other means could be utilized , to decrease the recreational kill in one place , by making it a one fish place or with true recreational take numbers . No recreational grab , ALL THOUGH IT GAVE THAT APPEARANCE.   to Simplify  THE POLICING ACTION  in order to make one area where every one has the same number to catch each day.  If the harvest rates are qualified it may well be some how or way for the powers that be to get a better picture of the true numbers being killed each day in suicide waters. WE still do not know the number of local fish being removed  from these waters and for me that is critical in determining long range goals to help keep those stocks as healthy as they can be. No one showed any care when the flounder, fluke,smelt,pollock, cod  [not all]were being taken from our local waters and today we have virgin places where no life exists , but did so in another time. One could say, that may well be, compounded elsewhere in other areas of our country where the striped is sought.

 

To many well promoted bass tournaments , where in some cases it is only about killing fish for a prize. So many contributing factors that only add to the problem at hand. The ten fold number of actual recreational users , from another time . More folks from different cultures that look at this resource as an unlimited supply . The lack of other fish to fish on , all play an important part in this continuing problem that will not be going away  in the near future.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 mins ago, FizzyFish said:

In the final analysis , IMO,  a dead fish is a dead fish, doesn't matter who killed it or why.  

No, it doesn't and never has - it does matter that the ASMFC moves to materially reduce striped bass mortality now. "They" won't want to because "they" are chock full of industry advocacy groups, their members and businesses that mistakenly believe fishermen will only fish if they can kill everything they can catch.  So "we" - the folks who hand our money to the businesses that hire these harvest heavy advocacy groups - need to let them know we aren't going to support businesses that fight regulations that have become desperately necessary. We won't support the businesses that pay industry advocacy groups to fight those regulations. Regulations that become more desperately needed because those organizations fought against regulations that would have prevented the situation from getting desperate :squid:  It's so short sighted and stupid - they fight regulations because they imagine it will hurt someone's business - while they allow population after population to be destroyed to the point where it actually hurts everyone's business. It's a mind set that needs to change.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 mins ago, Angler #1 said:

I will state once again that my early proposal was to see if any other means could be utilized , to decrease the recreational kill in one place , by making it a one fish place or with true recreational take numbers . No recreational grab , ALL THOUGH IT GAVE THAT APPEARANCE.   to Simplify  THE POLICING ACTION  in order to make one area where every one has the same number to catch each day.  If the harvest rates are qualified it may well be some how or way for the powers that be to get a better picture of the true numbers being killed each day in suicide waters.

Carl, it honestly wouldn't change a single thing. Not a single fish. Commercial guys would have to stop only long enough to take their first fish back to their truck - and then return. That's their recreational limit - who's gonna know if they bring a second fish back to their truck? It's an enforcement nightmare with zero upside or benefit. It wouldn't save a "tribe", particularly when they are being fished at both ends of the canal by boats, commercially and recreationally.  

 

Not trying to rain on your parade, just trying to give you my honest opinion - it is literally a waste of time and effort...there isn't even any potential upside for the stocks. It wouldn't reduce MA's commercial landings and it wouldn't reduce recreational landings - all it would do is waste a lot of time and effort to do it and then to enforce it - for nothing :o

 

TimS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The lack of other inshore species is unfortunate, and poor management undoubtedly contributed. However commercial draggers were the likely culprits in the demise of cod, pollock, flounder and even river herring, and not the recreational angler.

 

Presently there's still certain recreational species that are available in vast numbers. Scup and black sea bass are two examples. So our local waters are not quite the vast recreational wasteland as someone suggested.

But when you consider all the species, both locally and up and down the east coast, striped bass remains the jewel in the crown. This has always been the case. 

Its not that no one cared about cod, pollock, flounder, fluke or herring. Its simply the means of regulating them was beyond anyone's control. 

If anyone understands that frustration, its me. I dedicated 20 of the best years of my life to protecting and rebuilding our local herring runs in Bourne. In the end even I threw in thee towel when I came to the realization that no one cared.  Not my fellow fishermen, not the state biologists, and not even the town I worked for. All my efforts were for naught.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 mins ago, bob_G said:

The lack of other inshore species is unfortunate, and poor management undoubtedly contributed. However commercial draggers were the likely culprits in the demise of cod, pollock, flounder and even river herring, and not the recreational angler.

 

Presently there's still certain recreational species that are available in vast numbers. Scup and black sea bass are two examples. So our local waters are not quite the vast recreational wasteland as someone suggested.

But when you consider all the species, both locally and up and down the east coast, striped bass remains the jewel in the crown. This has always been the case. 

Its not that no one cared about cod, pollock, flounder, fluke or herring. Its simply the means of regulating them was beyond anyone's control. 

If anyone understands that frustration, its me. I dedicated 20 of the best years of my life to protecting and rebuilding our local herring runs in Bourne. In the end even I threw in thee towel when I came to the realization that no one cared.  Not my fellow fishermen, not the state biologists, and not even the town I worked for. All my efforts were for naught.

 

Not true........You did a good job.......Unfortunately you were working for than less and stellar DNR........

Share this post


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

The lack of other inshore species is unfortunate, and poor management undoubtedly contributed. However commercial draggers were the likely culprits in the demise of cod, pollock, flounder and even river herring, and not the recreational angler.

 

Presently there's still certain recreational species that are available in vast numbers. Scup and black sea bass are two examples. So our local waters are not quite the vast recreational wasteland as someone suggested.

But when you consider all the species, both locally and up and down the east coast, striped bass remains the jewel in the crown. This has always been the case. 

Its not that no one cared about cod, pollock, flounder, fluke or herring. Its simply the means of regulating them was beyond anyone's control. 

If anyone understands that frustration, its me. I dedicated 20 of the best years of my life to protecting and rebuilding our local herring runs in Bourne. In the end even I threw in thee towel when I came to the realization that no one cared.  Not my fellow fishermen, not the state biologists, and not even the town I worked for. All my efforts were for naught.

 

Bob, you did a lot more than just offering lip service on the internet and in spite of our differences over the years I respect that...………...

 

Thank You

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.