Drew C.

Striped bass bonus tag programs

Rate this topic

71 posts in this topic

CT is finally suspending theirs. Now NJ stands alone when it comes to fish-hoggery. Maybe they’ll do the right thing and stop it?

 

highly doubtful. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

any data on how many fish were harvested under this program...?  (I know several guys who would go and take the tags just so they would be out of circulation, and never had any intention of taking a fish with them)

just wondering how many got turned in...? 

Share this post


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

They give 100s of tags to the headboats here in jersey... They need to suspend it as well...

 

 

That's one of the biggest issue's, headboats single handedly do so much damage to the stocks. Best of all it takes 0 skill for someone to get on one and become an instant internet hero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I'm hearing, NJ is thinking about reversing things, so anglers can use the bonus tag not to take an immature female, and thus kill it before it can spawn even once, but instead to target the bigger, most valuable spawners.

 

It would then adopt a low-end slot, something like 24-28 inches or 24-29 inches, so that anglers can concentrate effort on destroying the 2015 year class before they mature.

 

That way, New Jersey can do the most harm to the striped bass possible, killing as many of the surviving big spawners as possible while also maximizing their take of the 2015s that form the future of the stock.

 

And no, I'm not kidding.  The above changes reflect proposals that New Jersey provided to the Atlantic Striped Bass Technical Committee earlier this week.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 mins ago, CWitek said:

From what I'm hearing, NJ is thinking about reversing things, so anglers can use the bonus tag not to take an immature female, and thus kill it before it can spawn even once, but instead to target the bigger, most valuable spawners.

 

It would then adopt a low-end slot, something like 24-28 inches or 24-29 inches, so that anglers can concentrate effort on destroying the 2015 year class before they mature.

 

That way, New Jersey can do the most harm to the striped bass possible, killing as many of the surviving big spawners as possible while also maximizing their take of the 2015s that form the future of the stock.

 

And no, I'm not kidding.  The above changes reflect proposals that New Jersey provided to the Atlantic Striped Bass Technical Committee earlier this week.

 

I’m not at all surprised by this. The state with the biggest harvest is doing the absolute minimum. 
 

NJ and it’s anglers are a menace to healthy fisheries. And yes, this is 1,000% on the anglers. They could make a change but they don’t. Too many guys only concerned about the size of the pile of their dead fish. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 mins ago, CWitek said:

From what I'm hearing, NJ is thinking about reversing things, so anglers can use the bonus tag not to take an immature female, and thus kill it before it can spawn even once, but instead to target the bigger, most valuable spawners.

 

It would then adopt a low-end slot, something like 24-28 inches or 24-29 inches, so that anglers can concentrate effort on destroying the 2015 year class before they mature.

 

That way, New Jersey can do the most harm to the striped bass possible, killing as many of the surviving big spawners as possible while also maximizing their take of the 2015s that form the future of the stock.

 

And no, I'm not kidding.  The above changes reflect proposals that New Jersey provided to the Atlantic Striped Bass Technical Committee earlier this week.

 

Is there any response from the ASMFC on this? Does the Technical Committee give their reasoning as to why they would approve or disapprove a states submitted regulations?

I realize they don't do anything based on the science provided to them, but I'm curious how they skirt the science in their reasoning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 mins ago, browndrake said:

Is there any response from the ASMFC on this? Does the Technical Committee give their reasoning as to why they would approve or disapprove a states submitted regulations?

I realize they don't do anything based on the science provided to them, but I'm curious how they skirt the science in their reasoning.

The Technical Committee--which is made up solely of scientists and, unlike Management Boards, actually do a good job of following the science--has a very limited mandate.  Pursuant to the provisions of Addendum VI, all they are authorized to do, in this context, is determine whether the data provided by New Jersey in support of its proposal supports a finding that the proposed regulations will reduce New Jersey striped bass landings by 18% compared to landings in 2017.

 

Unfortunately, the Technical Committee does not decide whether the decision is appropriate to promote the long-term health of the stock.  That goes beyond their mandate when advising on conservation equivalency re Addendum VI.

 

There are good scientists on the Technical Committee, and they could do a very good job of managing striped bass.  The problem is, their role is strictly advisory.  The Management Board, largely composed of non-scientists, can reject that advice out of hand.

 

Which is why ASMFC doesn't have too much success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 mins ago, CWitek said:

Unfortunately, the Technical Committee does not decide whether the decision is appropriate to promote the long-term health of the stock.  That goes beyond their mandate when advising on conservation equivalency re Addendum VI.

 

There are good scientists on the Technical Committee, and they could do a very good job of managing striped bass.  The problem is, their role is strictly advisory.  The Management Board, largely composed of non-scientists, can reject that advice out of hand.

 

Which is why ASMFC doesn't have too much success.

Thanks CWitek.

THIS IS THE MAIN PROBLEM IN ALL THIS. Until this process is fixed, it will always be a problem for the "sustained health of striped bass with a direction towards a robust population"

 

If the ASMFC Management Board bases their decision on something other than the TC advise, it's a decision based on money and votes and political cleanliness.

 

They exist to keep businesses open that rely on harvesting SB and by doing so they avoid any negative political backlash/press from any industry/people that would fail financially if they chose to sustain a healthy fishery.

 

Thats why the ASMFC is set up the way it is. Thats why they fail in generating a healthy fishery.

Until the recreational catch and release for hire groups outnumber the recreational and commercial harvest for hire groups, the bass lose every time.

 

No one will care if your hobby is threatened.

 

But destroy someones livelihood or infringe upon large corporations and you will be sure to feel the backlash and be destroyed politically for it.

 

All this has been said before. I just needed to type it out myself so I remember how it plays out.

 

So how do you fix it?

Show there is a need to protect the for hire catch and release industry. If their numbers are so small compared to the for hire harvest industry, then I don't see how that would work.

 

You will never dismantle the ASMFC as long as it's controlled by political members looking out for their state and the families/businesses and in return their own existence.

Edited by browndrake
edit

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.