CWitek

Conservation equivalency under fire at ASMFC Striped Bass Management Board meeting

Rate this topic

369 posts in this topic

Just now, Roccus7 said:

Just got back.  What did they approve for Rhode Island?

All of the CE options, but there is a motion to reconsider being debated now.

Share this post


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

Believe it or not, this is actually going pretty well—so far, better than I expected.

I will agree there. I think I was letting my emotion get too involved and I was quick to only focus on negativity. With that said, I do side with with the CE being unilaterally done coastwide. 

 

Also, I thank you for all of your input on this site, I always look forward to seeing your contributions and appreciate the logic that you provide. 

Share this post


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

All of the CE options, but there is a motion to reconsider being debated now.

They approved all the options for RI, RI-A, RI-B, and RI-C?  WTH are they doing, playing games???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 min ago, Roccus7 said:

They approved all the options for RI, RI-A, RI-B, and RI-C?  WTH are they doing, playing games???

They made a motion to reconsider the Rhode Island vote because they forced NJ into 28-35. I think. I wish these guys would be identified by State when they speak, it would be easier to listen to.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 mins ago, westhavendave said:

Why does the guy want to re-consider Rhode Islands vote?

 

Because it included slots with top ends over 35”.  But the motion failed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 mins ago, westhavendave said:

They made a motion to reconsider the Rhode Island vote because they forced NJ into 28-35. I think. I wish these guys would be identified by State when they speak, it would be easier to listen to.

 

What exactly did they approve for RI?  I'm hearing a 40" cap, but what was the low end and was their the difference between For Hire and Other Recs??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 mins ago, Roccus7 said:

They approved all the options for RI, RI-A, RI-B, and RI-C?  WTH are they doing, playing games???

Yes.  They approved all three, but some had second thoughts and wanted to reconsider, but that motion failed.  So all three options remain possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to meet this whiny "Adam" and give him a 5 lb block of Velveeta to match the quality of his w(h)ine, or lack thereof...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 mins ago, westhavendave said:

They made a motion to reconsider the Rhode Island vote because they forced NJ into 28-35. I think. I wish these guys would be identified by State when they speak, it would be easier to listen to.

 

Yes.  But now NJ wants to come back with a slot with a higher top end, so they can be like Rhode Island.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 min ago, Roccus7 said:

What exactly did they approve for RI?  I'm hearing a 40" cap, but what was the low end and was their the difference between For Hire and Other Recs??

32-40 slot, and one had a 32-40, but 30-38 (I think, might have been 30-40”) for for-hires.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Roccus7 said:

What did NY get approved?

 

28-35 coast and Delaware River, 18-28” Hudson River, 26-38” commercial slot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 mins ago, Roccus7 said:

I'd like to meet this whiny "Adam" and give him a 5 lb block of Velveeta to match the quality of his w(h)ine, or lack thereof...

NJ guy I assume ?

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.