stripedbassking

Striped Bass Comm Fishing Proposal for Mass...... Definitely not good

Rate this topic

952 posts in this topic

22 mins ago, liambrouillette said:

Probably caught your first striper this year or last, very obvious you have no respect for them. 

Not sure we have the same definition of "obvious".  I'd say of two guys, one who kills fish and feeds them to crabs after he gets a picture for facebook while the other kills them and feeds them to his kids, its "obvious" the second one has the most respect.

 

I caught my first striper in 1992.   I'm not particularly good at it, I've only caught a handful of "keepers" over the years.  But I've fished for them at least a little every year since.  This will be my first year commercial fishing and I've set my goals very low.  I want to fill my own freezer with enough fish to last the winter and then I also want to catch and sell at least one fish.  After that, everything is gravy.   And it will make me feel good knowing that somewhere out there someone is having striper for dinner, and I helped get it to them.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, liambrouillette said:

I think your in the wrong place bud this forum is for people who recreationally catch and release striped bass.... not sure how that slipped past you ??

Seriously?  I'm the only one of all the membership who's enjoyed striper for dinner?

Share this post


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

Not sure we have the same definition of "obvious".  I'd say of two guys, one who kills fish and feeds them to crabs after he gets a picture for facebook while the other kills them and feeds them to his kids, its "obvious" the second one has the most respect.

 

I caught my first striper in 1992.   I'm not particularly good at it, I've only caught a handful of "keepers" over the years.  But I've fished for them at least a little every year since.  This will be my first year commercial fishing and I've set my goals very low.  I want to fill my own freezer with enough fish to last the winter and then I also want to catch and sell at least one fish.  After that, everything is gravy.   And it will make me feel good knowing that somewhere out there someone is having striper for dinner, and I helped get it to them.  

Here’s a couple questions for you. 
When you fish for stripers to eat is the first fish you catch a keeper in the slot limit or are you releasing tons of shorts first? You are potentially feeding the crabs yourself with all the shorts you release. 
The second question is why in the hell would you want to become a commercial striper fishermen when the resource is crashing? I thought you just said that you care about the resource but yet you just want to fill your freezer and make a buck. Sounds like the only thing you care about is yourself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, MAArcher said:

How do?  The only data we have says catch and release kills more fish and they are wasted.  What’s the empirical evidence to the contrary?  I obviously don’t want to kill and waste fish.  Tell me how catch and release doesn’t do that?

Data states 9% mortality with catch a release. 50% mortality gut hooked from J hooks (Bait Fisherman). That number drops significantly with lures as they are rarely swallowed. Prime season for anglers is spring and fall, times of year with much lower mortality rates. Even at 9% I've killed far less stripe bass in my life time then anyone fishing for food who takes a fish a week.

 

And I'm not against taking dinner home but you can't deny the numbers.

 

I watched 5 guys take every blue fish they caught memorial weekend a total of 7. Another 5 guys released about the same amount of fish. Who's mortality rate is higher? 100% vs 9% of 7 fish. This isn't hypothetical, direct observation, All where using lures, apples to apples, Not to mention the same guys are there every weekend. Who is doing more damage to stocks?

Edited by nfnDrum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 mins ago, MAArcher said:

 

However, I take issue with two things.  One is that you don't address the core of my argument.  If you boil it down to just one dead fish at human hands, is it better it dies as food for me, or food for crabs?  Actually a more realistic/fair comparison is this; is it better that ten anglers each catch and release a fish and one dies after swimming off, after which one of the anglers buys an Asian tilapia fillet for dinner.  Or is it better if one angler catches one striper and goes home and eats it? 

 

I guess its a moral/philosophical question.   Answer it one way an it evidences you value money, economics and personal pleasure over whatever you would label catching and eating a fish.

 

The other issue is more of a question.  Rather than having US based aquiculture, what would you think about reversing the situation; you fish catch and release the diseased fish in pens, while I get to catch and eat the healthy wild fish?

 

Also, your economic waste scenario doesn't account for cost of carbon emissions getting corn and soy and menhaden from here to foreign nations for aquiculture fish food only to turn around and ship the grown fish back to the US.  Is that enough cost/waste to offset bait, tackle and tourist dollars?  IDK but its part of the equation. Also, your economics question doesn't account for the fact that most of us are still going to buy a fishing rod and go to the beach, it doesn't matter if you make me keep and eat the first fish I catch or let me catch and kill dozens of schoolies first.  

Taking these one at a time:

 

1)  Is it better that the bass becomes food for you or food for the crabs?

 

Neither.  From the bass' perspective, dead is dead.  It is no longer a part of the spawning stock, and cannot contribute to the future health of the stock.  How it died doesn't matter.  From an ecosystem perspective, I'd have to give the edge to the crabs.  You are part of an overpopulated species that is causing significant harm to ecosystems all over the planet, contribute to climate change, is causing the extinction of multiple species, etc.  Feeding you does little or nothing to benefit the ecosystem.  You are an apex predator/omnivore, that supports little in the food web save dust mites and mosquitoes, and will probably even deprive the ecosystem of the nutrients in your body after death, when such body will likely be buried or cremated (making its final contribution to atmospheric carbon).  Feeding the crabs sjupports the food web.and will support animals at higher trophic levels.

 

2)  Is it better that ten people catch and release the bass before one finally kills it, or one buys fish for dinner, on one catches and kills one bass?

 

Undoubtedly the former.  Ten people are brought closer to the natural world, enjoy outdoor recreation, and perhaps gain enough appreciation of the striped bass resource to try to conserve it, while the other just kills and eats the bass instead of eating something else.  Certainly greater overall public benefit from the former.  I also won't accept the notion that the alternative is Asian tilapia.  Could be Maine-grown mussels, Long Island clams, or Virginia oysters.  Or beef, lamb, or chicken.  Or US caught fish, including a fish that the same person caught, which is less of a conservation worry than striped bass, such as scup, black sea bass, or mahi.

 

3)  What would I think about fishing for farm-raised fish?

 

As I noted in another post in this thread, I regard hatcheries of any sort as a failure of fishery management.  The entire point of angling is to interact with the natural world.  Fishing for hatchery fish appeals to me as little as shooting preserve pheasants or high-fence deer.  Might be OK if all you want is food, but it isn't sport fishing.

 

4)  My catch-and-release scenario doesn't consider the carbon costs of importing seafood.

 

No, it doesn't.  But your argument against the economic benefits of such imports also ignores the benefits to those who farm the corn and soybeans used in fish meal, the income that helps to keep dying farm country communities alive, the income that flows to those who run the grain silos, the income to truckers who help ship the grain, the mechanics who fix the farm equipment, the farm hands's incomes, etc.  If you want to pull in external economic factors such as carbon costs, you have to consider the positive factors, too.

 

5) Finally, would people still buy fishig gear if they had to keep the first bass they caught and then quit?

 

Can't speak for others, but I wouldn't.  Going through all that time and trouble to fish for less than an hour on many days would be worth neither the associated costs nor the time.

Share this post


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

Here’s a couple questions for you. 
When you fish for stripers to eat is the first fish you catch a keeper in the slot limit or are you releasing tons of shorts first? You are potentially feeding the crabs yourself with all the shorts you release. 
The second question is why in the hell would you want to become a commercial striper fishermen when the resource is crashing? I thought you just said that you care about the resource but yet you just want to fill your freezer and make a buck. Sounds like the only thing you care about is yourself. 

Last year I only used big bait, live pogies.  I only fished a dozen times and caught a half dozen fish, all over 30".  I didn't even lay eyes on a short fish last year, so no, I didn't kill a single short.  The only ones I may have killed were the ones that were too big to keep.  But this year I have a commercial license, now I won't kill anything that won't be eaten.  Can you say the same?

 

Why in hell would you practice any sort of catch and release, knowing it isn't 0% mortality, if you care about the fish?  Sounds like you only care about how good a bent rod makes you feel.  If you'd quit that I could fill my freezer and not materially impact the stock.  Feeding my family healthy natural wild caught striper is fare more important than ten guys feeling bent rods.  Still waiting for you to explain how I'm wrong or any more selfish than you.  Hypocrisy is an ugly thing.  Carful now, don't look in a mirror.

Share this post


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

3)  What would I think about fishing for farm-raised fish?

 

As I noted in another post in this thread, I regard hatcheries of any sort as a failure of fishery management.  The entire point of angling is to interact with the natural world.  Fishing for hatchery fish appeals to me as little as shooting preserve pheasants or high-fence deer.  Might be OK if all you want is food, but it isn't sport fishing.

 

5) Finally, would people still buy fishig gear if they had to keep the first bass they caught and then quit?

 

Can't speak for others, but I wouldn't.  Going through all that time and trouble to fish for less than an hour on many days would be worth neither the associated costs nor the time.

Now that's how you have a discussion!  My laptop screen is dripping with reasonableness and now I'm actually going to have to spend some time thinking about things in a different way.

 

The only two points I have an immediate retort for are the two left above.

 

"The entire point of angling is to interact with the natural word".  Wouldn't you say that if I eat my catch I've interacted more deeply and meaningfully than you?  Also, as I've already stated, I don't consider fishing or hunting as sports and take offense to the term.  Adding "sport" to hunting and fishing is a modern byproduct of our ever increasing detachment from nature.  No one gets killed and eaten in a "sport" and there's nothing noble or admirably traditional about "sportfishing" or "sport hunting" from my perspective; they are derogatory terms.  

 

I don't think your answer to #5 is fully thought out.  If we put a moratorium on catch and release and striper populations bounced back, when we allowed recreational fishing again for catch and keep only, are you telling me that you wouldn't go fish and throw big lures to avoid schoolies knowing you have a chance at a meal sized fish before the day was done but it might take all day to get there?  You don't go out there now contented to catch shoolies all day do you?  You don't ever tie on a big lure, knowing you'll miss short fish, in hopes of catching something that can pull some drag?  If you size your tackle right you're not going to catch a fish within an hour every day and have the game called early, but you can still have some action.  And if you don't want to eat the fish yourself, find a food pantry to stop by on the way home.

Edited by MAArcher

Share this post


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

Now that's how you have a discussion!  My laptop screen is dripping with reasonableness and now I'm actually going to have to spend some time thinking about things in a different way.

 

The only two points I have an immediate retort for are the two left above.

 

"The entire point of angling is to interact with the natural word".  Wouldn't you say that if I eat my catch I've interacted more deeply and meaningfully than you?  Also, as I've already stated, I don't consider fishing or hunting as sports and take offense to the term.  Adding "sport" to hunting and fishing is a modern byproduct of our ever increasing detachment from nature.  No one gets killed and eaten in a "sport" and there's nothing noble or admirably traditional about "sportfishing" or "sport hunting" from my perspective; they are derogatory terms.  

 

I don't think your answer to #5 is fully thought out.  If we put a moratorium on catch and release and striper populations bounced back, when we allowed recreational fishing again for catch and keep only, are you telling me that you wouldn't go fish and throw big lures to avoid schoolies knowing you have a chance at a meal sized fish before the day was done but it might take all day to get there?  You don't go out there now contented to catch shoolies all day do you?  You don't ever tie on a big lure, knowing you'll miss short fish, in hopes of catching something that can pull some drag?  If you size your tackle right you're not going to catch a fish within an hour every day and have the game called early, but you can still have some action.  And if you don't want to eat the fish yourself, find a food pantry to stop by on the way home.

 

 

No, I don't believe that eating something makes an interaction more meaningful.

 

Understanding how a fish reacts to bait, current, water temperature and color, wind, tide, structure, etc., and learning to predict where it will be, and what lure it would react to (I graduated from fishing live bunker back in '74), and how to fish that lure in the varying conditions, ties me very closely to the world.  Killing and eating it?  Not much to be learned there.  

 

I can buy a fish and do the same thing. 

 

Hunting is a little different, because we can't avoid the kill there, although I've certainly turned down animals that I could have killed merely because I was looking for something different.  It's also different because once I get to the point where I've got the rifle up and my sights on the animal, it's as good as dead if I want it to be.  My woodcraft has gotten me to that point, and if I choose not to shoot, well, maybe it's possible to practice catch and release hunting, too.

 

Would I be happy to fish for big bass only, if I had to kill it?  No.  The kill would take all of the joy out of it for me.  I'd rather not fish at all if I knew that I had to condemn any bass that I caught to die.

 

In fact, I release big fish all of the time.  I've been known to run my boat to the canyons to release tuna and billfish.  Haven't killed a bluefin since 2006 (and that's because it was badly hooked), or a shark since 2000, although I run into quite a few makos and threshers over the course of the year.

 

I'll take a yellowfin or a bigeye once in a while, but most of the fish that I keep are the ones that are abundant and available--black sea bass, scup, dolphin, sea robin, blowfish, and such.

 

Bass, I treat the way Lee Wulff treated salmon, believing that such game fish are too valuable to be caught only once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 mins ago, MAArcher said:

Last year I only used big bait, live pogies.  I only fished a dozen times and caught a half dozen fish, all over 30".  I didn't even lay eyes on a short fish last year, so no, I didn't kill a single short.  The only ones I may have killed were the ones that were too big to keep.  But this year I have a commercial license, now I won't kill anything that won't be eaten.  Can you say the same?

 

Why in hell would you practice any sort of catch and release, knowing it isn't 0% mortality, if you care about the fish?  Sounds like you only care about how good a bent rod makes you feel.  If you'd quit that I could fill my freezer and not materially impact the stock.  Feeding my family healthy natural wild caught striper is fare more important than ten guys feeling bent rods.  Still waiting for you to explain how I'm wrong or any more selfish than you.  Hypocrisy is an ugly thing.  Carful now, don't look in a mirror.

I know for a fact I kill less with my C & R than you do if you’re eating every keeper you catch. 
Commercial fishing for bass is about as selfish as it gets. Killing a resource just to make a few bucks. It’s pathetic. 

Share this post


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

Taking these one at a time:

 

1)  Is it better that the bass becomes food for you or food for the crabs?

 

Neither.  From the bass' perspective, dead is dead.  It is no longer a part of the spawning stock, and cannot contribute to the future health of the stock.  How it died doesn't matter.  From an ecosystem perspective, I'd have to give the edge to the crabs.  You are part of an overpopulated species that is causing significant harm to ecosystems all over the planet, contribute to climate change, is causing the extinction of multiple species, etc.  Feeding you does little or nothing to benefit the ecosystem.  You are an apex predator/omnivore, that supports little in the food web save dust mites and mosquitoes, and will probably even deprive the ecosystem of the nutrients in your body after death, when such body will likely be buried or cremated (making its final contribution to atmospheric carbon).  Feeding the crabs sjupports the food web.and will support animals at higher trophic levels.

 

2)  Is it better that ten people catch and release the bass before one finally kills it, or one buys fish for dinner, on one catches and kills one bass?

 

Undoubtedly the former.  Ten people are brought closer to the natural world, enjoy outdoor recreation, and perhaps gain enough appreciation of the striped bass resource to try to conserve it, while the other just kills and eats the bass instead of eating something else.  Certainly greater overall public benefit from the former.  I also won't accept the notion that the alternative is Asian tilapia.  Could be Maine-grown mussels, Long Island clams, or Virginia oysters.  Or beef, lamb, or chicken.  Or US caught fish, including a fish that the same person caught, which is less of a conservation worry than striped bass, such as scup, black sea bass, or mahi.

 

4)  My catch-and-release scenario doesn't consider the carbon costs of importing seafood.

 

No, it doesn't.  But your argument against the economic benefits of such imports also ignores the benefits to those who farm the corn and soybeans used in fish meal, the income that helps to keep dying farm country communities alive, the income that flows to those who run the grain silos, the income to truckers who help ship the grain, the mechanics who fix the farm equipment, the farm hands's incomes, etc.  If you want to pull in external economic factors such as carbon costs, you have to consider the positive factors, too.

 

5) Finally, would people still buy fishig gear if they had to keep the first bass they caught and then quit?

 

Can't speak for others, but I wouldn't.  Going through all that time and trouble to fish for less than an hour on many days would be worth neither the associated costs nor the time.

OK.  #1:  Valid point; however, if you are going to take the highest rode and take into account human overpopulation (an issue I've thought about and agree with you on), allow me to then adjust my stance.   How would you argue for "sportfishing" against not killing fish at all?  As a member of the destructive over populated species, isn't the right thing to just stop killing fish for any form of human benefit?  

 

#2:  Your answer is flawed in that it doesn't recognize that the non-fish-eating-catch-and-release-only angler is still negatively impacting the environment.  If he's not eating a wild fish he caught himself, he's still eating something, what's the impact of that?  What if we all ate only Virginia oysters, what would happen to that population?  Wouldn't it be better if we spread our consumption out across all the available species, managing each to promote healthy stocks of all?  

 

#4: Two wrongs do not make a right.  The industrial food complex is a nightmare and will probably be the cause of population correction if not extinction.  Your argument here is like saying taking the machete away from the guy running around cutting people up isn't fair to the machete manufacturer.  

Share this post


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

I know for a fact I kill less with my C & R than you do if you’re eating every keeper you catch. 
Commercial fishing for bass is about as selfish as it gets. Killing a resource just to make a few bucks. It’s pathetic. 

Do the math.  I caught and ate two keepers last year.  What's 9% of the total number of fish you caught last year?  I'm suspecting you have a very loose grip of what constitutes a fact.

 

I haven't mentioned one time making money from fishing as a driving factor.  The reality is I'm not likely to even come close to the cost of licenses, never mind make money. 

 

Where is it you think your food comes from?

 

Denying people a living and healthy food because you want to play with a wild animal is fare and away more pathetic, by any measure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 mins ago, MAArcher said:

Do the math.  I caught and ate two keepers last year.  What's 9% of the total number of fish you caught last year?  I'm suspecting you have a very loose grip of what constitutes a fact.

 

I haven't mentioned one time making money from fishing as a driving factor.  The reality is I'm not likely to even come close to the cost of licenses, never mind make money. 

 

Where is it you think your food comes from?

 

Denying people a living and healthy food because you want to play with a wild animal is fare and away more pathetic, by any measure.

First of all I’m not killing 9% of fish. That’s an average of all styles of fishing.  I fish almost exclusively single hook soft plastics so my mortality rate is much lower. Almost every fish is release with nothing more than a small hole in its lip. My mortality rate is probably more like 1% or less. 
 

Why are you becoming a commercial fishermen if not for the money? Is it the cool thing to do?

 

“Denying people a living”, what a joke. There’s thousands of other ways to make a living without killing resources. 

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.