stripedbassking

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

Rate this topic

952 posts in this topic

55 mins ago, CWitek said:

Can't help but play the Devil's advocate here.

 

As some have already stated, Massachusetts commercial fishermen have a hard-poundage quota that is at least somewhat science-based.  Thus, they can at least argue that catching their entire quota will not harm the stock, and if they exceed their quota this year, they will have to pay back the overage in 2022.

 

At any rate, the last benchmark stock assessment found that the entire coastwide commercial fishery, with landings and dead discards combined, only causes 10% of overall striped bass fishing mortality.

 

On the other hand, there is no recreational quota at all, even though 90% of striped bass fishing mortality is attributable to anglers.  We only have a bag and slot limits, and seasons in some states, that when taken together have only a 41% probability of reducing fishing mortality back to the target level (thanks largely to special, allegedly "conservation equivalent" regulations adopted by New Jersey and Maryland.  

 

This year, the big 2014 (in the Hudson) and 2015 year classes will start moving into the 28-35" slot this year, and recreational landings are expected to spike as a result, and will continue to do so over the next couple of years.  

 

So my question for those who oppse the proposed Massachusetts regulations is this:  What meaures do you propose to keep recreational striped bass landings, in Massachusetts and elesewhere, from increasing from their already high (compared to commercial) levels this year, and what do you propose to hold anglers accountable--particularly in conservationally-equivalent New Jersey and Massachusetts--if they don't achieve an 18% landings reduction?

 

Because, in the end, it is anglers who do most of the harm.  The commercial fishery is only a small part of the problem

All good points as usual and I agree with them.  I am a business manager by trade and have spent a good amount of time in my career working for UPS in operations as well as supporting them as an industrial engineer.  You had to get results and if you didn't you were either demoted or later relieved of your duties.  At a very young age I was lucky enough to be mentored by someone who taught me most of the time it isn't a silver bullet that fixes all your issues but instead you address each one separately and as a result the issue as a whole is corrected.  I believe this can apply to this same problem.  There is less fish around which is why they cannot fill their quotas in the given time frame.  The answer shouldn't be to give them more time to deplete a resource that is in trouble.

 

I do realize the recs account for the vast majority of the issues here.  I was very much in favor of the 1 @ 36" which worked the last time and would like them to implement a tag system like they do for hunting.  Too many people are taking too many fish.  However, to answer your question my proposal would be to increase their landings reduction quota the following year by the amount they missed the previous year. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 mins ago, jps1010 said:

All good points as usual and I agree with them.  I am a business manager by trade and have spent a good amount of time in my career working for UPS in operations as well as supporting them as an industrial engineer.  You had to get results and if you didn't you were either demoted or later relieved of your duties.  At a very young age I was lucky enough to be mentored by someone who taught me most of the time it isn't a silver bullet that fixes all your issues but instead you address each one separately and as a result the issue as a whole is corrected.  I believe this can apply to this same problem.  There is less fish around which is why they cannot fill their quotas in the given time frame.  The answer shouldn't be to give them more time to deplete a resource that is in trouble.

 

I do realize the recs account for the vast majority of the issues here.  I was very much in favor of the 1 @ 36" which worked the last time and would like them to implement a tag system like they do for hunting.  Too many people are taking too many fish.  However, to answer your question my proposal would be to increase their landings reduction quota the following year by the amount they missed the previous year. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree almost everything have said. Tagging would have challenges, but it works in hunting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

What to propose....

 

personally, I no longer fish for striped bass or really much salt fishing in general. I can’t, in good conscience fish for bass any longer. Plus, the fishery is so piss poor at this point that it’s not worth the time or expense. 
 

Bigger picture, for hires need their own category with trip reporting and a hard cap with payback.
 

Pure rec,in season closures at peak summer months to help reduce mortality. Fish can’t be targeted at those times at all. Other times of the year cnr only. Eliminate treble hooks or no more than one treble per plug. Also, complete closure at spawning times. 
 

but nothing like that will ever happen. The asmfc is hellbent on destroying the bass stock. 

Edited by Drew C.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, CWitek said:

Can't help but play the Devil's advocate here.

 

As some have already stated, Massachusetts commercial fishermen have a hard-poundage quota that is at least somewhat science-based.  Thus, they can at least argue that catching their entire quota will not harm the stock, and if they exceed their quota this year, they will have to pay back the overage in 2022.

 

At any rate, the last benchmark stock assessment found that the entire coastwide commercial fishery, with landings and dead discards combined, only causes 10% of overall striped bass fishing mortality.

 

On the other hand, there is no recreational quota at all, even though 90% of striped bass fishing mortality is attributable to anglers.  We only have a bag and slot limits, and seasons in some states, that when taken together have only a 41% probability of reducing fishing mortality back to the target level (thanks largely to special, allegedly "conservation equivalent" regulations adopted by New Jersey and Maryland.  

 

This year, the big 2014 (in the Hudson) and 2015 year classes will start moving into the 28-35" slot this year, and recreational landings are expected to spike as a result, and will continue to do so over the next couple of years.  

 

So my question for those who oppse the proposed Massachusetts regulations is this:  What meaures do you propose to keep recreational striped bass landings, in Massachusetts and elesewhere, from increasing from their already high (compared to commercial) levels this year, and what do you propose to hold anglers accountable--particularly in conservationally-equivalent New Jersey and Massachusetts--if they don't achieve an 18% landings reduction?

 

Because, in the end, it is anglers who do most of the harm.  The commercial fishery is only a small part of the problem

Maintain the slot and Limit the recreational “keep” days to the same as commercial.  That includes charters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, CWitek said:

Can't help but play the Devil's advocate here.

 

As some have already stated, Massachusetts commercial fishermen have a hard-poundage quota that is at least somewhat science-based.  Thus, they can at least argue that catching their entire quota will not harm the stock, and if they exceed their quota this year, they will have to pay back the overage in 2022.

 

At any rate, the last benchmark stock assessment found that the entire coastwide commercial fishery, with landings and dead discards combined, only causes 10% of overall striped bass fishing mortality.

 

On the other hand, there is no recreational quota at all, even though 90% of striped bass fishing mortality is attributable to anglers.  We only have a bag and slot limits, and seasons in some states, that when taken together have only a 41% probability of reducing fishing mortality back to the target level (thanks largely to special, allegedly "conservation equivalent" regulations adopted by New Jersey and Maryland.  

 

This year, the big 2014 (in the Hudson) and 2015 year classes will start moving into the 28-35" slot this year, and recreational landings are expected to spike as a result, and will continue to do so over the next couple of years.  

 

So my question for those who oppse the proposed Massachusetts regulations is this:  What meaures do you propose to keep recreational striped bass landings, in Massachusetts and elesewhere, from increasing from their already high (compared to commercial) levels this year, and what do you propose to hold anglers accountable--particularly in conservationally-equivalent New Jersey and Massachusetts--if they don't achieve an 18% landings reduction?

 

Because, in the end, it is anglers who do most of the harm.  The commercial fishery is only a small part of the problem

Well said. Most of the commenters here want to further restrict the people that only kill 10% of the fish while ignoring those who kill 90% of the fish. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

56 mins ago, MakoMike said:

Well said. Most of the commenters here want to further restrict the people that only kill 10% of the fish while ignoring those who kill 90% of the fish. 

Careful - this guys wants your support to join a board overseeing our ground fish! 
 

I don’t believe your phony math. I have seen what a trawler can do. Kill more stripers in a sweep than I will my whole life. I bet you aren’t counting those fish towards the commercial kill are you?

Edited by ged

Share this post


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

Careful - this guys wants your support to join a board overseeing our ground fish! 
 

I don’t believe your phony math. I have seen what a trawler can do. Kill more stripers in a sweep than I will my whole life. I bet you aren’t counting those fish towards the commercial kill are you?

But the MA commercial fishery is rod & reel only.

Share this post


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

But the MA commercial fishery is rod & reel only.

Yup, but those fish swim to the Chesapeake and South in the winter where they are killed by other commercial fisherman. You do everything you can to blame recreational fisherman for the demise of the striped bess, yet you come in SOL and represent yourself as someone with a recreational voice, asking for help getting appointed to the New England Fisheries Council. 
 

I can’t make this up. You literally started a thread asking us to write letter a your supporting you because you “represent recreational fishing”. 
 

I will say this again, every commercial fisherman I know leaves in the morning hoping to kill their maximum limit of breeder stripers. I don’t know a single recreational fisherman that keeps a single day commercial limit in an entire year. Many recreational fisherman are strictly C&R for bass. 
 

According to your junk math and logic, if I buy a $30 commercial permit suddenly the fish I release will survive at a much higher rate than as a recreational fisherman. I mean, the table says that so it must be true. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There’s no good will to protect the fisheries from recreational to commercial fishermen period. Either go to regulations that have worked in the past or close down the fishery completely until it recovers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, PFallon said:

 

Reported landings for commercial striped bass have not reached the quota for the previous three years:

2018  89%

2019  67%

2020  52%

Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jps1010 said:

Too many people are taking too many fish.  However, to answer your question my proposal would be to increase their landings reduction quota the following year by the amount they missed the previous year. 

I think that this may backfire and it may lead to destroying fishery.

Lets say they missed quote by 25% this year so they will have 125% for next year

Now, they miss the quote again by 20% so 3rd year they will have 20% more but that would be another 25% on the 1st year.

Doing this, in the 4th year quota will be more than double than in the 1st year.

How that will will help?

 

Share this post


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


 

I don’t believe your phony math. I have seen what a trawler can do. Kill more stripers in a sweep than I will my whole life. I bet you aren’t counting those fish towards the commercial kill are you?

This is #1 killer and party boats catching 30+ pound fish and just throwing them back into the water hoping they revive themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 mins ago, Irishfire18 said:

This is #1 killer and party boats catching 30+ pound fish and just throwing them back into the water hoping they revive themselves.

I assume this is a NY/NJ thing. I have heard stories.  We had a debate in the MA forum if charters are commercial or recreational fishermen. 

Share this post


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

I assume this is a NY/NJ thing. I have heard stories.  We had a debate in the MA forum if charters are commercial or recreational fishermen. 

All I know is a lot of big fish were caught by the party boat fleet the past few years and you can’t revive a fish when you 5 feet above the water.    

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.