stripedbassking

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

Rate this topic

952 posts in this topic

9 mins ago, jps1010 said:

The fishery was even worse then than it is now.  So to address this some states implemented a moratorium.  Others had implemented the 1 @ 36".  The more restrictive measures are what brought back this fishery.  Eliminating C&R wasn't one of them.  There is no need to recreate the wheel.  The issue is we allowed history to repeat itself by not implementing more restrictive measures sooner.

 

By the way, I am not opposed to commercial fishing.  I don't think they were the cause for this latest downfall.  The recs, who fought lighter regs are.

I would have to look at all the data from back then.  how much of the recovery was due to improved environmental conditions rather than the 36" limit?  How many fishermen left the fishery because it was too hard to catch a 36" fish?

 

Why wouldn't you improve a wood spoke wagon wheel with a nice polished aluminum one that can do the job hundreds of times better?

 

What is you're suggestion to fix the situation?  Eliminate catch and release to save two million fish a year or eliminate commercial fishing to save 250 thousand?  If your answer is to eliminate commercial fishing and continue to allow the wasting of 2 million fish a year, then you are against commercial fishing, no?

Share this post


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

We need diversity.  Monoculture is a bad idea and can lead to catastrophic problems.   For every stiper not eaten, there is something else that is, and it probably isn't a sustainably wild caught fish, that means their most likely was a higher negative environmental impact for that meal.  Research the modern agribusiness.  Its important to eat striper just because its not that.  

 

You say eat another fish, then that puts all the pressure on another species and drives that one into decline, and then we switch and drive another into decline.  We need to spread out the pressure as much as we can.  So if the stiped bass fishery can sustain some level of mortality right now, then we should use it.  Again, don't confuse this with advocacy for fishing striper into extinction, that's not at all what I'm saying.

Wrong there are literally tons of other species that would be more ethically consumed than stripers, you are obviously in denial of their population. Blackfish, porgys, and even weakfish are more numerous than they have been and years would be much more sustainable for everyone to eat those instead. 

Share this post


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

 

What is you're suggestion to fix the situation?  Eliminate catch and release to save two million fish a year or eliminate commercial fishing to save 250 thousand?  If your answer is to eliminate commercial fishing and continue to allow the wasting of 2 million fish a year, then you are against commercial fishing, no?

Or...eliminate all keeping of bass, commercial and rec, which would have the biggest impact. But you don't like that option so you don't even consider it. 

Share this post


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

We need diversity.  Monoculture is a bad idea and can lead to catastrophic problems.   For every stiper not eaten, there is something else that is, and it probably isn't a sustainably wild caught fish, that means their most likely was a higher negative environmental impact for that meal.  Research the modern agribusiness.  Its important to eat striper just because its not that.  

 

You say eat another fish, then that puts all the pressure on another species and drives that one into decline, and then we switch and drive another into decline.  We need to spread out the pressure as much as we can.  So if the stiped bass fishery can sustain some level of mortality right now, then we should use it.  Again, don't confuse this with advocacy for fishing striper into extinction, that's not at all what I'm saying.

Great strawman you've attempted to construct!  There is zero need to eat stripers.    Your leap of logic from "if you don't eat a striper" to "you are causing a higher negative environmental impact", is grasping.  You insist on avoiding the obvious fact that you have no legitimate reason to kill stripers other than you want to satisfy your palate.  Please don't try and convince us that you purposely kill them in order to save us from ourselves.

Share this post


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

I don't think you're a scum bag but I think you have a strange view of striped bass. You say you've kept 4 fish all season, yet you call yourself a commercial fisherman because you decided to get yourself a commercial license, even though those 4 fish aren't really helping you pay the bills. So you're essentially a recreational fisherman who likes to eat striped bass and you got a commercial license in order to legally keep more fish than you would be allowed to with a rec license. 

 

 

I do have a different point of view.   As I've explained, I don't think we should allow any commercial fisherman to be 100% dependent on killing fish to survive.  That's what destroys fisheries, pitting the needs of humans against the needs of a lowly fish that lives in the ocean and hardly anyone thinks about on a day to day basis.

 

And now I've said it a stupid amount of times, I didn't get a commercial license to keep more fish than allowed, I got it because I didn't want to waste any fish, not one.   So now I can fish with big bait, avoid small fish, and keep the first fish I catch over 28".   That's why I got the license.  The reason I'll keep getting the license is because I love the idea of feeding other people fresh wild caught fish.  Who wouldn't want to go out and have all the fun of catching fish, something we all agree is a blast, and then on top of that, I get to make other people feel good and go "Yum" when they grill up the fish I provided them.    

Share this post


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

 

I do have a different point of view.   As I've explained, I don't think we should allow any commercial fisherman to be 100% dependent on killing fish to survive.  That's what destroys fisheries, pitting the needs of humans against the needs of a lowly fish that lives in the ocean and hardly anyone thinks about on a day to day basis.

 

And now I've said it a stupid amount of times, I didn't get a commercial license to keep more fish than allowed, I got it because I didn't want to waste any fish, not one.   So now I can fish with big bait, avoid small fish, and keep the first fish I catch over 28".   That's why I got the license.  The reason I'll keep getting the license is because I love the idea of feeding other people fresh wild caught fish.  Who wouldn't want to go out and have all the fun of catching fish, something we all agree is a blast, and then on top of that, I get to make other people feel good and go "Yum" when they grill up the fish I provided them.    

I know, I know...you believe your 100% mortality rate is better than a 9% mortality rate for C&R. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jeff270 said:

Great strawman you've attempted to construct!  There is zero need to eat stripers.    Your leap of logic from "if you don't eat a striper" to "you are causing a higher negative environmental impact", is grasping.  You insist on avoiding the obvious fact that you have no legitimate reason to kill stripers other than you want to satisfy your palate.  Please don't try and convince us that you purposely kill them in order to save us from ourselves.

Maybe there's no arguing with simple minds.  Or are you just in denial?   I don't believe its because you're dim whited.  So lets try again.  What happens if I don't eat a striper?  I don't loose a pound, I eat something else.  What happens if that something else is a beef steak?  The cow has to be grown, probably in Texas.  The cow is probably fattened up on corn, where did the corn come from?  Probably Iowa.  How did the corn get from Iowa to Texas?  On an 18 wheeler burning diesel or rail car.  Once the cows fat where does it go?  On a rail car to Colorado to be slaughtered.  Once its slaughtered how does it get to Massachusetts?  More 18 wheelers and rail cars, now refrigerated and consuming more energy.  When the cow was being fattened in the feed lot, where did all its $hit go?  In a manure lagoon.  What happened when there was a rain storm?  It overflowed the manure lagoon, which ran off into a trout stream and killed it.   How did Iowa grow enough corn to feed the cows?  They used poison coated seeds that killed all the wildlife that ate them.  They sprayed the fields with weed killer that gave people cancer and killed all the bees so they couldn't pollinate our vegetable crops.  Follow the logic here?  There is a desperate need to eat striper so we depend less on modern agribusiness.   

Share this post


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

I know, I know...you believe your 100% mortality rate is better than a 9% mortality rate for C&R. 

Let me fix that for you, I believe every one fish I kill and eat is better than every one fish a C&R fisherman feeds to the crabs.

Share this post


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

I agree that those uneducated anglers that cause complete destruction

1 hour ago, liambrouillette said:

I think what your not getting is that the 9% is an average for every recreational angler. I bet 80% of the anglers on this forum are competent enough to have a release mortality below 2-3%. While lots of people who are just getting into the sport/ use buckets and sand spikes for their rod probably have a 15-20% mortality rate, why aren't u attacking them. 

shouldn't be allowed to fish, no one likes them either! 

Sounds like get rid of them more fish for me.

 

 I bet 80% of the anglers on this forum are competent enough to have a release mortality below 2-3%.

 

Creating your narrative, nice job.

Share this post


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

 

I do have a different point of view.   As I've explained, I don't think we should allow any commercial fisherman to be 100% dependent on killing fish to survive.  That's what destroys fisheries, pitting the needs of humans against the needs of a lowly fish that lives in the ocean and hardly anyone thinks about on a day to day basis.

 

And now I've said it a stupid amount of times, I didn't get a commercial license to keep more fish than allowed, I got it because I didn't want to waste any fish, not one.   So now I can fish with big bait, avoid small fish, and keep the first fish I catch over 28".   That's why I got the license.  The reason I'll keep getting the license is because I love the idea of feeding other people fresh wild caught fish.  Who wouldn't want to go out and have all the fun of catching fish, something we all agree is a blast, and then on top of that, I get to make other people feel good and go "Yum" when they grill up the fish I provided them.    

Or you could just learn to revive and release a fish properly and not kill them and have no “WASTE” as you call it. 

Share this post


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

Maybe there's no arguing with simple minds.  Or are you just in denial?   I don't believe its because you're dim whited.  So lets try again.  What happens if I don't eat a striper?  I don't loose a pound, I eat something else.  What happens if that something else is a beef steak?  The cow has to be grown, probably in Texas.  The cow is probably fattened up on corn, where did the corn come from?  Probably Iowa.  How did the corn get from Iowa to Texas?  On an 18 wheeler burning diesel or rail car.  Once the cows fat where does it go?  On a rail car to Colorado to be slaughtered.  Once its slaughtered how does it get to Massachusetts?  More 18 wheelers and rail cars, now refrigerated and consuming more energy.  When the cow was being fattened in the feed lot, where did all its $hit go?  In a manure lagoon.  What happened when there was a rain storm?  It overflowed the manure lagoon, which ran off into a trout stream and killed it.   How did Iowa grow enough corn to feed the cows?  They used poison coated seeds that killed all the wildlife that ate them.  They sprayed the fields with weed killer that gave people cancer and killed all the bees so they couldn't pollinate our vegetable crops.  Follow the logic here?  There is a desperate need to eat striper so we depend less on modern agribusiness.   

The difference is cows aren’t going extinct. Your logic is flawed in so many ways. 

Share this post


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

How many fishermen left the fishery because it was too hard to catch a 36" fish?

 

 

This is what we want

 

1 hour ago, MAArcher said:

 

What is you're suggestion to fix the situation?  Eliminate catch and release to save two million fish a year or eliminate commercial fishing to save 250 thousand?  

Eliminating catch and release does nothing

Share this post


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

Maybe there's no arguing with simple minds.  Or are you just in denial?   I don't believe its because you're dim whited.  So lets try again.  What happens if I don't eat a striper?  I don't loose a pound, I eat something else.  What happens if that something else is a beef steak?  The cow has to be grown, probably in Texas.  The cow is probably fattened up on corn, where did the corn come from?  Probably Iowa.  How did the corn get from Iowa to Texas?  On an 18 wheeler burning diesel or rail car.  Once the cows fat where does it go?  On a rail car to Colorado to be slaughtered.  Once its slaughtered how does it get to Massachusetts?  More 18 wheelers and rail cars, now refrigerated and consuming more energy.  When the cow was being fattened in the feed lot, where did all its $hit go?  In a manure lagoon.  What happened when there was a rain storm?  It overflowed the manure lagoon, which ran off into a trout stream and killed it.   How did Iowa grow enough corn to feed the cows?  They used poison coated seeds that killed all the wildlife that ate them.  They sprayed the fields with weed killer that gave people cancer and killed all the bees so they couldn't pollinate our vegetable crops.  Follow the logic here?  There is a desperate need to eat striper so we depend less on modern agribusiness.   

Stop, you are starting to sound foolish. There is no desperate need to eat stripers.  Plenty of options out there that won't adversely impact a species that is in trouble.  Your premise that you are doing this to save us from ourselves is lame.  If you are concerned about the impact of livestock on the environment, pick something else.  You act as if stripers are the only viable alternative to big agriculture.  In reality, they are arguably one of the worst choices because the stocks are in trouble.

Share this post


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

Wrong there are literally tons of other species that would be more ethically consumed than stripers, you are obviously in denial of their population. Blackfish, porgys, and even weakfish are more numerous than they have been and years would be much more sustainable for everyone to eat those instead. 

How many blackfish, porgys and weakfish do you catch from the beaches of Plum Island?

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.