OnlyChunk

Striped Bass are Overfished

Rate this topic

235 posts in this topic

1 min ago, Drew C. said:

There’s really no politicians involved here. It’s the structure of the asmfc. They are not obligated to do anything at all. They have good data, at least good enough to make sound decisions but it’s ignored by the various reps due to plain ol greed. It’s a bunch of foxes guarding the henhouse. 

What capacity does the ASMFC have in setting regulations? I find it extremely difficult to adhere to the thought that " there are no politicians involved".  Quite frankly, I can't think of anythingthat a politician  is not involved in,  in one capacity or another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 mins ago, Drew C. said:

There’s really no politicians involved here. It’s the structure of the asmfc. They are not obligated to do anything at all. They have good data, at least good enough to make sound decisions but it’s ignored by the various reps due to plain ol greed. It’s a bunch of foxes guarding the henhouse. 

There is a portion of my thoughts that does mention disbanding commissions.  ......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 mins ago, Drew C. said:

There’s really no politicians involved here. It’s the structure of the asmfc. They are not obligated to do anything at all. They have good data, at least good enough to make sound decisions but it’s ignored by the various reps due to plain ol greed. It’s a bunch of foxes guarding the henhouse. 

DaveC: from the ASMFC web site:   Each state is represented on the Commission by three Commissioners: the director of the state’s marine fisheries management agency, a state legislator, and an individual appointed by the state’s governor to represent stakeholder interests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

16 mins ago, chisler said:

DaveC: from the ASMFC web site:   Each state is represented on the Commission by three Commissioners: the director of the state’s marine fisheries management agency, a state legislator, and an individual appointed by the state’s governor to represent stakeholder interests.

Key words:  an individual appointed by the states governor to represent stakeholder interests

 

Notice that there’s nothing about the resources interests. 
 

while there is certainly’politics’ at play here I wouldn’t say there are politicians. 
 

Ultimately, you have a commission manned by the states and they are not held to any sort of standard. They can come up with a good management plan (like amendment 6) that details virtually everything and when to how and how to act. But they are not obligated in any way to follow that plan. They can do whatever they want. And when they fail, no big deal, at least on their end. 

Edited by Drew C.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 min ago, Drew C. said:

Key words:  an individual appointed by the states governor to represent stakeholder interests

 

Notice that there’s nothing about the resources interests. 
 

while there is certainly’politics’ at play here I wouldn’t say there are politicians. 
 

Ultimately, you have a commission manned by the states and they are not held to any sort of standard. They can come up with a good management plan (like amendment 6) that details virtually everything and when to how and how to act. But they are obligated in any way to follow that plan. They can do whatever they want. And when they fail, no big deal, at least on their end. 

a State Legislator, and Governor are politicians: whether you "say" so or not.....

Share this post


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

Yup management and enforcement.  I had an eye opening discussion with a high ranking officer from NJDEP Bureau of Law Enforcement.  Repeated budget cuts and the area they required to cover make the job nearly impossible....there's a reason we hardly see them.  The other thing that really frustrates the officer is the groups that threaten to have him fired for over-enforcement.  These groups are financed by the tackle industry and have deep pockets....AND friends in politics.        

The tackle industry and those that make their money off fishing need to wake up. 

 

Right next to my gym is a local tackle shop.  I stopped in this morning since it was on the way to my car.  I figured I pick up a lure I have been meaning to get.  The owner jokingly said "is that all you're going to buy?"  I replied I would be in here every week if the fishing was good.  It's been horrible.  He agreed.

 

Share this post


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

DaveC: from the ASMFC web site:   Each state is represented on the Commission by three Commissioners: the director of the state’s marine fisheries management agency, a state legislator, and an individual appointed by the state’s governor to represent stakeholder interests.

Not trying to start a battle, but this is unfortunately true.  ....and throw a bunch of money into the mix!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

8 mins ago, Frede said:

Not trying to start a battle, but this is unfortunately true.  ....and throw a bunch of money into the mix!

I don't think there's any battle.  It's just that political influence is present; and it needs to be replaced while respective commissions are disbanded in order for methods to flow in a new direction. 

 

I think DaveC is much more knowledgeable than I on this matter.  I just see the problem with political regimes.

 

Edited by chisler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 mins ago, chisler said:

I don't think there's any battle.  It's just that political influence is present; and it needs to be replaced while respective commissions are disbanded in order for methods to flow in a new direction. 

 

I think DaveC is much more knowledgeable than I on this matter.  I just see the problem with political regimes.

 

So what ‘political’ influence is at play here ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The striper fishery is toast.

 

The only question is can they manage it back off the bottom of the crash as well as they did last time?

 

Even if they put a full moratorium in place that's only part of the issue.

 

Water quality and habitat destruction in the primary breeding sites and sufficient forage for them to eat are just as important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 mins ago, Drew C. said:

So what ‘political’ influence is at play here ?

I feel that long standing political figures develope relationships, and in extreme cases "partnerships" with acute stakeholders (lobby, buddy, commercial entity) to best serve their interests. The relationships become such that instead of it being a consideration to accept the acute stakeholders position, it becomes a matter of process.  Or, a position of norm.

Although, my knowledge of this commission is limited, other commissions I've viewed suffered from the problem of 'age and influence' by weighting special stakeholder's  input more than others.  It becomes hard to break up the relationships, and ultimately you need to just disband the commission.  

 

The influences of politicas are terribly deep, and it's a frustrating topic for me.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another threat to striped bass that gets almost no attention is matching your tackle to the size of the bass you have the potential to catch. Just this week some guy was telling me how he caught a 45 incher and after a long battle it took 5 minutes to revive and it floated off dead.  His tackle consisted of an old penn reel half full of braid and a 9' rod I had never heard of, I mentioned to him that his tackle was a little light for the type of fishing he was doing and he responded this combo right here has landed a 50 pounder in only 10 minutes. Now I've never caught a 50 pounder but I don't see one kicking off strong after a 10 minute fight not to mention it being taken out of the water to be measured and photographed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

3 hours ago, chisler said:

I feel that long standing political figures develope relationships, and in extreme cases "partnerships" with acute stakeholders (lobby, buddy, commercial entity) to best serve their interests. The relationships become such that instead of it being a consideration to accept the acute stakeholders position, it becomes a matter of process.  Or, a position of norm.

Although, my knowledge of this commission is limited, other commissions I've viewed suffered from the problem of 'age and influence' by weighting special stakeholder's  input more than others.  It becomes hard to break up the relationships, and ultimately you need to just disband the commission.  

 

The influences of politicas are terribly deep, and it's a frustrating topic for me.

 

 

You admit that your knowledge is limited, it is. 
 

The best way to  learn more is to follow Charles Witek’s blog. Pretty much everything that you want/need to know is right there. 
 

Keeping to striped bass, the structure of the asmfc realistically doesn’t allow for significant political influence. Each state gets 3 people but only one vote on the subject at hand. I don’t know how a particular state figures out how to actually vote. Could there be some politician involvement there, sure but it’s only one state and a simple majority rules. 
 

Right now you have 3 states firmly against any sort of conservation attempts - NJ, DE, and MD. They like to whine, bitch and complain a lot. But there only three states. The problem is that other than a very people know one has the balls or decency to stand up for the resource. And the scant few people that do still only make up 1/3 of any potential state vote. So if the state in question determines their vote by a simple majority the strong voice for the resource won’t matter. 
 

ME and NH are probably pro conservation but that’s about it. The others are swing states.
 

 

Can there be arrangements between the states - you vote my way on this and I’ll return the favor on another subject? Probably. Is that political? I don’t know. That’s a vague definition. It might not even get to the level of a politician. The commissioners will keep it between themselves. 
 

The asmfc and the process is broken beyond repair at this point. It either needs to be torn down or there needs to be a way to have them bound to the mag-stev act. That’s the only way that this gets fixed. 
 

The problem, even if that happens it’s still a long time until things could improve. 
 

If there was a complete and total moratorium put in place today (that means no comm fishing, no rec fishing, not even cnr), given the life cycle of bass, it would take 6-8 years to see any improvement on the coast. And that’s only of reproduction was good. The problem is, it hasn’t been good at all. There’s very few fish out there to help rebuild. 

Regarding the past moratorium, there never really was one. Some states had a moratorium but some still allowed fishing. For all practical purposes there was a functional moratorium- there simply wasn’t many fish the catch. Getting a complete moratorium today? No way in hell that can happen. 

 

Summarizing, Bass are screwed for a long time. 

Edited by Drew C.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, chisler said:

I feel that long standing political figures develope relationships, and in extreme cases "partnerships" with acute stakeholders (lobby, buddy, commercial entity) to best serve their interests. The relationships become such that instead of it being a consideration to accept the acute stakeholders position, it becomes a matter of process.  Or, a position of norm.

Although, my knowledge of this commission is limited, other commissions I've viewed suffered from the problem of 'age and influence' by weighting special stakeholder's  input more than others.  It becomes hard to break up the relationships, and ultimately you need to just disband the commission.  

 

The influences of politicas are terribly deep, and it's a frustrating topic for me.

 

 

So, just to play devil’s advocate, let’s say the ASMFC is disbanded, then who manages the fisheries? Is it then just all out chaos?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Drew C. said:

You admit that your knowledge is limited, it is. 
 

The best way to  learn more is to follow Charles Witek’s blog. Pretty much everything that you want/need to know is right there. 
 

Keeping to striped bass, the structure of the asmfc realistically doesn’t allow for significant political influence. Each state gets 3 people but only one vote on the subject at hand. I don’t know how a particular state figures out how to actually vote. Could there be some politician involvement there, sure but it’s only one state and a simple majority rules. 
 

Right now you have 3 states firmly against any sort of conservation attempts - NJ, DE, and MD. They like to whine, bitch and complain a lot. But there only three states. The problem is that other than a very people know one has the balls or decency to stand up for the resource. And the scant few people that do still only make up 1/3 of any potential state vote. So if the state in question determines their vote by a simple majority the strong voice for the resource won’t matter. 
 

ME and NH are probably pro conservation but that’s about it. The others are swing states.
 

 

Can there be arrangements between the states - you vote my way on this and I’ll return the favor on another subject? Probably. Is that political? I don’t know. That’s a vague definition. It might not even get to the level of a politician. The commissioners will keep it between themselves. 
 

The asmfc and the process is broken beyond repair at this point. It either needs to be torn down or there needs to be a way to have them bound to the mag-stev act. That’s the only way that this gets fixed. 
 

The problem, even if that happens it’s still a long time until things could improve. 
 

If there was a complete and total moratorium put in place today (that means no comm fishing, no rec fishing, not even cnr), given the life cycle of bass, it would take 6-8 years to see any improvement on the coast. And that’s only of reproduction was good. The problem is, it hasn’t been good at all. There’s very few fish out there to help rebuild. 

Regarding the past moratorium, there never really was one. Some states had a moratorium but some still allowed fishing. For all practical purposes there was a functional moratorium- there simply wasn’t many fish the catch. Getting a complete moratorium today? No way in hell that can happen. 

 

Summarizing, Bass are screwed for a long time. 

Not quite true. The previous rebuilding was done on the back of the 1982 year class, which was protected by the 36 inch limit until they got a chance to spawn 3 or 4 times before  they could be killed. We have a similar opportunity today based on the 2015 year class, which is why the tech. Committee and the advisory panel are so concerned with protecting that year class. 

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   1 member