stripedbassking

Summer striped bass ASMFC meeting

Rate this topic

90 posts in this topic

37 mins ago, linesiderdemdnj said:

The fact that there are only a few guys commenting on this thread says a lot about where peoples priorities are in striper fishing. Guys would rather talk about their plugs and plug bags, their van staals, googans and how hard they sweat ODM over how the meetings are and the status of the fishery as a whole.  

Sad but true. 
 

Who’s getting the new VS?! Lolz. 

Share this post


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

The fact that there are only a few guys commenting on this thread says a lot about where peoples priorities are in striper fishing. Guys would rather talk about their plugs and plug bags, their van staals, googans and how hard they sweat ODM over how the meetings are and the status of the fishery as a whole.  

Because the mismanagement is rampant and the meetings are bull crap and "they" will do what their backers want them to regardless of facts and the public input..Anyone can comment; but input is a farce and nothing going to sway the people in charge anyway!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 mins ago, K Foley said:

Because the mismanagement is rampant and the meetings are bull crap and "they" will do what their backers want them to regardless of facts and the public input..Anyone can comment; but input is a farce and nothing going to sway the people in charge anyway!

Unfortunately true. 
 

but hey, they’re starting to show some concern now…

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, stripedbassking said:

And then you’ve got idiots down south saying we need to commercially take small fish for the plate and bigger sized fish for the grill…… wonder what they are smoking down there….

When I heard that justification for those harvesting sizes and how it's more "convenient" for restaurants during the meeting my head was spinning 

Share this post


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

Because the mismanagement is rampant and the meetings are bull crap and "they" will do what their backers want them to regardless of facts and the public input..Anyone can comment; but input is a farce and nothing going to sway the people in charge anyway!

Agreed on that for sure but you’d think there would be more conversation about it. Van staals are only good when there are fish to catch. But it seems like now people have resorted to taking pictures of them instead of fishing them. 

Share this post


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

Agreed on that for sure but you’d think there would be more conversation about it. Van staals are only good when there are fish to catch. But it seems like now people have resorted to taking pictures of them instead of fishing them. 

They're a clout icon in a lot of places. 

 

A lot of people who really cared about the striper fishery for the fish just left and went elsewhere. They didn't feel like waiting for an incompetent and failure prone management system to figure out and execute a solution over the span of 2 decades

Share this post


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

Unfortunately true. 
 

but hey, they’re starting to show some concern now…

They need something to screw up and that's going away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rollincoal said:

Its only "mismanagement," if you don't understand the actual goals of the managers.

Well then their goals suck! It's a joke.

Share this post


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

Agreed on that for sure but you’d think there would be more conversation about it. Van staals are only good when there are fish to catch. But it seems like now people have resorted to taking pictures of them instead of fishing them. 

Because it's BS and no one can do anything about it. You could put 1000 opposing people in those meetings and "they" will still do what they want.

Share this post


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

The fact that some people were talking about this at the meeting, and no one came back with a "management stability" retort, is also something new, and suggests that managers are becoming concerned.

This was a first that made me somewhat optimistic.  Suggests the letters and public comments sunk in and they're taking the worst case scenario seriously. 

 

I doubt moving the slot will be enough, but need to admit the CE vs board approved state-specific measures technicality left me with a very confused headache...

 

Is Luisi arguing that a new slot shouldn't effect MD's state-specific seasonal limits because the board already adopted state-specific measures under the rebuilding plan?  A lot of this might might have gone way over my head.  Couldn't they use the same logic to avoid seasonal harvest closures if we need those too?   

 

Sorry if this makes no sense.  I really appreciate the recap and insight as always. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 mins ago, Bait Tailer said:
12 mins ago, Bait Tailer said:

This was a first that made me somewhat optimistic.  Suggests the letters and public comments sunk in and they're taking the worst case scenario seriously. 

 

I doubt moving the slot will be enough, but need to admit the CE vs board approved state-specific measures technicality left me with a very confused headache...

 

Is Luisi arguing that a new slot shouldn't effect MD's state-specific seasonal limits because the board already adopted state-specific measures under the rebuilding plan?  A lot of this might might have gone way over my head.  Couldn't they use the same logic to avoid seasonal harvest closures if we need those too?   

 

Sorry if this makes no sense.  I really appreciate the recap and insight as always. 

 

What Luisi was arguing was that if the Management Board put state-specific management measures into the rebuilding plan, then it wouldn't constitute an impermissible conservation equiivalency, because conservation equivalency is, by definition, regulations that diverge from the original plan.

 

So if the Management Board says that Maryland gets 1 fish @ 18 inches for private anglers, and 2@18 for for-hires, with a certain set of seasonal closures, and does something else for Virginia, it's OK, but if the Board established a bay-wide standard of, say, 1 fish in a 25-28 inch slot, and Maryland then tried to get the 1@18/2@18 plus seasons, it would constitute an imprrmissible CE proposal.

 

What he said was probably techinically correct, but it elevates form over substande.  It didn't seem that the rest of the Management Board was convinced, although Dr. Justin Davis of Connectciut seemed to have some sympathy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 mins ago, K Foley said:

Well then their goals suck! It's a joke.

At best, the managers are generally trying to figure out the maximum amount of fish that can be harvested (without over harvesting.) not exactly a promising definition of conservation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 mins ago, rollincoal said:

At best, the managers are generally trying to figure out the maximum amount of fish that can be harvested (without over harvesting.) not exactly a promising definition of conservation

Yup. MSY how's it working so far? Their best is not good enough. Let's deplete the resource.

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