Jump to content

Amendment 7: Is it enough to rebuild Striped Bass Stock?

Rate this topic


The Riddler

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, CWitek said:

To the contrary, they ARE acting lawfully, because they have no legal obligation to follow the dictates of their own management plan.  In fact, Management Board members have no legal obligations at all.  Unlike federal fishery managers, who are bound by the provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and must end overfishing, rebuild overfished stocks in a time certain, follow the bestr available science, etc., the Management Board may exercise unfettered discretion, and face no consequences for their actions.  A 2nd Circuit court decision, in New York v. Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, handed down in 2010, found that ASMFC management actions are not subject to judicial review pursuant to the federal Administrative Procedures Act, so to date, no one has found a way to legally challenge or compel ASMFC action.

 

I take exception to the comment re "corruption," which assumes that there is some sort of quid pro quo underlying Management Board decisions.  I have seen nothing to make me believe that is the case.  Instead, because--again unlike members of federal fishery management councils--ASMFC board members are not paid for serving, but only have their expenses reimbursed, the people you get in the Governors' Appointee and Legislative proxy positions tend to be preinclined to certain positions.  Put a charter boat captain in an ASMFC slot, and that appointee/proxy is likely to vote in a way that benefits his and his friends' businesses.  The same thing is true of commercial fishermen, or tackle shop owners, or marina operators, etc.  They're not corrupt, in the sense that they're taking payoffs, they're just voting for their own interests.  We saw the same thing on the regional fishery management councils for the first 20 years of Magnsuon-Stevens, which is why Congres ultimately passed the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996, which forced the federal managers to act responsibly with respect to conservation.  We recently made an effort to do the same thing with the ASMFC, but the political environment in Washington wasn't right--too many other things in a COVID/immediately post-COVID world had legislative priority--and given what we're seeing in the midterms, the next couple years won't be favorable for any sort of pro-conservation legislation, either.

 

Given the current lack of legal and political leverage, your suggestion that "We all need to learn to call out and make issue of the corruption front and center" would be counterproductive. All that does is push peoiple into the arms of the for-hires and the rest of the pro-exploitation crowd.  What we need to do is engage, and get to know the people who make the deisions and, to the extent that they are not firmly opposed to conservation measures, give them reason to support our positions.  State fishery managers are the first place to start.  Although they tend to be caught between competing political currents, and are sometimes compelled to vote in a particular manner by the state administration, most of them went into the profession because they wanted to make a difference, and will vote the right way if they know that a good percentage of people will stand behind them and support their actions, particularly when they get crucified by the for-hires, commercials, tackle industry and bozos like Zeldin, as exemplified in the press release posted above.  Most New England and--at least for the moment--New York fishery managers are in a pretty good place right now, in part because of such outreach.  So are some in other states.  Working to find and develop contacts in the governor's office or higher up in the state natural resources agency doesn;t hurt, either, as that's what the other side also tries to do.   But when you get someone like Maryland Govermor Hogan, Virginia's Governor Youngkin, or--if things turn out badly--a Governor Zeldin, there's nothing that you can do to get a good result there.  Governor's appointees can go either way; some are good, some are bad, and some have open minds.  Again, reaching out to them and developing a relationship that makes them willing to listen to your arguments works far better than calling them out and creating a situation where they don't return your calls.  Legislative proxies are a third case; sometimes, the approach can be the same as governors' appointees, but with an additional twist--you an go to the Legislative Appointee him- or herself; most don't attend the meetings, although some do, but all will appoint a proxy, and if you can get the legislator's ear, he/she will make sure the proxy votes the same way.

 

Finally, and what really needs to be done, is more anglers need to get on the Management Board as Governors' Appointees or Legislative proxies.  There was a real window in New Jersey, where both positions were, for a time, open.  I'm not sure who wil fill/has filled them, but I'm willing to bet that very few anglers tried for the jobs.  Openings occur in other states as well.  Also, openings occasionally occur on advisory panels, which provide an opportunity to demonstrate your familiarity with the management process and create relationships with both ASMFC staff and management board members.  But, again, far too few people who profess to care about the health of striped bass and other stocks step up to the plate when an opening occurs.

Charles-

Let me ask you a question …… do you think the striped bass is an overfished species here on the east coast?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 mins ago, yogiiiboy said:

Charles-

Let me ask you a question …… do you think the striped bass is an overfished species here on the east coast?

Yes.

 

Based on the recent stock assessment update, the coastal migratory striped bass stock is currently overfished, although biomass is increasing and expected to rise above the biomass threshold sometime in 2023.

"I have always believed that outdoor writers who come out against fish and wildlife conservation are in the wrong business. To me, it makes as much sense golf writers coming out against grass.."  --  Ted Williams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 mins ago, CWitek said:

Yes.

 

Based on the recent stock assessment update, the coastal migratory striped bass stock is currently overfished, although biomass is increasing and expected to rise above the biomass threshold sometime in 2023.

Then why haven’t these organizations established some hard lines against the overfishing that has been occurring over the past few years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 mins ago, yogiiiboy said:

Then why haven’t these organizations established some hard lines against the overfishing that has been occurring over the past few years?

I said that the striped bass was overfished, meaning that SSB<SSBthreshold.

 

I did not say that overfishing was occurring, meaning that F>Fthreshold.

 

In fact, after the 2018 benchmark stock assessment was accepted for management use in April 2019, and found the striped bass stock to be experiencing overfishing, the Management Board acted quickly to end overfishing, issuing a draft Addendum VI to Amendment 6 to the Atlantic Striped Bass Interstate Fishery Management Plan, holding hearings on such Addendum during late summer, and adopting such addendum at the October 2019 Management Board meeting.  As a result of such action, F2021=0.14, well below the Fthreshold of 0.20, and even somewhat below the Ftarget of 0.17.

 

Overfishing has not occurred since 2019.

"I have always believed that outdoor writers who come out against fish and wildlife conservation are in the wrong business. To me, it makes as much sense golf writers coming out against grass.."  --  Ted Williams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CWitek said:

I said that the striped bass was overfished, meaning that SSB<SSBthreshold.

 

I did not say that overfishing was occurring, meaning that F>Fthreshold.

 

In fact, after the 2018 benchmark stock assessment was accepted for management use in April 2019, and found the striped bass stock to be experiencing overfishing, the Management Board acted quickly to end overfishing, issuing a draft Addendum VI to Amendment 6 to the Atlantic Striped Bass Interstate Fishery Management Plan, holding hearings on such Addendum during late summer, and adopting such addendum at the October 2019 Management Board meeting.  As a result of such action, F2021=0.14, well below the Fthreshold of 0.20, and even somewhat below the Ftarget of 0.17.

 

Overfishing has not occurred since 2019.

But the stocks are still at low levels…… bad spawn years, as well as, pollution have decimated classes of young.  It all attributes to the same thing……bass are declining!

 

I just think these organizations can do more…..but you can’t telll me that some of them are influenced by the fishing industry down there in Maryland and Virginia and the political component that comes along with it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 mins ago, yogiiiboy said:

But the stocks are still at low levels…… bad spawn years, as well as, pollution have decimated classes of young.  It all attributes to the same thing……bass are declining!

 

I just think these organizations can do more…..but you can’t telll me that some of them are influenced by the fishing industry down there in Maryland and Virginia and the political component that comes along with it!

No, the data suggests that, rather than declining, SSB is increasing.

 

But yes, Hogan’s Maryland and Youngkin’s Virginia are not good for striped bass.  Under those states’ previous governors, they were conservation advocates.

"I have always believed that outdoor writers who come out against fish and wildlife conservation are in the wrong business. To me, it makes as much sense golf writers coming out against grass.."  --  Ted Williams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 mins ago, CWitek said:

No, the data suggests that, rather than declining, SSB is increasing.

 

But yes, Hogan’s Maryland and Youngkin’s Virginia are not good for striped bass.  Under those states’ previous governors, they were conservation advocates.

Yes ……. Is there any way of having some type of Coalition where all the states are in unison with a migratory fish’s outlook?

Cause as you know, it’s useless if other coastal states are not implementing conservation type legislation to help with this…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 mins ago, yogiiiboy said:

Yes ……. Is there any way of having some type of Coalition where all the states are in unison with a migratory fish’s outlook?

Cause as you know, it’s useless if other coastal states are not implementing conservation type legislation to help with this…

Thats the ASMFC.  Unfortunately it is what it is. You can work within or against.  The later would require an act of congress. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, CWitek said:

It means data that will allow the New York for-hires to kill more striped bass and black sea bass.  

 

He was irritated that the ASMFC didn';t find that New York's striped bass were all offshore, and that the relatively Hudson stock, compared to the Chesapeake stock, did not allow New York to kill more fish.  He also wanted to change the bondaries of the EEZ to allow NY boats to fish for bass anywhere between Long Island and Block Island.

 

And he wanted New York to go out of compliance with the black sea bass rules.

 

I write a semi-weekly blog on fisheries issues, and the below is part of my response to Zeldin's press release.  I generally try not to bring my blog into my SOL posts, but this one is particularly relevant.  Apologies for the length

 

The guy is a disaster when it comes to fisheries management.  And he may well be our next governor.

I should've searched.  His relationship with NY RFHFA is very scary.  I respect a few of the captains I've met, but their interests couldn't be further from recreational or responsible for 'their' fishery. 

 

Edited by Bait Tailer
Hidden?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 mins ago, Bait Tailer said:

Thats the ASMFC.  Unfortunately it is what it is. You can work within or against.  The later would require an act of congress. 

Yeah …… and, personally, I don’t think the ASMFC is optimizing itself and frankly, is influenced by some of the political shenanigans down there in Maryland and Virginia….

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 mins ago, yogiiiboy said:

Yeah …… and, personally, I don’t think the ASMFC is optimizing itself and frankly, is influenced by some of the political shenanigans down there in Maryland and Virginia….

Don't forget NJ.  It drives me crazy too.  A nonbinding, unaccountable handshake agreement between states was the worst idea ever.  

 

Good people work hard to make it work but part of me would love if it imploded 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 mins ago, Bait Tailer said:

Don't forget NJ.  It drives me crazy too.  A nonbinding, unaccountable handshake agreement between states was the worst idea ever.  

 

Good people work hard to make it work but part of me would love if it imploded 

Exactly…..you know what unaccountably will get us!  It’s just the same old game…..I’m pessimistic about the whole thing…..all factors included, the stock is not at adequate levels and it’s been that way for several years now and I don’t seeing the ASMFC optimizing its’ authority in helping the cause. Charts keep giving us the grim reminder that things are looking bad in the horizon!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bait Tailer said:

I should've searched.  His relationship with NY RFHFA is very scary.  I respect a few of the captains I've met, but their interests couldn't be further from recreational or responsible for 'their' fishery. 

 

RFHFA is the lunatic fringe of the for-hire industry.  The local boatmen's/captains' groups are more or less trade organizations and do what they do to benefit their members, but RFHFA is something else.  Boimb throwers, with no redeeming social value.

"I have always believed that outdoor writers who come out against fish and wildlife conservation are in the wrong business. To me, it makes as much sense golf writers coming out against grass.."  --  Ted Williams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, yogiiiboy said:

Yes ……. Is there any way of having some type of Coalition where all the states are in unison with a migratory fish’s outlook?

Cause as you know, it’s useless if other coastal states are not implementing conservation type legislation to help with this…

The ASMFC is supposed to be that sort of coalition.  It's not, at least not completely, but what we've seen recently is New England, New York, Pennsylvania, and usually North Carolina, generally supporting bass conservation.  New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland and, more recently, Virginia push for exploitation.  The District of Columbia, NMFS, US Fish & Wildlife and, surprisingly often, the Potomac River Fisheries Commission are swing votes, with the first three having a pro-conservation lean and the latter leaning toward the other Chesapeake jurisdictions.  

 

That alignment is a big change from where things stood 10, or even 7 or 8, years ago.  But alignments change as governors and appointees change, so the future is tough to predict.

"I have always believed that outdoor writers who come out against fish and wildlife conservation are in the wrong business. To me, it makes as much sense golf writers coming out against grass.."  --  Ted Williams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bait Tailer said:

Don't forget NJ.  It drives me crazy too.  A nonbinding, unaccountable handshake agreement between states was the worst idea ever.  

 

Good people work hard to make it work but part of me would love if it imploded 

Yet, to be fair, things were worse before the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act gave it binding management authority in 1984.  Back then, even though the stock had collapsed, the states refused to work together to benefit the resource.  Instead, they all were looking out for their own fishermen, and lived in fear of restricting their local fishery and letting bass live, only to be killed when they entered a neighboring state's waters.  Giving ASMFC management authority put everyone on a level playing field and allowed them to craft effective management measures.

 

Where ASMFC went wrong was in 2000, when it gave the governors' and legislative appointees parity with the professional fishery managers.  In the past, when the professionals controlled the Management Board, decisions were more-or-less science based.  Giving the appointees equal voting authority actually put them in charge--there are two mostly amateur appointees for each fishery professional--and allowed politics and economic concerns to dominate the process.

"I have always believed that outdoor writers who come out against fish and wildlife conservation are in the wrong business. To me, it makes as much sense golf writers coming out against grass.."  --  Ted Williams

Link to comment
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


×
×
  • Create New...