Jump to content

BSB. What's the reason for the closure?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

To allow for an earlier opening.

 

Regulations are always a combination of season length, minimum (and sometimes maximum) size, and bag limit, which are combined to give anglers and the angling industry something close to what they might want.

 

A season that ran from the current start to the current finish without a midseason closure would require the bag limit to be cut or the size limit to be increased.  The only alternatives are to start it later, end it sooner, or have a mid-season closure. Connecticut chose the last option.

 

My guess is that the shops and/or for-hire boats wanted the early opening so that their bottom-fishing customers would have something to fish for before the fluke began to be caught in any sort of numbers.  Once the fluke are in strong--or at least as strong as they're going to get at current population levels--the closure has less impact on the industry's bottom line.

"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

9 mins ago, z-man said:

I wonder how many people actually follow this mid season closure? I’m sure a ton of people don’t even know it exists, forgot about it or just don’t care. 

That's a ridiculous mid season closure because it's only closed for people who run their own boats - the folks charging people to fish for boat limits twice a day can fish right through it. And they get two bonus fish per person per trip in the second part of the season. That doesn't feel equitable at all.

Show someone how to catch striped bass and they'll be ready to fish anywhere.
Show someone where to go striped bass fishing and you'll have a desperate report chaser with loose lips.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 mins ago, TimS said:

That's a ridiculous mid season closure because it's only closed for people who run their own boats - the folks charging people to fish for boat limits twice a day can fish right through it. And they get two bonus fish per person per trip in the second part of the season. That doesn't feel equitable at all.

I doubt there’s even many 16”+ keepers out there anyways. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/23/2024 at 7:51 AM, CWitek said:

To allow for an earlier opening.

 

Regulations are always a combination of season length, minimum (and sometimes maximum) size, and bag limit, which are combined to give anglers and the angling industry something close to what they might want.

 

A season that ran from the current start to the current finish without a midseason closure would require the bag limit to be cut or the size limit to be increased.  The only alternatives are to start it later, end it sooner, or have a mid-season closure. Connecticut chose the last option.

 

My guess is that the shops and/or for-hire boats wanted the early opening so that their bottom-fishing customers would have something to fish for before the fluke began to be caught in any sort of numbers.  Once the fluke are in strong--or at least as strong as they're going to get at current population levels--the closure has less impact on the industry's bottom line.

 

 

I could have sworn that the justification was to protect their spawning - this is when they're all schooled up in deep water doing their thing, isn't it?  I remember thinking it was odd that CT would close to protect the spawn but NY would open on the same day.  If it's just to extend the season it doesn't make a ton of sense.....why close for 2 weeks during good fishing just to open 2 weeks earlier when the fishing generally sucks?

I've done stuff I ain't proud of, and the stuff I am proud of is disgusting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EBHarvey said:

 

 

I could have sworn that the justification was to protect their spawning - this is when they're all schooled up in deep water doing their thing, isn't it?  I remember thinking it was odd that CT would close to protect the spawn but NY would open on the same day.  If it's just to extend the season it doesn't make a ton of sense.....why close for 2 weeks during good fishing just to open 2 weeks earlier when the fishing generally sucks?

The spawn is fairly drawn out.  New York used to start the season in July to try to avoid the spawn, but we still caught a lot of fish with roe/milt.  Depending on who you talk to, it starts sometime in May and runs into July, although at the Council meetings, at least one charter boat operator from New Jersey claimed that, based on the eggs and roe in the fish he caught, it went on all summer.

 

But the spawn definitely extends far beyond the short Connecticut closure.

 

I'm not going to claim The Fisherman magazone as authority for anything, but this is its take:

 

Connecticut fisheries managers decided to extend their creative solutions to the sea bass overharvest through the 2024 season. After NOAA dropped the hammer on a coastwide overharvest in 2022, lawmakers in Connecticut used some Yankee ingenuity to weave a sea bass season through the year without having to drop bag limits or increase minimum size limits. The trick was closing the season for two weeks at the beginning of the summer.

 

This closure took effect on June 24 and runs through July 7, with the season reopening on July 8. After reopening, the fishery will remain open through November 28. This closure will not affect party and charter boats. The for-hire fleet will be allowed to continue fishing through the recreational closure and, later in the season, they will also enjoy a bump in bag limit to seven fish starting September 1. In addition to the fall bag limit boost, for-hire boats will be allowed to continue fishing for sea bass through December 31.

 

If you really want to get in on some sea bass fishing in Connecticut waters during the closure, you’ll have to fish aboard a licensed party or charter boat, please consider leafing through our reports section and taking a trip with any of our affiliated captains. As they say, the best way to learn a fishery is to “go with a pro”. Otherwise, you’ll have to wait until the season reopens on July 8.

 

"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

On 6/23/2024 at 10:57 AM, TimS said:

That's a ridiculous mid season closure because it's only closed for people who run their own boats - the folks charging people to fish for boat limits twice a day can fish right through it. And they get two bonus fish per person per trip in the second part of the season. That doesn't feel equitable at all.

The for-hires' concept of "equitable" is about the same as a three-year-old's.

 

If they dodn't get what they want, it's inequitable, and the managers don';t love them.  If they get something no one else gets, life is perfectly fair.

"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

On 6/23/2024 at 10:44 AM, z-man said:

I wonder how many people actually follow this mid season closure? I’m sure a ton of people don’t even know it exists, forgot about it or just don’t care. 

A lot of anglers will fish right through it.  People often forget about mid-season closures.  New York DEC does its best to avoid them for that reason, among others.

"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, EBHarvey said:

 

 

I could have sworn that the justification was to protect their spawning - this is when they're all schooled up in deep water doing their thing, isn't it?  I remember thinking it was odd that CT would close to protect the spawn but NY would open on the same day.  If it's just to extend the season it doesn't make a ton of sense.....why close for 2 weeks during good fishing just to open 2 weeks earlier when the fishing generally sucks?

If the goal was to protect the stocks, they wouldn't allow for hires to increases their bag limit while keeping private boaters out of the fishery :read: It's a fish grab....it's one of the main reasons why we don't have "gamefish status". "They" want commercials out of the fishery...but not to conserve striped bass, but to be able to kill more themselves. This kind of inequity is amazing these days...who fights for this kind of nonsense? They are the enemy :wave:

 

Show someone how to catch striped bass and they'll be ready to fish anywhere.
Show someone where to go striped bass fishing and you'll have a desperate report chaser with loose lips.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 mins ago, CWitek said:

This closure will not affect party and charter boats. The for-hire fleet will be allowed to continue fishing through the recreational closure and, later in the season, they will also enjoy a bump in bag limit to seven fish starting September 1.

Seriously? In this day and age of equity, how does a suggestion like this even pass the most basic scrutiny, long before it gets voted on :dismay:

Show someone how to catch striped bass and they'll be ready to fish anywhere.
Show someone where to go striped bass fishing and you'll have a desperate report chaser with loose lips.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 mins ago, CWitek said:

The for-hires' concept of "equitable" is about the same as a three-year-old's.

 

If they dodn't get what they want, it's inequitable, and the managers don';t love them.  If they get something no one else gets, life is perfectly fair.

This is absurd...and supported only by the folks taking money for advertising. How do normal people vote for this garbage? I thought "for hires" were on the same team as recreational anglers? Recreational anglers always defend the for hires - don't they know the for hires could care less about recreational anglers and will sell them out for a few more fish they get to kill?

 

I thought the RFA was done? This feels very RFA-ish....

Show someone how to catch striped bass and they'll be ready to fish anywhere.
Show someone where to go striped bass fishing and you'll have a desperate report chaser with loose lips.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's pretty ridiculous that they get to fish right through the closure.  So for the next few weeks a NY party boat can come fish a reef right off the beach in CT but a CT resident can't.  How the **** is that fair?

I've done stuff I ain't proud of, and the stuff I am proud of is disgusting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 min ago, TimS said:

Seriously? In this day and age of equity, how does a suggestion like this even pass the most basic scrutiny, long before it gets voted on :dismay:

We have it in far too many fisheries.  For example,

 

Bluefish bag limit is 5 for for-hires, 3 for the rest of us.  

 

For-hires get a "bonus" scup season in September and October (spring in Massachusetts) that allows them a significantly larger bag limit.

 

Federal bluefin tuna regulations give private boats two school fish, but give charters three, and party boats even more.

 

Various states have other sector-specific rules for some species.

 

We came pretty close to having "sector separation" for striped bass in Addendum II; the Management Board vote doesn't really reflect the amount of support it had among Board members; however, the pro-sector separation members only dominated in a few states.

 

This is going to be the big fisheries debate for much of the remainder of the decade.  The Mid-Atlantic council is looking at sector separation as part of its "recreational reform" agenda, and given that the council's recreational members almost all come out of the for-hire industry, and that the commercials view them as fellow watermen, I suspect that it will ultimately happen.  Rhode Island traditionally pushes hard for it at the ASMFC, with Jason McNamee a big supporter and Rick Bellevance constantly prodding him to take action.

 

As I noted before, "equity" is in the eye of the beholder.  You rarely see the kid who gets the bigger piece of the cake cry that folks were being unfair.  And given that the recreational seats on management boards are dominated by for-hires rather than private anglers, the equity of sector separation is never an issue.  If anything, they argue that it is more equitable because it gives people who want to kill fish an equal seat at the table compared to the catch and rlease advocates (obviously, this is primarily a bass and bluefish argument).  I've also heard it argued that it provides economic equity, because poor folks who can't afford a boat can now go out on a for-hire with confidence that they'll probably catch enough fish to pay for the trip, a concern that affluent anglers don't have.  I've even heard one Montauk party boat operator (Viking Fleet) argue that high for-hire bag limits for porgies (scup) are the only equitable approach, because it allows the residents of a housing project to all chip in for one person's party boat fare,, and he can then go out and catch a bunch of fish to distribute to his impoverished neighbors who otherwise had no access to freshly caught fish.

 

 

 

"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...