NorEast Fishing Forum banner
61 - 79 of 79 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Observation: I had been watching that poll for a long time. For the longest time, as the numbers increased, it was about 90/10 or 80/20, if I recall.

Interesting late surge, all asking for harvest over quality. Hmmmm
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,401 Posts
quote:

Interesting late surge, all asking for harvest over quality. Hmmmm[/i]

Hi JohnP,
Thanks for chiming in. If I am reading you right, I don?t agree at all. I definitely like to see the return of the trophy fish? but are you suggesting that we should stop harvesting?

I just feel that we are pressured to choose one over the other and not having the option of both.

I am all for BRINGING BACK THE BIG BASS - But we can?t stop harvesting!

What we really need is collaborated effort and a better management system!

"Crazy" Alberto
[email protected]
 

· Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Hi Alberto. Re the Poll, I remember when there was somehting like 1000 votes and it was split 80/20 (at least thats what I remember). Now there are 1,573 votes and its 57/43? Statistically is that possible? Lets look for cross-validation... lets look at the previous poll George ran on bass, the results that he presented at the last hearing in East Setauket. Those results showed folks preferred a higher size and a uniform bag limit. Then, lets look at the last wide-scale poll done in Newsday / Noreast / Fisherman etc. What were preferences about size then?

Stepping away from the polls, what do I want? I want to be assured that I will not have a future where a 15 lb fish is a trophy. I'd like to see contest numbers like the ones that you used to see in the old Schaefer Contest. I want to see a Montauk locals contest req a 50, like the way it used to be. I want to hear of boat fishing like Al Ristori says it was, when he says didnt even bother to keep track of 40s. Will we get there? Maybe. Do we have to cut back on harvest. Well, if everyone is so confident that the current plan is "working," then no. I want a management plan that says we HAVE to get there. If evyerone is so confident we will get there, they can endorse a management plan that says we HAVE to get there. If folks say the plan/regs are working and we will get there, but then stop short of endorsing a plan that says we have to get there, I'm suspicious.

Off my soapbox now. Have a nice day. Now, get them tog!
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,214 Posts
Nobody can wave a magic wand and create 50 and 60 pound bass. We must keep in mind that the bass plunged into a decline in the late 70's and through the 80's. This is the time when our current trophy fish would have been hatched. Is it a coincidence that the biggies are few and far between? I doubt it.

Regarding the vote, I did not keep an eye on it, but I am one of the minority that voted in favor of a maximum sustainable harvest. So you can be sure at least one vote was real. As I said before, this is a resource that should be accessed by all levels of anglers.

I'll say this again too, by catch is far more devasting than slot limits, Jersey's 3rd fish, and the 2 fish party/charter rule in NY combined. Instead of wasting our energies debating the pros and cons of increased/deccreased recreational harvest, we should unite and fight the commercial by catch problem.

Gamakatsu
 

· Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Gamkatsu, growth rates, YOY trends, yes, I know all that.

So for your purposes you'd rather make sure eveyone gets fish in the cooler rather than see the fishery return to what it was (if you had to choose).

Rallying cry aginst the commercials?

Is it me, or can others see the irony? I can see the Bass hearings now. After they show a graph with recent trends in rec harvest on the overhead, recs are really going to ask for max harvest under Ammendment Six, and then they are going to demand a cut in commercial havest and bycatch.

As George once said: "Its about the FISH"





This message was edited by johnP on 12-8-01 @ 8:22 AM
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,214 Posts
JohnP,

Yes, I would like to see fishery produce the maximum SUSTAINABLE harvest. This allows all a anglers a chance to keep a fish and not just an elite few. If the studies indicate that the population is in a decline, than so be it, we will need to reduce the harvest. Until such time, it is a PUBLIC resource to be enjoyed by all those that chose to participate.

There will always be a commercial interest in this fish so we might as well get used to the idea. I would not waste my time suggesting that we cut their harvest while asking for an increase in ours. If the condition of the stock permits an increase in harvest, it has to be applied equitably. However, true and correct data must be collected on by catch mortality and that mortality must be applied to their quota. Equally, proper data must be collected on C&R mortality and this data should be considered in recreational limits. I know that this is done now, but IMHO the data is severely flawed in favor of the commercials.

If this is truly about the fish, than we should put down our rods and take up snorkling. Fortunately, it has not come to that.

Gamakatsu



This message was edited by Gamakatsu on 12-8-01 @ 4:10 PM
 

· Registered
Joined
·
721 Posts
Maybe if all the guys who only catch and release bass because they don't like the taste of fish or because they feel like they are helping the population or there in it for the fight could switch over to bluefish. They hit every lure known to man and they fight much harder than bass and can also be caught from the surf.
If the bass weren't so prized commercially we wouldn't have limits. If searobins were going for $5.00 a pound we would have limits up the ying yang.
The bass limits are really in place to keep a commercial fisherman from fishing as a recreational fisherman then selling his fish at the end of the day.
The Rec. fisherman is getting much less than he is really entitled to why should they settle for less.
If you don't ask for maximum harvest your making a big mistake.
The further away from zero the better, and if the rec's. do get a big limit like 3 fish or so you can always let them go.
Once the Rec's get it out of there mind that it's NOT about the fish then you can start making progress. Until then you'll just be arguing amongst yourselves.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
721 Posts
Opinari

You forget all the bass eggs that didn't hatch due to PCB levels as well as the toxins, sludge, and runoff that pollute our waters.
Lawn fertilizer
dog crap
anti freeze
diesel fuel
gasoline
acid's
yadda yadda yadda....

Commercial by catch and catch & release mortality are the least of our worries.

Would you rather release a gut hooked fish or eat a poisoned one?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
It IS about the fish.

"...The distribution of age classes in a population has important implications for stock productivity and stability. Studies on striped bass have shown that larger fish produce larger eggs and larvae, and larger individuals of these life stages have a greater chance of survival (Zastrow et al. 1989; Monteleone and Houde 1990). Studies on other species such as cod (Marteinsdottir and Steinarsson 1998; Trippel 1998) have demonstrated that first-time spawners are generally less successful in producing offspring than fish that have spawned multiple times. As such, populations that rely heavily on first-time spawners to maintain recruitment levels face a greater risk of recruitment failure than those composed of a number of spawning classes...."

From
A Population Study of Atlantic Striped Bass

Submitted to the:

Committee on Resources of the United States House of Representatives and
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the United States Senate

Donald L. Evans, Secretary of Commerce and Gale A. Norton, Secretary of the Interior

Whatever the stock is at right now, sounds like basic biology.
Alberto? George? Anybody?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,401 Posts
Hello JohnP,
You raised a valid and compelling argument but what are you really recommending?
The truth of the matter is, many fishers that cares about this fishery know where the problems lie but what are we to do? It?s simple to say? Let?s bring back the big fish and do the right thing.

Well, what is the right thing I ask?
Should we bring back the 36? limit?
Are we to reduce our keep (maximum harvest) and not worry about what the commercials next moves are (taking what we forfeit)?
Should we impose a stricter size limit to save the big fish (sounds good but please recommend ideas)
Maybe we to have a slot fish (say 24?-32?) and possibly a trophy fish?
Should we try to work with our said (allocation) numbers and ignore the commercial?s (destructive) methods?
Are we really happy with the allocated figures and willing to reduce it by _ % while the commercial continues to wins the larger share?
Are you recommending us not to kill/hunt big fish?
Are we to fight to have coastal wide restrictions?
Maybe we should try for a gamefish status again?
How about just practice Catch & Release and forget about the ugly meat hunters?
Or are we to take drastic measures and forget about our industry and ban fishing all together until the big fish comes back by the year 2016?

I could go on and on... but do I dare to ask what the future holds?
Well, to be perfectly honest, in my eyes, it does not look good at all!

Why? I still don?t think we are addressing the BIG PROBLEM and besides, we don?t count! Please let me try to enlighten you without any stock data, biological, political or any statistical backing? Based on my fishing experiences and what I see happening today? All I can say is ? It?s VERY disturbing! Regardless of the species? What does the future holds you may ask? My answer would simply be?. It doesn?t matter because we will have no saying whatsoever! Why? Because in the future, the commercial entities will controls our fishery! All we can do is this?. Practice Catch and Release during a said timeframe - And if you want a fish for the table? Sorry, you need to buy it in the fish market!

I guess I painted a very ugly picture eh? But that?s not too far fetched if you think about it. Now, do we dare to continue to fight amongst ourselves (recreational, conservationist, sportsman, etc) and let the commercial laugh at us? Or- do we try to widen our spectrum and fight a bigger battle?

Maybe we should simply go back and discuss bringing back the big fish only? You may think that I am confusing tow different issues ? but I don?t think so?Because no matter how you cut it? I believe it?s a fishery matter that needs to be fought in a bigger battlefield.

Given that, where do we start? Maybe we could petition for a better Striped Bass management and at the same token, try to address the bigger picture too. How about it?

"Crazy" Alberto
[email protected]
 

· Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Alberto,

The paper I am referring to (prepared by tech committee and signed by Secretary) has very specific suggestions to much of what you ask. It suggests reducing fishing mortality to F=.25. I was actually quite surprised to see that figure given that in another sentence they say the stock can be "sustained" at a much higher level. So why are they saying to keep it lower? First they point to these studies about how old a fish must be to be a productive spawner. Things are ok RIGHT now, but the paper points to almost 19 YEARS of "below average recruitment" 1970-1989.

It also implies problems with lack of uniformity in regs state to state, or bay vs. coast.

I'm actually surprised that your log does not have you more upbeat. I have not been fishing as long as you I do not think, but my view right now if cautious optimism, as long as keep keep a lid on the kill. BUt there will be a lot of pressure to blow the top off the lid right now, thats my concern.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
THESE 43 PERCENT HAVE NEVER FISHED HERE IN THE COLD WATERS OF MAINE,
WE DO NOT SELL ARE STRIPERS FOR TABLE FARE AND THE LARGE COWS WE SAW IN THE PAST YEARS ARE NO GONE.IN THE PAST TWO SEASONS I RELEASED ONLY
TWO STRIPERS OVER 50 INCHES ALL THE OTHERS WERE THIRTYS,FOURTYS
OR LESS. WE HAVE A SLOT LIMIT HERE IN MAINE AND IT IS MY BELIEF THAT THIS SHOULD BE ADOPTED TO THE SOUTH WERE THEY ARE HARVESTED COMMERCIALLY
WE WOULD ALL HAVE MORE FISH TO CATCH AND THEY WOULD HAVE THE CHANCE TO GROW TO THERE NATURAL SIZE

TIGHTLINES
SHAWNTUNACHASER
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,651 Posts
There seems to be a misconception concerning commercial fishermen and bycatch.As a former commercial fisherman(draggers and gillnetter)I agree 100% that bycatch is ONE reason for the decline of big bass. Also bycatch is one huge pain in the ass! More work moving non saleable product and the fact that juvenile or otherwise illegal fish are going to waste! These guys are not the boogeyman, they are yer neighbors and fellow fishermen just trying to make a living.The laws that are in place are the real crime.
Dragging causes the most bycatch and gillnetting is the "cleanest" fishery bass wise due to the fact that gill nets have to have a specific mesh size that allows small fish to swim through and larger fish not to get gilled. I know that this post will piss off some of you, but I had to respond from the other side. On another note, What is wrong with the status quo? There are more bass around now than in recent memory,plenty of big fish if yer sharp and a strict limit on commercial harvest, sounds like a pretty good scenario. If we can stop the bycatch on the draggers, then we'd really be in good shape. LATER
 

· Registered
Joined
·
10,712 Posts
Bucktail,

I agree with what you posted. The goverment people make the laws. If there is too much bycatch using legal gear then the rules should be changed.

I hate to see a resource wasted and that is what happens when bycatch is shoveled over the side.

I feel that if bycatch is allowed to be kept then unscrupulous fishermen will target the bycatch especially if it is profitable.

To bad most recreational fishermen won't financially support conservation organizations such as RFA, CCA and NY SF. You don't have to agree with everything but please stand up and be counted. If you don't, you have no right to complain.

Capt Neil

Have Fun Fishing. Capt Neil
Custom Fishing Rods by Captain Neil
 

· Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
Fellow Fisherman:

Every person has their own ideas regarding regulations. Every person, whether we admit it or not, has his/her own agenda. This agenda can be good or bad.

I currently live in Connecticut and follow the slot limits set forth, which are:

Keep 1 fish between 24-32"
Keep 1 fish over 41"

These regulations allow the "trophy hunter" to come home with a lunker, while it allows ************* looking for a good meal to bring home soemthing to eat.

The 24-32" slot seems to be working well, and local fisherman have expressed positive feelings towards these regulations. They feel it protects the fish, and at the same time allows every type of fisherman to enjoy Striper fishing.

You may feel this is way off base, but it seems to be working well.

As for the feeling that fisherman won't follow the rules, well, I haven't run into anybody who has neglected/ignored these regulations.

Tight lines to you all,

Soundfisher
 
61 - 79 of 79 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top