NorEast Fishing Forum banner
1 - 20 of 106 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,031 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Bill to ban commercial fishermen from artificial reefs pending

pressofatlanticcity wrote:
A bill that would ban commercial trap and pot fishermen from the state's offshore artificial reefs was approved by the state Senate this week in a 33-0 vote.

The bill, sponsored by Sen. James "Sonny" McCullough, R-Atlantic, has created a huge rift between the commercial and recreational fishing communities. Commercial fishermen argue the ocean can't be given to one special-interest group. Anglers note they have invested more money in the reef network and run into conflicts with commercial fishing gear.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,031 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I guess we know who's side this guy is on???

ARTIFICIAL REEF BILL WOULD ZAP COMMERCIALS

NY Post wrote:
January 6, 2008 -- THE New Jersey Artificial Reef Bill passed unani mously out of the state senate this week and is one step closer to the governor's desk.

This important bill has been opposed by commercial fish lobbyists who want to keep their clients fishing with thousands of pots and traps on New Jersey's artificial reefs.

The bill, S-2635, will prohibit the use of pots and traps on the artificial reefs in state waters. The bill also will charge the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection to forward a request to the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council to apply for special management zone status for NJ artificial reefs in federal waters.

New Jersey's program, one of the most successful in the country, was implemented and designed for divers and hook-and-line fishermen. Currently 30-40 commercial pot and trap fishermen are dominating the reefs and using highly efficient gear contrary to the goals and objectives of the plan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
579 Posts
It's a good decision

I fish in New York. I think the commercial fishermen are not allowed to put their traps on reefs out here.

I take issue with a commercial fisherman trapping on a reef. Especially since the reefs are supported and often financed by the recreational fisherman (Moriches Reef in this case).

If commercial fisherman places traps on a reef then this forces the recreational fisherman to fish around the gear that will no doubt use up all available space on the reef. That is not fair to the recreatioanl fisherman. It also would make it dangerous for recreational boats to navigate because of the high probability of prop entanglements on commercial gear. Then the commercial guy will get all pissed that their high flyers are missing.

This only creates more friction between recreational and commercial fishing. As an example. Look what the commercial guys are doing off shore. They are placing booby trap high flyers. Now, I can understand the frustration of recs tying off to a commercial pot. I am strictly against it. It's somebody't private property and you have no right tying off to it even if you think it doesn't hurt. I respect that. BUT the commercial guy needs to know two wrongs don't make a right. That stupid booby trap can sink innocent boats just passing by. I have never ever ever tied off to a commercial pot (and never will) at the off shore but I have gotten ensnared on a booby trap that had the perpensity to sink the boat.

Don't you think that it is a little presumptuous to believe that your are entitled to use a reef that was sponsored by recreational fisherman?

Looneytunes
Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,031 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Here's my problem with the recs have an exclusive-

Where are the studies that show that these reef do not attract fish , or aggregate fish, if you will? If these man made structures are in fact
attracting fish to them, then how is it possibly justifiable to give those fish to the rec's exclusively?

You are really tickin me off Dave.

All I hear you saying here is bad comm'l fisherman- bad comm'l fisherman!! It's like a broken record.

It's awfully hard for you or any recs to "defend" their dsesire for exclusive access, when you aren't subsistence fishing, you are fishing for fun and food is a fringe benefit. Unless you are fishing from the shore, with a very cheap pole and bait you gathered yourself....then you are sportfishing.

There needs to be some compromise, after all the recs in NJ have almost exclusive access to tautog already and totally exclusive access to striped bass:mad: So how can you honestly say that creating more rules to grant exclusive access are necessary, when rec's already have near exclusivity in this fishery?


foot tapping on floor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,472 Posts
Lets try a little analogy.

There are programs in many cities that allow private citizens to have small gardens to grow tomatoes, cukes, etc. on small lots of public land.

The participants buy the seeds, plant and tend the garden and then harvest and enjoy the results.

Question: Should share croppers be allowed to decend on these gardens and take (steal really) all the veggies. Why not? After all, a garden is nothing more than a plant aggregating device. Why should the people funding the garden, caring for it and maintaining it be allowed to hog all that "free food"? These share croppers have to make a living and its tough enough without all these wanna-be farmers trying to grow there own food.

Get it now?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,031 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
No and bad ANALogy

obtuseangler wrote:

Get it now?

Would be a little different if the recs built hatcheries and released all those togs on those reefs.......;)

"a plant aggregating device"

that is funny

This post edited by loligo 10:23 AM 01/06/2008
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
579 Posts
loligo wrote:
Here's my problem with the recs have an exclusive-

Where are the studies that show that these reef do not attract fish , or aggregate fish, if you will? If these man made structures are in fact
attracting fish to them, then how is it possibly justifiable to give those fish to the rec's exclusively?

You are really tickin me off Dave.

All I hear you saying here is bad comm'l fisherman- bad comm'l fisherman!! It's like a broken record.

It's awfully hard for you or any recs to "defend" their dsesire for exclusive access, when you aren't subsistence fishing, you are fishing for fun and food is a fringe benefit. Unless you are fishing from the shore, with a very cheap pole and bait you gathered yourself....then you are sportfishing.

There needs to be some compromise, after all the recs in NJ have almost exclusive access to tautog already and totally exclusive access to striped bass:mad: So how can you honestly say that creating more rules to grant exclusive access are necessary, when rec's already have near exclusivity in this fishery?


foot tapping on floor.




Loligo,

Again, with all due respect. I am not trying to tick you off. I think the exchange so far has been respectful. I think it is a good exchange. It shows both sides of the issue. First of all you have to recognize that you are on a recreational fishing board. I would not dare go to a commercial board trying to push a recreational agenda.

Your issue regarding studies and proof that the reefs attract fish is answered just in the fact that they obviously attract fish. Otherwise, a commercial fisherman would have no interest in placing traps on a reef. Right?

As far as giving exclusive access to the recreational fishermen, I will repeat my statement earlier statement. Why should a commercial fisherman be allowed to harvest fish from a reef that was built with recreational money? I am sorry, but that is a legitimate question.

Your statement of compromise is wrong too. Compromising means seeing it the commercial way, and we are recreational fishermen. Commercial nearly wiped out stipers and the recreational fishermen compromised with big limits on striped bass. They limited commercial fishing and the fishery is thriving. Maybe you should take some of your own advice regarding compromise. That is a real life success story and would be a good model for future success. BUT commercial will not hear anything about compromise.

I am sorry. Commercial fishing and recreational fishing just don't belong together. They are diametrically opposed in every way shape and form.

LooneyTunes
Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,472 Posts
loligo wrote:
obtuseangler wrote:


Get it now?



Would be a little different if the recs built hatcheries and released all those togs on those reefs.......;)


Guess again, good analogy, those reefs were funded by rec's.

Even if they are no more than aggregating devices (an unfunded and unsubstantiated claim) the people who build and maintain them should have the first claim on there use.

Since your pots are only fish aggregating devices, I guess anyone can just help themselves?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,065 Posts
Atlantic City Press on the reef issue in New Jersey

Bill to ban commercial fishermen from artificial reefs pending

By RICHARD DEGENER Staff Writer, 609-463-6711
(Published: January 5, 200

A bill that would ban commercial trap and pot fishermen from the state's offshore artificial reefs was approved by the state Senate this week in a 33-0 vote.

The bill, sponsored by Sen. James "Sonny" McCullough, R-Atlantic, has created a huge rift between the commercial and recreational fishing communities. Commercial fishermen argue the ocean can't be given to one special-interest group. Anglers note they have invested more money in the reef network and run into conflicts with commercial fishing gear.

The issue may not go much further in the immediate future unless the state Assembly acts on it at Monday's session. It's the last legislative session before new office holders are sworn in, and any legislation not approved is automatically killed.

"If they don't get it done Monday, that's it," said John Depersonaire, of the Galloway Township-based Recreational Fishing Alliance.

The RFA is pushing the bill, and Depersonaire is hoping to get the Assembly version voted on. As of Friday afternoon, there was no vote scheduled on the bill Monday.

"I hope we make it through this legislative session without that bill passing," said Greg DiDomenico, of the Garden State Seafood Association, a commercial fishing trade group. DiDomenico called the state's pot and trap fishermen "the last of a dying breed" in New Jersey. He said there are small owner-operated boats that fish for tautog, sea bass and lobster.

"They'd have to learn to catch lobsters off the reef, and quite frankly the reefs are where the lobsters are. Guys will have to reinvent the wheel," DiDomenico said.

Depersonaire said New York banned commercial fishing on its reefs in 2003, and it did not hurt the lobster market there.

"There was no impact at the consumer and wholesale level for lobsters," Depersonaire said.

If the Assembly approves the bill, and Gov. Jon S. Corzine signs it, it would only apply to two of the state's 15 reefs. Those two are in state waters. The other 13 reefs are outside three miles in federal waters. Depersonaire said the next step would be to ask the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, which regulates fisheries in federal waters, to adopt the state prohibition. The council would be asked to set up Special Management Zones, or SMZs, that allow state regulations to apply in the federal zone.

"New York and Delaware are going through the same process right now" Depersonaire said.

The council would set up a SMZ monitoring team to assess the request, and it would follow a set of criteria before acting. It must consider historical uses, conservation, equity and fairness, avoiding giving one group excess shares of the resource, the natural sea bottom, consistency with fishing laws and other factors.

"The council will have to adhere to national standards of equity and fairness, and those things don't have to be applied in New Jersey," DiDomenico said.

The commercial sector offered a compromise last year to reduce gear conflicts, but it was rejected by the RFA. McCullough said the commercial gear not only denies use of the sites to anglers but also "may very well destroy" the reef structures.

The issue is not as cut and dried as it may seem. Recreational fishermen also use pots, and they would be banned from doing this. The RFA also points out the law would allow commercial fishermen to catch fish with rod-and-reel or hand lines, though this would not work for lobster. More than half the commercial reef fishing is for lobster.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35,001 Posts
Captneilf wrote:
Good morning,

Why not have reefs dedicated to either comms or recs. Then each side would have their turf. Fair and equal!

CN



That may work if the reefs for the comms were funded by the comms.

Mikes anology is a fairly good one, but in the land of handouts.....everyone has just that...........:rolleyes:...............let someone else do the work so they can reap the rewards.:rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,031 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Seems to me that if the fishermen (recs) want the reefs all to themselves, then they should have passed a law about this when they were installed. Now and only now, that the noose is tightening around all our throats, do they cry -our fish-our fish!!

How can it be fair that the recs can make these "things" that attract all the fish away from and or to these things from the greater area/s
thereby causing a localized aggregation, unnaturally and then claim sole access.



The common ground is access and money....both need the first to get the second. Don't claim that there isn't a rec industry either, because there is and it has grown considerably over the years, to the point where it is demanding more ACCESS.

Less access means less money for the recs.....pretty simple.
Less access means less money for comm'l too. = common ground:rolleyes:

And about the commercial discussion board/s....would you PM me the URL, because I've never seen one that was a real DB.(seriously)
NF tried, it failed, it was probably bombarded with anti comm'l BS.

I tried several years ago...same problem.



This post edited by loligo 10:57 AM 01/06/2008
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,031 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Ok Ok....guess I hit a really sore spot with some of ya.

This vilifying of comm'l fishers has me kinda PO'd.

Thing is it won't matter soon,,,,we're all rats on the same sinking ship.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,718 Posts
Let me see if I have this right.NJ is considering a law that will in effect ban a segment of the public(pot fishermen) from accessing a resource(fish)on public property. Sounds like a crock to me,do you really think this will stand up in court? Now for the argument that the reef was paid for by rec fishermen, therefore they should have EXCLUSIVE ACCES:By creating a reef on public property the rec user group doesn't legally stake a claim to that area. Plain and simple. Conversely, can you imagine the BS that would fill this board if there was an area designated for Commercial Fishing only?
IMHO the ocean belongs to all of us, rec, comm and anything in between. The reefs are there for all of us.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,031 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
How about closed days....no pots on the reefs on weekends:):):)

There has to be some give and take.

Kinda funny.....I support the efforts to save the recs from no fluke this year.....but....the second they think they can snatch ANOTHER fishery, man they jump on that bandwagon pretty quick!?!?

Take take take....

When do we get something?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,031 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
No negotiation? Not very "sporting" eh?

It's funny, recs , some anyways (most?) act as if they are the ethically superiors to comm's, but in this refusal to negotiate.....seems kinda fishy......

I don't personally know very many recs who are just blindly anti comm'l, they form opinions based on experiences and knowledge and reason accordingly.

No negotiating? What country is this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,031 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
claw1 wrote:
Recs pay for what ? It cost me well over a $ 1,000 per year for the right to fish in this state!

WOW!! $1000 bucks for your permits?:confused:
Holy Smokes!!!

Thats expensive.
 
1 - 20 of 106 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