GOM Groundfish Outlook?
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Bruce
GOM rec fisherman have taken the lions share of rec cod restrictions (winter closed season, 24 inch length and ten fish limit) while areas
to the south fish no limits all winter long. The panel appears dominated by charter- party and commercial fisherman who didn't see fit to recommend the same restrictions on the areas that they fish.
I personally don't have a problem with the ten fish limit or the 24 inch length but it really should be a consistant everywhere. Recommending shutting down the very limited winter rec codfishing in the GOM seems like a back room deal.
Bob
Recreational Fishing Advisory Panel
Bud Brown, Georgetown, ME Joseph Huckemeyer, Hyannis, MA
Charles Trent Casella, Georgetown, MA Ed Nowak, Needham, MA
George Costello, Falmouth, MA Michael Plaia, Exeter, RI
Tom DePersia, Marshfield Hills, MA Michael Sosik, Jr., Sturbridge, MA
Anthony DiLernia, Fresh Meadows, NY Jonathan Sterritt, Newton, NH
Barry Gibson (Chair), East Boothbay, ME Donald L. Swanson, Derry, NH
GOM rec fisherman have taken the lions share of rec cod restrictions (winter closed season, 24 inch length and ten fish limit) while areas
to the south fish no limits all winter long. The panel appears dominated by charter- party and commercial fisherman who didn't see fit to recommend the same restrictions on the areas that they fish.
I personally don't have a problem with the ten fish limit or the 24 inch length but it really should be a consistant everywhere. Recommending shutting down the very limited winter rec codfishing in the GOM seems like a back room deal.
Bob
Recreational Fishing Advisory Panel
Bud Brown, Georgetown, ME Joseph Huckemeyer, Hyannis, MA
Charles Trent Casella, Georgetown, MA Ed Nowak, Needham, MA
George Costello, Falmouth, MA Michael Plaia, Exeter, RI
Tom DePersia, Marshfield Hills, MA Michael Sosik, Jr., Sturbridge, MA
Anthony DiLernia, Fresh Meadows, NY Jonathan Sterritt, Newton, NH
Barry Gibson (Chair), East Boothbay, ME Donald L. Swanson, Derry, NH
And now for the deep thought of the day...
Codkiller wrote:
The rec advisory panel has no power over anybody, all they can do is
look out for their own best interest which they seem to do very well.
Bob
Ask yourself why there isn't a panel named the "Commercial Advisory Panel" on the NEFMC.
And no, it isn't due to the clever acronym it would make.
Codkiller wrote:
The rec advisory panel has no power over anybody, all they can do is
look out for their own best interest which they seem to do very well.
Bob
Ask yourself why there isn't a panel named the "Commercial Advisory Panel" on the NEFMC.
And no, it isn't due to the clever acronym it would make.
Joined
·
2,763 Posts
flatts1b wrote:
Codkiller wrote:
The rec advisory panel has no power over anybody, all they can do is
look out for their own best interest which they seem to do very well.
Bob
Ask yourself why there isn't a panel named the "Commercial Advisory Panel" on the NEFMC.
And no, it isn't due to the clever acronym it would make.
Uh- because it's a commercial council?
Codkiller wrote:
The rec advisory panel has no power over anybody, all they can do is
look out for their own best interest which they seem to do very well.
Bob
Ask yourself why there isn't a panel named the "Commercial Advisory Panel" on the NEFMC.
And no, it isn't due to the clever acronym it would make.
Uh- because it's a commercial council?
hairbone wrote:
What are your predictions for the Gulf of Maine this year? Any news from the commercial guys over the winter? I think some good speculation would be a great way to start the season off. HB
As of 3/24 the comms' out of Gloucester aren 't having any problem getting their 800 lbs. of cod in short order. A couple of longliners claim they aren 't getting any haddock so who knows what it looks like for that fisherie ? They have been hammered the last 5-yrs. Don 't know if its' relative but believe that fisherie may be headed for trouble ? Along with everyone else I hope not as a number of times out they were the only game in town.
What are your predictions for the Gulf of Maine this year? Any news from the commercial guys over the winter? I think some good speculation would be a great way to start the season off. HB
As of 3/24 the comms' out of Gloucester aren 't having any problem getting their 800 lbs. of cod in short order. A couple of longliners claim they aren 't getting any haddock so who knows what it looks like for that fisherie ? They have been hammered the last 5-yrs. Don 't know if its' relative but believe that fisherie may be headed for trouble ? Along with everyone else I hope not as a number of times out they were the only game in town.
Joined
·
67,033 Posts
Codkiller wrote:
Bruce
GOM rec fisherman have taken the lions share of rec cod restrictions (winter closed season, 24 inch length and ten fish limit) while areas
to the south fish no limits all winter long. The panel appears dominated by charter- party and commercial fisherman who didn't see fit to recommend the same restrictions on the areas that they fish.
I personally don't have a problem with the ten fish limit or the 24 inch length but it really should be a consistant everywhere. Recommending shutting down the very limited winter rec codfishing in the GOM seems like a back room deal.
Bob
Recreational Fishing Advisory Panel
Bud Brown, Georgetown, ME Joseph Huckemeyer, Hyannis, MA
Charles Trent Casella, Georgetown, MA Ed Nowak, Needham, MA
George Costello, Falmouth, MA Michael Plaia, Exeter, RI
Tom DePersia, Marshfield Hills, MA Michael Sosik, Jr., Sturbridge, MA
Anthony DiLernia, Fresh Meadows, NY Jonathan Sterritt, Newton, NH
Barry Gibson (Chair), East Boothbay, ME Donald L. Swanson, Derry, NH
Sounds like a mouthful of sour grapes there. So becuase you have to suffer then everyone should suffer, is that the idea? The reason why we didn't recommend any change in the SNE area limits and sizes is because the council didn't ask us to. The council told us that we had to impose limits that would restrict the catch in the GOM only So you want us to restrict the catch everywhere else just to "share the pain"? Sounds like a beggar thy neighbor strategy to me.
Bruce
GOM rec fisherman have taken the lions share of rec cod restrictions (winter closed season, 24 inch length and ten fish limit) while areas
to the south fish no limits all winter long. The panel appears dominated by charter- party and commercial fisherman who didn't see fit to recommend the same restrictions on the areas that they fish.
I personally don't have a problem with the ten fish limit or the 24 inch length but it really should be a consistant everywhere. Recommending shutting down the very limited winter rec codfishing in the GOM seems like a back room deal.
Bob
Recreational Fishing Advisory Panel
Bud Brown, Georgetown, ME Joseph Huckemeyer, Hyannis, MA
Charles Trent Casella, Georgetown, MA Ed Nowak, Needham, MA
George Costello, Falmouth, MA Michael Plaia, Exeter, RI
Tom DePersia, Marshfield Hills, MA Michael Sosik, Jr., Sturbridge, MA
Anthony DiLernia, Fresh Meadows, NY Jonathan Sterritt, Newton, NH
Barry Gibson (Chair), East Boothbay, ME Donald L. Swanson, Derry, NH
Sounds like a mouthful of sour grapes there. So becuase you have to suffer then everyone should suffer, is that the idea? The reason why we didn't recommend any change in the SNE area limits and sizes is because the council didn't ask us to. The council told us that we had to impose limits that would restrict the catch in the GOM only So you want us to restrict the catch everywhere else just to "share the pain"? Sounds like a beggar thy neighbor strategy to me.
Give the man a cigar!
loligo wrote:
flatts1b wrote:
Codkiller wrote:
The rec advisory panel has no power over anybody, all they can do is
look out for their own best interest which they seem to do very well.
Bob
Ask yourself why there isn't a panel named the "Commercial Advisory Panel" on the NEFMC.
And no, it isn't due to the clever acronym it would make.
Uh- because it's a commercial council?
Yes. All of the other panels (groundfish, herring, etc) have been defacto commercial advisory panels. Ditto on the Oversight Committies. Although it appears there has been some progress this year on the herring AP to include a more diverse group of stakeholders.
So for example, when the "Groundfish Oversight Committee" puts forth a proposal for 17 inch baby haddock, it isn't for everyone - it is just for the comms - for good or ill.
Whereas rhe recreational AP is left to fight over the crumbs left from the commercial sector and also siplistic internal squabbles like party charter limited entry or separating private vs party/charter allocations. But again, all of the internal rec squabbles are based on the crumbs (and habitat impacts) that are left from the draggers and such.
We are basically at the kiddie table.
And so it shall forever be under the current system.....
This post edited by flatts1b 08:46 AM 03/27/2008
loligo wrote:
flatts1b wrote:
Codkiller wrote:
The rec advisory panel has no power over anybody, all they can do is
look out for their own best interest which they seem to do very well.
Bob
Ask yourself why there isn't a panel named the "Commercial Advisory Panel" on the NEFMC.
And no, it isn't due to the clever acronym it would make.
Uh- because it's a commercial council?
Yes. All of the other panels (groundfish, herring, etc) have been defacto commercial advisory panels. Ditto on the Oversight Committies. Although it appears there has been some progress this year on the herring AP to include a more diverse group of stakeholders.
So for example, when the "Groundfish Oversight Committee" puts forth a proposal for 17 inch baby haddock, it isn't for everyone - it is just for the comms - for good or ill.
Whereas rhe recreational AP is left to fight over the crumbs left from the commercial sector and also siplistic internal squabbles like party charter limited entry or separating private vs party/charter allocations. But again, all of the internal rec squabbles are based on the crumbs (and habitat impacts) that are left from the draggers and such.
We are basically at the kiddie table.
And so it shall forever be under the current system.....
This post edited by flatts1b 08:46 AM 03/27/2008
Joined
·
318 Posts
chumslk wrote:
hairbone wrote:
What are your predictions for the Gulf of Maine this year? Any news from the commercial guys over the winter? I think some good speculation would be a great way to start the season off. HB
As of 3/24 the comms' out of Gloucester aren 't having any problem getting their 800 lbs. of cod in short order. A couple of longliners claim they aren 't getting any haddock so who knows what it looks like for that fisherie ? They have been hammered the last 5-yrs. Don 't know if its' relative but believe that fisherie may be headed for trouble ? Along with everyone else I hope not as a number of times out they were the only game in town.
Chunslk, Thanks for the good info. I wonder where the haddock are?
As far as all of the other posts thanks for highjacking my thread
![]()
. Put your swords back in your pocket as the season is open in a few days! The whole point of my posting was to see if the was going to be good numbers and sizes of groundfish this summer. And yeah I fished the water south of the GOM this winter and it wasn't anything to get excited about. The few boats running over the winter are not going to put a hurting on GOM groundfish. There was a few days of lock & load by the reports but how many times have GOM fisherman had a pollock slam and stayed on them till there arms ached last summer? HB
hairbone wrote:
What are your predictions for the Gulf of Maine this year? Any news from the commercial guys over the winter? I think some good speculation would be a great way to start the season off. HB
As of 3/24 the comms' out of Gloucester aren 't having any problem getting their 800 lbs. of cod in short order. A couple of longliners claim they aren 't getting any haddock so who knows what it looks like for that fisherie ? They have been hammered the last 5-yrs. Don 't know if its' relative but believe that fisherie may be headed for trouble ? Along with everyone else I hope not as a number of times out they were the only game in town.
Chunslk, Thanks for the good info. I wonder where the haddock are?
As far as all of the other posts thanks for highjacking my thread
Joined
·
67,033 Posts
flatts1b wrote:
loligo wrote:
flatts1b wrote:
Codkiller wrote:
The rec advisory panel has no power over anybody, all they can do is
look out for their own best interest which they seem to do very well.
Bob
Ask yourself why there isn't a panel named the "Commercial Advisory Panel" on the NEFMC.
And no, it isn't due to the clever acronym it would make.
Uh- because it's a commercial council?
Yes. All of the other panels (groundfish, herring, etc) have been defacto commercial advisory panels. Ditto on the Oversight Committies. Although it appears there has been some progress this year on the herring AP to include a more diverse group of stakeholders.
So for example, when the "Groundfish Oversight Committee" puts forth a proposal for 17 inch baby haddock, it isn't for everyone - it is just for the comms - for good or ill.
Whereas rhe recreational AP is left to fight over the crumbs left from the commercial sector and also siplistic internal squabbles like party charter limited entry or separating private vs party/charter allocations. But again, all of the internal rec squabbles are based on the crumbs (and habitat impacts) that are left from the draggers and such.
We are basically at the kiddie table.
And so it shall forever be under the current system.....
Sure about that Mike? The council has what, 18 voting members? 5 of them are from the various state F&G agencies, one is from NMFS, of the five obligatory memebers 1 is a charter captain (Dave Preble) and one is from a green group (Sally McGee)so so far we have maybe 3 commercials. From the 7 at large members Two (Rip Cunningham and Frank Blount) are recreational fishermen One is definately a commercial fisherman ( John Papalardo) One is unaffilaited amd Even if all of the other are commercial fishermen that means the breakdown would be:
3 Recreational Fishermen
5 State Representatives
1 Federal Representative
1 From an Environmental group
1 Unaffiliated
7 ? maybe commercial fishermen.
Still care to argue that the commercials "dominate" the council?
This post edited by MakoMike 02:49 PM 03/27/2008
loligo wrote:
flatts1b wrote:
Codkiller wrote:
The rec advisory panel has no power over anybody, all they can do is
look out for their own best interest which they seem to do very well.
Bob
Ask yourself why there isn't a panel named the "Commercial Advisory Panel" on the NEFMC.
And no, it isn't due to the clever acronym it would make.
Uh- because it's a commercial council?
Yes. All of the other panels (groundfish, herring, etc) have been defacto commercial advisory panels. Ditto on the Oversight Committies. Although it appears there has been some progress this year on the herring AP to include a more diverse group of stakeholders.
So for example, when the "Groundfish Oversight Committee" puts forth a proposal for 17 inch baby haddock, it isn't for everyone - it is just for the comms - for good or ill.
Whereas rhe recreational AP is left to fight over the crumbs left from the commercial sector and also siplistic internal squabbles like party charter limited entry or separating private vs party/charter allocations. But again, all of the internal rec squabbles are based on the crumbs (and habitat impacts) that are left from the draggers and such.
We are basically at the kiddie table.
And so it shall forever be under the current system.....
Sure about that Mike? The council has what, 18 voting members? 5 of them are from the various state F&G agencies, one is from NMFS, of the five obligatory memebers 1 is a charter captain (Dave Preble) and one is from a green group (Sally McGee)so so far we have maybe 3 commercials. From the 7 at large members Two (Rip Cunningham and Frank Blount) are recreational fishermen One is definately a commercial fisherman ( John Papalardo) One is unaffilaited amd Even if all of the other are commercial fishermen that means the breakdown would be:
3 Recreational Fishermen
5 State Representatives
1 Federal Representative
1 From an Environmental group
1 Unaffiliated
7 ? maybe commercial fishermen.
Still care to argue that the commercials "dominate" the council?
This post edited by MakoMike 02:49 PM 03/27/2008
Joined
·
2,763 Posts
MakoMike wrote:
3 Recreational Fishermen
5 State Representatives
1 Federal Representative
1 From an Environmental group
1 Unaffilaited
7 ? maybe commercial fishermen.
Still care to argue that the commercials "dominate" the council?
I think you just proved they do
This post edited by MakoMike 02:49 PM 03/27/2008
3 Recreational Fishermen
5 State Representatives
1 Federal Representative
1 From an Environmental group
1 Unaffilaited
7 ? maybe commercial fishermen.
Still care to argue that the commercials "dominate" the council?
I think you just proved they do
This post edited by MakoMike 02:49 PM 03/27/2008
Fishery management falls under the Department of "Commerce" for a reason...
MakoMike wrote:
Sure about that Mike? The council has what, 18 voting members? 5 of them are from the various state F&G agencies, one is from NMFS, of the five obligatory memebers 1 is a charter captain (Dave Preble) and one is from a green group (Sally McGee)so so far we have maybe 3 commercials. From the 7 at large members Two (Rip Cunningham and Frank Blount) are recreational fishermen One is definately a commercial fisherman ( John Papalardo) Even if all of the other are commercial fishermen that means the breakdown would be:
3 Recreational Fishermen
5 State Representatives
1 Federal Representative
1 From an Environmental group
8 ? maybe commercial fishermen.
Still care to argue that the commercials "dominate" the council?
Yes, MakoMike, and it demonstrable.
Frankly I'm surprised that knowing what you know about the NEFMC that you would suggest otherwise. Then again I've never seen you there. Not even at a recreational advisory meeting. Try listening to the audio sometime. It is almost as good.
Are you forgetting that the state directors are under tremendous political pressure from the commercial fishing interests to vote their way. So much more often than not the majority of those "5 State Representatives" are really in the commercial list.
There is a reason why elected rep after elected rep from all over New Englend gets to the microphone at NEFMC meetings to advocate in favor of the commercial fishing positions (delay, delay delay) and that not a single elected official EVER gets to the microphone to advocate for the enviro (or even the rec) position. Sort of makes you wonder how much clout foundation funded groups really have - doesn't it???
And let's face it, as Codkiller points out, most of the folks on the recreational advisory panel fall under what Jimmy Rhule best describes as the "commercial component" of the recreational fishery.
Best,
Mike F.
MakoMike wrote:
Sure about that Mike? The council has what, 18 voting members? 5 of them are from the various state F&G agencies, one is from NMFS, of the five obligatory memebers 1 is a charter captain (Dave Preble) and one is from a green group (Sally McGee)so so far we have maybe 3 commercials. From the 7 at large members Two (Rip Cunningham and Frank Blount) are recreational fishermen One is definately a commercial fisherman ( John Papalardo) Even if all of the other are commercial fishermen that means the breakdown would be:
3 Recreational Fishermen
5 State Representatives
1 Federal Representative
1 From an Environmental group
8 ? maybe commercial fishermen.
Still care to argue that the commercials "dominate" the council?
Yes, MakoMike, and it demonstrable.
Frankly I'm surprised that knowing what you know about the NEFMC that you would suggest otherwise. Then again I've never seen you there. Not even at a recreational advisory meeting. Try listening to the audio sometime. It is almost as good.
Are you forgetting that the state directors are under tremendous political pressure from the commercial fishing interests to vote their way. So much more often than not the majority of those "5 State Representatives" are really in the commercial list.
There is a reason why elected rep after elected rep from all over New Englend gets to the microphone at NEFMC meetings to advocate in favor of the commercial fishing positions (delay, delay delay) and that not a single elected official EVER gets to the microphone to advocate for the enviro (or even the rec) position. Sort of makes you wonder how much clout foundation funded groups really have - doesn't it???
And let's face it, as Codkiller points out, most of the folks on the recreational advisory panel fall under what Jimmy Rhule best describes as the "commercial component" of the recreational fishery.
Best,
Mike F.
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
