Striped Bass Gamefish act of 1984 - HB2655...and Updates

This act was presented by various groups who saw the strides that were made in the recuperation of the striped bass stocks from the 1982 Moratorium.

These people had the foresight to realize that nothing good lasts forever unless there is a system of checks and balances.

I'm going to try to post up about this important bill which was signed into law by President Bush.

This began back in 1984. There have been amendments and re-visits to the act until 2003.

Each year, there are legal challenges from people who want to open the EEZ to commercial or recreational fishing.

It's my hope that those who might not have been aware of this legislation can check in here and familiarize themselves with it.

What the act did:
1. Made the Atlantic Striped bass a Gamefish in the EEZ (Federal waters).

2. Established an Exclusionary Economic Zone (from 3-200 miles out) or EEZ, where fishing for striped bass was prohibited by Commercial and Recreational fishermen.

Anyone who wants to post related articles or stories on this topic in here, please feel free.

Thanks guys and girls. :thumbsup:

The bill was shuttled back and forth in Congress for many years.

I believe the latest amendments were made in 2003. Still checking my facts on that though.

Here's a pdf of the testimony from 12-26-95

http://www.archive.org/stream/atlant...0unit_djvu.txt

The way I understand it, the bonus tags now available to NJ rec fishermen are the result of Comm fishing being closed down in NJ. We get that allocation.

While I have gone on record as saying the bonus tag system should be eliminated, the implications are far-reaching.

It's not as simple as just pulling the program and moving on. That allocation then goes back to the Atlantic States as a shared allocation for them, and not us.

I still feel we need to dismantle the rec bonus tag program because of all the abuses. I just wanted to explain a little further that the answers in fisheries management are not always cut and dried.

:clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping:

Guess you didn't believe my post the other day:beatin: feel better now:D

Here's an easier read on that Dark -


ATLANTIC STRIPED BASS CONSERVATION ACT
16 U.S.C. § 1851 note, October 31, 1984, as amended 1986, 1988, 1991 and 1993.
Overview. This Act recognizes the commercial and recreational importance of Atlantic striped bass and establishes a consistent management scheme for its conservation. Coastal states that fail to adhere to the required management plan are subject to a striped bass fishing moratorium enforced by the federal government. The Act also requires an annual survey of striped bass fisheries in the coastal states.

Findings/Policy. Congress found: Atlantic striped bass have historic importance and economic benefit to the Atlantic coastal states and the nation; certain stocks of Atlantic striped bass are severely reduced in number due to increased fishing pressure, pollution, loss and alteration of habitat, and inadequate fishery conservation practices; because no single governmental entity has full management authority for the fish, state regulation has been inconsistent and intermittent, resulting in harm to their long-term maintenance; effective interjurisdictional species conservation and management is in the national interest. The purpose of the Act is to support and encourage the development, implementation and enforcement of effective interstate conservation and management of the Atlantic striped bass. § 1851 note (§ 2).

Selected Definitions. Coastal States: Pennsylvania; states bordering the Atlantic north of South Carolina; District of Columbia; Potomac River Fisheries Commission. Commission: Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. Plan: Interstate Fisheries Management Plan for Striped Bass prepared by the Commission, dated October 1, 1981 and all amendments related to striped bass fishing. Secretaries: Secretary of Commerce and Secretary of the Interior. § 1851 note (§ 3).

Plan Compliance and Moratorium. The Commission must determine at least annually whether each coastal state has adopted all regulatory measures necessary to implement the Plan, and whether each coastal state's enforcement of the Plan is satisfactory. The Commission must notify the Secretaries of any negative determination. If the Secretaries jointly determine that a coastal state is not in compliance with the Plan, they must declare a moratorium on fishing for Atlantic striped bass within the coastal waters of that state.

During a moratorium, it is unlawful to: catch, take or harvest Atlantic striped bass, or attempt to do so, within the restricted area; land or attempt to land Atlantic striped bass taken in violation of the moratorium; land lawfully harvested Atlantic striped bass within the boundaries of a coastal state under moratorium; fail to return to the water Atlantic striped bass to which the moratorium applies that are caught incidental to commercial or recreational harvesting. Violation of these prohibitions is subject to civil penalty imposed by the Secretaries. Vessels used in violation, along with fish taken, are subject to forfeiture to the federal government.

The Secretaries are responsible for enforcing moratoriums declared under this Act. By agreement, to enforce the Act the Secretaries may use personnel and facilities of federal agencies and coastal state agencies, and enforcement authorities provided in the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act. § 1851 note (§§ 4 and 5).

Annual Survey. The Secretaries must conduct a comprehensive annual survey of the Atlantic striped bass fisheries. The survey, to be published in the Federal Register, must include a compilation and assessment of the recreational and commercial landings of the species in the coastal states. § 1851 note (§ 6).

Appropriations Authorized. Congress authorized appropriations necessary to carry out the Act for fiscal years 1986-1994. The Secretaries may use appropriated funds to support financially the Commission's functions under this Act. § 1851 note (§ 7).






This was the beginning of new legislation for a few species
http://www.jstor.org/pss/1312277

^ Thanks for the contribution, Steve. :HappyWave:


**********
I'm going to be adding to this thread, and talking about modern day options, why some could work, and why others could not.


Fin has been doing some research and should get credit for some of the links you see posted going forward. :thumbsup:


We had a long discussion about this the other day.

There are various movements out there now, to try and work with the numbers of striped bass we have now, instead of the final option of another moratorium.

1. The 1 @ 32" pledge
2. Pledges to better release fish to decrease fish mortality of striped bass, along with ASMFC focus on this
3. C&R pledges and movements cropping up on facebook and other social media
4. Movements to eliminate fishing during Spawning in spawning areas (this already occurs, to an extent, in the Chesapeake)




I think many of us would prefer any option..... to an act where the fishery is shut down for rebuilding. If there was a shutdown, that could be devastating for a lot of Captains, tackle shops, and small businesses.....
There are specific reasons why some could make a difference, and some may not have a chance of happening.
I'll try to talk more about these options, and what we can do, in the coming months......
Thanks to any and all who can add further contributions to this thread....:HappyWave:

2005 Updates - HR 2059 - sent in by Fin, thanks. :HappyWave:

1/23/2005 For Immediate Release by Stripers Forever U. S. Congressman Frank Pallone Introduces Striped Bass Game Fish Bill and Cites Southwick Study by Stripers Forever Stripers Forever, a national organization of recreational anglers, announces its support for HR 2059, a bill introduced last week by U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), the ranking Democrat on the House Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans. The bill would prohibit the commercial harvesting of wild striped bass in Atlantic coastal waters and in federal waters up to 12 miles offshore known as the exclusive economic zone. The Atlantic striped bass is a valuable resource along the Atlantic coast and is one of the most important fisheries for recreational anglers in New Jersey, Pallone said. I have a long history of involvement in protecting, preserving and enhancing the striped bass fishery, and I know how critical it is to take action now so we can avoid the potential threat of a collapse in the future. It is in this spirit that I would like to designate the striped bass as a federal game fish. Pallone's legislation would prohibit the commercial harvesting of striped bass and reserve the resource exclusively for recreational fishing. New Jersey is one of six states along the Atlantic Coast that already classify the striped bass as a game fish. In his introduction of HR 2059, Congressman Pallone cited the Southwick Study, The Economics of Recreational and Commercial Striped Bass Fishing, commissioned earlier this year by Stripers Forever. The landmark study concluded that if commercial fishing for striped bass were eliminated, "future harvest levels would produce greater returns for coastal economies and the national economy?" since "fish captured by the recreational sector are far more valuable on a per-pound basis than when harvested commercially. The Southwick Study specifically forecasts 14,400 new jobs and a $1.79 billion increase in economic value to the U.S. economy by making wild striped bass a gamefish coast-wide, says Brad Burns, president of Stripers Forever. Striped bass raised through aquaculture, which already account for 60 percent of all the stripers consumed in America and could replace the wild harvest within a year or two, offer a more consistently available product than seasonally available wild fish. The Southwick Study shows that wild striped bass and stripers raised through aquaculture command almost identical retail prices. Game fish status for wild stripers would mean more jobs, a stronger economy, and a more consistently available food source for the public. It's a win-win situation, says Burns. For more information on Stripers Forever, and to view a copy of HR 2059, visit the Stripers Forever website at www.stripersforever.org. *********** Many folks might be surprised to know that this was introduced in 2005, yet has not yet received enough votes to become law. As I understand it, Senator Pallone re-introduces it every year, and it fails to get enough votes. Some possible reasons why? 1. There is a very strong Commercial lobby in Congress. 2. There is a very strong presence of Recreational fishing interests - (Capts- party, charter boats, marina owners, etc) who feel their income may be affected if the regs not only shut down commercial fishing, but affect striped bass fishing limits for them as well. 3. This extends beyond NJ. Even though there is "no sale" of wild striped bass in NJ, there are many other states that would oppose this bill. These various interests have made their opposition clear every time. As a result this bill gets pushed around, every year, without much of a resolution. When folks out there get angry, say "Why isn't anything being done!"...they need to realize that attempts are being made. However, with opposing political interests and specific factions maneuvering behind closed doors, things don't get done. **The best way to simplify this, is to say that Pallone has introduced legislation to make striped bass a "no sale" fish Coastwide, and there are various factions (some described above) who vigorously oppose this.

Where does the ASMFC/ NOAA fit into all of this?

ASMFC:
They are the governing board that mandates Striped bass limits and regulations based on scientific data.

NOAA:
The ultimate hand of doom, the highest federal agency that has the power to shut down complete fisheries if overfishing is occurring or a species is declared overfished.

I have watched the ASMFC come up with yearly assessments throughout the last 7 years about the striped bass population. It seems each year the assessments/ YOY data become more grim.
To me, this shows a pattern of decline in the overall striped bass fishing.
I and others who spend a lot of time on the water have seen this general decline over the last 7 years as well.

This has become very frustrating for me.

Yet nothing is done.
I think the best description of what they have done is the "wait and see" approach.




I, for one, am tired of this status quo approach.
Realizing that not much will happen without a change in the laws, I am documenting it here, in an attempt to educate and inform the folks out there..........

Hopefully some of these posts will spark interest and concern.
When the final ASMFC Striped Bass decisions are made in 2015, some user groups among us recreational fishermen will suffer more than most.....I am hoping to spark some interest in these procedings, so more folks will stand up to be heard as a group.

Thanks for reading.......

JCAA Fisheries Management and Legislative Report - 6-1-2000


Sent in by Fin, thanks...:HappyWave:..I'll try to post some comments when I get a chance.....






FISHERIES MANAGEMENT & LEGISLATIVE REPORT

by Tom Fote(from Jersey Coast Anglers Association June 2000 Newsletter)

• Slot Limit In Effect - Senator DiFrancesco Signs Striped Bass Bill
• Striped Bass Amendment 6 PID Hearings
• Tom Fote's Congressional Testimony
• Captain Al Ristori's Testimony

I did my first fishing trip of the season May 19 in all that nasty weather. Steve Sloan called and said, "you need to go fishing and get away from those meetings". So I got in my car and fished on Steve Sloan's boat in a CCA Manhattan Cup Tournament. It was a catch and release tournament. We fished off Brooklyn and Manhattan from 1:30 till 6:00. It always amazes me that we can be fishing off one of the most populated cites in world and still have good fishing. The New York and Brooklyn skylines always impress me. I think of all those millions of people working in those tall building while I am out here fishing. It also brings back memories of my youth since I grew up there. I saw the building where I worked at teenager before going into the service. It was home to the New York Journal American Newspaper then. I worked as a route man delivering newspapers to stores and newsstands all over the city. This was the same job my grandfather, great uncles and my father had. They are all gone now, as is the New York Journal American. It is now where the New York Post is published. Ken Moran joined us. I though how ironic that was since he works as the fishing columnist for New York Post.

I managed to catch two weakfish, both over 23 inches, one bass and one bluefish. Steve and Ken Moran caught the bigger fish, all stripers. Not bad for a day with the wind blew above 20 knots and the rain fell. What a great way to start the season. Good fishing, good memories and good company. Thanks Steve and Ken.

I am the volunteer editor and a contributing writer for the JCAA Newspaper. I guess I cannot get away from the newspaper business after all these years.
Senator DiFrancesco Signs Striped Bass Bill

Slot Limit In Effect

JCAA and the New Jersey State Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs wish to thank Senator DiFrancesco for signing the Striped Bass Bill. Since Governor Whitman is in Japan, Senator DiFrancesco is acting governor. In response to requests from JCAA, the New Jersey State Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs and the RFA, Senator DiFrancesco took action to end the wait.

Effective 12:00 AM, May 17, 2000, the new regulations become law.

In addition to allowing anglers to take home a wider size range of fish for personal consumption, the new regulations will also have a positive, conservation impact on the older year classes.

Remember, this slot limit was enacted to achieve a 36% reduction on the larger fish. This is even more than the 14% reduction required by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission.

This also allows anglers to take home a safer fish. We know that PCB levels are lower in the smaller fish. Rhode Island and Delaware have already used their commercial slot limits to provide this benefit to those who purchase fish. Now New Jersey is providing the same advantage to the anglers who catch and consume their fish.

Again, we are delighted with the actions of Senate President DiFrancesco. He has demonstrated his leadership and concern for the anglers of New Jersey in this work to achieve the passage of this bill. It was Senator DiFrancesco who made sure this bill passed the Senate in a timely manner in early April. It is appropriate for you to call or write him to thank him for his efforts.

Thanks to him, on May 17^th you can harvest one striped bass at least 24 inches but less than 28 inches and conserve the larger fish.

http://www.jcaa.org/

Tom Fote's newsletter:


Striped Bass Amendment 6 PID Hearings

I attended two of the three hearings in New Jersey. The attendance was awful. I had hoped many of you would express you opinions about how you want striped bass managed in the future. This was your chance and you missed it! I could assume you are pleased with the job your representatives to ASMFC are doing and felt no need to attend.

But I get a lot of email about information being posted on the net attacking our positions. Where were these folks? This was the time to put up or shut up. The officers and members of JCAA who attended these meetings are all volunteers. We have no more time than anyone else but we make the time for important meetings. Before anyone finds the time to criticize, they need to put in the time at the public forums. Following are copies of the testimony Al Ristori and I submitted on Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act Reauthorization And Related Issues to the House of Representatives Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans Hearing in Toms River, NJ on April 28,2000. I also testified in person.





Tom Fote's Congressional Testimony

My name is Thomas Fote. I am here today representing Jersey Coast Anglers Association and New Jersey State Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs. These two organizations are comprised of 150,000 concerned sportsmen and women throughout New Jersey. As their legislative liaison,

I speak for the citizens of New Jersey who harvest and consume striped bass from the bays, rivers and the Atlantic Ocean. I would like to thank Congressman Saxton and Pallone for conducting this hearing.
JCAA & NJSFSC believe that Congress should reauthorize the Striped Bass Bill and continue to treat it as separate legislation. This bill was passed because we recognized the importance of striped bass from Maine to North Carolina. Their importance has not diminished and, in some respects, has grown. With the demise of other species due to overfishing, striped bass is even more important for a viable recreational fishing industry. A healthy striped bass stock equates to jobs, salaries and stronger economies for communities throughout the fish's range.

Did the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, the National Marine Fisheries Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service prematurely declare striped bass a recovered species?

The majority of anglers from all the states on the Atlantic coast believe the fishery is far from recovered. Even with very strict recreational controls along the coast, which have not been relaxed since 1989, the 1999 addendum provides further restrictions. Remember, when the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission voted to open this fishery in 1989 we were allowed two fish at 18 inches in the bays and two fish at 28 inches along the coast. The only reason they can even consider striped bass recovered is because many states have had more restrictive rules in both the producing areas and the ocean. If this fishery is recovered, we should, at the very minimum, implement the size and bag limits proposed and passed in 1989. Anything less is an insult to the anglers of New Jersey.

What should we do about the moratorium on striped bass fishing in the EEZ?

Unlike the management of other species, striped bass management must consider the "game fish status" or "no sale status" imposed by some states within the range. Until other states get as smart as New Jersey, New Hampshire, Maine, Connecticut, Pennsylvania and Washington D.C. and make striped bass a game fish, the opening of the EEZ will continue to present serious management problems. At the present time, anglers have little or no trust in the ability of the National Marine Fisheries Service to manage any species in the EEZ. They are managing scup, summer flounder, blue fin tuna, sharks and yellowfin tuna so poorly that we can think of no reason to give them the opportunity to add another species to their list of failures.

The only way we can see to allow striped bass to be caught outside of the three-mile limit is to revise the management rules for striped bass at the federal level and give that responsibility to the individual states. I know this is a complicated process but it would address the concerns of recreational anglers and individual states. Unless you can devise a method to allow individual states to manage this fishery, even in federal waters, we call on Congress to keep the EEZ moratorium in place.


How can we improve the harvest statistics of striped bass?

I find this to be a very interesting question. Although I have some concerns about the Marine Recreational Survey, I do recognize that the survey is not being manipulated by recreational anglers. It is applied fairly across all the states. This recreational survey is not dependent on law enforcement or the honesty of recreational anglers. The sampling techniques take into account poaching and the harvesting of undersized fish. Unfortunately, this is not true of the methods used to collect commercial statistics. There have been numerous reported cases of illegal commercial sale of striped bass in New Jersey and shipment of striped bass from New Jersey to other states for sale in violation of both fisheries and federal interstate commerce laws. It stands to reason that if this is happening and is not reported in the landing statistics in New Jersey, where the commercial harvest is banned by law, we an only imagine what goes unreported instates that have a legal commercial fishery for striped bass.

It is interesting that many states with a legal commercial fishery continue to ask for larger quotas while the statistics suggest they are not filling their current quotas. Have the commercial fishermen learned to manipulate the landing figures to such an extent that they don?t even report meeting the current quota?

How can we improve the harvest statistics of striped bass?

Until we spend the necessary funds to guarantee an accurate recording of commercial landings, we will not have statistics we can rely on. The cost of collecting honest statistics is probably so prohibitive that it would be cheaper to buy out the commercial interests and make striped bass a game fish along the entire coast. There may be state directors and federal bureaucrats who will disagree with my criticism of the statistics. If you want to know the truth, ask any recreational angler or any honest commercial fisherman about their landings.

My main concern is that we frequently change the recreational regulations - quotas, seasons, bag limits and minimum size - so frequently, we never have the opportunity to gauge the impact, positive or negative, of the previous regulations. We are making decisions in 2001 based on regulations put in place in 1999. Those are not the same regulations that will be in place in 2000. This makes no sense at all. We replay this ludicrous cycle over and over again. The statistical data we need generally comes to us after decisions are made and another set of regulations are already in place. I believe Amendment 6 needs to address this problem.

By the middle of May New Jersey will have legislation in place that provides for the same size limits in both our producing areas and the coast. By providing a slot limit we will spread the harvest across a wider range of year classes rather than concentrating on just the older fish. If we could maintain this management regime for more than two years, we could collect statistics that could really show if this is a viable management tool. That would make all future decisions much easier. Every scientist knows that you need to let an experiment work through an entire cycle to test the benefits. This should be addressed in Amendment 6.

When we passed the striped bass "no sale" bill in New Jersey in 1991, many fisheries managers and commercial fishermen said this legislation was unnecessary. They stated that this fishery could be carefully managed for both sectors. I believe the events of the past 10 years prove that JCAA was correct and the fisheries managers and commercial fishermen were in error. Just look at Amendment 6 to the striped bass management plan. Under Amendment 5 ASMFC allowed the commercial fishery along the coast to expand to 70% of their harvest during the base years. In the Chesapeake Bay and Delaware Bay the commercial catch far exceeds the base years while the individual recreational catch is far below the base years.

At the same time recreational anglers have maintained the same restrictive limits since 1989. In practice, most individual recreational anglers bring home fewer striped bass for their own consumption than they did in 1989. In order to keep the commercial fishery open we are subsidizing that fishery with millions of dollars at the state and federal level. At the same time, the money available for all research and management continues to shrink. If striped bass were exclusively a recreational species, they would require little or no management at all!

We could establish appropriate bag and size limits, maintain these limits for set periods of time and provide the necessary research from recreational tag and release studies. Since commercial landings and commercial discards are seriously underreported, we spend millions of dollars on constant changes in management plans to account for "unexplained mortality". I honestly believe that government spends more in tax dollars to manage the commercial fishery than generates in income to the actual participants. If we look at the statistics for the income generated by the recreational sector, we can see how little we actually spend on management and research.

We are planning three public hearings in New Jersey on Amendment 6. I can guarantee that the concensus in the recreational community will be to make striped bass a game fish along the entire coast. New Jersey's recreational anglers are frustrated and angry. They cannot understand how other states and the federal government can be so blind to their concerns. Until we make striped bass a game fish along the entire coast we will continue to waste money maintaining an inefficient, unsustainable commercial fishery that could easily be replaced through aquaculture, while downplaying the importance of an easily managed, sustainable, income producing recreational fishery.

Sincerely,
Thomas P. Fote
Legislative Chairman JCAA & NJSFSC

Captain Al Ristori's Testimony

Thanks for the opportunity to submit testimony relative to the most important inshore game fish from the Mid-Atlantic through New England. The Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act was a milestone in fisheries management as the federal government finally got involved in assuring conservation of species which migrate primarily inshore along the coast and cross through many jurisdictions.

When I first became involved with striper conservation about 35 years ago, each state had it?s own regulations which were designed not really for conservation but to ensure maximum harvest. When I innocently suggested to those involved in management at the time that the federal government should get involved in this migratory fishery for the common good, just as in interstate commerce, I was assured that the states would never give up their rights. There was little incentive for them to do so at the time, as striped bass were abundant and a series of good spawning years kept the population high despite virtually unlimited harvest of a readily available inshore species.

I was a voice in the wilderness during the 1960s while attempting to have the striped bass made a game fish in New York. At the time I testified before the state legislature that stripers, despite their present abundance, would not continue to multiply like Al Capp?s schmoos in order to satisfy everyone?s desires. We narrowly missed achieving game fish status when the Assembly speaker refused to let a bill already passed unanimously in the Senate come to the floor for a vote?and my prediction came true little more than a decade later when overfishing combined with a lack of spawning success resulted in the crisis which finally resulted in the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act.

That crisis could have been mitigated if the states had taken conservation actions beforehand. Given the huge economic value of the striper as a game fish and its relatively minor value as a commercial fish, I still feel that we?re playing with dynamite by continuing the attempt to balance the two. Though the Act has led to one of the great marine conservation success stories of the 1990s, scientists issued warnings of overfishing of spawning size stripers last year and cutbacks were imposed this year. Yet, if the commercial portion of the catch were eliminated there would be no such need for denying the public their opportunity for a relatively small harvest.

In looking back at the huge quantities of stripers landed prior to the Act, when the release of any bass over 16 inches along the coast (18 inches in New Jersey) or 12 inches in Chesapeake Bay was unusual, the recent recreational harvest based on two bass at 28 inches has been miniscule as release rates have been in the 90% range.

Yet, there are so many recreational fishermen seeking stripers that even under those circumstances the 8% mortality assumed for released bass is creating a possible overfishing condition on what was assumed to be a recovered stock.
The first and most important step to avoid future problems and to provide the recreational fishing public with the fishery they deserve should be passage of Rep. Frank Pallone?s striped bass game fish bill. It was over a century ago that Congress ensured preservation of recreational fishing in the nation?s fresh waters by passing the Black Bass Act prohibiting interstate commerce in those game fish. It?s well past time that Congress takes similar bold action in regard to the striped bass.

The Act has provided funds with which to conduct studies of striped bass, and Rep. Saxton deserves our thanks for bringing such previously ignored problems as striper interaction with bluefish to the forefront. That is but the tip of the iceberg in relation to realistic marine fisheries management. Ever since serving on the first Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, I?ve been urging a move toward ecosystem management rather than the present system of managing each species as if they existed independently in the ocean.

The ASMFC and the councils are seeking to rebuild all predator populations to historic highs, while completely ignoring prey species. Freshwater management, even in bodies as large as the Great Lakes, is based on balancing predators and prey. When I asked a saltwater manager what a vastly increased bluefish population would be consuming he assumed that if they found enough to eat when they were previously superabundant they?ll probably do so again. That reply overlooked the fact that the sand eels which were available in huge quantities then have almost disappeared from the Mid-Atlantic. More importantly, it illustrates the fact that there is virtually no knowledge of predator-prey relationships in marine fisheries management at this time. How can we manage major food and game species when managers know practically nothing about sand eels and bay anchovies while continuing to manage menhaden to maximize commercial harvest rather than balancing that catch with the needs of the predators they?re also trying to build up?

Though the ocean is a far more complicated than even the largest of lakes, the present state of computers should provide the opportunity to manage marine fisheries in similar fashion. I sincerely feel it?s only a matter of priorities. When Congress became committed to putting a man on the moon, it was not only done but also accomplished within a decade. Today we probably know more about the surface of the moon than we do about the oceans that surround us and I regard that as a sad commentary on our priorities. If during this period of prosperity and budget surpluses we cannot find the funds with which to fuel a race to create marine ecosystem management the alternative may well be a future crisis which will impose the necessity to do so at much greater costs to society.

I don't have a lot of time to go into more detail, but it seems to me that the positions of Tom Fote and Capt Al Ristori were a little more pro-active in trying to protect the striped bass population, even back in 2000. Even then, they were talking about possible overfishing occurring.

This is just my opinion, but I feel these statements, when he was in the JCAA, Tom Fote showed more of an interest in Conservation.
I feel his views today are much different and more in line with someone who has been influenced by back channel meetings to keep up a "wait and see" status quo until the numbers are so bad it's impossible NOT to do something.....

Again, just my opinion.






Capt Al Ristori speaks about more recreational anglers than ever before, and this was back in 2000.
"Yet, there are so many recreational fishermen seeking stripers that even under those circumstances the 8% mortality assumed for released bass is creating a possible overfishing condition on what was assumed to be a recovered stock"



Since 2000, it's reasonable to assume that recreational participation has jumped even more.

Both gentlemen are pushing for the Striped bass Gamefish bill, which would make striped bass a No-Sale fish along the East Coast.
Since this bill has been up for consideration so many times, it is apparent to me, that there are unseen influences preventing its passage.

2005 - Striped Bass Gamefish Bill introduced, Sen Frank Pallone

This is a press release when he introduced this bill, back in 2005


1/23/2005 For Immediate Release by Stripers Forever

U. S. Congressman Frank Pallone Introduces Striped Bass Game Fish Bill and
Cites Southwick Study by Stripers Forever

Stripers Forever, a national organization of recreational anglers,
announces its support for HR 2059, a bill introduced last week by U.S.
Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), the ranking Democrat on the House
Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans. The bill would prohibit the
commercial harvesting of wild striped bass in Atlantic coastal waters and
in federal waters up to 12 miles offshore known as the exclusive economic
zone.

The Atlantic striped bass is a valuable resource along the Atlantic coast
and is one of the most important fisheries for recreational anglers in New
Jersey, Pallone said. I have a long history of involvement in
protecting, preserving and enhancing the striped bass fishery, and I know
how critical it is to take action now so we can avoid the potential threat
of a collapse in the future. It is in this spirit that I would like to
designate the striped bass as a federal game fish.?

Pallone's legislation would prohibit the commercial harvesting of striped
bass and reserve the resource exclusively for recreational fishing. New
Jersey is one of six states along the Atlantic Coast that already classify
the striped bass as a game fish.

In his introduction of HR 2059, Congressman Pallone cited the Southwick
Study, The Economics of Recreational and Commercial Striped Bass Fishing,
commissioned earlier this year by Stripers Forever.

The landmark study concluded that if commercial fishing for striped bass were eliminated,
"future harvest levels would produce greater returns for coastal
economies and the national economy" since "fish captured by the
recreational sector are far more valuable on a per-pound basis than when
harvested commercially.

The Southwick Study specifically forecasts 14,400 new jobs and a $1.79
billion increase in economic value to the U.S. economy by making wild
striped bass a gamefish coast-wide,? says Brad Burns, president of
Stripers Forever.

Striped bass raised through aquaculture, which already
account for 60 percent of all the stripers consumed in America and could
replace the wild harvest within a year or two, offer a more consistently
available product than seasonally available wild fish. The Southwick Study
shows that wild striped bass and stripers raised through aquaculture
command almost identical retail prices.

Game fish status for wild stripers would mean more jobs, a stronger
economy, and a more consistently available food source for the public.
It's a win-win situation, says Burns.

For more information on Stripers Forever, and to view a copy of HR 2059,
visit the Stripers Forever website at www.stripersforever.org.

Sent in by Fin, thanks.




2003 - another article that talks about the need for the Gamefish Bill, back in 2003......
As I understand it.......Back then, commercial fishing was responsible for a good portion of the fishing pressure. They lobbied hard for a greater increase in quota, and they got it.

http://www.saltwatersportsman.com/st...duced-congress
Striped Bass Game Fish Bill Reintroduced in Congress

July, 2003

A New Jersey Congressman has reintroduced a bill that would prohibit commercial harvesting of striped bass in coastal waters and the exclusive economic zone. Frank Pallone (D-NJ), the ranking Democrat on the House Sub-committee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans, has long advocated federal striped bass game fish status.

Pallone recently disagreed with actions by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission that increased the commercial striped bass quota by 42 percent and spawned new discussions about opening federal waters to striper fishing.

Additional possible reasons for introducing the gamefish bill back then.

1. There was talk of opening federal waters to striped bass fishing.

2. It's a well-known fact that every year in the Winter, striped bass will concentrate in huge numbers off the coasts of Va and NC. This seems to occur with more frequency in cold winters, when the inshore waters become very cold and inhospitable for these mega-large schools of breeder bass.

3. When they concentrate like this, they are easy targets for commercial as well as recreational fishermen.

4. Most recreational fishermen know they cannot catch or target fish beyond the 3 mile limit, but there is still rampant abuse.
http://stripersandanglers.com/Forum/...nomic-decision

** (This abuse and disregard for the law also occurs yearly off the coasts of NJ and NY.)
http://stripersandanglers.com/Forum/...he-regulations

http://stripersandanglers.com/Forum/...and-violations









Without a strong federal law to clearly define the boundaries, IMO there would be much more abuse.
In fact, in 2009 there was a move from recreational anglers in Virginia to allow opening of EEZ striped bass fishing.
http://stripersandanglers.com/Forum/...-to-3-mile-EEZ

As I understand it, it never got anywhere.
Still, it's worth mentioning.


**Just because striped bass numbers are down, doesn't mean that commercial fishermen, or many recreationals, will recognize that fact, or try to change their fishing habits and catch totals.
Some folks would fish for these fish, until there are no more, and then wonder why they are not around. :learn:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarkSkies

Pallone recently disagreed with actions by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission that increased the commercial striped bass quota by 42 percent and spawned new discussions about opening federal waters to striper fishing.

---

When you realize that in 2003, the ASMFC was willing to make decisions that increased the commercial striped bass quota by 42%....you have to wonder how much commercial fishermen were able to lobby and influence the members there.

These are the types of actions that lead me to draw inferences that the ASMFC is influenced by many interests, and its decisions are not always made with the future of striped bass in mind.

In fact, the ASMFC and some fisheries management policies of managing for MSY (maximum sustainable yield) is outdated and disregards the future.

As I understnd it, it mandates yearly regs based on the maximum possible numbers of bass that can be harvested each year (MSY).....without the SSB (Spawning striped bass) biomass sinking below an acceptable level (the threshhold, or threshhold level)

A grave problem with this legacy method of calculating, is that the SSB numbers, as explained previously, are numbers extrapolated from raw data and catch reports. where small sample sizes are used. This data, admittedly a small and inaccurate sample size, is extrapolated to calculate the size of the whole striped bass population.

In statistics, when you take small sample sizes and subject them to hypotheses about a large population, there is a significant margin for error.





**Thusly, the SSB numbers that are claimed to exist now, could be grossly inaccurate.
It's my opinion that right now we are below the SSB that is designated where overfishing is occurring.
(They claim we are at 98 milliion lbs, where the overfishing line is at 97 million lbs)

It's my contention that if we are at 98 million or less now, that number could be even less with the statistical margin of error for such a large sample size.
Therefore, when stricter catch limits are enacted in 2015, it may already be too late.

This could result in a multi-year lag until the striped bass population reaches healthy numbers again.

Sent in by Fin, thanks.

Originally published in Saltwater Sportsman March Edition

GAMEFISH, BUT FOR THE RIGHT REASONS
An honest look at why striped bass is not a gamefish?
By Capt. John McMurray

The recovery of the striped bass is the first and one of the only successes stories of east-coast fisheries management. The population collapsed in the 1980s, but is now at or near record abundance, and bass have become, in terms of pounds landed, the most important recreationally caught fish in the nation. Some states still permit a small number of commercial fishermen to harvest this publicly owned resource. Other states have long-standing gamefish laws that prohibit it.

Gamefish proponents have made more recent efforts to enact commercial prohibitions elsewhere, but have been universally rebuffed. New Jersey Congressman Frank Pallone has repeatedly introduced gamefish legislation in the House of Representatives, but has been unable to marshal sufficient support to move it out of committee.

Gamefish advocates have up to now clothed their efforts in the rhetoric of conservation. However, commercial interests have been very successful in convincing policymakers that the gamefish movement is nothing more than an effort to shift harvest from commercial to recreational fishers, and exchange the current commercial harvest for a larger recreational kill.

The commercials' arguments are supported by the actions of the State of New Jersey, which banned commercial harvest but permits anglers a third bonus fish. in addition to the two bass permitted anglers under ASMFC's Interstate Striped Bass Management Plan. Spokesmen for the New Jersey angling community justify the increased recreational kill by asserting that the commercial quota has to be netted out to the state's anglers in order to prevent it from being returned to the coastal commercial pool, and further excuse their state's regulations by claiming that fewer fish are killed under the bonus plan than would be harvested if a commercial fishery still existed in New Jersey.

However, even a casual reading of the management plan reveals that there is no "coastal commercial pool".

Commercial allocation is calculated on a state-by-state basis, and there is no provision for one state's unused commercial harvest to be reallocated elsewhere. Thus, the commercials have successfully convinced decision-makers thus far that sportsmen want to hog the fish for themselves and deny a traditional fishing industry its livelihood.

Current sources of striped bass mortality also confound gamefish proponents.
Anglers kill more than three times as many striped bass than do commercial fishers. The mortality attributed to catch-and-release fishing alone nearly doubles the total commercial harvest. Furthermore, angling-related mortality continues to increase as new anglers enter the sport. It makes no sense to shift the allocation to the people already doing the most damage to the resource notes Cape Cod commercial John Rice.

Efforts to justify gamefish status based on economic considerations also appear to be based on shaky ground.

Stripers Forever, an organization dedicated to obtaining coast-wide gamefish status for bass, retained Southwick Associates to prepare an economic study of the fishery, which ultimately determined that the total economic activity generated by striped bass anglers was more than 26 times greater than that produced by the commercial fishery.

However, the ASMFC Committee on Economics and Social Sciences reviewed the study and rejected it in its entirety in May. Stripers Forever founder, Brad Burns, noted in response, "This is largely based on the same kind pro-commercial fishing at any cost rhetoric that has been used to keep regulators from effectively conserving our ground fish resources until they could be wiped out."

Perhaps Burns is right, but it is clear that economic arguments do not yet provide a clear path to gamefish status.






So, is a coast-wide gamefish for striped bass a non-starter? Not necessarily. Based on the most recent stock assessment, overall fishing mortality of striped bass exceeds the target mortality level by nearly 35%, and hovers just below the overfishing threshold. The same assessment shows that the larger, older fish are under too much pressure.

**Many experienced striped bass anglers are noting a decline in the number of large fish, a sentiment echoed in Stripers Forever's 2006 survey of its members.

Reducing mortality, particularly on older fish, should be a management goal. Decommercialization of striped bass is a realistic means to achieve it, particularly since decreasing recreational harvest is likely to lead to increased catch-and-release mortality.

However, such action is only justifiable if the former commercial harvest is used to increase the population, and not merely transferred to recreational landings as it is in New Jersey.

A coastal gamefish law would further eliminate some bycatch-prone commercial gear such as gillnets and would stop the practice of discarding smaller, dead fish in favor of larger ones ("highgrading") in order to maximize profit. It would also quell a rampant black market in illegally harvested striped bass.

Burns notes, "If the striped bass were a personal-use-only species, the values of recreational fisherman would control its fate. Sure, a few would be eaten, but a healthy stock and high-quality fishing experience would be the primary values."

Charles Witek, Chair of Coastal Conservation Association New York, echoed those sentiments, noting that "Striped bass should first be managed in a way that makes biological sense and, once that is achieved, managed in a way that brings the greatest overall benefit to the general public. Permitting the continued commercial exploitation of naturally-spawned striped bass achieves neither objective."

Thus, decommercialization is valuable not because it will permit a bigger recreational kill, but because it is the
surest way to reduce overall striped bass mortality,
increase the spawning stock,
better assure the long-term health of the striped bass fishery
and better represent the long term interests of the general public.

However, merely replacing commercial harvest with recreational harvest fails to achieve such goals. Efforts to do so harm anglers' credibility with fishery managers and deals commercial interests a winning hand. Until the gamefish movement realizes that, we will more than likely never see a coast-wide gamefish bill.

http://www.nycflyfishing.com/Gamefis...%20Reasons.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarkSkies

GAMEFISH, BUT FOR THE RIGHT REASONS
An honest look at why striped bass is not a gamefish?
By Capt. John McMurray

Bass have become, in terms of pounds landed, the most important recreationally caught fish in the nation.

However, commercial interests have been very successful in convincing policymakers that the gamefish movement is nothing more than an effort to shift harvest from commercial to recreational fishers, and exchange the current commercial harvest for a larger recreational kill.

The commercials' arguments are supported by the actions of the State of New Jersey, which banned commercial harvest but permits anglers a third bonus fish. in addition to the two bass permitted anglers under ASMFC's Interstate Striped Bass Management Plan. Spokesmen for the New Jersey angling community justify the increased recreational kill by asserting that the commercial quota has to be netted out to the state's anglers in order to prevent it from being returned to the coastal commercial pool, and further excuse their state's regulations by claiming that fewer fish are killed under the bonus plan than would be harvested if a commercial fishery still existed in New Jersey.

I. However, even a casual reading of the management plan reveals that there is no "coastal commercial pool".

** Commercial allocation is calculated on a state-by-state basis, and there is no provision for one state's unused commercial harvest to be reallocated elsewhere. Thus, the commercials have successfully convinced decision-makers thus far that sportsmen want to hog the fish for themselves and deny a traditional fishing industry its livelihood.

II. Current sources of striped bass mortality also confound gamefish proponents.
1. Anglers kill more than three times as many striped bass than do commercial fishers.
2. The mortality attributed to catch-and-release fishing alone nearly doubles the total commercial harvest. Furthermore, angling-related mortality continues to increase as new anglers enter the sport. It makes no sense to shift the allocation to the people already doing the most damage to the resource notes Cape Cod commercial John Rice.

Efforts to justify gamefish status based on economic considerations also appear to be based on shaky ground.
Perhaps Burns is right, but it is clear that economic arguments do not yet provide a clear path to gamefish status.






So, is a coast-wide gamefish for striped bass a non-starter? Not necessarily. Based on the most recent stock assessment,
1. overall fishing mortality of striped bass exceeds the target mortality level by nearly 35%,
2. and hovers just below the overfishing threshold.
3. The same assessment shows that the larger, older fish are under too much pressure.

**Many experienced striped bass anglers are noting a decline in the number of large fish, a sentiment echoed in Stripers Forever's 2006 survey of its members.

Reducing mortality, particularly on older fish, should be a management goal. ...However, such action is only justifiable if the former commercial harvest is used to increase the population, and not merely transferred to recreational landings as it is in New Jersey.

A coastal gamefish law would
1. further eliminate some bycatch-prone commercial gear such as gillnets
2. and would stop the practice of discarding smaller, dead fish in favor of larger ones ("highgrading") in order to maximize profit.
3. It would also quell a rampant black market in illegally harvested striped bass.

Thus, decommercialization is valuable not because it will permit a bigger recreational kill, but because it is the
A. surest way to reduce overall striped bass mortality,
B. increase the spawning stock,
C. better assure the long-term health of the striped bass fishery
D. and better represent the long term interests of the general public.

However, merely replacing commercial harvest with recreational harvest fails to achieve such goals. Efforts to do so harm anglers' credibility with fishery managers and deals commercial interests a winning hand. Until the gamefish movement realizes that, we will more than likely never see a coast-wide gamefish bill.

http://www.nycflyfishing.com/Gamefis...%20Reasons.htm

---

I tried to condense what Capt McMurray said, into bullet points.
I have gotten feedback that readers generally will not read something that contains many paragraphs. That's one of the reasons for the highlight colors I use.

I have been trying to condense my own posts down as well.
**I also learned here, that we can eliminate the NJ bonus tags, without allocating the fish to the commercial fishery.
It appears my previous statements on this were not completely accurate. I was told we could not do this.

As always, it's informative to hear the perspective of others.
If I am wrong in one of my statements or something I represented, I would be grateful for someone pointing that out.




There can be no change, without informed discussion on both sides....
Differences of opinion are valuable as well...would love to hear what some others think....
Thanks for reading....:HappyWave:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarkSkies

In fact, the ASMFC and some fisheries management policies of managing for MSY (maximum sustainable yield) is outdated and disregards the future.

A grave problem with this legacy method of calculating, is that the SSB numbers, as explained previously, are numbers extrapolated from raw data and catch reports. where small sample sizes are used. This data, admittedly a small and inaccurate sample size, is extrapolated to calculate the size of the whole striped bass population.

In statistics, when you take small sample sizes and subject them to hypotheses about a large population, there is a significant margin for error.

---

Small Sample Sizes and Data Extrapolation -
My habit of referring to the inadequacy of taking small sample sizes and extrapolating that to hypothesize a population amount, has also been said by others. Here, a quote from Capt John McMurray referring to MRFSS, used by NMFS for various species, and recently recognized as flawed.






"While MRFSS will always be subject to sampling error, its precision can be increased by increasing the sampling size. More and more states are taking it into their own hands to do so.

Most states rely on a contractor to do the sampling and do the absolute minimum sampling required. States that do their fisheries data collection in-house can employ much larger sample sizes than NMFS. Such states report a high level of angler acceptance of MRFSS data. . Oregon samples 30% of angler trips to better manage its halibut fishery, which has a strict quota limit. It could be argued that the states that don’t do their own sampling are the ones who have the most problems with their data....

Still, some of the biggest critics of MRFSS are also the biggest opponents of a salt water license. Perhaps, with MRFSS as with so many other things, the simplest solutions also appear to be the most elusive."

http://www.nycflyfishing.com/A%20Num...20Accuracy.htm

I came across this document when doing some research last week........ thought others might like to read.
About the Striped Bass Conservation Act, circa 2000.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-10...106hrpt698.htm

Bumping this forward in case anyone wants to do some light reading this summer. :rolleyes: :HappyWave:

Here is an update for you folks called the Striped bass Heritage Act. Unfortunately not much movement happened on it. We can always hope for next year.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/2040
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr2040


H.R.2040 -- Striped Bass American Heritage Act (Introduced in House - IH)
114th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 2040
To designate the Atlantic striped bass as the National Fish of the United States.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

April 28, 2015
Mr. MACARTHUR introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

A BILL
To designate the Atlantic striped bass as the National Fish of the United States.

• Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

• This Act may be cited as the `Striped Bass American Heritage Act'.

SEC. 2. DESIGNATION OF ATLANTIC STRIPED BASS AS NATIONAL FISH OF THE UNITED STATES.

• (a) Findings- The Congress finds the following:
• (1) The striped bass, Morone saxatilis, is an anadromous species, frequenting and requiring both fresh water and salt water throughout its life.
• (2) The Atlantic striped bass has played an important role in the development and growth of the United States.
• (3) The Atlantic striped bass is identified as playing a pivotal role in providing the Pilgrims of the Plymouth Colony sustenance in 1620.
• (4) The Nation's first fishing conservation law was enacted in 1639, pertaining to the use of Atlantic striped bass.
• (5) The Nation's first free public school was funded with income derived from the income accrued from Atlantic striped bass in 1670.
• (6) Atlantic striped bass from the Navesink River in New Jersey were transported west to San Francisco Bay via railway car in 1879 during the country's great expansion west.
• (7) Atlantic striped bass spawn in freshwater, the success of which is influenced by environmental conditions, habitat, and water conditions.
• (8) Widespread pollution of coastal estuaries and rivers and overfishing in the 1960s and 1970s lead to dramatic decline of the Atlantic striped bass population and the passage of the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act in 1984 (16 U.S.C 5151 et seq.).
• 9) Through Executive Order 13449, issued on October 24, 2007, Atlantic striped bass in Federal waters were afforded protection from sale.
• (10) The Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act is a regional management success due in part to the moratorium authority vested in both the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of the Interior who can declare jointly a moratorium on fishing for Atlantic striped bass within the coastal waters of any coastal State if the Secretaries determine that coastal State to be out of compliance with any regulatory measures necessary to fully implement and enforce the Atlantic striped bass management plan within its coastal waters.
• (11) The Atlantic striped bass population responded positively to management measures and improvements to water quality, and was therefore declared rebuilt in 1995.
• (12) The Atlantic striped bass supports significant and sustainable commercial and recreational fisheries that provide income, employment, and food.
• (13) The Atlantic striped bass, through its resilience and persistence, represents the American ideals and spirit that helped shaped the Nation.
• (b) Declaration- The Atlantic striped bass, Morone saxatilis, is designated as the National Fish of the United States.