asmfc public bunker hearing toms river

Ths meeting is tonight did anyone from here go?

The Star-Ledger
ASMFC public hearing on amendments to the Atlantic Menhaden Fishery Management Plan begins at 7 p.m. in the Ocean County Administration Building, 101 Hooper Ave. in Toms River. Bunkers are a vital prey species for striped bass and many other species, and their present abundance is only a fraction of the historical abundance. Proposals to reduce purse seining of menhaden could have a very positive impact on furure recreational fisheries, and those proposals need broad support in order to overcome the influence of Omega Protein.

I bet you Omega Protein will have reps there.

Be careful what you ask for you just might get it. - this was something my grandfather used to say all the time when we were growing up. A friend of mine was at that meeting tonight. He said that the gov't is thinking about closing all bunker netting down not only to the commercial big boats but the recreational boats too. I guess that means every single personal boat out there, even the ones with the small 6' nets?
It is mind boggling that they would do something like that.
Dark Skies I hope you don't mind me mentioning this as I see your posts on several sites. On one site, bass Barn, you got into it hot and heavy with a Capt over there. You were saying that the group, menhaden defenders, has PEW ties. or something like that. I am sorry if I don't remember it correctly.
What I understood from your posts is that these groups want to make it worse for all fishermen and support these groups like bunker defenders as a way to do that. I thank you for having the courage to speak out and point out some things that are unpleasant. After hearing what happened tonight I will never support the menhaden defenders. It seems liike they want to get everyone all riled up but the real intention is to shut bunker down for everyoe. And then if that doesn't happen they will say here here look what we did for you we got them to agree to give NJ fishermen 10,000 bunker a year. No way did I think they would go after the receational fisherman. This just sucks, totally.

Bunker makes everyone a bass fisherman.

VS dreams,,,, I regret you characterizing what happened on the Barn that way. I was in intense discussions. I was very passionate in those discussions,. These discussions were with more than one person representing that group.

I want to come back and go into more detail when I get a chance,
In the meantime....

1. Thanks for your opinion and words. :HappyWave:
2. As always, I welcome your opinion, and if that's what it appeared like to you, it's perfectly acceptable to relate it as you saw it.
3. I'm agreeing with you moreso than I'm disagreeing.
4. However, I don't want people to accept blindly any statements I may make, as I also encourage them not to blindly accept statements made by others.
5. I don't have enough knowledge about that group to make an offiicial statement at this time.
6. It's my constitutionally protected opinion there could be some possible connections to, or support of, PEW. That has been discussed, and to some extent, admissions have been made.
7. That doesn't mean that the group supports PEW, only that some of its members may be supporters.
8. I want people to form their own opinions of this group.
9. Read the threads over there, if that's what you're referencing.
10. Please don't make assumptions about the character of folks if you don't know them.
11. I may agree with some of you. I don't want anyone negatively characterizing anyone out there, unless that party has an opportunity to come here and respond in rebuttal.


The bottom line....please investigate all PACs (political action committees) that you contribute to, and ask yourselves where the bulk of their funding comes from....

more on this later....thanks..:HappyWave:

This year we have a lot of bunker in the sound. Last few years we didn't. FYi, dark. I can't speak for jersey.

From a friend that sits on fisheries boards that I fish with and attend some meetings with.

Quote:

I have been going to fisheries meetings since 1981 and I must say last night's meeting was easily the most f-cked up one I've attended. The ASMFC was so unprepared as far as facts it was beyond ridiculous! They claim that one year the rec "harvest" of bunker exceeded 620 metric tons! They also stated NJ landed 49% of the entire bunker quota. When was the last time they noticed all of the out of state home ports on the back of the boats? Not many people attended last night, but the complaining should start soon!
__________________

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishinmission78

. Proposals to reduce purse seining of menhaden could have a very positive impact on furure recreational fisheries,

---

yeah but as I read on this site there are a lot of pods of bunker with nothing under them. Why don't people become as worried about increasing the bass? Because that means we will be allowed to keep less of them. God forbid guys can't use their bonus tags and only keep 1 or 2 bass instead of 3.:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finchaser

Well the pain in the a_s bunker schools are here and stretched for miles with no fish under them. That didn't stop the snag and drop crew from stopping and snagging away. But then again bunker makes everyone a bass fisherman.

---

Sent in by Fin, thanks.



(5/8/2012) The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) last week voted to move forward with a Public Comment Draft of Amendment 2 to the Atlantic menhaden fisheries management plan (FMP). ASMFC's official vote this past Thursday in Alexandria, VA will open the window for public comment in addressing overall bunker harvest throughout the Atlantic States in 2013.
Amendment 2 will ultimately set up a timeline for achieving the target mortality rate for menhaden by establishing certain management mechanisms in both the recreational and commercial sector. Of note to anglers, the draft addendum will not be geared towards cuts in the recreational sector because of the minimal landings from the recreational sector.

According to Capt. Adam Nowalsky, chairman of the Recreational Fishing Alliance's New Jersey chapter (RFA-NJ) and the legislative proxy to the ASMFC for New Jersey Assemblyman Nelson Albano, an update to the stock assessment will be released later this summer which is expected to incorporate the latest information about the bunker fishery, including up-to-date harvest tallies and overall status of the stock.

"The current scientific data shows that overfishing is occurring on bunker, but only by less than 1%," Nowalsky said. "The updated stock assessment coming out this summer may say that we're not overfishing, it could say that we're overfishing by more than 1%, but that presently is an unknown."

Nowalsky said this week's vote by the ASMFC will allow Draft Amendment 2 to be decided upon in October after the updates to the stock assessment have been released and once the full range of public comment is received by the ASMFC regarding the document to be released in August for review.

"ASMFC will draft a document, we'll get to review it again and then in October a vote will take place to enact the measures in the amendment," Nowalsky said, adding "the good news is that we continue to move forward in the amendment process."

It should be noted that the ASMFC vote was not about setting management measures for bunker, but about including information for public comment to be released for review sometime in August. Nowalsky noted that the complexity of fisheries management plans, particularly with regard to bunker which is targeted primarily by bait boats along the Atlantic Seaboard and the reduction fleet inside of Virginia waters including up inside the Chesapeake Bay, has spawned a lot of misinformation in Internet message boards with regard to the process.

"Much of the confusion is that folks reading the message board analysis don't understand that this can be a slow-moving process, particularly when you consider that managers are dealing with a series of numbers including thresholds and targets," explained Nowalsky. "Everything is going to be about mortality rate in the coming months, the mortality threshold by which acceptable biological fishing will be allowed over the next few years, and the overall mortality target which is more of a policy decision."

"It's important to remember that no decisions have been made yet except to move forward with crafting a document for the public for review that has a suite of options for addressing the future mortality of bunker," he added.

As an appointed delegate for the chairman of the Assembly Natural Resources Committee in New Jersey, Nowalsky said he and fellow ASMFC Commissioners from New Jersey including the Governor's Appointee Tom Fote and the proxy for the state Department of Environmental Protection, Pete Himchak, had one of the votes on the ASMFC for moving the document forward for public comment.

"New Jersey voted in favor of leaving an option in place for a 10-year timeframe for reaching a final target mortality, which is in addition to 3-year and 5-year timeframes which are also in the document," said Nowalsky. "No one voted for only a 10-year timeframe, there was simply a vote to leave this timeframe in the document for consideration and public comment along with other options."

"Steps will be taken in 2013 to achieve the threshold fishing mortality rate," Nowalsky said, adding "when the updated stock assessments come out this summer, there will be a lot more to talk about with regard to this extremely important fishery."

According to the ASMFC, a total of 22,641 comments were received as of the April 20, 2012 deadline date with regard to the initial public information document on bunker. Of those comments 104 were personalized individual comment, 18 were from organizations, and 22,519 comments were from form letters. The comments gathered by ASMFC came on the heels of 12 public hearings in 12 different states, where approximately 185 individuals were estimated to have attended the hearings combined.

As for the RFA's official position with regard to the future of menhaden management along the Atlantic Coast, one recommendation was that the bunker reduction fishery on the Chesapeake Bay be eliminated. (see www.joinrfa.org/Press/MenhadenFinalComments_042012.pdf.)

"Consistent with action taken by most states dealing with their inshore waters and bays, RFA believes a closed area for the reduction fishery should be imposed for the entire Bay and its tributaries," said Jim Donofrio in official comments to the ASFMC. "RFA believes such a closed area would result in positive ecological benefits to the Bay and species that rely on menhaden such as striped bass."

Also come up during the ASMFC bunker discussion was a reminder by the Technical Committee that they had been asked in 2010 to develop ecological reference points for menhaden which would take into account natural predation and forage issues. The problem with this particular project discussed by the ASMFC's Technical Committee was that that cost to improve the science was somewhere in the neighborhood of $300,000.

"If these environmental groups who are blanketing the Internet with form letters truly cared about helping protect bunker stocks, you'd think they would help pony up the funding to support improved science," said Donofrio. "With the war chests that Pew and Environmental Defense Fund have, you could probably find a couple of hundred thousand in cash in between the boardroom couch cushions."