OGB
I'm against the tag ,there is a quota assigned to it and once met that should be it for the year but no one monitors it.under the new method
Under the old method you had cards that had to be filled out and mailed in, and you were sent another but after so many cards were issued in general it stooped. Using the INTERNET to do it is total bull ****. IMO the INTERNET will aid in destroying bass fishing even faster this time around.
Pay attention to what history has taught us or be prepared to relive it again
Senior Member
Time well spent Dark, it must have taken you hours to collect your thoughts and get them down on paper. It is much appreciated. Nice reporting. Thanks.
Administrator
The phone calls and PMs keep me going
VSDreams, I honestly spend way too much time on these issues. What pushes me is there are many out there who don't know any of this stuff, because it's never been presented to them before.
I want to give it my best effort. My energies are fueled by the countless phone calls and PMs I get thanking me for trying.
Many of those contacting me are old-timers, who have seen this happen once, and see the potential of it happening again. Quite a few of them are tired of fighting. A general consensus among a lot of old timers I know and a lot of other fishermen is that we might as well ignore this. They feel another moratorium is inevitable given all the fighting we recreational fishermen do. They feel things will get shut down anyway, what's the use of trying?
Sometimes I wonder if in the grand scheme of things if it's worth it? Why fight a growing trend of anglers who don't want to believe it unless they see it before their very eyes?
My answer:
It's the phone calls and PMs. I thank you guys for that.
Thanks to all who keep pushing me, even the grouchy ones.
Senior Member
Nice report Dark, Thanks for the update.
Administrator
More comments
11. Tim Silva, cf
"50% of my income comes from bass fishing. This bill is selfish."
******************************
12. Thomas Short, cf
"This is a sustainable fishery"
********************************
13. Darren Saletta, cf Chatham
"I have a marine sciences degree from Cornell. We don't hi-grade our fish. We are accused of not contributing to the fishing culture. Many families come to the docks to see us come in. It's true there are many inactive permits, but people maintain these permits to keep their options open. "
**************************
14. Allen Forrest, rf, Cape Cod, fishing for 50 years
I was once a cf, am now solely a rf. I believe we need to protect these fish. We all deserve better fishing than what we're having now. The preservation of this species has been maligned, like it only benefits a special interest group. I say that statement is false. The making of the striper a gamefish will ultimately benefit us all, and because the numbers are down, now is the time to do it."
****************************
15. Russell Cleary, cf, representing the Commercial Anglers Assoc. (CAA)
"Striped bass are not overfished. This bill would place an undue burden on many families. I was on the MFC advisory committee at one time."
****************************
16. George Watson, rf
I have many years of fishing experience. I grew up fishing with John Tolten. I have issues with several claims put forth with commercial fishermen:
a. No one will eat farm raised striped bass and people will lose restaurant customers if they try to serve it.
This is an untrue statement. If you look at the value of farm raised vs wild striped bass in the fish markets, wild striped bass sells for only 10c more/lb than farm raised. What does that tell you about market forces? People are already eating farm raised striped bass and paying for the privelege with no complaints. Market forces have dictated that farm raised is comparable to wild bass, at least from an economics standpoint.
b. All striped bass are healthy as sold.
This is another fallacy. The larger striped bass have higher concentrations of PCBs. This has been scientifically proven. There is also a high % of mycobacteriosis in bass who spawn in the Chesapeake bay. They are having serious problems with that now.
c. The striped bass fishery is sustainable.
This is another fallacy. In the 1800s there were 100lb striped bass. The average size has been decreasing since then. I don't expect people to have 100lb bass as a standard now. After all, that was over 150 years ago. However, this continuous harvesting of the bigger bass has had a negative effect on average striped bass size. I maintain it is decreasing, and will continue until we do something about it.
****************************
17. Dave Tripp, cf & charter captain
"The slot limit is bad because it doesn't allow bass to spawn"
***************************
18. Jose______, cf
"rf has more mortality than cf"
*********************
19. Hunter Mark (14 years old) and David Mark (uncle), cf, Chatham
"This bill will restrict us and not allow us to make a living"
********************************
20. ______________ , rf
(I didn't get this guy's name. Anyone who recognizes his testimony here, plse let me know and I'll edit it in later)
'I was a cf for many years, and now just fish rf.
I may be one of the few in this room who is a regular ASMFC attendee.
Some of you have criticized the Southwick Study put up by sf. I remind you that -
'Results of this survey should not be used to make decisions for research allocations or mandates.'
Although I feel something needs to be done, I DON'T support the slot limit. Bad science is bad science. I firmly believe that a 20-26" slot is bad. May I remind you that Maine went to a slot limit in 1997. By 1999, 2 years later, reported catches had risen 1000%.
I will read a letter from Dr Michael Armstrong, retired head of the RF program for the state of MA:
'....the slot limit does not work...the economics for that size don't work.'
I can report that the latest ASMFC meeting, there was an updated stock assessment. This assessent says that the overall biomass is trending down. There will ultimately be some sanctions recommended by the ASMFC to restrict striped bass catches somewhat.
That's how this matter should be handled, on the ASMFC level.
**************************
21. Brian Curry, cf, fishing 50 years
"This bill unfairly targets cf, while rf kill many more bass than cf. I don't see where the science behind it is accurate. On the Cape, we have had differences in bait migration. We also have an abundance of seals and cormorants whose population is unchecked and growing. I don't feel it's fair to place the whole blame squarely on the shoulders of cf. '
Administrator
More comments
22. Arthur C, rec fisherman, Cape Cod
"I am 75 years old. I have been fishing since I was 12, for a total of 63 years.
I am here not merely to support the bill, but to voice my concerns about both sides of the issue. I would like to make the following points:
1. If striped bass numbers go down again like they were in the 1980's, they will have a very difficult period of recovery. This could economically impact tourism as fishermen will not travel here to fish.
2. I do support a slot limit as I feel it would keep bigger fish in the gene pool.
3. I want my grandchildren to be able to continue to catch bass, and am here also as a voice for their future.
4. The current law as it is written is faulty. I am catching too many big fish in the estuaries. Even though I am a catch and release fisherman, I think we should limit our take of big fish. "
*********************************
As they were leaving the meeting Arthur proposed to his fiance Rosalie M. This was the highlight of the day.
After a year-long whirlwind courtship, she gladly accepted. This must have been a relief for Arthur. What if she had said no?
I was so impressed I left the room with Arthur and Rosalie, and took some pictures outside the Assembly.
Arthur is one of the most avid fly fishermen on the Cape. He holds a PHD from Cornell, and has caught striped bass from St John's River in NB Canada to the St John's River in Jacksonville, Fla. His major base for fishing has been Cape Cod. He is strictly a catch and release fisherman and crafts all of the flies he uses.
It was my pleasure to meet Arthur and his fiance Rosalie. I wish them much happiness and health in their years together!
Administrator
The wrap-up and my analysis
I tried to be as fair and impartial as I could here. Those who know me know I have a problem with people who feel the law is written for others to follow, and not them.
I realize the majority of commercial fishermen, and recreationals, are honest and want to follow the laws.
However, I know of both recs and comms who have very creative ways of disregarding the laws and getting away with it. This becomes a bigger problem where you have an activity like fishing, where it's very difficult to have universal compliance.
There aren't enough officers in the field. People who disregard the law regularly know they have a slim chance of getting caught for fishing violations. The fines are so small that it's almost worth it to cheat for the dishonest ones. They view it as the cost of doing business.
These are some of the questions that arose for the state of MA, based on the responses from both sides:
1. Negative tourism impact from closing down commercial fishing.
I think this is a poor argument, and simply can't be supported by the numbers. Look at any of the other states that have shut comm fishing down. I don't believe any of them have been economically harmed by it, in terms of aggregate dollars coming into the state from fishing.
2. People have to eat wild striped bass or they won't come to MA.
I don't think that argument holds water. Mass is a beautiful state, and a preferred destination for many families. There might be some unhappy people. I would bet that it wouldn't change net tourism dollar inflow or tourism traffic into the state if this were changed.
3. The striped bass stock is sustainable.
I heard that phrase so many times by Comms my head was spinning.
IMO the problem with the concept of sustainability is that they use MSY as a benchmark. Simplified, that means that they are managing the resource for the "hypothesized" maximum yield that won't cause the biomass numbers to go down.
Fisheries terms explained here:
http://stripersandanglers.com/Forum/...ead.php?t=5533
This is faulty science, people. It's attributable to the management practices of the NMFS, ASMFC, and NOAA. The way to realistically manage the biomass for future growth is complex. It would require a series of newer calculations, such as predicted entrants into the fishing world, growth of that unknown number, and the variance and standard deviation of that growth rate.
It becomes complicated when you consider all the other variables that can affect fishing results, such as weather, bait migration, etc, etc. So it's not clear how these variables are factored into the equation.
Fisheries management is also a fallacy if you don't look at the global biomasses of inter-dependent species when making these decisions.
Simply repeating a mantra that:
The numbers are screwed up because they don't take into account a,b,c, d, e, and f...gets us nowhere.
I don't have the answers for that. I wanted to make note of it for the historical record.
4. The big bass are all offshore because that's where the bait is:
I hear this so many times from people it causes my head to spin as well.
If that were empirically true, then every time you had large schools of bait, you would consistently find good numbers of large bass underneath. Although other bait will be targeted, bunker are the preferred food source for the biggest bass because they're the easiest meal.
Big bass are lazy, ask author H Bruce Franklin. The charter boat guys and professional fishermen know this as well, and that's why they'll get their biggest bass near high bait concentrations.
Also, this statement that the bass are where the bait is in MA, should be always true for large concentrations in any state, if the biomass and numbers of large bass are statistically accurate. That simply was not true last year for NJ. At times, with water temps being optimal, there were miles of bunker schools off the coast of NJ, with only a few big bass under them.
That to me indicates a problem. There will always be a Captain who claims they found bass anyway.
This goes to the M&M theory, where of course the biggest bass will always be found in the middle of the highest bait concentrations. The important indicator of a stock's health is the edges of the bowl, representing its geographic range, and not just a few hot spots in the middle.
M&M theory explained here:
http://stripersandanglers.com/Forum/...p?t=760&page=5
http://stripersandanglers.com/Forum/...p?t=760&page=7
Administrator
Key issues
Based on the testimony I heard from both sides, here are some of the key issues that need to be addressed:
1. Recs kill more bass.
This is a true statement. I agree with it. It's supported by all historical data we have for the past few years. Basically, the commercial harvest has stayed the same (allegedly as reported)
The rec harvest has continued to climb, not only for bass but some other species we fish for recreationally, with the exception of weakfish. Before I explained to you how the data collection is not optimally accurate. Now I'm telling you the numbers are correct.
What gives?
Simple answer..they are relatively correct.
Even if you were to assume that every single comm out there is dishonest and is mis-stating their catch, the sheer number of rec fishermen and catches is such that Recs logically catch more than Comms do in the case of MA.
For the record, I will state that MA's Comm method of fishing with heavy tackle is one of the most efficient ways of harvesting fish without a high mortality. I think we should believe that the Comm mortality numbers are accurate. To be honest, I'm not so sure about the Rec mortality numbers. I think they could be higher than represented. The figure they use is less than 10%. Some people with more experience than me claim the mortality is at least 10% for Recs.
So, it is what it is, and we need to accept the fact that recs kill more bass in this case.
2. Is it in the best interests of MA to prevent every Comm fisherman from fishing for striped bass?
This issue became confusing the more I heard the testimony from the Comm guys. In the previous post I slammed some of the things the Comm guys do. I also stated that there are abuses on the Rec side as well.
I think the real answer here to a workable solution lies somewhere in the middle:
a. They could immediately put a cap on all new commercial licenses, none permitted for the future.
b. Let guys know that the weekend warrior comm guys would be weeded out from the system. If you can't prove you fish commercially for a living, it might be a good idea to look into why that group has to be gven the privelege of a commercial permit. The commercial permit gives you the right to harvest and carry 30 fish/day. I respectfully submit that if there is abuse of this permit, it's more llikely to be by a guy who doesn't do it for a living. Of course, that's just my opinion.
I know of a few NJ guys who make the run to MA every year to fish commercially. Private intel came in that said some of them were finding ways to take more than their limits. I think it's important for abuses like that to be stopped. As some of those testifying said, when people do that they're stealing from all people in MA. I've also heard of instances of commercial guys living in MA who have sold to restaurants & small independent fish markets where they don't have to report it on their license. This underground industry needs to be looked at.
c. Again, that method of hook and line fishing is more efficient than purse seining and gill-netting for bass, where the dead bycatch numbers are horrible. Even though I've never been a big fan of commercial fishing, I think some of the fault with the fishery lies squarely on the shoulders of the recs. You need to find a way to address that as well.
d. Lawsuits - when we talk about these things in the abstract, it's important to understand the many obstacles that can create an impasse. When you restrict a guy's right to do business in your state, you become exposed to potential legal liability. Every proposal has to be able to withstand a legal challenge.
3. Rep Patrick and Sen Tarr need to get together to work out some sort of solution.
I'm sure other Reps and Senators will be involved, and I was grateful to hear their positions as well. However, for an outsider, IMO it seemed like these 2 had the best working relationship in the meeting.
If anyone from MA can weigh in on this I would appreciate it. I'm not well-versed with who has the real power in those rooms.
4. The problem lies in the slot.
There is too much polarization about that slot issue. People either love it or hate it. There needs to be some other compromise that both sides will accept.
5. Everyone manipulates data to their own agenda.
I saw this first hand, and it was confusing. After thinking about it, I came to the conclusion that some of the reported data and reported catches had to be inaccurate.
6. The commercial figures are off. So are the recreational figures.
Again, the data became confusing to me as each side tried to pick apart the data the other was using. The most logical solution to me was that some people on both sides, comms and recs, are not reporting accurately. This skews the numbers. If people are going to trust each other, IMO you need more accurate reporting and enforcement on both sides.
Hence the proposed saltwater registry, and the eventual fee revenue. I don't know if that will work as intended, but the system in place now isn't working.
7. The attitude of many people regarding striped bass is polarized.
Spawning...For example, when talking about sb spawning, not once was any place other than the Chesapeake mentioned. No mention was made of the Hudson River, where (allegedly) 4 million bass spawn a year. I feel many people are not aware there are various places that bass spawn, Chesapeake, Delaware river, possibly the Raritan river, the Hudson, and possibly some of the larger Connecticut rivers. Bass spawn in fresh water, this is a basic marine fact. One Comm guy even said for all he knew bass could spawn in the ocean.
I bring up that statement not to slam that guy or Comms as a group. However, it became apparent to me that with all the intelligent statements made at the meeting, we all have a lot to learn and understand about striped bass.
Coastal Dependence of all species...People who are truly concerned about the resource need to understand how a lot of this is connected with what happens in other Coastal states. There was some awareness, and some who only seemed to be concerned with MA.
I understand part of that, but striped bass are a migratory species. What happens with catches, bait migration, spawning conditions affects all states. Again, there were many very intelligent minds at that meeting.
I personally felt people need to be aware of bass as a shared coastal resource. They also need to be aware how a tightening of other fishing regulations puts pressure on the striped bass.
This education of people seems simple enough. In reality it's extremely hard as people continue to hold onto their traditional beliefs.
Thanks for reading, people.
I hope the pics, anecdotes, and marriage proposal helped to make this thead an interesting read.
Senior Member
I didn't think that was possible until I scanned this thread. how many cups of coffee today, Dark?Originally Posted by DarkSkies
The posting will be here for a historical record, and may be more lengthy than you're used to seeing me post.
I couldn't make it to that meeting but heard stripers forever got crushed. You took the tail end of a losing situation and turned it into a good story. Ya done good.
Senior Member
Amazing job Dark, Thanks for your efforts. You got some good reporting skills.
Senior Member
The political landscape is harsh and confusing for lots of folks. That may be why many don't get involved. I think your presentation was very fair and accurate. Thanks for breaking it up with the pictures Dark.
Actually, I have some real questions about the testimony presented on both sides. It bugs me that so many only wanted to see their side of things, and refused to consider the position of the other side.
In the end, I realized that's what our representatives, fishing organizations, and lobbyists are for. It seems like dirty politics, but that's how things are run in this world.
They listen to our opinions, and then decide among themselves behind closed doors. Our job as voters is to decide who best represents our interests, and then lobby that politician with letters, campaign donations, or donations to a group that can represent us en masse. Otherwise, gov't politely listens, but they are mostly listening to their Constituents.
Constituents as a bloc have the most power in getting politicians' attention because they are the key group that, when mad enough, can vote a politician IN, or OUT OF, office.
I'll be trying to present a fair and balanced paraphrasal of peoples' statements here. I hope my biases don't show through too much. I understand each politician has a self-preservation interest to represent the voters in their district. They are just doing the best to maintain job security, like everyone else.
I will try to point out which politicians seemed more favorable to recreational fishermen, without seeming to endorse a certain politician. You guys and girls in MA have to keep yourselves informed and make your own decisions.
Senior Member
However, I know of both recs and comms who have very creative ways of disregarding the laws and getting away with it. This becomes a bigger problem where you have an activity like fishing, where it's very difficult to have universal compliance.
There aren't enough officers in the field. People who disregard the law regularly know they have a slim chance of getting caught for fishing violations. The fines are so small that it's almost worth it to cheat for the dishonest ones. They view it as the cost of doing business.
You touched on some good points. I know 5 guys with commercial licenses. 3 of them openly brag how they are selling outside their license to restaurants and mom and pop fish markets, so it doesn't go on their total. This is more widespread than you think. These abuses have to be stopped with higher fines and better enforcement.
As for the out of state guys, I don't think you can stop them from fishing, as you said. What you can do is make their license cost 10x what a resident pays. Or prove that 50% of their income came from commercial fishing. This is not without precedent. Alaska, Florida, and many other states have license fee differentials for in-state vs out of state. This seems like the fairest in the long run. Here is how they run it in NY -
(ii) Permits to take a full quota share of striped bass will be issued at no cost to persons who currently possess a valid New York State commercial food fish license and who previously held a New York State license to sell striped bass during 1984, 1985, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, or 1995 and who can demonstrate through Federal or New York State income tax records that 50 percent or more of his or her earned income resulted from his or her direct participation in the harvest of marine fish, shellfish, crustaceans or other marine biota in any one year during the period 1994 through 2004. A complete copy of such tax record must be filed with the department upon application.
(iii) Permits to take a partial quota share of striped bass will be issued at no cost to persons who currently possess a valid New York State commercial food fish license and who previously held a New York State license to sell striped bass during 1984, 1985, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, or 1995 but who cannot demonstrate that they earned 50 percent or more of their earned income from the direct participation in the harvest of marine fish, shellfish, crustaceans or other marine biota.
(iv) Any holder of a partial share permit may apply for a full share permit by demonstrating through federal or state tax records that 50 percent or more of his or her earned income has been derived from the direct participation in the harvest of marine fish, shellfish, crustaceans or other marine biota during the preceding year.
(v) Beginning in 2005, and continuing at five year intervals, each striped bass commercial harvesters permit holder in the full share category must file with the department a complete copy of his or her federal or state income tax records from one of the preceding three years. Such tax records must be filed before the June 1 deadline for receipt of applications. Such tax records must demonstrate that the permit holder has, as stated in subparagraph (ii) above, maintained the 50 percent earned income level in order to remain a participant in the full share category. Failure to file a timely and complete copy of federal or state income tax records which demonstrate that the permit holder has maintained the 50 percent earned income level will result in the permit holder being placed into the partial share category. Thereafter, the rules pertaining to partial share permit holders provided in subparagraph (iv) above apply.
Senior Member
CT is right on the $$ about this. Way too much abuse in the commercial permit area. 30 fish a day is too much of a temptation for the sleazebags who want to cheat. Another solution is to cut the commercial harvest/day, down to 10 or 15 bass. This would give the hardworking MA fishermen a longer season. Then, once quota is reached, shut it down.
That might make it harder for the out of state guys who come up here trailering their $50k boats to make their $20k in a months time. I'm not looking to get into a war of state vs state, but you can tell who these guys are. It's like a gold rush for some of them. And I'm sorry if anyone is offended by this, but I don't like them. They come up here to rape our resource.
Senior Member
I think they need to concentrate on the abuses as well. Dark did a good job pointing out that recreationals kill most of the fish. This happens because every year you have more people taking up striped bass fishing. Also, with all the closures and restrictions, people spending their dollars on the party boat circuit would naturally prefer to target bass.
This will explode in our faces. I think there will be resistance to modifications until we reach the point that some of the year classes are wiped out. I see a long slow rebuilding process like we had in the 1980s. I hope I am in error. Like it was said, there is too much polarization and not enough people willing to work together. Fine job Dark.
Senior Member
I like some of the articles on the stripers forever site. They seem reasonable. When you talk about buying out commercial fishermen who catch less than the rest of the people, that part i find hard to understand. Like everyone said, there should be something in between that can be worked on. I'm definitely ok with only allowing one keeper per trip for everyone. My .02.
Senior Member
one keeper only
It would be so much easier if they made it one keeper for the whole east coast.
Senior Member
The commerical fishermen don't look too kindly on stripers forever. The article is three pages but worth reading.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wires...9601383&page=1
Senior Member
I didn't study every post in this thread but those 2 jumped out at me. There's no way those guys are only making $2800/year bass fishing.
I have a friend who owns a pizzeria. He tried to tell the IRS he was making 20k a year while he was making $80k. They almost put my friend in jail for one year of misstated income. He had to sell his house and move in with the parents so he wouldn't go to jail because the penalties were so high and they were going to seize his business. If the IRS can audit pizza joints they should audit commercial fishmen. Some of those guys have to be lying I hope they get caught.
Senior Member
I wondered if people are aware of the regs in Rhode Island. Rhode island permits commercial fishing but limits the guys to 5/day. That seems like a more reasonable number. You're hardly going to get a gold rush of guys entering the state for that limit. Sounds like a good plan to me.
"While Massachusetts fishermen can also fish Rhode Island waters for striped bass, they can only take five fish per day per fisherman while Massachusetts allows daily catch limits of 30 fish per fisherman. "
Administrator
Stripers Forever isn't down for the count. They still have support and recognition among groups of Rec anglers. They're not going away. They won't be forced out of business. And they remain committed to getting their positions known throughout the angling world.. You took the tail end of a losing situation and turned it into a good story. Ya done good.
I felt a lot more guys could have given them support that day. Maybe this will bring awareness of how much more advance work needs to be done for next time. In the end, I think all sides will have to work out some of the most contentious issues for a compromise that will be passed by both groups in the Legislature. That will take some time.
Meanwhile, for anyone who wants to see some of the media reports, this came from StripersForever:
Stripers Forever members - now is time for all members everywhere to support our efforts in MA by writing letters to the editor of papers that have written recently about striped bass. Our press consultant worked with Associated Press to get a good national story that was picked up by news outlets throughout the US. Locally, the story ran in the Boston Herald online, Brockton Enterprise, WBZ-TV online, Worcester Telegram and Gazette online, ABC News online, and the Gloucester Daily News. Additionally, tons and tons of news outlets nationally also ran the story.
Today, the Gloucester Daily News ran a thoughtful piece by Richard Gaines, a veteran Boston-area newsman who writes fulltime on fishery issues.
See the story here: http://www.gloucestertimes.com/punews/local_story_019230624.html?keyword=topstory
We also know that the Cape Cod Times will soon release a story on the bill. Given the very hard-line commercial stance of this paper we can't expect it to be fair, but it still provides a forum for our comments.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
