Report: MA gamefish bill meeting

[DarkSkies]

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.

[CharlieTuna]

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.

Based on the testimony I heard from both sides, here are some of the key issues that need to be addressed:

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.

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.

[dogfish]

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.

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.

[clamchucker]

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.

[crosseyedbass]

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.

[rockhopper]

It would be so much easier if they made it one keeper for the whole east coast.

[ledhead36]

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

[BassBuddah]

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.

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. "