John McMurray

October 27, 2008

PROMINENT MAINE GUIDE (AND STRIPED BASS AP MEMBER) SOUNDS OFF ON BASS

Filed under: Uncategorized — John McMurray @ 4:32 pm

There’s been a lot of discussion on declining bass stocks on this site as well as plenty of others. After witnessing some of the epic bass blitzes this year in Montauk, it’s hard to believe that there could be a problem. But indeed there does appear to be one.

If you are one of the skeptics, consider the below passage taken from a University of New Hampshire Department of Natural Resources document titled A Guide to Fisheries Stock Assessment. This is the document used to educate members of the fisheries management councils on how fisheries stock assessments are conducted:

“Fishermen will actively seek out areas with greater fish concentrations. As a result, their catch-per-unit effort could remain stable in the face of a declining stock. Consider a stock that contracts its range as the population shrinks, or increases its range as the population grows. Despite the changing range, catch-per-unit effort may remain relatively constant if the fishermen focus their effort on the center of the range, where fish density remains relatively stable.”

Complaints about the lack of quality fish are wide spread, and the voices are indeed becoming louder. In light of this, I offer the below letter to the ASMFC Striped Bass Management Board from Maine Charter Boat Captain Dave Pecci.
Joebasspopper
From Capt. Dave Pecc
To: Striped Bass Management Board

“I apologize for not being able to present this information in person. The reason is that because of the drastic downturn in the striped bass stock here in the Northeast, my charter business suffered a 40 percent drop this year. So I am working overtime these days in my off season carpentry business to try and recoup my losses. Many other Maine charter captains are also struggling to make up income lost during a disastrous striped bass season.

As I mentioned at the last striped bass advisory panel meeting, there has been a steady and marked downturn in Maine’s striped bass migration over the past five years– most especially in the greatly reduced numbers of trophy size stripers. In 2008, my average catch per trip dropped 80 percent! Not surprisingly, Maine’s resident anglers and our highly valued destination anglers chose to fish elsewhere, thus seriously crippling Maine’s 140 boat charter fleet and its $4 to $5 million contribution to the state’s economy.

The drastic striped bass downturn in 2008 cannot be blamed on local conditions. There was an above average, season-long presence of baitfish in Maine waters this year. For the first time in more than 15 years, we had schools and schools of adult menhaden. And as you know, the most robust populations of river herring available anywhere along the East Coast continue to thrive in Maine waters.

We in Maine have been saying for years that the coast-wide striped bass stocks are dwindling at a rate much higher than the stock assessment trends suggest. I urge you to consider the following measures which would help to correct this downturn and preserve the charter industry and the private angler fishery in Maine and along the entire Northeast coast:

1. Widen the gap between target and threshold mortality to allow for the dynamic changes typical in an 80 percent recreationally utilized stock. This would provide the cushion needed to absorb the possibility of higher species mortality due to unanticipated increases in the numbers of recreational fishermen without allowing over-fishing to occur.
2. Lower the overall mortality on striped bass to allow for a true complete restoration of age structure and to provide stock population increases throughout the historic range of the fishery.
3. Provide odelith study funding so the coast-wide age structure and population of older, trophy size striped bass can be scientifically assessed.
4. Provide MRFSS wave 1 sampling of the winter striped bass fisheries in North Carolina and Virginia. The current estimates used by the Technical Committee on landing and mortality data in these very dynamic fisheries are incomplete and most likely flawed drastically.
5. Provide mechanisms to address and reduce both commercial and recreational discard mortality.

It is my opinion that the coast-wide striped bass fishery –which is 80 percent recreationally utilized – should not be managed using the typical commercial maximum sustainable yield methodology. Recreational hook-and-line fishing is fundamentally inefficient when compared to commercial harvesting practices. For that reason a predominantly recreational fishery such as striped bass should have a larger overall biomass than a typical commercial fishery.

We should also manage our striped bass stocks to provide a true quality recreational fishery throughout the species’ historic range – a quality fishery in which trophy size fish are accessible to sport fishermen.
The five bullets listed above would help greatly to achieve a truly recovered and successful coast-wide striped bass fishery.

Thank you for your time. Again, I would have much preferred to present this to you in person, but I have to work to make up for a lost season.”

I couldn’t agree more. I think Dave his hit the nail on the head here. While I hope I’m wrong, I’m beginning to strongly believe that Maine is the bellwether state. Only time will tell. In the meantime, I would hope that managers would proceed with extreme caution when managing striped bass. Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to be the case as sates like Delaware, Pennsylvania and Virginia seek to increase harvest.

October 14, 2008

SPIN POLITICS, IT AIN’T JUST FOR PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGNS…

Filed under: Uncategorized — John McMurray @ 7:33 pm

It’s been over a month now since I saw the link-referenced letter to the Gloucester Daily Times regarding the “dissolving” of the New England Fishery Management Council. If that link dosen’t work on your computer, you can cut and paste this one into your browser: http://listserv.uri.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0809&L=riseagrant-l&D=0&T=0&P=48.

Sounds like pretty serious stuff right? But, of course it’s not entirely true. Indeed similar action happened, but the New England Council was certainly not “dissolved” like the author of the letter would lead his readers to believe. The letter is a major spin on the actual events of that day.

I had since forgotten about the letter as really, it wasn’t worthy of remembering, but after reading the many Presidential campaign articles in this morning’s paper, it got me thinking about spin. Thus, I offer the following “spin” regarding the actions of that day. I can’t take credit for this one. It came from a friend who wishes to remain nameless. And, as a Mid Atlantic Council Member I need to say that the views expressed in this letter are not my own. But indeed it is worth sharing. So, check it out:

“NMFS Regional Administrator Recognizes Obligation to Restore Fisheries”

“In a courageous and unprecedented move, The National Marine Fisheries Service’s (NMFS) Regional Administrator ignored the self-serving advice of the New England Fisheries Management Council (NEFMC) at the Council’s most recent meeting in Providence, RI. After days of discussing ways to frustrate the intent of the Magnuson Act while protecting their own financial interests, the Council approved a set of measures developed by the National Seafood Coalition that would delay needed rebuilding efforts and continue the chronic overfishing of groundfish stocks, until a way to permanently avoid conservation obligations could be conceived. In a 15-1 vote, the Council approved the Coalition proposal, the only dissenting vote being cast by the NMFS Regional Administrator, Pat Kurkul. Ms. Kurkul subsequently announced that, in the face of the Council’s failure to live up to their responsibilities under the law, she would be compelled to develop and implement an interim set of measures designed to begin the conservation and restoration of New England fish stocks. What is truly remarkable about this watershed event is that, for the first time, the National Marine Fisheries Service has taken a firm stand against the chronic cronyism and mutual back-scratching that has been endemic to the Council since its inception, and is acting decisively to protect the public interest in healthy and restored marine fisheries. Although the Council members, feeling financially threatened by the manifest need to reduce harvest that is evidenced in the GARM III report, came together to oppose any meaningful conservation measures, the Regional Administrator was cognizant of the fact that the Council’s role is advisory, and acted decisively to fulfill her agency’s obligations under the Magnuson Act. While Council and stakeholder input is certainly important to the fisheries management process, when such input is purely self-serving, and ignores both the best scientific evidence and the mandate of law, NMFS only responsible course is to ignore such comment and act in the greater public interest. The fishing industry is now undoubtedly in consultation with their lobbyists and calling in favors for past campaign contributions, in an attempt to foment a legislative assault on the agency’s management efforts. It is time for Americans to realize that the nation’s marine resources belong equally to all of us, and are not the special property of those who profited from the depletion of one of the world’s great fishing grounds. We all should contact our legislators and encourage them to support the agency action and, by extension, the public interest in having healthy and restored marine fish populations.”

See, it’s all about spin.

Powered by WordPress