Stripers Forever

[saltyflyguy]

Join this organization. Their head is in the right place. CCA too!

Look here: http://www.stripersforever.org/

[mumichog]

How does one contact this group?

[saltyflyguy]

Look here:


http://www.stripersforever.org/

[flatts1]

Be very leary about blindly supporting any club that will not answer fundamental questions directly asked of it.

For more information, check out...

http://reel-time.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=30642

The first post there is mine (username = flatts1). It is quite long and best read from the ground up.

To be fair, I did get a response from someone claiming to be involved with SF (I have no reason to doubt him). However, his reply to me was largely his own opinion and he didn't speak for the group.

I have yet to be told where/when this organization holds their E-board meetings. If you were a member, wouldn't you want to have some say in the direction of your org?


Later,
Mike Flaherty

[baldwin]

I can't see that many questions need be asked of them. Their mission is plain and simple: gamefish status (no commercial harvest) for stripers. That's it. Go to the website and read it.
GRB

[Onshore]

I had pretty much the same experience as Flatts when I asked questions of SF's spokesmen. In reply to some drivle about needing a better management tool than Atlantic States Marine Fisheries for Stripers; I asked two of them how they would propose to manage the fish. One said and entirely new burocracy; the other said they would re-organize ASMFC.

Neither answer makes much sense and both have about as much chance of taking place as SF has of making Stripers a gamefish by sending e-mails to congressmen.

I was supposed to be their NH state coordinator for a couple of months, but was never invited to take part in the e-conferences or asked my opinion on any issues. Just asked to get more members and buy more decals. SF appears to be a big ego trip for a few folks.

To be sure, the leaders of SF have the right idea; it's just that it appears they have no clue as to how to accomplish their goal. It certainly won't be by sending e-mails.

[flatts1]

Onshore wrote:
To be sure, the leaders of SF have the right idea; it's just that it appears they have no clue as to how to accomplish their goal. It certainly won't be by sending e-mails.


Onshore, where do you find common ground with this group? Where do you part company? What would you suggest to them for accomplishing their goal?

Mike

[Onshore]

Mike:

I really don't have a dog in this fight, as I will be retiring soon and moving south of the Stripers' normal range, however...

I could support gamefish status for Stripers. That is the common ground. While I'm not advocating for it, should legislation come along to create it, I would support it.

I also believe that to accomplish that, Stripers must be managed by ASMFC, as they are now. It would take several acts of Congress to reverse the federal legislation that placed ASMFC in control of the species. And then it would take another to set up a system to allocate it among the coastal and producer states. I think that is near imposible under present political circumstances.

I believe ASMFC does a much better job of managing their species than does the NMFS/Council System. I have to say that my experience is limited to New England as far as the council system is concerned; but the system is certainly broken here.

Also, I see nothing wrong with opening the EEZ, so long as it is policed. However, there is a lot of directed Striped bass fishing going on outside of the 3 mile limit as we speak; and no one is even half-heartedly trying to police it. It goes on our of Portsmouth, Rye, Gloucester, Ptown, Chatham,etc,etc. I was six miles east of Chatham just about a week ago and there were 13 boats catching large Stripers in about half a sq.mile.

[flatts1]

Onshore wrote:
Also, I see nothing wrong with opening the EEZ, so long as it is policed. However, there is a lot of directed Striped bass fishing going on outside of the 3 mile limit as we speak; and no one is even half-heartedly trying to police it.

Soooo True!!!

I have some audio that I could point folks to that I'm sure many on this site would be VERY interested in. However, it would require crossposting. Is that OK with the folks in charge of this site?

[Onshore]

Better ask the chief moderator

[Bob Parsons]

it would require crossposting.

No!

[flatts1]

Mr. Parsons,

Please define crossposting. I looked in the Reel Time Forum Rules under the registration link and it made no mention of it.

Is it that folks can't post links to...

- other fishing websites
- other fishing websites' forums
- commercial sites
- posting the same message on different websites
- some or all of the above

I only ask because I think that I posted links on RT that met all of the above descriptions in the past and the links were not removed and I was not told it was forbidden.

Please See:
http://reel-time.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=30642

I hope that this was not just an oversight and that now those links will be removed.

I want to follow the rules but I also want to help inform. I have audio that I know folks here would be interested in and it is 8mb.

If I simply post a direct link to the audio file on another website, is that acceptable?

Thanks,
Mike

[Bob Parsons]

You asked if you could crosspost even though Mr. Cahill has emailed you concerning the issue. Thus the no. As far as making posts with some crossposts in them, I can't keep track of all the forums but since you have pointed them out, thanks -they b gone.

[flatts1]

OK. Got it.

[al_Sahaf]

Crossposting, crossposting, what is this crossposting? I look up crossposting in my Iraqi-English dictionary and there is nothing.

Cross = "annoyed, showing bad temper"
Posting = "publish or announce"

among many other meanings...

does crossposting = bad temper posts?

Someone please explain this. Thank you so much.

[baldwin]

SF posts relevant info on their website, and provides a means to contact your representatives to urge them to support gamefish status for stripers. What else do you expect them to do? Don't expect to sit back and let others do the work to improve your fishery, get involved yourself.
This doesn't just pertain to those wishing for gamefish status, and not just to recreational fishermen, either.
It seems that our regulatory commissions have a bad track record in managing our resources. They also seem to ignore both the biologists and public comments.
The system obviously needs to be overhauled. The Magnuson act was supposed to safeguard against overharvest of our fisheries, but isn't being adhered to. I'm not talking about stripers in particular, so don't start nitpicking me on that one.
Instead of wasting your time nitpicking each other on petty details, put the time into a good conservation organization or letters to your representatives.
GRB

[flatts1]

Originally posted by baldwin

Instead of wasting your time nitpicking each other on petty details, put the time into a good conservation organization or letters to your representatives.

Baldwin. The devil is always in the details. Sure Stripers Forever would have you believe that they are only interested in gamefish status for striped bass. I'm sorry but I just don't buy it. For example, their latest efforts are focused on keeping the EEZ closed. Regardless of what you may think of commercial fishermen, a closed EEZ is closed to both commercial folks as well as recreational folks.

I could go on but I don't think it would make a differerence here. Instead, I will take your advice and continue to write letters to my represntatives to let them know what groups like SF are really all about.

See a recent letter of mine here:
http://reel-time.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32811&perpage=15&pagenumber=1

[kwakr]

Mike
You really are a tiresome bore. (IMHO). Did you ever consider switching your attention to some (any) other topic?
You obviously have discovered that Stripers Forever's real agenda is game fish status for mumichogs.--125-3

[jmccall]

So if I understand things correctly. The only "Conservation Groups" we should support are those that advocate killing the maximum #of fish, the consequences be damned? And yes I am a member of Stripers Forever

[flatts1]

Originally posted by jmccall
So if I understand things correctly. The only "Conservation Groups" we should support are those that advocate killing the maximum #of fish, the consequences be damned? And yes I am a member of Stripers Forever

Heavens no! Simply find one that does not take an apocalyptic view of a fishery that is in fantastic shape - while all the while allowing commercial harvest.

If you can find a group that seeks to allow folks to fish well within the sustainable levels of a fishery and then harvest and/or kill (i.e. discard mortlity) the rest, then you should be fine.

Anything else would amount to a waste in the fishery. You wouldn't want to support that now would you?

Cheers,
Mike Flaherty

[jmccall]

In my opinion a waste in the fishery, would be allowing Commercial fishing to decimate the populations again. I still am not convinced the populations have recovered to the extent some claim. And just so you know I happen to think the rec limits are to high

[baldwin]

We wouldn't have to worry about picking between conservation groups if we had fishery regulatory agencies that could be trusted to manage our fisheries so that we could enjoy stable, healthy fish stocks and a sensible commercial harvest.
I support Stripers Forever. I don't blame commercial fishermen for the demise of any fish species. They are almost all merely honest men trying to make an honest living. When the regulations are allowing overharvest, they must compete with others in order to not lose out. It is strictly the fault of mismanagement, not the commercial fishermen.
I do not trust these agencies to do the job correctly. They ignore the advice of the scientists, the recreational fishermen, the conservationists, AND the commercial fishermen. Every user group is a victim.
It just saddens me that there doesn't seem to be a way to allow ASMFC to call the shots.
I am not being malicious toward those that make a living (or, more likely these days,TRYING to make a living) harvesting what the seas have to offer, I just don't see a truly workable alternative given the present system of management.
Go ahead and crucify me now.
GRB

[flatts1]

When the regulations are allowing overharvest, they must compete with others in order to not lose out. It is strictly the fault of mismanagement, not the commercial fishermen.


Baldwin, I do not intend to crucify you :rolleyes: but it is statements like these that serve only to further confuse folks. The fact is that striped bass is one of best success stories is fisheries management. They are not being over harvested plain and simple because the target mortality is still less than F=.30 which is the same rate that has proven so successful during the striped bass recovery and will continue to be successfull.

If you (or SF) can prove otherwise then I'm all ears.

If everyone who buys into the SF philosophy hook line and sinker could just stop for 1 second and realize this then we could ALL focus our effort on REAL problems that face stiped bass and other species.

What I'm taling about here is commercial bycatch, loss of estuaries due to development, run off from fertilizer and pesicides, lack of baitfish, etc.

The real problem is that these issues continue to get worse and unnoticed by fishery activists while valuable effort is lost on demonizing a few folks who sell striped bass until they hit a hard quota.

Respectfully,
Mike Flaherty

[kwakr]

Mike
I've said it before and I'll try again. Ending commercial fishing for striped bass is the single best thing that we can accomplish as the first step in assuring the millions of folks who fish for them for pleasue and/or a meal for the family that the resource will be there for their kids and grandkids.
"Target mortality" is a buzzword to many of us. The commercial interests crow about how everyone knows exactly how many fish they kill because they have quotas They claim that studies prove that their discard mortality is 8% compared to 25% for recreationals. A bunch of complete BS, but, hey, its the "best" info we have.
How many of us ever run into a DMR person or a warden or other type with a clipboard to ask what we caught etc?
A journey of a thousand miles does indeed begin with a single step. That step should be removing the price from the striper's head. Nothing else can have as much positive impact on the fishery. Nothing else is as easy to accomplish.
The "real problems" you note are real enough (you left out Global Warming and World Peace, by the way). Pursuing them first, however, is a guaranteed recipe for failure. While we're off tilting at windmills like pesticides, we'll get caught up in a nasty dogfight with farmers and chemical companies and we'll turn around and discover that there are no bass anymore. How the heck did that happen? If you can't sell a wild striper anywhere to anyone, you then have to regulate only the recreational, personal use angler. That is easier said than done, but its a lot easier that dealing with the commercial side as well. Where there is a buck to be made catching fish, some professionals will figure out a way to make that buck, legal or not.

[flatts1]

Kwakr wrote:
While we're off tilting at windmills like pesticides, we'll get caught up in a nasty dogfight with farmers and chemical companies and we'll turn around and discover that there are no bass anymore.


Again, more of the same bogus premise. Kwakr, I know that facts irritate those with SF but as long as I'm allowed to, I will continue to demonstrate what this really group is - a fraud!

You and SF have zero credibility until you can prove that striped bass are actually being overfished. It just isn't true and those who take the time to really follow the issue know it. I assume this includes Mr Burns.

Kwakr, it is too easy to make unfounded claims. Furthermore, it's just plain lazy.

I challenge anyone from SF (or anyone else) to come up with a credible post that proves that striped bass are being overfished. Please include citations.

As for addressing the real problems that striped bass face, you don't have to fight with current farmers or anyone else today. It would be enough to just stop any FURTHER development and pollution via zoning laws alone. It isn't easy but it can be done and I think you will find a lot more support for it than you think.

If you have access to On The Water magazine, there is a very relavent editorial in the August issue that nails it on the head regarding the loss of shore access, estuaries, etc.

I recommend it to anyone truely interested in the REAL problems that face this fishery.

Best,
Mike Flaherty
Quincy, MA

[kwakr]

Some folks just won't take a stand and would rather "research" something to death and you're one of the best. I'm done jousting with you because, apparently, that's what you enjoy more than anything.
Some of the folks who share my view feel that striper fishing will have to get a whole lot worse before we can end commercial fishing for them. I sure hope not, but, maybe they're right. That day is closer than you think, and no, I can't prove it. You don't, however, need to be a meteorlogist to know it's raining out.
In the meantime, I hope you have only one commode in your house, Mike, because, in the event of a gastric emergency, by the time you decide which one to use, it could be too late.

"Make it a game fish"

[CMP]

Flatts, you are right, they are wrong and therein lies the reason they can provide no citations or other proof ofthe apocolyptic view that the striped bass fishery is on the verge of collapse. The claim that removing a group responsible for less than 25% of the total mortality from a thriving fishery is a good idea is nonsense and gripers forever is a bunch of frauds. There is NO data, NONE that shows the commercial sector taking more than 25% of the total mortality. People who support this foolishness merely want what they want, so they'll hold their breath until they either die or get their way. Without the science and justification, they'll die on this issue. More time and effort should be spent on raising size limits throughout the fish's migratory pattern in order to make what is already one of the most successful re-building programs aven better. Instead, these chicken-little nitwits prefer to try and co-opt a fishery for hobbyists despite the FACT that the same hobbyists are responsible for 3/4 of the mortality that is incurred. Unreal...

CMP

[kwakr]

Watch who you're calling a nitwit. My pet giant squiid will tear you limb from limb.
In your last post on the main forum you pointed out (with some heat) what a bunch of scallywags and ne're do wells SOME commercial fishermen are, But none of the striper guys are like that, I'm sure.
The more you see the handwriting on the wall for the end of the striper commercial fishery the nastier and spleenier you get.
Relax, take a deep breath.
There will always be another fishery for you guys to ruin.

[CMP]

As is typical with you quota-grabbing nitwits, you have nothing to support your claims, no proof to your allegations and no support from ANY governing body, so you merely make noise. There is a saying in the legal community that goes something like this: when you have the law on your side, pound the law. When you have the evidence on your side, pound the evidence. When you have nothing, pound the table. You gripers forever people are doing alot of table-pounding and it amounts to alot of nothing. You greatly exaggerate your importance and your little band of miscreants, but have fun-I know I am...

CMP

[Bob Parsons]

When are you going to learn to avoid name calling?