EEZ and Bass.....

[finatic]

Well as most of you know the ASMFC has proposed the opening of the EEZ to the commercial take of striped bass. All BS aside it is really a few states pushing for it and MA. being one of the leaders in the push. All this will do in my opinion is put more pressure on the inshore fishery for bass. And it benefits no one except a small percentage of comm. guys that want to fish closer to home. The EEZ has been in place for years and needs to stay of limits to comm. take. Lets give the bass ONE safe haven. The comm. guys have taken enough...

www.stripersforever.org - go here and send a letter to NMFS and tell them to leave the EEZ alone.

[CMP]

Another ill-informed post regarding the imminent opening of the EEZ to all sectors. First, griper's forever has no biological or fisheries-management stance to try and take 100% of the bass quota ANYWHERE, esp given that recs harvest 4 times what commercial intersts do. Add to that the bykill of recs at 25% (documented) vs. 7% (also documented) for commercial interests and you have no leg to stand on. Also, you stated, and I quote,

"All this will do in my opinion is put more pressure on the inshore fishery for bass."

On what do you base such an opinion? The statement makes absolutely ZERO sense. If both sectors could legally fish the EEZ-and make no mistake about it, MANY charter and comm guys are already doing it-in shore spots would see a marked DECREASE in fishing pressure. Opening the EEZ will spread pressure out, not confine it.

You also stated, "And it benefits no one except a small percentage of comm. guys that want to fish closer to home."

Huh??? Again, that statement makes ZERO sense. Do you even know what the EEZ is? I can't see how you do given the statements you make in error. When the EEZ is opened, both comms and recs can fish father offshore AWAY from inshore spots. Learn what the EEZ is and the practical effect of opening it BEFORE you post such silliness please.

Lastly, you opined, "The EEZ has been in place for years and needs to stay of limits to comm. take."

Where to start with this gem? The EEZ closing effects both conmmercial and recreational fishermen. By this above statement, are you advocating that the EEZ be open to recs, who kill around 4 times what comms do, but still closed to comms? Do you have any idea why the EEZ ban was enacted? Since you've displayed an uncanny misunderstanding of the rest of the issues in play here, I'll assume for the moment that you don't. Please do us all a favor, research the reasoning behind the EEZ ban and then tell us how you feel. Sheesh...

CMP

[Slamdance]

Wow. Where can I find those "documented" by-kill numbers you threw out there CMP?

[finatic]

CMP- I refuse to get into a heated discussion with you so you can get this post locked out- Nice try. But in my opinion some of the banks and ledges(most 10-20 miles) in the EEZ (3-100 miles) are INSHORE and those fish that are protected right now (big fish) need to stay protected because those are fish that travel WAY inshore into bays and harbors for most recs. to get a shot at. Why are you guys yelling to get the EEZ open anyway? Just two months ago you were all claiming there was PLENTY of big fish around to target for your pin-hook fishery- now you guys want to go after the big fish out on the ledges?? Amazing....

[kwakr]

CMP
I watched that fly drift over your location and I knew you would rise to it! Your "documented bykill" is the joke of the year and you've got to know that because you are a bright and clever guy. I'd like to know how many gut-hooked bass were discarded by our heroic commercial fleet the past three weeks as they: 1.) released fish under 34"... 2.) culled and highgraded. How about the 2/3rd of liscenced Mass commercials who report no, as in ZERO fish caught. They're buying those liscences as a donation to the state you say? With the liscence, they're legal enough, but if no one notices they caught any fish, why not just sell 'em to their pals or that little restaurant down the street. Pays for gas for the boat and beer in the cooler. I would wager that in Mass that, if you included unreported catches by liscenced commercial fisherpeople, with discards by pinhookers and with trawler bycatch, (much of it in the EEZ), real mortality figures from your beloved sector would approach 100%. Can I prove it? No. Do I believe the "documented rec bykill" is 25%? Maybe. Depends who's doing the documenting. If all chunkers would switch to circle hooks, it would be lower than it is now. But as the guys who paint the end zone for Patriot games say, "I digress".
The reason commercial harvest of stripers will end, and end it will, is that allowing wild bass to be sold anywhere brings out the basest instincts of mankind. I think, and this is my personal opinion, that many commercial fishermen feel as they have always felt. "If it swims in my ocean, it belongs to me" I'm going to catch it, kill it and keep it. Why not? I paid my dues! Those recreational jerks are playing......I'm working! If the rules say I can't do something, I'll find a way around them".
Nothing personal, by the way.

[kwakr]

I wouldn't hold my breath for the "imminent" EEZ opening either.--125-3

[flatts1]

This is a copy of the letter that I sent to NMFS. You have until August 20th to send your own.

************************************************** ****

Michael Flaherty
{address omitted}

Anne Lange
Chief, State-Federal Fisheries Division
Office of Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS
1315 East West Highway, Room 13317
Silver Spring, MD 20910

August 15, 2003

Ms. Lange,

I am a recreational angler writing in response to the request for comments regarding the re-opening of the EEZ to striped bass fishing. I believe that the EEZ should be re-opened to striped bass fishing so long as doing so will conform to all measures set forth in Amendment 6.

As your request mentions, the EEZ closure for striped bass was implemented back in 1989. It was intended to be a temporary measure to help striped bass stocks recover. However now it has become permanent (i.e. indefinite). While the EEZ is not a "marine reserve" because it does not ban ALL fishing, it has effectively become a permanent no-fish/no-take zone to all striper fishermen since it is illegal to target or possess stripers while in it.

The EEZ is a historical striped bass fishery and its closure presents a classic example of what is wrong about permanent no-take zones (even for a single species). Whenever any historical area is closed to fishing, effort {people fishing} will unnaturally be shifted into the remaining fishable waters. This added pressure eventually results in smaller and fewer fish in the unprotected area.

Granted, a case can be made here that striped bass are a migratory species and that man made borders on a chart would not impact their distribution. However, I have to believe that the shrinking a historical fishery to 1.5% of its original size (coastal limit of 200 miles down to 3 miles) coupled with the ever rising popularity of striped bass fishing (added effort), has placed extraordinary pressure on the relatively little waters that remain fishable for striped bass.

Your request also states that striped bass have been declared federally fully recovered since 1995. This means that the EEZ closure for striped bass is now obsolete. I understand that there are several conservation groups now insisting that the EEZ should remain closed, most notably the Coastal Conservation Association (CCA). As you know CCA has requested that NMFS initiate an Environmental Impact Study before any decision is reached on opening the EEZ.

This study sounds reasonable to me and I say "let the chips fall where they may." That is what a study like this is for. However, this study clearly has only one acceptable outcome for CCA as indicated in the last paragraph of their press release on it...


CCA Press Release- April 23, 2003:
"CCA is confident that the information produced through this procedure will result in the continued closure of the EEZ."

See:
{Sorry, I had to remove the link to make this post comply with this forum's rules} - flatts1

The real irony here is that CCA is known for making repeated claims that there are currently not enough big striped bass, yet at every available opportunity CCA calls for keeping the EEZ closed which effectively keeps most big fish locked up permanently away from recreational anglers (though they do find their way into commercial nets as bycatch). CCA seeks only to keep the EEZ closed in perpetuity and they offer no criteria as to when they believe that the EEZ should be reopened.

Another conservation group that is currently insisting that the EEZ remain closed is Stripers Forever. This organization's mission is to make striped bass a game fish. While I believe that this goal has some merit if the quality of aqua cultured striped bass becomes equal to those harvested wildly, I have found that Stripers Forever's motivation is based simply on a visceral contempt for "greedy" commercial fishermen and not what is best for the resource.

The following is part of a message from Stripers Forever President, Brad Burns…

"To some extent the EEZ acts as a buffer, a protected area, where large stripers are at least somewhat protected from greedy commercial interests. Since it is the furthering of commercial striped bass fishing interests that is behind this move, Stripers Forever is opposed to it. Reopening the EEZ to harvest will just furthermore commercialize a fishery that should belong to the public. By any measure of sensible public policy commercial fishing for stripers should be immediately eliminated, not proliferated!"

See:
{Sorry, I had to remove the link to make this post comply with this forum's rules} - flatts1

Furthermore, Stripers Forever's argument for keeping the EEZ closed is very flawed. The following is an excerpt of the boilerplate message that I am sure you are receiving from members…

"What is known is that more than 3,000,000 recreational anglers, as well as a huge guiding and tackle industry along the East Coast, depend on the continued availability of good striped bass fishing. We do not need more pressure on the resource."

See:
{Sorry, I had to remove the link to make this post comply with this forum's rules} - flatts1

Forgive me for restating the obvious but re-opening the EEZ will not add any more pressure on the resource. On the contrary, it will distribute effort more evenly which will actually take pressure off the nearshore waters where fishing is now unnaturally restricted to (more on that below).

Therefore, I urge NMFS to use the best science available in making this decision and to disregard the positions of extremist organizations like CCA and Striper Forever.

As you know, the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF) has also proposed opening the EEZ out to at least 12 miles so that it would fall under each respective state's jurisdiction. DMF Director and member of ASMFC, Paul Diodati uses the following reasoning...

Mr. Diodati writes:

"Some advocates for a continued closure of the EEZ argue that the closure provides an important conservation measure needed to protect larger and older striped bass. I do not think striped bass stocks need such protection, but if they did we should determine with more technical scrutiny where effective conservation should be practiced. MRFSS length frequency information and tagging data show striped bass that aggregate farther from shore are composed of mixed stocks of many age groups. In fact, mixing of stocks and age groups is greater offshore than from any nearshore area. Offshore waters are also colder and more saline than nearshore waters, a condition that is associated with the lowest discard mortality rates. Young, sexually immature fish, often originating from a single stock compose the bulk of schools that are targeted in shallow coastal waters, bays, and rivers where water quality conditions create the highest discard mortality rates. Accordingly, any effective conservation-based closure of fishing areas should focus on nearshore waters and rivers; such areas typically are also more easily monitored and enforced for regulatory violations."

"Advocates of a continued EEZ closure also appear to link this closure with curtailment of commercial fishing activity. But in fact an opening of the EEZ would be a conservation-neutral measure with regards to commercial fisheries since they are already restricted by quotas. In the case of Massachusetts, our commercial quotas have been fully harvested without legal access to the EEZ. True benefactors of lifting the moratorium would be recreational fishery participants, especially anglers that fish from hired vessels because it typically requires captains that have extensive knowledge and experience to successfully prosecute the offshore fishery."

See:
{Sorry, I had to remove the link to make this post comply with this forum's rules} - flatts1

The fact that opening the EEZ is a conservation neutral measure is also echoed in your request for public comment…

"(2) The commercial harvest is controlled by hard quotas; when they are reached the fishery is closed; and overages are taken out of next year's quotas. The Commercial quota will be landed regardless of whether or not the EEZ is opened."

I am aware that the argument can be made that if the EEZ is opened then fisheries managers may need to increase size limits or reduce bag limits (or resort to other options) because larger numbers of bigger fish will be caught. However, these are decisions that should be left to respective state's managers along the EEZ who must already conform to the target mortality rate and triggers set forth in Amendment 6.

I don't own a boat and I am not a commercial fisherman. However, again it makes sense to me that if the EEZ is opened and others do head out to fish it, then it will leave more fish near the shore for me. So in the end, as a surf fisherman, I will be taking advantage of an open EEZ!

In the event that NMFS decides not to re-open the EEZ then I insist that its closure actually be enforced. I say this because it is common knowledge that many commercial fishermen currently do fish in the EEZ despite the fact that it is illegal to do so. If you doubt this then please listen to audio available at the following link. You will hear the testimony of a commercial fisherman, named Mike Abdow(sp?), given at a Massachusetts Amendment 6 hearing. He boasts to ASMFC that he would like to see the EEZ kept closed because he considers it his "own private fishing bowl" and opening it will force him to compete with others. There were two others at the same hearing who also claimed that they were already fishing in the EEZ despite the law. Please don't get me wrong, I am not advocating that the EEZ should be re-opened in order to simply legalize what is already going on. I simply want access to the EEZ for all law-abiding citizens if sound science says that it is OK to do so – which evidently is the case.

Mike Abdow's public testimony at a MA Amendment 6 hearing:
{Sorry, I had to remove the link to make this post comply with this forum's rules} - flatts1

In closing, I believe that the time for re-opening the EEZ is overdue and from what I understand it will take about another two years to complete all of the legalities needed in order to re-open it. For these reasons, I urge the NMFS to re-open the EEZ with all due diligence.

Please feel free to contact me if I can be of any further assistance.


Sincerely,


Michael Flaherty


CC via fax: Paul Diodati, Director of Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries
CC via fax: Brad Burns, President of Stripers Forever
CC via fax: Pat Keliher, Executive Director of the Coastal Conservation Association (NE)

[dewey]

Originally posted by finatic
Well as most of you know the ASMFC has proposed the opening of the EEZ to the commercial take of striped bass. All BS aside it is really a few states pushing for it and MA. being one of the leaders in the push. All this will do in my opinion is put more pressure on the inshore fishery for bass. And it benefits no one except a small percentage of comm. guys that want to fish closer to home. The EEZ has been in place for years and needs to stay of limits to comm. take. Lets give the bass ONE safe haven. The comm. guys have taken enough...

www.stripersforever.org - go here and send a letter to NMFS and tell them to leave the EEZ alone. i dissaggree there is no commercial allocation for bass in the state of nj, and opening the eez would benefit sport fihermen and woman only, not commercials.

[kwakr]

Mike
You are the epitome of what is wrong with so-called recreational fishermen. You delight in being a nit-picker, and I'll give you full credit, you really do your homework. You may drive us nuts with the length of your essays, but you have covered most bases with your research. But...here's my problem. You say you support game fish status for Stripers, yet you want to pick away at everyone and every thing that doesn't agree with you on all the peripheral issues. They say that all the economists in the world laid end to end would never reach a conclusion. The same thing seems to be true with the recreational fishing community. You will never reach real consensus with a majority of fisherman on this or any other topic, so lets go for what is achievable, namely the end of commercial fishing everywhere for stripers. At least for now, stop harping on what you get for your lousy $25 with CCA, or get all bent out of shape on a sentence that Brad Burns used in a message to his group. Brad has forgotten more about the striper fishery than you'll ever know. Do you really think he doesn't know that the total commercial quota won't be impacted by reopening the EEZ? Who knows how many thousands of fish are already being caught in the EEZ already and bing sold over or under the table. You allow commercial fishermen to roam the EEZ catching stripers and the abuses will grow by a factor of tenfold. It is extremely difficult to police the inshore waters for illegal catches. You open the EEZ and the striper fishery will accelerate its downward spiral and we'll soon remember the bad old days.
Yoy really seem to have convinced yourself that Commissioner Diodati is a friend to the recreational angler. Well I have a really great bridge in New York I'd like to show you.

[flatts1]

Kwakr


You are the epitome of what is wrong with so-called recreational fishermen. You delight in being a nit-picker


Really? I would say that the real problem with recreational fishermen is that they are largely uninformed. I am doing my best to change that but it is tough to do when I can't link to other sources of information due to this forum's rules. The result is that everyone stays uninformed and the blind keep leading the blind.

For example, the audio link of Mike Abdow's Ammendment 6 testimony is exactly what folks who want to support Stripers Forever need to hear. If you listen to the whole thing, you will learn that bycatch discard of striped bass from groundfishermen is by far a more REAL problem than commercial striped bass fishermen fishing with a hook and line and bound by a quota.

And here's where the real meat and potatoes of the problem with groups like Stripers Forever comes to play. SF is so blinded by their contempt for commercial striped bass fishermen that they are not open minded enough to see the real problem even when I hand it to them.

It was I who took the time to attend the hearing, record Mr Abdow (among others), digitize the audio, and post it on various sites. Then what does Stripers Forever do? The send out a mailing with the following excerpt...


Brad Burns wrote in part:

"If you really want to get bent out of shape listen to the audio available at this web site address,

{Sorry, I had to remove the link to make this post comply with this forum's rules} - flatts1

of a Massachusetts commercial fisherman bragging about and flaunting his illegal fishing at a public meeting."

I know it is tough to describe this audio without giving the link to actually hear it, but trust me it was very rich with very USEFUL information that could have been used to actually do something about the unecessary killing of striped bass. Unfortunately, the only use that Mr Burns found for it was to use it as a rallying cry for his lemmings.

and I'll give you full credit, you really do your homework. You may drive us nuts with the length of your essays, but you have covered most bases with your research.


Thanks.

But...here's my problem. You say you support game fish status for Stripers, yet you want to pick away at everyone and every thing that doesn't agree with you on all the peripheral issues.


The sum of the peripheral issues add up to the main issue. In other words, I want to be very clear on what it is that I am actually supporting. As you know, I have been hoodwinked by a conservation group in the past and I don't want it to happen again.



They say that all the economists in the world laid end to end would never reach a conclusion.


It's funny that you should say that. One of my professors was once asked why it is that economists disagree with each other so much given that they all study the same theory and models.

He answered that an Economist's position on many issues will be determined by where he did his post graduate work (liberal vs conservative schools).

Another professor of mine also once said that the study of economics is nothing more than common sense made difficult.

All I can do is back up my arguments with proven economic theory and hope that some of it sticks. I find it to be a better approach than comming off like "Hey, ya really wanna get bent? Listen to this!"

But what do I know sensationalism sells.


The same thing seems to be true with the recreational fishing community. You will never reach real consensus with a majority of fisherman on this or any other topic


This is a very pessimistic outlook but you might be right. I like to think that if everyone is truly informed with all of the pertinent facts then we can all find common ground and come up with REASONABLE solutions. That said, I find nothing reasonable about a group whose sole purpose in life is to put folks out of a job.


At least for now, stop harping on what you get for your lousy $25 with CCA,


That reminds me, I still have not received my refund from CCA.


or get all bent out of shape on a sentence that Brad Burns used in a message to his group. Brad has forgotten more about the striper fishery than you'll ever know.


You may be right that Mr Burns knows more about the striper fishery than myself. I really don't know the man to make that call. That said, if he knows so much then why does he mislead his membership by claiming that opening the EEZ will lead to more preasure on striped bass? To Mr Burn's credit, he did respond to my letter to NMFS on another website (sorry, I can't link to it). However,to his discredit he does not answer my criticism of his position. He only went on to state...


Mr. Burns wrote in part:

"Fishing commercially for striped bass is just one of those things that fits into the senseless category. The self serving arguments of the pro commercial bass fishing crowd are perfectly exemplified by the statement that opening an area currently closed to keeping striped bass will result in less pressure on the fish. Brad Burns"

He then refered readers to a piece called the Case under Why Gamefish on Stripers Forever's website. I have only glanced this article and I will read it later but it makes no mention of the EEZ (with just a search for "EEZ) so he essentially just dodged the argument.


Yoy really seem to have convinced yourself that Commissioner Diodati is a friend to the recreational angler. Well I have a really great bridge in New York I'd like to show you.


Whatever.

Later,
Mike Flaherty
Quincy, Ma

[h2p530]

gentelmen you are so close but yet so far off base. You are pointing your fingers in the wrong direction, step back and take a hard look at the big picture. Please don't confuse boat for hire and commerical fishining boats . It is the head boats/partyboats/all of the little 6pack boats that are going to benifit. when not if the eez get open. We "comms"will not be aloud to sell rocks in NJ . but the above mention boat will be aloud to HARVEST rocks in the eez. It all gose back to the log books that we have to fill out every trip. Please think about this. Before we get blamed for something ealse.:D

[dewey]

Originally posted by kwakr
CMP
I watched that fly drift over your location and I knew you would rise to it! Your "documented bykill" is the joke of the year and you've got to know that because you are a bright and clever guy. I'd like to know how many gut-hooked bass were discarded by our heroic commercial fleet the past three weeks as they: 1.) released fish under 34"... 2.) culled and highgraded. How about the 2/3rd of liscenced Mass commercials who report no, as in ZERO fish caught. They're buying those liscences as a donation to the state you say? With the liscence, they're legal enough, but if no one notices they caught any fish, why not just sell 'em to their pals or that little restaurant down the street. Pays for gas for the boat and beer in the cooler. I would wager that in Mass that, if you included unreported catches by liscenced commercial fisherpeople, with discards by pinhookers and with trawler bycatch, (much of it in the EEZ), real mortality figures from your beloved sector would approach 100%. Can I prove it? No. Do I believe the "documented rec bykill" is 25%? Maybe. Depends who's doing the documenting. If all chunkers would switch to circle hooks, it would be lower than it is now. But as the guys who paint the end zone for Patriot games say, "I digress".
The reason commercial harvest of stripers will end, and end it will, is that allowing wild bass to be sold anywhere brings out the basest instincts of mankind. I think, and this is my personal opinion, that many commercial fishermen feel as they have always felt. "If it swims in my ocean, it belongs to me" I'm going to catch it, kill it and keep it. Why not? I paid my dues! Those recreational jerks are playing......I'm working! If the rules say I can't do something, I'll find a way around them".
Nothing personal, by the way. kwakr, im not sure how to do the quote thing yet, but the last part of this post where u start with your opinion about comms. in my opinion is i dont feel that way at all. :o

[Onshore]

Many of you are missing the point on the EEZ.

Right now many private and charter boats are fishing the EEZ out of New Hampshire and Cape Ann to be sure, but mainly fishing East of Chatham, Marthas's Vinyard and Nantucket.

These are not commercial boats as that season is closed. And believe me, the state officials know it's happening and purposely look the other way. Only a few years ago a Boston Globe article featured taking big bass on Nantucket Shoals and some high-ranking Mass. Marine Fisheries folks were some of the fishermen in the article.

I have not seen one valid argument that would convince me that the EEZ should remain closed.

Sanctuary? Hardly. Stripers have been the object of more tagging studies to track their movements than any other species. You cannot find one that says a certain group of big fish go to the EEZ for sanctuary. They pass through the EEZ on their way north and south and stay for a while if the forage is good.

Taking pressure off inshore areas? Of course it does. How does that work? If you have 100 boats fishing inshore and 20 of them decide to fish offshore, that means only 80 boats are chasing fish inshore, thus there is less pressure inshore. It's simple math. And I don't know anyone that calls the ledges and banks 20 miles off the coast inshore waters.

Until Striper populations crashed and we had the moratorium on fishing, the EEZ was open and being fished by boats out of those ports I mentioned above. It was closed during the moratorium as one of many measures to rebuild the stocks. Now stocks are rebuilt and the biomass is bigger than anyone has ever seen it; what good reason is there to keep the EEZ closed.

[h2p530]

well said onshore I really don't understand the big deal. I feel that it is 1 an enforcement issiue 2 I'll never understand WHY ONE USER GROUP is aloud to target this fish . In NJ the commerical quota gose to the rec fishiers, because bass are considered a game fish.But boats that are for hire are able to target them, looks to me like both sides of the fence are being walked by those boats for hire. I say enforcement because thay can't catch all of them, so why not tip there hats to them.I've seen boats many miles outside the line. The marine police/coast gard and conservation officers are spread so thin that thay can't enforce the whole coast. So why not join them>.

[dewey]

onshore i aggree very well said, exspecially the last part where u said about the stocks being rebuilt so why keep it closed. Thats the main argument i have if the eez was closed due to science reasons and now the science says open it then why not?? ill answer that ITS POLLITICAL B.S. and thats ashame
nmfs can be swayed that way but they are. ITS the almighty buck, and pollitical interests. IVE personaly never have made 1 penny on stripers as i live and work out of n.j and if they do open it it wont matter to me in any way shape or form.what mostly bothers me is the science thing. Well said onshore i need to figure out that darn quote thing......:)

[Onshore]

Originally posted by dewey
onshore i aggree very well said, exspecially the last part where u said about the stocks being rebuilt so why keep it closed. Thats the main argument i have if the eez was closed due to science reasons and now the science says open it then why not?? ill answer that ITS POLLITICAL B.S. and thats ashame



The EEZ was never and is not now closed for any scientific reason. It was closed when the states declared a moratorium after the striper stocks had crashed. Fishing in the Chesapeake Bay Spawning areas and many coastal states was closed at the same time - to bring the fish back at a faster pace.

Now the species is restored and there are more Stripers than anyone has ever seen. The Bay and the states have reopened their fisheries and it's far past the time the EEZ was reopened too.

[JGH]

I must be missing something. If the EEZ was closed as part of the measures designed to rebuild the fish stocks, and it was successful in doing so, won't re-opening it just drive the stocks down again? Why would we want to re-open it? :confused: :confused: :confused:

[Onshore]

Originally posted by JGH
I must be missing something. If the EEZ was closed as part of the measures designed to rebuild the fish stocks, and it was successful in doing so, won't re-opening it just drive the stocks down again? Why would we want to re-open it? :confused: :confused: :confused:

We stopped fisihing in the Bay and in most coastal states and the EEZ while stocks were rebuilt. THE STOCKS ARE NOW REBUILT. We have reopened the Bay and the coastal states. Why not the EEZ. At the last ASMFC Striped Bass Management Board meeting; the Technical Committee(scientists) advised opening the EEZ would have no adverse effect upon the stocks because the commercial quotas remain unchanged.

Why open it? Many private recreational boat owners and charter boat operators and commercial fishermen would like to see it reopened because some parts of the EEZ were traditional fishing grounds during certain times of the year. I think the question should really be why not open it? So far I have not seen one valid reason to keep it closed.

[flatts1]

Why open the EEZ?

Envision this...

7:00am you and your buddies board a charter.

9:00am fish for Cod and Haddock in ~200 feet of water (catch say 8 keepers each.

12:00 noon Motor around a bit looking for stripers and ice 2 keepers each.

2:00pm Start heading back to port.

4:00pm drive home, make some chowder, fill your freezer with remaining fillets - as well as your 2 neighbors' freezers.

I can think of no finer New England saltwater fishing experience.

[h2p530]

Thats the problem in this case , The striper are being fished for by one type of user . I'm not up on my new england laws but I'm fairly certian that rocks are closed for commerical harvast except pin hooking .
I think that it is sicking for states to allow one user group to profit well the other group is told to go bankrupt. I live in NJ pay a bundle in permits insurance taxes and any thing ealse that the state see fit to charge me for .Two states to the south, all but beg me and others to come down and fish. It's to bad that NJ will never have a commerical harvest . Our quota gose into a "trophy" fish program. I don't want alot just to be able to keep the few dead fish without being a bad guy. I can keep them in MD and VA so whats the diffe! Why not in NJ . We might upset one or two million rec fisherperson's.that harvest for "free" in this find stateof NJ.

[dewey]

Originally posted by h2p530
Thats the problem in this case , The striper are being fished for by one type of user . I'm not up on my new england laws but I'm fairly certian that rocks are closed for commerical harvast except pin hooking .
I think that it is sicking for states to allow one user group to profit well the other group is told to go bankrupt. I live in NJ pay a bundle in permits insurance taxes and any thing ealse that the state see fit to charge me for .Two states to the south, all but beg me and others to come down and fish. It's to bad that NJ will never have a commerical harvest . Our quota gose into a "trophy" fish program. I don't want alot just to be able to keep the few dead fish without being a bad guy. I can keep them in MD and VA so whats the diffe! Why not in NJ . We might upset one or two million rec fisherperson's.that harvest for "free" in this find stateof NJ. wow ure gettin pretty good at this stuff thats very well said. i aggree 100 %.:-% :-%