Forum Navigation

New Posts

Search

  #1  
Old 03-01-2012, 11:29 AM
bucko's Avatar
bucko bucko is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Braintree
Posts: 484
Mass Hearings Part II

Based on all the Internet chatter and newspaper coverage of the State House hearing it looks like there is not going to be any imminent changes to Striper Management policy.

Maybe an email to Commissioner Diodatti and your local state rep and senator may help. Here’s a simple statement you might use in your email:

Please support efforts to reduce the Striped Bass harvest.

Recreational fisherman should be limited to a single fish a day at 36 inches. The Commercial fishery should be limited to 750 thousand pounds annually.

Thank you for your consideration
.

Change the numbers as you personally think appropriate— but let the manager’s/politicians know how you feel.

Last edited by bucko; 03-02-2012 at 07:53 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-01-2012, 01:02 PM
Onshore's Avatar
Onshore Onshore is offline
Veteran Reel-Timer
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On the Indian River Lagoon, Melbourne, Florida
Posts: 4,309
Diodati and the Ma Legislature can only effect Striped Bass legislation in Massachusetts. Only ASMFC can set benchmark regulations for the entire Atlantic coast. The states can change them; but only if their rules are more conservative than what the commission sets.

ASMFC is in the midst of amending the Striped Bass Management Plan and it will probably be done before the 2013 season opens. Paul Diodatti and the legislature are well aware of that fact and will probably opt to wait to see what the commission does.
Bill H
__________________
XGloucesterman

This and other original paintings and fine art prints of fishing and marine subjects may be seen on my website
http://bill-hubbard.fineartamerica.com/
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-01-2012, 01:32 PM
IronSkippy IronSkippy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by bucko View Post
Based on all Internet chatter and newspaper coverage of the State House hearing it looks like there is not going to be any imminent changes to Striper Management policy.

Maybe an email to Commissioner Diodatti and your local state rep and senator may help. Here’s a simple statement you might use in your email:

Please support efforts to reduce the Striped Bass harvest.

Recreational fisherman should be limited to a single fish a day at 36 inches. The Commercial fishery should be limited to 750 thousand pounds annually.

Thank you for your consideration
.

Change the numbers as you personally think appropriate— but let the manager’s/politicians know how you feel.
Send them by the hundreds to Paul Diodatti! Onshore is right, 2013 is when we will see potential changes. It is doubtful that Paul would approve anything until the new management plan comes out. BUT, your lobbying will have an effect on Paul's position and th effort he puts out to lobby for those limits.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-01-2012, 03:34 PM
CasterOfFlies CasterOfFlies is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cape Cod, Eastham to be exact
Posts: 47
ASMFC needs to make changes but in no way can I accept a decrease of commerical catch even with a 36" limit. Mass may be able to enact a 36" commercial and recreational limit, but to curtail one sector without benefit of reasonable biological evidence that they are the problem is just plain wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-01-2012, 10:57 PM
IronSkippy IronSkippy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by CasterOfFlies View Post
ASMFC needs to make changes but in no way can I accept a decrease of commerical catch even with a 36" limit. Mass may be able to enact a 36" commercial and recreational limit, but to curtail one sector without benefit of reasonable biological evidence that they are the problem is just plain wrong.
There is plenty of evidence to support the fact that recreational catch rates are down. If the commercial sector is not willing to make sacrifices to improve that situation, it risks losing the support of the major recreational groups that are helping the commercial fishery survive right now. It would be far better for the commercial fishermen of mass to have the same proportion of a smaller pie than it would be to lose the support of organizations like MassBass and SBCBA - support you will lose if you are unwilling to help out improving the biomass. The group trying to eliminate you is sophisticated and is not going to stop. Trust me when I say that the situation was a lot more dangerous this year than it was two years ago. The support of the major recreational groups and a couple of correctable boo boos by your opponents put you over the top in this one. Discount that and you are a gonner next time around.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-02-2012, 06:33 AM
Onshore's Avatar
Onshore Onshore is offline
Veteran Reel-Timer
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On the Indian River Lagoon, Melbourne, Florida
Posts: 4,309
Well said, IS and I agree wholeheartedly.

However, it is incumbent on ASMFC if they take action to change daily limit or length limit on recreational fishery to reduce the overall coastwide quota of the commercial fishery.

If the commission does not do that and MA gets the same com.quota as last year, you can bet they will be fishing it and will not see any change.
Bill H
__________________
XGloucesterman

This and other original paintings and fine art prints of fishing and marine subjects may be seen on my website
http://bill-hubbard.fineartamerica.com/
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-02-2012, 07:06 AM
CasterOfFlies CasterOfFlies is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cape Cod, Eastham to be exact
Posts: 47
I'm not a commercial guy, Iron Skippy-far from it. I do, however have many friends who are. The problem you and others who think the tocks are down have is that ASFMC does not agree. The states will, and are legislated to, defer to that body. IF there was concrete evidence that ASFMC put forth showing a decling stock biomass, THEN a pie scenario that you describe would make sense. The 36" for all idea is simply a preventative measure in my eyes. It would improve an already robust fishery. Some say it is not. Go "outside" fishing for bluefish and you'll have all the big stripers you want. The real problem as someone put forth in another thread is bait. FIsh have tails and follow the food. They're around in big numbers of big fish, following bait offshore.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-02-2012, 07:59 AM
Onshore's Avatar
Onshore Onshore is offline
Veteran Reel-Timer
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On the Indian River Lagoon, Melbourne, Florida
Posts: 4,309
And that's the truth, too. I saw that in the four years I lived and fished on the Cape. I was retired and fished 3-day/week by boat and surf. Our best fishing, by far was offshore - where the bait was. And that was the beginning of the time when shore fishermen from Plymouth to Maine were complaining of no fish.
Bill H
__________________
XGloucesterman

This and other original paintings and fine art prints of fishing and marine subjects may be seen on my website
http://bill-hubbard.fineartamerica.com/
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-04-2012, 11:25 AM
z-drive z-drive is offline
Beat it!
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Beverly, MA & Tugboats
Posts: 1,308
I whacky idea just dawned on me about recreational catch limits, and how numbers can be interpreted/misinterpreted. hard to explain, but here is my best:

Imagine this: they bump the recreational size limit up to 36", and keep it at 2 fish. Good god now only 1/4 the anglers out there catch a fish that meets that 36" limit on 1/4 their trips, as opposed to say 1/2 catching a 28" on 1/2" their trips. suddenly they are only taking what, maybe 1/10th of the fish that were caught at 28"......so did the fishery suffer because less fish are being taken, or is it actually helping the fishery to be sustainable? the way the numbers are presented and interpreted would mean to most that don't read into it that the fishery has tanked...1/10th the recreational harvest means there are no fish....right? WRONG. thats why these stats and figures really are confusing and can be interpreted any way someone wants.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-18-2013, 06:47 PM
FishHawk FishHawk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Before Nov. 1999
Posts: 458
Seals

Perhaps the seals are the problem . If each seal eats 1.5 pounds of sandeels per day then what's left for the fish? I think you have to factor in the seals and their impact on the fishery to help solve the problem.
FishHawk
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 05-20-2013, 06:08 PM
jewmont3 jewmont3 is offline
Cpt. Of "My Lil Dinghy"
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Rindge, NH
Posts: 180
Speaking of seals. I caught several keeper sized Stripers last year with seal bites in them!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mass Hearings IronSkippy New England 82 03-09-2012 05:17 AM
Aluminum Skiff Rebuild Part 3 – Hull DaleH Boats and Electronics 0 01-27-2010 04:34 PM
Mass. Ocean Planning Public Hearings PMcHallam Conservation and Ecology 0 09-01-2009 08:29 AM
Fishing Law - Fact or Fiction? msiler New England 23 09-27-2007 12:08 PM
Mass DMF announces public hearings... bdowning New England 6 11-06-2000 06:15 PM



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:37 PM.




vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.


Copyright ©1995-2013, Cahill Digital