It’s probably not news to anyone who pays attention to what’s
going on up and down the coast, but a lot of striped bass fishermen weren’t happy with what went on at the February meeting of the Atlantic States
Marine Fisheries Commission’s Atlantic Striped Bass Management Board.
The meeting was supposed to address “conservation
equivalency,” and review the forty-nine different proposals that various states
had made, as such states sought to adopt regulations that differed from the one fish
bag, 28 to 35-inch coastal slot limit and the 18-inch minimum size in the
Chesapeake Bay that were included in the recently-approved Addendum
VI to Amendment 6 to the Atlantic Striped Bass Interstate Fishery Management
Plan.
Things started heading downhill early on.
As soon as the technical reports had been
presented, and the floor opened for questions, one Management Board member
asked a Technical Committee representative what the coastwide reduction in
fishing mortality would be if all of the state proposals were approved. The response was that no one knew; there were
so many proposals, which could be combined in so many different ways, that it
just wasn’t practical to calculate all of the possible outcomes.
Thus, the Management Board was being asked to approve
management measures without knowing what the outcome would
be.
That didn’t go over with a number of Management Board
members.
To their credit, the
representatives from New York and from the New England states did try hard to bring some order out of the chaos, and to do the right thing for
the bass. A few Management Board members
from northern New England worked particularly hard for a meaningful review of
the state proposals and, perhaps more important, to hold states accountable if
their supposedly “conservation equivalent” regulations fell short of the mark.
Yet, in the end, they didn’t succeed. While there is a very good chance that we’ll
have consistent coastal regulations in all of the states between Maine and New
York (Rhode Island being the only possible outlier), and in some states south
of that as well, conservation equivalency proposals adopted for Maryland and
New Jersey make it likely that Addendum VI will fall short of its mark.
And judging from the comments we’ve been hearing, that has made striped
bass anglers, including many in New Jersey and Maryland, pretty mad.
The comments started coming in right after the Management
Board meeting. One
observer made the wry observations that
“49 different choices on conservation equivalency were
submitted, many of which the technical committee straight out said could not be
modelled…
“Several Commissioners went on record calling out the
[conservation equivalency] bullshit, one saying, ‘We agreed to a size limit at
the last meeting, while right then and there a number of you sat in the back of
the room trying to figure out how to then work up an alternative conservation
equivalency in your state.’
“’Accountability’ was voted down. Yes, read it twice if you have to. The idea of paying for what you eat (and
penalties for overages) was handily defeated.
Note to self—never invite these types out to dinner and expect them to
split the bill fairly…
“A coalition of 28-35 [inch slot limit] was building coast-wide,
but Rhode Island and then NJ couldn’t resist.
The visual is the grade school teacher telling each child they should
take one cookie, and one cookie only.
But then two kids decide to reach in for more, the children start to fight,
and the cookie jar falls onto the floor into a pile of crumbs.
“And that pretty much sums up the process of ASMFC this week.”
It was a pretty good, and remarkably polite, description of
what went on.
Many other folks expressed anger and/or disappointment. On
one website devoted to striped bass fishing, people listening in on the Management
Board meeting kept up a running commentary, making statements such as
“unbelievable [sic]. Are
we trying to conserve the fish here or the wallets of those that profit off
their harvest.
“Solid job to the people at the ASMFC. They really need to go, every single one of
them,”
“And now we’ve avoided accountability. I’ve lost all respect for the ‘August Body.’ They should all be ashamed of themselves. Time for NOAA to manage striped bass, it’s
beyond the abilities of these pikers.”
In the wake of the meeting, there were many more comments of
that kind, but they began to taper off after a few days. At that point, Maryland and New Jersey came
out with their final rules, and the conversation grew more specific.
Maryland decided that, instead of adopting the Addendum VI
rule of a one-fish bag and 18-inch minimum size for striped bass in the
Chesapeake Bay, it would instead establish a complicated set of regulations
that prohibited catch-and-release striped bass fishing prior to May 1, and pushed
back the start of the season until that date.
For the first two weeks of the season, the size limit was set at 35 inches,
to give Maryland’s recreational fishermen a chance to kill the big, fecund
females that are protected from anglers everywhere else on the coast; for the remainder of the season, the size limit falls to 19 inches, with
a 2-fish bag for anglers on for-hire vessels and a 1-fish bag for everyone
else. The commercial fishery would take
a 1.8 percent cut in quota; since Addendum VI called for an 18 percent cut for both
the commercial and the recreational sector, Maryland anglers will have to take
a greater than 20% cut in fishing mortality to make up the difference.
In Maryland, the commercial and for-hire sectors
won at the expense of the recreational sector and the striped bass.
After
Maryland announced the new rules on its Facebook page, it received well over
100 comments, almost all of them critical and many downright hostile. One commenter wrote
“To call them ‘conservation measures’ is a joke. Maryland Department of Natural Resources
Fisheries has failed yet again to make meaningful changes to protect the future
of our fishery. Pathetic.”
Another noted that the Maryland announcement said that
“The department will announce a public comment schedule for
those regulations in the coming weeks,”
and responded
“Why bother? You
ignored the overwhelming, collective voice this go around in favor of self
interest. Your sole responsibility is to
protect the fishery and you’re wholeheartedly failing in that regard.”
A third person speculated for the reasons behind the Maryland
regulations, writing
“It’s time the appointees stopped handing out political
favors to their base and started working to conserve our fisheries resources
for everyone in Maryland. These
regulations look more like feathering the nest for a future run for office—not even
close to conservative action to protect the resources…”
“Conservation equivalency has not
proven to be effective in the past,”
but that
“New Jersey has proven to be a thorn in the side of the states
trying to turn this [striped bass decline] around.”
However, such comments were in vain. Those who managed to get into the meeting
were confronted with a list of all of New Jersey’s possible striped bass management
options, including the 28 to 35-inch coastwide slot. But a few of those options, for a 28 to
38-inch slot limit, and a continuation of New Jersey’s “bonus” program, which turns
over bass supposedly “saved” when the state outlawed commercial striped bass
fishing to the recreational sector, which kills them in the commercial
fishermen’s stead, were already highlighted in red.
As part of its new regulatory package, New Jersey will move up the start of the bonus program, which targets 24 to 28-inch striped bass, from September to
May 15, thus giving the state’s anglers the chance to remove even more of the big 2015
year class from the population before it matures and has a chance to contribute
to the spawning stock.
Given that the highlighted options were selected before the first angler even entered the meeting room, making many anglers agree with the sentiment that, as one for-hire
fishing boat operators’ association expressed it, “The fix is in.”
The reason for that was perfectly clear, and perfectly
understandable, given the mentality of the people making the decision. As
the Asbury Park Press reported on its website,
“The [New Jersey Marine Fisheries] council settled on the
option it felt gave fishermen the most opportunity to keep a fish.”
Of course, the whole point of Addendum VI was to end
overfishing and reduce fishing mortality to the point where the spawning stock
might have the opportunity to begin rebuilding, so providing fishermen with “the
most opportunity to keep a fish” might not be the best way to achieve the addendum’s
goals.
But, of course, it suits New Jersey’s goals quite well. The bass will just have to look out for
themselves.
The question now is what responsible anglers, in Maryland, in New Jersey, and everywhere else along the striper coastm, ought to
do.
First, everyone must recognize that change needs to come
from within the angling community. It
cannot be imposed from outside. So responsible
anglers must continue to do what they’re doing, releasing most or all of their
bass, handing them properly, and setting an example for other anglers to
emulate. Each of us has the opportunity to
educate other fishermen on the need for conservation every time we set out on the water.
A good example of that comes from Maryland.
Although that state bent over backward to let
its for-hire fleet kill as many fish as possible, some charter boat owners are making their own, principled stand.
Capt. Nick
Lombardi, who operates his Redbeard Charters out of Annapolis, is one person trying to lead the way.
“Throwing trophies back is not real popular around here. We need to make a drastic shift in culture
here on the bay…Just because it’s legal doesn’t make it right.”
Lombardi has no plans to allow customers to take more than
one bass per day, either; his customers will be limited to a single, smaller
fish caught during the regular season, which begins on May 16. He will also avoid the summer
catch-and-release striped bass fishery, which sees high levels of release
mortality due to the warm waters and lower levels of dissolved oxygen. He noted that
“You’ll be out on a hot day and pass 40 or 50 dead fish on
the way to a spot.”
Instead, he’ll target species such as red drum, cobia, Spanish
mackerel and bluefish because yes, despite the claims of the Maryland fisheries
managers, there are other things to fish for in the Chesapeake Bay besides
striped bass.
All of us, even though we don’t run charters, can strive to
emulate Capt. Lombardi’s example.
But the one thing we can’t do is quit. Whatever anger we feel must fuel future action.
No, Addendum VI’s outcome wasn’t as good as we might have hoped,
but at least we’re only dealing with two rogue states, Maryland and New
Jersey, when we could have been dealing with many more. And the comments of a number of Management Board
members made it clear that we’re being heard, even though it would be nice if a
few more people were listening.
In the end, though, Addendum VI and the February Management
Board meeting were only preliminary scuffles.
The main event will be the debate over Amendment 7 to the striped bass
management plan.
That will be a long, difficult fight, but it is of the
utmost importance, because the outcome of that debate will shape the way
striped bass are managed for a very long time, and shape the health of the
stock well into the foreseeable future.
For those of us born before man set foot on the moon, it
will probably be, for all practical purposes, the last and most important striped bass fight
we’ll face in what remains of our lifetimes.
No comments:
Post a Comment