Someone tell me why you need more than one striper

[CamaroSSlover]

Why would you want to keep more than one striper a day? I don't see it :confused: One a month is good for me

[RJ]

To each his own. I had given my reasons in the last posting on the other thread.:D

[LkyLindy]

Camaro-

Nobody really needs more than 1 striper a day.Remember you don't have to keep any.However in todays politically driven atmosphere we must play the DEC game and scrounge for the most we can get to protect ourselves from the Comms and their quest to deplete the oceans of every single fish.It's all strategy and politics:(

[John Papciak]

For folks who dont fish more than a few times a year, one might be able to justify two fish in possession. Granted, they can do this already if they take a charter/party boat.

At the same time, according to health advisories, eating more than a few meals a month and/or feeding it to your kids or pregnant wife is not suggested. So, if you are the guy that only fishes a couple times a year, you will have to freeze the fish in small portions so that you can spread it out over a longer period.

Then we have the slob fishermen who feel they are entitiled to the fish, and just what they do with the "extra" is nobody's business - I can recall dozens of excuses, let's see: "I give them to my neighbor and he gives me tomatoes, I give them away in the neighborhood, I barter them for lobsters, "etc.

Also, many folks who have chartered boats (like me) recall being "asked" to keep the extra fish (of various species) even if they didn't plan to take the fish home - just leave the fish with the boat as "gratuity." Note: I perfectly understand the economics of some charter/party boat businesses that rely on selling of fish by the captain and/or mates. But it is what it is - regular anglers are being sold on the merits of a higher bag limit for a hidden reason.

Finally, there is a perception in the rec fishing industry that more potential fish in the cooler means more business - its called a "perception fish" - yes this is a real term thrown around among the industry. Of course, the fly and light tackle guides have built a solid business on clientele who keep NO fish, but thats another story. I'm not saying this is they way it should always be, but it certainly proved that you dont need a high bag limit to make the business work.

Solutions? A buddy of mine who knows nothing of fish politics once commented that maybe they could give out tags like they do for deer (in some states). You get a few tags and you can use em all on one day or take a fish at random during the season.

Use em or lose em?

There is some merit to the idea that you get an allocation based on your historical take. But to try to game the system, today, so as to speak, can end up being counterproductive.

And it is an odd concept if you think about it. This would be like a mother telling her children they will get portions of food based on how much they've eaten in the past. What this would do would force the kids to become gluttons and try to consume more than they actually need for fear that if there are cutbacks, they will be reduced from 150% of what they need to perhaps 110%.

In striped bass, around 1998, there were some stock projections that pointed to the need for possible redutions. (The NJ slot fish was created during this time). Here's the kicker, since NY did not use their second fish in 1996+, there was talk among ASMFC they they would be exempt from reductions while other states who took that second fish would be required to. The fish hawks howled and protested - "where was it written that voluntary conservation expempted them from future reductions?" And these were so-called conservationists!

In the final analysis, its probably better to sell the idea that voluntary conservation should bring exemptions of across-the-board cuts (if there should ever be some). But instead, we are being sold on the concept of gluttony - that you will be given a future allocation based on current consumption - so, in essence, the message becomes - "pig out."

[RJ]

Originally posted by John Papciak
1.Then we have the slob fishermen who feel they are entitiled to the fish, and just what they do with the "extra" is nobody's business - I can recall dozens of excuses, let's see: "I give them to my neighbor and he gives me tomatoes, I give them away in the neighborhood, I barter them for lobsters, "etc.

2. Finally, there is a perception in the rec fishing industry that more potential fish in the cooler means more business - its called a "perception fish" - yes this is a real term thrown around among the industry. Of course, the fly and light tackle guides have built a solid business on clientele who keep NO fish, but thats another story. I'm not saying this is they way it should always be, but it certainly proved that you dont need a high bag limit to make the business work.

3. And it is an odd concept if you think about it. This would be like a mother telling her children they will get portions of food based on how much they've eaten in the past. What this would do would force the kids to become gluttons and try to consume more than they actually need for fear that if there are cutbacks, they will be reduced from 150% of what they need to perhaps 110%.

In the final analysis, its probably better to sell the idea that voluntary conservation should bring exemptions of across-the-board cuts (if there should ever be some). But instead, we are being sold on the concept of gluttony - that you will be given a future allocation based on current consumption - so, in essence, the message becomes - "pig out."

1. While I am not a fan of trading fish for tomatoes, it does not bother me as much with bass as compared to a high bag limit fish like in the old days like catching 200 flounder to trade for vegatables. However, I have no problem trading a bass for a few lobsters..that's for sure and either way you look at it...if it is within the bag limit guidelines...it is not illegal and nothing wrong with it..as long as someone does not sel it without their foodfish license and bass tag.

2. You're right...I am convinced as well that the NYFTTA and their perception of more fish or higher bag limits is really a joke. Their asking for higher bag limits is hurting us in the fact this keeps size limits higher as well. If they came to their senses and asked for a four fluke bag limit we may have had their 16 inch fluke. the party boats wanted a four fish limiit with 16 inches, but the New York Fishing Tackle Trades Assoc. seems to have the ear of those involved for whatever reason and is really hurt their customers more by askign for more fish than smaller fish!

3. You are kidding right? You know as well as I do many NMFS and ASMFC descisions are based on historical data and user group statistics. Why do you think pair trawlers started pair trawling in the Canyon for yellowfin? To dramatically increase their catch so when the decisions come down in the future on yellowifn...they can claim tonage numbers to claim historical use and try to shut us out of the tuna fishery! There's is no way you can compare feeding children to the gluttony of the commercial fishery...you know better than that!

4. Self conservation is a great idea, but I am never going to tell someone what they can or can't do with the fish they are legally entitled to keep. Get what we are entitled to because until we can count and have firm numbers of anglers in a fishery...the ony way we can be counted is to have historical data on our side!!!

[John Papciak]

Rich,

The system is still run primarily by the old school maximum sustainable yield thinkers. This might work for mackerel, but for striped bass, for many, the prospects for large fish outweigh all other aspects.

People write books about catching big fish, they give seminars about catching big fish. They write articles or give rigged eel how-to's with the intention of targeting big fish ;)

We dont write articles or give seminars on how to load up with schoolies.

There are no mackerel clubs or porgie associations.

So when it comes to use em or lose em, it wont work for striped bass. But our old school thinkers know of no other way.

Having said that, I perfectly understand a desire to take fish home now and then - within the law. I do so myself. But the law (actually NY DEC Regulation) is created based on policy - and policy / goals are decided by the ASMFC - largely old school thinkers.

If we give in to the use em or lose em philosophy (assuming we are asking for the second fish for just this reason, and there are no other hidden reasons) we are promoting a fish grab policy.

Granted, I know the world wont change overnight. My father , his entire life, kept every single fish he was legally allowed to and worried about what to do with them later. I see my father in many of the policy makers on the council or ASMFC.

It may take another generation before any new ideas really take root. But at least I will admit that use em or lose em takes us down a dead end street no matter what.

[RJ]

I still maintain there are plenty of big fish out there!
1. They do not get big by being stupid.
2 The problem is the bays are overrun with smaller fish.
3. Small fish will beat big fish to a bait or lure every single time.
4. This is why sharpies leave schools of smaller fish when catching to go find larger fish.
5. Large fish only eat once or maybe twice a day but they eat more at these particular feeding times.
6. Larger bass are solitary creatures swimming alone, in small schools or lulling behind and below a school fish that me half their size waiting for the opportunity or urge to feed on the scrap left by others.
7. There are still big fish out there and while they may not be in the numbers (we think) they once were, there is no way any biologist or fishery manager can EVER count the number of big fish in the ocean.

We must cull out smaller fish to bring back large fish. Plain and simple because there is no accurate way to count fish, estimate fish, or get any idea how many big bass there are because smaller fish have taken over the water ways, bays and Oceana and I am worried too many smaller bass spawning with yield a gene pool to produce smaller fish!

[John Papciak]

I still maintain there are plenty of big fish out there!

We must cull out smaller fish to bring back large fish.


:confused:

[RJ]

While I would never think that anybody at the CCA or associated with the CCA would ever agree or have this opinion, there are some think tankers who do share this opinion. Just my $.02

[John Papciak]

Sorry, I honestly can't figure out if you are making an argument that there are plenty of big fish - or- that we must "bring back" the big fish, by culling more small fish.

Out of all the plan documents and stock assessment documents I''ve read over the last 7 years, I never once saw any mention of small fish "overrunning" the bays, or that culling small fish was a potential solution.

This has nothing to do with the CCA, or any other org.

[Rockfish]

You're seeing it here and now. And its coming from the experts, the fisherman who actually have been observing the situation for many more years than DEC has been fabricating statistics, based on smoke and mirrors. I doubt that anyone in DEC has the accumulated field experience that exists on these boards.
Many of us have been pursuing the striped bass for more years than the so called DEC experts have been alive, and we've seen the ups and the down, before and after regulations were even thought of.
Dan
in Massapequa
;)

[RJ]

Originally posted by John Papciak
Sorry, I honestly can't figure out if you are making an argument that there are plenty of big fish - or- that we must "bring back" the big fish, by culling more small fish.

Out of all the plan documents and stock assessment documents I''ve read over the last 7 years, I never once saw any mention of small fish "overrunning" the bays, or that culling small fish was a potential solution.

This has nothing to do with the CCA, or any other org.

now that I think aout it...kind of both :)

[RJ]

Originally posted by Rockfish
You're seeing it here and now. And its coming from the experts, the fisherman who actually have been observing the situation for many more years than DEC has been fabricating statistics, based on smoke and mirrors. I doubt that anyone in DEC has the accumulated field experience that exists on these boards.
Many of us have been pursuing the striped bass for more years than the so called DEC experts have been alive, and we've seen the ups and the down, before and after regulations were even thought of.
Dan
in Massapequa
;)

That's very kind, but they are the biologists and do understand it even if we don't think they do, but ...it is the method to the madness we don't understand or agree with.

[Stoker1]

If last fall indicates the "state" of the striper fishery I find it hard to believe we are being overrun with bass large or small.

Also I think we should be advocating less pressure on the fishery than more, whether it be commercial or recreational. I would like to see stripers around this year, next year and twenty years from now.

The issue of PCB's retained in stripers is a valid one, why then advocate the possiblitiy of keeping and potentially consuming two fish per day? isn't one enough for consumptive purposes in addition to reducing the human uptake of PCBs?

My .02.

[RJ]

The winds were too predominantly out of the north driving bait and bass off the beaches rather than onto the beaches and the water chilled so fast the blues scattered instead of driving bait to the beach. Plus the iwnds were so strong, 6 days out of sevent we couldn't get of the inlet and the bays were no bargain either because the winds again were from the north. This year will be different...I promise.:D

[surfbeater]

You guys have a great exchange going, sorry to interrupt, but on the topic of cows and schoolies I was wondering:

In any ecosystem there exists a mortality curve where older and larger members of the population are outnumbered but younger and smaller members. The few that live to an older age survived for any number of reasons including intelligence and luck.

I don't doubt that big bass have survived longer through a combination of acquired knowledge and luck. But is it possible that as bass get older and their bodies grow, that the size of their eyes increase too, improving their vision and making them more discriminating predators (harder to fool)?

[Rockfish]

I think we may be giving the fish a little too much credit for brainpower. I believe its more instinctive. When there is a large abundance of any fish they seem to rush for the bait in competition with each other. We've seen this time and again with large schools of bluefish and porgies and I believe its the same with bass. Large schools of big bass in a feeding frenzy are not hard to catch, they are just far less common than large schools of small bass. Hence the small schoolies are easier to catch. Solitary cows really have no reason to rush for your bait, they would rather wait for a meal to come to them, but put an attractive bait in front of their face and they will eat it.
Dan
in Massapequa
;)