What Now? Recreational Fisherpersons vs. Commercial Fishing??

[saltandsand]

Oh my, now it's getting even more uncontrolled. In-fighting amongst fishing people will certainly not help the cause...I was thinking it wouldn't be long till it happened.

Here's one account of this development. http://www.islandfreepress.org/2008Archives/04.11.2008-RecreationalFishingGroupCallsForNetBan.html

And a previous one: http://www.islandfreepress.org/2008Archives/03.22.2008-DebateFocusesOnAllocatingFishBetweenCommercialAndRecreationalFishermen.html

And for those who have not seen it, here's the transcript of the April 4 meeting, as well as the signs which clearly limit more than ORV access. http://www.islandfreepress.org/2008Archives/04.09.2008-TranscriptApril4JudgeBoyle.html

[basstardo]

The only issue I have is when the comm's are wasteful of the resource. The photos of unattended gillnets during low tides down south with many dead puppy drum in them is somewhat disturbing. I certainly don't think it's indicative of all waterman though. I certainly don't like the fact that we're at odds with each other though. A united front is a strong front.

[Rocks&Reds]

If the pictures of the nets with the drum out of water are the same ones I think your talking about in NC, the last offical word I seen was they were illigal nets set by a non commercial fisherman. Several of the tree hugger articals said they were commercial but they were'nt





The only issue I have is when the comm's are wasteful of the resource. The photos of unattended gillnets during low tides down south with many dead puppy drum in them is somewhat disturbing. I certainly don't think it's indicative of all waterman though. I certainly don't like the fact that we're at odds with each other though. A united front is a strong front.

[saltandsand]

If the pictures of the nets with the drum out of water are the same ones I think your talking about in NC, the last offical word I seen was they were illigal nets set by a non commercial fisherman. Several of the tree hugger articals said they were commercial but they were'nt

I can see another problem a brewing... we should all appreciate nature's abundance. Just seems funny that the tree huggers don't love fish.

[Rocks&Reds]

Sorry I said anything, shouldn't have wasted my breath!!One lesson learned. should have known

[steve grossman]

I believe in my heart, that a commercial waterman would take the last thing out of the water to make a nickel. He would then look in the mirror, and would not be able to figure out where ALOT of the problem comes from.

I dont know about you guys on P and S, I have had to do other things for a living that I did not want to do to PAY MY BILLS. Is there a certain group of people on this planet, that think they are excluded from this, so that a resource can recover for a few years???? Just a thought.

[Clyde]

Well Steve I'm sorry you feel that way about commercial fishermen. I know for a fact that 99% of them don't feel that way about the resource.

[eric]

I can see another problem a brewing... we should all appreciate nature's abundance. Just seems funny that the tree huggers don't love fish.

but they like to lick penguins.

[scavengerj]

Well, just my thoughts on the whole aquaculture thing....
Increased pollution and spread of disease because of crowding.
The amount of chemicals that are added to the food and the antibiotics that will be used on the fish.
And, if the fish that are so valuable now are no longer valuable, who will care what happens to them if we get our fish from a farm? Will funding for research, conservation and such still be available like it is now?

I believe that as far as commercial fishing goes, the economic sustainabilty path is the best approach. Not economic growth. With the ability and technology that alot of commercial fishers have, populations could be seriously depleted in no time.

Most states around the country that I have read about are talking about the decline of the recreational fishing population.

So the more I think about it, both parties should be looking more towards economic stability.

Most of all these numbers that get thrown around about bio-mass and reproduction bio-mass and such are, I think, based mostly on models right now. There needs to be more hard data in order to make decisions about how the fisheries are managed and quotas.

We all may not share a common approach to the matter, but we do share a common goal...to sustain and be able to continue to utilize a resource.

[steve grossman]

lWhatever the cost, the resource has and MUST be protected.. The bay population of the blue crab is a scary low. I know at least 3 popular, and many generation waterman, in the bay, are ready to scream at the Governor of Maryland for his most recent proposed changes.

How low does a resource have to get before actions, which are unpopular, come into play. I do not want anyone to lose their livelyhood, but
sometimes we have to do things, and get used to doing things for years, to get things back on track. I am not that smart, but a little common sense tells me that the recreational fishermen, and commercial fishermen must and have to agree that a resource cannot be allowed to just dissappear.

Sacrifices, yes are very painful, in many ways. Look at the alternative. I, for one, miss recreational crabbing tremendously, I do what I can, in my own small personal way to help. Generations ago, a member of my family told me, when I was a small boy, of the huge numbers of shad in the bay, even mention of sturgeon a long time ago. Look at the oyster population decline due to the viruses.

It is frustrating for all. I just think that some times, we have to do things we dont want to do.

[scavengerj]

It is going to take all the groups/states that share the bay to agree to the same regulations. One group/state doing what they want while another doesn't isn't going to help.

I feel that only when an economic impact is to be felt by the state due to a loss of a significant tax base, will they decide that changes need to be made. But, as long as a group or state are able to continue doing what they have been doing while not feeling a significant loss of those monies they don't care.
They may complain about the lower harvest, which means they need to take more to make the same money but, they aren't going to do anything until in crisis mode.

Alot of very complex issues to be looked at and decisions based on facts and hard scientific data are needed in order to say what approach is the right way in the conservation and utilization of any resource. And above all, all parties have to agree.

Look at our flounder fisheries.

[steve grossman]

"ALL PARTIES HAVE TO AGREE'*********

Perfect-enough said. Life can be so simple, yet----.

[saltandsand]

If the pictures of the nets with the drum out of water are the same ones I think your talking about in NC, the last offical word I seen was they were illigal nets set by a non commercial fisherman. Several of the tree hugger articals said they were commercial but they were'nt

I can see another problem a brewing... we should all appreciate nature's abundance. Just seems funny that the tree huggers don't love fish.

Sorry I said anything, shouldn't have wasted my breath!!One lesson learned. should have known

We all need to agree, this includes the hearing tree huggers who seem to focus on issues that are not elemental to the problem. Nets with fish taken and wasted is a problem no matter who did it. Rocks&Reds: I am agreeing with you in that it is the tree huggers that are succeeding with dividing commercial and non commercial fisherpeople. Let's not give them a divided front or inconsistent message.

Alot of good points being made. But IMO the "wait till hard data" logic does not work as the only thing that will be hard is the rigor mortis corpse of the last known fish of yet another species. IMO the biological data is, by its nature, estimations within degrees of acceptable statistical error. These estimations make clear that certain species are doing poorly.

The statement about States getting together and "agreeing" to policy that improves the issues is an absolute requirement. In another thread I spoke about a unified resource management plan but many reject this idea. I can't see how one could reject the idea but it's a free country. How can any species improve when one state is taking back the gains made in another state?

The economic sustainability approach is a tool, but if there are too many interests then sustainability is simply status quo and doomed to fail. There needs to be a balance of economic sustainability with benchmarks of bio-mass indicators.

I fear that the only fish that will be consumed are those from farms and the only fish to catch will be from out of a tank.

[pier-legend]

lWhatever the cost, the resource has and MUST be protected.. The bay population of the blue crab is a scary low. I know at least 3 popular, and many generation waterman, in the bay, are ready to scream at the Governor of Maryland for his most recent proposed changes.

How low does a resource have to get before actions, which are unpopular, come into play. I do not want anyone to lose their livelyhood, but
sometimes we have to do things, and get used to doing things for years, to get things back on track. I am not that smart, but a little common sense tells me that the recreational fishermen, and commercial fishermen must and have to agree that a resource cannot be allowed to just dissappear.

Sacrifices, yes are very painful, in many ways. Look at the alternative. I, for one, miss recreational crabbing tremendously, I do what I can, in my own small personal way to help. Generations ago, a member of my family told me, when I was a small boy, of the huge numbers of shad in the bay, even mention of sturgeon a long time ago. Look at the oyster population decline due to the viruses.

It is frustrating for all. I just think that some times, we have to do things we dont want to do.

...well how about a little SCARIFICING for the real KILLERS in this issue who are never mentioned???
/
...lets see..how about all the maggot developers polluting the wateway and ocean with their Mcmansions..the run off kills the crab larva and OUT OF SIGHT ..OUT OF MIND...COMMERCIALS get the blame for the lack of crabs..

..have an associate at Topsail that has been a commercial crabber for 30 years...he went and got a second job...not because of competition but just from the ever increasing lack of crabs..

...as the McMansions went up on Topsail the run-off increased and the Crabs can't reproduce..
..water quality will not support their infantile stage..most die when hatch...of course NO ONE CAN COUNT THEM...CAUSE THEY DIDN;T MAKE IT INTO THE SYSTEM!!

...crabs that NEVER MATURE are NEVER CAUGHT and NEVER REPLACE the one that are caught..

..but just like the tree hugger birdy folks blaming the RV's for the lack of birds.. so we blame the commercials ....for what the greed of OVER-DEVELOPENT of OUR COASTS have done AND will CONTINUE to do....

....BELIEVE IT OR LEAVE IT..
..IF there were NO COMMERCIAL FISHERMEN..
..IF there were NO RECREATIONAL FISHERMEN.
..IF there were NO 4W DRIVE on the BANKS..

...COASTAL WILDLIFE on SHORE and In the WATER..
...WILL CONTINUE TO DIMINISH....

...until something is done about the maggot developers and the saturation of "new to the areas"....

...COASTAL WILDLIFE HAS NO CHANCE....its just a matter of time before its all polluted to the point where nothing NATURAL CAN REPRODUCE..
..AND WE MAY ALREADY BE THERE!...
..FECAL MATERIAL...FECAL MATERIAL...FECES.. and all that fancy LAWN FERTILIZER..

...Be nice to hear about some new law of IMMINENT DOMAIN to REMOVE ALL OCEAN FRONT and SOUND FRONT dwellings ....to protect our wildlife..on shore and off....

..now we are talking about a SCARIFICING that will actually CHANGE SOMETHING!!

..til then we are just continually fighting over a DIMINISHING RETURN..
..and you can't run enough of any kind of fisherman off to change anything...

[Clyde]

dang PL, tell us how you really feel about it will ya?

[saltandsand]

Pier Legend....You are right on the spot!

And this is another topic where threads exist. The Weary Shoreline deals with obtuse development in Maryland and how it is killing the Cheasapeake Bay. Once again there are those who seem to think that that show and it's message had no factual relevance...go figure??? :confused:

MONEY, MONEY MONEY MONEY...it's all about bastages that want what they want no matter what it costs. They seem to think they own the water just because they own a little piece of land. They seem to think they control the beach because they fight for the birds in the air. MONEY MONEY MONEY... Land grab as they chant "It's mine, all mine and everyone else stay away."

What doesn't get counted is what doesn't count, or so their faulty logic goes. And then there's "it doesn't count unless you can show that you counted each and every last one." And other non-sense about how bio-mass should be evaluated. If we sit and debate to conclusion the finer points of how things should be counted we'll never have a single second to address the issue that has passed from our grip.

Wild Wild West I tell you...it's still the Wild Wild West where anything goes as long as they can get away with it.

[Drumdum]

Some have so much $ they can buy thier way to a home on the sound,when it was totally wetland prior to.. Just fill it up and build... One that comes to mind is Slash Creek in Hatteras.. No doubt there are a few down there where you are as well..
When I had my home built,I was told no structure within 40 ft of a small creek in my back yard.. No problem,that's they way I had it built,and gave 20 ft extra.. I drive down to the n end near Pea Island and look at those oceanfront homes.. No one in thier right mind is going to tell me those septic systems work properly.....

[scavengerj]

No arguments here on either of those statements PL and S&S.
Unfortunately, the only thing that seems to matter to some nowadays as said by s&s, is money. And I agree, time is indeed very limited to act. I don't think in all cases a ban is needed. What is needed, and I'll say it again...is for the states that share a resource to come together and agree what needs to be done. Keep the Fed. Govt. out of these issues or we loose all control. Part of the problem associated with all the data gathering needed!

The states, the commercial fisherman, the recreational fisherman, and landowners have a stake in and have shared these resources for years. Now is when everyone should come together to solve the problems and prevent new ones from happening. I feel everyone is in the same book, we are just on the wrong pages and sometimes are reading it in a different language.

[sea witch]

we all need to get along and play nice.
im a recreational fisherman, plane and simple, however i have some very close commercial friends.

i think that some things should change in the NC sounds, ie introduce oriental oysters and take pressure of the shrimp.

[saltandsand]

No arguments here on either of those statements PL and S&S.
Unfortunately, the only thing that seems to matter to some nowadays as said by s&s, is money. And I agree, time is indeed very limited to act. I don't think in all cases a ban is needed. What is needed, and I'll say it again...is for the states that share a resource to come together and agree what needs to be done. Keep the Fed. Govt. out of these issues or we loose all control. Part of the problem associated with all the data gathering needed!

The states, the commercial fisherman, the recreational fisherman, and landowners have a stake in and have shared these resources for years. Now is when everyone should come together to solve the problems and prevent new ones from happening. I feel everyone is in the same book, we are just on the wrong pages and sometimes are reading it in a different language.

In order to preserve our hobby action is needed. IMO we need to come up with statistically relevant studies, do em ourselves if necessary, and prove the issues. Someone started a thread about a club. I added my .02 about it. Multi-state approach, bio-mass, encroachment, balance of economic factors, offset to lost income/displacement... alot of issues. ALOT.

Resources of experts with skill in math, biology, economy, history, law, local practices and problems... one heck of a treatise and a message. ALOT of WORK... not alot of money to be made.

Who cares about money anyway...I don't remember spending money on fishing gear but I darn sure remember catching the fish!

[Rocks&Reds]

Well my friend as a long time commercial waterman now I guess you say retired, I'm here to tell you that you are absolutly wrong that.
I believe in my heart, that a commercial waterman would take the last thing out of the water to make a nickel.
WE had quota's and limits and got check often!
and are well aware of why we have them, and might I say never had a fine or citation!!


[QUOTE=steve grossman;403170]I believe in my heart, that a commercial waterman would take the last thing out of the water to make a nickel. He would then look in the mirror, and would not be able to figure out where ALOT of the problem comes from.

I dont know about you guys on P and S, I have had to do other things for a living that I did not want to do to PAY MY BILLS. Is there a certain group of people on this planet, that think they are excluded from this, so that a resource can recover for a few years???? Just a thought.

[Oyster]

Oh my, now it's getting even more uncontrolled. In-fighting amongst fishing people will certainly not help the cause...I was thinking it wouldn't be long till it happened.

Here's one account of this development. http://www.islandfreepress.org/2008Archives/04.11.2008-RecreationalFishingGroupCallsForNetBan.html

Thanks for the heads-up. I have been a long-standing member of the CCA but was unaware of this organization, The Recreational Fishing Alliance, http://www.joinrfa.org/. I read over their home page and liked the fact that they are taking an even more aggressive approach than the CCA in working toward rational fisheries management. I immediately joined. Thanks again.

[saltandsand]

Thanks for the heads-up. I have been a long-standing member of the CCA but was unaware of this organization, The Recreational Fishing Alliance, http://www.joinrfa.org/. I read over their home page and liked the fact that they are taking an even more aggressive approach than the CCA in working toward rational fisheries management. I immediately joined. Thanks again.


Much welcome.

[seajay]

Ditto on that Rock everyone wants to blame us Comm. fishers go figure. Salt I am sure that because of the damage done by the beach driving that it has taken a toll. I have seen way to many houses and condos built by Yankees that now try and claim our Fla. beaches as there's. In south Fla. they will dictate when and were one can fish. Just be thankful that yall stil have undeveloped and protected beach's to fish from. Sell your truck mounts and by a cart and count your blessings for you are still fortunate to have beach access.

[saltandsand]

Just to clarify: I'm not, as a group, blaming the commerical fishermen, nor am I saying that, as a group, all recreational fishermen are sinless. What I am saying is that in-fighting between the two groups of commercials and recreationals is a ploy brought to divide and conquer.

We fishing people ought to be wiser than that and own up for each of our respective responsibilities.

Recreationals should call in violations, carry out more trash than they bring in, follow limits, keep only what they can consume, etc.

Commercials should follow the law, work against known culprits, limit damage to structure, practice sustainability, etc.

I think we all know what the bad apples do and we ought not accept them.

Likewise I've had it with fishermen of either group being blamed for marine devastation when far more damage is done at the hands of greedy land developers, excessive oil drilling and mining, lawn fertilizing companies, foolish farmers, faulty public sewage practices, etc.

[Rocks&Reds]

Very well said,exactly what needs to happen!!

[rattler]

I used to know alot of comm. fisherman...and everyone was looking to keep the catch UP...conserve let them breed,etc...they followed the rules+...but, I've never met a dredger and don't want to...I have seen them at work and its not pretty...and they do have by catch...they change the bottom by taking out the natural sponges. and contours of the bay...they drag up the crabs, flatties, etc that winter in the bay...yes most of the problems are due to construction and fertilizer and the OMEGA PROTIEN problem...I clean up when I fish, I smoke and keep the buts...I talk up conversation...and I still feel like we are losing...

[seajay]

That said I totally agree Salt.

[saltandsand]

I'm not all about non-sensical environmentalism. It's about a policy that is set on a singular point of reason. Certain people will never understand.

Question is not about who to blame but more about who has acted irresponsibly. Most important is to no longer tolerate what is currently accepted as irresponsible.

Land development has caused much, over harvesting also, and living like pigs certainly doesn't help. I still can't get over the defeat of wind power in the state of Maryland. BTW: Maryland has accepted wind power but has not regulated transmission rates so the only viable application is for non-essential use.

Freedom still allows fishing within the limits of set by regulators...yet fishing is far from free. Take a regulator when you go diving!

[Lipyourown]

Too many folks (and the media) blame over developement on the condition of the Bay and I agree to a certian extent. However the biggest polluters are the factory farms. Move them west.

[fish bucket]

Originally Posted by steve grossman
I believe in my heart, that a commercial waterman would take the last thing out of the water to make a nickel. He would then look in the mirror, and would not be able to figure out where ALOT of the problem comes from.

amen

although there are lots of reasons for the problem,that is #1