# MD Rockfish Regulations Finally Out



## Green Cart

http://www.eregulations.com/maryland/fishing/

Opening Days April 18 through May 15 only one allowed at 28"-36" or over 40". I dunno the rationale for not keeping 37" through 40".

May 16 through May 31 for bay only, you can keep two 20" to 28", but one can be over 28". June 1 through December 15, bay fishing is extended to tributaries with the same rules.

Coastal fishing is very strict. Same all year, but you can only keep one at 28" or larger.

Happy striped bass fishing!


----------



## transamsam98

Strictly politics , the coastal guys fishing on the same fish we do in the spring went from 2 big fish (some states 3) down to one. New York is allowed a fish under 28 inches in the rivers. New Jersey is still allowed 2 big fish and you can still buy a bonus stamp (New Jersey really felt the pain huh) and all the states fought against MD bay /Va bay / Potomac river fisheries commission to prevent us from submitting our own data. If we could submit our data chances are our season and sizes would have remained the same as before. For those that it bothers support you local fisheries and contact the proper officials but do so with the proper background information. It's going to be an interesting ride this year but at least we can still catch them better than the Yankees


----------



## bluefish1928

If you care aboutg mercury/toxins, I would not keep a single fish over 36 inches. I wished it was 28-36 inches and a bonus stamp.
The idea is for some anglers to keep their once in a lifetime fish.

Bumping the original 18 inches to 20 inches minimum is a huge plus for the sake of conservation.


----------



## Espresso

Conservation means changing the commercial regulations. That has yet to happen. Us shore bound guys are a drop in the bucket compared to them.


----------



## CJS

But the recreational fishery that harvests more fish and targets "trophy" fish all up and down the coast is conservation friendly?


----------



## zam

there's a lot of people fishing the shoreline along the Rockfishes migratory route from North Carolina to Nova Scotia, every river, harbor, bay, inlet, ect... would hardly call that a drop in the bucket


----------



## catman

Green Cart said:


> http://www.eregulations.com/maryland/fishing/
> 
> Opening Days April 18 through May 15 only one allowed at 28"-36" or over 40". I dunno the rationale for not keeping 37" through 40".
> 
> !


Be very careful with that 37". The reg says larger than 36" which means a whisker hair over 36" must be released. As far as the rational behind the >36" - 40" release it protects that class of fish for breading.


----------



## CaliYellowtail

bluefish1928 said:


> If you care aboutg mercury/toxins, I would not keep a single fish over 36 inches. I wished it was 28-36 inches and a bonus stamp.
> The idea is for some anglers to keep their once in a lifetime fish.
> 
> Bumping the original 18 inches to 20 inches minimum is a huge plus for the sake of conservation.


Agreed..........AMEN!


----------



## tripleheetheet

Leave in water on a line bc they shrink if left in cooler. Dnr has ramped their staff so more will be out


----------



## striperone

Hi,Sick of this ****.FACT! Shore fisherman do not come even close to what the commercial guys do.Who do you think fished out the stripers in the 70s and 80s commercial.They take tons of stripers in a day period ive seen it up close.If you do think sport fisherman are the cause your fn nutts and dont know **** about the fisheries and another your a commercial fisherman posting this bull**** or you work for one period!Im out tired of all the bull**** on here thats why alot of good people stopped posting on here.Yes DNR are looking for that money6 for the state again so guys lookout whisker hair means whisker hair


----------



## jlentz

striperone said:


> Hi,Sick of this ****.FACT! Shore fisherman do not come even close to what the commercial guys do.Who do you think fished out the stripers in the 70s and 80s commercial.They take tons of stripers in a day period ive seen it up close.If you do think sport fisherman are the cause your fn nutts and dont know **** about the fisheries and another your a commercial fisherman posting this bull**** or you work for one period!Im out tired of all the bull**** on here thats why alot of good people stopped posting on here.Yes DNR are looking for that money6 for the state again so guys lookout whisker hair means whisker hair


You might want to check the facts. Commercial fisherman take much less than the recreational fisherman. It is not commercial fisherman that are the main cause of the decline in the striper population today, it is the recreational fisherman. Commercial harvest as a percentage of total harvest has been in decline for years while the recreational harvest has grown.

John


----------



## CJS

Jlentz, you are talking to a brick wall. As long as you are pointing fingers at someone else, noone is looking back at you.

For the "if it wasn't for the netters crowd", according to the ASMFC website, rec harvest is ~19 million pounds (without properly accounting for release mortality) and commercial harvest is ~8 million pounds.


----------



## catman

striperone said:


> Hi,Sick of this ****.FACT! Shore fisherman do not come even close to what the commercial guys do.....


Well I took some time to do some research and here are the cold, hard facts. This is the total catch of Atlantic Striped Bass by Fishery from 2003 - 2012. I have it by year if anyone is interested.

Commercial Total Harvest - 9.67 Millions of Fish
Recreational Total Harvest - 23.08 Millions of Fish

End of discussion.


----------



## jlentz

CJS said:


> Jlentz, you are talking to a brick wall. As long as you are pointing fingers at someone else, noone is looking back at you.
> 
> For the "if it wasn't for the netters crowd", according to the ASMFC website, rec harvest is ~19 million pounds (without properly accounting for release mortality) and commercial harvest is ~8 million pounds.


CJS I know it does no good and the facts do not mean much to some people but I would a least hope a few people can get a better understanding of the real situation. It is funny that stripeone comes on here with his rant and than he/she says a lot of good people stopped posting here because of the bull***. Maybe he/she will realize that people like him/her are the ones that are full of it and do not have the facts to back up their argument and they may be the real reason some of the good posters do not post on this site anymore.

John


----------



## Tracker01

What really bothers me is I was in Wegmans yesterday, There was a wild caught rock being displayed in the seafood section. This thing had to be 40 pounds. It was just laying on ice straight up. The fish was drying out and the skin just peeled off when I touched it. What a waste.


----------



## zam

Tracker01 said:


> What really bothers me is I was in Wegmans yesterday, There was a wild caught rock being displayed in the seafood section. This thing had to be 40 pounds. It was just laying on ice straight up. The fish was drying out and the skin just peeled off when I touched it. What a waste.


Coms aren't even allowed to keep fish over 36". besides its not a waste if its being sold in a store to feed a family that chose to buy their fish instead of harvesting their self, they have just as much right as us sportfishermen


----------



## Tracker01

If you seen this fish no one would buy it. next time I will take a picture and weigh it and measure also. I NEVER SAID HOW LONG IT WAS , JUST HOW BIG IT LOOKED.


----------



## catman

Tracker01 said:


> If you seen this fish no one would buy it. next time I will take a picture and weigh it and measure also. I NEVER SAID HOW LONG IT WAS , JUST HOW BIG IT LOOKED.


Today's dried looking whole rock is tomorrow's wild caught fillets @ $11.99 lb.


----------



## Tracker01

No thanks thing looked like shoe leather.


----------



## transamsam98

I'm very glad to be a member here where at least some of you guys understand the facts behind comm vs Rec fishing 

Zam I know in MD it is 18-36 for comm rockfish but it very well may be different in the ocean or Virginia. 
Tracker what color was the tag ? My Chesapeake itq tags are orange this year. 
Catman I hope one day we get a good reporting system for Rec guys that has some kind of enforcement just like the comm and charter guys. 

But who's ready for opening day ? I know I'm excited but i am already fantasizing about live lining. I picked up a few new st Croix ice rods to use on the boat this year should be fun for those that remember pinky


----------



## catman

Parking lot is way too crowded on opening day. What I'm looking forward to is live lining with you guys.


----------



## kurazy kracka

And then let's not forget all those poor 12-14" fish that are kept around MD in the summer. Fish that haven't even gotten a single spawn in. 

Went by SPSP sat and there were a good 10 people out there but saw no action. Crazy hey are so late. I'm hoping they stay in the channels and get their spawn run done honestly.


----------



## Tracker01

The tag was white


----------



## striperone

You better check yourself Jlentz cause you havent got an fn clue prick.Everyone out here knows that the commercial fisherman have been a problem for years and still are FACT!.Its people like you that live on fantasy island somewhere and dont have a clue period.Ive been the commercial side and seen it with my own fn eyes.Wake up before long wont be know sport fishing because of them period


----------



## striperone

Jlentz your full of **** just like half the people on here.Boy things have changed on here in the last few years I remember all th eactual guys who fished and didnt post bull like sport fisherman take way more than commercial which everyone on here knows the truth.CJS your absolutely right dude you know the facts to and seen them.Its people like Lentz who ruins **** for others.And here ill even give you my real name lentz LEE!And most good people around this whole area know me as one hell of a fisherman and i know my ****,Commercial ruins the fisheries period


----------



## CJS

Recreational fishermen are in good hands with someone like you as a spokesman.


----------



## surfnsam

jlentz said:


> You might want to check the facts. Commercial fisherman take much less than the recreational fisherman. It is not commercial fisherman that are the main cause of the decline in the striper population today, it is the recreational fisherman. Commercial harvest as a percentage of total harvest has been in decline for years while the recreational harvest has grown.
> 
> John


A load of BS


----------



## zam

It is a fact that Recs harvest and kill a lot more Stripers then commercial fishing, this graph isn't something made up or the opinion of someone that just states things based on emotion and no facts, this is from the ASMFC


----------



## CJS

No it isn't BS. Those are the facts. Now they have been shown by several people in several ways, but since they disagree with the world as you see it, they must be wrong.


----------



## jlentz

striperone said:


> You better check yourself Jlentz cause you havent got an fn clue prick.Everyone out here knows that the commercial fisherman have been a problem for years and still are FACT!.Its people like you that live on fantasy island somewhere and dont have a clue period.Ive been the commercial side and seen it with my own fn eyes.Wake up before long wont be know sport fishing because of them period





striperone said:


> Jlentz your full of **** just like half the people on here.Boy things have changed on here in the last few years I remember all th eactual guys who fished and didnt post bull like sport fisherman take way more than commercial which everyone on here knows the truth.CJS your absolutely right dude you know the facts to and seen them.Its people like Lentz who ruins **** for others.And here ill even give you my real name lentz LEE!And most good people around this whole area know me as one hell of a fisherman and i know my ****,Commercial ruins the fisheries period





surfnsam said:


> A load of BS


Please drop the name calling and post facts disputing what I and others have said in this thread. 

John


----------



## kurazy kracka

Have yall never gone out on the bay and watched the rec chartered boats? they hammer the fish HARD all day long running 2 trips a day with 8-10 people a trip. That is 40 fish a day per boat right there alone. and the way they handle the poor fish, rip the hooks out of them and toss em over the side fast as possible to get the lines back in the water.


----------



## jlentz

striperone said:


> Jlentz your full of **** just like half the people on here.Boy things have changed on here in the last few years I remember all th eactual guys who fished and didnt post bull like sport fisherman take way more than commercial which everyone on here knows the truth.CJS your absolutely right dude you know the facts to and seen them.Its people like Lentz who ruins **** for others.And here ill even give you my real name lentz LEE!And most good people around this whole area know me as one hell of a fisherman and i know my ****,Commercial ruins the fisheries period





surfnsam said:


> A load of BS


Since you do not understand the facts that have been posted I will try to clarify them for you. Maybe you both missed the day of school back in third grade when the teacher explained greater than and less than so a short lesson is in order for you. I will try to explain it the best way I think you will understand. The greater than sign (>) signifies that the number to the left is greater than(larger) than the number to the right. The less than sign(<) signifies that the number to the left is less than(smaller) than the number to the right. The way it was explained to me many years back may help you understand, think of the sign as the open mouth of an alligator, do you see the resemblance? Now imagine that the alligator when he is hungry wants to eat the largest meal possible. So if you look at the the open part of the sign imagine the alligator going after the larger thing. Are you two following me? Ok a few examples to see if you understand the basics 2>1, 3<5. Are you two still with me? Ok so now for some data relevant to the topic of this thread

The striped bass commercial harvest steadily grew from 3.4 million pounds in 1995 to peak at over 7 million pounds in 2003. Commercial harvest of the species since 2004 has averaged around 7 million pounds per year. Gill nets are the dominant commercial gear used to target striped bass. Other commercial fishing gears include hook and line, pound nets, seines, and trawls.

As the saltwater recreational fishing sector has grown, so has the popularity of striped bass. The recreational sector now accounts for a larger portion of the total harvest than the commercial sector. Recreational harvest has grown steadily since the reopening of many state fisheries in 1990, with landings of 19 million pounds in 2012.

Here is the link if you would like to verify the quote.
http://www.asmfc.org/species/atlantic-striped-bass

I cited this article in a previous thread and the one arguing with me, I think his user name was StriperslayerG1 seems to have disappeared once the facts were presented. He is probably still curled up in the corner of his mothers basement in the fetal position shivering and sucking his thumb crying out "mama mama" after he was defeated by actual data. You should see from the article I quoted that from 2003 to 2012 the recreational harvest has grown to 19 million pounds while at the same time all commercial harvest (hook and line, gill net, pound nets seines and trawls) grew from 3.4 million pounds in 1995 to 7 million pounds and has averaged that number since then.

Ok back to the math lesson. So from the data provided all commercial harvest is 7 million lbs and recreational harvest is 19 million lbs. Which one do you two think is the larger number? Is 7 million lbs greater than 19 million lbs? Thinks of the hungry alligator, I am am sure you two can figure this out. I hope you got the answer correct the alligator would go for the 19 million lbs of recreationaly harvested fish as opposed to the 7 million lbs of commercially harvested fish. So 19 million lbs > 7 million lbs so you could say recreational harvest > commercial harvest. Enlightening isn't it.

Striperone I am glad that most good people around the area know as one hell of a fisherman. More pertaining to the discussion at hand I would be more curious as to those same peoples opinion of your reading, writing and comprehension skills. Please present any data you have that contradicts what I and others have posted. Be sure to cite your sources and since you lack proper etiquette and communication skills I would be glad to present the data at the next ASMFC conference on your behalf.

John


----------



## transamsam98

Guys let not forget he witnessed it first hand ! Unfortunately I am lead to believe he was working for one of the crooks who decided checking in his fish was not a worthy cause or possibly the idea of catching the fish in one day vs spreading it out over a year just didn't add up.


----------



## Lipyourown

The ASMFC is dominated by commercial interests and that pie chart above is the biggest piece of junk science out there. You guys really believe what they are saying? I, nor anyone I know has never been asked by a Government official "what did you catch?". Yet they know how much we caught, kept and released. 

For example, their official stance on menhaden is that they are not overfished. Anyone who has been around more than a couple decades knows that is BS. I see Omega has folks on their board. Hmmmm.


----------



## jlentz

Lipyourown said:


> The ASMFC is dominated by commercial interests and that pie chart above is the biggest piece of junk science out there. You guys really believe what they are saying? I, nor anyone I know has never been asked by a Government official "what did you catch?". Yet they know how much we caught, kept and released.
> 
> For example, their official stance on menhaden is that they are not overfished. Anyone who has been around more than a couple decades knows that is BS. I see Omega has folks on their board. Hmmmm.



Since it is junk science what else out there is better? For the sake of discussion exactly what problem do you see in their data collection and analysis? What would you do to improve the random surveys, catch reports, MRIP, and VTR data collection and analysis? There is no perfect way to get the exact numbers but what the science does is make the best educated guess on the data they have. I have been surveyed and many other I know have also. 

John


----------



## Lipyourown

Since it is junk science what else out there is better? *How bout surveying everyone when they buy a license online?* For the sake of discussion exactly what problem do you see in their data collection and analysis? *Way too small of a sample size*What would you do to improve the random surveys, catch reports, MRIP, and VTR data collection and analysis? *See above*There is no perfect way to get the exact numbers but what the science does is make the best educated guess on the data they have. I have been surveyed and many other I know have also. 

My suggestions are simple, cheap and straight forward...but won't be implemented because it puts the resources first and the comms second. Yeah, only 4% dead discards by comms. Please.


----------



## jlentz

Lipyourown said:


> Since it is junk science what else out there is better? *How bout surveying everyone when they buy a license online?* For the sake of discussion exactly what problem do you see in their data collection and analysis? *Way too small of a sample size*What would you do to improve the random surveys, catch reports, MRIP, and VTR data collection and analysis? *See above*There is no perfect way to get the exact numbers but what the science does is make the best educated guess on the data they have. I have been surveyed and many other I know have also.
> 
> My suggestions are simple, cheap and straight forward...but won't be implemented because it puts the resources first and the comms second. Yeah, only 4% dead discards by comms. Please.


Who is going to pay for the surveys of everyone? The time involved not just in collecting the data but processing it also. You mention surveying someone when they buy a license who will pay the tackle store selling the licenses for the time involved. Right now selling a license there is very little profit margins. Will it be included in the license fee? If so the price of a license is going to skyrocket or will it be an increase in the excise tax on sporting equipment. Of course it would be great to survey everyone but it currently is not economically feasible. A lot of scientific studies rely on samples and fisheries management follows suit.

John


----------



## CJS

I can't argue with disputing the science. I am certain it is flawed, but it is what is available. That said, harvests are based on quotas and the quotas are set up such that recs make up a much larger slice of the pie. 

Considering the black eye that commercial fishermen get every time a poacher is caught or a pile of dead, culled fish is found, I can't believe that commercial interests are somehow hiding million of pounds of harvested fish from being counted. And if comms are hiding fish, how much are recs also hiding?

There was a story someone posted way back on one of the forums, it was about a hunter being convinced that one type of hunting was unsportsmanlike. He agreed anf supported a ban. Then he was convinced of another type of unsporting hunting, he agreed and supported that ban too, and so on until finally all hunting was banned in his state because there was noone left to fight the bans. Kind of a slippery slope argument, but I get the logic. I forget where I read it, but I wish I could find it. 

I like to keep a fish every now and then. I like to C&R fish, including pre-spawn fish and fishing from piers with less than gentle releases. Some people might think my way of fishing is unsportsmanlike and should be banned. I don't particularly like the way gill nets or charter boats take fish, but as long as I am taking fish too, I am not going to claim that my way is better. 

I am a big advocate of getting your house in order before pointing fingers at someone else. If you can look at the recreational seasons and tactics and not think that recs are as harmful (or even more devastating) to striped bass stocks, then I am wasting my breath.


----------



## Lipyourown

^ Yeah, just like they banned commercial duck hunting and now we can't recreationally hunt ducks.


----------



## Lipyourown

jlentz said:


> Who is going to pay for the surveys of everyone? The time involved not just in collecting the data but processing it also. You mention surveying someone when they buy a license who will pay the tackle store selling the licenses for the time involved. Right now selling a license there is very little profit margins. Will it be included in the license fee? If so the price of a license is going to skyrocket or will it be an increase in the excise tax on sporting equipment. Of course it would be great to survey everyone but it currently is not economically feasible. A lot of scientific studies rely on samples and fisheries management follows suit.
> 
> John


Who buys their license in person anymore? When you are online getting a license, how much will it cost to add 3 or 4 questions to the page? How many rock did you catch last year? How many did you keep? release? How often did you fish? Yeah, it will cost billons! Skyrocketing costs, come on. But again, certain members on the board will block any attempt at more accurate data collections.

Any additional costs (not) will be a recreational burden...just like recs fund the DNR to police us all anyway as comm tax revenues don't begin to cover the cost of policing them.


----------



## CJS

Lipyourown said:


> ^ Yeah, just like they banned commercial duck hunting and now we can't recreationally hunt ducks.


I am sure you are right. Everything will be fine. 

You do what you think is right and I will to.


----------



## catman

Lipyourown some of us have taken the time to research this topic and have provided information. You say it's junk science but you haven't provided one shred of information to back up your statements. Perhaps instead of running off at the mouth you'll use that energy to substantiate your position. I did my research with an open unbiased mind. Can you please do the same. I'm looking forward to your findings.


----------



## Lipyourown

You looked up one stat and provided that stat like other folks already did. A stat that comes from a very limited sample size from an organization that does not have the resource or recs best interests in mind. That organization is dominated by commercial interests. My point is that there are easier ways to conduct surveys that will give us far more accurate information. 

I guess you missed the shred of information I posted by informing some that Omega Protein sits on the board. Here is another shred of information, that pic you posted of dead floating stripers in another thread was not from recreational C&R, those floaters were from netters culling their catch in NC.

Sorry, I ran off at the mouth, nothing personal to anyone in this thread.


----------



## jlentz

Lipyourown said:


> Who buys their license in person anymore? When you are online getting a license, how much will it cost to add 3 or 4 questions to the page? How many rock did you catch last year? How many did you keep? release? How often did you fish? Yeah, it will cost billons! Skyrocketing costs, come on. But again, certain members on the board will block any attempt at more accurate data collections.
> 
> Any additional costs (not) will be a recreational burden...just like recs fund the DNR to police us all anyway as comm tax revenues don't begin to cover the cost of policing them.


Lots of people buy their licenses in person. If you say just ask online license buyers a few questions when they get online to buy their license will they give an accurate answer? I know recs who stated when the MD license was put into affect in coastal waters many said when surveyed they would tell them they did not catch any fish. That would causes an under reporting of actual recreational catches. When MD initiated the requirement for a license in the coastal waters it was as a result of NOAA's requirement for more data. Initially it was free in MD but of course a coastal license fee of $15.00 is required now. Again who will absorb these costs when everyone is surveyed? Do you know how many millions of anglers would need to be surveyed and how many employees it would take to process and analyze the data? Since you say every angler need to be counted are you also going to say that to get an accurate count of the fish stock we need drain the oceans and count all of the fish to get an accurate assessment? Please name me one other biological study that covers such a wide amount of data that counts every variable. Comms are much more regulated than the recs so their numbers are a more accurate representation of the total fish they harvest. Do you think we should require all of the recs to have the same requirements the comms do? You say tax revenues from comms does not begin to cover the policing of them. I am interested in you providing us the numbers and breakdown of what exactly the income from the "taxes" is and how it is spent policing the recs and the comms.

John


----------



## transamsam98

I just wanted to add in that charter boats are considered recreational not commercial. All charter boats must fill out daily reports or face a license suspension or revolution. While charter boats are a very small percentage of the recreational fishermen as a whole there is at least aome good numbers being provided. I look foreword to the day that all fishermen have to file reports daily. It will be a big pain for most but if done properly without lies (ha good luck all fishermen do ) the numbers may reveal what the science claims already.


----------



## zam

I think both recs and coms (or I should say the people that choose to buy their fish) harvest their fair share, and that's the way it should be, to act as if us recs should have more of a right to the resources is just wrong. I think people should learn to get along with others not try to divide. there's plenty of fish to go around, practical regulations is all we need. no citizen has to get screwed over so others can benefit
The main reason we are having new restrictions on us is because of the people that kept complaining that there was a low population of Rockfish, which I believe couldn't be farther from the truth. there so many fish out there its ridiculous for anyone to complain. I can't believe the ASMFC even caved


----------



## surfnsam

You are quoting ASFMC which is so bias and underhanded it a joke also you didn't say that Rec fisherman put 10 times the revenue back to the community than com. fisheries. We put more back to the economy than com's but get screwd by ASFMC and its corrupt administration. I can do the math and thier numbers don't add up.


----------



## transamsam98

Let me add this last part before I leave this conversation and just lurk. I want everyone to catch fish and everyone to get their fair share all while allowing the resource to stay stable and produce for years to come.


----------



## Lipyourown

jlentz said:


> Lots of people buy their licenses in person. If you say just ask online license buyers a few questions when they get online to buy their license will they give an accurate answer? I know recs who stated when the MD license was put into affect in coastal waters many said when surveyed they would tell them they did not catch any fish. That would causes an under reporting of actual recreational catches. When MD initiated the requirement for a license in the coastal waters it was as a result of NOAA's requirement for more data. Initially it was free in MD but of course a coastal license fee of $15.00 is required now. Again who will absorb these costs when everyone is surveyed? Do you know how many millions of anglers would need to be surveyed and how many employees it would take to process and analyze the data? Since you say every angler need to be counted are you also going to say that to get an accurate count of the fish stock we need drain the oceans and count all of the fish to get an accurate assessment? Please name me one other biological study that covers such a wide amount of data that counts every variable. Comms are much more regulated than the recs so their numbers are a more accurate representation of the total fish they harvest. Do you think we should require all of the recs to have the same requirements the comms do? You say tax revenues from comms does not begin to cover the policing of them. I am interested in you providing us the numbers and breakdown of what exactly the income from the "taxes" is and how it is spent policing the recs and the comms.
> 
> John


Who is more likely to fudge their answers? Average Joe buying a license online or a business who has a vested interest in fudging numbers? It won't be perfect but it would be far better that what it is today. Average Joe doesn't have a voice currently, businesses have a huge voice currently and you are repeating the message.

An online survey would be dirt cheap when folks are buying licenses- 3 or 4 more questions and the data goes to the folks who study it now....but access to the data will be far more easy to get and in my opinion more accurate than what we have today. Heck it might be a lot cheaper adding a few questions online than paying someone to hang out at the docks or on the phone making calls.

Again, my point to all this is that the numbers are fudged because commercial interests dominate these organizations. Do I think recs kill more? I don't know. Do I think recs kill twice as much as comms. I highly doubt it and I'm not going to believe an organization that is biased. You are welcome to. So, I have no study for you to review- they don't exist. I want them to exist though.

So, do you believe menhaden are not over fished? ASMFC says they are not...what is your belief?

In regards who pays for what, the DNR is my source. I'll dig something up for you.


----------



## jlentz

surfnsam said:


> You are quoting ASFMC which is so bias and underhanded it a joke also you didn't say that Rec fisherman put 10 times the revenue back to the community than com. fisheries. We put more back to the economy than com's but get screwd by ASFMC and its corrupt administration. I can do the math and thier numbers don't add up.


Managing fisheries is not all about putting money back into the economy. Please give me a breakdown of the beneficial economic impact of recs vs. comms. How did this go from a rockfish regulation thread to a comms vs recs and now to a thread about who provides the most benefit to the economy. Fisheries management is balance between the economic impact but more importantly conservation of the resource. We are waiting for someone to post their data of why the numbers from the ASMFC are flawed. You said you can do the math, please show me a breakdown of the math you can do, your results and how it supports your ideas. Until I see facts I really do not have anything to debate and only have to put up with name calling and attempts to derail the topic at hand. The usual tactics from one with no substance behind their argument. 

John


----------



## Tracker01

In the end it does not matter what you or I or anyone else for that matter wants the law makers will decide the fate of the Rock fish, people will still poach and illegally net . But the true fisherman will respect the law and will fish another day.


----------



## CJS

transamsam98 said:


> Let me add this last part before I leave this conversation and just lurk. I want everyone to catch fish and everyone to get their fair share all while allowing the resource to stay stable and produce for years to come.


Couldn't agree more. Both the last comment part and wanting the resource to be stable, productive, and available to everyone.


----------



## zam

So the ASMFC scientific findings are untrue but the anti commercial organizations claims that recs have a larger economic impact is true. LOL. there is no way the economic impact of recs is larger then the fish sold to consumers. common sense should tell you that


----------



## catman

Lipyourown said:


> ...........Sorry, I ran off at the mouth, nothing personal to anyone in this thread.


Hey no offense taken. At least you've taken the time to state your position and I can respect that. Like Capt Sam said maybe someday there will be a system in place to accurately account for the harvest of the rec fisherman. Until then I hope we are all responsible fishermen.


----------



## Lipyourown

I shouldn't have shouted back about the pics either. At least we all seem passionate about helping the fish. You are a stand up guy but there is one thing I don't understand about you, why would you let the Qball on your boat???


----------



## catman

Lipyourown said:


> I shouldn't have shouted back about the pics either. At least we all seem passionate about helping the fish. You are a stand up guy but there is one thing I don't understand about you, why would you let the Qball on your boat???


Why would you let the Qball on your boat??? Now you're putting me on the spot.:redface: Actually any P&S guy or gal is always welcome on my boat anytime.


----------



## jlentz

Lipyourown said:


> Who is more likely to fudge their answers? Average Joe buying a license online or a business who has a vested interest in fudging numbers? It won't be perfect but it would be far better that what it is today. Average Joe doesn't have a voice currently, businesses have a huge voice currently and you are repeating the message.
> 
> An online survey would be dirt cheap when folks are buying licenses- 3 or 4 more questions and the data goes to the folks who study it now....but access to the data will be far more easy to get and in my opinion more accurate than what we have today. Heck it might be a lot cheaper adding a few questions online than paying someone to hang out at the docks or on the phone making calls.
> 
> Again, my point to all this is that the numbers are fudged because commercial interests dominate these organizations. Do I think recs kill more? I don't know. Do I think recs kill twice as much as comms. I highly doubt it and I'm not going to believe an organization that is biased. You are welcome to. So, I have no study for you to review- they don't exist. I want them to exist though.
> 
> So, do you believe menhaden are not over fished? ASMFC says they are not...what is your belief?
> 
> In regards who pays for what, the DNR is my source. I'll dig something up for you.


Why do you think an "average Joe" as you say is less likely to lie than than someone with "vested interest"? The average Joe is just as likely to lie because he also has a vested interest in the resource. Again I would ask for facts to back up your position but like everything else I doubt they exist. Read up on the "tragedy of the commons" and you will see that any resource will likely be exploited by an individuals and businesses alike.

If as you say the comms have such dominance over the organizations why do they set a lower quota for themselves than for the rec guys? Seems to debunk your argument since they they do not do so. Do the comms set a lower quota because they respect the fish and want to help with the recovery or because it is a compromise between all interested parties? I believe it is the later. You have a problem with Omega Protein having someone on the ASMFC board why should they not have a say in the regulations that effect them. The regulations is, as I mentioned before, a balance between economic impact and more importantly protecting the resource. It also is a compromise between all parties involved with utilizing the resource including the recs the comms. 

What do you think would happen if the some of the recs got their way and got rid of the commercial fishery when the time came for another reduction in harvest? The recs would band up into groups and attack and blame the other group that would have the least effect on themselves. They would all point their finger at, blame and try to limit the others quota be it trollers vs. light tackle jiggers vs live liners vs. chummers etc. 

No I do not believe the menhaden are over fished right now. Do I have a any scientific data from anyone other the the ASMFC to back that up? No, but I have a family fishing log going back 20-30yrs that supports my belief. Surf fishing the east coast I rarely buy bait usually catching it myself with a sabiki rig, clam rake, sand flea rake, spot rigs or most commonly throwing a cast net. I catch all the fresh/live bait I need in the backwaters or more frequently in the surf. Menhaden is the bait I use most often and rarely have trouble getting it. Last fall drum fishing in VA there were fewer menhaden than years past but nothing to worry me. Last week these same waters were loaded with schools of Menhaden stretching for miles, probably more than I have seen in years. I am sure others will disagree with my position on the health of the menhaden population which I have no problem with since I have no scientific study to support my position.

John


----------



## catman

Very well stated John. The one bond we all have in common regardless of which side of the aisle we're sitting on is our passion for a healthy stripe bass fishery. Personally I don't believe there's a wrong side - too many things to ponder. Great thread!!


----------



## Lipyourown

Why do you think an "average Joe" as you say is less likely to lie than than someone with "vested interest"? 

Money of course. 

20-30 years of family logs huh. You should look up baseline theory.

I don't trust the Government numbers that have been massaged by Omega lobbyists but that is just me.

Have a great season-


----------



## jlentz

Lipyourown said:


> Why do you think an "average Joe" as you say is less likely to lie than than someone with "vested interest"?
> 
> Money of course.
> 
> 20-30 years of family logs huh. You should look up baseline theory.
> 
> I don't trust the Government numbers that have been massaged by Omega lobbyists but that is just me.
> 
> Have a great season-


How is money not an interest for the individual rec fisherman? How much would a striper cost for an individual to buy in a seafood market or grocery store $7.99, $11.99, $17.99, $19.99 a lb? What ever amount it is it is still money that the individual can save by harvesting the fish themselves. Multiply that small amount of money for each individual rec fisherman and the number would most likely dwarf the monetary value you say that drives the commercial side. Why would an individual be less likely to lie than a business? You say money but both recs and comms can benefit monetarily from lying. It is the persons conscience that would dictate whether a person would lie or not. So you are saying money drive the person to lie. I feel bad that you have this outlook on people. I have a more positive view of people, maybe I am naive but I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt before rushing to judgement. You mention baseline theory, would you like to have the population of the fish what it was before humans affected it. Please tell me how you expect this to happen and also balance out the management of the fisheries and the economic impact. I doubt you have a coherent answer for that just like every other argument you have made. I would be glad to have a debate with you but you are going to need to supply some facts to support you positions and we are still waiting for them.

John


----------



## Lipyourown

You are presenting suspect data from a corrupt entity as facts. I claim there are no facts on either side because there is no solid data- but I have offered ways to get better data. If you are fine with the status quo, great. I am not. 

In regards to baseline theory and menhaden, of course I didn't mean going back 100,000+ years...more like back to the 70s, 60s, 50s...but since you asked for an example- I'd say the moratorium put rockfish at all time highs and everyone benefited.

No, I say individuals are more honest than business in general...you are the one saying average Joe is just as likely to lie as a business. That's not my experience.

I think we should agree to disagree, how bout you? Again, have a great season.


----------



## kurazy kracka

jlentz said:


> How is money not an interest for the individual rec fisherman? How much would a striper cost for an individual to buy in a seafood market or grocery store $7.99, $11.99, $17.99, $19.99 a lb? What ever amount it is it is still money that the individual can save by harvesting the fish themselves. Multiply that small amount of money for each individual rec fisherman and the number would most likely dwarf the monetary value you say that drives the commercial side. Why would an individual be less likely to lie than a business? You say money but both recs and comms can benefit monetarily from lying. It is the persons conscience that would dictate whether a person would lie or not. So you are saying money drive the person to lie. I feel bad that you have this outlook on people. I have a more positive view of people, maybe I am naive but I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt before rushing to judgement. You mention baseline theory, would you like to have the population of the fish what it was before humans affected it. Please tell me how you expect this to happen and also balance out the management of the fisheries and the economic impact. I doubt you have a coherent answer for that just like every other argument you have made. I would be glad to have a debate with you but you are going to need to supply some facts to support you positions and we are still waiting for them.
> 
> John


Recreational fishing is almost never a cost effective way to save. Let's see how much you spend on gear, time going out there trying, bait, licenses, etc. Then you aren't coming home with a catch every time either. The sport of fishing costs more money than it would to go to the store and purchase a few pounds of fish. Instead of spending the day driving and on the water HOPING to catch a keeper you could work those 8 hours and KNOW you will get paid the money to purchase fresh fish if that's what you desire and you don't ahve the overhead costs of everything involved with the SPORT.


----------



## jlentz

Lipyourown said:


> You are presenting suspect data from a corrupt entity as facts. I claim there are no facts on either side because there is no solid data- but I have offered ways to get better data. If you are fine with the status quo, great. I am not.
> 
> In regards to baseline theory and menhaden, of course I didn't mean going back 100,000+ years...more like back to the 70s, 60s, 50s...but since you asked for an example- I'd say the moratorium put rockfish at all time highs and everyone benefited.
> 
> No, I say individuals are more honest than business in general...you are the one saying average Joe is just as likely to lie as a business. That's not my experience.
> 
> I think we should agree to disagree, how bout you? Again, have a great season.


OK Lipyourown, you question the data that has been presented yet you have no data to dispute what the ASMFC says. We have presented the best data at hand you have presented NOTHING but your opinion. Again to your baseline theory, you present NO data of the health of the stock of the menhaden from the 50's, 60's or 70's. You question my fishing log data yet you present NOTHING to dispute it. I did a little research this morning for you, I contacted my local tackle shop to find out how many licenses they sold last year since you said hardly anybody buys their license in person. The one tackle store I spoke to sold 3900 licenses last year. That is just one small shop, now add in all or the tackle stores, sporting goods stores, DNR offices and Wal-Marts(I believe they are the largest volume brick and Mortar license sellers) and it a sizable number of people who buy licenses in person. Again you said hardly anybody buys a license in person Yet present NOTHING to defend you assumed position. You say it would be inexpensive to ask a few questions yet you provide NOTHING of how you would do it. You say you have a problem with someone from Omega Protein being on the board of the ASMFC but say NOTHING as to what they have done to change the regulations in their favor. You mention NOTHING of the major interest of the other board members. What would your ideal make of board members be? What percentage should be scientists? What percentage should represent the commercial interests? What percentage should represent the recreational interests? What percentage should represent the business interests? Again if the ASMFC is corrupted by the commercial interests why do they set a lower quota for themselves? Please come back with some facts which I doubt you have to support your position or at the least some observations you have made. I am sorry this post has a lot of NOTHING'S in it but it is a whole lot of NOTHING that we are getting from your posts.


John


----------



## jlentz

kurazy kracka said:


> Recreational fishing is almost never a cost effective way to save. Let's see how much you spend on gear, time going out there trying, bait, licenses, etc. Then you aren't coming home with a catch every time either. The sport of fishing costs more money than it would to go to the store and purchase a few pounds of fish. Instead of spending the day driving and on the water HOPING to catch a keeper you could work those 8 hours and KNOW you will get paid the money to purchase fresh fish if that's what you desire and you don't ahve the overhead costs of everything involved with the SPORT.


I am not saying it is a cost effective way to obtain fish. What I am stating is that Lipyourown says that a business will lie because of money and I say an individual is just as likely to lie and be dishonest because of money. That 40lb fish the individual just caught would have cost them big bucks in the grocery store possibly giving that angler an incentive to keep an illegal fish. That same incentive may also drive the individual do be dishonest in a survey if they fell it will take away from the amount of fish they can keep. Again I presented an example of rec anglers stating that when surveyed they would say they caught no fish, in effect causing an under reporting of harvested fish. Do I have a signed paper as evidence of anglers saying that? No I do not, it is another observation I have made that can be disputed. Just as Lipyourown has in his experience observed that a business is more likely to lie than an individual. 

John


----------



## Lipyourown

I was trying to be nice, but you lost all credibility when you stated Menhaden are not overfished. You can't even agree to disagree. Have a great season.


----------



## jlentz

Lipyourown said:


> I was trying to be nice, but you lost all credibility when you stated Menhaden are not overfished. You can't even agree to disagree. Have a great season.


You have shown no credibility in this entire thread. I posted about my observations of menhaden in the last 30 years and you have only posted a statement that they are over fished, not even any observations you have made. I and others have posted data that you dispute yet you have not offered one shred of evidence or even an observation of the reason behind your positions. 

John


----------



## 1BadF350

opcorn:I'm just posting before the thread lock. :beer:


----------



## Lipyourown

jlentz said:


> You have shown no credibility in this entire thread. I posted about my observations of menhaden in the last 30 years and you have only posted a statement that they are over fished, not even any observations you have made. I and others have posted data that you dispute yet you have not offered one shred of evidence or even an observation of the reason behind your positions.
> 
> John


What I have observed over the last 40 years is a dramatic decline in the menhaden population. I back this up with the simple fact that there used to be dozens and dozens (100s?) of reduction operations up down the coast. Now there is only one left. 

I don't trust the ASMFC numbers, you do. That is it. You seem like an ok guy so lets agree to disagree.


----------



## 1BadF350




----------



## jlentz

Lipyourown said:


> What I have observed over the last 40 years is a dramatic decline in the menhaden population. I back this up with the simple fact that there used to be dozens and dozens (100s?) of reduction operations up down the coast. Now there is only one left.
> 
> I don't trust the ASMFC numbers, you do. That is it. You seem like an ok guy so lets agree to disagree.


Your fact that if there was a decline in the number of reduction operations from dozens to one doesn't that mean there is less pressure on the menhaden now? I am sure the reduction fleet was hurting the population but isn's it possible that the menhaden have rebounded with the decline in the size of the reduction fleet and reduced quotas? I just spoke with someone from the MD DNR about his position on the status of the menhaden, he says he does not believe it is over fished. He is going to do some more research and get back to me. You have not mentioned that you distrust MD DNR but from your disposition I believe you distrust anyone who you do not agree with. What source can I gather data from that you will trust? 

John


----------



## Lipyourown

In my opinion it means there are not enough menhaden out there to support dozens of reduction facilities. Just like there are not enough typewriters out there to support dozens of typewriter repair men. 

You could look at a history book and read about how John Smith claimed there were so many bunker out there he could walk across the Bay. For the most part, I trust the DNR but don't believe every single one of them knows what they are talking about. I spoke with a DNR agent a couple of years ago and he said there are no Cobia in MD's portion of the Bay. A few months later we trolled one up so you gotta take it with a grain of salt.


----------



## zam

Just like the Rockfish, I don't think the Menhaden are going extinct either. people have been claiming the sky is falling with both of them as long as I can remember. All people ever care about is Rockfish and Menhaden, Menhaden is the Rockfishes favorite food to eat so they worry about them to. mean while theres plenty of species that really are in trouble, but since its not their favorite fish to catch, or the bait their favorite fish eats, no one cares


----------



## jlentz

Lipyourown said:


> In my opinion it means there are not enough menhaden out there to support dozens of reduction facilities. Just like there are not enough typewriters out there to support dozens of typewriter repair men.
> 
> You could look at a history book and read about how John Smith claimed there were so many bunker out there he could walk across the Bay. For the most part, I trust the DNR but don't believe every single one of them knows what they are talking about. I spoke with a DNR agent a couple of years ago and he said there are no Cobia in MD's portion of the Bay. A few months later we trolled one up so you gotta take it with a grain of salt.


I respect your opinion about the health of the menhaden population, and appreciate the typewriter repair man analogy. In my observation the menhaden were in decline but it seem to me the population has rebounded. I guess we can just agree to disagree. I am sure a lot of other people on here will disagree with my position on the menhaden but I stick by it.

John


----------



## jlentz

zam said:


> Just like the Rockfish, I don't think the Menhaden are going extinct either. people have been claiming the sky is falling with both of them as long as I can remember. All people ever care about is Rockfish and Menhaden, Menhaden is the Rockfishes favorite food to eat so they worry about them to. mean while theres plenty of species that really are in trouble, but since its not their favorite fish to catch, or the bait their favorite fish eats, no one cares


I agree with most of what you mentioned here, with the exception of the rockfish. I believe they are in decline and something should be done now. Why no push for the sea trout or the chomper bluefish we used to get in the bay? I do not want to derail this much more than it is but I do believe that the rockfish moratorium had a huge detrimental affect on the seatrout poulation.

John


----------



## Lipyourown

I have noticed a bit of a rebound too and hope it continues. Have a good one.


----------



## surfnsam

Go to CCA.com and get the truth.


----------



## CaliYellowtail

1BadF350 said:


>


WTF??......ha ha ha


----------



## jlentz

surfnsam said:


> Go to CCA.com and get the truth.


I did go to CCA.com and this is what I found
We Are CCA


Our company – the first of its kind – was founded in 1983. Our approach to public-private partnership in corrections combines the cost savings and innovation of business with the strict guidelines and consistent oversight of government. This has produced proven results for more than three decades.

Our company designs, builds, manages and operates prisons, jails, detention centers and residential reentry centers on behalf of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the United States Marshals Service, many states and counties across the country.

We benefit America by protecting public safety, employing the best people in solid careers, preparing inmates for reentry, giving back to communities, and bringing innovative security to government corrections – all while consistently saving hardworking taxpayers' dollars.

We are America’s Leader in Partnership Corrections.

Is someone going to prison over this thread?


----------



## Sandcrab

its .org


----------



## jlentz

Sandcrab said:


> its .org


I know Sandcrab I work with members of the CCA, I was just having a little fun. Surfnsam what articles on CCA are you referencing? I do applaud you for doing research. In the thread a few months back I was asking anyone to dispute what I had said trying to throw them a bone but nobody ever challenged the data collection or analysis, all they did was assign me positions I never held and resort to name calling which has also happened in this thread. For the sake of debate I am glad you and lipyourown are challenging the data. 

John


----------



## zam

I doubt the CCA would ever disagree with anything I said on this thread, its hard to deny the truth


----------



## Windrift00

So I read through this thread, a few times, and I'm curious, this "data" was posted but was the website which gathered this data posted? I would like to research their methodology and collection methods. I analyze data as my business, and it's always interesting the spin people can put on something in a chart. Someone with solid good data will post everything including raw numbers and how they arrived at their conclusions. The only conceivable way to get Rec fishing numbers is a polling system, which is going to have big issues do to the vast differences in fishing time of any given fisherman/woman. So any sample size would have to be rather large and varied to account for that. Can anyone point me in the right direction?


----------



## jlentz

Windrift00 said:


> So I read through this thread, a few times, and I'm curious, this "data" was posted but was the website which gathered this data posted? I would like to research their methodology and collection methods. I analyze data as my business, and it's always interesting the spin people can put on something in a chart. Someone with solid good data will post everything including raw numbers and how they arrived at their conclusions. The only conceivable way to get Rec fishing numbers is a polling system, which is going to have big issues do to the vast differences in fishing time of any given fisherman/woman. So any sample size would have to be rather large and varied to account for that. Can anyone point me in the right direction?


If you go to the site I posted earlier for the ASMC concerning striped bass and scroll down you will see the stock assessment reports and the technical committee meeting summaries and reports. I believe the data collection methods are posted and sources cited in some of the reports. If it is not on that site let me know and I will find the correct site for you. Here is the link again. 

http://www.asmfc.org/species/atlantic-striped-bass

Let us know what you find.

John


----------



## Tracker01

http://www.chesbay.org/articles/latest2.asp


----------



## jlentz

Tracker01 said:


> http://www.chesbay.org/articles/latest2.asp


Here is a link to a more recent article showing the positive effects of the cap placed on the menhaden. It follows my earlier observation that the menhaden are rebounding.

http://www.talkingfish.org/opinion/...ns-more-of-the-most-important-fish-in-the-sea


----------



## Tracker01

In the end there are just as many bad reports as good.


----------



## Tracker01

http://www.virginiaplaces.org/natural/menhaden.html


----------



## jlentz

Tracker01 said:


> http://www.virginiaplaces.org/natural/menhaden.html


This comes directly from your link you posted

Menhaden are not a threatened or endangered species. There are plenty in the Atlantic Ocean, but conservationists fear that over-fishing could result in "ecological depletion" in the Chesapeake Bay


----------



## Tracker01

The link also says that omega over fish for menhaden and have been fined several times for overfishing.


----------



## jlentz

Tracker01 said:


> The link also says that omega over fish for menhaden and have been fined several times for overfishing.


ok so they say that omega has been fined overfishing for menhaden. it also goes on to say

The results triggered proposals to increase the menhaden harvest, especially for the fishermen who caught the fish to use as bait for other species such as rockfish 

So what is your arguemen? Are you disputing my stance that menhaden is not overfished because you have yet to show any data that proves it is currently overfished. Your article from 2008 was a feeble attempt.

John


----------



## Tracker01

https://savemenhaden.wordpress.com/tag/chesapeake-bay-menhaden/
http://www.chesapeakequarterly.net/V10N23/side2/
http://news.fisheries.org/bill-goldsborough-and-chris-moore-discuss-menhaden-stock-assessment/
http://www.mondovacilando.com/something-fishy-in-reedville-va/




Been accused of a lot of things being feeble is not one of them. Mean, common , a hole, and some not so nice things. Feeble lol thats a good one.


----------



## Tracker01

http://www.menhadendefenders.org/2012/08/28/mini-needs-menhaden/


----------



## Lipyourown

Tracker01 said:


> In the end there are just as many bad reports as good.


Be honest, it's about 97.314% bad. I got that stat directly from a baleen whale who was once fed in the Bay then a lobbyist from Texas took his spoon.


----------



## jlentz

Tracker01 said:


> https://savemenhaden.wordpress.com/tag/chesapeake-bay-menhaden/
> http://www.chesapeakequarterly.net/V10N23/side2/
> http://news.fisheries.org/bill-goldsborough-and-chris-moore-discuss-menhaden-stock-assessment/
> http://www.mondovacilando.com/something-fishy-in-reedville-va/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Been accused of a lot of things being feeble is not one of them. Mean, common , a hole, and some not so nice things. Feeble lol thats a good one.


Feeble may have been too nice of a word to use.

Your first link's most recent article is from 2013 every article is from 2012 or before so it is irrelevant to the current state of menhaden.

The second link article is from 2011 again irrelevant to the current state of the menhaden.

The third was a better attempt on your part but it really does not support the position you are holding this quote was pulled directly from that article.
While the new assessment is “good news,” according to Chris Moore, Virginia senior scientist for the CBF, he acknowledged “there is still a lot of work to be done.

The third link is the best of all. It is an opinion piece from a blogger, but even better yet it is a sailboat blogger. It was an opinion piece slamming Omega protein. I did not find any scientific data saying the menhaden are currently overfished. I did find the links at the top of the page very interesting though. In one they offer their sailboat for sale but the other is even better. Did you click on the link about us? I assume you did not or you would have not posted the link in the first place. Let me show you what it says.
This is the story about a man, a woman, a dog, and a journey. We are Chris, Melody, and Jet. We sold our house to move aboard our 35′ sailboat in search of adventure, simplicity, and the freedom that comes with finding both.I have to post the link again because it too good to miss
http://www.mondovacilando.com/someth...-reedville-va/

So you accept old articles and an opinion piece from a man, a women, and a dog over all of the scientific data out there.

John


----------



## Tracker01

And all your post are well just yours and some law makers opinion who has lined his pockets. Yes I do becase this did not happen over night.


----------



## Tracker01

Sir you can call me what ever you want. Because when you resort to name calling just shows me we'll it just proves my point.


----------



## jlentz

Tracker01 said:


> Sir you can call me what ever you want. Because when you resort to name calling just shows me we'll it just proves my point.


You are trying to derail the thread even more, you are being deceitful and dishonest to draw attention away from your flawed argument. I never resorted to calling you names. Please quote the post in this thread where I called you a name. I assume you are referring to this post.



jlentz said:


> ok so they say that omega has been fined overfishing for menhaden. it also goes on to say
> 
> The results triggered proposals to increase the menhaden harvest, especially for the fishermen who caught the fish to use as bait for other species such as rockfish
> 
> So what is your arguemen? Are you disputing my stance that menhaden is not overfished because you have yet to show any data that proves it is currently overfished. Your article from 2008 was a feeble attempt.
> 
> John


If you read it slowly maybe you can see that I was calling your attempt at an argument by using an article from 2008 a feeble attempt. I did not say you were feeble, just your choice of articles to attempt to further your argument. I apologize if I called you a name in the heat of this argument. But please to give you some credibility show we were I called you any names.

John


----------



## striperone

Ok heres your answer its called common sense catman which everyone knows your a spot burner to begin with and lentz just an idiot is that blunt enough,heres the answer your waiting on its called common sense you cannot come up with anykind of weight at all on recreational fisherman theres no possable way to regulate that period.so your weight in tons pounds or which ever is in fact bull****.buuuutt the count on commercial is not because it is regulated period.and thanks recreational fisherman you guys most def know the truth thank you for having the common sense to know the difference in facts and bull**** comming out these idiots mouths


----------



## striperone

oH AND FURTHER MORE MOST OF THE FACTS DRAWINGS AND OTHER BULL**** IN FACT IS PUT ON THE NET BY WHO?THE FN GOV AND COMMERCIAL BACKERS YOU IDIOTS


----------



## surfnsam

Common sense! AFSME & NOAA are what? Branches of the commerce dept. Federal government. Who put a former gov. of va and his wife in prison? Omega Protein!! Even the press didn't call them out saying the rat owned a vitamin company, OP. A com. Netter gets into a big school of stripers too many and over quota what does he do? He dumps THOUSANDS OF POUNDS OF STRIPERS overboard as by catch. Dead stripers!! And its legal. A line of dead fish 2 miles long. Me and 99 other fisherman won't catch that many fish in our lifetime. The only ones getting screwed here are rec fishermen.


----------



## jlentz

striperone said:


> Ok heres your answer its called common sense catman which everyone knows your a spot burner to begin with and lentz just an idiot is that blunt enough,heres the answer your waiting on its called common sense you cannot come up with anykind of weight at all on recreational fisherman theres no possable way to regulate that period.so your weight in tons pounds or which ever is in fact bull****.buuuutt the count on commercial is not because it is regulated period.and thanks recreational fisherman you guys most def know the truth thank you for having the common sense to know the difference in facts and bull**** comming out these idiots mouths


Glad you are back Striperone and thanks for the kind words. I have been missing your insightful posts and also your smooth grammatical flow. Now do you and Surfnsam have any facts, evidence, or observations to back up your positions because you have yet to present any coherent data defending your positions? Please post what you have found, and do a little better than tracker1's use of a post on the menhaden status friom 2008 prior to the caps being put in place.

John


----------



## Tracker01

https://www.oag.state.md.us/Press/2011/110211.html


----------



## surfnsam

Its public record you look it up.


----------



## Tracker01

Thanks to Omega’s slaughter of approximately 233 million pounds of Chesapeake menhaden each year, the fish can no longer perform their other great ecological mission: being eaten by animals higher up the food chain. The most dramatic effect is on striped bass, the bay’s signature fish.

The Chesapeake is the world’s principal spawning region for striped bass, but half the stripers in the bay are now diseased with mycobacterial infections. Some scientists now think that the stripers are sick because they are malnourished, and malnourished because they are not getting enough menhaden to eat.


----------



## Tracker01

LAST JULY, I went out for stripers with Price on his 29-foot Bertram. We sailed into the bay from the four-mile-wide mouth of eastern Maryland’s Choptank River, close to where Price and the previous four generations of his family have always lived. Accompanying us were Joe Boone, an ex-paratrooper who had worked for 27 years as an estuarine biologist in the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, and Jim Uphoff, then the stock assessment coordinator for the DNR’s fisheries service. Having caught or seen hundreds of healthy striped bass in New Jersey and New York, I was horrified by what I saw that night. Except for one, every striper we caught was covered with open red sores, often eating deep into the flesh. The only fish without sores was pathetically skinny.

The three men were unanimous in targeting the problem. “It’s plain evidence of how critical menhaden are to the health of the striped bass,” Boone said. “Menhaden are the keystone species.” “This is what happens when we use our menhaden as forage for chickens rather than forage for fish,” Uphoff said, adding, “There’s nothing in this bay that can take menhaden’s place.” Boone later told me that in writing about what I had witnessed, “you can’t overemphasize the importance of this fish to the ecology of the entire East Coast.”

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commissio


----------



## Tracker01

http://www.menhadendefenders.org/why-defend/


----------



## jlentz

Tracker I really have to ask, do you have any knowledge of the life cycle of the menhaden and any knowledge of fisheries management? From your posts it appears that you do not. I have stated twice and commonsense would dictate that the current state of menhaden is dependent on the coast wide cap that was put in place in 2012. I have asked for you to give me some data that shows since the cap has been put in place but you have produced nothing. This first article is from 2011 one year before the cap was put in place. So again it is irrelevant to the current status of the menhaden. If you had even a simple understanding of the life cycle of the menhaden you would see that menhaden do not reach sexual maturity until age 3. Again if you had any understanding of fisheries science you would expect the beneficial results of the cap to take a couple years to show up. The current data suggests that it is rebounding just as I said I have observed with my own eyes. I have asked to give an example of your own observation of the menhaden stock which you have yet to do. You have not told us why you believe that they are overfished. Without giving us your observation I am lead to believe you think they are over fished because you read it on the internet so it must be true



Tracker01 said:


> https://www.oag.state.md.us/Press/2011/110211.html


I found it odd that instead of posting links like you have been doing you quoted the article so I sensed something fishy was going on so I did a little research. This article was an even weaker attempt at an argument on your part. The article is a Mother Jones article from 2006 six years before the coast wide cap was put in place, again making it completely irrelevant to the current status of the menhaden. Here is the link to the article if anyone would like to read it
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2006/03/net-losses-declaring-war-menhaden?page=4



Tracker01 said:


> Thanks to Omega’s slaughter of approximately 233 million pounds of Chesapeake menhaden each year, the fish can no longer perform their other great ecological mission: being eaten by animals higher up the food chain. The most dramatic effect is on striped bass, the bay’s signature fish.
> 
> The Chesapeake is the world’s principal spawning region for striped bass, but half the stripers in the bay are now diseased with mycobacterial infections. Some scientists now think that the stripers are sick because they are malnourished, and malnourished because they are not getting enough menhaden to eat.


The next quote was another one of your attempts to deceive the reader. Again it is again from the same Mother Jones article pg 5.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2006/03/net-losses-declaring-war-menhaden?page=5



Tracker01 said:


> LAST JULY, I went out for stripers with Price on his 29-foot Bertram. We sailed into the bay from the four-mile-wide mouth of eastern Maryland’s Choptank River, close to where Price and the previous four generations of his family have always lived. Accompanying us were Joe Boone, an ex-paratrooper who had worked for 27 years as an estuarine biologist in the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, and Jim Uphoff, then the stock assessment coordinator for the DNR’s fisheries service. Having caught or seen hundreds of healthy striped bass in New Jersey and New York, I was horrified by what I saw that night. Except for one, every striper we caught was covered with open red sores, often eating deep into the flesh. The only fish without sores was pathetically skinny.
> 
> The three men were unanimous in targeting the problem. “It’s plain evidence of how critical menhaden are to the health of the striped bass,” Boone said. “Menhaden are the keystone species.” “This is what happens when we use our menhaden as forage for chickens rather than forage for fish,” Uphoff said, adding, “There’s nothing in this bay that can take menhaden’s place.” Boone later told me that in writing about what I had witnessed, “you can’t overemphasize the importance of this fish to the ecology of the entire East Coast.”
> 
> The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commissio


The thing I found so interesting was that in your quote the last line says The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commision. Were you trying to deceive the reader into thinking that this was the position the ASMFC held? Again since it was from an article in 2006 it is irrelevant to the current status of the menhaden. The thing that gets me is if you are trying to suggest that this is the current position the ASMFC holds it goes against what you said earlier when you said you do not trust the ASMFC. It appears you are trying deceive the reader into thinking that it is the current position the ASMFC holds. As has been shown many times the current position of the ASMFC is that menhaden are not overfished. Do you think the P & S users are that gullible to fall for your dishonest tactics? Most P & S users are smarter than you think and can see through your childish attempts.



surfnsam said:


> Its public record you look it up.


Why don't you post it here for all to see. And please post the links.

John


----------



## Windrift00

Ok so a few issues with the data right off the plate, 

"Data and Assessment: The ASMFC Striped Bass Stock Assessment Subcommittee (SB SAS) compiled
the commercial and recreational catch at age data provided by state agencies (Figure 3, Table 7). Recreational
landings, length data, and discard estimates were collected by the MRFSS survey and supplemented
by state voluntary logbook programs as available. Commercial landings and length frequency data were
collected by states with commercial fisheries (MA, RI, NY, DE, MD, VA, PRFC and NC)."

They maybe double dipping. I need to dig deeper and see if they offer up the exact numbers they use to make these estimates. the mortality rate they use is a base 8% from Rec fishers. So it's a worse case scenario, I'm ok with that. Anyway on to the data, they use the MRFSS Survey data, which per their website, focuses on coastal cities. This method will give you an extremely high number when it comes to a fish like Rockfish, hell when it comes to any fish, as people in coastal cities will have more chances to fish than the average non coastal person, who make up the BULK of citizens. Huge potential flaws in the data IMO. I'll dig more and type up a better more clear and concise breakdown of the issues later. Work is nuts right now and I have to get back to my data.


----------

