# we should all be pizzed at nc fisheries management



## pogeymoe (May 5, 2009)

MENHADEN!!!! EVER HEAR OF THEM? WHERE ARE THEY?? A post in sc pier and surf prompted this "rant". Someone asked if there was any bait pods. Someone else responded," YES, AND THEY ARE GOOD ONES 6-8 INCHES LONG"! REALLY?? SERIOUSLY??

IN my hay day (the 80's) menhaden were commonly a pound. 10-13" fish were the norm. Now they are pathetic and resemble shad caught in a river.

Bait pods??? The ones ive seen the last 5 years are almost hard to spot UNLESS YOU USE A SPOTTER PLANE HINT HINT NC FISHERIES!!!!!! I remember being able to see the pods of pogies miles down the beach from the pier. At times these pods were not pods but the size of football fields. Some of you younger folks may find that hard to believe but us older folks remember.

Yes, I was a king fisher but I am smart enough to see how pathetic many fisheries are becoming because of the plight of the pogey!! I applaud those who refuse to buy coastal liscence. Why?? WHERE IS THE IMPROVEMENT IN THE FISHERIES? WHERE IS IT

So many times the government finds ways to get in our pockets( coastal liscence)yet there is no account where the money goes.




just like the stupid new circle hook law in s.c.. Come on!! Thats a compliance law put into place because its a fact that tourist wont know that law therefore wont be able to comply and ca-ching game warden collects a fine.

For those of you who dont know or were not alive in the 80's, A 6 INCH MENHADEN IN THE OCEAN WAS UNHEARD OF 20 YEARS AGO!!!!!!!! ITS TIME WE GIVE THOSE INCHARGE MORE HELL!! ITS GETTING TO BE RIDICULOUS.

AS ALWAYS ITS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY!!


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

May be a stupid question,and I'm not a big ncdmf fan either,but just exactly what can they do to correct pogey boats that sail from the cheasbay in nov-dec to catch our fatback???


----------



## surffshr (Dec 8, 2003)

Drumdum said:


> May be a stupid question,and I'm not a big ncdmf fan either,but just exactly what can they do to correct pogey boats that sail from the cheasbay in nov-dec to catch our fatback???


Can't they pass laws for the state waters for the insore 3 miles?


----------



## AbuMike (Sep 3, 2007)

And back in the 80's we caught 400-600+lb biters from the pier. Back in the 80's we caught 9-10lb Specks from the pier. Back in the 80's we caught 15-20lb Blues from Seagull. I personally think all fish run in cycles......Just my $.02


----------



## turfrooster (Apr 16, 2007)

As a Marine Fisheries employee, I have seen more than my fair share of people getting upset at marine fisheries for some reason or another. 9 times out of 10, including this case, it is because marine fisheries hasn't "fixed" the problem well enough. How selfish is it that people get pissed at marine fisheries for trying to manage and protect the future of our fisheries. How selfish of those fisheries azzholes. Every single thing they do is to protect the fisheries and the future of it. They are trying to compensate for overfishing from commercial and recretional fisherman. Its just the "tragedy of the commons" and you should appreciate that someone is looking out for the health of our waters. Why do you think there are less menhaden? DUH too many people too many fisherman. I know that nothing they do is always perfect, but the Biologist are going on decades of data, not just how many they "see". And it's common sense to start using circle hooks for drum, as much as you wouuld like to think, it's not a grand scheme to get money.


----------



## nissan11 (Jan 24, 2010)

turfrooster said:


> As a Marine Fisheries employee, I have seen more than my fair share of people getting upset at marine fisheries for some reason or another. 9 times out of 10, including this case, it is because marine fisheries hasn't "fixed" the problem well enough. How selfish is it that people get pissed at marine fisheries for trying to manage and protect the future of our fisheries. How selfish of those fisheries azzholes. Every single thing they do is to protect the fisheries and the future of it. They are trying to compensate for overfishing from commercial and recretional fisherman. Its just the "tragedy of the commons" and you should appreciate that someone is looking out for the health of our waters. Why do you think there are less menhaden? DUH too many people too many fisherman. I know that nothing they do is always perfect, but the Biologist are going on decades of data, not just how many they "see". And it's common sense to start using circle hooks for drum, as much as you wouuld like to think, it's not a grand scheme to get money.


x2


----------



## Rick (Feb 10, 2005)

I would recomend torpedos and anti-shiping mines for those pogie boats. If line of sight, maybe some small arms fire put on the pilot house. I do remember those endless shoals of menhadin. I've cut many over 12-14" for bait, especialy in December on the OBX. We would snag them with a 6oz hoppkis andf think we had a rockfish hooked up.


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

*Then Please explain to me The DogShark Ban for over 10 years and how that helped?*



turfrooster said:


> As a Marine Fisheries employee, I have seen more than my fair share of people getting upset at marine fisheries for some reason or another. 9 times out of 10, including this case, it is because marine fisheries hasn't "fixed" the problem well enough. How selfish is it that people get pissed at marine fisheries for trying to manage and protect the future of our fisheries. How selfish of those fisheries azzholes. Every single thing they do is to protect the fisheries and the future of it. They are trying to compensate for overfishing from commercial and recretional fisherman. Its just the "tragedy of the commons" and you should appreciate that someone is looking out for the health of our waters. Why do you think there are less menhaden? DUH too many people too many fisherman. I know that nothing they do is always perfect, but the Biologist are going on decades of data, not just how many they "see". And it's common sense to start using circle hooks for drum, as much as you wouuld like to think, it's not a grand scheme to get money.


Or why the only negitive impact of any fish population, is over fished... Never weather, never predation, just over fished..

Or why the DMF's don't even know their own regs???
Or why they can't identify Sharks Corectly....

They are part of the problem, not part of the solution, they justify their jobs by always having a crisis... 

JAM


----------



## hifishing (Dec 22, 2009)

WTG JAM!!! Agree with you 100%. Lets not forget, it is not the commercial bait guys that are decimating the bunker, it is OMEGA PROTEIN. They are a corporation with lots of money and lobbying power, and are extremely effective in catching menhaden. Spotter planes, huge boats, and all the political connections you could imagine. They are based in Reedville, and gave Gov. Bob Mcdonnel $60,000 in political contributions. They are "allowed" over 100,000 metric tons in the bay alone, not to mention what they can take in the ocean.

NCDMF are part of the problem. A big part is the fed, NOAA and ASMFC


----------



## hifishing (Dec 22, 2009)

*Ncdmf*

Allowing the slaughter of Striped Bass every winter is just peachy of them too.

Yes fish do run in cycles, but when you have a corporation raping the resource, all you are gonna have is decimated stocks.

It starts with a domino effect. No bunker for the Stripers to eat, correlates possibly to myoobacteriosis. Look at Weakfish, no bunker so the Stripers and blues are eating the juvenile weaks. Not to mention the filter feeding advantages of bunker, now we have dead zones in the Chesapeake and red tides that boogle the mind. No bunker near the beach in the winter off OBX, and look no stripers and haven't seen a chopper blitz since the 90s. And no don't tell me about the new years day blitz of a few years ago. I am talking bunker pinned on the beach by 15-20# blues. Any one remember the late 80s early 90s around thanksgiving on OBX?


----------



## surffshr (Dec 8, 2003)

AbuMike said:


> And back in the 80's we caught 400-600+lb biters from the pier. Back in the 80's we caught 9-10lb Specks from the pier. Back in the 80's we caught 15-20lb Blues from Seagull. I personally think all fish run in cycles......Just my $.02


Not to be a smart a.. But back in the 80's is when the inshore menhaden were thick. Schools a mile long would come in. Then the Omega spotter planes and boats wiped out the inshore schools cause they are easier to get at. Now big blues, and stripers feed about 1 to 5 miles off shore where there is some food.


----------



## turfrooster (Apr 16, 2007)

JAM said:


> Or why the only negitive impact of any fish population, is over fished... Never weather, never predation, just over fished..
> 
> Or why the DMF's don't even know their own regs???
> Or why they can't identify Sharks Corectly....
> ...




First of all...

Sharks are extremely hard to identify. There are over 50 species of sharks in NC waters alone, both pelagic and inshore. Most people mis-identify species. That's why the big shark tournaments are very controversial. They are trying to come up with new methods for accurately identifying sharks, especially for catch and release tournaments. 

Secondly, before you get pissed at fisheries for banning a species, or regulating it for that matter, maybe you should actually look into to the species and understand some basic biology. Dogfish have been overfished for a long time. They were declared overfished in 1998. Dogfish are considered sharks. They are very slow growing fish, not maturing until age 6 (males) and 12 (females). Most of the commercially targeted fish were the larger ones( up to 40 years old), which mostly happened to be females. There is now an overwhelming ratio of about 4:1 males to females. This is not a good thing for a fish stock. When you remove older, larger fish from an old growing, slow maturing species, they cannot respond with susutainable reproduction (Look at Sturgeon, Red Drum, or any shark species for that matter). They have now opened back up with new quotas. 

If they had banned striper fishing, people would have gotten upset about it and everytime they caught a striper or saw one, people would say "They are everywhere". That is just how it is. People love to hate someone or something. It is a lot easier to put the blame on marine fisheries than to look into the facts and data and to understand what is ACTUALLY going on.


----------



## turfrooster (Apr 16, 2007)

Also, DMF has nothing to do with dogfish, NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service is in charge of everything past 3 miles, which includes dogfish.


----------



## tylerhb (Mar 29, 2010)

i believe there needs to be more regulation on commercial fishing. just yesterday fishing seagull pier i saw about 7 or 8 big blue and white boats all netting menhaden along the CBBT. Who allowed them to do this? especially when there has hardly been any bunker around all year. Its the money and the lobbying that allow them to do this, they could care less about the health of the ecosystem as long as there getting paid. and then when almost all the fish are killed and gone away who gets the blame.....us RECREATIONAL fisherman. what a joke


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

"Secondly, before you get pissed at fisheries for banning a species, or regulating it for that matter, maybe you should actually look into to the species and understand some basic biology. Dogfish have been overfished for a long time. They were declared overfished in 1998. Dogfish are considered sharks. They are very slow growing fish, not maturing until age 6 (males) and 12 (females). Most of the commercially targeted fish were the larger ones( up to 40 years old), which mostly happened to be females. There is now an overwhelming ratio of about 4:1 males to females. This is not a good thing for a fish stock. When you remove older, larger fish from an old growing, slow maturing species, they cannot respond with susutainable reproduction (Look at Sturgeon, Red Drum, or any shark species for that matter). They have now opened back up with new quotas". 

I can throw a bait lefty, with my right arm tied behind my back and catch a doggie from the Beach, all winter long.. So ban fishing for them don't do something like change the mesh size of the net, to control the size of fish caught.. Is that why we arre allowed to kill slot size drum?? Stripers have not shown on Hatteras in 6 years.. Thanks to mis-management.. Doggies decimate the grey and speck poupulations, thanks not to over fishing but to mis-management.. Holding Hatteras NC to samples found in mass. is foolish at best.. But is sustains a Job for folks.. JAM


----------



## Tailwalker (Jul 24, 2006)

Yep, fish do run in cycles. Historically if you look at those cycles nearly every one of them is tied to overfishing of that species until they are decimated, the fleet (be it rec or commercial) then turns their attention to another species that has not been fished and may be in good numbers and then focus on wiping those out, once those are gone they then switch to another species and so on and so forth. While one is being raped and plundered the others usually manage to stage a comeback.

That's what caused the collapse of the striper back in the late 70's and early 80's, then the collapse of the big bluefish in VA in the late 80's, early 90s as well as the big gray trout in the 80's.

It's not science and it sure as heck is not rocket science.

I'll grant you that the actual fisheries biologist do care and are trying to protect the fisheries but their bosses and bosses bosses are the ones pulling the strings and we all know what they are doing, don't we!

Nuff said. 

Thank God I like hunting because most of the fishing recently sucks and speaking of hunting the only reason we have any animals to hunt is because they are actually managed and are not allowed to be raped and pillaged. Not so with fish. Maybe the fisheries folks can learn something from the game folks, oh, that's right, there is no big dollar industry with selling wild game (cause it ain't allowed!) so there are no palms to be greased or big money changing hands.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

Hard to walk that "perfect balance" when it comes to regulating fish.. Although with doggies,strange that they have to attain such an age when our beaches are full of them,as Jam said.. Or the video of bottom fishermen up north after cod,when doggies were covering the net and the cods they did catch had been ravaged by doggies... Heck ya cant' even fish a wreck without pulling up at least one here on Hatteras.. I've caught the dern things on stretches before,as well as jigs.. I can never remember catching a doggie on a pier in late fall,until after the 90's?? It's just hard to make sense out of what was said in your post,turfrooster??
In defense of turfrooster,yeap sharks can be hard to identify,especially if you are handing out a ticket on an illegal dusky when it was actually a sandbar.. You do have a job to do and do not envy your possition.. Although,science is the only glorified way of making these regs,sometimes common sense should have a say in the matter as well.. jmho...

Yes,fish do run in cycles.. Can remember when there were cobia in the sound,now no cobia in the sound.. Now there are tons of cobia in the ocean,and much less in the sound,but more cobia and bigger ones,as well as some dinks that were never seen in these numbers.. When fishing in the 70's there weren't as many snapper blues and spainish,now bunches of them,btw,both being com harvested as fast as a dropnet can catch them.. You want bluefish,go to the wrecks off Hatteras in the springtime,more than you can pull on I promise.. Stripers were overharvested,although I never caught one on Hatteras Island from the 70's into the 90's,then record numbers.. Now,they seem to have made a different route,stopping just short?? They still catch record numbers in cheasbay,and this year around OI.. Could that be bunker,you know they do eat and follow schools of bunker?? Not putting down the argument that they are overharvested,but dmf is hopefully on the right trach with hook and line rather than a "stick of dynomite" like trawlers represtent... In short regs are important to tone down overharvest,although "JMHO" they do have cycles determined by weather,hatches,and geography...


----------



## surffshr (Dec 8, 2003)

My take on cycles is this. with 1 being low 10 high.

before overfishing cycle down to 7 back up to 10.
with overfishing cycle down to 4 back up to 7 some species down to 2 up to 4.


----------



## LEADDRAFT (Oct 9, 2001)

> TurfRooster:.. Dogfish have been overfished for a long time.


SIR being a Former Commerical & Rec Fisherman, I'll take the other side of that "bet" *Statement**
LD


----------



## twitch (Jan 29, 2008)

Drumdum said:


> Hard to walk that "perfect balance" when it comes to regulating fish.. Although with doggies,strange that they have to attain such an age when our beaches are full of them,as Jam said.. Or the video of bottom fishermen up north after cod,when doggies were covering the net and the cods they did catch had been ravaged by doggies... Heck ya cant' even fish a wreck without pulling up at least one here on Hatteras.. I've caught the dern things on stretches before,as well as jigs.. I can never remember catching a doggie on a pier in late fall,until after the 90's?? It's just hard to make sense out of what was said in your post,turfrooster??
> In defense of turfrooster,yeap sharks can be hard to identify,especially if you are handing out a ticket on an illegal dusky when it was actually a sandbar.. You do have a job to do and do not envy your possition.. Although,science is the only glorified way of making these regs,sometimes common sense should have a say in the matter as well.. jmho...
> 
> Yes,fish do run in cycles.. Can remember when there were cobia in the sound,now no cobia in the sound.. Now there are tons of cobia in the ocean,and much less in the sound,but more cobia and bigger ones,as well as some dinks that were never seen in these numbers.. When fishing in the 70's there weren't as many snapper blues and spainish,now bunches of them,btw,both being com harvested as fast as a dropnet can catch them.. You want bluefish,go to the wrecks off Hatteras in the springtime,more than you can pull on I promise.. Stripers were overharvested,although I never caught one on Hatteras Island from the 70's into the 90's,then record numbers.. Now,they seem to have made a different route,stopping just short?? They still catch record numbers in cheasbay,and this year around OI.. Could that be bunker,you know they do eat and follow schools of bunker?? Not putting down the argument that they are overharvested,but dmf is hopefully on the right trach with hook and line rather than a "stick of dynomite" like trawlers represtent... In short regs are important to tone down overharvest,although "JMHO" they do have cycles determined by weather,hatches,and geography...


Agreed.

The MFC shot down the commercial hook and line striper fishery last month, so it looks like status quo.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

twitch said:


> Agreed.
> 
> The MFC shot down the commercial hook and line striper fishery last month, so it looks like status quo.


Not good.... Now we will see the alliance of dow,selc to take down the fishery alltogether.. I won't declare who is going to unknowingly help with this all coming down,but can see the whole picture plain as day....


----------



## ReelKingin (Aug 3, 2009)

The fat fish caught in the 80's...had food to eat...Yes there were less fisherman then, BUT...without food, there is nothing to argue about and those fleets wipe out entire bait fish colonies...So sad...

And ftr...DMF isn't the brightest bunch...had a friend up from FL fishing with me last week, and ran into 3 dmf fellas, and when we left them my friend actually looked at me and said "wow, no wonder your state fisheries are going to he** in a handbasket"


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

ReelKingin said:


> The fat fish caught in the 80's...had food to eat...Yes there were less fisherman then, BUT...without food, there is nothing to argue about and those fleets wipe out entire bait fish colonies...So sad...


 You are correct,we have *absolutly nothing* to argue here.. When talking pogie boats,they are the ones taking from the resource and not helping other fish within the resource as well.. They get to fly around with planes to spot fish (no other part of the fishery is allowed to do this),in Va they are so into the political system that they aren't even regulated by fishery management as other fisheries are,and seem to have the politicos in thier pockets as well.. Funny part about it is that they could catch and not hurt a dern thing if they were managed properly...


----------



## dirtyhandslopez (Nov 17, 2006)

Simple question for you Turfrooster, "A Marine Fisheries employee". Why are menhaden not regulated by the fishery management folks? They are fish, correct? and as such should be regulated by fisheries managment. If any other fish were spotted by planes for harvesting, there would be measures put in place to stop this. And, as they are a important forage fish for other fish and cleaner of water by nature, it would seeem they the should be regulated even more so. Without them, everything goes down hill...
A simple answer to the original question will suffice. If you need to ask your bosses and their bosses, please do so.
Thank you in advance.


----------



## dena (Jun 20, 2010)

To get a politician's attention is a simple matter, in theory.
Just give him more money than the other guy gives him.
While there are more rec fishermen, we carry more votes, the comms have more money.

How about a published list around election time of all politician's who took money from commercial fishing interests.
Then, we as rec fishermen vote for the other guy.
If we, as a large voting block, can get our guys elected, we might have a chance to get some regulations changed to protect the vulnerable species we care about.
Imagine, if we can get menhaden classifies as a threatened species, the comm boats would have to keep a thousand feet away from them like we have to keep distance from the Plovers.
Money and votes around election time are all the politicians care about.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

dena said:


> To get a politician's attention is a simple matter, in theory.
> Just give him more money than the other guy gives him.
> While there are more rec fishermen, we carry more votes, the comms have more money.
> 
> ...



So in short,you want a Pandora's Box opened for "you know who" to crawl through?? ESA will be the death of us all,especially if we try to use it to block other user groups for our own selfish purposes.. Getting a block vote to get the management into the correct hands would be a good first step.. As far as having them put onto a "threatened species list",would have to pass on that catastophy.... jmho.....


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

*Ponder This*

People have been fishing with Nets since the begining of Time...

Division of Marine Fisheries and Noaa been around about 40 years, all the sudden we have problems, yup 40 years of agenda based mis-management is far worse for a species then Netting Fish since the begining of time.. Folks that think they are smarter then God, get what they deserve...

JAM


----------



## nissan11 (Jan 24, 2010)

JAM said:


> People have been fishing with Nets since the begining of Time...
> 
> Division of Marine Fisheries and Noaa been around about 40 years, all the sudden we have problems, yup 40 years of agenda based mis-management is far worse for a species then Netting Fish since the begining of time.. Folks that think they are smarter then God, get what they deserve...
> 
> JAM


What a brilliant theory! Somebody give this man a cookie...

So, since netting has been around since the begining of time, the problem with fishing the last 40 years has to be the DMF and NOAA? Of course! It has nothing to do with the technological advances in boats, fishing gear, techniques and practices. It has nothing to do with tracking, tagging and research capabilities that have advanced over the last 40 years to more ACCURATELY show the health of fish species and popultions. It also has nothing to do with the fact that the world population has almost DOUBLED in the last 40 years, right? No, its the fault of the organizations which were created to sustain the heart beat of YOUR passionate hobby. Yeah! Its the DMF's and NOAA's fault because their creation is the ONLY thing that has changed in fishing during the last 40 years!

You know, hunting has been around since the beginning of time too, and how many species of game animal have been driven to the brink of extinction? Damn the NC wildlife resource commision, US fish and wildlife service, DMF, and NOAA! What do THEY know about wildlife?! Afterall, I saw a school of menhaden 20 years ago.


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

*I Like Chocolate Chip*

Thanks and Yes...

Great Job on the wolf's and coyotee's, dogsharks and comerants. Name one Species that has gone extinct, in our life time.

JAM


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

nissan11 said:


> What a brilliant theory! Somebody give this man a cookie...
> 
> So, since netting has been around since the begining of time, the problem with fishing the last 40 years has to be the DMF and NOAA? Of course! It has nothing to do with the technological advances in boats, fishing gear, techniques and practices. It has nothing to do with tracking, tagging and research capabilities that have advanced over the last 40 years to more ACCURATELY show the health of fish species and popultions. It also has nothing to do with the fact that the world population has almost DOUBLED in the last 40 years, right? No, its the fault of the organizations which were created to sustain the heart beat of YOUR passionate hobby. Yeah! Its the DMF's and NOAA's fault because their creation is the ONLY thing that has changed in fishing during the last 40 years!
> 
> You know, hunting has been around since the beginning of time too, and how many species of game animal have been driven to the brink of extinction? Damn the NC wildlife resource commision, US fish and wildlife service, DMF, and NOAA! What do THEY know about wildlife?! Afterall, I saw a school of menhaden 20 years ago.


 I agree to some degree,but handing the managment of menhaden to the "deep pockets of politicos" in Va is not a good move,do you not agree?? Also would tend to question scientific data that says dogfish are overfished??????? In that particular species there are just too many indicators that point in the other direction... If anything,they should be com harvesting as many for fishnchips as they can... jmho...


----------



## turfrooster (Apr 16, 2007)

dirtyhandslopez said:


> Simple question for you Turfrooster, "A Marine Fisheries employee". Why are menhaden not regulated by the fishery management folks? They are fish, correct? and as such should be regulated by fisheries managment. If any other fish were spotted by planes for harvesting, there would be measures put in place to stop this. And, as they are a important forage fish for other fish and cleaner of water by nature, it would seeem they the should be regulated even more so. Without them, everything goes down hill...
> A simple answer to the original question will suffice. If you need to ask your bosses and their bosses, please do so.
> Thank you in advance.


http://www.ncfisheries.net/stocks/atlanticmenhaden.htm

Menhaden ARE managed by Marine Fisheries. Simple answer to a simple question.


----------



## turfrooster (Apr 16, 2007)

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/fishwatch/species/atl_spiny_dogfish.htm

And once again dogfish are regulated by NOAA. This thread has gotten to the point where it is just people making speculations. There is this awesome website called "google". You can type in a keyword or topic and it can give you loads of information all about it. It's even free to use JAM! I know this may sound silly to you folks, but just because you catch a lot of fish, does not mean the stock is healthy. Just because you have a net and a boat, that does not make you a biologists. Also, when you hear the word "Overfished", you are more than likely mis-interpreting the word. Overfished is not just about fishing. It includes all biotic and abiotic factors, including weather patterns, climate, habitat distruction,..etc. Read this atricle and it will explain a simple misconception. 

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/stories/2011/07/14_overfished_isnt_just_about_fishing.html

Yes of course politics and money do play a role in everything. But dogfish WERE overfished for decades, no matter how many you caught on a bottom rig that winter 8 years ago. There was a large age gap in the species, as well as a sex gap, which complicates the situation. A lot of times extreme fishing pressure has a delayed effect on the fisheries. And just because there are a lot of fish, does not mean they are all able to reproduce and replace themselves. Use the "google" thing to find out more!


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

*Just because your a Biologist, and have a Net and a Boat*

Damm sure don't make you a fisherman. The sampling data is screwed because of wrong mesh per horsepower of boat.. Rhode Island Waterman Video ring a bell..What google Studies, by AGENDA based Biologists.. 

80 percent less com fishermen then 20 years ago.. keep dreaming.. 

JAM


----------



## turfrooster (Apr 16, 2007)

What does horsepower have to do with any type pf study? Horsepower would only matter for trawls, not set nets runarounds or anything else. Mesh size is a huge factor which is obviosly taken into consideration on any study. You ever looked at a trip ticket?

http://www.seawatch.org/bibliography/billfish.php


----------



## chest2head&glassy (Jul 2, 2002)

JAM said:


> Name one Species that has gone extinct, in our life time.
> 
> JAM


I'll play.
Tecopa Pupfish - Extinct in 1981
http://listverse.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/tecopapupfish-tm.jpg?w=400&h=296

Baiji River Dolphin - Extinct in 2006
http://listverse.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/baiji-tm.jpg?w=400&h=213

Hey - you didn't say where the fish had to live. FWIW, the Tecopa Pupfish lived in the hot springs in the Mojave Desert. Hotels and bathhouses that sprung up in the 50s killed their population. The River Dolphin lived in the Yangtze (China) where commercialization, pollution, caught in nets, etc. caused these animals to be extinct in 2006.

Do I get a cookie?


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

*Fill them out all the time.. LOL*

The Rhode Island Water made fools of NOAA/DMF's, and out fished them 50 to 1 right in a fog bank, they did a documentary on it.. You know what I am talking about, don't be coy.. BTW I hope you are posting here on your own time, not on a Govt computer, time stamps and all are a B1tch, and so is waste fraud and abuse... 

I am in and on the water 365 days a year, I don't sit at a desk with my pencil sharperner, and pocket protector..

40 years of Mis-Management is what got us to where we are.. Over laping agencies with multiple mission statements, gonna be funny when the hammer falls and most of you "Crisis" managers are out of work.. Enjoy..

BTW I loved your definition so much of Over Fishing, I showed it to a real Bio Big Bill Foster from Hatteras, he laughed as well.. Over Fishing does not me its Over Fishing.. JAM


----------



## dena (Jun 20, 2010)

Drumdum said:


> So in short,you want a Pandora's Box opened for "you know who" to crawl through?? ESA will be the death of us all,especially if we try to use it to block other user groups for our own selfish purposes.. Getting a block vote to get the management into the correct hands would be a good first step.. As far as having them put onto a "threatened species list",would have to pass on that catastophy.... jmho.....


I'm sorry you missed my sarcasm about getting menhaden listed. 
I was trying to be humorous with the bunker remark, sorry if I failed to be funny.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 12, 2006)

JAM said:


> 40 years of Mis-Management is what got us to where we are.


Jam,

I would love to hear what you would do to protect the resources that we all love. I especially would like to hear where you would get the information necessary to make informed decisions.

Serious.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

turfrooster said:


> But dogfish WERE overfished for decades, no matter how many you caught on a bottom rig that winter 8 years ago. There was a large age gap in the species, as well as a sex gap, which complicates the situation. A lot of times extreme fishing pressure has a delayed effect on the fisheries. And just because there are a lot of fish, does not mean they are all able to reproduce and replace themselves. Use the "google" thing to find out more!


 You know I have no "scientific data" to back me up.. ALTHOUGH,you didn't properly read my earlier post.. I wasn't talking about catching a bunch on a bottomrig 8yrs ago.. We are talking jigs,divers,bottombaits,grubs,mirrorlures,the dam things eat anything that stinks,swims,or moves.. It's not a couple or a hundred,they are like swams of mosquitos in the winter.. I ain't talking one winter 8yrs ago,I'm talking since 90 when I first caught one of the dern things on Avon and had never seen a spiny in my life till that day.. After the first one hit the deck it was game on,one after the other that day and has been that way ever since.. As Jam said they eat and destroy other species as well.. I'm not against management,but common sense has to come in at some time.. Why doesn't the dmf ever listen to fishermen,or at least take some of what they tell you into consideration, instead of "googling" up something that some scientist that has never wet a line and just counts beans and fish.. Probably the same ones that need 1000meter buffers for two dern birds to hatch...



dena said:


> I'm sorry you missed my sarcasm about getting menhaden listed.
> I was trying to be humorous with the bunker remark, sorry if I failed to be funny.


 Sorry my sense of humor was errased when I thought of what might or could happen.. You see,I have become supersensitized (msp) to enviro causes "that are for the good of the resource"... My fault for posting instead of laughing,but living here I tend to take statements like that seriously.. You see,what has happened here on nps land on Hatteras Island is about as rediculous...


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

turfrooster said:


> http://www.ncfisheries.net/stocks/atlanticmenhaden.htm
> 
> Menhaden ARE managed by Marine Fisheries. Simple answer to a simple question.


 If that is the case,then dmf has screwed the pooch on that one... 

I do want you to understand that I am not being critical because I disagree with all the rules and regs that have been put down,just some that seem to be counterproductive.. again just the humble opinion of someone that fishes.. not someone you could "googleup".....


----------



## turfrooster (Apr 16, 2007)

I understand Drumdum. I am sure that DMF hasen't done the perfect thing in every case. After all regs are not always set strickly on ecological factors, though they absolutely should be. The sad truth to why gov't officials do independent studies all the time instead of taking the word of commercial and rec fisherman is becasue they lie. I have seen it happen tons of times. Commercial fisherman lie about mesh size, soak time, line length, twine size, everything..I am no way shape or form saying that all commercial fisherman lie. I am just saying that it happens enough to where the data can no longer be reliable. They lie because they want the Catch Per Unit Effort to increase. They want biologists to believe that they were able to catch more fish with less gear, so that more regs aren't set. Makes sense doesn't it? Thats why there is a need for such studies. And believe me most biologists are or have been on the water quite a bit. Field studies and surveys are done year round. Not many DMF jobs are at a desk. Speculate all you want. I have talked to commercial fisherman that have said if there weren't any regs they would fish until they couldn't fish anymore, or until the ocean was dry. I take you for one of those guys JAM. Im sure you know how much you can fish without calapsing a stock, right? 

JAM you are part of the problem. People who are against any type of regulations and restrictions for the greater good the the ocean's ecological health need to wake up and understand that humans are directly tied in. Everything we do involves the ocean. We have now filled it with trash and are emptying it's recources. The North Pacific Gyre is the Largest landfill in the world. Many shark species are predicted to be exinct by the year 2025. Unless we all change the way we think we will continue down this path. Everyone wants to protect their own interest and thats the problem. Time to step up and stop being selfish and think a little about the future.


----------



## sharkslayer89 (Apr 16, 2007)

*E.t.*

Hey turf, tell them about the aliens


----------



## twitch (Jan 29, 2008)

Turf, ya don't happen to be crotalus on other forums do ya?


----------



## dirtyhandslopez (Nov 17, 2006)

turfrooster said:


> http://www.ncfisheries.net/stocks/atlanticmenhaden.htm
> 
> Menhaden ARE managed by Marine Fisheries. Simple answer to a simple question.


 What you have have posted deals primarily with NC. The problem is the spotter planes and boats that decimate the stocks of menhaden that eventually make it to NC are doing the nasty in Va, in or very near the Chesapeake bay, the precise place that most of the fish that migrate from north to south and from south to north come to eat and spawn. The Chesapeake bay the area I am discussing, where most of the commercial boat operations that target the menhaden deploy from. Those harvesting operations are not managed by the fisheries, but are run by and owned by persons that are directly tied to politicians and are allowed to continue thier operations because of the fear that those politicians that have their hands in those companies pockets will not be re-elected under the guise of loss of jobs. When the menhaden are gone, many more poeple will be out of jobs because of the lack of fish to be caught that both the recs. and the comms rely on, not to mention restruants and fish selling oprations. That doesn't even take take into consideration the lowering of the water quality because of the lack of filtration that the menhaden do. And yes, over development also play into water quality, but overdevelopment is not being done by the fishermen, but by the interests of big money, ie politicians and developers with interests of keeping their votes and their jobs.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

turfrooster said:


> I understand Drumdum. I am sure that DMF hasen't done the perfect thing in every case. After all regs are not always set strickly on ecological factors, though they absolutely should be. The sad truth to why gov't officials do independent studies all the time instead of taking the word of commercial and rec fisherman is becasue they lie. I have seen it happen tons of times. Commercial fisherman lie about mesh size, soak time, line length, twine size, everything..I am no way shape or form saying that all commercial fisherman lie. I am just saying that it happens enough to where the data can no longer be reliable. They lie because they want the Catch Per Unit Effort to increase. They want biologists to believe that they were able to catch more fish with less gear, so that more regs aren't set. Makes sense doesn't it? Thats why there is a need for such studies. And believe me most biologists are or have been on the water quite a bit. Field studies and surveys are done year round. Not many DMF jobs are at a desk. Speculate all you want. I have talked to commercial fisherman that have said if there weren't any regs they would fish until they couldn't fish anymore, or until the ocean was dry.


 I've seen those type of com fishermen as well,although not all are liers,as not all recs and knowlegable fishermen are either... As you do to tell populations of fish,or conditions,you take samples,put the best "commonsense approach" on the table and use it... As was said I'm not against regulation,understood it has to be done,although in many cases,such as seabass,snappers,deep dropping,ect they could be regulated and not totally shut down..



dirtyhandslopez said:


> What you have have posted deals primarily with NC. The problem is the spotter planes and boats that decimate the stocks of menhaden that eventually make it to NC are doing the nasty in Va, in or very near the Chesapeake bay, the precise place that most of the fish that migrate from north to south and from south to north come to eat and spawn. The Chesapeake bay the area I am discussing, where most of the commercial boat operations that target the menhaden deploy from. Those harvesting operations are not managed by the fisheries, but are run by and owned by persons that are directly tied to politicians and are allowed to continue thier operations because of the fear that those politicians that have their hands in those companies pockets will not be re-elected under the guise of loss of jobs. When the menhaden are gone, many more poeple will be out of jobs because of the lack of fish to be caught that both the recs. and the comms rely on, not to mention restruants and fish selling oprations. That doesn't even take take into consideration the lowering of the water quality because of the lack of filtration that the menhaden do. And yes, over development also play into water quality, but overdevelopment is not being done by the fishermen, but by the interests of big money, ie politicians and developers with interests of keeping their votes and their jobs.


 Yeap..


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

[email protected] said:


> Jam,
> 
> I would love to hear what you would do to protect the resources that we all love. I especially would like to hear where you would get the information necessary to make informed decisions.
> 
> Serious.


OK I'll give it a shot here is a good start. Disbanned NOAA, DMF, DNR,USFWS, WRC, and the EPA. Roll into one organization. No more overlapping infighting between all of the aboave alphabet soup, one stop shopping for all the resourses. 

Turf believes his own BS, he seems newly indocterned. And this section is at him..

What about the NOAA BREAKINS, tampering of Documents, planting catches in fish houses.. (use your google Bud Glouster Mass Fish House) Just happened over this winter and went on for 4 years prior to them getting caught, and they were busted this spring. 

All are AGENDA BASSED ORGS... They forgot who they work for...

There are 80 percent less Com Fishermen today due to to the overregulation, overbearing rules, observers, electronic monitoring and the such.

No Com Fisherman I know would ever fish the Ocean Dry, just like no Farmer I know would over farm his land an destroy it.. They are good traditional, hard working folks, that would due allot better with out the Govt up their @ss. 

Folks like you are the problem, you believe that you are smarter then God, and you can fix this and fix that by regulation of certain species. All you do in the process (cause you'all ain't that smart) is create an imbalance of nature, and get things all out of wack. And then it on to the blame game, no matter what the cause of a depletation of a species, You'all call it "OVERFISHING" , and then you Point out that "OVERFISHING" does not mean OverFishing, yet you Point fingers at the com's saying that they are killing the Oceans. Take another sip of the Kool-Aid Capt. as you talk from both sides of your mouth. 

You are the main reason for all the Fish Importing going on because US Fishermen are the only ones required to follow your BS Rules. The rest of the World Dam sure dosen't.. So you all are just part of the GREEN MOVEMENT, AGENDA based Science, people aare bad animals are good, kumbaya crowd that is Destroying this once great country. 

Go Join the Whale Wars I thin you would fit right in.. Never said I was not for regulation, just not for dumb ones..

JAM


----------



## nissan11 (Jan 24, 2010)

JAM said:


> OK I'll give it a shot here is a good start. Disbanned NOAA, DMF, DNR,USFWS, WRC, and the EPA. Roll into one organization. No more overlapping infighting between all of the aboave alphabet soup, one stop shopping for all the resourses.
> 
> Turf believes his own BS, he seems newly indocterned. And this section is at him..
> 
> ...


Besides your opinion of dogfish, which in your opinion are "dumb" regulations?


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

10 year moritorium of Drum, going on 15 years now.. 

Bycatch Laws are screwed... Its ok to throw them back DEAD.. Wasteful...

Bottom Fish Shut down @ 40 fathoms..

I can keep going on...

Specks Shut down this winter.. 

JAM


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

chest2head&glassy said:


> I'll play.
> Tecopa Pupfish - Extinct in 1981
> http://listverse.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/tecopapupfish-tm.jpg?w=400&h=296
> 
> ...


Your gonna quote a Word Press Blog article, from fish from third world countries.. OK.. WOW, and the world is such a worse place with out them.. Thats a real stretch..

And how many NEW SPECIES have been discovered in the same time frame.. 

JAM


----------



## chest2head&glassy (Jul 2, 2002)

JAM said:


> Your gonna quote a Word Press Blog article, from fish from third world countries.. OK.. WOW, and the world is such a worse place with out them.. Thats a real stretch..
> 
> And how many NEW SPECIES have been discovered in the same time frame..
> 
> JAM


Wow JAM - take a few deep breaths of that lovely salty Hattaras air and chill out. Albeit it was rhetorical, you posed the question of what fish were extinct in our lifetime, it was answered. Find the humor in it.


----------



## turfrooster (Apr 16, 2007)

All are AGENDA BASSED ORGS... They forgot who they work for...


Yes, the agenda is to keep fisherman from taking every last fish from our ocean.. Dude it's common sense. 


All you do in the process (cause you'all ain't that smart) is create an imbalance of nature, and get things all out of wack. 

I think your losing your own teammates on this one. The imbalance on nature is when commercial (and rec) fisherman are allowed to fish without regulation. The point of any conservation organization is to KEEP our resources for future generations. JAM look up "tragedy of the commons". So you want less governmental force and less restriction but you want one organization to control everything???? Hmm. I do not think I am smarter than anyone else on this forum, I just want people to understand that regulation is absolutely needed. No one "owns" the fish in the ocean therefore no one takes responsibility. This is why a third party is needed.


----------



## turfrooster (Apr 16, 2007)

JAM said:


> 10 year moritorium of Drum, going on 15 years now..
> 
> Bycatch Laws are screwed... Its ok to throw them back DEAD.. Wasteful...
> 
> ...


Throwing dead fish back is wasteful. What do you suggest? Raise the limit to however many you happen to catch?? And dead fish thrown back still keeps organic material in the ocean. Other fish feed off the protein and isotopes are passed on. And if you truley think the trout shutdown this winter was wrong you have lost all credibility. The population was hit hard with the past winters, overfishing has occured. You can still keep trout what are you complaining about. The shutdown was during spawn why are you upset? You clearly want to protect your interest and resist everything that slightly compromises it.


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

*Who are my Teamates Coms. or Recs?????*

Being as you know, tell me who is my team???

JAM


----------



## dirtyhandslopez (Nov 17, 2006)

No rebuttal on the Menhaden fishing in and around the Chesapeake Bay Turfrooster? Hard to squirrel your way out of that one isn't it?

Let me see, it's okay to buy fish from over seas and have them transported halfway around the world so so called rich people can sit in fancy restrauants and eat them(contributing to the "climate problem") but we can't catch some overly abundant dogfish and fry 'em up, stick them with some chips(french fries) and eat a low impact meal? Or do we all have to eat talipa that are raised in ponds and are fed human excrement?

Turfrooster, I am from England, I have seeen first hand what overfishing will do. We do need regulations, but you can't in all good faith say all fishes are in danger of severe decline around these shores.

Stop boats from other countries coming in and pilaging the resources would be a good first step. Size regulations are a good thing also. Step up enforcement on poaching.

Lots of people go to college to get their degrees for this and that in the nature watching aspect of the Gov. which means they then have to pay off a massive debt they have incurred. This is done by creating jobs that pay well. Those jobs are usually funded by the Gov.. And just where do you think the Gov. gets it's money? It gets it from us, by the taxes we pay on our wages, our fishing tackle, the bait we buy, the licenses we buy to go fishing. 
So just think about who you work for and what will happen if we stop fishing. You might just be out of a job, regardless of how many fish are swimming around...


----------



## turfrooster (Apr 16, 2007)

Ha I am not against Commercial fisherman. I support the group local catch here in manteo. I do not even eat farm rasied Salmon. I have PERSONALLY seen what it does to the area and the community. Look I think we are arguing the same things just in a different way. The biggest problem facing fisheries today is international affairs, not stripers in the Roanoke or Drum in the Neuse. 

As far as Menhaden in Chesapeake Bay, I really do not know and I am not going to pretend like I do. This is an NC forum so that's why I was talking about NC. I understand that because of the "lack of regulations", commercial fisherman were able to use planes, run arounds and long hauls and all types of technology to extinguish the stock. So who's fault is it really that VA didn't "stop" the commercial guys from taking too many fish, JAM said that they all know when to quit. Doesn't that go to show how bad we need certain regulations???


----------



## turfrooster (Apr 16, 2007)

dirtyhandslopez said:


> No rebuttal on the Menhaden fishing in and around the Chesapeake Bay Turfrooster? Hard to squirrel your way out of that one isn't it?
> 
> Let me see, it's okay to buy fish from over seas and have them transported halfway around the world so so called rich people can sit in fancy restrauants and eat them(contributing to the "climate problem") but we can't catch some overly abundant dogfish and fry 'em up, stick them with some chips(french fries) and eat a low impact meal? Or do we all have to eat talipa that are raised in ponds and are fed human excrement?
> 
> ...


Of course not all fishes are in danger of decline. But all species are important and play a key role in the ecosystem, which is why many DO need to be regulated. For example, large sharks have been overfished, now we see an explosion of Cow nose rays in the Chesapeake. They are not commercially important though, so we are stuck in an imbalance. The rays food source will soon decrease and so on and so on. Everything is essential as well as vulnerable.


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

"So who's fault is it really that VA didn't "stop" the commercial guys from taking too many fish, JAM said that they all know when to quit. Doesn't that go to show how bad we need certain regulations"??? 

VADMF.. Not the Fishermen.. thanks for proving my Point.. 

So who's team am I on, you seem to be tap dancin, and retreating very well.. 

JAM


----------



## turfrooster (Apr 16, 2007)

JAM said:


> "So who's fault is it really that VA didn't "stop" the commercial guys from taking too many fish, JAM said that they all know when to quit. Doesn't that go to show how bad we need certain regulations"???
> 
> VADMF.. Not the Fishermen.. thanks for proving my Point..
> 
> ...


Meant your followers on this forum. But if your asking me to guess if your comm or rec, ill take a chance and say comm.


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

Names JAM not Jesus, I have no Followers, just speak Common Sense.. No Com here Capt.. Rec Fisherman from the South Bronx of NY.. Thanks for playin..

JAM


----------



## ReelKingin (Aug 3, 2009)

Maybe you should read up on your neighbors laws and guidelines...If I were a DMF, I would want to know everything that I can to make me better at my job...Especially waters to my north and south, cause they have HUGE dividends on our waters in the end


----------



## turfrooster (Apr 16, 2007)

ReelKingin said:


> Maybe you should read up on your neighbors laws and guidelines...If I were a DMF, I would want to know everything that I can to make me better at my job...Especially waters to my north and south, cause they have HUGE dividends on our waters in the end


Maybe you should ask yourself if you have done a single thing to help the cause which you believe in. Which is??


----------



## turfrooster (Apr 16, 2007)

Yes, waters anywhere effect waters everywhere. We only have one ocean. I am a technician, not the director of marine fisheries.


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

"Look I think we are arguing the same things just in a different way. The biggest problem facing fisheries today is international affairs, not stripers in the Roanoke or Drum in the Neuse". 

No we are not, And here in lies another "Problem with your thought process" We are the United States of America, a small little section of the world, with a small little piece of realestate, all bougus regulations do is put Good Hard Working American Folks and families out of Business, because they are being held to a Higher standard then the rest of the World.. Which inturns costs them excessive money to continue their operations or go out of Business. So yes you are against Comm fishermen because you support/work for a broken beuracratic (sp) Gov't Org. that is bought and paid for by the Rich. Until you can regulate the entire world,(God Forbid) and keep EVERYONE on an equal playing fields. These orgs are trying to force Catch Shares down the throats of all the folks that spoke out against it. If they can run most of the Fishing Fleet out of business, then there will be less noise made when they try and force feed us Catch Shares, because most fishermen and there operations will have shutdown due to FUSTRATION, or the in-ability to make a living because of AGENDA BASED SCIENCE and manipulation of the Numbers.. Next time ya want to go Head to Head with me, at least have your BS straight and whatever ya do, don't make my points for me, in your argument. 

Did a little pokeing around, at best you are a first year tech. or possibly an intern, don't try and come off like Mr. Marine Bio here to save the day... Sorry the Pea Island Refugee job did not work out for ya, ya would have fit in GREAT there with all the Bird Brains.. I don't claim to know anything, but allot of the Fishermen and Bio's around me do, and I respect and listen to them on a regular basis, and agree 100% with their Stances, maybe you have heard of them Capt. Ernie Foster Albatross Fleet, and Big Bill Foster/ no relation to each other, but both have been in fisheries for over 50 years a piece.. They make sense, you do not... Enjoy your GREEN Career... I don't support that BS either.....

JAM over and out on this note...


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

Was going to lock this thread,but hopefully we can discuss fisheries without insulting one another...


----------



## turfrooster (Apr 16, 2007)

Dude you haven't addressed a single thing I said. I'm trying to make since of what you are saying..Once again..

Instead of wasting exceded quota catch, what do you suggest be done? Make the the regs to whatever YOU happen to catch??

You said that you dont need regs because commercial fisherman are good hard working guys who know how much to fish and when to stop. REALLY???

YOU truley believe that if a species (such as trout) was hit hard by fishing in previous years on top of brutal winters that regulations should not be placed to aid their recovery??????????

And lastly, again, what have you done to help keep fish in our waters, and ensure that someday your grand-kids will get to catch a fish just as you have done??


----------



## ReelKingin (Aug 3, 2009)

Technician? What does that mean far as DMF is concerned? 

RFA-NC is one, as in my "stand"


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

turfrooster said:


> YOU truley believe that if a species (such as trout) was hit hard by fishing in previous years on top of brutal winters that regulations should not be placed to aid their recovery??????????


 Not really sure regs of any kind can help a cold freeze on trout,especially if you only shut down for one spawning..... If you were going to regulate what was left of the trout after a cold freeze like that,would like to have seen what prohibiting harvest throughout the rest of this year...Hopefully no cold freeze this winter,by the end of that time should have had what,3 spawnings? If regulation was going to do anything possitive it would show after that..


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

turfrooster said:


> Dude you haven't addressed a single thing I said. I'm trying to make since of what you are saying..Once again..
> 
> Because you have not said a single thing. You type then retreat...Then cahge your topic..
> 
> ...


What could my Grandad catch that I today can not?????

I belong to the American Sports Fishing Association, Keep America Fishing, and a few other groups that deal with Veterans, that are not fishing related...

Just a word of advice, from a former Govt employee, you would do good to keep your views off the Internet.. They will come back to haunt you one day.. 

I have addressed everything that you have put to me, it is you that has been doin a Texas Two Step around tha points that I bring up, I have shown this post in its total content to a few folks that have been on the Council in Fisheries Management that are way smarter then me, and they just shook their heads, and said one day he will be head of Fisheries, because he is so Clueless.. 

Adios

JAM


----------



## chest2head&glassy (Jul 2, 2002)

JAM said:


> Just a word of advice, from a former Govt employee, you would do good to keep your views off the Internet.. They will come back to haunt you one day..


JAM - he's got a circle hook baited with some bunker and has you hooked in. Spit it out man and let him keep chatting until nobody listens. 
The dude interned last summer on the island. DMF offers UNPAID summer internships and paid internships for college credits during the rest of the year. He's lives in Greenville. He goes to ECU. He moved there in 07 so he's still most likely an undergrad. ECU doesn't offer an undergrad Marine Bio program, just biology and Maritime Studies is a Master's program. Based that he's been at ECU since 07, assuming he started there as a freshman, I doubt he's in a Master's program. And most likely, he's not using government time to keep hooking you in. He's sitting in his dorm or off campus apartment waiting for his summer class to start and playing Call of Duty.
I've partied hard on road trips to ECU back in the day (I think Playboy had them ranked one of the best partying schools years ago) and I don't think too many government politicians will be coming out of that school so I'm sure he'll be safe to view his expressions on the 'net without hurting his future career.


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

*Chest he ain't got a hook in me*

I was just bored and playing, and pointing out how things work.. Found all the info about him being a kid and all yesterday as it was part of my post today.. Just another soul trying to save us from us.. Laughable.. Thanks..
JAM


----------



## turfrooster (Apr 16, 2007)

Good try. I'm 33 years old. Worked at the columbia office for 4 years as a tech 3. I have a masters in fisheries biology from state and currently work for a non-profit. Yea i went to ECU but grew up in Valdez, AK. I have seen what regulation free fishing can do. But hey if you have it your way and let the commercial fisherman keep whatever they happen to catch, well, I guess you'll never see what would happen because biologist and environmental advisors aren't idiots. They undersand BASIC BIOLOGY. And yea I had to go to work where I am now because Teach's wouldn't hire me. Said I was overqualified, and spoke too good of english.


----------



## nissan11 (Jan 24, 2010)

Jam, you and chesthead have resulted to stalking?
Wow this is getting sad.

JAM, In all seriousness, I would like to meet you just to talk to you about your opinion on what is good for fishing. I can't take anyone as being sane that said they would set government land on fire if they couldn't use it, that way NOBODY can use it. Please correct me if that good idea was just sarcasm.

I live in the rocks, but I will be at Topsail in a week and a half if you are going to be in the area.


----------



## Sean B (Jul 29, 2010)

Haven't been to this site in a while but having read this entire thread, I have a question for JAM. If I'm reading you correctly, you're saying that we should loosen up our regs to match what other countries can do? That doesn't sound like a good thing for the resource. Maybe someone's bottom line and some jobs but not the resource. 

Your general attitude that fishermen are capable of self-regulating, or even knowing the criteria they'd need to form ideas and make decisions, is puzzling. 

Believe me, I'm not a fan of more government agencies and bureaucrats but we really do need some of them. And yes, we need them to be free from any influence of big business.


----------



## chest2head&glassy (Jul 2, 2002)

turfrooster said:


> Good try. I'm 33 years old. Worked at the columbia office for 4 years as a tech 3. I have a masters in fisheries biology from state and currently work for a non-profit. Yea i went to ECU but grew up in Valdez, AK. I have seen what regulation free fishing can do. But hey if you have it your way and let the commercial fisherman keep whatever they happen to catch, well, I guess you'll never see what would happen because biologist and environmental advisors aren't idiots. They undersand BASIC BIOLOGY. And yea I had to go to work where I am now because Teach's wouldn't hire me. Said I was overqualified, and spoke too good of english.


I stand corrected. Had you pegged as pimple dotted snot nose kid that likes to stir the pot and ruffle some feathers behind the security of a user name on forums.
Let the debate continue and sidebar assumptions and stalking end.


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

nissan11 said:


> Jam, you and chesthead have resulted to stalking?
> Wow this is getting sad.
> 
> JAM, In all seriousness, I would like to meet you just to talk to you about your opinion on what is good for fishing. I can't take anyone as being sane that said they would set government land on fire if they couldn't use it, that way NOBODY can use it. Please correct me if that good idea was just sarcasm.
> ...


No wheres ner TopSail Capt. not sure what you are talking about setting land on fire??????? If your ever in Hatteras stop by and chat, I'll introduce you to people who have been at it for over 50 years... 

@MasterBIOTECH just a year ago I'm interning at the Refuge. 
What everybody's take on this? I'm a student here and I don't think the furture will be too bright.. Any other ECU fans out there?

And yea I had to go to work where I am now because Teach's wouldn't hire me. Said I was overqualified, and spoke too good of english. 

Not gonna take things personal to you, its beneath me, you have not replied to anything I have stated and 2 step all around it. If you would ever like to say the above statement to my face, feel frogy, stop by Teach's anytime..

JAM


----------



## Garboman (Jul 22, 2010)

My name is Garbo

I am 57 years old .........

I have fished OBX for 47 years mostly as an intern, though I did fish comm for three years as an intern to the Midgettes...

To NC Marine Fisheries Interns and Externs

I do not like doggies...........please regulate them down to a more sustainable number...........like one or two.....

If you want to make a difference .............eliminate Omega..............I mean eliminate off the planet.....47 years ago a single Menhaden pod could encompass ten or more acres in surface volume....

Changes in my lifetime include..................more cops with guns...........more rules..........More people .................less fun..................less fish...............less fish may have something to do with less Menhaden.........................get the picture ?


----------



## dena (Jun 20, 2010)

Why is it that even with all the modern science and knowledgeable regulations, the general fish population has gone down?

The fishermen couldn't have done much worse by them selves, with out the regulations, could they?


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

dena said:


> Why is it that even with all the modern science and knowledgeable regulations, the general fish population has gone down?
> 
> The fishermen couldn't have done much worse by them selves, with out the regulations, could they?


 You bring up an excellent point... My way of thinking would be to compose a panel of folks that FISH,not JUST SCIENCE (as numbers and stats can be played) and not rely on bogus surveys to make thier decissions...


----------



## ReelKingin (Aug 3, 2009)

Garboman said:


> .............eliminate Omega..............


Amen!!! All predatory fish would have a nice meal at the end of the day if this happened...Specks, Flounder, Kings, Spanish, Cobia, Tarpon, Shark, Blues, Crevelles, Stripers, Drum...The list goes on and on...


----------



## jamesvafisher (Jul 4, 2010)

ReelKingin said:


> Amen!!!


+1


----------



## chest2head&glassy (Jul 2, 2002)

JAM said:


> .. Any other ECU fans out there?






:beer:


----------



## PopsBoy (Sep 17, 2010)

I can't believe you guys have spent 4 pages finger pointing at who's to blame and who's lying about what. Let's start with the fact tht the two groups you're arguing over are not the most trustworthy people ever. Government agencies tell the truth as it applies to money, and we all know fishermen NEVER lie...lol
All joking aside, I think the blame and the resolution lie somewhere in the middle:
Fishermen have proven throughout history that if a species of fish is profitable they will fish it until it's not profitable or until they can't catch them anymore. This isn't just U.S. fishermen, all fishermen, everywhere. Look at the history of New Bedford, MA. as a quick example. Before regulations they were depleting natural resources with abandon. When the regulations went into place the economy of the town was decimated, so they found another species to target and did the same thing..over and over again.
Goverment agencies and their scientists have proven time and again that they will regulate and create laws for whatever big money tells them to do. The land issue in Cape Hatteras is a prime example. It's not always the smart or most effective way to take care of the issue, but the scientists aren't always funded for the smart answers, but for the answers the funding group wants to hear. If I worked as a taste tester for Coke and the answer I always gave them was that Pepsi is better, exactly how long do you think I would have a job with Coke?
The truth is, we shouldn't be as pizzed at fisheries management as we are at ourselves. We've caused these issues by not policing ourselves, by not taking good enough care of what the ocean gave us. Greed (over fishing) and pride (nice big houses on big wide beaches) have caused the mess, and the attitude of "it's not our back yard, so why do we care" while beaches all over the U.S. were being closed allowed the eco groups to get into the politicians back pockets. We did it to ourselves and the only thing that will ever even begin to fix it is working together to make it better all the way around. There are things to be learned from both sides, but until the blame game is over we'll all just stay here and chase our tails while the poeple who are really to blame keep taking more and more away from us.


----------



## map120277 (Jul 17, 2008)

_*Omega Protein has made campaign contributions to McDonnell and a long list of legislators totaling nearly $100,000 during the 2009-10 reporting period, according to the Virginia Public Access Project.*_


----------



## dirtyhandslopez (Nov 17, 2006)

Perhaps the mods could put this issue on all the relative boards so more people would understand the situation we all are dealing with?
Still awaiting a rebuttal concerning the menhaden in the Chesapeake Bay and it's surrounding ecosystems Mr. Turfrooster, as are others.
The responsible anglers do police themsleves and try to educate other anglers. 
Money and votes will always influence everything, especially politicians and their protegees(sp?). 
The problem, as I see, it is protecting what is available here, not trying to do as other countries have done/are doing, but instead standing firm against outside enterprises. The US cannot tell other countries what to do with regards to their own fishing laws but it can enforce laws here and those laws should be based on a sharing of information by all parties that are involved.
Nature is an awesome thing and does a good job for itself when the special interests and numbers and lies don't get in the way...
You do express valid points Popsboy, but most of those points have in fact already been encompassed in earlier posts on this thread.
Most of the menhaden are being turned into fish oil pills so that people can be healthy. Why not let the menhaden be allowed to grow and flourish and then fish for and eat the fish that eat the menhaden that acually taste good with a side of potatoes and or pasta or between some good homecooked or even store bought bread? Why import crap tasting fish that have been flown in from other countries? Not good from a "green" point of view to import anything.
We all want our children to be able to eat fresh food, period, end of story, full stop(as they say in my home country)

Breasticles are awesome, as are furry flounder.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

Drumdum said:


> You bring up an excellent point... My way of thinking would be to compose a panel of folks that FISH,not JUST SCIENCE (as numbers and stats can be played) and not rely on bogus surveys to make thier decissions...


 Wouldn't this be the "somehwere in the middle" approach you're talking about?? You have the "lieing fishermen",and the "politically steered scientist" hashing it out... Maybe if folks weren't allowed to fill politicians pockets,or they were to elliminate all groups from the table that have an agenda as do dow and selc, of course "lieing fishermen" and add retired fishermen that have no dog in the fight..It would actually make a good working body out of fisheries,and the regs necessary would be put into place... I know just dreaming of a way that my son and has his son in the future will be able to fish as I have..



PopsBoy said:


> I can't believe you guys have spent 4 pages finger pointing at who's to blame and who's lying about what. Let's start with the fact tht the two groups you're arguing over are not the most trustworthy people ever. Government agencies tell the truth as it applies to money, and we all know fishermen NEVER lie...lol
> All joking aside, I think the blame and the resolution lie somewhere in the middle:
> Fishermen have proven throughout history that if a species of fish is profitable they will fish it until it's not profitable or until they can't catch them anymore. This isn't just U.S. fishermen, all fishermen, everywhere. Look at the history of New Bedford, MA. as a quick example. Before regulations they were depleting natural resources with abandon. When the regulations went into place the economy of the town was decimated, so they found another species to target and did the same thing..over and over again.
> Goverment agencies and their scientists have proven time and again that they will regulate and create laws for whatever big money tells them to do. The land issue in Cape Hatteras is a prime example. It's not always the smart or most effective way to take care of the issue, but the scientists aren't always funded for the smart answers, but for the answers the funding group wants to hear. If I worked as a taste tester for Coke and the answer I always gave them was that Pepsi is better, exactly how long do you think I would have a job with Coke?
> The truth is, we shouldn't be as pizzed at fisheries management as we are at ourselves. We've caused these issues by not policing ourselves, by not taking good enough care of what the ocean gave us. Greed (over fishing) and pride (nice big houses on big wide beaches) have caused the mess, and the attitude of "it's not our back yard, so why do we care" while beaches all over the U.S. were being closed allowed the eco groups to get into the politicians back pockets. We did it to ourselves and the only thing that will ever even begin to fix it is working together to make it better all the way around. There are things to be learned from both sides, but until the blame game is over we'll all just stay here and chase our tails while the poeple who are really to blame keep taking more and more away from us.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 12, 2006)

This just in...Courtesy of Tidalfish.com

TOP FISHING NEWS: Critique of the Proposed New ASMFC Menhaden Fishery Plan

Published on 07-27-2011 10:05 AM
0 Comments Comments
Menhaden Fishing Omega Protein Chesapeake Bay Atlantic Ocean Commercial Fishing
Guest writer Charlie Hutchinson from MSSA takes over today's top new story with some thoughts on the menhaden management situation along the East Coast with his Critique of the new ASMFC Proposed Menhaden Fishery Plan.

At the last meeting of the Menhaden Management Board, the commissioners directed a Plan Development Team be assembled whose mission would be to create a draft addendum to the present plan. The new plan would be based on the agreed upon goal of increasing the menhaden breeding stock to the equivalent of 15% of an unfished stock from its present level of +/- 8%. The team is composed of members who are diversified geographically as well as professionally. Their proposed plan consists of two segments, the technical (fishery biology) side and a section on social/economic issues.

The technical side of the document is extensive and detailed. Based on the concept of a 15% maximum spawning potential as a threshold measure, the plan lays out the use of a target to which the fishery is to be managed. The threshold becomes a mandatory action point to reduce harvest to obtain the target level of landings if they ever exceeded the threshold limit. For this method to be successful, the target must be more conservative (smaller catch) than the threshold by a statistically significant amount. The team proposed a range of targets, from 20% to 40%. The breadth of the range recognizes the degree of uncertainty encountered in the inputs to the computer model which calculates effects. One of the major factors is estimating the change in natural mortality resulting from more forage available to predators. Given the fact that predators are currently considered under fed at present stock levels, the wide range is not unexpected. The Board will have to determine the extent of conservatism they wish to employ. The draft document outlines a host of tools the Board would have available to effect the reduction in harvest that would be required to achieve the goal. The Plan Development Team seems to favor a hard cap as the best method of control. They also note the need for improved monitoring/reporting to make any of the available methods work, primarily in the bait segment of the landings. So, on the technical side the work seems to be complete and realistic.

When it comes to the social/economic issues which might result from more stringent regulation, the work seems to be much less rigorous than the technical side. The first controversial point has to do with the predictions of effects on the reduction industry without a corresponding evaluation of the impact on the bait industry and its customers. Cited as reasons for the lack of consideration of the bait industry is a lack of data. The “data” is available, although some skepticism exists with respect to accuracy and completeness. Simply put, no effort was made to do the work it might require.

The second point of controversy has to do with the description of effects on the reduction industry. The document cites the predominate negative effect on jobs would be borne by “ the least skilled ,least educated, marginally employed and poorest sections of the affected communities.” Such an analysis doesn’t seem reasonable in an economic sense. First, if volume of business decreases one normally decreases the acquisition of raw materials to balance demand. In this business that would be accomplished by reducing the number of vessels utilized to supply the factory. Affected would be the crews on the vessels who are skilled and their wage scale is much higher than the wage scale in the factory .In addition there is not much known about the degree of automation employed in the factory. It may be that a reduction in throughput does not necessarily translate to a similar reduction in the labor force. So in essence, reductions could be made in that segment of the work force that is directly variable with volume and at the same time the average labor cost is decreased by reductions in the most costly element. All in all the social /economic portion of this document seems to portray an emotional response rather than an accurate picture of probable effects. Given the fact that decisions will be made on both technical and economic outputs, the economic aspects of this document should be treated with considerable skepticism.

That's all the fresh fishing news for today, until tomorrow, stay cool and I hope you get out and doing some fishing.

Brandon, Chief Angler


----------



## PopsBoy (Sep 17, 2010)

Drumdum and dirtyhands, Don't get me wrong, I'm an avid fisherman, and I want a way for my children's children to enjoy better fishing than I had. We're in agreement on most of this. The problem is that both sides have done enough damage that it's not likely to get to the point where the correct decisions can be made. It's like an ugly divorce and neither side wants to give in, and it doesn't matter how it effects the kids, you know?
I have to admit that I take a little offense to the suggestion that the laws aren't being enforced here when talking about other countries. Trust me when I tell you that they are, and few on here would know this better than I. It's what I do...Any commercial fishermen allowed to fish inside United States EEZ are United States commercial fishing vessels and the rules are enforced. We spend a tremendous amount of time and money patrolling these zones and ensuring that only US vessels are taking natural resources from US waters. Are there poachers? Sure, but we do everything we can to stop and prosecute them. The ships raping the menhaden from the Chesapeake are U.S. ships, not from other countries.


----------



## Garboman (Jul 22, 2010)

"One of the major factors is estimating the change in natural mortality resulting from more forage available to predators. Given the fact that predators are currently considered under fed at present stock levels, 

Well the Scientists have finally figured it out.....


----------



## dirtyhandslopez (Nov 17, 2006)

Glad someone was able to understand what that all said.
Thank you for the post [email protected] Praps there may be hope after all. Or not, as the case may be.


----------



## biggestsquid (Jan 6, 2010)

Just an ever so slight observation about this thread. There are a couple of ecos/pseudo ecos/wantabe ecos here who are a) sucking off the taxayer teat under the guise of "serving" the taxpayer b) criticizing those who live work and play on the water as being stupid liars ---- kind of ironic to hear someone from a government agency doing that pot and kettle scheme and c) are so indoctrinated that I'm sure they needed their superiors to show them how to use both hands to TRY to find their butts.

Wise is the man who listens to those with experience and knows how to glean the truth and knowledge --- ignorant is the man who has all the technology ande science available to him and has not the common sense to decipher that information.


----------



## dena (Jun 20, 2010)

The hell of it is that most, if not all of of us fishermen would be on the side of the G&F guys if their agenda was the improvement of our fisheries.
The G&F agenda has been corrupted by the enviros, and is counter to what most of believe would help the improvement of fishing.


----------



## PopsBoy (Sep 17, 2010)

I agree. I don't know one fishermen who wants to see any creature become endangered. By nature most of us are outdoorsmen and without the animlas there is no outdoors. Without the fish, there are no fishermen and the birds and turtles are all a part of the coastal ecosystem. We all want the same thing, but the two sides are more concerned with being right than they are in doing right and the real "bad guys" have us right where they want us. 
I work for the goverment, I help enforce the laws, but I don't write them and I don't always agree with them. I will say that the vast majority of the fishermen we encounter are honest hard working people who are doing a tough job and trying to make ends meet. I think it's disgusting that they have to throw huge amounts of dead fish back into the water becuase of by-catch. I know that there has to be a better way, I just don't know what it is.


----------



## Drumdum (Jan 6, 2003)

PopsBoy said:


> I agree. I don't know one fishermen who wants to see any creature become endangered. By nature most of us are outdoorsmen and without the animlas there is no outdoors. Without the fish, there are no fishermen and the birds and turtles are all a part of the coastal ecosystem. We all want the same thing, but the two sides are more concerned with being right than they are in doing right and the [/B] real "bad guys" have us right where they want us. [/B]
> I work for the goverment, I help enforce the laws, but I don't write them and I don't always agree with them. I will say that the vast majority of the fishermen we encounter are honest hard working people who are doing a tough job and trying to make ends meet. I think it's disgusting that they have to throw huge amounts of dead fish back into the water becuase of by-catch. I know that there has to be a better way, I just don't know what it is.


 No doubt with all the $ and influence they have,along with an outdated esa,they are using it to their best advantage..

Only answer I see to bycatch is to just stop all netting and indiscriminate ways of catching alltogether,but imo,that is no answer,folks eat fish ya know?? And no doubt they don't want ALL their fish to be transported from other countries...


----------



## dirtyhandslopez (Nov 17, 2006)

PopsBoy said:


> The ships raping the menhaden from the Chesapeake are U.S. ships, not from other countries.


Stop this happening will be the first step. Find ways for those that will become unemployed if those factory ship operations close. Adaptation is how humans have always been able to survive and that will always be a constant...
There has to be a way for those workers who would loose their jobs in those occupations to make money to live...We just have to think about it a bit more and the answer will come.


----------



## CJS (Oct 2, 2006)

If the pockets of politicians weren't lined by Omega Protein they would have no trouble doing the "environmentally friendly" thing and eliminating the menhaden harvest (and the jobs that go with it) in the Chesapeake Bay. I don't buy the Omega Protein saves jobs argument. 

IMO, the goals of fisheries management groups are skewed by the influence of the majority of their "members". One organization is funded by commercial dollars so they have an interest in a flourishing commercial fishery. Another relies on recreational fisherman's donations or membership dues and so they work for more a of a slice for the recreational fisherman. A third is run by tax dollars and is influenced by politicians who "serve their constituents", or more likely listen with their pockets. All three have the same goal, self preservation. 

The only way to manage fisheries effectively is on an ecosystem based level. Clean water and a managed harvest mean lots of filter feeders. Lots of little fish provide a large forage base for predators and allow those species to maintain their populations during natural cycles like cold kills or bad spawns without over regulation on a species specific level. I know it is not as simple as getting rid of Omega Protein, but imagine how much more resilient the trout population would be if the menhaden population was closer to 25% of historical levels.

That being said, I am also for the reduction of the dogshark population to approximately one or two before the fall.


----------

