Striped Bass Roll Over Quota!

[Capt.Castafly]

The meeting of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission took place on Monday, November 2nd at Goat Island, Newport Rhode Island. There was a lengthy delay of some thirty minutes before the proceedings. I surmise this time was spent as a last minute attempt to align constituents. Finally at 1:45 pm the meeting began.

The usually business was reported by several advisory groups to the whole panel. A synopsis of the current striper stock was given in chart form using PowerPoint. Most charts were too small for all to see. Two of the more interesting discussions were centered on the Microbacterialosis and poaching issues. More investigating was required. No one knew the direct impact on either topic but felt it was substantial on the stock assessment. Further studies were recommended. Discussion tabled.

Finally after more than an hour and half, the debate about Article II began. Several constituents made opening statements. Those in favor of the “Roll over Quota” seem to center around the scientific studies done in various areas. Their argument was the numbers were not below the level of sustaining the level of striped bass. All but three studies done by most of the coastal states showed a decline. Maryland, Connecticut, and New York showed a slight increase. There argument, the committee policy dictates a three year norm of a negative slope before any changes can be made.

Those against the “Roll Over” expressed their views by the current trends of the fishery. Most constituent’s felt that their views were a representation of the populous of fishermen given thru e-mails, letters, and phone call. The public attending were given only a small amount of time for discussion. Only three were given the opportunity to speak. Finally after lengthy discussions and a one minute caucus the roll call vote was polled individually by each coastal state. Final tally count for Amendment II, four in favor of a roll-over, eleven were against.

Immediately afterward, the principle supporter of the amendment asked to make revisions. After lengthy discussions and another panel vote, she was ruled “out of order with parliamentary procedures.

The recreational anglers, who care about the future stock of striped bass, know that this is not the end. Commercials will test the water again either by extending the seasons, larger quotas, or size limits, possible trying to enlarge the Exclusive Economic Zone. Most rec's are willing to make concessions if in fact it benifits the stock.

Capt. Doug Jewett from Brunswick, ME came a long way to express his views and opinions. Doug eloquently expressed the poor conditions along the Maine and New Hampshire coast the last few seasons. He handed out ball caps with the theme “No Roll Over” that helped give a visual message of those in attendance. If you have a love/passion about striped bass you need to stay informed on the subject.

[whitey]

thanks capt ... not sure what it means but if you were there it was important

[20/4 a table]

That's great news

[BassAddict]

Yes thanks for posting the good news, and thanks to those that attended and spoke to help defeat the rollover.

Now, if we can just get them to vote on cutting the recreational take in half (1 fish/person)!

As far a Micobacteria - I caught two this year that most likely had it - sunken belly, missing scales, red lines - nasty!

[Yardguy71]

Originally Posted by whitey

thanks capt ... not sure what it means but if you were there it was important

Hope this helps.

It means that XXX amount of Stripers to maintain the healthy stock ,
and their findings show that XXX +10 are available (so to speak)
So they would "roll over" the +10 to next years stock #'s so by voting FOR
a roll over they would "increase " the numbers for harvest next year .

They voted against it . Which would be relative to what we have seen this year, which is a definitive decline for "most" of the coastal
states ,seems the upper northern most states frequented by migratory striped bass has seen the decline the most.
BUT according to their policy the won't acknowledge a decline in the fishery till AFTER a 3 year slide in the stocks .

Which to me should be monitored on a year by year basis rather than over the course of a 3 year total to show a slope or a slide in the fishery.

I am sure everyone involved in the fishery (Rec's and commercial guys)
can agree unanimously that this year has been a off year ,
The things we expected to happen "fish wise" never did or even if you can argue that the migration went as expected it was definitely NOT what it should have been .

[Tduffy]

Great news.

My thanks go out to Capt Jewett. I understand the Maine presence there was a major factor.