FISHERIES MANAGEMENT & LEGISLATIVE REPORT
by TOM FOTE
(from Jersey Coast Anglers Association - November 1996 Newspaper)
ATLANTIC STATES MARINE FISHERIES COMMISSION WEEK
SUMMER FLOUNDER SCUP & SEA BASS
OCEAN DUMPING: AN OPEN LETTER TO GOVERNOR CHRISTINE TODD WHITMAN
DOING OUR FAIR SHARE: HOOK AND RELEASE MORTALITY
ATLANTIC STATES MARINE FISHERIES COMMISSION WEEK
The ASMFC 55th Annual Meeting took place on October 20-24, 1996 in Hyannis, MA. A report on the results of the meeting will be given at the JCAA meeting on October 29th. Pat Donnelly and I will be attending.
SUMMER FLOUNDER SCUP & SEA BASS
There was a Summer Flounder and Scup Board meeting in September. As usual, there were mixed results. There was a great deal of concern expressed by the scientists that the summer flounder fishery was not recovering as rapidly as it should. Using retrospective analysis, they also discovered we are greatly exceeding our target mortality. When we set up a target quota for a year the results are not what we expect. Why is that happening? Some of the reasons we have exceeded our target quotas by more than double the amount are:
When we consider the results of these three actions along with the failure to allow a recreational bag limit that would approximate our cap, it appears that the recreational sector is catching approximately twenty percent or less of the flounder rather than the forty percent allowed in the management plan. This is another example of a management plan that may look good on paper but is a failure in practice.
There was a motion passed to require a 51/2 inch mesh throughout the net. This should help reduce the bycatch and also limit attempts to circumvent the mesh requirements. The other positive outcome was a motion that would raise the size limit to fourteen inches commercially some time in 1997. This action is long overdue. In my opinion, the commercial size limit in any fisheries management plan should be larger than the recreational size limit. This is due to the efficiency of the commercial gear. In the case of summer flounder, commercial boats were catching twelve to thirteen inch fish before they had opportunity to spawn in the canyon. The reason given to retain the size exemption was that there were only a small number of fish caught at thirteen inches and they shouldn’t be wasted. If you look at the statistics you see that almost thirty percent of their catch was these small fish. It was no longer a bycatch but a targeted part of the overall catch. It’s the same old story, leaving a bycatch in to reduce waste results in a directed fishery. This loophole only allows them to circumvent the size limit. My opinion is that the minimum size for the commercial fishery should be fifteen inches, giving these smaller fish an opportunity to spawn.
Unfortunately the recreational community took it on the chin. The ASMFC Summer Flounder Board promised to reopen the discussion of the 3.1 million pounds due to my request at the previous meeting. The current Northeast Regional Director for the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Dr. Andy Rosenberg, began the discussion by declaring NMFS had decided that 3.1 million pounds "a wash" leaving little hope that the Mid-Atlantic Council would take any action. I made a motion at the Commission level that any fish awarded as a result of judicial action must be paid back. I could not get a second for the motion for discussion . Do I hold the Mid-Atlantic council members and the state directors ASMFC Commissioners responsible for their inaction? No! The commercial community was out in full force to show the commission members and the council members how much grief they would take if they took the 3.1 million pounds out of their quota. The recreational community was not there to show their support. The Commissioners and the Council Members gauge how much controversy each action will create and respond to lessen any negative impact on themselves. If we are not present and vocal, we are easy to ignore. If the recreational community had effected the commercial catch by even half that amount, the commercial community would have created such a controversy that the recreational community would have been required to make a pay back. The recreational voices at the Commission and the Council are seriously outnumbered. They cannot act alone. Check out the story about the Striped Bass meeting. When the recreational community does its homework, positive action can be the result. Do you want to make the 3.1 million pounds an issue with your state directors? If so, this can be resolved at the Commission level. It’s up to you.
The scup plan is a disaster for the recreational community. Dusty Rhodes, Gary Caputi and I have pointed this out numerous times to both the Council and the Commission to no avail. As usual, the commercial community was out in force at the meeting and reacted aggressively at every attempt to modify the plan. Except for the three of us, there was no voice for the recreational community. There were recreational people present, both party and charter boat captains, but only one of them spoke up in two days of meetings. Talking to us individually is not going to change any other votes. People must come prepared to speak before the full Council and Commission. I appreciate that recreational fishermen will take the time to come to these meetings, but unless you speak up, you will not get the results you are hoping for. At the very minimum, you can simply say you support the position taken by a particular Council or Commission member. There is nothing more frustrating than being a member of the Council or Commission, having supporters in the audience and then having no one speak in your support. The commercial interests make sure their supporters attend and speak up as often as possible. They pay people to attend on their behalf. We just don’t show at all.
This is the press release I sent out after the Striped Bass Board vote.
STRIPED BASS BOARD VOTES TO STAY AT 1996 QUOTAS FOR 1997 - September 25, 1996
When the JCAA sent out its action alert on September 9th, we knew there would be a close vote on the issue of a dramatic increase in the Chesapeake Bay commercial quotas. The reason we opposed this unfair increase is that it was too much, too soon, too fast. At the same time there was discussion about a reduction along the coast in the commercial harvest. It was also unfair to the recreational fishermen of the Chesapeake Bay. The present system of calculating the quotas for the recreational fishermen in Chesapeake Bay would not have allowed them a reasonable share of this increase. When the commercial community in the Chesapeake Bay reduced their size limit from 20 inches to 18 inches, they were required to take a penalty, something we assumed would reduce their catch. However, since there are more fish to harvest at 18 inches, the result was an overall increase instead of a decrease. The recreational community in Chesapeake actually took a reduction in the number of days they were allowed to fish when they had the same size limit change from 20 to 18 inches. The same inequity applies to both commercial and recreational fishermen along the entire coast. Only the commercial fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay reap the benefit.
Because of these reasons and a concern about the mortality rate, many Striped Bass Board members felt a conservative approach was appropriate. Freezing everything at the present rate seemed the most prudent action. The opponents of this measure suggested that it lacked true conservation because of the 700,000 pounds additional that would be allowed along the coast. They conveniently ignored the impact of the increase in the Chesapeake Bay that amounts to millions of pounds.
JCAA is aware of the hard work done by many other individuals and organizations in passing this motion. In supporting this motion, JCAA worked with CCA’s from Maine, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, and Maryland, the ASA and its members, The Legal Defense Fund, and the Maryland Sportfishing Association. There were many representatives from these groups prepared to speak in favor of the motion. The Board’s prompt action on the favorable motion made this unnecessary. All the contacts we made before the meeting began must have had an impact on their thinking.
While this may seem to be a victory, it is only a delaying action. We need to develop a comprehensive plan to deal with the new system that goes into effect in 1998. Before the Board even voted to freeze the quota, the representative from Delaware had already proposed an increase from 77,000 pounds to 159,000 pounds in the Delaware Bay. Because New Jersey’s and Pennsylvania’s recreational fishermen in Delaware Bay have been conservative to help restore the stocks, the commercial fishermen in Delaware hope to claim these fish in the commercial quota. There was no proposal to allow a smaller size limit for Delaware’s recreational fishermen. There was a motion to declare the Delaware River restored and allow for a larger increase in the harvest. There will be an addendum to the plan prepared and it will go out to public hearings. JCAA will keep you informed.
The motion that was passed at the Striped Bass Board Meeting is as follows:
That the 1997 management regime be as follows:
Motion by Mr. Driscoll, seconded by Mr. Lesser (this motion was originally made at the July 1996 meeting and was tabled until this meeting)
Motion passed 9 to 8 with no abstentions.
The motion tabled at the July 24th Board Meeting and brought forward and discussed and voted at this meeting contained two major elements: "A) commercial fishing quotas be maintained at the 1996 levels for all jurisdictions and areas B) minimum recreational fishery management provisions be continued." Our understanding is that this means: up to 2 fish at 28 inches for coastal jurisdictions with provision for conservation equivalency as stated in Amendment #5.
Regarding Bay jurisdictions: the 1996 seasons, bags and size limits can be continued with provision for conservation equivalencies.
Nothing in this motion precludes a state from submitting alternative plans in 1997 as long as conservation equivalency is maintained.
On October 7, 1996 I received a phone call suggesting that Maryland was attempting to get the Striped Bass Board to reconsider its motion at the annual meeting. JCAA is working with ASA, CCA chapters along the coast, legislators and other interested individuals to guarantee this doesn’t happen. We need to put pressure on the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service to insure they do not repeat their action of last time. It is absolutely essential that they use their votes to support conservation and keep Maryland from increasing the quota for Chesapeake Bay. Their last "no" vote was a tactical one and not in opposition to freezing Maryland’s quota. They stated they were hoping for an even more conservative approach. This was the reason I did not make an issue of their vote in the press release. Let’s see how they vote in the annual meeting. The other vote that was disturbing was the vote by the Governor’s appointee from Maryland. He was supposed to be voting for all the Governor’s appointees, not just his own interests. Unfortunately he voted not to freeze Maryland’s quota, an action that was not supported by a majority of Governor’s appointees that I have contacted. In the month and a half between the motion and the vote, it appears he never called any other Governor’s appointees to solicit their opinions. It is my opinion that when a you decide to serve as a representative for all the Governor’s appointees on any board, you must put your own personal feelings aside and vote for everyone. If you cannot do this, you should not serve. Over the years when I have represented the Governor’s appointees I have occasionally been required to vote against the interests of my own state and its fishermen because a majority of Governor’s appointees were in favor of a different position. I voted New Jersey out of compliance on three separate occasions and voted in favor of the blackfish management plan at the policy board as Chairman of the Governor’s Appointees despite my personal feelings that it was a poor, politically motivated plan. As chairman of the Governor’s appointees, I tried to set that example.
This is a letter I sent on October 14th when I heard that Maryland was planning to reopen the discussion on increasing the harvest in the Chesapeake Bay.
Dear President Clinton:
I am writing this letter not only for the Jersey Coast Anglers Association but also for the New Jersey Federation of Sports’ Clubs. I am Legislative Chairman for both organizations. Together these two organizations represent 150,000 concerned sportsmen in New Jersey. Both organizations support the motion that froze the 1997 Striped Bass Quotas.
At the last Striped Bass Board meeting of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, the representatives for the National Marine Fisheries Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service voted against a motion that froze the quotas for Striped Bass along the East coast. This was a strong conservation measure that reflected the concerns of the scientists on the Technical Committee. I have enclosed my discussion on the motion for your information. There is a move by Maryland to reopen this issue. Seven states voted for the motion to freeze the quota and four states voted against. One of those states have indicated a change of position. Their original vote was in hope of having a more conservative motion to vote on. The recreational fishermen in all eleven states are in favor of freezing the quota. In at least eight of eleven states, commercial fishermen also agree that freezing the quota is an appropriate action. One of the Service’s explained that they too were hoping for a more conservative motion and only voted against the original motion for that reason. We need the support from both the services in voting for conservation. It has been a long, difficult struggle to bring back the striped bass stocks and we cannot afford to foolishly increase the quota at this time. There are several million recreational anglers in these eleven states who want the services to vote in favor of conservation. We know that you have the authority to direct the two Services to vote for conservation if another vote is taken on this issue and we are counting on you to take the appropriate action. The Striped Bass Board Meeting is on October 21st and the representatives of these services may well be called on to vote on this issue then. Jamie Geiger represents the Fish and Wildlife Service and Dick Schaefer represents the National Marine Fisheries Service. Thank you for your support in this matter.
On October 18 I received another phone call stating that two states might change their vote. By the time you read this the meeting will have taken place. We will be discussing a plan of action at the next JCAA meeting October 29. It will be interesting to see if the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission ignores the recreational sector again. If the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission had listened to public comments and its advisors it would have raised the commercial catch from 20% to 40% under Amendment Five. Instead, Maryland is presently at 100% of what it’s commercial catch was during the base years and the coast is at 70%. The recreational sector, at two fish at twenty-eight inches along the coast and two fish at eight inches with a limited season in the bay, is nowhere near what it was catching during the base years. When are we going to wake up and stop taking it on the chin?
OCEAN DUMPING: AN OPEN LETTER TO GOVERNOR CHRISTINE TODD WHITMAN
Dear Governor Christine Todd Whitman:
I am writing this letter not only for the Jersey Coast Anglers Association but also for the New Jersey Federation of Sports’ Clubs. I am Legislative Chairman for both organizations. Together these two organizations represent 150,000 concerned sportsmen. Both organizations oppose the dumping of contaminated dredge spoils in the ocean
Four years ago during your campaign for Governor, you promised that no contaminated dredge spoils would be dumped into the ocean if you were Governor. JCAA and the NJ Federation of Sportsmen Clubs have heard many campaign promises and have learned to be very skeptical. We have seen more campaign promises broken than kept. Despite tremendous pressure, you have gained our respect by keeping your promise on ocean dumping of contaminated dredge spoils. We understand you were not part of the agreement made between President Clinton and certain environmental groups.
Neither was JCAA nor the Federation. We understand that this agreement puts more pressure on you by leaving the entire problem on your doorstep. You still kept your promise.
You can understand how disappointed we were by the recent joint agreement between you and Governor Pataki. This agreement makes it possible that some contaminated dredge spoils will be dumped in the ocean. The just released advisory issued by New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection on lobster caught at the Mud Dump only confirms our contention that there is no safe amount of contaminated material in the ocean. We are continually reminded of the economic value of the port. What is overlooked is the permanent damage done to the ocean. The economic value of the fishing industry and the health of the consumer seem to get lost. How is it possible to place a dollar value on the future of the ocean and the health of our children. Dioxin is dangerous not only to the people who consume the fish but can cause genetic problems for future generations of people and fish.
You are the only person who can keep this from happening and we are counting on you to continue to keep you campaign promise. Not only can you keep the contaminated dredge spoils out of the ocean but you can continue to show us all that at least one politician, a promise is a promise.
DOING OUR FAIR SHARE: HOOK AND RELEASE MORTALITY
As we force the commercial community to do more to reduce bycatch mortality, it is important for us to set a good example. The JCAA and members continue to investigate additional ways to reduce our hook and release mortality. As the striped bass stocks have increased, methods of recreational fishing that were used when they were in abundance are being used again. It was common practice to chum with grass shrimp in Barnegat Inlet and Bay for striped bass and other species. On Long Island there was chumming with clam bellies and bunkers. All of these methods produced a large number of fish. Back when there were large or non existent bag limits and low size limits, no one was worried about mortality rates. Almost every fish caught went home. It made no difference if a fish was gut hooked or lip hooked. Most of them were keepers. These same tactics are wasteful now when size limits and bag limits require the release of a vast majority of the fish caught.
The biggest problem today is the number of fish gut hooked. The mortality of gut hooked fish is very high compared to lip hooked fish. We must find a way to release the majority of these fish unharmed. Keith Walter and Gary Caputi have written articles suggesting that circle hooks would produce more lip hooked fish. The longliners were the first to use circle hooks, realizing that hooks released more easily from the lip than the gut. Their experience with circle hooks suggests they produce many more lip hooked fish. Fishermen fishing for tarpon in Louisiana have seen the same results. Most of the preliminary data on the East coast have been for larger pelagic species like bluefin tuna. The North Carolina bluefin tuna fishery uses this as a standard hook since most of their fish are hook and release. People who have used the circle hooks report high percentage of fish are lip hooked. At the last Striped Bass board meeting, the mortality of fish caught from chumming in Chesapeake Bay was discussed. There was a discussion on circle hooks. Eagle Claw now offers a wide selection of circle hooks, some light enough and small enough for use even on school size stripers and freshwater species.
The JCAA has contacted hook manufacturers and NJ Sea Grant to develop some projects to study this for next year. We are looking at striped bass, weakfish, summer flounder and other species. When we have news about this study, we will report to you. We may be seeking volunteers.
This is one step in reducing recreational mortality. You have the right to take home fish to eat but it is wasteful to release fish and have them die, especially if there is an alternative. If you have suggestions on how to reduce recreational fish and release mortality, please contact JCAA. We will run any good ideas in the JCAA Newspaper. I hope one of our governmental agencies becomes interested in this topic and becomes a clearing house for information. National Marine Fisheries Service spends millions on commercial fishing gear studies and buying back commercial fishing vessels but have shown no interest in recreational gear.
[Home] [Contents] [Archive Index] [Top]