Holy Crap!!

[5th Tuition]

Again; I can live with either option. I am no longer associated with a charter (as mate). I am strictly a rec angler, and what I say is strictly opinion.

1) I was (and still am) confused as to why the specific group who initiated and got behind PSCR restrictions (the Md Charter Boat Assoc.) and testified so strongly against it; now wants to impose a slot limit (C/R) on trophy fish.

2) Yes, it was Brian Keene who testified (on record) that all the slot fish the charters returned to the water, died. A panel of other charter captains, commercial fishermen, and rec. organization (MSSA and maybe CCA also), sat there and NOONE disputed this comment. PSCR was vilified. I had to sit and listen to stories about trollers dragging the cows through the water and stressing them to the point that they possibly released their eggs, or even died.
Now, the MCBA wants to C/R trophies 36 inches to 40 inches. Why?

3) I truly believe that most (maybe 95%, with cold water) survive C/R. Therefore, I think for the sake of conservation, the slot option will benefit the rock population.

4) I don't want to get into a pissin contest over this, because as I said, I can live with either option. I just scratch my head and wonder why? Perhaps, the MCBA believes that all those 38-39 inch fish we caught last year have grown another couple inches and we will see many more over 40 fish this year. Perhaps, the MCBA was afraid that even more restrictions were coming down the pike, and this was a way to "get ahead" of more restrictions. I don't know.

5) If the slot option is adopted, I do fully intend to ask DNR to "scope" the rod restriction for PSCR. DNR will have, in effect, supported C/R as a CONSERVATION tool.

These types of topics allow "speculation" to run rampant on fishing boards. My original post was to inform those on CBA that a new option was being thrown into the mix at what I consider, a late date. I had been lead to believe that the 36" and over was going to be the option presented. I guess I should know by now that "it ain't over till it's over"; and anything can change in Md. if you have somebodies ear.

the end
5th

[5th Tuition]

Originally Posted by Shore Thing

To each his own but I think fishery rules and regs should be skewed toward the commercial fishermen. They are doing it to make a living. Rec fishermen should be in it for the fun.

Are you serious? In todays world, everything has to be fair!!! We can't have something skewed toward one group.

Do you want to turn on your TV to watch BassMasters or Roland Martin and see recreational fishermen with their hands up and saying "recreational fun fishing matters"



Just my attempt at humor Shore Thing
If the slot keeps me from bringing home a full cooler this year, but makes more fish available next year (and for years to come); all is good.
5th

[Shore Thing]

Life isn't fair Marty. Haha.

[B-Faithful]

Originally Posted by Shore Thing

To each his own but I think fishery rules and regs should be skewed toward the commercial fishermen. They are doing it to make a living. Rec fishermen should be in it for the fun. Plus commercial fishermen pay exponential more in license and fees. Fees being the cost to obtain the license. Recreational fishermen need to make some concessions to help the fishery. I feel the same way about crabs.

I am someone who believes strongly in individual freedoms. We need to protect the access and opportunity to do for oneself. People shouldnt have to buy their fish if they are willing and able to fish themselves. Open access to the public resource should be provided for ahead of any special limited entry. (google: public trust doctrine)

This is the model for most public state resources too. Fish such as redfish, rockfish (in nearly half the Atlantic States), snook, etc. are all allocated to benefit individual access first. It is also how other resources such as wild game like deer, goose, etc. are all managed as well.

As far as sport fishing being merely for ones pleasure. I suggest you ask Bill if he builds boats for his mere pleasure, ask Keith if he runs AllTackle for his mere pleasure, or Billy at ShoreTackle, ask Jim at BOE who he sells the bulk of his electronics too and if he does it for pleasure, ask the owners of many marine businesses (such as marinas boat dealers, guides, charters etc.) in this state if they operate out of mere pleasure. Do you insure recreational fishing boats for your mere pleasure? Our state sport fishery is driven by striped bass. I know people arent buying 100k 27 Judge's to fish for white perch, catfish and croaker.

You also bring up fees.. resource management is mostly paid for on the backs of sportsmen due to the shear numbers of people participating. Go to the DNR site and see where the money is generated. The sport fishing industry drives far greater tax revenue. State sales tax (fuel, gear, boats, trucks, trailers, etc.), license and fees, 10% federal excise tax on all our gear (wallop breaux),... Heck, DNR is desperate to raise the numbers of recreational license sales so that they qualify for more Wallop Breaux money from the feds- Like $2 mil more) Most commercially harvested rockfish are going out state and we never see sales tax. Cost of gear is written off against profits and there are far fewer of them due to limited entry.

Given your philosophy, maybe I should run with it and advocate we go to limited entry on the sportsmen side and only let those with limited professional guides licenses to fish the trophy season If you want to keep a fish during the trophy season you need to fish with licensed charter. After all charters are just trying to make a living You just have all the money wrapped in your boat merely for pleasure so you dont count (at least as much).

[Shore Thing]

Not saying to do away with recreational rockfishing. Just saying if you really want to help the fishery recreation fishermen should concede more. The charter industry is in a tuff spot within the industry and I see why you tAke the stand you do. Charter fishing in my opinion is a commercial fishery subject to recreational regulations. We could go back and forth for hours regarding financial impacts but I'm not suggesting any drastic moves to impact business as I really don't think the fishery is in such bad shape.

[B-Faithful]

Originally Posted by Shore Thing

Not saying to do away with recreational rockfishing. Just saying if you really want to help the fishery recreation fishermen should concede more. The charter industry is in a tuff spot within the industry and I see why you tAke the stand you do. Charter fishing in my opinion is a commercial fishery subject to recreational regulations. We could go back and forth for hours regarding financial impacts but I'm not suggesting any drastic moves to impact business as I really don't think the fishery is in such bad shape.

I dont think the fishery is in dire straights either. However I do hold the ASMFC accountable to ensure we are not over-fished. I am hopeful that the 25% reduction on the SSB will be effective.

I must note that I take the position of recreational fishing ahead of charter fishing. I view charter fishing as facilitating fishing for oneself. We are hired to enable people to fish for themselves, not catch the fish for them. We can instruct and teach but they catch the fish. Also, though I have a limited entry license, I am against guide/charter licenses from being limited entry. I think anyone who takes the time to become USCG certified, buys the licenses, safety gear, insurance (I think there should be an insurance requirement by law in order to protect passengers -think you might like that ), and registers their trips and catch should be able to offer for-hire services. I am a free market guy and it would provide better public access to our resources.

As far as rockfish in the commercial market in Maryland goes, they make up a small percentage of the overall landing value according to NOAA. As far as actually MD harvested seafood goes, we are typically 85% or so non-finfish dependent with crabs, oysters, clams, etc. driving our harvest value. Even still, the vast majority of our seafood industry fincancially is driven by imported seafood. Seafood distributors, grocery stores, and restaurants have plenty of other product to supply them even if rockfish was declared a gamefish, which I dont think is necessary either. However I do believe protecting individual access should priority over protecting special privileges.

[Shore Thing]

Agreed. My original point was if they are going to make changes to rec. regs then do something worthwhile that really helps the fishery and dont appease someone's agenda. Which I feel has happened with the slot limit and over 40. Whether it be MSSA or the charter industry. But I guess that's how politics work.

[B-Faithful]

I actually think this slot limit is going to be more effective than what people think. My bet is that it results is far greater than a 25% reduction. Vast majority of fish over the last couple of years will be in that no-take slot this year. Look at the numbers in the link i posted above to see how effective they were the last time too. (There was ~45% reduction over the previous year and participation went up -http://www.tidalfish.com/forums/showthread.php/345081-2013-SB-Stock-Assessment-Summary?p=2039561&viewfull=1#post2039561 )

I dont know about you but the fish over 40" make up a small percentage of what is caught. I think it is great that people will be able to weigh and check in a state citation. The popularity of the trophy season is due to people being able to keep a fish of lifetime.

Where I think the no-take slot will hurt is in recreation violations. DNR is going to have to be real-clear on how fish are measured. For me I have always flat tailed measure just to make sure we are over a mark. What happens if an officer can squeeze a tail a tad more than the boat did. A 35.5" fish can go over 36" with a tail squeeze. A flat ruler vs a tape that curves on the fish can add a 1/4" or more too. DNR noted that there was a significant increase in violations with the last time we had a no-take slot. Hopefully they will do a good job at notifying and education to help reduce that. Also if they are in place multiple years, participants will have a better understanding.

[Shore Thing]

Agree again. Only thing I disagree with is people can still go home with the fish of a lifetime with a picture and a tape measure. The majority of the fish I caught last year were 38-39 inches. I wonder if that is the class of fish they are trying to protect but will be 40 inches this year and kept. Will be interesting to see to say the least.

[B-Faithful]

While I am a big catch and release guy myself, I will argue to look at participation levels of when people can keep big fish from when they cannot. The trophy season has very high levels of participation over the short period of time because people can catch and keep big fish. I see this with my charters too. People are asking when the season opens to keep fish. When I offer earlier season catch and release trips 9/10 say they want to wait until they can keep the fish even if I offer the C&R only trips at a discount. Sportsmen have a long tradition of celebrating the biggest fish. There are a lot of charters who charge more during the trophy season because of the demand to catch and keep big fish.