Hey Philk999

[reds]

Here's the answer to your question on the other board (C&P) that no one seems to be able to answer. All the know it all boys either haven't been fishing long enough or haven't lived in the state long enough to even be familiar with how the ASMFC manages.

Striped Bass is managed by Amendment 6 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Striped Bass.

The Goal of Amendment 6 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Striped Bass is:
“To perpetuate, through cooperative interstate fishery management, migratory stocks of striped bass; to allow commercial and recreational fisheries consistent with the long-term maintenance of a broad age structure, a self-sustaining spawning stock; and also to provide for the restoration and maintenance of their essential habitat.”
In support of this goal, the following objectives are recommended for Amendment 6:
• Manage striped bass fisheries under a control rule designed to maintain stock size at or above the target female spawning stock biomass level and a level of fishing mortality at or below the target exploitation rate.
• Manage fishing mortality to maintain an age structure that provides adequate spawning potential to sustain long-term abundance of striped bass populations.
• Provide a management plan that strives, to the extent practical, to maintain coastwide consistency of implemented measures, while allowing the States defined flexibility to implement alternative strategies that accomplish the objectives of the FMP.
• Foster quality and economically viable recreational, for-hire, and commercial fisheries.

Fishing Mortality Target & Threshold (2.5.1)
The striped bass fishing mortality threshold under Amendment 6 is the fishing mortality rate that allows for maximum sustainable yield (Fmsy), currently estimated to be 0.41. Amendment 6 also establishes a fishing mortality target of F=0.30, which equates to an exploitation rate of 24%. This target (F=0.30) provides a higher long–term yield from the fishery and adequate protection to ensure that the striped bass population is not reduced to a level where the spawning potential is adversely affected.
There are two areas where the fishing mortality target is lower than the rest of the East Coast, the Chesapeake Bay and the Albemarle Sound/Roanoke River. To compensate for the smaller minimum size limit granted to both of these areas, the target fishing mortality is set a F=0.27.

For more info see Amendment 6, located on the ASMFC website

[PhilK999]

Hi Reds, Thanks for trying to answer my question, but I hate to admit I am stupid and that is all legalize or science that I do not understand.

There was an easily definable trigger to open the fishery from the moratorium, and it was a 3 year average YOY index above 8, so there must be a trigger to either start to rachet it back or shut it down.

What I saw in your answer was that we are striving for maintaining a maximum sustainable yeild estimated to be 0.41% and our fishing mortality rate in the bay is F=0.27. Those numbers means nothing to me, but a YOY index average under 8 or trying to maintain a population of spawning age fish at a particular number would make sense to me.

Can you tell me what you response translates to in data that I may be familiar with, if that is even possible?

[reds]

Originally Posted by PhilK999

Hi Reds, Thanks for trying to answer my question, but I hate to admit I am stupid and that is all legalize or science that I do not understand.

There was an easily definable trigger to open the fishery from the moratorium, and it was a 3 year average YOY index above 8, so there must be a trigger to either start to rachet it back or shut it down.

What I saw in your answer was that we are striving for maintaining a maximum sustainable yeild estimated to be 0.41% and our fishing mortality rate in the bay is F=0.27. Those numbers means nothing to me, but a YOY index average under 8 or trying to maintain a population of spawning age fish at a particular number would make sense to me.

Can you tell me what you response translates to in data that I may be familiar with, if that is even possible?

The 3 year average is not for over all management. The biomass of productive females is the key. If it falls below the level that ASMFC has set. Then heavy restrictions set in. Also if the mortality rate for the bay exceeds F=.27 then restrictions on catch are enacted.

The mortality rate for the bay in 2007 was F=.10.
There is a 2 year lag on data. 2008 data will be available at the end of this summer.

The over all quota for the Chesapeake for 2010 was reduced 6%.

[Skip]

That two year lag worries me.

Far too many good anglers / guides / charters are reporting the number of big Rock as being much less then just a few years ago. Not just in Md but up and down the coast.

There has to be a better / faster way to get info to ASMFC.

[reds]

Originally Posted by Skip

That two year lag worries me.

Far too many good anglers / guides / charters are reporting the number of big Rock as being much less then just a few years ago. Not just in Md but up and down the coast.

There has to be a better / faster way to get info to ASMFC.

The 2 year lag has been going on since the moratorium was taken off in 1991.

Patterns change. The Stripers didn't used to gather off the mouth of the bay in the winter. Pattern changed (weather) then they did. Pattern changed (weather) and they were back off the Carolina coast. Same thing is happening up the coast.

[Skip]

Not trying to be smart - picture computers in 1991 vs now.

There has to be a better way to get ASMFC updated / current info with today's computer systems.

Picture the old system of mailing letters - 3-5 days vs E mail of today that takes 3-5 seconds.

You have to wonder if info two years old is of any worth.

[reds]

Originally Posted by Skip

Not trying to be smart - picture computers in 1991 vs now.

There has to be a better way to get ASMFC updated / current info with today's computer systems.

Picture the old system of mailing letters - 3-5 days vs E mail of today that takes 3-5 seconds.

You have to wonder if info two years old is of any worth.

The best time to count the large Stripers is when they are massed in the ocean in the winter. To my knowledge winter only happens once a year and it takes time to assemble data. I'm sure budget constraints also enter into the 2 year cycle.

If you don't think 2 years data is of any worth, you may want to talk to the US government about the Census (10 year cycle). It's been working for 2 hundred plus years

[crabby and son]

Originally Posted by reds

The best time to count the large Stripers is when they are massed in the ocean in the winter. To my knowledge winter only happens once a year and it takes time to assemble data. I'm sure budget constraints also enter into the 2 year cycle.

If you don't think 2 years data is of any worth, you may want to talk to the US government about the Census (10 year cycle). It's been working for 2 hundred plus years

The census has remained a steady slow climb for the past 100 years BUT the last 10 years has been a huge climb and very different too Hate to see the next census. Sometimes 2 year old data is good but not in this case ASMFC.........Gary

[Skip]

Two years - government time - now it makes more sense.

Still should be a way to rely daily catch numbers on the survey boats.

My real worry - all the big Rock taken the last few years are not being accounted for - now. By 2012 - might be far fewer then the two year old info tells them.

Tough to compare people census to a fish count.

[reds]

Originally Posted by crabby and son

The census has remained a steady slow climb for the past 100 years BUT the last 10 years has been a huge climb and very different too Hate to see the next census. Sometimes 2 year old data is good but not in this case ASMFC.........Gary

So tell me what is bad about ASMFC's data? Could it be, it's not what you want to hear? Don't believe everything you read about the doom & gloom. Most that are preaching doom and gloom have an agenda.