RETHINKING BLUEFISH MANAGEMENT

A new benchmark stock assessment for bluefish has just been completed.  The assessment is so new that the entire document is not yet available, although a summary has been posted onthe Northeast Fisheries Science Center’s website.

However, even the summary confirms something that anglers and fisheries managers have both known for years.

Bluefish are predominantly a recreationally caught species, with recreational harvest making up approximately 80% of total removals in recent years.

LINK (via: One Anglers Voyage)

The so-called "Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act"

Don't be fooled by the public relations spin.

H.R. 1335, the so-called Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act, is bad for fish and bad for fisherman.

How bad is it?

“If the President were presented with H.R. 1335, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill."

The Administration strongly opposes H.R. 1335, which would amend the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), because it would impose arbitrary and unnecessary requirements that would harm the environment and the economy. The MSA currently provides the flexibility needed to effectively manage the Nation's marine commercial, recreational, and subsistence fisheries. In contrast, H.R. 1335 would undermine science-based actions to end and prevent overfishing.

As always, Charles Witek delivers the straight scoop.

When a bill’s primary sponsor has to reassure his constituents that his bill won’t hurt them, regardless of how it might impact anyone else, and that their fisheries managers “will continue to use sound scientific data in their management decisions” even if, because of his bill, others stop doing so, it’s a pretty good indication that the guy promoting the bill understands that it has some really big problems.

LINK

That doesn’t sound like “coastal conservation” to me…

Another must read from Charles Witek.

Hatcheries, for example, don’t promote conservation at all.  They are its very antithesis, and represent a profound failure of fisheries management.  Instead of encouraging the use of disciplined, science-based management measures to maintain healthy, naturally-reproducing stocks of fish, they encourage irresponsible use of our fish stocks with the promise that any overfishing will be remedied not through harvest constraints, but by dumping yet another load of man-made fish into the bay.

LINK (via: One Anglers Voyage)

Could Red Drum Management Threaten Striped Bass?

Charles Witek explains why NOAA's recent proposal to open federal waters to redfish harvest could impact striped bass.

LINK (via: One Angler's Voyage)

How Should We Value Striped Bass?

"A good gamefish is too valuable to be caught only once." - Lee Wulff

When the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission put forth striped bass management proposals based on declining stocks, anglers came out overwhelmingly in favor of a one fish bag limit with a minimum size of between 28 and 32 inches.

But a funny thing happened on the way to the forum.

In New York those proposed cuts were watered done by tone deaf MRAC members on behalf of party boat operators.

Chares Witek lays out the conflicts of interest that are at play and asks the question, how do we value striped bass?

The various recreational fishing trade groups that like to pride themselves on the economic engine their members provide should be listening to folks like Charles Witek when it comes to fighting on behalf of striped bass.

Not as an icon that can never be killed, and not at two dollars a pound. 

Instead, it must be valued for what it is, the region’s iconic gamefish, which will always be worth more alive on the water than dead on the dock.

LINK

The Road Ahead

Charles Witek takes a look at the 2015 issues that will be confounding managers in the areas covered by the regional fishery management councils.

LINK