Recreational Anglers Deserve an Apology

I've Been Saying This All Along: Recreational Anglers Deserve an Apology​

The data is finally in, and it proves what we've known for years—we were never the problem.
For over a decade, recreational striped bass anglers have been treated like criminals. We've endured slot limits, bag restrictions, circle hook mandates, and season closures—all based on the premise that we were killing millions of fish through catch-and-release mortality. Fisheries managers pointed their fingers at us, blamed us for the decline of the striped bass population, and implemented increasingly draconian regulations that strangled an entire industry. Charter captains lost their livelihoods. Tackle shops closed their doors. Coastal communities that depended on recreational fishing tourism watched their economies crumble.
And all along, I've been saying the same thing: the science was wrong, and recreational anglers were being scapegoated.
Now, after a comprehensive analysis of Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) data spanning 2014 to 2024, the numbers tell a story that vindicates everything I've been arguing. The flawed 9% release mortality rate that regulators used to justify punishing restrictions? It was inflated by a factor of two. The actual rate is closer to 4.5%. That difference isn't just a statistical footnote—it represents 13.16 million striped bass that were wrongly attributed as dead due to recreational fishing over the past eleven years.
Thirteen million fish. Let that sink in.
That's 13 million striped bass that managers claimed we killed, that we were blamed for, that we were punished for—fish that never died in the first place. Those phantom mortalities became the foundation for regulations that devastated our community, destroyed businesses, and painted recreational anglers as the villains in the striped bass conservation story.

The Damage Has Been Done​

The economic and social toll of these misguided regulations cannot be overstated. When you tell a charter captain in Massachusetts or Maryland that they can only keep one fish per trip, or that their season is cut short because anglers are "killing too many fish," you're not just imposing a rule—you're destroying a way of life. You're telling families who have fished these waters for generations that they can't be trusted. You're shutting down businesses that employ dozens of people and contribute millions to local economies.
The recreational fishing industry supports over 472,000 jobs nationwide and generates more than $68 billion in economic output annually. In striped bass fisheries alone, the economic impact runs into the hundreds of millions when you account for charter operations, tackle sales, boat maintenance, lodging, restaurants, and fuel. Every time regulators tightened the noose on recreational anglers based on faulty mortality assumptions, they weren't just affecting a few weekend fishermen—they were crippling entire coastal economies.
And for what? To solve a problem that didn't exist in the magnitude they claimed.

I've Been Saying This All Along​

I didn't need a comprehensive data analysis to know something was wrong. Any angler who has spent serious time on the water understands fish behavior, water temperature, handling techniques, and survival rates better than any laboratory study conducted in artificial conditions. We've watched our released fish swim away strong. We've seen firsthand how proper handling and quick releases result in healthy, viable fish returning to the population.
But when we raised these concerns, we were dismissed. When we questioned the 9% mortality rate, we were told to trust the science. When we pointed out that the models didn't match our real-world observations, we were accused of being biased, of putting our own interests ahead of conservation.
We were right. They were wrong.
The 9% release mortality rate came from studies that didn't adequately account for variables like water temperature, handling time, hook type, and angler experience. It was a one-size-fits-all number applied to a complex, dynamic fishery. Worse, it was used as a blunt instrument to justify regulations that treated all anglers as if they were equally careless, equally destructive.
The reality, as this new analysis demonstrates, is that the actual mortality rate is approximately 4.5%—half of what regulators claimed. This isn't a minor adjustment. This is a fundamental error that has shaped policy for more than a decade.

Where the Blame Really Belongs​

If recreational anglers aren't responsible for the mortality levels that managers claimed, then where should the focus be? The striped bass population has faced legitimate challenges—there's no denying that. But instead of honestly examining all the contributing factors, regulators took the easy route: blame the most visible, most politically convenient target.
Commercial bycatch in other fisheries continues to kill striped bass with little accountability. Habitat degradation from coastal development, pollution, and warming waters affects spawning success and juvenile survival. Forage base collapse due to overfishing of menhaden and other baitfish has left striped bass struggling to find adequate nutrition. Predation from recovering seal populations and other species takes a toll that's rarely quantified in management models.
These are complex, difficult problems that require cooperation across multiple jurisdictions, industries, and interest groups. It's far easier to impose restrictions on recreational anglers—a diffuse, politically weak constituency—than to tackle the harder issues that involve powerful commercial interests or require significant investment in habitat restoration.
But easy doesn't mean right. And the cost of taking the easy route has been borne by the very people who care most about striped bass conservation: recreational anglers.

It's Time for Accountability​

Fisheries managers owe recreational anglers an apology. They owe charter captains an apology. They owe tackle shop owners, marina operators, and coastal communities an apology. But more than apologies, we deserve action.
First, the ASMFC and state fisheries agencies must immediately revise their stock assessments to reflect accurate release mortality rates. Every management decision based on the inflated 9% figure needs to be reconsidered. Slot limits, bag limits, and seasonal closures should be reevaluated in light of this new understanding.
Second, regulators must commit to transparency and stakeholder engagement in the development of mortality estimates. Anglers aren't just users of the resource—we're stewards, observers, and experts in our own right. Our input should be valued, not dismissed.
Third, management agencies need to shift their focus to the real threats facing striped bass populations. Stop using recreational anglers as scapegoats and start addressing commercial bycatch, habitat loss, forage base depletion, and environmental factors that genuinely impact fish survival.
Finally, there must be accountability for the economic damage inflicted by regulations based on faulty science. While we can't undo the past decade of harm, we can ensure that future management decisions are grounded in sound data and honest analysis rather than convenience and political expediency.

Moving Forward​

I take no pleasure in being proven right. I would have preferred that the science had been accurate from the start, that recreational anglers had been treated fairly, and that the past decade of restrictions had been based on solid evidence rather than inflated assumptions. But here we are.
The question now is: what will fisheries managers do with this information? Will they acknowledge their mistakes and adjust course? Or will they double down, find new justifications for the same restrictive policies, and continue to treat recreational anglers as the problem?
The data is clear. The evidence is undeniable. Recreational anglers have been unjustly blamed for killing 13.16 million striped bass that never died. We've been penalized, restricted, and demonized based on flawed science.
It's time for that to end. It's time for fisheries managers to look elsewhere, to address the real issues facing striped bass populations, and to stop using recreational anglers as convenient scapegoats.
I've been saying this all along. Now the numbers prove it.
The striped bass fishery deserves better management. Recreational anglers deserve respect and fair treatment. And coastal communities deserve policies based on facts, not fiction.
Let's start rebuilding trust. Let's start making decisions based on accurate data. And let's finally give recreational anglers the recognition they deserve—not as the problem, but as part of the solution.