ASMFC Striped Bass Draft Addendum III - Plain English Summary

We can go back and see Giant bluefin in dumpsters. Weakfish, bluefish sitting in garbage cans at the dock after a night trip, rotting, because customers left them. All the result of gluttonous recreational fishermen!

And on and on.........

Need to move forward and coexist. One side is not going to give in to the other.
 
You mean like discard from a net? Area was huge!

IMG_8914.webp

IMG_8913.webp
IMG_8911.webp
 
We can go back and see Giant bluefin in dumpsters. Weakfish, bluefish sitting in garbage cans at the dock after a night trip, rotting, because customers left them. All the result of gluttonous recreational fishermen!

And on and on.........

Need to move forward and coexist. One side is not going to give in to the other.
I am not sure I would compare 10 thousand pounds of dead bass rotting on a beach with a rec who kept more fish than he should have. Recs have been educated and we do not need to kill bass, unlike the commercial side. And trust me I am in no way suggesting that commercial fishermen are responsible for what is happening today, because they clearly are not.

I do not view this as us against them. The fact is we are both in this together.
 
i believe the asmfc should look at 1984 striped bass act where hatcheries were used and also introduce fish throughout range to try and give fish a chance remember if managers cause divide between rec and commercial no one is looking at the horrible job they have done where are the flounder ,cinderworms,jellyfish and now small bass.Why are bait stores, charter boats and commercial fisherman being held responsible for there mistakes with no scientific actions taken
 
I am not sure I would compare 10 thousand pounds of dead bass rotting on a beach with a rec who kept more fish than he should have. Recs have been educated and we do not need to kill bass, unlike the commercial side. And trust me I am in no way suggesting that commercial fishermen are responsible for what is happening today, because they clearly are not.

I do not view this as us against them. The fact is we are both in this together.
It doesn't compare but recs have had their own abuses. I think both sides are more aware of waste and try to limit it.
 
Hawk my friend, you’re right about the hatcheries. When all was said and done they figured the introduced bass made up about five percent of the biomass. Not many people even realize that it worked.


We’re on the same page about management dropping the ball. For a politician, nothing is easier than kicking a problem down the road. Isn’t that what they do? And there’s nothing easier to ignore than something under the sea. That’s a recipe for disaster. We put all this time and effort into gathering data, have the scientists build a plan, and then watch it get tossed aside or twisted to fit a political agenda. The science gets ignored until their backs are against the wall. That’s exactly where we are today.
 
I’ve been running the numbers and it’s plain the board doesn’t have the guts to get this done. They set the rules to hit the target, and here’s how they just reacted:

The Board stripped out the 60% probability options in the August 2025 Atlantic Striped Bass Draft Addendum III from the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission.

They also pulled the ocean size limit options out of the same addendum.

Now the whole focus is on a 12% reduction that only gives a 50% shot at rebuilding.

Think about that. They are settling for a coin flip. A 50/50 chance that we avoid a shutdown in two years. They couldn’t even fight for a 60% chance. Is this really the best they can do for the number one targeted fish on the East Coast?

To me, it looks like they are setting this up so they can miss the target, let the feds shut it down, so our politicians can wash their hands of it.
 
I just wish they would stop using that 50% number which was validated in court when one group called them out on their 50%itis and a judge said that was OK. Based on that the states that refuse to take any bold steps will always cling to the 50% plan since it's usually the least onerous.

Even if they 12% reduction works, and they hit the target in 2029, it will only be a few short years more before the dearth of young fish will rear it's ugly head and force more severe cutbacks.
 
anyone who thinks any of there science works should consider the fact that they say flounder is not overfished and the stock is ok before any cuts should be done they should have a plan put in place that address catch and release mortality circle hooks has proven to not address that problem .predator pray issue from when they are embryo till there death we are told it could be zooplankton we know they use study this but stoped in around 2002 the thing some people dont realize is that comm fish bait and tackle stores and charterboats dont have margins that people may think and the fact is how many times can a govt agency be wrong and doesnt face any oversight
 
Ok so are you suggesting a commercial and recreational moritorium instead of a 12% reduction?
What I'm saying is that without identifying and resolving why the YOY count has abysmal for the last 6 years Addendum III is worthless in any shape or form, It's clear that we're screwed in the not so distant future no matter WTH they decide for Addendum III which is solely focused on 2029. That is, the year which 2 of the failed spawn generations, 2020 & 2021, should be spawning, which will guarantee that the spawning biomass numbers will plummet.

Addendum III has become an exercise in futility. That's the elephant in the room that everyone seems to be ignoring!!
 
Just seems a 12% reduction means nothing if the YOY issue is not addressed. I know you've been beating the drum about it and I agree. The biomass will take a sharp downward turn without recruitment. I would hope it might be a cyclical anomoly but it doesn't seem that way.
 
After decades of watching fisheries get mismanaged, I’ve grown numb to all the moving parts. In the end, none of it matters. The biologists set the number they want, and that’s it. What we think doesn’t count. The only thing they ask us is how we want to split up what they decide we can take. Anything outside of that is off the table. It’s always “how do you want to get there,” never “how did we get here.”

@hawk375 I’m with you on revisiting the C&R number. MA studies suggest it’s closer to 5%, but you know damn well ASMFC isn’t touching that now. And show me one study that proves circle hooks don’t work, because I can’t stand them. I want to set a hook. Why no mention of the MA study showing 63% mortality with gill nets? Maybe commercial should be hook and line only.

And here’s the part you keep leaving out: rec anglers pump billions into local economies. You’re not the only ones making a living on the water. You’re lucky to get 100–200 tags a year. Most guys won’t take that many bass in their lifetime.
 
Why no mention of the MA study showing 63% mortality with gill nets? Maybe commercial should be hook and line only.

Exactly!

And here’s the part you keep leaving out: rec anglers pump billions into local economies.

That part is always left out!!
 
no mention because its fake news just like circle hooks trumps order bring back american seafood not Japanese outboards and china tackle make America great again
 

Fishing Reports

Latest articles

Back
Top