RI - Amendment 6 meetings - Wednesday Night - who is going?

[Ed B]

Last nights meeting really showed the importance of Showing Up and participating in the process. The party and charter boat association was well prepared in expressing their desires for 2 fish and minimal phase-in for catch reduction. As others mentioned, then most of the recreational fisherman (with the exception of RISAA) started voicing their opinions for 1 fish with the maximum 25 % reduced catch. You could see considerable consternation on the faces of some of the charter captains when so many recreational anglers were in favor of the max reduction.

KUDOS to all who attended and spoke up and especially Charlie Donilon, captain of the charter boat SNAPPA for advocating reducing to 1 fish. He may not be the most popular guy in Pt Judith today but he's got my respect.

[Liv2Fish]

Why the #^&#^&#^&#^& is it up to what the majority wants to see happen. I could see if there is a single mathematical end result and we have to decide on which road to take to get to that same result. Shouldn't the "scientists" enforce what they believe to be required to allow the stock to recover?

The bitching and complaining from either side(s) should have no bearing on what gets done. Our collective input should only be considered to vet out the "science" We've all seen the same thing - steady decline to the point where we all agree they're in danger.

[DZ]

Just read the Projo fishing report by Dave Monti? - had a few paragraphs about the meeting last night - mentioned the charter boat recommended options along with RISAA's position. Nothing about the feedback at the meeting supporting a one fish bag.

[piemma]

Originally Posted by DZ

Just read the Projo fishing report by Dave Monti? - had a few paragraphs about the meeting last night - mentioned the charter boat recommended options along with RISAA's position. Nothing about the feedback at the meeting supporting a one fish bag.

So does anyone think Monti gives a &^%? His report yesterday stated that someone caught a 28" bass near Conimicut Light. A 28" bass and this guy writes a weekly column for the only paper of note that is published in "THE OCEAN STATE" and he thinks a 28" fish is noteworthy! Please save me! He's looking out for his charter business. Not that there would be anything wrong with that if the Striper stocks were health.

[Ed B]

I think Monti writes a decent column when it comes to fishing, but when acting as a reporter there is a conflict of interest to have a charter captain biasing his assessment to the point where he did not even mention the fact that the audience which was overwhelmingly recreational was voting for the one fish option. In addition, there were other charter captains including several from Block Island represented by Zach Harvey who wanted to see the one fish option. That to me was one of the most significant revelations of the meeting and there was absolutely no mention of it by a man who was present and should be acting as a reporter of news events.

[JohnR]

I might have been approached by him Wednesday night, he asked me what forum, I told him. And he goes message boards and reports, right?

I said no reports, we try not to burn spots. His smile faded away, said thank you, he'd check it out, and left.

I have no problem with the guy, but his story was rather one sided, which one can assume is bias.

[bobber]

Originally Posted by Liv2Fish

Shouldn't the "scientists" enforce what they believe to be required to allow the stock to recover?

.

thats the fundamental problem with the way ASMFC operates- they are accountable to no one, and can be as capricious as they damn well please. they frequently ignore their own scientists' best advice

[JohnR]

[QUOTE=goosefish;1051869]

Originally Posted by JohnR

John - I didn't see you (or maybe not recognize you as it has been 7-8 years?)


I was up in the back sitting next to Zach. I should've said hello but my head hurt from too much Spawning Stock Biomass and F-mortality. I bolted for home.

Haha

Originally Posted by Liv2Fish

Why the #^&#^&#^&#^& is it up to what the majority wants to see happen. I could see if there is a single mathematical end result and we have to decide on which road to take to get to that same result. Shouldn't the "scientists" enforce what they believe to be required to allow the stock to recover?

The bitching and complaining from either side(s) should have no bearing on what gets done. Our collective input should only be considered to vet out the "science" We've all seen the same thing - steady decline to the point where we all agree they're in danger.

I don't think that would be best either. Scientifically the best way is to close all fishing and some scientist might just do that. So in lieu of that we get the pi$$ing contests, ahem, fisheries meetings. There is no balance in the Force.

[Dick Durand]

Interesting development - RISAA has altered its previous position and is now recommending one fish larger than 30".

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by #^&#^&#^&#^& Durand

Interesting development - RISAA has altered its previous position and is now recommending one fish larger than 30".

Very interesting - and good to hear

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by #^&#^&#^&#^& Durand

Interesting development - RISAA has altered its previous position and is now recommending one fish larger than 30".

"You don’t need a weatherman
To know which way the wind blows

Get sick, get well
Hang around a ink well
Ring bell, hard to tell
If anything is goin’ to sell"