When we speak of DNR it is not the NRP which is the Natural Resources Police. They do not make the DNR policies....just enforce it. Most of the people who work for DNR are sincere, hard working and honest folks trying to make a difference. The problem comes at the TOP which is PURE politics. There are MANY people who work for DNR that are as disgusted as we are. Most folks who don't fish or hunt could care less about DNR policies and the ones that do fish and hunt better get more involved. That is the only way it will change. I think people in general are getting fed up with our political leaders and I see a BIG change coming on...............Gary

I don't think anyone is questioning the NRP or the people who work for DNR. The problem is that the head of DNR is an appointed position. It is TOTALLY political. Until a govenor starts appointing true professionals and subsequent administrations have some continuity; this mess will continue. 5th (Marty)

The deputy secretary of DNR, Eric Schwab just left his position for a federal position in marine fisheries. Lets see what changes come about from that.....Gary

I believe the overall harvest (for Striped Bass) for the east coast is presently 70% recreational catch, 30% commercial.

And yeah, ASMFC meetings are a lot of politics. Just remember without the politics, Maryland would still be a producer state without any harvest.

The ASMFC proposed commercial increase in Striped Bass harvest has nothing to do with the Chesapeake Bay Quota...That's written in stone at 42.5% of the quota.

Bug Guy, I completely agree. The individuals that work DNR are truly trying to do the right thing, and work hard doing it. The job is a labor of love. They could certainly make more money in another occupation. Coming from a scientific background, I can say politics isn’t something most biologists are trained for. I doubt most individuals in DNR have input into policy issues.


Crabby and Son I hope change for the better is in our future. I am just having a hard time figuring out all of the politics, players involved and the subterfuge that goes along with Maryland fisheries management.


Red, I appreciate the input and the numbers. Recently, we were told that C&R of migratory stripers could have an impact on the current population of fish. I will add that little to no significant evidence was given to support this policy. Then we switch gears and possibly up the total allowable catch in another sector. More fish taken and killed = less population and potentially lower spawning numbers. Quota management?????? Population Management????? Management for abundance?????

I just don’t understand the politics behind these decisions :confused:

I guess, I should just crawl back under my rock and hope something miraculous happens.:p

Thanks for letting me vent.

Thanks for the managment education :)

Before the moratorium, the harvest was about equal between rec's and commercial fishermen. Since 1991 the commercial ocean harvest has been increased 5.5 million lbs.(from 1.5 million to 7 million lbs) The rec harvest has increased 25 million lbs. ( from 3.5 million to 28.5 million lbs)

Thank you once again reds. To quote DNR we are taking a cautious approach to management of striped bass. Why would you increase quota in any sector if your doctrine is to be cautious. If anything after there original statement I would expect them to push for more restrictions and tightening of management guideline across the board REC and commercial.

I am going to the TFAC meeting tonight at 6:00pm and see what they have to say.
Tawes state office bldg c1 conference room

Maybe I will learn how things work.


Thanks for the comments everyone

Nut you nailed it. Their "Cautious" approach given some key indicators (according to them) obviously has a message problem now.

Can you say political pandering... :rolleyes:

MD voted in support of the motion to start the discussion on an increase in the coastal commercial quota. There had been an vote last year that failed to carry the same motion. I've been told MD's vote was made in an effort to at least bring the discussion to the table and allow it to take place.

If I'm not mistaken, ASMFC will now draft an addendum with options for an increase.

There will be further discussion, and debate, once some real numbers make it to paper.

Again, I could be wrong, but it sounds like this is an allocation issue, where the rec quota will be reduced to increase the commercial quota. I do not believe an increase in TAC will be an option.

I hope to see many of you at the SFAC meeting next Monday Feb 22nd @ 6pm in Tawes C1. I look forward to hearing what Tom O'Connell has to say with regard to MD's vote.

-D

WHAT does it do for the fishery when you raise one allocation and lower another? That's taking from Peter to pay Paul. Just as I thought, it's for the fisherman and not the fish. As a recreational fisherman, I am not saying , Don't take from me. I am saying don't take as much period...........Gary