Ban Gill Netting in the Chesapeake
 

From The Hull Truth


Many of you may be aware of the rampant problem with illegal gill netting of striped bass in the Chesapeake Bay. Literally tons and tons of fish, many breeding stock fish, are being netting illegally and sold out of state. This is a big problem for Maryland and the Striped Bass population as a whole. It is estimated that 75% of all East Coast stripers spawn in the Chesapeake and the illegal netting is having a big impact on the population of these fish along the entire coast.

There is a grass roots effort in Maryland to support a petition that calls for the ban of commercial nets in the Chesapeake Bay. This is not an anti-Commercial fishing initiative, but an effort to ban nets. Nets are indiscriminate and can kill thousands of fish in a single set. Maryland has a long-standing tradition on the Bay and is an important part of the social and economic fabric of many local communities within Maryland. The goal is to ban nets in the Chesapeake with hopes that commercial fisherman will develop a robust and thriving hook-and-line commercial fishery.

Please sign the following petition and spread the word to other anglers. It does not matter if you live in another state. Stripers do not know how to read a map and know no state boundaries.

http://www.petitiononline.com/yrrejmaj/petition.html

These signatures we help to support the long term viability of the fishery!

Caribbean Soul
40 O'Neil Jones

Almost a million and a half pounds will go to another commercial state. $5+ million in sales off the boat. At least $12 million wholesale, out of Maryland and gone somewhere else, on Striped Bass alone..... A net ban would probably mean a loss of about 100 million in revenue to Maryland.

That much additional poundage cannot be caught by hook and line in Maryland because the hook and line yearly quota is not caught now.

OH WELL:rolleyes: Maybe that should have been thought of before all these illegal nets were set. You reap what you sew.:D.Watermen might have to work a 10 hour day hook and lining instead of an hour taking fish from a net.................Gary

What you'll not reap is a loss of a $100 million dollar industry at this time.

Good luck on your petition. Too bad 3/4 are out of state people and wasted their time.

And don't tell me I reap what I sew..... or are you one of the 17 from Baltimore who just got caught with their hand out? After all aren't all policeman crooks?:D

[QUOTE=reds;
And don't tell me I reap what I sew..... or are you one of the 17 from Baltimore who just got caught with their hand out? After all aren't all policeman crooks?:D[/QUOTE]

Reds; since Gary is ex-cop, I'll handle this one for him, as his response might look to be prejudicial.
There are bad apples in every group. Those 17 officers who were caught, will never be officers again. Those watermen who are caught, are back on the water the next day.
I know there are some officers who are also just looking at suspensions, but I don't know their involvement.

I appreciate your opposing views on topics, but you have to make good analogies.
5th (Marty)

When a person tells me "You reap what you sew" He is accusing me of being a poacher. He doesn't like being called a crook, neither do I.

Most waterman who are caught with a fisheries violation, has committed a misdemeanor not a felony.
I believe the laws have been changed this year to address the serious problems.

Like I said. The net industry is worth, very very conservatively $100 million to Maryland and probably 5000 jobs.

Trying to shut an industry down and putting people out of work for 2 poachers is a joke.

Reds, The comment , you reap what you sew was not a comment directed at you unless you are a poacher. You read it as you want to read it. Yes there are bad cops but not 43%. We don't need a $30,000.00 reward to turn the bad cops in. We do it out of pride and self esteem. We don't tolerate the bad cops and accept them as our brothers. If a police officer is charged even with a misdemeanor, chances are he will lose his job. I guess a waterman is an OK guy if he has just been charged with misdemeanors:confused: A waterman is about the only one that keeps his license after 20-50 misdemeanor violations. Even a professional driver or Home Improvement Contractor will lose his license after a few misdemeanor violations. Take, take, take is OVER and we will do the best we can to rid the Chesapeake Bay of nets.Oh , and 2 poachers is a joke too!!!.Instead of spending time on here defending nets, you should go and sharpen your hooks!.......Gary

I've become used to your intent. Usually you mean what you post when a smiley goes behind it.

As far as the 43 percent. I'll ask you what I asked the JCAA and the DNR. Where is the proof?. Guess what there is none. Pure conjecture. The people on Toilet Flush who posted that number, have an agenda. Only parrots repeat everything they hear without verifying if it true or not.

You'll get no argument from me on the numerous violations. They should be stopped from working the water, most are doing it without a license.

Don't hold your breath on the net ban. The hundreds of millions will be the deciding factor as well as the thousands of job. Just make sure, in your pursuit, you don't repeat what you have heard without verification. It happens a lot on Toilet Flush.

Oh and you can take the 2 poachers to the bank.

Reds; when I read Gary's post, I didn't take it as a personal accusation about you. If you took it that way, I can see why you were sensitive.

The only thing I saw was that Gary should have said sow, instead of sew. However, when speaking of nets, I suppose you do sew them sometimes:D.

I took it as a personal insult to his eighth grade english teacher:eek:.

5th (Marty)

I like how the police commissioner took away the crooked cops badges himself.

As a rec, I don't like the recs lumping all watermen in one group as poachers. Not that that is what Gary was doing but it comes across that way. But, Telling them to go sharpen their hooks is just a "go f yourself" after that. Putting a lot of hard working, honest watermen out of work for poachers will solve nothing. Poachers will poach regardless of what ban you put out there. Do i like netting, no, but i like taking away another mans means of supporting his family even less. It's like saying, "doctors are caught practicing without a license every day and people are dying because of it. We need to ban all doctors from practicing medicine.". Sounds stupid, right? Its an extreme example, but its just to make a point. The net ban comes across as completely self serving, just as the reallocation in the name of conservation does. Do you really think these criminals will say, "oh crap, they banned netting! We have to stop poaching now!" Do we really believe all other states will follow suit, or will their watermen prosper as ours flounder? Will they applaud the efforts in public while they laugh behind our backs as they cash our watermens checks?

Telling them to go be hook and liners, in many cases, is like telling them to learn a new trade. For a cop, since we are on that, it's like saying, " there have been a lot of killings by rogue cops out there. Go learn to slide own a pole and put out fires. "

I just want to see the day when there are NO nets allowed in the Chesapeake Bay. I am not anti waterman nor did I make a personal attack on Reds. If you took it as a personal attack, please accept my apology. I don't know you and have no reason to believe that you have DNR violations or are a poacher. I do not hide my feelings with smiley faces. If I have something to say, I will say it and stand behind it. I have a construction business that has basically shut down in this economy. No one is going to bail me out and I have to change gears and find another way to support myself. If nets are banned, netters need to find another way to support themselves. Life ain't easy and it's not fair. Things happen for a reason and all this bad poaching might lead to the net ban. Something good does come out of something bad sometimes. This ban in my opinion is the best thing for the fishery.................Gary

Mark, While I agree with most all you have said I cannot agree with your statement concerning the net banning. It is a simple question of what is best for the species. It really has nothing to do with the waterman. Yea sure they will be put out of business but remember, the DNR is to protect the fisheries NOT get involved in the economics of society. Therefore they (DNR) should not even consider what the waterman will do or the effects upon them due to closing the bay to their nets.

Another statement is will other states follow Mds' example? Well if a person checks around they will find that Md. is behind the times and most all states have already banned the netters. That is why their fisheries are on the rebound while the Ches. Bay fisheries are becoming extinct.

Asking a cop to become a fireman. What is wrong with that? Remember the mon & pop corner stores, US Steel, the coal miners? These people all had to make changes because their jobs fell by the wayside, so what makes the waterman special? I've had a lot of jobs only to be laid off and find another job in a different field. This is reality-the real world!

Bob

I am not sure how many gill net permits exist, but would a ban really affect that many people? The mates could hook and line, the price would go up so the boat owners could make more per pound. The income from netting rockfish is also a suplemental part of most waterman's income correct? I am not sure the impact would be that great except for a few, but it would interesting to have the numbers to run.

"It really has nothing to do with the waterman. Yea sure they will be put out of business but remember, the DNR is to protect the fisheries NOT get involved in the economics of society. Therefore they (DNR) should not even consider what the waterman will do or the effects upon them due to closing the bay to their nets."

Actually, I believe you will find if you check the mission statement of the DNR, socio-economic impact is a large and required factor to be used in their determinations of regulation and management.

Random question unaffiliated with the biological implications of the nets:

Has anyone ever gotten their boat tangled up in one?

I remember reading about a musician...Orlando Something leaving a gig in Annapolis a few years ago and straying into a net which pulled his cruiser under at the stern.

Do you guys ever read anything you sign?

The petition clearly states "All Nets". All nets doesn't mean gill nets, it means what it says.

The economic impact to Maryland in banning all net fishing, would be in the hundreds of million dollars and around 5000 jobs state wide. The catching of rockfish commercially, for Virginia and Maryland amounts to $93,000,000.

Spot 77 - If I remember right - the guys hit a pound net off West river at night.

The outdrive got wrapped up in the net and it held the boat as waves came in and sank it.

Pound nets can be tricky to see - often not very well marked.

Odd but I think his boat had been sunk once before he bought it.

I don't know how that petition could ever be a tool to ban nets. It should be what the majority wants. for instance, there were a quater of a million people that passed through the doors of the Pasedena show and only 800 signed in favor of a ban. Why would the minority ever be able to make a decsion like that?

These are some notes cribed from a friend

2009 Numbers from DNR:

1. Total number of commercial fishermen in Maryland harvesting rockfish

In 2009, there were 1135 commercial licensees that received striped bass permits, Of these potential commercial harvesters, 796 actually harvested striped bass in 2009. In the commercial striped bass fishery, licensees must declare their intent to fish for striped bass prior to the start of the calendar year. Participants may declare into one of five different sub-fisheries based on gear type. These sub-fisheries include gill net and hook and line, hook and line only, pound net, haul seine, and Atlantic trawl and gill net.

Within each sub-fishery, fishermen may hold multiple permits through a transfer process that allows inactive fishermen to transfer a declared permit to active fishermen. This process allows striped bass harvesters to hold up to four gill net permits, five pound net permits, or four Atlantic trawl and gill net permits. Licensees declared for hook and line may only hold one hook and line permit and may not hold a permit for hook and line if they hold a pound net permit. In 2009, there were 2030 total permits issued to 1135 licensees. There were 818 gill net permits issued to 726 licensees in the gill net sub-fishery, 443 of which actually harvested striped bass. There were 961 permits issued to 961 licensees in the hook and line fishery, with 390 of the licensees actually harvesting striped bass. In the pound net sub-fishery, 101 licensees received 178 permits, with 94 of the licensees actively harvesting striped bass. Only four permits were issued to four licensees in the haul seine fishery, and none of the licensees harvested striped bass commercially. Finally, 69 permits were issued to 62 licensees in the Atlantic sub-fishery, with all 62 licensees harvesting commercial striped bass.

Gear Type --- Permits issued --- Licensees --- Participants
Gill Net ------- 818 --------------- 726 ----------- 443
Hook and Line --- 961 --------------- 961 ----------- 390
Pound Net ------- 178-----------------101------------ 94
Haul Seine ------- 4 ------------------- 4-------------- 0
Atlantic ------------69-------------------69--------------62

2. Total number of harvested rockfish by commercial fishermen in 2009

Chesapeake Bay commercial fishermen harvested 649,033 total fish and 2,267,099 lbs of rockfish in 2009. Atlantic commercial fishermen harvested 13,409 total fish and 127,327 pounds of rockfish in 2009.

Chesapeake Bay harvests by gear type:
Gill Net: 286,982 fish, 1,050,188 pounds
Hook and Line: 191760 fish, 650,013 pounds
Pound Net: 170,291 fish, 566,898 pounds
Haul Seine: 0 fish, 0 pounds

No not that Many "quater of a million". Actually150 vendors on site and roughly 3500 people entered the doors. In addition, the petition table was stuck back in the corner near the bathrooms Not much traffic past the table. Most people had more urgent problems to deal with. I had a table next to his if he or I had a better table location we would have had a lot more exposure.

You don't need to defend this Rob. We have to go into this with a positive attitude and I think the ball is rolling real well now. I think the rock fish are starting to smile!! Good seeing you at the show and look forward to fishing with you and your Dad!.............Gary

Bob, Rich,
All good information and points. I also agree with you to an extent. I'm all for the health of the species but I just find it hard to take away a mans income. I'm sure this is not the intent of the majority, but in my opinion it's a very undesirable consequence. Some people on this board and the other don't seem to care at all which is very disconcerting. I also think that not all but many of these same people would absolutely freak out if they ban planer boards because "they are too efficient a means of catching rockfish.". This is the hypocritical nature of many recs that pisses me off. Could care less about people (other than themselves) losing their jobs, but take away an 18 rod spread and you'll never hear a louder uproar.

Rob, very good data. Thanks for posting it. Shows a lot more netters than I even thought. I really just hope the reaction to illegal netting doesn't lead to 537 men out of work and drawing welfare, creating more crime, people losing their homes, kids not able to eat. That's my only concern with this, and it still won't stop illegal netting which is what set all this uproar in motion in the first place.

How do you figure 5000 jobs? You must mean part time jobs, these guys do other things besides run nets. if Fish Nuts is correct in the harvest, the $93MM is way over stated as well. Where are you getting your numbers?

I personally do not like to see the waterman losing a source of income, but it would appear they are going to lose it anyway. I was shocked to see the graph that shows rockfish numbers dropping off the cliff and the continued pressure will be unsustainable. The DNR did make changes to the pre season trollings regs, and I think more regs are coming. You can also bet the commercial guys will be pounding on the DNR to get some rec limitations. My money is on more regs for both the commercial and recreational groups are coming, and I am okay with that.

Im ok with new regs for the groups for the health of the species founded in science. Last years regs were founded in retaliation, and if watermen get pissed off at the recs over this and politically pushes for more restrictions as revenge, and they are enacted with no scientific evidence, we are back to square 1. If recs are selfish, watermen will be selfish, and the giant pissing contest just gets more heated and more ridiculous restrictions get pushed. The pissing spillover creates rec on rec infighting, waterman on waterman issues, and rec on watermen issues We should all work together towards compromise and proper fisheries management or no one wins. I vowed after last year i would not get involved in these issues, and im trying to keep that promise I am not going to post anymore on the subject, but will watch it very closely Just a concerned citizen and fisherman.

I just think that banning nets because of a petition thats is not signed by the majority of tax payers would be unjust. It wouldn't be surprising the way out government is run, but it would be wrong. You can get thousands of people to sign a petition off the internet for any topic. Theres 300 million americans, unless the petition got over 150 million it should be voided

I was thinking about it and I was wrong, since the petition is off the World wide internet and the world population is 7 billion you should need 3.5 billion signatures. good luck

I did not realize the commercial guys (knew about some charter guys) were behind the trolling restrictions. I agree it is a tinkling contest, but it always seemed to be this way to me. I agree on the compromises, and would support a one fish limit until July 1 and having on C&R until May 15th. This will hurt the charter guys, but we need to change the culture of rockfishing which seems to be stuck in killing all of the fish.

it's been awhile since civics in high school (and i may not have been there that day) so i'm a little confused about the political process as regards a petition.

i've always assumed petitions either 1) showed intent of 'a bunch' of people to be used as part of some attempt to get the attention of lawmakers, but were not politically/legally binding in any real way, or 2) could be used to get an issue placed on the regular ballot as a process of law.

is one, or other, or something else the case now?

Net fishing in the bay is an industry not a hobby.
The people that catch the fish are not the only ones involved. There is transportation from the boat, wholesale facilities, processing, storage facilities, and then transportation to retail outlets. They all employ people.

Rockfish is not the only species that is caught in nets. The list is as long as your arm.

Net fishing in the bay is a year around business supporting the crab industry, chicken industry, aquaculture, wholesale, retail fish markets and restaurants.

My figures are conservative and a Google search will reveal studies by VIMS and articles by the Chesapeake Bay Foundation.

Fish Nuts' info stopped at the boat. It's easy for him to make his case that way. The whole story is commercial waterman and their families, supporting industry and their families, and the retail industry and their families.

Roger that.

I need to googlw the differences in the types of nets. I suppose the gill nets are most efficient based on the number of permits issued?

And different types of nets target different species?

You are correct in your assumption Southerly. MD has about 6 million people and even if 5 million signed it, it would not be law. It is an attention getter by the people to the legislature. It is a lobby which is also big business in MD.

Net fishing is also a business that does involve many different industries. We are attempting to change one aspect of that industry. Netting. Fish will still be caught, transported, processed and sold. This change is not a battle or punishment against commercial fishermen, it is a conservation issue to protect a fishery. We are giving this petition to the MD legislators, not he DNR. This is a legal process and bargaining is involved. Hopefully the end result will be a conservation of our fishery. It is protecting the commercial fisherman's future also.

Reds, The numbers I posted were from DNR they are the number of licenses for commercial fishing in 2009. Posted for a request From Hockleyneck . At this time I believe it is time for the discussion about gillnets in Maryland. As with all of these discussions hopefully the resource will be better in the end. I am not anti watermen. My close family works the water they Crab, run eel pots and net perch. With the past and current events of illegal gillnetting it is apparent that the state agencies have extreme difficulty policing and regulating the gillnet gear type in Maryland. Hopefully, the current concerns and petition will create a situation in which the state will give proper resources and or rethink the standards operating procedures for the gillnet fishery. I think we both can agree that procedures can be changed to make the managing of the gear type more robust. The commercial industry in Maryland has always denounced poaching but on this front they have been unable to police themselves. It is time for something to be done to control outlaw poaching. Poaching with gill nets due to their efficiency, takes fish from the public resource at an exponential rate. This is what has concerned the citizens of Maryland. Unfortunately, when the picture of the tons of illegal rock fish were shown on local and mid Atlantic TV the entire gillnet fishery came under scrutiny. The initial feelings from me and most was if DNR can’t control poaching during the legal gillnet season then it needs to be closed until they can legitimately demonstrate control of the poaching. The reason I say this is, Poaching / using gillnets is occurring under the umbrella of the legal gillnet season. When this gear type is used in a highly regulated fishery such as Gill nets it is impossible for DNR to manage the fishery based on quotas for the fishery. Therefore DNR need to step up to the plate and fix this problem. Who would have thought that the fishery sting we had a few years ago was huge sweeping all the way into the fish retail& wholesale food markets. What we have seen over the past few years with illegal gill net seizures WE AKA Maryland have a huge problem.

As far as social economics of Striped Bass we can agree to disagree.

Some more facts.

Main , Connecticut, New Hampshire, New Jersey & South Carolina Have no commercial harvest Of rock Fish.
Massachusetts Has a Hook& Line fishery ONLY
Rhode Island has a Fish trap and hook & line Fishery
Delaware has a Hook & line & a Gillnet Fishery
Virginia has a Hook & line & a Gillnet Fishery
New York has Hook & Line Pound Nets Fish traps Gillnets
Maryland has Hook & Line Pound Nets Gill Nets Haul seines
North Carolina has everything
Potomac River Hook & Line Pound Nets Gill Nets.

5 states Under the striped bass managment of the ASMFS allow gill netting and one more for the Potomac fishery
7 States don’t allow Gillnets.

Mark, Numbers of licenses doesn’t reflect individuals actively working. People hold licenses for many different reasons. Individual can transfer or sell there licenses to other individuals and allow them to work that permit for its allocation. There are regulations on what combination and how many licenses you can hold at any given time.