Ban Gill Netting in the Chesapeake

[reds]

Originally Posted by Hockleyneck

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.

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.

[Skip]

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.

[Spot77]

Originally Posted by Skip

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.

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?

[Chesapeake Rock]

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?

[Fish Nut]

Originally Posted by Chesapeake Rock

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?

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.

[crabby and son]

Originally Posted by Fish Nut

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

[Mark]

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.

[Hockleyneck]

Originally Posted by Mark

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.

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.

[Mark]

Originally Posted by Hockleyneck

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.

[Fish Nut]

Originally Posted by Mark

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.

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.