New stiper regs

[bassnblues]

The approved option allows for one fish between 28 to 43 inches and another fish at 43 inches and above.

So what does everyone think? I've been out of the loop fishing-wise but from what I hear cuts were needed. I would have been fine with a one fish limit.

[Eng 94]

I'm fine with limits that make sense and regulate the cause of wildlife/fish depletion. I am still of the opinion that placing a two fish restriction on anglers is not helping anyone or anything. There were comments made about party boats coming in with decks loaded with sow Strippers well if you look at the head count that's not a lot of fish, and it doesn't happen every day. The season was short in 2014 for catch purposes so how are we as anglers effecting the Stripe Bass fisheries?

Some one here made as suggestion last year when slotting the fish size, it makes more sense to keep the limit smaller with a one fish limit on the larger fish (Spawning Size). That makes far more sense to me.

You have the fisheries department of the DEP taking senses of the Stripper in the Delaware and basing there so called scientific approach being the positive factor of the fish population. I don't buy that.


I believe in a 18" to 22" limit of four and No fish over 40" in the fall. Spring catch should allow two fish between 24" to 42" nothing smaller or larger. See how that works. If there must be limits.

Having said that I'm still not convinced that restrictions on Stripe Bass are doing anything to help there survival as far as the angler is concerned.

Now on another note. I have a small farm and there are five other farms within 2 miles of my place. With all of the changes in the deer regulations in the past 15 or more years, I have seen NO! change in a positive manor to reduce the amount of deer or reduce crop damage. As a matter of Fact it has gotten worse. My son has taken his share and many other unsuccessful hunters share of deer from one location. That area has and still does produce some of the largest deer in Monmouth County.

I stand by my convictions 100%       

[BigAl13]

if only stripped bass were a species that exhibited  dimorphic ornamentation of sexual dichromatism, the solution would be simple. Don't keep the females.

Eng as for your deer problem I could gladly help with that as well 

[Hunter 2]

The email from RFA,,

NJ COUNCIL SUPPORTS NEW STRIPER REGULATIONS
Proposed Limits for 2015 Must Now Be Considered by Legislature
 
The New Jersey Marine Fisheries Council unanimously voted to support a two fish bag limit for striped bass beginning sometime in 2015, with one fish at 28 to less than 43 inches, and a second fish equal to or greater than 43 inches. 
 
Yesterday's decision at the council's regular meeting in Galloway Township must now be picked up by New Jersey legislators, as any changes to striped bass regulations in the state must be made through Trenton by an act of law.
 
It is expected that both a Senate and Assembly bill will be adopted next week, with the appropriate committees in Trenton then responsible for reviewing, discussing and ultimately approving the change before it can be voted on by the full legislature.
 
The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) recently mandated a 25% or better reduction by all coastal states on striped bass harvest beginning in 2015, with ASMFC technical committee members approving New Jersey's proposal of one striper at less than 43 and one striper at 43 or greater as meeting that 25% reduction goal.
 
As for New Jersey's bonus striped bass program which utilizes the unused commercial quota of striped bass through a $2 tag system, the New Jersey Marine Fisheries Council also voted to convene their striped bass advisory committee to look at possible changes to the program.
 
The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) also put forward a new regulatory proposal for fixed gear on New Jersey's artificial reef sites which was unanimously approved by the New Jersey Marine Fisheries Council.  NJDEP expects the new regulations to go into effect before the summer and should help improve public access at Axel Carlson and Sandy Hook reef sites in New Jersey coastal waters.
 
On the fluke front, the next important meeting coming up for public comment for New Jersey anglers is Monday, January 12th at the Toms River Township Administrative Building, L.M. Hirshblond Room at 33 Washington Street in Toms River.  This meeting will not be focused on striped bass, but on Draft Addendum XXVI for summer flounder management.

[Hunter 2]

I'm alright with this decision.   I think it might encourage some good hearted fisherman to even release the bigger ones over 43".
      In my opinion,  I think we can even lower the size from 28" to say 24" or 26".   Down south in NC the size limit is 18".  1 Striper does provided good  sized fillets. 

[Hotrod]

 

[Takes Prizoners]

how often do you catch 40"+ stripers? I think the hidden agenda here is slimming down to a 1 fish limit for the future

[Fisherman120]

Stupid.... When livelining from a boat 43 inch fish are more common then fish below 35 inches, what will happen is the first keeper will be caught and after that plenty of 29-42 inch will swallow the hook down, be released, and inevitably die as livelining hookups are usually fatal. This will keep happening until that boat catches their 43+ inch limit. When fishing is good these regs will only hurt the population more in my honest opinion as fish up to 43 will keep being released.

[Salty Dog]

  Look at how many short gut hooked fluke have been thrown back ,to die .$125 for one fish ,from six pack boat, Yeah ,right !

[Eng 94]

if only stripped bass were a species that exhibited  dimorphic ornamentation of sexual dichromatism, the solution would be simple. Don't keep the females.

Eng as for your deer problem I could gladly help with that as well 

I still stand by my conviction on the DEP Regulations being a FARCE!! Sorry That is my honest opinion.

You can shoot all the deer you want with Bow this is a bow only zone. After all the deer that have been taken by my son and me over the years...and this is no brag 100s of deer. There are still plenty to go around, and it cost us over $4,000 in crop damage last year.

DEP? I have worked with the DEP as a field engineer in civil Engineering and in construction as well as Super fund sites. I have seen there work first hand. It leaves much to be desired. And I have received letters of thanks for my work on such sites, I did little for it in my opinion,other then doing my job.I can site to many incidences of there over-site and lack of concern in many incidences in the past. You want to hear the real truth. Ill tell you the real truth,NO BS.!!!

And now they are doing the job of Fish and Game?   

[Luna Sea 5]

I feel like if you can prove they are gut hooked, by cutting the leader, you should keep the fish because it is going to die anyway.

Im ok with 1 fish limit.. 1 fish can feed a few of us.. I also like the 1 larger fish limit as for me, as much as I would love to have 1 for the table, I would also love to have one for the wall. 

I don't like to freeze fish anyway.. If its frozen, it becomes crab bait.

[Eng 94]

I don't want to disrespect anyone here with my comment on restrictions for anglers.

So Ill pose a few questions:

1: Do you believe that Anglers have the ability to catch that many fish each season as the fishing fleet does?

Note: There limits are in Tons. How many anglers does it take to catch a Ton of fish?

2: Do you believe that it is fair to every Angler to limit 1 fish per day when he or she is spending hundreds on tackle to possibly subsidies his or her food.

Note: Most of us are not that fortunate to catch limits every day,and can not afford to fish every day.

3: what other scientific proof does anyone have that supports the fact that Anglers are the cause for species reduction in the Oceans.

Note: Fishing nets don't have brains or eyes to tell them what fish is legal catch or not.


I am sick and tired of fish and game telling me what fish I can catch and how many....How the hell am I hurting the fisheries with my simple catch of the day. This is all BS as far as I am concerned, people wanting government to control there lives. Sorry if I offended anyone,but this is one sore subject for me.     

[bassnblues]

I think in the case of stripers, recreational fishing has an effect. Though not as much as trawlers. Unlike most other fish that migrate to deep water and are out of reach part of the year, stripers remain inshore and are targeted 12 months a year from NC in the winter to Maine in the summer. Also, rec anglers can catch and kill them in their spawning areas up the Hudson, Chesapeake and Delaware.

[Luna Sea 5]

I don't want to disrespect anyone here with my comment on restrictions for anglers.

So Ill pose a few questions:

1: Do you believe that Anglers have the ability to catch that many fish each season as the fishing fleet does?

Note: There limits are in Tons. How many anglers does it take to catch a Ton of fish?

2: Do you believe that it is fair to every Angler to limit 1 fish per day when he or she is spending hundreds on tackle to possibly subsidies his or her food.

Note: Most of us are not that fortunate to catch limits every day,and can not afford to fish every day.

3: what other scientific proof does anyone have that supports the fact that Anglers are the cause for species reduction in the Oceans.

Note: Fishing nets don't have brains or eyes to tell them what fish is legal catch or not.


I am sick and tired of fish and game telling me what fish I can catch and how many....How the hell am I hurting the fisheries with my simple catch of the day. This is all BS as far as I am concerned, people wanting government to control there lives. Sorry if I offended anyone,but this is one sore subject for me.     

it does cost a lot of money on fishing tackle... but nobody says you can't catch and release after your limit or target another species..

[Eng 94]

I copied this from another site today. Interesting read.

Striped bass like the ones illegally netted in the Tilghman Island case. (Photo courtesy of VIMS)
A Tilghman Island fisherman will have to serve time in federal prison for his role in a striped-bass poaching ring that spanned four years and netted  185,000 pounds of stolen fish valued at close to half a million dollars.

U.S. District Judge Richard D. Bennett sentenced William J. Lednum, 41, to one year and one day in jail, followed by six months home detention and three years’ probation. Lednum, along with his co-defendant in the case, Michael D. Hayden, will have to pay $498,923 in restitution to the Department of Natural Resources for the theft. Lednum also must pay a $40,000 fine.

Hayden, is scheduled to be sentenced Friday, February 27. Two more defendants in the Tilghman Island poaching case have upcoming court dates. Lawrence “Daniel” Murphy, 37, of St. Michaels, will be sentenced in federal court tomorrow (Friday, December 18th). Kent Sadler, 31, of Tilghman, will be sentenced January 7. Both have pleaded guilty.

Lednum and Hayden both pleaded guilty last summer to violating the federal Lacey Act, which prohibits the sale of illegally caught fish. Between 2007 and 2011, the pair - both captains of commercial fishing vessels - engaged in a conspiracy to take a public resource from the Chesapeake Bay and cover their crimes. They used illegally anchored gill nets and sometimes left them in the water overnight long after the netting season was closed for striped bass fishing.

They then falsified the daily allocation and permit paperwork they were required to file with the Department of Natural Resources. To further conceal their crimes, they sold the fish directly to wholesalers in New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware and Maryland, circumventing fish check stations and mandatory harvest reports. Investigators determined the men, with help from others who have also pled guilty, stole about 185,000 pounds of fish that netted them a total of $498,293.47.

When Natural Resources Police discovered the theft in February 2011, the department shut down the gill-netting season, depriving law-abiding watermen of an honest living. DNR officials discovered illegal nets off Kent Island, spanning many miles. Officers discovered thousands of dead rockfish, so many that the department’s ice-breaker, the Sandusky, had trouble lifting them.

Yesterday, prosecutor Todd Gleason of the U.S. Department of Justice’s environmental crimes section reminded the judge that attorneys for the indicted fishermen had tried to describe the scheme as a crime against other watermen. But, Gleason argued, it was much more than that. To underscore the point, Michael Luisi, a fisheries manager with the Department of Natural Resources, explained that Maryland uses data it collects from harvest reports, fish-checking stations and tagging programs to set its striped bass policy.

It is crucial, Luisi explained, to have accurate harvest numbers, because harvest is the one aspect of managing the striped bass fishery that the department can control. Luisi and his colleagues can’t control the weather, the ocean currents, or the breeding patterns. But if they know how many fish the watermen are removing, they have in idea of the population. And if they are able to weigh, measure and assess the fish, they have an idea of the population’s relative health and abundance. They use that information to not only make decisions on fishing restrictions in the Chesapeake Bay, but they share the information with the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, which uses it to manage the species coast-wide. The Chesapeake Bay is the nursery for east Coast striped bass; what happens within its boundaries affects a huge recreational and commercial fishery coast-wide.

“The public has entrusted our agency,” Luisi told the court. “Conspiring against our agency, falsifying reports, poaching - it all undermines the job we are trying to do to protect the resource.”

Frank Bonnanno of the Coastal Conservation Association, which represents recreational fishermen, echoed Luisi but went further, asking the judge to consider the full sentence of five years for the crime.

“It may seem as though this is a victimless crime, but there are many victims,” Bonnanno said.

The judge was clearly moved by a courtroom full of Tilghman Island families, the 36 letters of character references for Lednum, the fisherman’s longtime service on the island’ volunteer fire department and Lednum’s own statements that he was disappointed in himself. But he said he could not agree with the defense’s recommendation of probation, even with the hefty fines.

“You’ve led an exemplary life, yet you’ve committed a very serious offense,” Judge Bennett told Lednum. “My job is to enforce the law, and there can be no deterrent without some kind of jail sentence…the simple fact is that there has to be a message sent from this courtroom.”

Bennett told Lednum he loved Tilghman Island and had a photo of Knapps Narrows in his conference room. While all Marylanders have an obligation to do their part for the Bay, Bennett said, the expectation was even higher for people who live so close to such beauty. On that front, Bennett told Lednum, “You have absolutely breached that obligation.”

Over the last two decades, federal judges have increasingly looked at poaching as a serious offense punishable by jail time. In 2010, a federal judge sentenced Profish vice president Timothy Lydon, of Bethesda, to 21 months in prison and a $60,000 fine for what was then the largest fish-poaching scheme in the Chesapeake Bay. Fish buyer Benjamin Clough of Grasonville got 15 months in prison and a $7,500 fine. The Profish cases so disturbed the legislature that they helped bring about the Natural Resources Police’s power to suspend licenses indefinitely for repeat offenders. Both the Potomac River Fisheries Commission and the Virginia Marine Resources Council took notice as well, suspending the licenses for as long as the law allowed.

After Lednum’s sentencing, Capt. Lloyd Ingerson of the Natural Resources Police said the sentence was appropriate and that the department was “very satisfied.”

Lednum will be paying for his crime for decades after his prison sentence is complete. The judge ordered him to pay $100 a month towards the fine and $250 a month towards restitution.

Lednum’s co-defendant, Michael Hayden is scheduled to be sentencedFriday, February 27, at 10 a.m. Hayden was supposed to be sentenced jointly with Lednum yesterday. But Hayden was also charged with several counts of obstruction of justice for allegedly intimidating witnesses. He did not plead guilty to the obstruction charges, but the judge indicated he would take the charges into consideration at sentencing. Hayden’s lawyers challenged the assertion his client had intimidated anyone, and the judge said he was not comfortable making a sentencing determination without giving Hayden an opportunity to defend himself. A mini-trial on the obstruction charge will precede Hayden’s sentencing.

Yesterday, Hayden asked the judge if he could be responsible for any incarceration or restitution Murphy is required to pay.

“I drug him into this situation, Your Honor,” Hayden said. “I want to be 100 percent responsible.”