By Toby Lapinski
[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he Atlantic State Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) held their 73rd Annual Meeting the week of October 27 – 30 in Mystic, CT. The entire calendar for Wednesday, October 29 was set aside to address the highly-publicized and debated Atlantic Striped Bass Management Board’s Draft Addendum IV to Amendment 6 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Striped Bass as it was anticipated to include lengthy debate and discussion (and boy were the managers accurate in this assumption!) Douglas Grout of the New Hampshire Fish and Game department presided over the day’s meeting. The amendment included several proposed changes such as adjusting fishing mortality (F) and threshold based on reference points developed in the 2013 stock assessment, reducing F to a level that is at or below the target within on year versus three years and the subsequent establishment of new minimum size and bag limits based on these choices.
In attendance were representatives of member states of the Atlantic Striped Bass Management Board: Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia and North Carolina. Also in attendance were board representatives from Washington DC, the National Martine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the Potomac River Fisheries Commission (PRFC). Each member was afforded a single vote on all motions. Additionally, there were non-voting seats available for the general public.
The day began at 8:00 a.m. with the administrative items being taken care of, but the meat of the day began around 10:15 a.m. as ASMFC Fishery Management Plan Coordinator, Mike Waine presented an overview of Draft Addendum IV. This was essentially a recap of what was presented at each of the 19 public hearings which were held across 12 states beginning on August 26 in Connecticut and concluding on September 29 in North Carolina. At these 19 hearings there were 874 attendees with 40% in New England, 44% in the mid-Atlantic and 16% in the Chesapeake Bay (CB).
Mr. Waine went on to present a public comment summary which included 3,847 written public comments. This included 2,490 submissions from 13 different form letters, 1,323 personalized individual comments and 34 letters from specific groups or individuals such as fishing clubs and charter boat associations. The public comment summaries were broken down by recreational fishery interests (majority or responses and inclusive of for-hire interests), commercial fishery interests and CB interests.
Overwhelmingly the recreational fishery interests were in favor of a reduction of F to the target within 1 year, a 1-fish bag limit (2-fish bag limit favored by some for-hire respondents), a 25% reduction in commercial quota based on actual harvest numbers and a general sentiment that the fishery should be managed for abundance and opportunity. Commercial fishery interests generally favored status quo or an incremental 7-7-7% reduction in harvest, felt the data being used in the stock assessment is flawed and fear an increase in striped bass will further negatively impact prey populations. The CB interests stated that Bay harvest is primarily of male (smaller) fish, favored status quo or an incremental 7-7-7% reduction in harvest and were concerned about disease and prey for striped bass.
Common across all three interest groups was a sentiment that illegal harvest (poaching) by both recreational and commercial fishermen needs to be addressed, the US Coast Guard has increased its patrolling of federal waters, that fines should be increased and enforcement of regulations stepped up across the board. Other general comments included the use of circle hooks, the elimination of all striped bass tournaments, the sentiment that declining striped bass stocks will result in negative economic impacts to related industries, gamefish status for striped bass, charter boats to be prohibited from including captain and/or crew in a boat’s possession limit, stronger commercial restrictions (moratorium or 50% reduction), saltwater license fee to directly benefit law enforcement, cut coastal quota and increase CB quota to save the blue crab industry and more.
Next up was a brief Law Enforcement committee report presented by Marc Robinson. A lunch break followed and when the meeting resumed Charlton Godwin presented the Technical Committee’s (TC) report followed by the Advisory Panel’s (AP) report presented by Kelly Place.
As the technical stuff was finally out of the way, it was time to get down to the nuts and bolts of the day’s agenda and begin the voting process. The following is a list of motions which passed which apply to northeast and mid-Atlantic coastal fisheries:
- Motion to a) established the 2013 benchmark stock assessment F reference points, b) uses coastwide population F reference points and c) allow North Carolina to manage the Albemarle Sound/Roanoke River using reference points from the last North Carolina stock assessment accepted and approved by the board: 12 in favor and 4 opposed.
- Motion not to allow commercial quotas to be transferred between states: 15 in favor (ME, NH, MA, RI, CT, NJ, DE, PA, MD, DC, PRFC, VA, NC, NMFS, USFW) -1 opposed (NY).
- Motion to maintain commercial size limits from 2013: 16-0.
- Motion for a 25% reduction from commercial coastal Amendment 6 quotas: 8 in favor (ME, NH, MA, RI, NY, NJ, PA, MD) – 6 opposed (DE, DC, PRFC, VA, NC, CT) – two abstained (USF&W and NMFS).
- Motion that prior to the 2015 fishery all jurisdictions implement rules to achieve new fishing mortality targets by implementing a 25% harvest reduction in coastal fisheries and a 20.5% reduction in the CB fisheries: 14 in favor (ME, NH, MA, RI, CT, NY, PA, MD, DC, PRFC, VA, NC, NMFS, USFW) – 2 opposed (NJ, DE).
Finally we arrived at the big item of the day, the 2015 size and bag limits for striped bass. NJ proposed a motion that states submit for technical committee review and board approval conservation equivalency proposals for 2015 that achieve a 25% reduction in the coastal recreational fishery. It was seconded by MD and subsequently amended by NH, seconded by ME, to include option B3 (1 fish at 32 inches). The motion failed 3 in favor (MA, RI, PA) – 13 (ME, NH, CT, NY, NJ, DE, MD, DC, PRFC, VA, NC, NMFS, USFW). It was then amended by CT, seconded by NY, to include option B1 (I fish at 28 inches). This motion failed with 4 in favor (ME, NH, CT, PA) and 12 opposed (MA, RI, NJ, DE, MD, DC, PRFC, VA, NC, NMFS, USFWS, NY). The motion was then amended once more, this time by MA, seconded by ME, to include option B1 (1 fish at 28 inches) with all conservation equivalency measures equal to a 25% reduction in harvest. The motion passed 14 in favor (ME, NH, MA, RI, CT, NY, PA, MD, DC, PRFC, VA, NC, NMFS, USFW) to 2 opposed (NJ, DE).
So what does this mean for you? Well in short each state must now implement striped bass regulations prior to the commencement of their 2015 fishery which meet at minimum 1 fish at 28 inches or an alternate measure that equal a 25% reduction in harvest. The alternate measures can be achieved in a variety of different measures and all states continue to have the option to implement stricter regulations if they choose to do so. This is why, for example, states such as Maine and New York previously had slightly different coastal recreational regulations than surrounding states.
