Without arguing about the data and science here is a graph that was part of the 2024 Striped Bass Stock Assessment Report. It breaks down removals in millions of fish for each year since 1983. It displays both recreational and commercial numbers. Below is the written explanation for the last few years as it appears in the report,
So, the recreational sector, which includes the for-hire fleet, harvested 49% of the fish, 40% were killed during releases, 10% was from commercial harvest, and 0.5% were from commercial discards. That's the best science and they're going with it.
When science and data support your position it's easy to be a believer.
Like many others out there I'd like to be a believer. But sometimes when I sit back and think independently I do question things from time to time. Sometimes I am left to question things because I'm not that smart, and things are above my pay, or brain grade.
The above ASMFC chart may be easy for you to understand but for me it takes a little time to navigate around it. Others may not choose to stick around and twist up their brains. And others just won't believe it at all.
Sometimes I grab onto the point rather quickly. Above is a graph showing why we should be concerned if we keep the current 28-31" slot as it will cut into the 2018 year class of fish. We just got through 2024 where we hammered down on the 2015-2017 year class fish that fell between those three inches. It's kind of hard when you are trying to protect something but allow it to be harvested.
The MRIP, or Marine Recreational Information Program, is a program that collects and organizes data that is used by fisheries managers. In the case of the striped bass that's the ASMFC. I looked around and found some "stuff" that was interesting. The data is comprised from willing anglers who participate when approached by volunteers or sent a mailer.
The ASMFC requires states to participate. When you are required to participate then there must be consequences if you do not. Above is New York's plea to anglers to participate. In the end the data is formulated into catch per unit effort, ie, CPUE+fish caught/ hours of unit fishing. A sample of an MRIP mailer, maybe you got one, is below.
In the latest round of nonsense and striped bass management they are looking into things like the number of trips taken and preliminary (predicted) removals in states during different waves (see yesterdays post) to support the theory that rebuilding may be in jeopardy 2029 if things continue as they currently are.
An example of an MRIP chart, just showing the results of the FES (Fishing Effort Survey) would be below, for the State of Maine, during 2023.
That tally tells us that most of the fishing excursions done in Maine were done by shore based recreational anglers, followed by private owned boat anglers. Below is the explanation of the data collected,
Now I'm not questioning anything but surely someone is interested in the "effort" made from the recreational sector. Is effort the same for a boat that livelines as the other who throws barbless flies? Some of you may remember the movie "History of The World Part I". In it Mel Brooks plays Comicus, an unemployed stand up philosopher who at one point heads to the umemployment line.
When asked what he does Comicus states, "I coalesce the vapors of human experience into a viable and meaningful comprehension", to which the Dole Office Clerk played by Bea Arthur answers, "Oh a bullshit artist". She then asks, "Did you bullshit last week?", answer "No", "Did you try to bullshit last week?", answer "Yes" before handing over that weeks unemployment. It kind of reminds me how someone stopping me on the dock might go, depending on my trust of the "system" and if I were in the mood to play along. "Did you fish over the last two months?", answer "No", but I really did. It's similar to trying to
fill out the Coast Guard form CS-719S when you try and renew your Captain's license. There they ask how many days you were out on the water within the last five years, as you need a total of 360 over five years. I put my license on hold the last go around because I couldn't honestly say I had the time as Covid shut things down for almost a year. So Mmmmmm, with pen in hand, "How many days did I go out in April, May and June in 2020 during Covid", answer "27". Yea right, let me see how I can make those numbers add up to 360. Not me, no thanks. And that's where I can see Bea Arthur asking me, "Did you bullshit last week?". C'mon man. Questioning the data and the science, or maybe how the data is collected, yes sometimes.
As you can read below they get addresses from the USPS matched to the National Saltwater Registry and send out surveys. So they can catch you at the dock or in the mail.
I went on to read further about MRIP and how the data is collected and for what purpose. If you read into it you may start to raise a question or two, and rightfully so.
And while no survey or data collection type is 100% without fail, NOAA does explain quality assurance and control measures before releasing the data to fisheries managers, to say, the ASMFC.
But there has been some conflict with the MRIP and lots of people have questioned it. There have been studies and things like the below have been noted,
I have always said that fisheries management comes down to money and politics, a position I have been questioned, and cautioned, on. Do I think someone is on the take at the ASMFC? Absolutely not. Do I think the State reps, who are political appointees, have a Big Daddy to answer to? Um, yes. And if we go all the way to the top might the conversation say come across the big desk in the White House about things fishing, hunting, and the environment? Let's say possibly. Let's just go State level, do you think Murphy gets briefed on the striped bass in New Jersey? I surely do. Why? Because the people affected are constituents. They have a voice, and a vote. So yes politics is in play.
What about money? Fishing in big business. Above is a chart from NOAA from 2020. That's a lot of moola. And with the money comes jobs. Just think of the money generated and spent in regards to striped bass. I don't know what that figure is but I know I must spend $2,000 a year on gear, gas, lodging, and trips, plus the food and the coffee alone. And that's just for just one very recreational fly fisherman. When fisheries are managed, especially for an overfished species, quotas get cut and that means the bottom line gets cut as well. Participation is down, guided trips are down, so are party boat trips, tackle shop sales, all boat related expenditures, as well as all the other things (purchased) that go along with recreational fishing. And then there's the commercial side, which I know nothing about, other than following the boats on the Deadliest Catch. Quotas, gas prices, fish and shellfish prices, etc. And when things get cut people lose money, and they don't run, they stand and yell, and fight. That's the money I'm talking about.
When the ASMFC came out with the Emergency Action and the current 28-31 inch slot the fear was that angling participation would decrease, especially those utilizing the for-hire fleet. Now with talks of having No Target and No Harvest seasonal closures, from 27 - 60 days during different "waves", people are very concerned about the true economic impact that it would create. No Harvest doesn't affect me, but it's not all about me. No Target means I can't fish. Although, the number of anglers that targeting bluefish and banded rudder fish would expand exponentially.
I work in healthcare. Both at the bedside and in the classroom. Do you think money and politics rear their ugly head into patient care? You bet they do. Just look at Big Pharma. Look at the insurance companies. Now I'm just a little player in the big healthcare picture but I see how money, and even politics, affects patient care first hand. Length of stays, supplies, and even coverage for procedures and medications. It all comes down to the almighty dollar.
As a practitioner and educator we use evidenced-based practice to guide how we care for patients. That EBP comes from research and data. An example, everyone used to get an indwelling catheter, or Foley catheter, while in the hospital or long term care facility. Through research and statistics, they learned
that CAUTI's, or catheter associated urinary tract infections, were occurring at an alarming rate and costing billions of dollars to treat, and led to increased patient mortality, or lets say F, like with the striped bass. These days you can count the number of patients who have catheters in the hospital on one hand. That is due to good research, solid data, and solid changes in what we do.
So, when we look at where we are heading into 2025 with striped bass management, in order to accept change we must have near 100% confidence in the research and data. In just 24 hours I have seen social media erupt with opinions and posts of the comments sent to the ASMFC regarding "No Target" and "No Harvest". This is going to pin fishing buddy against fishing buddy, conservation group against conservation group, recs against comms, states against states, and the science and data against public opinion. In the end the only true losers will be the striped bass. I hope the science and data, and not politics and money, guide fisheries managers to do the right things. That is something I have doubts with.