Hello all,
I fish from Mass to Florida depending on the time of year. The below link is the type of story that should really get fisherman (both commercial and recreational) ticked off.
Anyway, my goal is not for a response to this posting but to ask, or open dialogue with others, on how the heck to prevent this type fishing ie tossing or killing viable gamefish bycatch.
News story: http://www.gloucestertimes.com/punews/loca..._302225942.html

Video: http://www.sportfishermen.com/board/f186/d...ideo-55702.html


Dr. Jim

The easy solution is, of course, don't let them fish for herring or have the season closed while herring are migrating--but that will have a huge negative impact on many communities. Then how far do you take it? What's the next fishery to close completely due to 'bycatch'?

"Bycatch" is, always has been, and always will be a part of commercial and recreational fishing. The US Government has over the years imposed some of the strictest fishing regulations in the world. However, it is those same regulations which are the cause of these 'Stripers' in this fish kill going to waste. Yes, I know, the sea creatures will recycle the dead bycatch but the number of dead fish left behind is not 'natural' and can realistically be considered 'wasted'.

Let the fishing boats keep their 'bycatch' and let them donate them to charity? But commercial boats do NOT want 'bycatch' onboard that they cannot sell or are going to lose money--that 'bycatch' takes up space in the fish hold that can be occupied by their money making fish.

Solution: REQUIRE them to keep the 'bycatch' and let them bring them fish to the landing--government fisheries agent gives the boat Captain/owner a receipt for the number of pounds and gives a disbursement voucher for fair market value of the 'bycatch' minus 30% or 50%, but equal to or less than their targeted species (prevents them from fishing for herring and coming in with 75% striper 25% herring if the market value -30% is still greater than the market value for a pound of herring--hope that came thru clearly and makes sense?.

The fish is then not put on the 'market' but distributed to homeless shelter and/or any agency that is already receiving federal funds in some way. This way the 30-50% less than market value is not as profitable for the crew/boat owner; and also the market is not affected directly due to the influx of 'cheaper' fish lowering the value to the crews with licenses to fish directly for what is 'bycatch' for a different crew. By getting 'paid' for the bycatch the Captain/0wner (which isn't always the same as some may know) is able to distribute that money to his crew. Some may say just give them a tax credit and make them 'donate' the fish. When this is done the owner of the boat gets the credit or tax break--the crew gets NOTHING.

Well there is my lengthy two cents and then some. Grew up in the Gloucester area (where the news article is from) and have always been interested in fisheries management--hopefully will be using the GI Bill for a degree in Fisheries Management when I retire from the military.

good points

Luke,

Some good thinking there. I just woke up, so I may be missing something, but I like that solution. I haven't read the link yet but I will.

Hmm, video link shows database error - the server must have crashed. I read the article - darn shame.

I love my country........, but wow, you're asking an already overly large, overly burdened and inefficient Government to now manage the bycatch of a fishery. That sounds like lots of government jobs, lots and lots of potential for irregularities ("black market" potential), and it does nothing to alleviate overfishing by bycatch. I'm not saying your idea is bad or not well thought out and intentioned, but I think it would have to be a perfect world to work. I hope you go on to get that degree, lets keep working on ways to keep our fisheries healthy and new ways to reduce bycatch, and from my perspective, ways to keep our government out of managing our everyday lives in our free market economy.

luke918

First--I hope you are successful in your "post retirement career" !!

Next--Your solution seems approachable and manageable but does face the usual issues faced by government intervention as pointed out by lascaras observations.

Your suggested solution seems to follow the "light a candle rather than curse the darkness" approach which would also help remedy some of the concerns lascara accurately points out.

I certainly have no intention of hyjacking this thread and simply want to suggest that government "help" has historically meant redundancy, inefficiency, ....

I am optimistic (perhaps naive) that our recent major problems in the financial world, health care...will promote the kind of innovative thinking that luke918 brings to this issue.

Finally--Allowing the fish to rot when people are without food is just wrong! We are too smart to let that continue.

See? I knew there was something I hadn't thought out! Yes, that would be an increased burden, which would then translate into ever-increasing taxes, er, umm, "fees" that would serve to further discourage us rec guys.

Thanks all for your input and ideas. It is this intelligent, global thinking that may contribute positively to the fisheries discussion
Dr. Jim