Did SAFMC vote on BSB yesterday at the special meeting?
The increased the quota by 1 million lbs
The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council approved measures to increase the Annual Catch Limit (ACL) for black sea bass in the South Atlantic region during a special one-day meeting held yesterday. In a compromise vote, the Council approved an increase from the current limit of 847,000 pounds (all measures in whole weight) to 1,814,000 pounds. The increase would be effective for 2013, 2014, and 2015. For 2016 and beyond, the ACL would be 1,756,450 pounds until changed. The meeting, held via webinar, was called by the Council to help expedite the proposed increase for the 2013 fishing year. A recent stock assessment shows that the black sea bass stock in the South Atlantic is no longer undergoing overfishing, is not overfished, and the stock is rebuilt. The assessment, as reviewed by the Council’s Scientific and Statistical Committee, allows for an increase the ACL.
If approved by the Secretary of Commerce, the changes would be implemented through Regulatory Amendment 19 to the Snapper Grouper Fishery Management Plan. The amendment initially included three alternatives, a “no action” alternative leaving the current ACL in place and a second alternative to increase the ACL to 2,133,000 pounds in 2013, a value equal to the Acceptable Biological Catch as recommended by the Scientific and Statistical Committee, with a decrease in catch limits in subsequent years. The third, more conservative alternative would have allowed for an increase to 1,756,450 pounds per year for 2013-2015. After reviewing public comment and discussing the three alternatives, a fourth alternative to increase the ACL to 1,814,000 pounds was introduced and approved by the Council. The alternative represents a compromise between the two initial values considered by the Council in alternatives 2 and 3.
During the meeting, Council members acknowledged the need to provide fishermen an opportunity to maximize harvest of the recovered stock given hardships experienced by both commercial and rec
Kim Iverson forwarded me your message and asked me to follow up with you.
The Council approved a new alternative (alternative 4) and voted yesterday to increase the annual catch limit (ACL) for black sea bass to 1,814,000 pounds (whole weight) per year for 2013, 2014, and 2015. For 2016 and beyond, the ACL would be set at 1,756,450 pounds (whole weight) until changed by any new stock assessments or updates occur. Alternative 4 was a new alternative proposed by one of the Council members during the meeting yesterday that served as a compromise between the two other alternatives being proposed ? one with higher risk and one with lower risk of overfishing to occur in the future. This action will be implemented under Snapper Grouper Regulatory Amendment 19 and the amendment is now being sent to the Secretary of Commerce for formal review.
The 2013/2014 season will still open on June 1st as planned. However, the hope is that the increase in the ACL will be implemented during this fishing season allowing the season to extend a little longer. Last year the recreational fishery closed on September 4, 2012. The current catch limit is 847,000 pounds (for both commercial and recreational sectors) and the new limit of 1,814,000 is an almost 2.5X increase. Size and bag limits will remain the same.
You can read more about the Councils decisions from yesterday?s meeting on our website here: http://www.safmc.net/News/NewsReleases/NRMay142013/tabid/787/Default.aspx
Feel free to contact me with any further questions!
Best,
Amber
Amber Von Harten,
Fishery Outreach Specialist
South Atlantic Fishery Management Council
4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201
North Charleston, SC 29405
843/571-4366 or Toll Free 866/SAFMC-10
amber.vonharten@safmc.net
www.safmc.netThe douchebags should have said…we phucked up…season starts today.
^^^^^^x2
quote:
Originally posted by RedstripeThe douchebags should have said…we phucked up…season starts today.
Then they could not claim they solved the problem
This whole thing with BSB and other fish is these people have an agenda. Their agenda is to keep their asses employed. So they manufacture a crisis and then take drastic measures and claim to have fixed it.
The enviro nut bags will use this fiasco as a shining example of succesful fisheries management… just wait and see.
Squid Row 2
22 Shamrock WA
Flounder Pounder 2
16 Sandpiper Skiff
Council approved an increase from the current limit of 847,000 pounds (all measures in whole weight) to 1,814,000 pounds. The increase would be effective for 2013, 2014, and 2015
The 2013/2014 season will still open on June 1st as planned. However, the hope is that the increase in the ACL will be implemented during this fishing season allowing the season to extend a little longer
Size and bag limits will remain the same
so let’s double the ACL FOR THE NEXT 3 YEARS but only extend the season “a little longer” and keep the bag limit the same? I’m all about winning little battles in the war, but for some reason this just doesn’t feel much like a victory for us rec guys…
The Morris Island Lighthouse www.savethelight.org
Did any of you look at that Powerpoint presentation that was on an earlier post about this? Just curious on what your take on how, after very high total landings of BSB between roughly 1980 and 1988, the total landings generally decreased (with a couple of outliers in the data). Do you think that the fishermen were just getting worse at catching fish, or do you think there is a possibility (however slight) that the population was declining? Yes, they probably could have adjusted the quotas sooner, but determining what is an allowable quota is not even close to an exact science. I for one don’t think those folks have an agenda or are “trying to keep their a**** employed”. It is possible that those people actually care about maintaining a healthy fishery!!! I’m glad that there are rules in place so that my kids and their kids and so on will have a healthy fishery to enjoy and harvest. Call me a nut bag, but I certainly see value in not having billy bob or luther gene deciding it’s time to cut back on taking certain species.
^ You obviously have not been bottom fishing out of charleston lately… You literally can not catch anything but BSB. They are EVERYWHERE
“Good things come to those who bait”
quote:
Originally posted by OccamsRaiserDid any of you look at that Powerpoint presentation that was on an earlier post about this? Just curious on what your take on how, after very high total landings of BSB between roughly 1980 and 1988, the total landings generally decreased (with a couple of outliers in the data). Do you think that the fishermen were just getting worse at catching fish, or do you think there is a possibility (however slight) that the population was declining? Yes, they probably could have adjusted the quotas sooner, but determining what is an allowable quota is not even close to an exact science. I for one don’t think those folks have an agenda or are “trying to keep their a**** employed”. It is possible that those people actually care about maintaining a healthy fishery!!! I’m glad that there are rules in place so that my kids and their kids and so on will have a healthy fishery to enjoy and harvest. Call me a nut bag, but I certainly see value in not having billy bob or luther gene deciding it’s time to cut back on taking certain species.
Nut job
quote:
Originally posted by phinfreak09^ You obviously have not been bottom fishing out of charleston lately… You literally can not catch anything but BSB. They are EVERYWHERE
“Good things come to those who bait”
That’s the point. The reason there are so many is because of the closure. I’m looking forward to the season opening myself. Won’t take long to limit out! Love you guys even if you disagree with me.
quote:
Originally posted by OccamsRaiserDid any of you look at that Powerpoint presentation that was on an earlier post about this? Just curious on what your take on how, after very high total landings of BSB between roughly 1980 and 1988, the total landings generally decreased (with a couple of outliers in the data). Do you think that the fishermen were just getting worse at catching fish, or do you think there is a possibility (however slight) that the population was declining? Yes, they probably could have adjusted the quotas sooner, but determining what is an allowable quota is not even close to an exact science. I for one don’t think those folks have an agenda or are “trying to keep their a**** employed”. It is possible that those people actually care about maintaining a healthy fishery!!! I’m glad that there are rules in place so that my kids and their kids and so on will have a healthy fishery to enjoy and harvest. Call me a nut bag, but I certainly see value in not having billy bob or luther gene deciding it’s time to cut back on taking certain species.
What does Rush call them…Low information voter! Looks like an internet Troll for sure trying to get a rise. So tell me Occ…how many times were you surveyed? What did you think of the biomass and landings prior to the closures? FACT! the best year we had seen, was the same time they decided that the bsb’s were “overfished” . Did you ever stop to think that commercial landings were down because there are less and less commercial bottom boats every year due to over regulation. Next you will tell me Red Snapper stocks are in bad shape!
Good luck finding ANYONE to side with you on BSB’s (that actually fishes).
.
NMFS = No More Fishing Season
"Back home we got a taxidermy man. He gonna have a heart attack when he see w
quote:
Originally posted by OccamsRaiserDid any of you look at that Powerpoint presentation that was on an earlier post about this? Just curious on what your take on how, after very high total landings of BSB between roughly 1980 and 1988, the total landings generally decreased (with a couple of outliers in the data). Do you think that the fishermen were just getting worse at catching fish, or do you think there is a possibility (however slight) that the population was declining? Yes, they probably could have adjusted the quotas sooner, but determining what is an allowable quota is not even close to an exact science. I for one don’t think those folks have an agenda or are “trying to keep their a**** employed”. It is possible that those people actually care about maintaining a healthy fishery!!! I’m glad that there are rules in place so that my kids and their kids and so on will have a healthy fishery to enjoy and harvest. Call me a nut bag, but I certainly see value in not having billy bob or luther gene deciding it’s time to cut back on taking certain species.
They want to put cameras on our boats Billy Bob! Luther Gene cud give a fats rats a$$ about fishing cuz all he cares about is a free phone
given to him,his kids,and their kids and so on.
No agenda? Give me a freakin break.
Sorry you guys are so bitter. Don’t let it consume you. Believe me there capehorn, no one has ever given me anything.
I concur LOW INFORMATION VOTER…ignorance is bliss. Anyone who spends time offshore bottom fishing knows the BSB’s are like fleas on any live bottom or artificial reef. What about all the other species being displaced??? It has been like that for years…
We are not consumed with anger…just facts & not some government fiction.
Heck, as bad a fisherman as I am, I catch the dang things. THAT ought to tell you something about how many there are.
quote:
Originally posted by OccamsRaiserSorry you guys are so bitter. Don’t let it consume you. Believe me there capehorn, no one has ever given me anything.
If you think these jerks don’t have an agenda,someone should have at least given you some common sense.Not gonna say I don’t mean to offend anyone or schitt like that anymore, people like you are part of the problem.Putting your trust in these people and assuming they mean well after all the stupid schitt they have said and done is just plain dumb…Gathering data buy phone surveys(BS),video monitering systems,mpa’s,snapper closures ect…
Oh yea,I ain’t bitter,I’m just tired of liberal pinheads pushing schitt up in my face and telling me it’s not schitt I’m smelling.
Sell it somewhere else pal,ease out there once or twice a year and thank these A$$holes for “letting” you do it.
quote:
Originally posted by OccamsRaiserSorry you guys are so bitter. Don’t let it consume you. Believe me there capehorn, no one has ever given me anything.
Your right. This shouldn’t consume us. We should just cut our ballz off and eat the free ice cream with the masses while the government tramples our rights.
Occ, tell me how they came up with charts and grafts for recreational fishermen? Never once have I been checked coming in from off shore fishing. Haven’t been much in the last 4 years, but before that I would average 40-50 trips a year.
Sells hit the nail on the head, we have a ghost fleet of commercial fishermen compared to 20 years ago. The only Head boat I know left in S.C. is the Super Voyager III out of Myrtle Beach. by Head Boat I’m not referring to a 6 person charter. I’m talking a 60-110 footer.
I’d like to see size limits back down to 8" so when I’m fishing the P.I. reef I could keep a couple.
quote:Bingo. Unfortunately, this will keep the real science from being discovered for decades.
Originally posted by Squid RowThe enviro nut bags will use this fiasco as a shining example of succesful fisheries management… just wait and see.
quote:High total landings? Where did that data come from? Also, is that what we are using now? People were reporting high total landings for red snapper, but it was... uh.... "Age Structure" that shut the fishery down, because high landings only reflected a "good year class" is what they told us...
Originally posted by OccamsRaiserDid any of you look at that Powerpoint presentation that was on an earlier post about this? Just curious on what your take on how, after very high total landings of BSB between roughly 1980 and 1988, the total landings generally decreased (with a couple of outliers in the data). Do you think that the fishermen were just getting worse at catching fish, or do you think there is a possibility (however slight) that the population was declining? Yes, they probably could have adjusted the quotas sooner, but determining what is an allowable quota is not even close to an exact science. I for one don’t think those folks have an agenda or are “trying to keep their a**** employed”. It is possible that those people actually care about maintaining a healthy fishery!!! I’m glad that there are rules in place so that my kids and their kids and so on will have a healthy fishery to enjoy and harvest. Call me a nut bag, but I certainly see value in not having billy bob or luther gene deciding it’s time to cut back on taking certain species.
I just looked at the charts:
http://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/sedar/download/SEDAR2_SAR1_BSBComplete.pdf?id=DOCUMENT
Here are the data points they used (pg 26 figure 6.2):
1980 - 600 metric tons landed
1981 - 350mt
1983 - 800mt
1984 - 1100mt
1986 - 250mt
1987 - 800mt
Those are the “high landings” you speak of? Those numbers are ALL OVER THE PLACE!!! By YOUR LOGIC, fishermen were good at catching them in 1980 and forgot how to catch them in 1981, b