Nj & NY Different Striper Regulations? Ok for Bass unfair for Fluke?

[Capt. Jerry P]

So no matter what ur opinion is on what the striper regs should b ( I kbow there are many). It has come to my attention that striper regs and options that are proposed ( not definite till approved ) are different for Nj and Ny.

Im not hating on anybody or any state as we are all faced with tough decisions when it comes to regulations... But Wasnt it just last year that NY cried how it was unfair for nj and ny to have different fluke regulations ? Threatened lawsuits... One of the biggest arguments is that they shared waters in example raritan bay.

Now we are gonna adopt the same thing that was unfair with fluke n it's ok with stripers ?

A large part of striper fishing is done in raritan bay ( shared waters) and there will b two different regulations and slots to follow by where ur fishing n where ur boat is at of.

Isnt it now unfair to nj anglers esp the highlands party n charter boat fleet n recreational anglers that fish those areas.

That Nj boats will b right next to ny boats that would b allowed a smaller fish while nj second fish would have to b bigger. Not to mention nj boat wouldn't b allowed to posses whatever is a legal fish in nj in ny waters as there will b a fish of a certain size that is not permitted in ny.

[Capt. Jerry P]

Update from New York regarding striped bass - after what I'm told was a long, sometimes contentious and often boisterous debate, the New York Marine Resources Advisory Council voted for a slot option to provide a second fish and a 28% harvest reduction. That could fall in line with 'on at 28 to 34' and a 'second fish at 36 and above' - or if ASMFC decides that's not enough for a 28% reduction in NY, the 'trophy' fish could possibly go to a 38-inch minimum size.


On Thursday, the New Jersey Marine Fisheries Council approved an option for a two-fish limit for the 2015 striped bass season. The approved option allows for one fish between 28 to 43 inches and another fish at 43 inches and above. The size and bag limit must now meet with legislative approval.

[jmurr711]

Update from New York regarding striped bass - after what I'm told was a long, sometimes contentious and often boisterous debate, the New York Marine Resources Advisory Council voted for a slot option to provide a second fish and a 28% harvest reduction. That could fall in line with 'on at 28 to 34' and a 'second fish at 36 and above' - or if ASMFC decides that's not enough for a 28% reduction in NY, the 'trophy' fish could possibly go to a 38-inch minimum size.


On Thursday, the New Jersey Marine Fisheries Council approved an option for a two-fish limit for the 2015 striped bass season. The approved option allows for one fish between 28 to 43 inches and another fish at 43 inches and above. The size and bag limit must now meet with legislative approval.

#saveastriperbookabottomcharter

[Capt. Jerry P]

#saveastriperbookabottomcharter

Told ya that da 2015 motto:D

[Hunter 2]

Thanks for the info Jerry,
Fluking was less stressful in the Raritan Bay last season with the regs being the same. My Homeport is Keyport and it's such a pain in the a$$ to always worry about the "state line". Hopefully they can get this worked out.
Eddie

[chrislars]

should be a simple argument for this, like fluke. they migrate through both state's waters. hudson river and the spawning is obviously a whole different story, but both species don't winter in nj or ny waters, so they are simply migrating through to their summer homes or coming back for their winter respite. under that premise, and the one the fluke regs were based on, NJ & NY should have the same set of rules. plain and simple to me..... :confused::cool:

[Capt Sal]

NJ charter and PB must pay for a NY permit but NY for hire boats do not have to pay to fish in NJ! We will never be on the same page. I want the Statue Of Liberty back also!

[Capt. Jerry P]

NJ charter and PB must pay for a NY permit but NY for hire boats do not have to pay to fish in NJ! We will never be on the same page. I want the Statue Of Liberty back also!

If nj had a permit for charter boats then they would have to pay but we don't lol n the statue of liberty fight is not one that interests me or my livelhood. However u are correct with never being on the same page

Point being where is the ny politician now that was saying how un fair it was when fluke was gonna b different? Or the anglers who boasted about how unfair it was n it should b the same. Then we go and do the very same thing with another species that is heavily fished in shared waters ( which is what the argument was )

This would obviously hurt the party boats in Atlantic highlands even more than the regs changing to begin with on top of being a big headache. Ur legal 34.1 -35.11 inch bass would now b illegal soon as u crossed into ny bc there slot does not allow one

[Down Deep Sportfishing]

It hasn't even begun yet in regards to Fluke. The southern NJ guys have been trying to push a split NJ state Fluke size option. From say, Great Egg Inlet, south they want Delaware regulations. North of GEI they say we remain with NY regs. These are the same guys who gave back fish for a lower size limit. See how well that worked out.

http://www.asmfc.org/uploads/file/54...nt_Dec2014.pdf

[Capt. Jerry P]

Not trying to offer any opinions but they way I am seeing there appears to be confusion on a few things.
It may help to keep in mind that one is managed under a TAL (fluke) and one is managed under a mortality rate (stripers). These will create two completely different management strategies .
In the case of the stripers, the shared waters can have very different size limits and still achieve the target of 28 % reduction in mortality for each individual state. The decrease mortality rate is being managed state wide for each states full coast line. To my knowledge there has been no options to have reduced fishing days.
In the case of fluke it's TAL . Each state has it's allotted poundage for the season . They could opt for larger size and longer season or small fish with short season. I think the NY political issues were over allotted poundage for their states TAL than Jersey size limit.

The same paragraph u just wrote is the same bs we been hearing for years from the same people. Ur my bro birch but im surprised u could even stand to write it anymore lol bc to me and most it's all just make believe nonsense.

I'm just stating the fact that ny and nj are proposing to adopt separate n different regulations for stripers if approved and what it mears for nj anglers. All of which I posted is correct no?

Ur 34.1 inch up to 35.99999 inch legal nj striper will become illegal if u enter ny waters and our second fish will b 7 inches larger to keep in the same waters if these measures r approved.

Seems awful silly coming from a whole bunch of smart people who complained about shared waters with fluke

Even if both states meet the reduction it just seems we created the same problem all over again.

[Fishguts]

Stripers are managed under a coast wide mortality rate and fluke are managed under a regional and individual state TAL

[Capt. Jerry P]

Stripers are managed under a coast wide mortality rate and fluke are managed under a regional and individual state TAL

Yup I got it....and both states are going to adopt different regulations for stripers and that will create the same problem everyone complained about with fluke. No matter what way it regulated( even if both states meet reduction with different regs) it still creates the problem I stated in my previous post no?

Capt Birch will a nj anglers 34.1-35.9 inch legal bass become illegal in ny waters.... yes or no?

Will Nj Second fish have to b 7 inches than bigger than a ny boat fishing shared raritan bay waters. Yes are no?

This is the problem that now is created... weather it's TAL or coast wide mortality. Different regs in the same waters now create the same problem everyone complained about last season

[Fisherman120]

The waters are essentially the same between NY/NJ in RB, no reason should the regs be different. Too many boats from each side fish each others waters for it to not be the same. They finally woke up with sharing fluke regs now they're going backtrack on that and do this? Ridiculous.

[1captainron]

You could piss and moan and fight forever, like we have been doing for years.
Simple solution.... Just fish and do what you have to do to survive, screw everything else. This is what it has come to.:mad:

[shrimpman steve]

Our politicians are either spineless, don't care, or are afraid of that ass named chucky schumer. We should be threatening the same law suit he did with regionalization.

[TomKaye]

Let me see if I understand this proposal. Here's a hypothetical situation :
3 of us go fish a private boat from AHMM. One morning we're lucky enough
to get a 28, a 29 & a 30" striper for the table. Let's imagine we were at Flynn's.

On the same imaginary trip we get a 37" let's say off some NY point. We cannot keep that 37" because
we're berthed in NJ and heading back there, and need a 43" or bigger ???

Pls note we would probably C & R anyway after we got our table fare,
but what if we wanted to feed a neighbor or we have big families ??
WTF is with our politicians ?

[bunker dunker]

ron is right,We have marched,spoke,written letters, gone to meeting and every other thing we could think of to get this and others things cleared up or atleast actted upon.very little has been done to help the recreational angler,
headboat and charter boat businesses.i 2nd the 'do what you have to do".

[JBird]

The stupidity of these new rules is just absolutely beyond belief.
Why in the wide wide world of sports would these knuckleheads have a different set of rules on shared waters after having the same size limits for so long? Why would NJ encourage anglers to kill a 30lb+ bass?
You don't have to be wearing a tinfoil hat to think that this is an intentional move to screw us all up.
I've said this before and I'll say it again. The economic importance of the striped bass to the recreational sector FAR outweighs it's importance to the commercial one.
All the hand wringers who wanted one fish would be better served by using all that time and energy crying for an end to the commercial fishery coastwide, not hamstringing every charter/party boat already sqeezed in the vice of regulations.

[Joey Dah Fish]

I said it before I will say it again put on your peg leg and eye patch and do what you. If you're a responsible fisherman and care about our fishery you will do the right thing. I always follow the regs but they are early pissing me off!!! It's now not about the regs it's about the control and stupidity of the science and the government.

[Last Lady Charters]

Just another management screw up No one mentions Blackfish with the different seasons--another screw up. I'm with Capt Ron. You gotta do what you gotta do.

[Capt Sal]

Let me see if I understand this proposal. Here's a hypothetical situation :
3 of us go fish a private boat from AHMM. One morning we're lucky enough
to get a 28, a 29 & a 30" striper for the table. Let's imagine we were at Flynn's.

On the same imaginary trip we get a 37" let's say off some NY point. We cannot keep that 37" because
we're berthed in NJ and heading back there, and need a 43" or bigger ???

Pls note we would probably C & R anyway after we got our table fare,
but what if we wanted to feed a neighbor or we have big families ??
WTF is with our politicians ?

It is where your home port is. If you kept two fish say 30 and 34" in Ny last year and were out of AH you were illegal until you entered NJ waters. Years ago when we had a slot fish we had the same problem. I would tell my charter there is no problem keeping the 24-less than 28" bass but once we had one slot fish in the cooler we could not enter NY waters. It cuts the bay in half! Same thing with the fluke,weakfish and winter flounder years ago.On the other hand NY does not allow purse seining of bunker in the bay and NJ does.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Let me see if I understand this proposal. Here's a hypothetical situation :
3 of us go fish a private boat from AHMM. One morning we're lucky enough
to get a 28, a 29 & a 30" striper for the table. Let's imagine we were at Flynn's.

On the same imaginary trip we get a 37" let's say off some NY point. We cannot keep that 37" because
we're berthed in NJ and heading back there, and need a 43" or bigger ???

Pls note we would probably C & R anyway after we got our table fare,
but what if we wanted to feed a neighbor or we have big families ??
WTF is with our politicians ?

Tom - The way I understand it is even though that fish may be legal when you caught it in NY as long as you stay in NY you are in compliance. The minute you cross over into NJ, you need to be in complaince with NJ Laws.

So, your port of origin makes no difference what so ever. It's all about being in compliance with the local regs in what ever waters you are in at any given time.

The rest of this is not directed at you Tom but for everyone.

We all complained last year when they wanted to change fluke from local to regionally managed. We in NJ wanted to keep our more favorable local regs in place and NY wanted then to be regionalized and they won that argument. Fluke was regionlaized so we now have the same regs in NY and NJ.

Now Stripers come along and we want to keep it by state if it favors our preferences yet we complain about the confusion??

By the way, NY and NJ have had different Striper regulations in place for as long as I can remember and we've always had to deal with the different regs when we crossed boundries, just like we used to have to do with Fluke. We also have different federal regs for Stripers so once you cross over the 3 mile line, you are our of compliance if you have a Striper in your possession.

Some might argue, but I'm in favor of allowing the individual states to govern the regs in their own waters.... Not because I think it makes sense in managing an overall fishery. Fish migrate and spawn in different states and travel through mutiple states so managing the stocks on a state by state basis does not make sense. However, I want our local interests to be represented in our local waters. If you regionalize and lump us in with NY and they happen to have someone representing their interests who has more political power like Schumer, then NJ is going to get screwed.

Lastly and on a more of higher level, I'm of the opinion that the federal government should stick to governing federal issues that effect everyone in this country and keep their noses our of local affairs. Local interests need to be addressed and represented by local people not some bought and paid for fat cat in Washington.

Having said this, local, state or federal it's all about politics and polititcians. They are all self serving a holes but at least the local ones are our a holes ;)

[1captainron]

Now with that being said....Why the Hell doesn't our Governor grow some balls and step up to help us out? For Christ sake if it wasn't for the Sportsman vote, he would have never gotten to where he is today.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Ron - It's all about the political divide in our country. At the time our Governor was with the wrong party to try and infuence anything in Washington. Chuch Shumer happened to be with the right party.

Now that the senate and the house are both a Republican majority, he might have better luck and maybe even more luck when we elect a new President in 2 years.

Not trying to get political here and start a $hit storm, just stating some facts ;)

Both parties have their issues and as I've said before..... Politicians are like diapers... They need to be changed frequently and for the same reason.

[Sea Horse]

Our governor is the least bit to worry about right now. Sen McCain is trying to repeal the Jones Act and if he succedes our US domestic maritime industry (shipping,ferries,fishing etc) will be given up to foreign flag.

JANUARY 15, 2015 — Making the already controversial Keystone Pipepine Bill yet more so, Senator John McCain offered an amendment January 13 that would repeal the Jones Act.

The Senator said: "I have long advocated for a full repeal of The Jones Act, an antiquated law that has for too long hindered free trade, made U.S. industry less competitive and raised prices for American consumers. The amendment I am introducing again today would eliminate this unnecessary, protectionist restriction. According to the Congressional Research Service, it costs $6 per barrel to move crude from the Gulf Coast to the Northeast United States on a Jones Act tanker, while a foreign-flag tanker can take that same crude to a refinery in Canada for $2 per barrel – taking money directly out of the pockets of American consumers. I hope my colleagues will join in this important effort to repeal this archaic legislation to spur job creation and promote free trade."

Needless to say, McCain's move has stirred up a storm of protest.

"The McCain amendment would gut the nation’s shipbuilding capacity, outsource our U.S. Naval shipbuilding to foreign builders, and cost hundreds of thousands of family-wage jobs across this country," said American Maritime Partnership Chairman Tom Allegretti. "The shipbuilding requirement, which Senator McCain seeks to eliminate, is in place to ensure that the United States maintains the industrial capacity to build its own ships, so as to protect and defend the American homeland. It is hard to believe that the Congress would endorse a change to the law that would outsource U.S. jobs and reduce national security by effectively creating dependence on foreign countries to build our ships."

Here's what the Navy League said:

The Navy League of the United States opposes the McCain Amendment(amendment #2) to S.1, which would gut the U.S. shipbuilding industry by striking the U.S. build requirement provisions of the Jones Act.

The Jones Act requires vessels in domestic waterborne trade to be owned by U.S. citizens, built in the United States and crewed by U.S. mariners. These provisions keep American shipping companies, shipyards, mariners, maritime academies and thousands of people working. It is a critical component to the long-term sustainability of the U.S. fleet and the health of the U.S. shipbuilding industry. The Jones Act aids in controlling shipbuilding costs for the Navy, the Marine Corps and the Coast Guard by ensuring the health of the industrial base.

The Carl Levin and Howard P. "Buck" McKeon National Defense Authorization Act of 2015 demonstrates the national security importance of the Jones Act, stating that "coastwise trades laws [such as the Jones Act] promote a strong domestic trade maritime industry, which supports the national security and economic vitality of the United States."

The loss of the American-built provisions in the Jones Act would have devastating ripple effects on all the sea services. Its immediate impact would be a reduction in the number of ships built in U.S. shipyards, which would result in a loss of jobs, a loss of industrial knowledge and skills, and a loss in America's edge in shipbuilding quality and technology.

This would mean all ships used by our U.S. Navy, Marine Corps and Coast Guard, which of course will be built in the United States, would have a higher cost per ship due to increased overhead costs, and would have a less reliable industrial base. A strong industrial base is necessary for innovation and quality.

This amendment would increase costs for the sea services during a time of sequestration and tightening budgets, when each dollar our sea services spend must go farther. The impacts would be extremely detrimental to the sea services

Maritime unions have also expressed their opposition.

"Senator McCain has chosen to offer his amendment at the last minute to an unrelated bill because he knows that if the issue is debated fairly and openly on its merits, he would not be able to defend his position," said MEBA.

"This amendment has no place in the Keystone bill or in Congress," stated SIU President Michael Sacco. "It is just another attack on the Jones Act, one that could cripple the U.S.-flag maritime industry. We need all hands on deck to defeat this amendment.

[FASTEDDIE29]

I miss the slot fish between 24-28 inches! Man, oh man, that's a tasty Striper!!!!

[Capt. Jerry P]

Wasn't trying to start an uproar, piracy, or am I'm bitching n moaning bc I rarely post anything about regulations. Bc I don't believe any of the numbers or how anything is counted when it comes to the actual biomass of stocks and landings... especially fisheries that already faced tough regs on in the past most believe are healthy bc of that

I'm just over here hoping we can keep a seabass next year... Pretty sad I know...

But I just wanted to point out the outcome Nj Anglers would face if the states adopted two very different striper regs. Its alot different than fluke or when stripers was different b4. Where it was easy to understand for most anglers.

There will b two inch slot of stripers that are legal in nj n not in ny and a nj second fish will have to b alot bigger( 7 inches bigger N excluding 34.00001-35.99999 inch) even if fishing in the same spot in ny waters.

Personally I don't even fish in that area Just find it funny (no matter how it's regulated or what scientific way it's different) that in the end will result in same problem ( when it comes to shared waters ) a lot of people complained about for fluke

[Gerry Zagorski]

Did not think that was your intention Jerry. And yes it will cause confusion. This is however a good post. Kinda like those old gramar school reading rention questions I could never figure out...

Lets suppose the regulations get approved as follows:
- NJ is 1 Striper 28 to less than 43 inches with a second of 43 inches or more
- NY is 1 Striper from 28 to 34 inches with a second of 38 inches or more

A charter boat with 6 anglers, a captain and mate on board leaves from NJ. The anglers drink a bunch of beer, one guy gets a bunker snag stuck in his hand and can't fish so he goes in the cabin and takes a nap. That makes him sick so he throws up all over the cabin. The others are busting his balls but they keep on fishing with their spining reels but are using them upside down.

The Captain and mate are shaking their heads in disbelief that these guys are such hacks so they themselves proceed to fish. They catch and retain 9 Stripers.... 7 that are between 28 and 32 inches and 2 that are 38 and 47 inches.

By mistake they drift over into NY waters and are stopped and boarded by the NY DEP. To add insult to injury when they arrive back at the dock at the end of the day, there is an NJ DEP person checking all the boats.

Questions:
- Were they in compliance when they were boarded in NY waters?
- Were they in compliance when they got checked at the dock in NJ?
- If they were out of compliance who gets the summons?

On the lighter side:
- What would this fishing report look like if it where posted on NJfishing.com?
- Who gets stuck with the job of cleaning up the puke in the cabin?
- Should everyone have stopped fishing and gone home when the guy got the bunker snag stuck in his hand?

Can't wait to see some of the creative responses here ;)

[dales529]

Did not think that was your intention Jerry. And yes it will cause confusion. This is however a good post. Kinda like those old gramar school reading rention questions I could never figure out...

Lets suppose the regulations get approved as follows:
- NJ is 1 Striper 28 to less than 43 inches with a second of 43 inches or more
- NY is 1 Striper from 28 to 34 inches with a second of 38 inches or more

A charter boat with 6 anglers, a captain and mate on board leaves from NJ. The anglers drink a bunch of beer, one guy gets a bunker snag stuck in his hand and can't fish so he goes in the cabin and takes a nap. That makes him sick so he throws up all over the cabin. The others are busting his balls but they keep on fishing with their spining reels but are using them upside down.

The Captain and mate are shaking their heads in disbelief that these guys are such hacks so they themselves proceed to fish. They catch and retain 9 Stripers.... 7 that are between 28 and 32 inches and 2 that are 38 and 47 inches.

By mistake they drift over into NY waters and are stopped and boarded by the NY DEP. To add insult to injury when they arrive back at the dock at the end of the day, there is an NJ DEP person checking all the boats.

Questions:
- Were they in compliance when they were boarded in NY waters?
- Were they in compliance when they got checked at the dock in NJ?
- If they were out of compliance who gets the summons?

On the lighter side:
- What would this fishing report look like if it where posted on NJfishing.com?
- Who gets stuck with the job of cleaning up the puke in the cabin?
- Should everyone have stopped fishing and gone home when the guy got the bunker sang stuck in his hand?

Can't wait to see some of the creative responses here ;)

Sounds like they came up from Philly so rules don't apply:D

[jmurr711]

Sounds like they came up from Philly so rules don't apply:D

excuse me?

[dales529]

excuse me?
Figured you would respond Joey! Just kidding and hey you represent philly well, Congrats on your recent tog success and the pretzels are to die for!
All the best.

[dales529]

On a serious note this is a great post and Thanks Capt Jerry for starting it. Always good to hear the many for hire guys weigh in and glad you (Jerry P) started the discussion.

'I think you are absolutely correct about the unnecessary confusion the different regs can cause but what else is new. Not sure exactly why NJ went this way except its a way to meet the reduction, not piss off the factors that wanted a one fish limit and offer the factors that wanted 2 fish an option however we all know it amounts to a one fish limit in part.

I also agree with statement about the data, science or total lack thereof which creates all this regulation speculation that is now our lives. Its tough to know what or who to fight anymore .

Actually I give Chuck Schumer credit (although I am not a fan of regionalization) for getting his NY constituents what they wanted and wish NJ had politicians with the power and / or guts to do the same.

Many have posted that we need money for a lobbyist and compare to the NRA and what they have achieved. We have a federal lobbyist in RFA and local lobbyist in RFA -NJ along with many other groups. I cant speak for other groups but RFA national and RFA NJ has lobbied our politicians on both sides of the aisle for a long time. You can google "Lobbyists RFA " and see the contributions over the years ( approx. 1.3 million).

Granted we haven't gotten much and again what do we fight for and where do you put the money? Seems like the main fight should be reform of Magnuson Stevens as that is the only way to force them to use better data/ science and stop species closures without representation.

This again is where its more political than fishing conservation as we all want to save the fish but not put fishermen out of business and we all have no clue as to what species are in trouble or not. Having said that to mimic the NRA is hard because their membership / donations are pretty much a one topic discussion, you either believe in gun rights or you don't. With fishermen there is always debate on certain species, seasons, areas, fishing rights groups, Pots , commercial etc where we don't agree at all and that's why we cant ever mimic NRA fund raising. No one agrees on what or why to fight for.

So whats next? If a general fundraiser was established for both NJ and Federal lobbying say a pay pal account where you could donate as little as $5.00 to whatever and (lets start small) everyone on this saltwater site gave $5 to fight for Magnuson Stevens reform would you?

[Gerry Zagorski]

Count me in.

[Reel Class]

so whats next? If a general fundraiser was established for both nj and federal lobbying say a pay pal account where you could donate as little as $5.00 to whatever and (lets start small) everyone on this saltwater site gave $5 to fight for magnuson stevens reform would you?

i'm in

[Short Cast]

I have an proposal that might make the different regs livable. & this could work where any two state share fishing grounds. The state would have to add to there regulations that within 2-3 miles of their border a boat launched from
an adjoining state it shall be legal to "possess" fish based on that states regulations, but you can only "take" fish based on the state you are fishing in's
regulations. This makes sense since the state are regulated on their catch which I believe is calculated on their landings.

[Capt. JJ]

"Capt. Jelly....it BIIIIIGG ocean out there! You put more black color fish in boat, no stripe fish allowed!!!!!!"

[Capt Sal]

On a serious note this is a great post and Thanks Capt Jerry for starting it. Always good to hear the many for hire guys weigh in and glad you (Jerry P) started the discussion.

'I think you are absolutely correct about the unnecessary confusion the different regs can cause but what else is new. Not sure exactly why NJ went this way except its a way to meet the reduction, not piss off the factors that wanted a one fish limit and offer the factors that wanted 2 fish an option however we all know it amounts to a one fish limit in part.

I also agree with statement about the data, science or total lack thereof which creates all this regulation speculation that is now our lives. Its tough to know what or who to fight anymore .

Actually I give Chuck Schumer credit (although I am not a fan of regionalization) for getting his NY constituents what they wanted and wish NJ had politicians with the power and / or guts to do the same.

Many have posted that we need money for a lobbyist and compare to the NRA and what they have achieved. We have a federal lobbyist in RFA and local lobbyist in RFA -NJ along with many other groups. I cant speak for other groups but RFA national and RFA NJ has lobbied our politicians on both sides of the aisle for a long time. You can google "Lobbyists RFA " and see the contributions over the years ( approx. 1.3 million).

Granted we haven't gotten much and again what do we fight for and where do you put the money? Seems like the main fight should be reform of Magnuson Stevens as that is the only way to force them to use better data/ science and stop species closures without representation.

This again is where its more political than fishing conservation as we all want to save the fish but not put fishermen out of business and we all have no clue as to what species are in trouble or not. Having said that to mimic the NRA is hard because their membership / donations are pretty much a one topic discussion, you either believe in gun rights or you don't. With fishermen there is always debate on certain species, seasons, areas, fishing rights groups, Pots , commercial etc where we don't agree at all and that's why we cant ever mimic NRA fund raising. No one agrees on what or why to fight for.

So whats next? If a general fundraiser was established for both NJ and Federal lobbying say a pay pal account where you could donate as little as $5.00 to whatever and (lets start small) everyone on this saltwater site gave $5 to fight for Magnuson Stevens reform would you?

1.3million$ is a drop in the bucket compared to what the NRA gets. We also are going state by state with the RFA. What is good for us may not be good for Delaware or NY.We elected Christie and when we need him where is he? I wish we had a guy like Shumer representing NJ. When the moratorium on stripers went into effect years ago I thought it was the greatest thing that could happen for recreational fisherman. What we have lost in restrictions in that time is sad!

[dales529]

1.3million$ is a drop in the bucket compared to what the NRA gets. We also are going state by state with the RFA. What is good for us may not be good for Delaware or NY.We elected Christie and when we need him where is he? I wish we had a guy like Shumer representing NJ. When the moratorium on stripers went into effect years ago I thought it was the greatest thing that could happen for recreational fisherman. What we have lost in restrictions in that time is sad!

Exactly Sal, and to my point NRA generates the "full bucket" instead of a drop because they have mass nationwide members who agree with their mission (right or wrong). Our plight is a little different as all fishermen dont typically agree on the "mission" or who should be running the fight.

The idea is simple, starting with salt water members on this site and maybe a few fresh water ones we see how a general fundraiser would work or not. if there is any promise we go after the whole state via newspapers, fishing publications, major tackle and boating businesses etc. Depending on who you believe, fishermen in NJ alone are somewhere between 600,000 and over 1,000,000 ( hard to say as only 250,000 register on the saltwater registry but that's another issue to some) .
But lets say for argument sake all NJ fishermen kicked in $5.00 to buy us a politician ( again a whole other issue but apparently that's how it works)
Then add in all NJ fishing businesses etc and you could possibly raise some serious money to get a politicians / lobbyists attention.
That's NJ then if it snowballed you go after the whole east coast and make some noise with NRA type dollars.

It all has to start somewhere and from small ideas maybe bigger things can happen. After all its $5.00.

Doubt it will work but worth an effort and I agree with you "where is Mr Christie" and our other elected officials.

Thanks for your input

[Capt. Jerry P]

Exactly Sal, and to my point NRA generates the "full bucket" instead of a drop because they have mass nationwide members who agree with their mission (right or wrong). Our plight is a little different as all fishermen dont typically agree on the "mission" or who should be running the fight.

The idea is simple, starting with salt water members on this site and maybe a few fresh water ones we see how a general fundraiser would work or not. if there is any promise we go after the whole state via newspapers, fishing publications, major tackle and boating businesses etc. Depending on who you believe, fishermen in NJ alone are somewhere between 600,000 and over 1,000,000 ( hard to say as only 250,000 register on the saltwater registry but that's another issue to some) .
But lets say for argument sake all NJ fishermen kicked in $5.00 to buy us a politician ( again a whole other issue but apparently that's how it works)
Then add in all NJ fishing businesses etc and you could possibly raise some serious money to get a politicians / lobbyists attention.
That's NJ then if it snowballed you go after the whole east coast and make some noise with NRA type dollars.

It all has to start somewhere and from small ideas maybe bigger things can happen. After all its $5.00.

Doubt it will work but worth an effort and I agree with you "where is Mr Christie" and our other elected officials.

Thanks for your input

Least it's a idea or thought... gotta give u credit for that... bc complaining, telling war stories from 40 years ago and threatening to b a pirate clearly isnt the answer.

People don't even know where to give money too even if they wanted to... and let's face the fact that no one really likes to talk about... many people / customers are just disgusted with the whole ordeal over the years... how could u have faith in any of the fisheries councils, meeting or groups that fight for us. It's meant with no disrespect The fact it is not working... i know people work countless volunteer hrs and travel all over but doesn't change the end result. Sorry Im younger and maybe look at it different than some older than me but look at the regulations changes over the last 10-15 years. Big failure...

[Gerry Zagorski]

The one thing we all have working against us now more then ever, is the enviro extremists and other special interest groups like them. Just like the NRA, they are not splitered like us and have one simple goal and that is to totally eliminate fishing and hunting.

These groups are very well organized and funded and they fight on a federal and state level. Take a look at whats happenend in California and all the MPAs (Marine Protected Areas) and restrictions there. Entire swatches of oceans, bays and rivers have been closed down to fishing. Can you imagine that happening in a place like the Shrewsbury Rocks or Raritan Bay?? It could if we simply roll over and let it.

[Capt Sal]

Least it's a idea or thought... gotta give u credit for that... bc complaining, telling war stories from 40 years ago and threatening to b a pirate clearly isnt the answer.

People don't even know where to give money too even if they wanted to... and let's face the fact that no one really likes to talk about... many people / customers are just disgusted with the whole ordeal over the years... how could u have faith in any of the fisheries councils, meeting or groups that fight for us. It's meant with no disrespect The fact it is not working... i know people work countless volunteer hrs and travel all over but doesn't change the end result. Sorry Im younger and maybe look at it different than some older than me but look at the regulations changes over the last 10-15 years. Big failure...

Jerry, We need to have younger Capts. and the older Capts. as well as the entire recreational fisherman on the same page. Although you do more bottom fishing than me I still care about the regs. for seabass and blackfish. I gather you care about what is happening in Raritan Bay although you do not fish there. This a good thing. We "older guys" tell the war stories so the younger generation knows what we once had. I agree we have failed! The big question is how do we fix it? I wish I knew.