New Twist Ospreys decline vs bunker science?

[dales529]

https://www.bayjournal.com/news/fish...fc4cf2376.html

I will let you all form your own opinion.

[Broad Bill]

The Chesapeake is an entire ecosystem in and of itself and a food chain like any food chain if you alter one component there's a domino effect on the entire chain, including ocean dwellers which depend on menhaden for forage. Osprey egg population could be down for a number of reasons, but lack of forage or eating fish in a very polluted system because Cooke Inc. has destroyed natures natural filtration system in the Bay would be at the top of my list.

This isn't the first time the osprey population declined in an alarming manner. Most of the issues have been pollution and loss of habitat, specifically DDT's and PCB's. Build up of toxins was causing eggs to die before hatching, eggs shells weren't developing. See attached articles:

https://oystersforthebay.com/2019/04...of-the-osprey/

https://rachelcarsoncouncil.org/ospr...-20th-century/

Remove a substantial portion of the menhaden from the Chesapeake and we've removed nature's natural filtration system. Everything living in the bay will be effected including human consumption of shellfish which Virginia, ASMFC and other state and federal regulatory bodies don't appear to care about as long as Cooke Inc. provides kick backs to local politicians.

Add to that the continued and growing agricultural pesticides and urban run off in the Bay and we have a problem of epic proportion that will impact the Bay and many coastal states, anyone consuming fish or shellfish from the Chesapeake and all wildlife dependent on the Bay for sustenance. The issue we're seeing with the striped bass population is the tip of the iceberg or "the canary in the coal mine". It's not alright to kick Cooke Inc. out of the Bay, slash their annual ocean quota and protect our natural resources but it's ok for people to get cancer from harvesting multiple other species from the largest and most polluted Bay on the east coast and let multiple other species succumb to the same or the impacts of overharvesting the number one forage fish in our local waters.

Kick the can down road for another two years, I'm sure that will help the current situation.

[AndyS]

Found this of Facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/BayLifeBrokerage

Looks like this guy spends an awful amount of time cleaning up the bay.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Bunker boats need to be removed from the Chesapeake since it would solve a variety of problems.... They would help clean up the water, attract more Stripers to enter into the bay and stay since they would have something to forage on.

A big part of the problem is the political stronghold Omega has on Virginia and the Chesapeake bunker fishery is controlled by the states... We threw them out of our local waters years ago and look at the difference it made.

We and they have a huge Cormorant problem too and that needs to be dealt with as well...

[dales529]

My point basically is that they identify an Osprey issue exits but reject that its attributed to lack of bunker because they cant agree on the "trend analysis" used in the data as bunker trawls dont go back far enough so common sense from people on the water was used and ignorned.

Then they agree that a bunker problem exists but reject that its Omega or pollution as the "trend analysis" can NOT be agreed to

Then they agree that a Striper problem exists but screw the analysis and lets cut recreational fishermen!

Its no wonder we fight an uphill battle.

BB: Guess you have to change your "trend analysis" data as no one cares

[Broad Bill]

As I've been saying for years, the problem isn't lack of data, it's the fact the data is being ignored to support an alternative agenda. Not all NMFS's data is accurate, recruitment statistics, discard mortality rates for both recreational (overstated) and commercial (grossly understated), recreational catch using admittedly wrong MRIP statistics, assignable weight values between sectors etc.. But some data is relatively accurate and decisions being made essentially ignore it. MSA mandates that data drives decisions and not personal agendas, economics and corrupt politicians and bureaucrats which is the world we've been living in for too many years.

Dave you know I used NMFS's own data in my research so they couldn't say I introduced new data like they did when SSFFF tried to submit a new model factoring gender composition into their algorithms. Right approach but they gave NMFS an immediate out as NMFS stated "New Model has to be Peer Reviewed" so it was game over and it never got the traction or attention it deserved. Here's an article which chronicles the effort.

https://onthewater.com/news/2018/02/...flounder-stock

Dr. Pat Sullivan is I believe a member of this site and can opine if he so chooses. Like my work, their work fell on deaf ears. SSFFF because it challenged the existing model and required Peer Review, mine because it exposed the decisions NMFS, ASMFC and MAFMC have been making over the last two decades have actually caused the stock's declines.

Dave you know no one ever said my "relational trend analysis" was wrong because it's not and they couldn't attack the data because its their own. The crap that goes on behind the scenes would astonish everyone yet it's never discussed. All we hear about every year are quotas, season lengths and size and possession limits, nothing to do with how the fishery is being managed to address the problems they're facing. Precisely why we go from everything is fine to 42% cuts in quota and potentials moratoriums. Everything else gets buried in 400 plus page stock assessments which no one sees or discusses and its that way for a reason. And now the Commission and Council will only entertain questions and comments from the public of their choice, that's called censorship. And that all changed because my analysis hit a nerve and they didn't want it disseminated in the briefing materials at regulatory meetings.

60 million decline in the female composition of the summer flounder stock over the last 15 years due to regulatory mandates to harvest larger age classes and increase commercial catch values (almost exclusively females), major decline in the female composition of every age class (massive problem) and recruitment levels at continually declining and now historically low levels not seen since the 80's. You don't need a Ph.D. to realize what's causing the stock's decline yet the lead scientist Mark Terceiro at NOAA for the last decade or more has essentially stated and I'm paraphrasing "we have no idea why recruitment has fallen off the cliff." That's politics talking, not science and it's killing the stock.

BB: Guess you have to change your "trend analysis" data as no one cares! Dave, you're starting to sound like Adam Nowalsky. It's not the analysis which is flawed, it's the self serving individuals pulling the strings who repeatedly ignore the problems these fisheries are faced with. I'd bet if ASA filed a lawsuit against NOAA and NMFS for misappropriation of stock quotas or malfeasance in the manner NMFS, ASMFC and MAFMC have collectively mismanaged these two stocks, a judge just might care. At minimum, it'd be worth the effort. Commercials do it all the time, why not the recreational sector or ASA on our behalf through the use of money we fund through our own spending.

I viewed this data from a completely different perspective to analyze twenty year long trends showing how the summer flounder fishery fell apart by using size as a means of managing the stock. The same type analysis can be used for any fishery including menhaden, stripers, winter flounder, cod, whiting etc. The analysis is sound, conclusions are supported by facts but the problem is there's too much money involved and the system is as corrupt as it gets. Change that dynamic and you have a chance to actually manage these stocks again and start saving fisheries and ecosystems like the Chesapeake as opposed to exploiting them. How in the good Lord's name did we ever get here. The majestic Chesapeake Bay turned into a cesspool all for the benefit of a few conglomerates and corrupt politicians.

[dales529]

BB: I was being sarcastic on the "trend analysis"

[Broad Bill]

Dave I know but everyone else might not. Your points, all joking aside, are right on the money and one of the many problems we face with the way salt water fisheries are being managed. The entire system, top to bottom, is broken for reasons most people couldn't begin to comprehend.

NMFS controls the data, they control the systems, they control MRIP which is an abortion, they make the quota decisions and are the ultimate sign off of each state's regulations. So in other words they control everything and have the backing of a cabinet seat that favors economic results, not recreational activities. Anywhere you find the amount of money involved in this industry and government, you'll find copious amounts of corruption and at the end of the day that's what this is all about. Line the pockets of politicians, corrupt officials and who knows how many conglomerates like Cooke Inc. Recreational anglers aren't going to kick money back for little Joey's tuition so it knocks our sector to the back of the line in the list of priorities side by side with fisheries management itself and the environment.

[AndyS]

Pollution:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlMIidtwWGs

[Broad Bill]

Originally Posted by AndyS

Pollution:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlMIidtwWGs

Population growth which has almost doubled over the last four decades created an imbalance in the bay, only thing that saves the Chesapeake is restoring that balance and Cooke Inc. removing 250 million juvenile and adult bunker from the bay and another 500 million ocean side needs to stop in order for the bay to be saved. Too many new homes, too much agricultural and urban toxic runoff and the bay is dying. Place a moratorium on netting in the bay for at minimum 5 years, control the ocean harvest and start addressing the environmental issues sucking the like out of our largest coastal waterway.