I’d like to tell you the dust has settled in the 2019 striper debate, but the brouhaha is far from over. States have until November 30 to deliver options to the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASFMC) for technical committee approval, with a final decision coming in February.
As described in the official Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for Atlantic striped bass – which outlines very specifically how ASMFC is to manage the fishery – the use of conservation equivalency is quote, “an integral component of the Commission’s Interstate Fisheries Management Program, particularly for Atlantic striped bass.” As per the FMP, conservation equivalency allows states flexibility to develop alternative regulations that address specific state or regional differences while still achieving overall goals and objectives.
There’s been a lot finger pointing and blame about ASMFC’s final approval of a coastwide slot of one fish at 28 to 35 inches, with folks angry that the majority of written comments in support of a higher end minimum size of one fish at 35 inches was disregarded. However, because of conservation equivalency, the option selection was mostly irrelevant. Each state is essentially tasked with lowering 2020 harvest by 18% over 2017 numbers.
One might assume that if every state followed through with a similar 18% reduction, the coastwide reduction would equal 18%, right? Apparently, that wasn’t the case. I attended two of the three New Jersey public hearings, sat through all the slide presentations, listened to questions and answers, and kept tabs on what different speakers said, and not once did I hear it explained that New Jersey would shoulder a higher 40% decrease than other states based on the options presented. I’m no mathematician, but I do know if you’re shooting for an 18% average and one guy is getting 40%, then clearly others are doing much less.
“Several states currently use conservation equivalency,” the FMP states, adding as an example “the use of closed seasons have been used as an effective tool to implement smaller size limits or increased bag limits while still achieving the same quantified level of conservation.” In other words, New Jersey could choose to enhance spawning area restrictions, which could effectively add to its annual reduction; but those managing heavy artillery against New Jersey don’t really seem interested in separating this fisheries management fact from fiction.
Sadly, I believe many folks were led astray by out-of-state activists with a vendetta against New Jersey who have not been completely honest with their followers. An upstart fly and light tackle association based in New York for example openly pushed for the one at 35-inch option, because as one member stated at the Manahawkin meeting, it offered the highest level of reduction. In actuality, one at 35 offered an 18% reduction, whereas one at 28 to 35 inches results in a 19% reduction; the option with the highest overall reduction was actually the 32- to 40-inch slot (21%).
This new group’s anti-Jersey bias has been on full display on social media following the ASMFC decision; personally I saw it coming months prior in a few social media barbs and a rather nasty email exchange last May between a coworker at The Fisherman and the new group’s leader, a political activist from Maryland. In a personal appeal for support from our magazine soon after the group launched, their new policy director warned “we will delineate the publications who are on the wrong side of things,” while threatening those he perceived as abusive to his message “it will be met with special kind of hell that I have built a lucrative career upon.” Perhaps if this new organization spent less time lobbing hand grenades and more time being truthful and inclusive in their conservation message, the striper world would be a better place, with fewer dustups and brouhahas.
Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukah – and here’s hoping for a little more peace, love and understanding from all sides in the New Year!
