Discussion in 'Fishing Chit Chat' started by DHSDave, Jul 12, 2017.
I don't buy much seafood that i don't catch myself, but when I do I make sure that it is MSC Certified. www.msc.org It takes a lot of work to get that cert.
Your stating the obvious of course. Is there a representative that the recreational angler can lean on, can we support a lobby?
Trump shut out industry for species conservation??? That would be a switch ..
Your entitled to your opinion but the commercial tuna hunters are killing out fishing. What happened to the albacore?
I agree that data sample includes catches of bluefin in mexican waters where his commercial figures only include US eastern pacific fishery which is vague. The data raises more questions than it answers. It would by erroneous to conclude that the sportfishing fleet "outfished" the seiner fleet during those years based on that report alone. You can read the whole CDFW report here http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/G4b_Sup_CDFW_PowerPoint2_SEPT2014BB.pdf
You said it brother. Others are either covered in sand or in denial. I've fished recreationally in SD since the Mid 1950's, commercial over fishing as with many other parts of the world are responsible for the massive reduction in paligic fish.
The recreational fishing industry in California is worth $4.6 billion. You'd think that companies would care more. I think you're right, though, that because of the international nature of many of these corporations, they don't depend on our business as much as local commercial fishing operations do on the continued existence of the commercial fishery. Thus, there's less will to commit, because their survival isn't at stake.
Even so, with how much equipment many these companies sell in California, they should care more. You can't just replace a lucrative rod and reel market with products for ecology tours. Just look at the Fred Hall Show - how many of those products would exist, without recreational fishermen? They stand to lose a lot of money, and I actually have heard from certain people that there is interest on the side of these corporations to expand their local lobbies. That should be jumped on.
Really? do you really think that? How do you defend against a man earning a living by fishing?
US seiners aren't allowed to fish in Nexican waters. I understand your concern but this isn't government data it's a collection of actual catch reports data that are turned in by sport boat DFG logs and the commercial deliveries are extensively monitored by the fisheries commission. Commercial boats have to pay a landing tax on all the fish they deliver and it has to match the amount of fish sold by the market so there's not much room to fudge the numbers. But you're welcome to doubt it. I have no skin in the game I'm just trying to educate people about what's actually happening.
Thanks for the link, agree that it just raises more questions and I get an anti-rec vibe, but what else is new....
So for 2014, 451MT from the commercial side, about 7700 fish from the US rec side only that comes from a sampling method of 20% days per month. Sampling, hmmmm.
Would like to know the average fish size, I am sure the commercial guys have it. At 35 lbs. each and 2205 lbs per MT, that would be 122 MT for BFT in local US waters for 2014, which is 27% of the Commercial catch allotment. It would take a 65 lb average to get to 50% of the commercial allotment.
Albacore ? like a lot of Californians they moved to Washington and Oregon.
The argument "this is my living" long used by commercial fishermen and commercial sport boats alike is pure bullshit. In fact I would argue that anyone making a profit has less of a right to the fish, which are a public resource.
The analogy would be that a taxi driver has more rights to the public road because he is using it to make a living.
Sardine and anchovy populations cycle up and down not over decades but over centuries. If you scan down about 2/3s of the way (page 34 - figure 7) on the first document linked below you will see the graphs estimating the biomass over the last 2000 years or so. The commercial fishery was blamed for decades for the big population crash that happened in the late 1940s. When that study was done (1992) they realized that the problem was the commercial fishing which really got going during a pretty big uptick in the natural cycle but had continued into a sharp natural decline. Because they has seen such abundance they did not think (or know) to back off on the big commercial pressure and drove what was a big natural decline into the ground even further. That is why the sardine population took much longer to recover from that natural downturn in the cycle. That is why we saw so little sardine when we were growing up. I'm guessing I'm a couple ticks older than you so likely we witnessed the same thing. The recovery took so long that the fishery died. By the time the population was on its way to recovery we had learned to back off when the population was low as not to repeat that same mistake. That is why we have the regs in the commercial sardine fishery we have now. Add to that the big migration patterns which are still not fully understood but much better in the last decade and its easy to see what happened to the commercial sardine fishery in California. The second link is a short summery of a migration study written in 2012.
A couple more things to note. First a lot of that sardine from when the fishery was going good was shipped overseas. Second the sardine/anchovy population study was only possible because the relativly large scales of those fish being deposted into the sediment. With many species that is not possible, That second point is important because when the natural population boom/bust cycles happen over centuries looking at population trends over decades (most of the population trends in past were taken from commercial catch data) can be very misleading/worthless.
As for the U.S. tuna fishery that ones easy. The big majority of that fish was caught in Mexican waters. Mexico saw too much of that resource going into the pockets of foreigners and decided to exploit that resource themselves. I can't fault Mexico for doing that. The U.S. has a long history of not allowing foreigners to fish our waters - we were one of the first countries to set up an EEZ and we enforce it. That killed the viability of the U.S. fleet. What little remained of U.S.flagged vessels after that are now for the most part fishing in the south pacific. Even that has gotten tougher and tougher for them as the Chinese stepped up. The Chinese government subsidizes not only building vessels but also the fuel it takes for them to fish far far away from China and they do that in a BIG way. Makes it hard for others who don't have that support to compete.
I'm fairly confused by most of the comments but I thought we were talking about US regulations on US boats. US sportboats are allowed to fish in Mexican waters so the totals would include fish caught in Mexico. US seiners aren't allowed to fish in Mexican waters do the totals don't include that. I'm all for Mexico stepping up and setting the same quotas that we have in the US. There would definitely be more tuna around. That being said, Ted Dunn was the guy that started the Mexican tuna pen industry. If you aren't familia with the name I'd look him up.
I've shared about all I know here so I'm going to step back but I will say that albacore were not over fished by purse seiners. From what I've heard their schooling patterns preclude them being caught with a seine net. Have a great evening everyone!
I loved the albacore troll guys, they put me on fish and we did the same for them. Great coexistence between commercial and rec. those guys ventured far and wide in relatively small craft, my hats off to them.
Separate names with a comma.