Fly Fishing Forum - Reply to Topic
Stripers and Coastal Gamefish Stripers, Blues, Inshore tuna!

Thread: More on Closed Fishing Zones Reply to Thread
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Fly Fishing Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Home Waters
Your home waters
Current Favorite Fly
If you only had one... (change anytime)


Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.

Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options
Rate Thread
If you like, you can add a score for this thread.

Topic Review (Newest First)
12-11-2001 08:52 AM
DFix Historically, area closings are knee jerk reactions done in haste (redundant).

The upcoming meeting in NBPT has all the implications of effecting recreational area closings MORESO than it's effect on commercial closings - it is this scribe's understanding that CCA MA, of which I am a member , opposes the connection of any such closings of grounds to recreational pursuits, when combined with commercial restrictions.

provides no substantive information on when meeting convenes.

Further information may be obtained (depending on what has been discovered) by contacting Kent Jackson of CCA MA -

Personally, it is incumbent upon us all to show our concern and opposition to any closing which affects recreational harvest. We portray ourselves to be resource minded and, in doing so, should make that view clearly known to NEFMC. Argumentatively, we do not cause the same level of consumption or reduction of the resource.

I believe the window on this is very narrow (as this is written).
12-11-2001 08:37 AM
bcasey The position of CCA is not to stomp all over the idea of Marine Protected Areas, "MPA's". But to have the abillity, and the right, to review the intended closures and the supporting evidence as to why the closure has been proposed. This is not a "not in my backyard" issue, it's a decision that we as conservationists want to understand and potentially support. Please don't fault the CCA for trying to protect the rights of fishermen, it's what we are ! There are some locations that may deserve this type of protection, Stellwagon Bank may be one of them, however, that is just my opinion, not neccessarily that of CCA.
We, at CCA, are a GROUP and therefor need the support of many to atain a voice loud enough to be heard, but, also, even to formulate our stand on these types of issues. My individual opinion may not be what we as a group intend, although I'll allways freely give it out (never been one to withhold them, just ask my wife). So, please, if you are interesed in these issues, WE NEED YOU, come to the next CCA-Cape Cod meeting.
It will be held at the OLD INN in West Dennis, 6:30pm, Tuesday, January 8th, 2002.
The speaker will be Tony Stetzko, with a video and slide presentation and his views on fishing the beach. Bertha will also attend.
In addition to the speaker, a lively disscussion will be had with regard to MPA's as well as an update on the ASMFC Amendment #6 to Striped Bass Management Plan, the NEFMC proposed changes to the Groundfish allocation, the new changes to CCA-Ma and the implementation of the New England Regional Director and Management Staff.
Also, a quick review of the newly installed officers as well as positions need to be filled, both locally and regionally.
Cost of dinner and speaker is $20.00, and bucket raffles will be held with some great fishing tackle and related items up for grabs.
With the Mid-cape location for this meeting and the prodding by the lower Cape guys, we're expecting a large turnout for this evening, so, Please call me to make a reservation for dinner as well as to attend the event. 617-543-8354. Before January 6th if possible!
Remember, you don't have to be a member to join in.
12-11-2001 08:36 AM
Roop I was thinking about this last night, there are several different issues here being rolled into one. Don't really have time right now to dig into it but I strongly believe that someone like Tim Watts who has demonstrated a clear understanding of the status of the marine environs would be a valuable resource to share his knowledge as a moderator of a conservation/ environmental forum.

12-11-2001 06:08 AM
timwatts Part of Stellwagen may be a place where it could be done around here. I kinda like the idea of leaving some areas alone. Eddie and Chris is CCA involved in the effort to remove the Fort Halifax Dam at the mouth of the Sebasticook. That would give stripers access to some of their prime historic spawning grounds.
12-10-2001 05:31 PM
linesides Isn't the Fisheries meeting really targeted toward commercial fishing zone management? I am not aware of any specific Atlantic coastal zones where sportsmen harvest by hook and line would have population impact, although as a whole it has a huge impact. Commercial fishing would be another matter altogether, zone management would be very appropriate if coordinated with fish behavior and habitat. Zone restrictions like the offshore banks make all the difference in the world and are a big part of keeping the stocks abundant.

I would be 100% in favor of no-fishing zones provided they are imposed on cornerstone forage species like menhaden. I would support them 100% for sport angling if they were applied to known sportfishing impact areas, but I can't think of any (ocean) areas of that nature. There are really no distinct zones where angler impact can be localized, but there are many zones where commercial harvest can be identified as key:

North Sea sand eel fishery. Menhaden fisheries - albeit not really localized. Striped Bass netting in Chesapeake and Hudson Rivers. Open seas salmon netting in the Greenland fishing grounds.

Looking beyond coastal areas, any exploitation of anadromous fishes at dams, waterfalls, shipping locks, etc - are capable of major damage to specific populations by anglers. We should levy restrictions on these areas for sportsmen wherever possible. In many cases we already do.

Once again, as a whole sportsmen have a big impact especially in MA but within localized areas it would achieve nothing. Zone mgmt is for commercial fisheries, broad ranging rules are best for sportsmen - like an inter-coastal mgmt system. This would be best managed by the Federal authorities IMHO. In fact, I feel that the root of the problem is that state governments can't get their act together and need an intervening authority.
12-10-2001 05:29 PM
Chris There was no indication as to what locations may or may not be considered for closure other than it was offshore and concerned mainley fish stocks and commercial fishing. I just thought with the direction this thread seamed to be heading I'd throw in that I heard a meeting was planned and that if anyone thought that sportfishing may be impacted that I'd pass it on. If anyone hears what comes of the meeting(s) this week, as I will, to let us all know.

Eddie you are correct in the fact that the Kennebec is 1/5 the nursery of the Chessepeke. Merrymeeting Bay pales in size compared to the the Chessie also. However, it is very productive. My point was more to the ecology surrounding the resource as an example of some pretty effective mangement.
12-10-2001 04:56 PM
Roop Eddie,

Remeber, no two CCA chapters are the same. I had a similar experience here where the local meetings were just a gathering to talk, have dinner and listen to a guide or author talk. Little if no conservation issues were raised.

That's why I plan on supporting the Cape Cod chapter. Brain Case is running it and I expect him to provide some very strong stewardship.

12-10-2001 04:48 PM

I recently joined CCA in Maine because I thought it would be a good thing to support an organization that lobbies for rec. fishermen. When I got the news letter, I was afraid I had made a mistake. The editorial regarding the "no fishing zones" read like something issued by "Wise Use"(a conservative lobby group bought and paid for by mining and logging interests posing as outdoors men). The news letter used many of the same appeals that I have read in editorials supporting jet skis and criticizing "no motor zones". Hmm, I hope I'm wrong, be it seemed like CCA is in bed with the boating industry. I am opposed to the"my right to fish no matter what" mentality. Every one should be willing to make sacrifices to nurture abundant fishing. The striped bass resource has come a long way in a short period of time. These gains were achieved trough good management and sacrifice. No doubt the CCA had a role in this, and I hope I am wrong about their stand against the "no fish zones" I will go to the next meeting and check them out.
Also, I don't think that the Kennebec has even 1/20th the spawning productivity of the Chesapeake or the Hudson. I hope in time it will be a significant contributor.
12-10-2001 04:25 PM
Roop This is great. (sarcasm intended). I hope you're kidding about the East Coast areas.

We can't even get a coastal agreement on striped bass management but a federal decision to close waters seems to move like wildfire!

I remember peoples reaction a year ago being something like, "It's not going to happen in my favorite waters."

For an educational, clear position on the NO FISHING ZONES and their growth since the first one was established, check out the following link:

12-10-2001 01:38 PM
Lefty Ok, as long as there not meeting to CLOSE Newburyport by adding PI to a no fishing zone. Then I would be totally against them.

12-10-2001 01:34 PM

I heard this morning that the fisheries folks are meeting later this week in Newburyport, MA to discuss Marine Protective Zone selection for the east coast. Just wondering if the sport fishing crowd is going to have any representation by CCA or anyone else there to listen in and offer our angle?
12-10-2001 09:34 AM
DFix Just goes to show money doesn't always talk. No hidden message in that -
12-07-2001 10:36 PM
Chris My point in regards to access was that, at this point, I think we have more to be concerned about from the money folks buying up shore front property and then restricting parking and weigh points near them. Just look at the complaints about fisherman parking on the causeway, the difficulty of access on the Brewster side not to mention some of the north shore. The most important thing is to make sure we are heard when the powers that be sit down to draw the lines as to where, how and when fishing will be allowed.

I will say that Maine has held its ground for the in regards to the Kennebec striper nursery. It is right up there with the Chessepeek for spawning production. While we watched Massachusetts ease lenght, bag and commercial regulations on stripers Maine held fast and only after populations improved markedly did we change from one fish 36+" to a slot of one fish between 20" + 26" OR one over 40"- AND no commercial taking. You can't get striper in a restaurant here. Also, the Kennebec is closed to the use of bait and keeping fish until July first. You are required to fish with a single treble on a lure all season. These regs extend from the first impoundment in Waterville to an imaginary line drawn across the mouth of the river from Popham to Newagen. The elver fishing has also been restricted as well increasing the sand eel populations and in turn giving the yung fish a good chance at bulking up for the run south.

I would argue that one of the reasons the fishery is hanging in there so well and not dropping off from the easing if regs on the lower coast is because our nursery is so well protected. I saw a lot of young fish up here this year.

We need to talk seriously and loudly when the fisheries people start stirring but not assume that just because NPR said there were interesting stats coming from a few test cases that fishing will go away. I thought it was good news all in all but as yet not much of a threat.
12-07-2001 02:19 PM
Roop Interesting points.

Will jump into this tomorrow after I check my information.

12-07-2001 02:06 PM
juro Trying to cut to the core of the issue, I have absolutely no doubt at all that it's a good policy to shut down fishing in those areas where it's devastating the population. We must not forget Chesapeake Bay's striped bass spawning ground moratorium and the profound effect it had.

When discussing fishing, we can't compare commercial seining to a recreational flyfishing season either. Stopping one will have a much more emphatic effect on a population than the other in fact I would argue that a typical fish population could withstand fly fishing without measurable harm while it often can't survive a large scale commercial harvest.

So if they cut the million ton per year harvest of sand eels in the North sea to 500,000 tons, I would think that's good. If they say we can't flyfish on Cape Cod because it traumatizes the fish, well then that's when it's time for a revolution.

This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:29 AM.

vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright (All Rights Reserved)