New Legislation to remove gear from 99% of New Jersey's reef sites

[captadamnj]

[QUOTE=hammer4reel]They are used some by fluke, sea bass and porgy fisherman , but NOTHING like they are during the open blackfish season where I would expect there may be as many as ten times the boats frequenting those reefs.
QUOTE]

If the gear isn't on the structure then it shouldn't be a problem. That's the point of this legislation, keep fixed gear off structure. And then for the areas it is allowed, restrict fish pots from those areas as well during the predominant drifting months.

[hammer4reel]

[QUOTE=captadamnj]

Originally Posted by hammer4reel

They are used some by fluke, sea bass and porgy fisherman , but NOTHING like they are during the open blackfish season where I would expect there may be as many as ten times the boats frequenting those reefs.
QUOTE]

If the gear isn't on the structure then it shouldn't be a problem. That's the point of this legislation, keep fixed gear off structure. And then for the areas it is allowed, restrict fish pots from those areas as well during the predominant drifting months.

the RFA newsletter as well as yours and Franks writings here says removal of gear by (99%) the bill says 10-25%, so which is it 90 % or 99% as everything the RFA has written here and in Emails has both numbers in the same document, since the whole reef is NOT covered by structure , covering 25% of the structure will probably be equal to over HALF of 50% of the reef site, as they will not be setting gear in the sand.

Allowing that gear to be on the reef site when it is UTILIZED daily by hundreds of boats during the fall blackfish season means it WILL be in our way while anchoring the boats

[captadamnj]

Originally Posted by hammer4reel

covering 25% of the structure will probably be equal to over HALF of 50% of the reef site, as they will not be setting gear in the sand

No, simply not true. if you read the coordinates and look at the reef charts, you will see that only a couple dozen out of hundreds of patch reefs would be included in areas that would allow fixed gear, and we are working to further reduce that number. The gear would be allowed on parts of the reefs where limited materials have been deployed.

[njdiver]

Here are the URLs for the bill and to listen to the Committee hearing:

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2012/Bi...00/2645_I2.HTM

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2012/Bi...00/2645_I2.PDF


Here is the URL to get the recording of the meeting:

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/media/a...N&SESSION=2012

Click on “Listen” to the right of the date (March 8, 2012).

[hammer4reel]

[B][COLOR="Red"]No commercial fishing of lobster using lobster pots would be permitted in the designated areas from November 1 through December 15, and of other fish using fish pots from May 15 through October 1. The bill prohibits the recreational use of lobster pots in the designated areas.[COLOR="red"]

So in reading this more doesnt the bill ALLOW lobster pots to remain in the designated areas from Decmber 15th through the ENTIRE drifting season until the following November 1rst.

And allows fish pots to be on the selected sites from October 1 through the whole blackfish season until the following MAY

so in essense there still will be one type of pot on the reef ALL YEAR/

so this bill IS NOT getting enough done

[captadamnj]

Originally Posted by hammer4reel

[B][COLOR="Red"]so this bill IS NOT getting enough done

If

- geting the gear off 99% of the deployed materials on the two reefs the state has control over;
- removing 100% of the fish pots during the drifting season;
- initiating the process to remove pots from the other 13 reefs (though the only process there is);
- restoring funding to the reef program;
- initiating implemention of a plan to manage gear in state waters in areas outside the reefs

is not enough for you, that would be your opinion.

Alternatively, we can fight about this issue for another 6 years as opposed to focusing on the pressing needs of budget for the Bureau of Marine Fisheries, better science and improved management mechanisms.

Your entitled to your opinion, thanks for sharing.

[hammer4reel]

Originally Posted by captadamnj

If

- geting the gear off 99% of the deployed materials on the two reefs the state has control over;
- removing 100% of the fish pots during the drifting season;
- initiating the process to remove pots from the other 13 reefs (though the only process there is);
- restoring funding to the reef program;
- initiating implemention of a plan to manage gear in state waters in areas outside the reefs

is not enough for you, that would be your opinion.

Alternatively, we can fight about this issue for another 6 years as opposed to focusing on the pressing needs of budget for the Bureau of Marine Fisheries, better science and improved management mechanisms.

Your entitled to your opinion, thanks for sharing.

COMMERCIALgear in ANY type being in the way is still not allowing The DRIFT fishing as you put to happen .

allowing LOBSTER pots on the AXEL during the year except between November 1 and December 15th, means they will be there ALL summer in the way of Guys sea bass fishing, its the LOBSTER pots that are interferring with that reef that everyone is getting tangled in while anchoring on them.

And they have those pots on most of the productive pieces

[Fishin Polski]

Let them pot the whole thing, then we can tie right to them for blackfishing!

[Angler Paul]

I copied and pasted this from NJ Diver, who had posted it on the thread I started. I urge those interested to read the bill and to listen to the testimony that was given at the hearing.

Paul 2nd V.P. JCAA

Here are the URLs for the bill and to listen to the Committee hearing:

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2012/Bi...00/2645_I2.HTM

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2012/Bi...00/2645_I2.PDF


Here is the URL to get the recording of the meeting:

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/media/a...N&SESSION=2012

Click on “Listen” to the right of the date (March 8, 2012).

[hammer4reel]

after listening to the entire session it is Quite apparent that the previous upheld bill was in better interest to the recreational fishing interests, than the new bill that was just read .

That supporting this current bill is backwards in that aspect.

was glad to hear the rest of the fishing community minus the RFA felt the same way.