Immediate Action Needed By 7/30 For Seabass

[AndyS]

Would be nice to see more PB and charter captains commenting on this post, just sayin'.

[Duffman]

Stupid question since you guys who invest so much time into this……IYO or if you know for a fact, do the powers that be, people that make the regulation decisions, read reports on this site and others like it?

I ask for a reason. Give me a second here to explain the question…..

When my non boating/fishing friends say on a Monday…. “What an awesome weekend, how was fishing/boating?” Meanwhile it was a cloudless sky but blew 30 knots East. They just don’t get it.

So……the guys making the regs and reading all these sites and reading “on the meat” “Limited out” “slaughter” “epic” and whatever other nonsense that’s makes us fisherman look like turds in their eyes. That affect decision making process on regs?

[Duffman]

Is it “affect “ or “effect” ? I stand corrected sensitive people.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Originally Posted by Duffman

Stupid question since you guys who invest so much time into this……IYO or if you know for a fact, do the powers that be, people that make the regulation decisions, read reports on this site and others like it?

I ask for a reason. Give me a second here to explain the question…..

When my non boating/fishing friends say on a Monday…. “What an awesome weekend, how was fishing/boating?” Meanwhile it was a cloudless sky but blew 30 knots East. They just don’t get it.

So……the guys making the regs and reading all these sites and reading “on the meat” “Limited out” “slaughter” “epic” and whatever other nonsense that’s makes us fisherman look like turds in their eyes. That affect decision making process on regs?

Effect or affect their decisions if they read here who knows? ... The one thing I can say without a doubt, what you submit in public comments is public record and part of the reading notes for the councils before their meetings.

Lots more transparency these days because now they cover these comments and even present them in their slide presentations at these meetings. Kind of like reviews on google and all in the light of day which is very different then it used to be and much harder for them to ignore them and pass the red face test in a public meeting.

Imagine if they had a reviews page on google? Dreaming now but that's how it should be...

[Broad Bill]

Submitted with some slight alterations. Thanks again for the effort.

Dear Members of the Black Sea Bass "BSB" Fisheries Management Council,

I'm writing as a concerned member of the recreational fishing community to respectfully request your consideration of more liberal measures for BSB management in the 2026 / 2027 fishing season. As recent stock assessments have shown, BSB populations have exceeded their biomass targets by over 100%, a clear indication of a healthy and sustainable stock.

In addition, from 2000 through current, the BSB biomass has surged by an unprecedented 1000% while exploitation (commercial and recreational removals) over that same approximate time frame has declined by more than 60%. I understand the black sea bass is considered protogynous hermaphrodites, meaning they are born female and can later change sex to become male. This sex change typically occurs when a female reaches a certain size, usually around 9-13 inches in length, and it happens during the fall and winter after the spawning season. The transition is visually driven, rather than chemically essentially meaning the stock finds a way to transform gender composition to insure the sustainability of the stock. Recruitment analysis and the surge in SSB over the period mentioned above would certainly lead one to that conclusion.

It's my understanding there's concern by the Council of future recruitment levels with BSB which are indeterminable but as mentioned the prior year history supports have been sufficient to drive a ten-fold increase in the biomass. In the fluke fishery, which has been decimated over the last two decades, larger breeders (primarily female) represent the majority of commercial and recreational harvest as it's mandated by the recreational regulations and driven by higher ex-vessel values for larger fish by the commercial sector. The annual spawn remains unprotected from commercial netting by the Council. Why would there be concern about BSB recruitment levels which have produced unprecedented increases in the biomass from 2000 to current yet a completely different set of scientific standards seem to apply to fluke recruitment which have not only hampered but been the Achilles heel of a declining fishery over that same period?

Given the exceptional surge in stock status of BSB, I urge the Council to consider expanding access to this abundant resource by revisiting current harvest restrictions. These measures, while originally necessary for stock rebuilding, now appear beyond overly conservative in light of the most recent scientific data. Increased access—whether through a longer season, higher possession limits, or more inclusive quotas—would benefit a wide range of stakeholders, including charter operators, recreational anglers, and coastal communities whose economies depend on a vibrant, accessible fishery. Sacrifices by both sectors have been made, it's time for the recreational and commercial sector to reap the benefit of those sacrifices unless there's very specific reasons not to which doesn't appear to be the case.

Science-based management is the foundation of successful conservation, and the recent data confirm that BSB are thriving under the current framework. It is only fair and logical to allow regulations to evolve in response to this success. These regulations have worked for the fish, so now it’s time for them to work for the fishermen too. Maintaining overly restrictive measures in the face of abundant stock undermines public trust and risks alienating the very communities who have supported conservation efforts in good faith.

I appreciate the Council’s continued dedication to sustainable fisheries management and trust that you will weigh this request seriously as you begin planning for the 2026 / 2027 season.

Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Thomas B Smith

[Gerry Zagorski]

Originally Posted by Broad Bill

Submitted with some slight alterations. Thanks again for the effort.

Dear Members of the Black Sea Bass "BSB" Fisheries Management Council,

I'm writing as a concerned member of the recreational fishing community to respectfully request your consideration of more liberal measures for BSB management in the 2026 / 2027 fishing season. As recent stock assessments have shown, BSB populations have exceeded their biomass targets by over 100%, a clear indication of a healthy and sustainable stock.

In addition, from 2000 through current, the BSB biomass has surged by an unprecedented 1000% while exploitation (commercial and recreational removals) over that same approximate time frame has declined by more than 60%. I understand the black sea bass is considered protogynous hermaphrodites, meaning they are born female and can later change sex to become male. This sex change typically occurs when a female reaches a certain size, usually around 9-13 inches in length, and it happens during the fall and winter after the spawning season. The transition is visually driven, rather than chemically essentially meaning the stock finds a way to transform gender composition to insure the sustainability of the stock. Recruitment analysis and the surge in SSB over the period mentioned above would certainly lead one to that conclusion.

It's my understanding there's concern by the Council of future recruitment levels with BSB which are indeterminable but as mentioned the prior year history supports have been sufficient to drive a ten-fold increase in the biomass. In the fluke fishery, which has been decimated over the last two decades, larger breeders (primarily female) represent the majority of commercial and recreational harvest as it's mandated by the recreational regulations and driven by higher ex-vessel values for larger fish by the commercial sector. The annual spawn remains unprotected from commercial netting by the Council. Why would there be concern about BSB recruitment levels which have produced unprecedented increases in the biomass from 2000 to current yet a completely different set of scientific standards seem to apply to fluke recruitment which have not only hampered but been the Achilles heel of a declining fishery over that same period?

Given the exceptional surge in stock status of BSB, I urge the Council to consider expanding access to this abundant resource by revisiting current harvest restrictions. These measures, while originally necessary for stock rebuilding, now appear beyond overly conservative in light of the most recent scientific data. Increased access—whether through a longer season, higher possession limits, or more inclusive quotas—would benefit a wide range of stakeholders, including charter operators, recreational anglers, and coastal communities whose economies depend on a vibrant, accessible fishery. Sacrifices by both sectors have been made, it's time for the recreational and commercial sector to reap the benefit of those sacrifices unless there's very specific reasons not to which doesn't appear to be the case.

Science-based management is the foundation of successful conservation, and the recent data confirm that BSB are thriving under the current framework. It is only fair and logical to allow regulations to evolve in response to this success. These regulations have worked for the fish, so now it’s time for them to work for the fishermen too. Maintaining overly restrictive measures in the face of abundant stock undermines public trust and risks alienating the very communities who have supported conservation efforts in good faith.

I appreciate the Council’s continued dedication to sustainable fisheries management and trust that you will weigh this request seriously as you begin planning for the 2026 / 2027 season.

Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Thomas B Smith

Thank you Tom and couldn't have said it better!

[dales529]

More comments needed. You can say WHY but it doesn't hurt to say WHY NOT plus Gerry made it easy. Want to ever be heard and get a lobbyist then just send the public comment. We need thousands not a hundred

[Broad Bill]

So much for a thousand or even a hundred replies from the site. Honestly, I don't understand recreational anglers. Government is stealing your rights to a public resource and people sit on their hands and let it happen. Where are people's sense of pride, gumption to fight for a cause you believe in and conviction to say and mean I'm not going to stand for this bullshit anymore. We're our own worst enemy when it comes to fair and balanced regulations relating to saltwater fisheries. This thread, in itself, bears witness to the fact that very few on this site have the right to complain about regulations for any stock because quite frankly most don't care enough to get involved in any way and expect everyone else to do the work which is a formula for failure. We have the numbers but we fail repeatedly to utilize that leverage, maybe the only leverage we have.