what do you think

[pier_man0909]

Conservation Group Offers "Freedom to Fish" To Highest Bidder
New Management Approach Would Sell Off Recreational Access


Galloway, NJ - In what can best be described as a "pay to play" version of fisheries management, the Texas-based conservation group, Coastal Conservation Association (CCA), has gone on record with a new socialized approach to managing the nation's coastal fisheries, whereby access to the resource is offered to the highest bidder. According to Dr. Russ Nelson, Fisheries Consultant for CCA, a "free market-based approach to managing red snapper and other marine fishes" could create individual fishing quotas (IFQ) for the recreational fishing community, the same as commercial fishermen.

"IFQ programs have demonstrated some success in controlling commercial fisheries, but restrict access by the general public and necessitate difficult allocation decisions," Nelson said in a CCA discussion paper delivered to the Gulf Council on April 10. Citing current discard mortality problems within the recreational sector, particularly with regard to the red snapper fishery, Nelson said "We are facing new, stricter control measures to assure that our annual catch doesn't exceed the allowable level, and the recreational sector remains without an accurate means of counting the fish we catch."

CCA's proposed "free market-based approach" would issue individual, non-reusable tags for red snapper to account for the total allowable catch during an annual cycle. The tags would be issued for public auction every year, and those members of the public who wish to catch red snapper would make bids on the available fish tags. "Let anyone who so desires to place their best bid and distribute to the highest bidders," Nelson's paper stated, "bidders could be individuals, states or organizations."

Tags would remain on individual fish until cooked and consumed, whether in a residential home or at a seafood restaurant, which CCA explains will allow all fishermen who gain access to the tags to do with the fish what they please. "Those who buy the tags can used them any way they desire - take the fish home and eat it, give them as Christmas presents, sell them, take their fish to a market and sell them," the CCA paper continued.

The authors of the discussion paper explain that the current method of surveying recreational anglers through the Marine Recreational Fishing Statistical Survey (MRFSS) could be eliminated, since only anglers possessing tags would be allowed to fish for regulated species like red snapper, and only a certain allotment of tags would be issued during any given cycle. "It is simple and arguably the most fair and equitable approach. Every one - anglers, commercial harvesters, seafood processors, investors and conservationists would have the same opportunity to access the resource," the CCA paper added.

Many members of the recreational fishing community fear the proposal, if put into policy, would take the common man out of fishing. "We think it is bad policy to rest fishing rights in a select few," said Jim Hutchinson, Jr. Managing Director of the Recreational Fishing Alliance (RFA). "Such a proposal would create a fishing elite to the exclusion of the American fishing public."

"Together with marine reserves, this plan, if implemented, would completely eliminate open-access fishing in America," Hutchinson added. "Hopefully, the Gulf Council can squash this idea before it gains any credibility within fisheries management circles."

"We do not intend that our natural resources shall be exploited by the few against the interests of the many. Our aim is to preserve our natural resource for the public as a whole, for the average man and the average woman who make up the body of the American people."
- President Theodore Roosevelt.

[Fishwhore1]

Thanks for the post Matt, this is bad news IMO.

[Peddler]

Rights for sale? These so called "conservationists" are completely out of control. When all of our rights are stripped by these "conservationists" we will look back and wish we had come together to fight them. There is a storm coming. This is only the beginning. All fishermen need to drop their petty differences and start to look at things differently. Its one thing to regulate where regulation is nessesary and another to deny access and strip rights.

[Kevin Smith]

What a sorry attempt by the RFA to try and gain a few members.

This is the type of stupid scare tactics that radical organizations use.

When will they learn it is all about the saltwter fisheries and marine resources-including Virginia's Chesapeake Bay, Tidal Rivers and Coastal Atlantic Waters.

Kevin
Weekend Mistress

[cnaff]

Kevin,I can't grasp your post---RFA uses CCA to cause a scare?Looks to me that CCA wants the IFQ's,and RFA disagrees.I disagree,too.Shut the fishery DOWN if they're gonna just let the rich fish!I sure as hell will support a fight against this measure because there are alot of people saying there's more snapper in the gulf than is being acknowledged by NOAA.I agree we have huge habitat and development problems here on the east coast,BUT why should that stop a man from having a position on IFQ's in the Gulf on a mighty important species?The RFA at least is explicit about its aims and methods(political advocacy).What do YOU want? Everybody to sit down and shut up? Are we stupid to oppose political manipulation of a fishery by political means?If you are a habitat guy,why does that take away the validity of people protecting citizen access rights in an activist/lobbyist format? Just curious,as you are an expert and I want to see your point. Thanks.

[SaltyJB]

Reaction to a discussion paper recently presented by CCA concerning a Gulf Coast red snapper issue has created confusion. The paper in question describes one possible (but unconventional) approach to the equitable management of commercial and recreational harvest of snapper. Apparently that fishery is in bad shape in the Gulf, and various individuals have put forth several suggestions as to how it can be fairly managed.

Here is what an official at CCA headquarters in Houston told me yesterday:
"... it is not CCA policy. We put together that discussion document for this specific fishery (red snapper) simply to show that the past 30 years of management haven't worked - let's at least think about something completely different. That idea was one of several submitted by different groups for new ways to look at the fishery."

RFA has released statements that appear to be less about seriously exploring the management of a difficult fishery, and more an attempt to portray CCA members as irresponsible elitists tied to the interests of PETA and the Pew Foundation. That is a bum rap, and I can but wonder why RFA seems so anxious to trash a conservation organization dedicated to assuring sustainable stocks for saltwater anglers.
Obviously our concern in CCA VA is that the circulation of such overblown statements is damaging to the mission of over 103,000 dedicated volunteers who are trying to insure the future viability of saltwater angling.

I will share additional information on this issue as it is available.

[OneMoreCast]

..

[Peddler]

Kevin, are you a CCA member? Saltyjb, why did your quote from CCA headquarters start mid sentence. I think we need the entire quote to put it into context. We now seem to have two "conservation" groups squabbling over who is the best group. Very petty differences. The statement pierman0909 posted was a press release from RFA so i can see where this could be biased as well and i understand concern from CCA. Why would CCA publish this "idea" under their name and then backpeddle away from it? Are both of these groups trying to prove that they are the elite group? Is this about fame or helping the fisheries? This type of argument is exposing vital flaws in the "mission" of both groups. Kind of reminds me of missionaries that believe that their god is the only righteous god and other religions are wrong or evil. What a mess.

[SaltyJB]

Peddler,
As you requested, here is the complete quote that I received from a Coastal Conservation Association representative yesterday:

"You've got it - it is not CCA policy. Once you see the proposal I think you will see that this has been just a bit overblown. We put together that discussion document for this specific fishery simply to show that the past 30 years of management haven't worked - let's at least think about something completely different. That idea was one of several submitted by different groups for new ways to look at the fishery."

I do not pretend to know the ins and outs of the Gulf red snapper fishery, but apparently whatever has been tried over the last several decades has not worked. Some think that an IFQ approach has the potential to provide some additional benefits to recreational anglers. I don't know. It certainly has the potential for misunderstandings!
Here is a link to a CCA newsletter that came out today:
The eNewsletter for members of Coastal Conservation Association (http://www.joincca.org/eNewsletter/April%202009/April%202009.htm)
Take a look.

As for the "petty squabbling" you mention, only RFA has issued an alarmist news release condemning the discussion paper in question and attempting to unfairly associate CCA's name with PETA and the Pew Foundation. I suggest that we would be best served by allowing those in the Gulf to seek the optimal approach for the benefit of their fishery and their anglers. There are apparently no easy answers here. Let's let the Gulf guys work out the best solution for them. There are lots of smart people down there, and I am confident that they will do the right thing. The healthy populations of reds and specks in the Gulf today are testament enough to the value of the Coastal Conservation Association.

[Peddler]

Thanks for that response. I can understand your point of view. I am still curius to know if Kevin is a CCA member. Over the years i have known many CCA members. Most of them have withdrawn their membership for one reason or another. Alot of them withdrew after CCA Virginia attempted to restrict acces for commercials to harvest Cobia and Tautog. They volenteered the recreational limits to be cut in half in exchange for commercial limits to be cut in half as well. Before this effort, the commercial daily limits were the same as rec limits and commercial targeting of Cobia in particular was very rare and done by hook and line. The end result was that rec limts were cut in half and commercial limits stayed the same. IMO and many others, they had no right to pretend to represent all rec fishermen and basically screwed us. I wasnt affected much by the taug part of it but i used to do alot of cobia fishing by myself and it made me and many others very angry. The overwhelming majority of current CCA members i know are 100% anti commercial fishing. Over the years my views on this have changed dramatically. I now see that commercials are no different than us. They love to fish. It is their life. They have been let down by fisheries mgt just like we have. CCA NC recently attempted to ban all gillnetting in coastal waters through legislation. Thankfully, our legislators were not willing to put these people out of business in these hard economic times. I guess it goes without saying that i do not support CCA. I believe that many of their ideas are radical and instead of continueing to persue proper fisheries mgt they have decided that eliminating one entire user group would be an easier solution. Their interest is only to recreational fishing and that seems to skew their vision of the big picture which is the health and sharing of the entire ecosystem. I am still friends with some CCA members and i dont let their points of view or mine affect our friendship. I dont pretend to know the ins and outs of the red snapper fishery either but i have seen how tagging systems can be destructive by encouraging "high grading" or culling of dead fish like it did in the VA commercial striper fishery. It also goes without saying that these tags being given to the highest bidder is unfair to the common man that couldnt afford them. CCA must have had some interest in this radical idea or they would never have put their name on it.

[SaltyJB]

Peddler,
To answer your first question, Kevin Smith is a valuable, hard-working member of CCA VA. He is not anti-commercial, nor am I. All 1500 VA members are volunteers. None of our money is spent on staff. All of our efforts to track and influence legislation and regulations on behalf of marine resources are done on our own time and at our own expense. That is why we are sometimes taken aback by the harsh and unwarranted criticism of an organization that is trying to do the right thing.

I don't know how many CCA members that you know, but I am disappointed to hear you portray them as "anti-commercial." CCA is pro-resource ... that is, we seek a well-managed, sustainable fishery that benefits the public ... both recreational and commercial. Here is the opening paragraph from a flyer we give out at boat and fishing shows: "The Coastal Conservation Association advocates the scientific management of our coastal fisheries for the benefit of saltwater anglers and the public. Our goal is to assure healthy sustainable fish stocks for this and future generations. Well-managed fisheries benefit both recreational and commercial interests. We are anglers helping to create the future."

Incidentally, our travelling CCA VA exhibit booth will be at the Deltaville VA Maritime Museum for Working Watermen's Day this weekend. We expect to talk to as many "commercials" as we can. We value their perspective.

As I'm sure that you can appreciate, there is ever increasing competition for limited marine resources. Accordingly, neither side will ever be completely happy with the regulations. It's a tradeoff. My experience has been that while most anglers spend an enormous amount of their time fishing, only a precious few are willing to devote any time to the conservation and management of the species that they pursue. Then, those who offer no support for the regulatory process, complain that the regulations don't suit them.

CCA doesn't make the rules in VA, or anywhere else for that matter, but they are at least working for marine resources. That is much more difficult (and thankless) than letting others engage on the issues, and then criticizing the results. I'm sure that all of the interests in the Gulf area, including CCA, would welcome a silver bullet that will solve all of the red snapper fishery challenges. Suggesting that CCA's motives down in the Gulf are nefarious is just plain wrong.

I hope that you will take the time to become familiar with the incredible number of contributions that CCA has made to the cause of marine resources all over the US. The west coast states of Oregon, Washington, and California are the latest areas to recognize the need for organized efforts to save their saltwater fish. CCA is helping.

Also I hope that we can continue this dialog. I may have some additional info for you on the cobia fishery. Peace.

[Peddler]

It is refreshing to hear you say that you are not anti comm. The main problem i see with these types of groups is that their supporters or members have hidden agendas that they attempt to persue through the group. I'm sure its not the official position of CCA but when Kevin said "this is the type of stupid scare tactics that radical organizations use" and "what a weak attempt for RFA to gain a few members" it seems like he is speaking on behalf of CCA and is continueing the petty squabblig between the two groups. Its kind of like the pot calling the kettle black IMO.

[SaltyJB]

Peddler,
Kevin can speak as an individual, just as you and I do. Surely you don't think that any opinion of any of our 103,000 CCA members can be described as speaking for the CCA.

I'm a member of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, and the James River Association, and sometimes express opinions, but I don't expect anyone to accuse me of speaking for the CBF or JRA.

Kevin wonders, as do I, why RFA felt it wise or necessary to distribute an alarmist and misleading news release. Wouldn't it be more constructive to discuss the various management options for snapper in the Gulf? That is the issue that cries out for a solution.

[Scott McGuire]

Hey Guys,

I just wanted to add a little information to the fray.

ITQ's and IFQ's are coming to many fisheries. I understand that it is a priority of the Obama administration, and it is trickling down to several states. One major problem with these systems is they often don't account for recreational fishing. As a result, recreational fishing gets the squeezed out of the fishing almost entirely. This has happened even in the face of evidence that recreational fishing is of significant economic value. The strategy vaguely outlined by Russ Nelson is a way to allow the market to allocate catch shares, instead of having them artificially decided by managers. It's not a fish grab, or anti commercial - it's just a suggestion of a fair way to allocate. One thing is for sure - a market based approach will not work for all fisheries - but it could work very well for some.

For more information, I recommend reading: http://www.joincca.org/eNewsletter/April%202009/Gulf%20Fisheries%20Data%20Discussion%20Document.pd f

[Scott McGuire]

Hey Guys,

I just wanted to add a little information to the fray.

ITQ's and IFQ's are coming to many fisheries. I understand that it is a priority of the Obama administration, and it is trickling down to several states. Overall these systems can be effective management tools (example: Alaskan Crabs), but they often don't account for recreational fishing. As a result, recreational fishing gets the squeezed out of the fishing almost entirely.

This has happened even in the face of evidence that recreational fishing is of significant economic value. The strategy vaguely outlined by Russ Nelson is a way to allow the market to allocate catch shares, instead of having them artificially decided by managers. It's not a fish grab, or anti commercial - it's just a suggestion of a fair way to allocate. One thing is for sure - a market based approach will not work for all fisheries - but it could work very well for some.

For more information, I recommend reading: http://www.joincca.org/eNewsletter/April%202009/Gulf%20Fisheries%20Data%20Discussion%20Document.pd f

[Peddler]

Saltyjb, i agree with your earlier statement that we should let gulf residents decide what varius management options are best for them. As outsiders we really have no business meddling in their affairs. The only reason i have decided to comment on this issue is the tendancy for concervation measures that have been approved in other parts of the country to make their way here. I think this is a bad trend. If other states had stood up for their rights, the true radical groups would not have gained so much momentum and ended up closing the beaches in Hatteras. I dont think Kevin speaks for CCA. I thought i made that clear. The point is that as a CCA member or member of any group we need to be careful what we say so we dont cause people to misunderstand the intent of the group. What you, Kevin and many others are doing is admirable and i dont think you are radicals, especially after some of the statements you have made here. I do believe however that statements made by members and hidden agendas by them could ruin your "mission" from within. Right now there is alot of confusion among the public as to what conservation is all about. DOW, Audobon, PEW and PETA have made many, myself included, very suspicius of "conservation" groups in general. RFA has chosen to address this by making citizens rights a primary issue in their agenda. It may be an attempt to gain new members, like Kevin suggested, but it seems like a good idea to me considering what is going on around the country. Right now many of us are wary of any conservation measure that infringes on the rights of anyone. It makes your task more difficult but unfortunately it is something you have to deal with. CFRG origionally had a public comment section on their website. Many of their supporters made comments so radical and so against what CFRG was supposed to be about that they ended up removing the comment section because IMO they were making them look bad. Time after time the admin had to step in and say "this is not the position of CFRG" because these guys were so radical. I know there are some CCA members like that, just be careful that they dont cause a false perception of what you are all about. Just some things to think about.

[SaltyJB]

Dean Phillips and his original band of NC crusaders (Coastal Fisheries Reform Group) have gone about their task with class and commitment. It shows what can be accomplished when you have passionate, and responsible leaders. I am in awe of their performance.

[Peddler]

Sorry for sidetracking this thread. I believe CFRG's overall message is great. They too face the same challenges i mentioned above. I hope you realize that i'm trying to help you guys by pointing out the concerns of many that oppose you. Its not often that civil debate is encouraged by people on this site and for that i salute you saltyjb.

[Kevin Smith]

Peddler & Others,

My wife grew up in Virginia and fished with her Dad in all of Virginia's Tidal Rivers and the Chesapeake Bay. I grew up in upstate New York and fished the Tidal Hudson River, Mohawk River, Lake Ontario & Lake Erie, and watched them get polluted to the point there were no health fish and swimming made you sick. As an avid outdoorsman, it was very sad and extremely disappointing to see these bodies of water die before my eyes.

I moved to Virginia about 30 years ago and about 15 years ago my wife, sons & I started fishing the lower Chesapeake Bay Area, Virginia’s Tidal Rivers & offshore. So our family is very passionate about saltwater fishing. Primarily we fish for Flounder, Stripers, Grey Trout, & Spades in the lower Chesapeake Bay and Tuna offshore. My wife & I are both members of Coastal Conservation Association Virginia, I am a member of Stripers Forever and a member of Central Virginia Sport Fishing Association.

Both my wife and I are very concerned with the loss of the Grey Trout Fishery (her favorite) and we hate to see the stripers covered with sores or extremely thin. So we joined the CCA VA about 3 years ago in order to give back something and help the resource we all enjoy. Rest assured we do not agree with everything that these organizations represent or publish, but we feel strongly that the resources are in great jeopardy and need a lot of help.

I apologize if my response to the RFA post was offensive to anyone, but it was done to provoke a discussion and to make a serious point. The point is that this release doesn’t seem to be doing anything positive for the resources. IE For the RFA to claim in writing to their membership that “Coastal Conservation Association (CCA), has gone on record with a new socialized approach to managing the nation's coastal fisheries, whereby access to the resource is offered to the highest bidder.”, when it is actually came from discussion paper “thinking outside the box” and is absolutely not the CCA position, takes credibility from (and creates doubt in) all conservation organizations. It therefore seems destructive because it hurts the resource and makes people doubt the efforts and intent of the CCA.

Clearly there is no easy answer and we must all be willing to sacrafice to help the resoucres. But because of first hand experience watching the demise of rivers and lakes in New York thanks to politicians, it is obiously very important to see the Chesapeake Bay and Virginia’s Tidal Rivers & the related fisheries brought back from the brink, for the enjoyment of everyone in Virginia. Some day I hope we can stop fighting amongst ourselves (commercial and recreational interests), join forces, and work together to get Virginia, the Federal Government and the other states to help the coastal resources or we all will lose in the end.

Kevin Smith
Weekend Mistress
Coastal Conservation Association Virginia
Stripers Forever
CVSFA

[Peddler]

Kevin, i will admit that i was duped by the origional post. After i did some research i found that it was a press release from RFA. I should have done that research before i posted anything and for not doing so i was wrong to say "these so called conservationists are totally out of control". Thinking outside the box is something i believe in. Maybe by encouraging this type of thought you guys will come up with some better ideas. Your last statement about "joining forces" is the most encouraging thing i have ever heard from a CCA member. I have pushed that same idea on here many times and i believe it is the single most important issue for the health of all fisheries.

[pier_man0909]

I didnt do that much research on it either when I first posted it. I just saw it pop up here and there and a few other places and did a search on it and found it so I posted it. I dont know the details of it but it has been in discussion for a little while now and that press release was just the latest news of it.

here is what CCA put out earlier that I guess caused the press release.

http://www.joincca.org/eNewsletter/April%202009/Gulf%20Fisheries%20Data%20Discussion%20Document.pd f

[SaltyJB]

Thanks, guys for engaging in an adult discussion on the importance of assuring sustainable saltwater fisheries. As I have stated previously, there are an awful lot of anglers who enjoy riding on the wagon while a few others do the pushing. Wouldn't it be great if everybody out there recognized an obligation to occasionally get off and push. Imagine the clout we would have if that happened.

Managing public resources (and allocating them between recreational and commercial) is a difficult task, and always involves trade-offs. We should always be prepared to listen and to take the time to gather the facts.

[Matt]

talking about quotas in terms of CCA or RFA doesn't make much sense, neither group is focused on delivering these solutions more then they're focused on pro-rec fishery idealism.

Individual quotas are a method of controlling harvests. Opponents argue that quotas create property rights, which bring a new set of problems.

[Kevin Smith]

Matt,

You are right about the complexity of the issues. As more and more pressure is put on the dwindling resources, more factors come into play, making a equitable solution harder to work out.

The CCA has a long history of helping conserve, protect and restore the resources, which often times puts the CCA at odds with both sides of the commercial and recreational debate. As for the CCA being pro recreational angler, you may want to look at our track record because we are pro resource for everyone's benefit.

Over the years CCA National and CCA State Chapters has spent millions of dollars and millions of hours helping to building reefs around the country, educating the public about the resources, fighting to help stop poaching & pollution, providing grants for resource studies, working within the state and federal government organizations trying to push for good management of the resources.

Regards,
Kevin Smith

[Matt]

A local concern about conveying property rights with quotas is that Md and Va have already virtually conveyed property rights through a host of unscientific regulations that inadvertantly created entitlement. For example, industrial menhaden fishing in Virginia is a disgrace. That fishery compromises the entire bay. We can't get them to stop because it would put northumberland county out of work. In Maryland we continue to approve status quo oyster and crab fisheries that have been sitting at or near historic lows for years. We can't do anything about it because it would detrimentally effect small businesses in fishing communities. In another example, we are managing a declining striped bass fishery. We've known natural mortality die to myco infections in resident or immature fish would compromise recruitment to the spawning stock biomass, yet the fishing clubs through charter boat pressures have opted for a wait and see approach. This includes CCA. In my view none of the recreational fishing groups are willing or able to stand up for the kind of change we need to turn any of this around. These clubs tend to be "led" by retirees who get easily offended when anybody questions if they're up for a fight, even though they clearly are not willing to take on issues in the ways that made CCA famous.

[Kevin Smith]

Matt,

Your depth of knowledge and passion for the resource is great to see. I wish more people were as well informed and cared enough to take action. Like you a lot of us are frustrated too, but still keep trying to help the fisheries and resources.

Virginia has a reputation for being a very pro commercial state and that is somewhat true for Maryland, but at least Maryland doesn't allow the Menhaden Reduction Industry to fish their waters. The CCA VA strongly supported the elimination of the VA Winter Crab Dredge Season, which killed about 50% of the crabs they did not take. This became law in April 2008. This past February the CCA VA successfully led the fight to stop (Bill SB 1087) the addition of 2 more VA Watermen to the VMRC, just after it passed successfully through the VA Senate with a vote of 38-0. This was a bill introduced by Senator Miller to help the watermen because they lost the VA Winter Crab Dredge Season. Rumor has it that there may be a fight to allow the VA Winter Crab Dredge Season and the CCA VA we will be ready.

Unfortunately, Menhaden is the only saltwater fish that is controlled by the legislative branch of Virginia's government, which means it is controlled by politicians. Now the study and moritorium, we agreed to in hopes of seeing the scientific study, may be extended another 5 years. This new 5 year extension is so typical of the Menhaden Reduction Industry tactics. Just take a look at the same style of tactics that they are using in Mississippi.

Until more folks like you decided to get involved, there may be no organization or joint effort that can change this particular fishery, which is key to helping clean up the Chesapeake Bay.

Keep sharing your knowledge and passion with others and help get them involved working for the health of the resources.

Kevin Smith

Coastal Conservation Association Virginia
Stripers Forever
Central Virginia Sportfishing Association

[Matt]

A temporary closure on winter crabbing solves nothing. Winter Dredging was an easy target when crabs collapsed, but that change IMO was much more about Va doing something (but not much) when their crab industry was failing. Frankly the total harvest in the winter dredge fishery had already reached a point of futility. Going back five years, comms were doing it more to maintain access then to make money. We can't keep waiting for important fisheries to fail. Right now we're waiting for striped bass to fail again. Its a little sad to see so little action when we all know how much the population has changed for the worse.

[Kevin Smith]

Matt,

You are absolutely right that closing the Winter Crab Dredge Season may not the entire answer and yes our crabs were being seriously overfished for years, but at least VA & MD Governors demanded some positive action to help the crabs recover. It is also important to keep in mind it was not the harvest that was doing the damage. The damage was being done because over half of the crabs thrown back died including the egg covered females.

So the closure is a very positive step considering most of the Chesapeake Bay Blue Crabs winter in the very lower portion of the bay. Of course we won't see the full benefit for a few more years, but this years seanson is starting off stronger than most. Hopefully VA will take the next step very soon and to stop VA Watermen from taking females period.

These two actions could bring back the Chesapeake Blue Crab permanently. Then we all need to help keep the Menhaden in the Chesapeake Bay from being overfished, protect the shallow water nurseries from dragging nets and as a result, get the striper and trout populations healthy and growing stronger.

Keep the faith & keep on fighting to protect the resources.

Kevin Smith
Weekend Mistress
CCA VA, SF, CVSFA

[Matt]

I can find at least one optimistic article about crabs every spring in recent memory. The early season fishing pressure will reveal the truth, again.