Daily Fishing and Outdoor Report

Sunday, October 20, 2019: It’s a gloomyish day, though the rain held off

(I'm taking donations for this website. All offerings are highly appreciated ... and used to keep it up and running. Mailing address: Jay Mann, 222 18th Street, Ship Bottom, NJ 08008-4418. Fastest and easiest is PayPal to jmann99@hotmail.com.)


FURTHER BELOW: “What a Mess the New Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) Has Caused” by Tom Fote.

Sunday, October 20, 2019: It’s a gloomyish day, though the rain held off plenty long enough to get in many hours of a.m. surfcasting. The beaches weren't showing a ton of anglers – we’ve had a couple well-attended surfcasting days lately – but there were still folks out there spiking rods ... to then be gone with the arrival of wetness and increasing chilly onshore winds.

Once we’re done this tropical rain and sassy winds (by Tuesday), we could be in the clear for ideal fall fishing for a goodly stretch. Sure, there will be a few showery times but mainly highly fishable with no majorly disruptive storms. Air temps will be spot-on seasonal with a few warmer spikes thrown in. Ocean waters will fall into the bass-beliked low 60s.

FINALLY FISH: I had one of the first successful bassing sessions since I can’t remember when; just as the sun was going down yesterday, far south end.

The back cut of Holgate, aka the nursery, lived up to its name with small bass on the attack. My every cast garnered a hit or hookup. It was such a strange feeling after at least ten days with nary a touch.

I was using a Spook type surface-snaker, one that I enhanced with fierce trebles, as both the fish and my hands quickly realized. I don’t think there’s such a thing as a too-sharp hook but some of the Japan-based Gamakatsu offerings are nearing hypodermic-needle sharp. In fact, having used the brand for over 20 years, I think they’re still refining the points – to the point of ridiculously penetrating. If you so much as tenderly touch the tip of a 2019 Gamakatsu you’ll be offering  a blood sample to the out-of-body world. That said, I still managed to lose my biggest “small” striper, right in the wash, after a decent fight. While all my other six bass were what I call one-handers, indicating you can easily wrap your hand around them to unhook, the too-early release, which I had right to the sands, looked to be a solid 26- to 28-incher.

Adding to the fun of my harried sunset striper session was the calmness of the water. I could see the water hump up behind the plug as a bass approach, a bit like pickerel fishing -- though chainside wakes are more of a water parting V-shape while the chase-wake of the feisty linesiders was more of a ball shape. The youngster bass in The Nursery crashed the plug, something larger bass tend to tune down, going for more of a reduced-splash sucking in of a plug. Despite playing tailgunners, all my fish took the middle hook and not the trailing one. Hitting mid-plug is a trait common to bass. Back when bluefish ruled the fall roost, many pluggers would remove the rear treble, the one bluefish always grab, leaving the middle hook to stripers.  

I hate to even bring this up but IBSP is doing quite decently on the bass bite side of things. I know, I know: You can’t get there from here. Also, even a distance caster can’t cast there from the South Jetty. Nonetheless, I’m convinced that a southbound caravan of baitfish can be enough to draw bait-hawking gamefish across the inlet and into our far-more-thankful hands. Hey, those Northern Ocean County surfcasters take it for granted that gamefish will always be well within their fall reach. We used to think that here, too. I made up an appropriate saying: You don’t know what you’ve got until it’s gone. That’s Mann with two “n”s.

As to not be taken wrongly, we have fish aplenty on LBI. They simply don't always jump out at you. It comes down to meticulously working the beaches and moving slightly onward if a chosen spot is less than obliging. More than most, I’ve seen where I as that close to a hot spot. How do I know. Someone pulls up within casting distance from me and begins bailing fish. Doh!

The Classic has barely begun. Signups are still coming in. Your participation is highly appreciated. Keep the “Derby” tradition alive.

I’m frequently asked when the name “Derby” was dropped. Per an historic write-up at lbift.com: “A year of change... 1985. In an effort to aid conservation efforts, striped bass were eliminated from the fishing contest and the tournament name was changed to Long Beach Island Fishing Tournament.”

I actually kinda created the “Classic” part, wanting to bring some well-deserved class into the long-lived contest.

What a Mess the New Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) Has Caused 

By Tom Fote 


Where WStarted 

When there were two separate agencies (the Bureau of Sport Fisheries under the Secretary of the Interior and the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries under the Department of Commerce) dealing with marine fisheries, the statistics were separately controlled by each bureau.  The Bureau of Commercial Fisheries was looking for accurate catch numbers landed by the commercial fishery by having port agents and trying to record every fish caught and sold.  This was a combined effort of the states and the federal government.  The Bureau of Sport Fisheries was observing the trends in the recreational fishery and used a survey to compare recreational catch from year to year.  They also compared their information with the information from the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries to see what each sector caught.  The Bureau of Sport Fishing published figures from this comparison.  Unlike the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, the Bureau of Sport Fishing had a much smaller budget for gathering their data since they were not looking for precise landing data.   

When the Magnusson Stevens Act was passed, the two Bureaus were combined under NOAA and placed under the Department of Commerce and was called the National Marine Fisheries Service.  It also established the council system. The Bureau of Sport Fisheries was a much smaller agency with fewer employees so in the combination the commercial fisheries employees vastly outnumbered the employees from sport fisheries.  This difference in number had the impact of placing more value on the commercial issues and more emphasis on commercial statistics.  Vast amounts of money were spent to record every commercial fish landed.  Because of the efficiency of the new gear, we realized the commercial catch could quickly deplete stocks.  This led to a collapse of stocks and NMFS put in regulations to stop the overharvesting of the resource by the commercial fisheries.  NMFS did not concentrate at all on the recreational fishery since it was felt that this sector had little impact on the overall stocks.  The recreational equipment is less efficient and a large recreational catch only happens when there are large stocks.  The recreational catch is largely a catch of opportunity.    

I got involved in fisheries management in the 1980s with the Atlantic States Fisheries Commission and the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC).  The NMFS and the states were hoping to work together to develop plans to insure the survival of multiple stocks.  When the foreign fleets were put out of federal waters, we saw an immediate drop in the commercial landings of some species.  Through grants and tax breaks, the government helped expand the commercial fleet and also NMFS pushed them to fish what they considered was underutilized species.  A perfect example is when NMFS convinced the west coast tuna boats to come to the east coast and target bluefin tuna, then considered an underutilized species.  We are still suffering the consequences in the bluefin tuna stocks.    

In the 90s the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council began creating fisheries management plans that not only divided the commercial fishery into sectors but also placed quotas on both the commercial and recreational sectors.  This is when I was a Commissioner to the ASMFC and saw how the process developed.  There were some species for which was had joint responsibilities which continue to this day.  This required joint meetings to approve plans for these species.  The species that are jointly managed by the ASMFC and the MAFMC are bluefish, summer flounder, black sea bass and scup.  With the passage of the Atlantic Coast Conservation Act, the ASMFC got a powerful tool in managing their individual fisheries.  At that time the ASMFC had more power than the MAFMC since the ASMFC had the power to put in place a moratorium on a specific species.    

By the late 90s, the ASMFC and the MAFMC were placing quotas on the recreational sector, implementing these quotas with bag limits and size limits.  NMFS had long since rejected the original survey used by the Bureau of Sport Fishing and replaced it with the Marine Recreational Statistical Survey.  This survey was not designed to get accurate catch data but rather to show trends in recreational fishing.  This survey was, in its time, the best available data and was used to manage recreational fishing, set bag limits, size limits and quotas.  The problem was that data that was only designed to show coastwide trends was now used to manage stat- by-state quotas for recreational fishing.  The recreational community has never had any trust in these figures as they are used to create management plans.  There was an outcry from the recreational community to Congress.  Congress assigned the task of reviewing MRFSS to the National Academy of Science.  The report they created pointed out the flaws in MRFSS and explained that it cannot be used for any accurate management decisions.  The passage of the 2007 Magnusson Stevens Act required  NMFS to fix the problem within three years.  

Magnusson Stevens Act Mandates – Creation of a Valid Recreational Statistical Program by 2009 

In this case, Congress created a requirement without providing the funds necessary to complete the task.  Dr. John Borman, former head of the Northeast Science Center, was assigned this task.  He went to Congress and requested a budget of fifty million dollars.  The existing budget was only eleven million dollars which was totally inadequate to survey the millions of recreational anglers.  This is another example of a totally unfunded mandate.  To their credit, NMFS and their scientists tried to update the existing program with the available funds by using more and more statistical models without any additional data.  As the old computer expression goes, “garbage in garbage out.”  In this case, the lack of data guaranteed more problems.   

The lack of money also created a serious time lag in creating a new program.  Instead of having a fix available by 2009, we are now just seeing the new program in 2018/2019.  The MAFMC has become the testing ground for numbers gathered using this new program (Marine Recreational Information Program).    

Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) 

One of the big problems with MRIP and the previous program is the phone calls used to determine the number of trips.  With the advent of spam calls and the use of cell phones, calling people based on random numbers from a phone book has no reliability.  NMFS has tried multiple ways to get better phone lists and better responses to no avail.  Eventually NMFS decided to scrap the telephone survey and implement a mail-based Fishing Effort Survey (FES).  There appears to be a better response than there was to the phone call system.  In most instances the data gathered shows a huge increase in recreational participation and the amount of fish caught.    

The other part of the program is the dockside interviews.  Historically this was done by contractors in whom the recreational community placed little confidence.  The ASMFC has facilitated the states taking charge of the dockside interviews.  That is where we actually count the number and size of recreational fish landed.  Those numbers are used to extrapolate the entire recreational participation and catch numbers.  There are still problems with this method.  Using New Jersey as an example, like many NJ anglers I live on the water and have a boat at my dock.  I am never available for a dockside interview.  The only way they could count my information is to interview me while on the water.  The survey now includes additional intercepts with shore-based anglers.  Again, the surveying occurs where it is convenient.  These numbers are also used to extrapolate total catch.   

Comparing Numbers 

Over the years, there have been many attempts to correct MRFSS numbers.  NMFS scientists would create new models that were designed to get better results from the available data.  Every time this was done, it included a retrospective analysis and previous numbers were modified.  Even though numbers were modified to give a better understanding, the previous quotas were never changed.  The new retrospective analysis has gone back to 1982.  This has shown that NMFS and the ASMFC made dramatic errors in dividing the quotas between the recreational and commercial sectors by underestimating the total recreational catch.  It is my understanding that the South Atlantic Council will not use these numbers until NMFS has done quota adjustments.  The Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management Council and the ASMFC have not chosen to make this demand.  Instead they are moving ahead without any adjustments in the previous quotas.  Changing previous quotas will have no impact on what was caught in those years.  But new quotas are often developed based on the old quotas.  If the split between recreational and commercial catches in the old quotas is incorrect, a new quota based on the same split will be inherently incorrect.  We have seen this already happen.  Just dealing with the quotas is only part of the problem.  The new data also suggests that we are overfishing stocks that were previously estimated as not overfished.  This happened because the new numbers estimate the recreational catch and participation is much larger than previously thought.  If the managers do not also acknowledge that this data suggests the existence of larger biomasses, anglers continue to be penalized for having more fish to catch.  Two examples will help us understand how complex this issue is.  

We just had a joint meeting to deal with the scup quota.  MRIP estimated that the recreational scup catch was much larger than previously thought and that this catch exceeded the assigned quota.  We know this species is many times larger than estimated and is fully rebuilt.  In 1996 10% of our recreational quota was given to the commercial sector as incentive to reduce bycatch.  We already began this discussion with a split that was based on old, completely flawed numbers.  NMFS wants to reduce the recreational catch to maintain the 18% recreational allowance.  This would require a huge reduction on the recreational catch with changes in bag limits, seasons and size limits.  The economic impact on the recreational community will be a disaster for the charter and party boat fleets from Massachusetts to North Carolina.  There will be additional negative impacts on tackle stores and private boat owners.  All the attendees acknowledge that the reduction was not needed.  The abundance of the spawning stock and the underage of landings by the commercial sector of their quota would more than make up for any recreational increase and we would be way below the target.  NMFS could have also restored the recreational quota to our quota. Instead, NMFS pressured the MAFMC members to vote on a reduction they did not believe was necessary and the ASMFC Commissioners fell in line.  NMFS promised that there would be further discussions but insisted on a vote that day.  The message to the recreational community is clear, “We are going to cut back on your scup fishery but trust us.”  There is no way I trust NMFS.  We have all been lied to before.  They need to show us, not just keep telling us they are going to fix things.    

In April I wrote a long column on what happened with summer flounder.  It is available on the JCAA webpage.  Even though the catch numbers increased dramatically based on the new MRIP numbers, NMFS did not declare summer flounder was overfished or that overfishing was not taking place.  Instead they just increased the size of the stock and gave a 49% increase to the commercial sector.  Since the recreational community has been 11% under its quota for the last five years, we asked for an increase of 3.5%.  NMFS fought this and was successful in blocking any increase.  Our 2018 numbers were actually 24% under our quota.  NMFS has no problem with the recreational catch being 24% under quota but wants to maximize the commercial catch.  They still don’t get the economic impact of recreational fishing to the economy.  We will have to wait until December to find out what will be proposed for 2020.    

Correcting the Problems 

First, there should not be any more management using the new MRIP numbers until we have done quota adjustments.  We should put all decisions on hold until that is done.  Any decisions about the couple of stocks designated as overfished using these numbers should be delayed because of the huge economic impact to both the commercial and recreational sector.    

Second, we need Congress to fully fund the necessary research to develop reliable data.  If NMFS felt they needed fifty million in 2007, the price has surely gone up.  But I would settle for the original fifty million.   

Third, the recreational anglers need to get involved.  Letters and phone calls need to go to Governors, State and Federal Legislators and the President.  We need them to fully understand we are voters and we are tired of being ignored.  In New Jersey, we are 10% of the population and if we ever behave as though that is so, we could accomplish a great deal. We need to tell them to fund recreational data collection. 


For those of you monitoring the LBI Surf Fishing Classic ... here's the historic data. Superstorm Sandy was 2012. 


Jay Mann

10/15/2019 Holgate. Cozy sunset gathering of monarchs ... as one more arrives ... and one falls out (but quickly flies back to its dozing off buddies.)

Image may contain: plant, flower, outdoor and nature


Image may contain: 1 person, smiling, ocean, sky, outdoor and water
Image may contain: 1 person, ocean, outdoor, water and nature
Image may contain: 1 person, ocean, sky, outdoor, water and nature
Image may contain: 1 person, smiling, outdoor, water and nature
((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((())))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) · 

Had to sort through shorts but we managed to ice a few before trips end!

Stephen Moran Yooo

John Bushell Jr. to Betty and Nicks Bait and Tackle Fishing Club
UPDATED 2:41 PM Got these two reports today along with the shop weigh-ins and reports.

"Surfs loaded 22-26” bass, eels. Spitting sand eels just north."

"Hey john. Out in the boat. There is acres of bunker and rain fish from just south of Belmar way into seaside park A huge school of bunker about a mile long starts at the casino pier and get in casting ranger at the saw mill. I have never saw so many bunker and rain fish. Almost every school of rain fish has small snappers on them. I have a seen a few bass in the schools around point pleasant."


SHIP BOTTOM - Retired Ship Bottom Police Sergeant Scott Barr was injured in a tragic crash on the Garden State Parkway on Saturday, October 12. Barr stopped to help at the scene of an accident on the Garden State Parkway in Atlantic County. In  his effort to save lives and help others, he was struck by an oncoming vehicle. Barr is currently in the Critical Care Unit in the Atlantic City Regional Trauma Center, undergoing multiple procedures and surgeries. Barr is married and a father of four. 

A GoFundMe page in an effort to assist the family that has given so much to everyone around them. The funds that are raised will help ease the financial burden ahead. Readers can contribute by going to the Gofundme site at https://www.gofundme.com/f/scott-barr-fundraiser

There will also be a benefit for the Barr Family on November 17 at 2 p.m. at the Manahawkin Elks Lodge.  The cost of tickets are $50.00 and includes beer, wine, food and music.



(I throw these in to make sure folks get all sides of the controversy. I'm not siding one way or the other but have found myself questioning some of the seeming certainties regarding man's impacts on known planetary warming -- most significantly for us coastalites, the effects of warming oceans.)

Below: Ronald Marr

There are two things to consider for those that own property on the island.....

1) the physical safety of your house from damage due to storms and flooding, and 2) the safety of your financial investment in it.

#1 is the easiest for the individual to influence by raising houses and using building codes that increase wind resistance, etc. Local, State and Federal governments can help by maintaining dunes and bulkheads. Most of the newer houses on LBI would have survived the 44 and 62 storms with minor damage, and most survived Sandy likewise. Even if the frequency and severity of storms increases, these newer houses should still survive for another generation. Remember that there has ALWAYS been the 1 in 100 (or 1 in 1000) chance that a Cat 5 superstorm makes a direct hit on LBI. Even if you believe that there will be twice as many stronger storms in the future, the probability of a superstorm hitting LBI would still be relatively small.

#2 the VALUE of your house is dependent however, upon external factors that are much harder for individuals to influence: like stock market declines, recessions, the availability of financing and insurance, tax laws, property value declines after storms, and the neighborhood becoming less desirable because of traffic, repetitive/frequent storms or flooding, undesirable local industries etc.

So....this suggests that your decision to buy/remain on LBI should be mostly predicated on whether or not you can afford to lose the VALUE of your house here.


Below: For those who actually read ... (With me workload audio-book is the best I can do.)

Hot Talk, Cold Science
Global Warming’s Unfinished Debate
S. Fred Singer (Author)
Frederick Seitz (Foreword)
S. Fred Singer is a distinguished astrophysicist who has taken a hard, scientific look at the evidence. In this book, Dr. Singer explores the inaccuracies in historical climate data, the limitations of attempting to model climate on computers, solar variability and its impact on climate, the effects of clouds, ocean currents, and sea levels on global climate, and factors that could mitigate any human impacts on world climate.

Singer’s masterful analysis decisively shows that the pessimistic, and often alarming, global warming scenarios depicted in the media have no scientific basis. In fact, he finds that many aspects of any global warming, such as a longer growing season for food and a reduced need to use fossil fuels for heating, would actually have a positive impact on the human race. Further, Singer notes how many proposed “solutions” to the global warming “crisis” (like “carbon” taxes) would have severe consequences for economically disadvantaged groups and nations.

Hot Talk, Cold Science is essential reading for anyone who wants to be fully informed about the global warming debate.


Views: 430

Comment by Chris Cottone on October 21, 2019 at 10:06am

Hi Jay,

Add this to the list of books. Has some good excerpts about LBI development.



You need to be a member of jaymanntoday to add comments!

Join jaymanntoday



© 2021   Created by jaymann.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service