Chairman Wise reminded the Council that, when it last met in March 2007, there was an initial discussion of the tautog fishery, both recreational and commercial, and things that were going on within the fishery that necessitated a reexamination of tautog management, specifically the adoption of Addendum IV to the interstate fishery management plan for this species.  This Addendum sets out a number of issues, goals and objectives that together will form the basis of reshaping management of tautog.

Councilor Witek voiced the positions on current tautog management issues held by the Coastal Conservation Association (CCA).  He said on the commercial side of the fishery there should be more control over illegal harvesting of tautog and this should be handled through stronger enforcement.  There should be limited entry in the tautog commercial fishery and, to control the sale of illegal fish, a tagging program ala striped bass should be established. For the recreational tautog fishery, CCA would like to see regulations that give the public access throughout the year, consistent with conservation concerns.

Councilor Danielson felt that we shouldn’t force New York fishermen enter New Jersey waters to fish because of regulations in New York that are more restrictive than those of our neighbor to the west and south.  There should be more of a regional management approach for both commercial and recreational tautog fisheries. 

Councilor Jordan agreed that action of some sort needs to take place.  However, he expressed concern that in the attempt to crack down on the illegal sale of tautog, the legitimate commercial fisherman is also going to pay the price, which isn’t fair.  He stated that what the federal Magnuson-Stevenson Fishery Conservation and Management Act defines as a “by catch” fishery is not what the Council seems to think it is.  In 1997, there were options for the commercial tautog fishery, which included possession limits of either 25, 50, or 75 fish, each with various open season options.  These alternatives were all obviated by passage of the current law which restricts commercial possession of blackfish to 25 fish. Mr. Jordan noted the decline in commercial landings of tautog in New York: between 1996 – 1997 it dropped 26%; between 1996 –1998 it dropped 35%; and between 1996-1999 it dropped 64%.  In his view, the combination of DEC regulations and the 25-fish commercial possession statutory limit caused a significant reduction in commercial tautog landings in New York.  However, over the same period (1996-1999), the estimated recreational harvest of tautog by New York fishermen increased by 400%.  Mr. Jordan stated that, in light of this, future significant reductions in the tautog fisheries of New York should apply mainly, if not exclusively, to the recreational fishery for this species. 

Councilor Davi suggested the establishment of a Council subcommittee to examine the tautog situation more closely and to arrive at a number of recommendations to accommodate the requirements of Addendum IV.  Like Councilor Jordan, he stated that, since there has been no increase in commercial tautog landings in New York in recent years, and commercial fishermen are following the laws and regulations, the commercial fishery should not be penalized for an explosively expanding recreational fishery for this species.

It was questioned why there should be another subcommittee since it wasn’t too long ago that we had a blackfish subcommittee.  Chairman Wise explained that the last committee addressed only one part of the present problems, the illegal harvest and sale of tautog by non-licensed anglers.  The subcommittee proposed by Mr. Jordan would look at the full range of issues affecting tautog contained in Addendum IV.

A commercial fisherman, Mr. John Mihale stated that, under Addendum IV, reductions in the commercial catch of tautog won’t lessen the required reductions in the recreational harvest, so what’s the point of even talking about possible reductions on the commercial fishery?  Mr. Colvin noted three possible reasons: 1) because it’s only fair for both sides to consider an equally appropriate reduction;  2) because the tautog resource would benefit from any reduction in either fishery and  3) because the ASMFC Tautog Management Board might ultimately come to its senses and revise Addendum IV so that reductions in commercial harvests of this species would count towards a state's overall fishing mortality reduction target for blackfish.

Mr. Art Glowka wanted to know if the CCA has given any consideration to making the blackfish a game fish such as striped bass.  Councilor Witek said that if the other methods don’t work, CCA would consider pushing for gamefish status.

Councilor Witek also stated that most of the tautog landings in New York through the early 90’s were in waves 3 & 5 (particularly 5.)  That represented a balanced fishery; there was shore component, a private boat component, and a good healthy for-hire component.  Everyone had a chance to share in the fishery.  The decline in cod, whiting and ling on the south shore in the winter forced a switch in the winter fishery to a focus on tautog, putting a lot of pressure on winter fish, which concentrate in relatively small areas of structure where they were very vulnerable to exploitation.

One individual suggested that New York should lowering its recreational tautog possession limit to a reasonable amount, as happened in Connecticut.  This will seriously restrict the level of small boat-based recreational poaching.  He suggested that the Department's enforcement effort needs to catch a number of fishermen in illegal acts and publicize it – this will prevent recreational fishermen from going out with 5 or 6 friends, keeping blackfish in a livewell and selling them to the live fish market.  He recommended a tautog recreational possession limit of 4 fish.

Mr. Colvin concluded this discussion with the observation that there is a "culture of non-compliance (with laws/regulations) in the tautog fishery" that must be changed.  New York needs to develop a proposed plan to implement the provisions of Addendum IV in New York.  A subcommittee was been formed to develop recommendations to the full Council on what the major elements of this plan should be.  It members are:  Councilors, Jordan, Danielson, Davi, Witek, House and Messrs. Arnold Leo, James Schneider, and Mike Wasserman.  The group will get together a few times before the next Council meeting, which is on 15 May 2007.

 

Page last modified Thursday, May 10, 2007 by George E. Carroll