Well this stinks!!!!

[King Kong Matt]

Rick L once bubbled...
I also notice that most the comments here are from non
lobster divers!!

What difference does that make? It doesn't mean that my opinion on the matter is any less informed.

You're making an economic argument...that commerical lobstermen are simply trying to protect themselves against the individual fisherman. How do your skills in catching lobster provide you with a special insight into the economics of the situation that can't possibly be had by those of us that don't hunt lobster?

As a taxpayer in a state that depends on commerical fishing to a significant extent, you can bet I am concerned about protecting the rights of fisherman. Given the choice of protecting your "hobby" or making sure that the local economy isn't further damaged...well my personal choice is a pretty easy one.

 

[Rick L]

When you dont do something yourself its not a big deal to you!!
It changes the way ive been diving so it matters to me more.
This isnt about conservation if it was they would be hitting the problem (commercial fisherman) And why just the gulf of maine
why not the whole state? Why just divers not trap fisherman with
a catch limit? Go to one of those big seafood stores look in the tanks. You will see hundreds of 5lb to 25lb female lobsters taken
by draggers off this mass coast!!!!!! Hmm conservation dont think so. Its about political power and money..........
What i was trying to point out with my catch totals was that divers take a very small portion of the lobster catch.
But are being singled out here!!
If you dont think they (commercial lobsterman) think divers are compitition.then why are so many openly hostile towards divers??
Rick L

 

[notabob]

We're getting sidetracked here... The issue is not the fact that the limits are reduced, that won't affect most of us much at all. It is assigning blame for the population declines to the group that is least responsible for the problem. Even using the figures provided in the document itself, rec lobstering accounts for 0.4% of total female lobsters caught. That's 4 out of every 1,000!! The new measure would, according to the author, change that number to 0.33% - a whopping difference of 0.07%!!!! Now how is that protecting the populations if similar measures are not applied to the other 99.67% of the catch that is taken in by commercial lobstermen? While I agree that the new measures do not really cause a hardship for us divers (or at least a majority of us), the fact remains that the whole measure reeks of an attempt to make non-commercial lobster fishermen (including divers) a scapegoat for declining populations. When newspapers print the article, I seriously doubt that actual numbers and percentages would be published, simply a few key words, blaming the little guys for the problem while looking away from the real culprits.

I have nothing against commercial fishermen. As KKMatt said, they are a very important part of the state's economy and should be supported. But that does not mean that we have to take blame for problems caused by others and like it.

-Roman.

 

[Rick L]

Thats what i was trying to say but did wrong i guess?
If lobsters numbers are in trouble then fix the real problem!!
I feel non commercial lobstermen are being blamed !
What would be the next step if lobster numbers still go down?
Maybe stop non commercial lobstering?
And the problem will still be the same!!!!!!!
Rick L

 

[mer]

I think we can come to the conclusion that members of Scubaboard will not be celebrating this change of lobster law.

So what can we do about this?

Anyone have any ideas what agency is responsible for lobster law? Fish and game? Would writing to our local state congressperson help any?

Just my 2cents.

 

[Spectre]

Mass Division of Marine Fisheries, or something like that. I met the guy last year at SeaRovers and talked to him about some of the laws. He seemed a little concerned that I was '*****ing'; but after a little name dropping he figured out what I was trying to say.

I was talking to him about the idea of actually expanding the max limit to include all the zones, as it's been proven that the 'mature' lobsters can sustain the population even in 100% of the legal sized lobsters are taken every year. The egg production of larger lobsters is actually exponential, e.g. an 6 lb lobster produces far more than 120% of what a 5 lb lobster produces. I proposed that they cap at 5" though the whole state, and then slowly raise that max if/when a population rebound is seen. He said he'd 'look into it'.

Now about the increase in minimum size.

This actually makes a hell of a lot of sense. The reason being is that many of the females at the old size [3 1/4"] have only had one egg bearing season; if that. V-notching doesn't do much good if they haven't even had a chance to bear eggs yet.

 

[Joe R.]

Obviously it is the commercial lobstermen who want to limit divers. Lets be proportional and limit them even more! They're the ones that mess up entire areas with pots ,ropes, stinkin, noisey boats and the 'this is my ocean' mentality. Thanks to thier great ideas, we can't take the big lobster...(via New England Fisheries Council going along with archiac thinking anti dive lobstermen from Maine! What do they really care if I take a biggie once or twice a year! Sorry for ranting...But we need to do as in the past and load thier meetings with divers. Sure sometimes I get 20 bugs (in several dives) but sometimes I get 5. I even get skunked sometimes. Its nice to put a feed on for the family once in a while. I can eat 5 easily,its why I took up diving. The commercial fishermen originally opposed increasing the size because there would be too many and the price would come down. {ie what the market will bare} Again, if we fill the state meeting we will show the public what is really going on and
perhaps even stop them. (Let us know when/where etc.) ...V notching, another wasteful concept. I think 80% of the bugs I find are eggers sometimes?? (I actually found a male with a V notch last year!) Guess what else, big lobster eat other lobster,and some biologist argue that the big ones have difficulty finding mates with compatable sex apparratess.:boom: :boom: :boom:I attended a meeting many years ago, the commercial guys came on strong but after some of the divers spoke both the public officials and commercial guys looked really whimpy and the proposals died. ;-0

 

[Rick L]

Do any of you??
KKM if the state makes money and saves you taxs does that make
it ok to lie and say non commercial is the problem???
You know as well as I do that divers take a small part(under 1%)
of the lobsters!!!!!!!! What I am complaining about is they are not
confronting the problem they are scapegoating non commercial!!
Is it ok to wipe out a fishery and lie about it for money?????
Sorry if If I seem angry but it matters a lot to me!!!
Rick L

 

[decapoddiver]

My screen name means "lobster diver", the club I started and run now means "Lobster Divers". Believe me when I say that I love lobsters. Unfortunately this sometimes requires accepting things I don't really like. I am disgusted that the non-commercial guys/gals are being blamed but I think increasing the minimum size is a good idea. Let the females get a couple of breeding cycles in before being harvested.
As for the catch limit discussion here on the board, it seems to me like a bit of sour grapes. Those that aren't very good at it and average only a couple of bugs don't have a problem with it (naturally). Those of us that do relatively well and average much closer to 10 per day (sometimes more) are going to have to adjust. I'm not saying it's a bad idea but the reasoning behind it has been proven to be backwards. I guess I would feel better about the catch limit if I thought it would make any difference to the lobster population. It won't but once again, money talks.

P.S. To those people who wonder what we do with "all those lobsters", yes we do eat all of them. My family (what my license is for) can go through them pretty quick

 

[Spectre]

Rick... While I do agree with the decision to change the size restrictions and the catch limits, I also agree with you that the divers that take virtually nil of the catch are taking the brunt of the legislation as well.

At least the min size increase'll effect everyone. I've not renewed yet, so I'm unsure if the catch restriction effects just the divers, or the recreational lobster trappers as well.