903R89004
Chesapeake Executive Council
Chesapeake Bay
Striped Bass Management Plan
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region III Infotmation Resource
Center (3P;v152)
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Chesapeake
Bay
Program
Agreement Commitment Report
TD
225
.C54
S88
1989
December 1989
-------
Chesapeake Bay Striped Bass Management Plan
An Agreement Commitment Report from
the Chesapeake Executive Council
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region III Information Resource
Center (3PM52)
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Annapolis, Maryland
December, 1989
-------
-------
ADOPTION STATEMENT
We, the undersigned, adopt the Chesapeake Bay Striped Bass Management
Plan, in partial fulfillment of Living Resources Commitment Number 4 of the 1987
Chesapeake Bay Agreement:
"...by July 1989 to develop, adopt, and begin to implement a Bay-wide
management plan for oysters, blue crabs and American shad. Plans for
other major commercially, recreationalfy and ecologically valuable species
should be initiated by 1990."
Striped bass, or rockfish, was given priority as one of these valuable species in the
Schedule for Developing Bay-wide Resource Management Strategies, and 1990 was set for
completion of the plan.
We agree to accept the plan as a guide to enhancing and perpetuating the striped
bass stock in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries, and throughout its Atlantic coast
range, for optimum long-term ecological, social and economic benefits. We further agree
to work together to implement, by the dates set forth in the plan, management actions
recommended to address protection of the adult spawning stock and other life stages;
regulatory and enforcement issues; stock assessment and research needs; and water quality
criteria necessary for healthy striped bass populations.
We recognize the need to commit long-term, stable financial support and human
resources to the task of enhancing and perpetuating the striped bass stock. In addition, we
direct the Living Resources Subcommittee to review and update the plan periodically and to
prepare an annual report addressing the progress made in achieving the plan's management
recommendations.
Date
i
For the Commonwealth of Virginia
For the State of Maryland
•
For the Commonwealth of Pennsylvani
For the United States Of America
For the District of Columbia
For the Chesapeake Bay Commission
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ill
INTRODUCTION viii
SECTION 1. BACKGROUND 1
Striped Bass Life History 1
FMP Status and Management Unit 1
Fishery Parameters 2
Biological Profile 2
Habitat Issues 3
The Fisheries 4
Economic Perspective 9
Resource Status 10
Status of Traditional Fishery Management Approaches.. 12
Data and Analytical Needs 13
References 14
SECTION 2 . STRIPED BASS MANAGEMENT 15
A. Goal and Objectives 16
B. Problem Areas and Management Strategies 17
1. Overharvesting, Reduced Spawning Stock and
Poor Recruitment 17
2. Regulatory and Enforcement Issues 21
3. Stock Assessment and Research Needs 29
4. Declining Water Quality 30
Tables
1. Maryland Striped Bass Juvenile Index, 1954-1989 11
Figures
l. Striped Bass Commercial Landings (Chesapeake Bay,
Maryland and Virginia) 5
2. Maryland Striped Bass Landings (by gill net, pound
net and haul seine) 6
3. Virginia Striped Bass Landings (by gill net, pound
net and haul seine) 7
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Chesapeake Bay Striped Bass Management Plan was developed
under the direction of the Fisheries Management Workgroup. Staff
from the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Tidewater
Administration, and the Virginia Marine Resources Commission
(VMRC), Fisheries Management Division, authored the plan and
addressed comments on the draft versions. Contributing DNR staff
included Nancy Butowski, Steve Early, Harry T. Hornick, Phil Jones,
Randy Schneider, Harley Speir, and Striped Bass Project personnel.
VRMC staff included Erik Barth, Lewis Gillingham, Roy Insley,
Robert O'Reilly, Randy Owens, Ellen Smoller, and Lyle Varnell.
Thanks are due to Verna Harrison and Ed Christoffers for guiding
the plan through the development and adoption process. Finally,
we express gratitude to members of other Chesapeake Bay Program
committees and workgroups and to the public who commented on the
plan.
Members of the Fisheries Management Workgroup are:
Mr. Ralph Abele, Citizen's Advisory Committee (ad hoc)
Mr. Mark Bundy, STAC Economic Advisory Group
Mr. K.A. Carpenter, Potomac River Fisheries Commission
Mr. Ira Palmer, D.C. Department of Consumer & Regulatory Affairs
Mr. William Goldsborough, Chesapeake Bay Foundation
Mr. J. W. Gunther, Jr., Virginia Waterman
Mr. Robert Hesser, Pennsylvania Fish Commission
Dr. Edward Houde, UMCEES/Chesapeake Biological Laboratory
Mr. W. Pete Jensen, MD Department of Natural Resources
Mr. J. Claiborne Jones, Chesapeake Bay Commission
Dr. Romauld N. Lipcius, Virginia Institute .of Marine Science
Dr. Robert Lippspn, NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service
Dr. Joseph G. Loesch, Virginia institute of Marine Science
Dr. Charles F. Lovell, Jr., M.D., Virginia
Dr. Roger L. Mann, Virginia Institute of Marine Science
Mr. Richard Novotny, Maryland Saltwater Sportfishermen's Assoc.
Mr. Ed O'Brien, MD Charter Boat Association
Mr. James W. Sheffield, Atlantic Coast Conservation Assoc. of Va.
Mr. Larry Simns, MD Watermen's Association
Mr. Jack Travelstead, Virginia Marine Resources Commission
Dr. William Van Heukelem, UMCEES/Horn Point Environmental Lab.
Ms. Mary Roe Walkup, Citizen's Advisory Committee
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduct ion
One of the strategies for implementing the Living Resources
Commitments of the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement is to develop and
adopt a series of Baywide fishery management plans (FMPs) for
commercially, recreationally, and selected ecologically valuable
species. The FMPs are to be implemented by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, Commonwealth of Virginia, District of Columbia,
Potomac River Fisheries Commission, and State of Maryland as
appropriate. Under a timetable adopted for completing management
plans for several important species, the striped bass FMP was
scheduled for 1990.
The date for the striped bass FMP was moved ahead to December
1989, in order to have a framework in place for a reopening of the
Bay fishery in 1990. The fishery can be reopened due to
improvement in Chesapeake Bay striped bass reproduction, as
measured by the Maryland young-of-year index. The three-year
average index from 1987 through 1989 is above the long-term average
of 8.0. This meets the criterion of the Atlantic States Marine
Fisheries Commission for allowing a conservative fishery designed
to protect the reproductive potential of the species. Recovery of
the stock is also indicated by a large increase in the number of
mature females on Chesapeake Bay spawning grounds.
A comprehensive approach to managing Chesapeake Bay fisheries
is needed because biological, physical, economic, and social
aspects of the fisheries are shared among the Bay's jurisdictions.
The Chesapeake Bay Program's Living Resources Subcommittee formed
a Fisheries Management Workgroup to address the commitment in the
Bay Agreement for comprehensive, Bay-wide fishery management plans.
The workgroup is composed of members from government agencies, the
academic community, the fishing industry, and public interest
groups representing Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, the District
of Columbia, and the federal government.
Development of Fishery Management Plans
An FMP prepared under the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement serves
as a framework for conserving and wisely using a fishery resource
of the Bay. Each management plan contains a summary of the fishery
under consideration, a discussion of problems and issues that have
arisen, and recommended management actions. Development of a
fishery management plan is a dynamic, ongoing process.
The development process starts with initial input by the
Fishery Management Workgroup, is followed by public and scientific
review of the management proposals, and then is endorsed by the
appropriate Chesapeake Bay Program committees. After an FMP is
iii
-------
adopted by the Chesapeake Bay Program's Executive Committee, an
implementation plan is formulated to provide additional detail on
actions that participating jurisdictions will take and the
mechanisms for taking these actions. In some cases, regulatory and
legislative action will have to be initiated, while in others,
additional funding and staffing may be required. A periodic review
of each FMP will be conducted under the auspices of the Bay
Program's Living Resources Subcommittee, to incorporate new
information and to update management strategies as needed.
Goal of the Chesapeake Bay Striped Bass Management Plan
The goal of the Chesapeake Bay Striped Bass Management Plan
is to enhance and perpetuate the striped bass stock in the
Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries, and throughout its Atlantic
coast range, to generate optimum long-term ecological, social and
economic benefits.
In order to meet this goal, a number of objectives must be
met. The primary objective, from which all others stem, is to
abide by Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission guidelines
and requirements. Other objectives are included in the discussions
of problems and management strategies that follow.
Problem Areas and Management Strategies
Problem l: overharvesting, Reduced Spawning Stock and Poor
Recruitment. Striped bass is a popular game and food fish, making
it a highly sought after species. Heavy fishing pressure
drastically reduced both commercial and recreational catches of
striped bass during the 1970s and early 1980s, eliminating many of
the large spawning fish while lowering the yield per fish. A
reduced spawning' stock contributes to poor reproduction. A
succession of poor-to-average year classes since 1974 has
contributed to low adult striped bass abundance and a lack of
diversity in sizes and ages in the spawning population.
Strategy* l: Fishing mortality will be controlled to restore and
maintain striped bass stocks at levels appropriate for protecting
the reproductive potential of the species while allowing some
harvesting. Fishing rates accepted by the,Atlantic States Marine
Fisheries Commission fall into two categories: F=0.25 (equivalent
to about 18% of legal sized fish being harvested) during a
conservative transition fishery; and F=0.5 (equivalent to about
32% of legal sized fish being harvested) during a recovered
fishery. A transition fishery is allowed when the Maryland
juvenile index reaches a three-year average of 8.0 and there are
indications of recovering spawning populations, while a recovered
fishery must wait until the spawning stock is composed of an
adequate proportion of mature females (the exact proportion must
iv
-------
still be defined by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries
Commission). In addition, minimum size limits will be set that
allow sufficient numbers of females to reach spawning size and that
increase the optimum yield per fish.
Problem 2: Regulatory and Enforcement Issues. The strong interest
in fishing for striped bass makes timely promulgation of
regulations, especially in-season adjustments, essential for
adequately protecting the resource. The ability to monitor stocks,
harvests, and sales of striped bass in a timely manner is a
critical component of this effort. Conflicts among sport, charter,
and commercial interests must be addressed. Inconsistency among
the Chesapeake Bay jurisdictions in regulating and enforcing the
fishery must be avoided. An effective and efficient enforcement
strategy for the fishery is also needed.
Strategy 2: In order to allocate and control the harvest at safe
levels, harvest regulations will be developed. These will include
gear restrictions, fishing seasons, creel limits, and other
measures. A monitoring program will be established for the
recreational, charter and commercial fisheries to provide accurate
and timely data. Monitoring techniques will include surveys of
recreational fishermen, boat and port sampling of fish, and
reporting requirements for commercial fishermen, charter boat
operators, and buyers. The individual jurisdictions will comply
with ASMFC criteria for the striped bass fishery, and will
promulgate compatible fishing regulations in doing so. Enforcement
will be given high priority.
Problem 3: stock Assessment and Research Needs. Restrictions on
striped bass fishing in the Chesapeake Bay since 1985 have allowed
several aspects of the species' life history to be identified.
These include migration rates, maturity schedules and mortality
rates. Additional information is needed to identify, protect and
enhance the Chesapeake striped bass population.
Strategy 3: The Chesapeake Bay Stock Assessment Committee's (CBSAC)
Stock Assessment Plan and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries
Commission's (ASMFC) Striped Bass Plan identify numerous areas for
additional study. Stock identification studies should be expanded
to provide information on stock mixing and the contribution of
hybrids and hatchery-produced fish to the wild population. A
review of various fishing and by-catch mortality rates is needed
to help develop more precise fishing controls. Studies on
reproduction, larval growth, and recruitment in relation to
environmental variables are needed to provide a better
understanding of the factors affecting the strength of striped bass
year classes.
v
-------
Problem 4: Declining Water Quality. Good water quality in spawning
areas is critical for the survival of striped bass eggs and larvae,
however the specific roles many water quality parameters play are
not well known. Traces of heavy metals and organic compounds have
been found in striped bass spawning areas, and dissolved aluminum
and pH interactions are known to affect early life stages of the
fish. Low dissolved oxygen in the Chesapeake Bay during the summer
may limit some striped bass habitat. High levels of contaminants
in tissues of adult striped bass (as in the Hudson River stock) may
pose health risks for consumers.
Strategy 4: Spawning and nursery areas with good water quality are
critical for striped bass survival. Although causes of poor
reproduction may differ among years and spawning areas, several
water quality parameters are known to reduce survival of young.
Studies will continue to examine the effects of environmental
parameters on striped bass stocks. Chesapeake Bay jurisdictions
will take measures to meet habitat requirements for striped bass
and to reduce the input of nutrients, toxic materials, and
conventional pollutants entering the Bay watershed, as adopted
under other 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement reports.
VI
-------
INTRODUCTION
MANAGEMENT PLAN BACKGROUND
As part of the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement's commitment to
protect and manage the natural resources of the Chesapeake Bay,
the Bay jurisdictions are developing a series of fishery management
plans covering commercially, recreationally, and selected
ecologically valuable species. Under the agreement's Schedule for
Developing Baywide Resource Management Strategies. a list of the
priority species was formulated, with a timetable for completing
fishery management plans as follows:
° oysters, blue crabs and American shad by July 1989;
0 striped bass, bluefish, weakfish and spotted seatrout by 1990;
0 croaker, spot, summer flounder and American eel by 1991; and
° red and black drum by 1992
A comprehensive and coordinated approach by the various local,
state and federal groups in the Chesapeake Bay watershed is central
to successful fishery management. Bay fisheries are traditionally
managed separately by Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, the
District of Columbia, and the Potomac River Fisheries Commission.
There is also a federal Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council,
which has management jurisdiction for offshore fisheries (3-200
miles), and a coast-wide organization, the Atlantic states Marine
Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), which coordinates the management of
migratory species in state waters (internal waters to 3 miles
offshore) from Maine to Florida. The state/federal Chesapeake Bay
Stock Assessment Committee (CBSAC) is responsible for developing
a Baywide Stock Assessment Plan, which includes collection and
analysis of fisheries information, but does not include the
development of fishery management plans.
Consequently, a Fisheries Management Workgroup, under the
auspices of the Chesapeake Bay Program's Living Resources
Subcommittee, was formed to address the commitment in the Bay
Agreement for Baywide fishery management plans. The Fisheries
Management Workgroup is responsible for developing fishery
management plans with a broad-based view. The workgroup's members
represent fishery management agencies from Maryland, Pennsylvania,
Virginia, the District of Columbia, and the federal government; the
Potomac River Fisheries Commission; the Bay area academic
community; the fishing industry; conservation groups; and
interested citizens.
VII
-------
WHAT 18 A FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLAN?
A Chesapeake Bay fishery management plan is a framework under which
the Bay jurisdictions are committed to implementing compatible
management measures according to a specified timetable. Developing
a plan is a dynamic process consisting of several steps. The first
step consists of analyzing the complex biological, economic and
social aspects of a particular finfish or shellfish fishery. The
second step includes defining a fishery's problems, identifying
potential solutions, and choosing appropriate management
strategies. In the next step, the chosen management strategies are
put into action. A plan requires an adaptive management scheme
which responds to the most current status of the fishery;
therefore, as a fourth step, it is important to regularly review
and update management strategies.
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLANS
The goal of fisheries management is to protect the reproductive
capability of the resource while providing for its optimal use by
man. Fisheries management must include biological, economic and
sociological considerations in order to be effective. Three simply
stated objectives to protect the reproductive capabilities of the
resource while allowing its optimal use include:
o
quantify biologically appropriate levels of harvest;
° monitor current and future resource status to ensure harvest
levels are conserving the species while maintaining an
economically viable fishery; and
0 adjust resource status if necessary, through management efforts,
MANAGEMENT PLAN FORMAT
The background section for each management plan summarizes:
0 FMP status and management unit;
° fishery parameters;
0 biological profile;
° habitat issues;
0 historical fishery trends;
0 economic perspective;
° current resource status;
viii
-------
status of traditional management approaches; and
0 data and information needs.
The background information is derived primarily from the document
entitled, Chesapeake Bay Fisheries: Status. Trends. Priorities and
Data Needs and is supplemented with additional data. Inclusion of
this section as part of the management plan provides historical
background and basic biological information for each of the
species.
The management section of the plan, which follows the background,
defines:
° the goal and objectives for each species;
° problem areas for each species;
0 management strategies to address each problem area; and
o
action items with a schedule for implementation.
Once the plan has been adopted by the Bay Program's Executive
Committee, appropriate administrative, regulatory and legislative
action will be initiated. A periodic review of the management plan
will be required to continually update management strategies and
actions. The Living Resources Subcommittee will be responsible for
this review.
IX
-------
-------
Section 1. Striped Bass Background
Striped bass (Morone saxatilis) , or rockfish, occur along the
east coast of North America from the St. Lawrence River, Canada to
the St. Johns River, Florida. The coastal migratory pattern of
anadromous stocks of striped bass is northward along the coast in
the spring and southward in the fall. Striped bass from southern
North Carolina to northern Florida do not undertake coastal
migrations. Likewise, striped bass from the Canadian provinces of
Nova Scotia and New Brunswick are relatively isolated and probably
do not move great distances after spawning. The east coast
migratory population is composed of three major stocks - Hudson,
Chesapeake and Roanoke. Historically, the majority of striped bass
caught in northern waters were of Chesapeake Bay origin, with a
lesser contribution of Hudson and Roanoke River fish. An
understanding of the contribution of each stock to the coastal
fisheries is an important issue for management.
The striped bass stock within the Chesapeake Bay is composed
of pre-migratory fish, primarily age V and younger, and coastal
migratory striped bass from 2 to more than 20 years in age. In late
winter and spring, mature resident and migratory striped bass move
into tidal freshwater to spawn. Shortly after spawning, migratory
fish return to the coast. Most spend the summer and early fall
months in middle New England near-shore waters. During late fall
and early winter, coastal striped bass migrate south to winter off
the North Carolina/Virginia Capes.
Chesapeake female striped bass may spawn as early as age IV,
but a year class may not reach complete sexual maturity until age
VIII or older. Most male striped bass reach sexual maturity at age
II or III. Spawning is triggered by an increase in water
temperature and generally occurs in April, May and early June in
the Chesapeake Bay. Eggs and newly hatched larvae require
sufficient turbulence to remain suspended in the water column;
otherwise, they will settle to the bottom and be smothered. The
migratory behavior of juvenile striped bass varies with location.
Generally, juveniles move downstream to areas of higher salinity.
There is evidence that some striped bass younger than 2 years old
migrate along the Atlantic Coast, however, significant migration
does not occur until age III. Most young striped bass remain within
the river system in which they were spawned.
FMP status and management unit
Detailed analyses of habitat, biology, economics, population
parameters, and management options are available in the Atlantic
State Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) Striped Bass Management
Plan (ASMFC 1987). The ASMFC consists of forty-five members, three
from each of the fifteen member states. In addition, more than 125
fishery biologists and managers provide technical information and
-------
policy guidance for interjurisdictional fishery problems. The goal
of the ASMFC is to achieve cooperative interjurisdictional
management of migratory fisheries in state waters of the Atlantic
coast. In October 1984, the U.S. Congress gave the ASMFC regulatory
authority "...to evaluate the state's compliance and enforcement
of its Striped Bass Management Plan and all amendments thereto
related to fishing." The Revised Interstate Striped Bass
Management Plan (ASMFC 1989), which was adopted by the ASMFC at its
October 1989 meeting, provides the most recent framework for state
management of the striped bass fishery. The interstate plan
includes requirements for a young-of-year index trigger, adult
stock triggers, and harvest regulations, as well as recommendations
for stocking, habitat and water quality requirements, and research.
The management unit is the Chesapeake Bay stock of striped
bass (Morone saxatilis) throughout its range on the Atlantic coast.
Fishery Parameters
Status of exploitation:
Long term potential catch:
Importance of recreational
fishery:
Importance of commercial
fishery:
Fishing mortality rates:
Biological Profile
Natural mortality rate;
Fecundity:
Moratorium on the harvest of striped
bass in Maryland since January 1,
1985; in the Potomac River since May
31, 1989; and in Virginia since June
1, 1989.
Unknown.
Significant in the District of
Columbia, Maryland, Potomac River and
Virginia.
Significant in Maryland, Virginia and
the Potomac River.
Potomac River, 1974-77 annual rates
males — 70% (F=1.2), females — 42-
58% (F=0.55-0.87); Chesapeake Bay,
1982-85 annual rates — males 63%
(F=1.00), females — 58% (F=0.87).
15% - 20% (M=0.17-0.23) annually.
200,000 - 8,000,000 eggs/female,
based on length and weight.
Longevity:
In excess of 30 years.
-------
Spawning and larval development
Spawning season: April - June.
Spawning area:
Location:
Salinity:
Temperature:
Dissolved oxygen:
PH:
Flow:
Young-of-Year
Location:
Salinity:
Dissolved oxygen:
pH:
Subadults and Adults
Location:
Salinity:
Dissolved oxygen:
Habitat Issues
Northern Chesapeake Bay and all major
tributaries.
Generally within the first 25 miles
downriver of the tidal/freshwater
interface.
0.0 - 3.0 ppt.
Peak spawning activity - 60-70° F.
At least 5.0 ppm.
Optimum 7.5 - 8.5.
Optimum 0.3 - 2.0 ft/sec.
Fresh, tidal and estuarine
waters at depths of 10 feet or less.
0-20 ppt.
At least 5.0 ppm.
Optimum 7-9.
Estuarine and ocean waters.
0-35 ppt.
At least 5.0 ppm.
Estuaries are critically important to the life cycle of
striped bass. These areas are utilized as spawning grounds and as
nursery areas. Any major alteration of these habitats could disrupt
the life cycle of striped bass. Emergency Striped Bass Study
research projects have shown that some combinations of contaminants
found in Chesapeake Bay affect survival of striped bass early life
stages. In some years, poorly buffered Eastern Shore spawning
-------
rivers had pH depressions which, in combination with high levels
of dissolved aluminum, cadmium and copper, produced excessive
larval mortality. These conditions have been documented in the
Choptank and Nanticoke Rivers. Inorganic contaminants have been
identified as a potential problem in the Potomac River.
Although deep water hypoxia in Chesapeake Bay resulting from
nutrient enrichment is definitely a problem for some Chesapeake
Bay species, its effect on striped bass is not known. It has been
hypothesized that the striped bass population that inhabits
Chesapeake Bay in the summer can be limited and stressed by hypoxic
conditions.
Presently, adequate water quality conditions exist for coastal
striped bass except in the New York Bight area and some smaller
rivers on the New England coast. These areas have had periodic
dissolved oxygen depressions and may contain elevated levels of
organic pollutants. Hudson River stocks of striped bass are
carrying heavy tissue burdens of PCBs, and although they are a
health risk for human consumption, there is no evidence that this
contaminant poses a threat to successful fish reproduction.
The Fisheries
Commercial landings in the Maryland portion of the Bay
generally increased from the early 1930s to reach historically high
levels during the period 1961 through 1974, then declined
dramatically, thereafter (Figure la, b, & c). Similarly, commercial
landings in Virginia were at or near historically high levels in
the 1960s and early 1970s. As was the case in Maryland, Virginia
harvests declined rapidly after 1974.
Principal gears used in the Chesapeake Bay commercial striped
bass fishery included pound nets, haul seines, and drift, anchor
and stake gill nets. Gill nets have been the predominant gear type
in the Maryland striped bass fishery (Figure 2a), accounting for
30% (1946) to 97.5% (1981) of the total catch. Haul seines were an
important gear for capturing striped bass between 1946 and 1957,
averaging 26% of the total catch, before dropping to between 1% and
3% of the catch in the 1970s (Figure 2b) . Pound nets followed a
similar pattern of usage, averaging about 28% of the total catch
between 1944 and 1953, then fluctuating between 1% and 15% of the
total catch (Figure 2c). Commercial landings by gear type for the
Virginia fishery are available from 1960 to the present. During
the 1960s, the total catch was almost equally divided among haul
seines, pound nets, and gill nets (Figure 3a, b, & c) . Striped bass
caught by haul seine began to decline in the 1970s, and by 1980
haul seines captured an insignificant amount of the total
commercial catch. Gill nets increased in importance to become the
dominant gear type. Pound nets continued to account for
approximately 25% of the total catch.
-------
CO
'£
0)
il
o ^5
o >.
83
m E
•o 2
£; 0)
w.e
. TJ
s
CO
'o
E.J5
o .g
O g>
w •>
SP
ml
T3 i:
Q. eo
•C O)
*: c
C0T|
d co
§
O)
ID O'
d
-s ^
£ CQ
CO
03
CD
CO
0
£
co
D)
U>
oo
o>
o
oo
CT>
ID
h-
0)
o
ID
•«»•
O)
to
CO
o>
o
CO
o
oo
-------
-------
CO
CO
CO
m
"D •*-•
CD
. >>
C JD
II
-; ^
co c
co co
D)
LL
-------
Historically, the harvest of striped bass from the Chesapeake
Bay was regulated through gear restrictions (gill net mesh size),
minimum size limits, and areal/seasonal closures. These regulations
did not effectively protect the striped bass stocks as an alarming
long term decline in abundance began in the mid-1970s. Commercial
harvest of striped bass from the Atlantic Coast also began to
decline. In an attempt to conserve the striped bass resource along
the coast, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC)
adopted an Interstate Fishery Management Plan in 1981 which called
for minimum size and creel limits along the Atlantic Coast.
However, landings and recruitment continued to decline.
To counteract the decline, Amendment 3 to the ASMFC plan
established larger size limits in 1985, to protect the 1982 and all
subsequent year classes until 95% of the females had spawned at
least once. The amendment also provided the criterion for relaxing
management measures when a 3-year running average of 8.0 for the
Maryland juvenile striped bass index was reached. The Maryland
index was incorporated into the amendment because it is a reliable
indicator of reproductive success and because the Chesapeake Bay
stock of striped bass traditionally accounted for 60% to 90% of the
total coastal landings. To accelerate the restoration of Chesapeake
Bay striped bass stocks, Maryland imposed a moratorium on the
harvest, sale and possession of striped bass within state
boundaries. All states along the Atlantic Coast complied with
Amendment 3 with various restrictions on their fisheries. Virginia
and the Potomac River Fisheries Commission enacted moratoriums in
1989.
Historically, striped bass were a valuable commercial and
popular recreational finfish in the Chesapeake Bay. In Virginia,
striped bass traditionally commanded one of the highest prices per
pound of any finfish and, as a result, it was a target species of
many commercial fishermen. In both Maryland and Virginia,
recreational anglers considered striped bass the top game fish in
Chesapeake Bay. At least one user group fished for striped bass
each month of the year. Recreational and charter boat fishing began
in May and, in some areas of the Bay, fishing continued into
December. Commercial fishing occurred during every month, with most
of the annual harvest landed from November through May.
Estimates of the striped bass recreational catch in Maryland
range from two times the commercial catch in 1962, an estimated 9.3
million pounds, to seventy percent of the commercial catch in 1979,
an estimated 657,000 pounds. Only recently has data been collected
to specifically assess Maryland's recreational harvests. In 1979
and 1980, the annual recreational striped bass catch in Maryland
was approximately 508,000 and 441,000 pounds, respectively. Total
Maryland sportfishing effort for all finfish species during 1979
and 1980 was in the range of 2.6 to 2.7 million fishing trips each
year. Virginia's recreational fishery for striped bass has not been
determined. Both the saltwater sportfishing surveys in Virginia
8
-------
and the 1980 National Marine Fisheries Service survey data are
unable to provide accurate estimates of recreational catch. It has
been assumed that sportfishermen in Virginia are comparable to
sportfishermen on the Atlantic coast and probably take at least
equal the amount as the commercial fishery.
Economic Perspective
The following economic perspective on the striped bass fishery
in the Chesapeake Bay was taken from a study conducted by Norton,
Smith and strand (1983). This economic analysis was based on the
fishing industry that existed along the Atlantic Coast during 1979
and 1980.
Gill netting was the major commercial gear type reported in
Maryland, accounting for 97% of the total 1980 commercial striped
bass landings. About one-fourth of the 1,555 registered gill
netters were part-time fishermen. The average annual expenditures
attributable to striped bass, by both part-time and full-time
fishermen using gill nets in Maryland during 1980 were $5,516 and
$22,717, respectively. Income contributions from striped bass
fishing appear to vary geographically with the middle and upper Bay
harvesters relying more heavily on striped bass and finfish than
on shellfish.
During 1980, 82% of Virginia's striped bass landings were
caught by gill nets with harvest concentrated in the area between
the Potomac and Rappahannock rivers. An estimated 761 full-time
gill netters and an additional 2,000-3,000 part-time fishermen
participated in the striped bass fishery in Virginia. However,
full-time netters do not rely solely on the unpredictable
availability of striped bass. Average annual expenditures
attributable to striped bass by Virginia fishermen during 1980 were
$2,415. Net economic benefits are the value of consumption in
excess of the cost of production. Estimated net value of the
striped bass fishery from the Chesapeake Bay region in 1980 was
$1,747,000 for the commercial fishery and $3,487,000 for the
recreational fishery.
An analysis of the economic impact and value of the
recreational striped bass fishery in the Chesapeake Bay was based
on estimates of total effort (trips), catch rate and total catch,
mean and total expenditures, and the average striped bass fishing
trip. Compared to other states along the Atlantic Coast, the
Chesapeake Bay region received the most benefits from a striped
bass fishery by generating the largest recreational values.
Maryland's benefits were significantly greater than Virginia's. The
total net economic benefit from both the recreational and
commercial striped bass fisheries during 1980 was estimated at
$5,234,000 for the Chesapeake Bay region.
-------
In addition to the net benefits from the Chesapeake Bay
region, the striped bass fisheries produced important income and
employment in the coastal areas. For the ten coastal states from
Maine to North Carolina, a total net economic value of $12 million
was generated in 1980. Approximately 75% of the total was
associated with the recreational fishery and 25% with the
commercial fishery.
Resource status
The Maryland striped bass moratorium began on January 1, 1985
and was followed four years later by the closure of the Potomac
River fishery on May 31, 1989 and the Virginia fishery on June 1,
1989. strict management measures along the Atlantic coast,
including the Chesapeake Bay moratorium, were scheduled to remain
in effect until Maryland's spawning stock recovered to the point
of successfully reproducing. Reproductive success was measured by
the juvenile index of abundance reaching a 3-year running average
of 8.0. Maryland's juvenile index was used as the criterion for
relaxing fishing restrictions because it is a reliable indicator
of annual reproductive success and subsequent adult abundance in
the Bay and Atlantic coast. To establish reliability, statistically
significant relationships must be demonstrated between the index
value from year to year, and either the relative magnitude of
harvest from that year class or the relative magnitude of abundance
as measured by fishery-independent sampling programs.
Modest improvement in the juvenile index occurred the first
three years after the Maryland moratorium was imposed (2.9, 4.1
and 4.8 respectively, in 1985, 1986 and 1987). In 1988, the index
declined slightly (2.7), but by 1989 the juvenile index was 25.2,
the highest index recorded since 1970 (Table 1) . Spawning success,
as measured by the juvenile index, indicates that the Chesapeake
Bay striped bass 'stock is recovering from a prolonged period of low
abundance. Surveys also indicate a significant increase in the
number of female striped bass on Chesapeake Bay spawning grounds.
The Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS) conducted a
juvenile striped bass seining survey from 1967 through 1973 and
from 1980 to the present. A recent trend of steadily increasing
values in the juvenile index have been observed, and the 1987 index
was the highest ever recorded in Virginia.' Based on the results of
these surveys, it appears that striped bass juvenile production in
the lower Chesapeake Bay nursery areas is at historic levels.
The Maryland moratorium on striped bass fishing and minimum
sizes observed by other states allowed many aspects of striped bass
life history to be examined. Migration rates, maturity
schedules,and mortality rates have been refined, allowing a more
precise assessment of the Bay stocks. Striped bass spawning stock
surveys carried out from 1982-1989 on the spawning reaches of the
10
-------
Table 1. Maryland striped bass juvenile
1989.
Head
of Bay
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
Average
(1954-89)
0.9
4.4
33.9
5.4
28.2
1.9
9.3
22.1
11.4
6.1
31.0
2.2
32.3
17.4
13.1
26.6
33.1
23.7
12.1
24.7
19.9
7.6
9.8
12.1
12.5
8.3
2.3
0.3 '
5.5
1.2
6.1
0.3
1.6
0.3
7.3
19.4
12.6
Potomac
River
5.2
5.7
6.2
2.5
8.4
1.6
4.3
25.8
19.7
1.1
29.1
3.4
10.5
1.9
0.7
0.2
20.1
8.5
1.9
2.1
1.5
7.8
3.2
1.9
7.9
2.2
2.2
1.4
10.0
2.0
4.7
5.6
9.9
6.4
0.4
2.2
6.3
Choptank
River
1.2
12.5
9.8
2.1
19.5
0.1
9.0
6.0
6.1
5.4
10.6
9.5
13.6
5.3
6.3
4.8
57.2
6.3
11.0
1.0
15.3
4.7
2.4
1.2
6.0
2.8
1.0
1.3
13.0
0.9
2.8
3.7
0.5
12.1
0.7
97.8
10.1
(age 0) index, 1954 -
Nanticoke
River
25.1
5.9
8.2
1.3
22.5
1.8
4.7
1.5
6.6
4.1
13.3
21.6
3.3
4.1
9.0
6.2
17.1
2.0
25.0
1.1
3.9
5.2
1.7
1.0
4.8
0.9
1.8
2.4
6.2
1.0
1.5
2.1
2.2
2.5
0.4
2.9
6.3
Overall
Average
5.2
5.5
15.2
2.9
19.3
1.4
7.1
17.0
12.2
4.0
23.5
7.4
16.7
7.8
7.2
10.5
30.4
11.8
11.0
8.9
10.1
6.7
4.9
4.8
8.5
4.0
2.0
1.2
8.4
1.4
4.2
2.9
4.1
4.8
2.7
25.2
8.9
11
-------
Choptank River, Upper Bay, Chesapeake and Delaware Canal, and
Potomac River suggest that the recent recovery of the female
spawning stock is the dominant Contibutor to the large 1989 year
class. Poor reproduction in Maryland since the mid-1970's, combined
with apparently high levels of fishing mortality, had resulted in
a spawning stock with relatively low numbers of females in most age
classes. The lack of females in the spawning population was so
severe from 1982 through 1986 that the oldest year classes in the
population (the 1969-1971 age classes) were contributing a
significant portion of the eggs produced on the spawning grounds.
Because of the significant increase in the contribution of the 1982
year class and younger females to the total number of eggs produced
in 1989, this is no longer the case.
Since the Maryland juvenile index for 1987 through 1989 is
greater than 8.0, the ASMFC will allow a conservative, transitional
fishery along the Atlantic coast in 1990. The ASMFC must aprove a
coastal jurisdiction's striped bass management plan before the
jurisdiction can initiate its transitional fishery. ASMFC criteria
are designed to build and maintain the coastal striped bass stock.
Status of Traditional Fishery Management Approaches
Catch-Effort (Defined as the number or weight of fish caught during
a specific unit of fishing time and considered a basic measure of
abundance or stock density): Historical commercial fisheries data
is of low quality. The catch data is imprecise and there is no
species specific effort data. Maryland's fishery independent survey
data (1982-1989) and historical Potomac River spawning stock
assessment data (1976-1987) provide estimates of age and sex
specific catch-per-unit-of-effort (CPUE).
Estimates of mortality based on abundance (Instantaneous mortality
is defined as the rate at which fish are removed from a population
by death (Z). It can be represented mathematically by the natural
logarithm of a ratio of the number of fish alive at the end of a
unit of time, to the number alive at the beginning of the unit of
time. It can also be expressed as a percentage of the population) :
Potomac 1974-1977: males age 4-7, 70% (Z=1.2); females age 4-7,
58% (Z=0.87); females age 4-14, 43% (Z=0.57); females age 7-14, 41%
(Z=0.54); MDNR survey 1982-1985: males ages 3-9, 62% (Z=0.99);
females ages 4-9, 58% (Z=0.87).
Yield-per-Recruit (Describes the yield, by weight, per individual
fish. Yield-per-recruit changes with age of the fish. Yield models
are calculated from a fixed number of fish as a function of fishing
mortality and age at first capture): Yield-per-recruit is
maximized by delaying fishing in Chesapeake Bay and on the Atlantic
Coast until striped bass reach 33-37 inches total length. However,
because of the migratory behavior of the Chesapeake stock, Maryland
has essentially no striped bass 33 inches and larger except during
the spawning season. First approximations indicate that at F =
12
-------
about 0.5 (32% of legal sized fish being harvested), yield-per-
recruit in Maryland is maximized at 16-18 inches total length.
Stock-Recruitment (The relationship between the number of adults
and the number of surviving progeny or recruits they produce):
Analysis in progress and will be incorporated into the management
plan when it is available.
Maximum Sustainable Yield (There are many definitions in
quantitative terms, but it is usually considered the greatest catch
that can be taken for a long period of time without any danger to
the fish population): Analysis has not been carried out and there
are no plans to do so since the concept is considered of limited
value for practical management purposes.
Virtual Population Analysis (Defined as the minimum estimate of
catchable fish present in one year, i.e. the total of the minimum
number of fish in each year class. A yearly age census of the catch
and the allocation of the catch among year classes must be carried
out.): Has not been carried out because of a lack of historical
information on age specific estimates of catch.
Data and Analytical Needs:
1. Continued surveys on age and sex specific estimates of the
relative abundance of premigratory and spawning stocks in
Chesapeake Bay.
2. Annual age specific estimates of Chesapeake Bay and coastal
fishing mortality rates, including mortality by catch and
release of undersize fish.
3. Precise estimates of the commercial, recreational and charter
boat harvest, by sex and age class, when the fishery re-opens
in the Chesapeake Bay.
4. Refined estimates of sex and age specific rates of migration
of immature females and young males from the Bay.
5. Data which can be used to further refine estimates of the
Chesapeake Bay female striped bass maturity schedule.
6. Analysis of data on the stock-recruitment relationship.
7. Improved information on the composition (system of origin,
hatchery produced vs. natural) of the coastal stock.
8. Additional research on striped bass reproduction and early
life history stages.
9. Determination of contaminants which affect reproductive
success and the extent to which they do so.
13
-------
References
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, 1987. Interstate
fisheries management plan for the striped bass of the Atlantic
Coast from Maine to North Carolina - revised source document and
management plan framework. Prepared by Versar, Inc. ESM Operations,
9200 Rumsey Road, Columbia MD.
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, 1989. Draft Final-
Amendment 4 to the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission
Interstate Striped Bass Management Plan. Prepared by Versar, Inc.,
ESM Operations, 9200 Rumsey Road, Columbia, MD.
Early, R. S., H. Speir and M. Burch, 1985. Maryland striped bass
research. NMFS federal aid report, project AFC-11 segment 5.
Tidewater Administration, Maryland DNR, Tawes State Office
Building, Annapolis Maryland.
Early, R. S., 1986. Maryland striped bass research. NMFS federal
aid report, project AFC-11 segment 5. Tidewater Administration,
Maryland DNR, Tawes State Office Building, Annapolis Maryland.
Early, R. S., 1987. Maryland striped bass research. NMFS federal
aid report, project AFC-15 segment 1. Tidewater Administration,
Maryland DNR, Tawes State Office Building, Annapolis Maryland.
Jones, P. W., 1985. Potomac River striped bass population survey.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Federal Assistance Completion
Report AFS-13-R-1. Tidewater Administration, Maryland DNR, Tawes
State Office Building, Annapolis, Md.
Norton, V., T. Smith, and I. Strand, 1983. Stripers: The economic
value of the Atlantic coast commercial and recreational striped
bass fisheries. Maryland Sea Grant Publication, University of
Maryland, College Park. UM-SG-TS-83-12.
Setzler, E.M., W.R. Boynton, K.V. Wood, H.H. Zion, L. Lubbers, N.K.
Mountford, P. Frere, L. Tucker, and J.A. Mihursky, 1980. Synopsis
of biological data on striped bass, Morone saxatilis (Walbaum) . FAO
Synopsis No. 121.
Sminkey, T. R. and P.W. Jones, 1987. Characterization of Potomac
River spawning stocks and fecundities of Maryland striped bass.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Federal Assistance Completion
Report F-39-R-1. Tidewater Administration, Maryland DNR, Tawes
State Office Building, Annapolis, Md.
Stagg, Cluney, 1986. An evaluation of the information available
for managing Chesapeake Bay fisheries: preliminary stock
assessments, volume I and II. University of Maryland, Center for
Environmental and Estuarine Studies, Chesapeake Biological
Laboratory, UMCEES[CBL] Ref. No. 85-29.
14
-------
Section 2. striped Bass Management
The source documents for this plan (Setzler et al. 1980;
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission 1987 and 1989; Maryland
Department of Natural Resources Annual Status Reports 1985, 1986,
1987; Emergency Striped Bass Study Group Reports 1981, 1982, 1983,
1984, 1985, 1986 and 1987) contain current knowledge and the status
of striped bass stocks in the Chesapeake Bay and coastal waters.
Although striped bass reproduction in the Chesapeake Bay has
met the ASMFC criterion of a 3-year-running average of 8.0 and will
result in relaxed management measures along the coast, the
population must continue to be protected. A highly conservative
reopening of the fishery (transition fishery) in the Chesapeake Bay
will be implemented to allow time to assess the impact of regulated
fishing on the striped bass population and to guard against
overfishing. Thereafter, management actions in the Bay
jurisdictions will be adjusted as needed to reflect the status of
the resource, the success of the actions themselves, and ASMFC
coastal guidelines.
The Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), Fishery
Division is the responsible fishery management agency in Maryland.
The department is advised on fisheries policy by several
commissions and committees. In 1987, Governor Schaefer appointed
a Striped Bass White Paper Committee (SBWPC) to develop a framework
for striped bass management in Maryland. The committee has
representatives from MDNR, including enforcement and fisheries
personnel, the University of Maryland, conservation organizations,
commercial, recreational, and charter boat fisheries, processors
and the State General Assembly. The white paper committee
recommendations are incorporated in this plan.
Fishery activity on the tidewater portion of the Potomac River
is managed by the Potomac River Fisheries Commission (PRFC), a six
member body empowered under the Maryland-Virginia Potomac River
Compact of 1958. The commission meets quarterly to establish and
maintain a program of conservation and improvement of the seafood
resources, and to regulate and license fisheries in the Potomac
River. The commission was responsible for developing actions in
this plan that were within its purview. A Rockfish Study Group
was established in 1989 to evaluate alternatives for managing the
striped bass fishery in the Potomac River, and will make its
recommendations to the commission. The study group is composed of
representatives from management agencies and Potomac River fishing
interests in both Virginia and Maryland.
The Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC), Fisheries
Management Division is responsible for fisheries management in the
Commonwealth of Virginia. The commission developed actions to
address problems identified in this plan for the Virginia portion
15
-------
of the Chesapeake Bay. The Finfish Subcommittee of the Virginia
Fisheries Advisory Committee is evaluating management options for
the striped bass fishery and is providing VMRC with its
recommendations. Subcommitte members represent Virginia fishermen
and processors.
The District of Columbia Department of Consumer and Regulatory
Affairs, Fisheries Management Section (DCFM), was responsible for
developing actions for the District of Columbia management of
striped bass. There is no commercial striped bass fishery in the
District's portion of the Potomac River.
Administrative authority to open and close areas to fishing,
adjust the length of the season, determine fishing quotas, set size
limits, regulate permissible gear types, require record keeping,
and monitor the results of these actions is necessary to react to
changing conditions. The strategies in this plan reflect a broad
approach that gives the affected jurisdictions flexibility in
meeting their specific management needs, while striving toward
compatibility and consistency. The management plan for striped bass
will be adaptive and continuously responsive to new information
about the current status of the resource.
A. GOAL AND OBJECTIVES
The goal of this plan is to:
Enhance and perpetuate the striped bass stock in the
Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries, and throughout its
Atlantic coast range, so as to generate optimum long-term
ecological, social and economic benefits.
In order to meet this goal, the. following objectives must be met:
r
1) Follow guidelines established by the Atlantic States Marine
Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) for coastwide management of
striped bass stocks and make Bay regulatory actions compatible
where possible.
2) Promote protection of the resource by maintaining a clear
distinction between conservation goals and allocation issues.
t
3) Restore and maintain an adequate spawning stock with a
balanced age composition to minimize the possibility of
recruitment failure.
4) Promote fair allocation of allowable harvest among various
components of the fishery.
5) Establish programs to closely monitor the harvest and sale of
striped bass.
16
-------
6) Promulgate an effective enforcement strategy during an open
fishery.
7) Promote research to improve our understanding of striped bass
biology and population dynamics, and the socioeconomics of the
fishery.
8) Adopt standards of environmental quality necessary for the
maximum natural production of striped bass and for the
utilization of allowable harvest.
B. PROBLEM AREAS AND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
Problem l - overharvesting, Reduced Spawning Stock and Poor
Recruitment: Historically, the striped bass population in
Chesapeake Bay has experienced heavy fishing pressure. From 1973
to 1983, striped bass commercial landings in the Chesapeake Bay
decreased from over 7,000,000 pounds to less than 600,000 pounds.
Recreational harvests also decreased but catch records are not
adequate to quantify their contribution to the population decline.
An analysis of the average size of striped bass in the Maryland
commercial harvest indicated a downward trend in size over time.
Harvest of fish at small sizes reduced the number of females
reaching spawning age. New information indicates that a year class
of female striped bass is not expected to reach 100% maturity until
age VIII or older in the Chesapeake Bay.
There has been a succession of poor-to-average year classes
since 1974, resulting in lowered adult striped bass abundance and
a lack of diversity in sizes and ages in the spawning population.
Reduced spawning stock has contributed to poor reproduction.
Strategy l - Overharvesting, Reduced Spawning stock and Poor
Recruitment: Controlling fishing mortality will be the primary
method of maintaining adequate striped bass stocks. Optimum yield
per fish will be more closely approached by establishing minimum
sizes greater than historic limits. Long term fishery maintenance
must be based on a. management objective commensurate with
reproductive success. The number of eggs per striped bass is
directly related to fish size and age. Females will be protected
so that more can reach their spawning potential. As reproductive
potential is protected and spawning stock -increases, more young
striped bass should enter the fishery.
Two types of fisheries have been defined by the ASMFC: (1) A
conservative transitional fishery, which would go into effect after
the Maryland striped bass juvenile index has reached a 3-year-
average of 8.0; and (2) A more robust recovered fishery, to be
considered when a certain percentage of the female spawning stock
is composed of striped bass females equal to or greater than age
VIII. The percentage will be determined by the ASMFC.
17
-------
Mathematical models were utilized to determine acceptable
fishing rates (F) and were the basis for arriving at a transition
fishing rate of 0.25 and a long-term fishing rate of 0.5. These
rates have been accepted by ASMFC as appropriate levels of fishing
harvest while protecting the reproductive potential of the
resource.
PROBLEM 1.1
Overfishing has led to depressed striped bass populations.
STRATEGY 1.1
Fishing mortality will be controlled by several means to
protect striped bass stocks. Harvest restrictions will
be set to provide a fishing mortality rate of 0.25
(equivalent to about 18% of the legal sized fish being
harvested) during a transition fishery and a rate of 0.5
(equivalent to about 32% of the legal sized fish being
harvested) during a recovered fishery, in accordance with
ASMFC guidelines (these percentages may change slightly
as additional calculations are made by the ASMFC) . Adult
stock levels, stock composition, and the Maryland striped
bass young-of-the-year index (or other juvenile indices
as approved by ASMFC) will be used in determining needed
restrictions.
ACTION 1.1.1
The District of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia and the
Potomac River Fisheries Commission will utilize a
combination of harvest restrictions to meet target
fishing mortality rates. Controls may include
seasonal quotas, daily bag limits, minimum size
limits, seasons, time restrictions, gear
restrictions, license requirements, and other
actions. Maryland's annual quota will be presented
as total sport and commercial landings.
IMPLEMENTATION 1.1.1
1990 for a transition fishery.
ACTION 1.1.2
Maryland, the Potomac River Fisheries Commission and
Virginia will cap commercial harvest during the
transitional fishery with a quota not to exceed 20%
of the average annual commercial harvest as reported
for the period 1972-1979. No commercial fishing is
permitted in the District of Columbia.
18
-------
IMPLEMENTATION 1.1.2
1990; to be evaluated annually thereafter with
a goal of setting the harvest two years in
advance.
PROBLEM 1.2
Excessive fishing mortality on immature fish has led to an
inadequate spawning stock, thereby hampering reproductive
success.
STRATEGY 1.2
Size limits and fishing mortality rates will be set to
allow sufficient recruitment to the spawning stock.
ACTION 1.2.1
The District of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia and the
Potomac River Fisheries Commission will establish
a minimum size limit of 18 inches total length in
the Chesapeake Bay and tributaries during the
transition fishery. Maryland may establish a larger
minimum legal size during a May trophy fishery
beginning in 1991.
IMPLEMENTATION 1.2.1
1990 for the transitional fishery; to be
reevaluated for a recovered fishery.
ACTION 1.2.2
Maryland, Virginia and the Potomac River Fisheries
Commission will prohibit the keeping and sale of
sublegal (fish smaller than the minimum size)
striped bass by-catch.
IMPLEMENTATION 1.2.2
1990
ACTION 1.2.3
As a conservation measure, the District of Columbia,
Maryland, Virginia and the Potomac River Fisheries
Commission will establish a consistent maximum legal
size for striped bass in the Chesapeake Bay and its
tributaries.
IMPLEMENTATION 1.2.3
1990
19
-------
PROBLEM 1.3
Excessive fishing mortality on Chesapeake Bay spawning stocks
reduced both the number of viable spawners and the diversity
in age and size of spawners, resulting in decreased
reproductive potential.
STRATEGY 1.3
Fishing mortality rates will be set to ensure a viable
female spawning stock of age VIII and older females, and
stocks will continue to be enhanced with hatchery
production.
ACTION 1.3.1
During a transition fishery, mortality will be
controlled to protect age VIII or older females
until they comprise at least a certain percentage
(as determined by the ASMFC) of the female spawning
population.
IMPLEMENTATION 1.3.1
1990
ACTION 1.3.2
A fishery on a recovered stock will be controlled
so that females age VIII or older continue to
comprise at least a certain percentage (as
determined by the ASMFC) of the female spawning
stock.
IMPLEMENTATION 1.3.2
Open, depending on when a recovered fishery is
reached.
ACTION 1.3.3
Maryland and Virginia will continue hatchery
production to enhance striped bass spawning stocks
in areas that are still depleted. The District of
Columbia will work with the Maryland and Virginia
hatchery programs to enhance striped bass spawning
stocks.
IMPLEMENTATION 1.3.3
In progress. Restocking programs will target
areas with inadequate striped bass spawning
populations.
20
-------
ACTION 1.3.4
Hybrid striped bass stocking and the introduction
of non-native stocks will be restricted in the
Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries in accordance
with ASMFC guidelines. The Maryland Department of
Natural Resources, the Pennsylvania Fish Commission
and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service will discuss
stocking issues regarding the Susquehanna River.
IMPLEMENTATION 1.3.4
1990
Problem 2 - Regulatory and Enforcement Issues: Striped bass is a
highly desirable market item and recreational trophy which provides
a strong incentive to fish at high levels. A limited fishery
requires promulgation of timely annual regulations to balance and
limit the pressures of both commercial and recreational fishing on
the stock. In-season adjustments to the fishery may also be needed.
The ability to monitor stocks and measure the results of
regulations is of great importance. Allocation of harvest between
sport and commercial interests is a highly debated issue that must
be resolved. In addition, Chesapeake Bay jurisdictions have
different fisheries for striped bass, which has led to a set of
different and often inconsistent regulatory measures. An
enforcement strategy is needed to provide the most effective and
efficient protection for the striped bass resource.
Strategy 2 - Regulatory and Enforcement Issues: In order to control
fishing effort and fishing mortality rates, harvest and sale
regulations will be developed and implemented. Guidelines will be
set for monitoring the resource and harvest restrictions. The
individual jurisdictions will comply with ASMFC goals and criteria
for the striped bass fishery and, where possible, have compatible
fishing regulations. Areas of harvest pressure and times when
harvesting pressure will be the heaviest will be defined in order
to facilitate adequate enforcement.
PROBLEM 2.1
Traditionally, there have been three harvesting components in
the striped bass fishery - commercial, recreational, and the
charter boat industry, which contains both commercial and
recreational elements. Allocation conflicts exist between
these groups.
STRATEGY 2.1
The striped bass harvest will be equitably allocated
among user groups on a yearly basis.
21
-------
ACTION 2.1.1
The Maryland quota will be allocated as follows -
42.5% commercial; 42.5% recreational; 15% charter.
Virginia and the Potomac River Fisheries Commission
will use various restrictions in fishing seasons and
bag limits to equitably allocate and restrict
harvest among the commercial, recreational and
charter boat fisheries.
IMPLEMENTATION 2.1.1
1990; to be reevaluated after 1990 season.
ACTION 2.1.2
Maryland will terminate the fishing season for each
of its three component fisheries when their
individual quota is reached, regardless of time
during the season. Virginia will terminate its
commercial fishing component when its harvest quota
is reached, regardless of time during the season.
The Potomac River Fisheries Commission will
terminate its fishing seasons when the allowable
harvest under the ASMFC's Striped Bass Plan is
reached, regardless of the time during that season.
IMPLEMENTATION 2.1.2
1990
PROBLEM 2.2
Gill netting is the primary method for commercially harvesting
rockfish. Unrestricted use of gillnets could result in high
fishing mortality. There would also be a high by-catch
mortality of sublegal striped bass from the use of gill nets
with small ifiesh sizes. Similar problems exist for other
commercial fishing gear. In concert with gear restrictions to
limit fishing effort and mortality, certain measures are
needed to facilitate enforcement.
STRATEGY 2.2
Maryland, Potomac River Fisheries Commission and Virginia
will establish commercial gear restrictions to limit
fishing effort and sublegal by-catch, and to facilitate
enforcement.
ACTION 2.2.1
Maryland, the Potomac River Fisheries Commission and
Virginia will establish a minimum gill net mesh size
designed to reduce sublegal by-catch mortality to
negligible levels.
22
-------
IMPLEMENTATION 2.2.1
1990
ACTION 2.2.2
Maryland and Virginia will require that gill nets
be marked, tended, and recovered (except for
Virginia's stake nets) daily. The Potomac River
Fisheries Commission will continue a fixed location
for each gill net licensed in the Potomac.
IMPLEMENTATION 2.2.2
1990
ACTION 2.2.3
Maryland and Virginia will establish a maximum
length of gill net allowed on board a vessel and in
the water based on the number of expected gill
netters, the total gill net quota and the projected
season. The Potomac River Fisheries Commission will
establish a maximum number of gill net licenses for
the Potomac River and maintain a maximum length per
license during the transitional fishery. When the
recovered fishery begins, maximum yardage will be
reevaluated.
IMPLEMENTATION 2.2.3
1990
ACTION 2.2.4
Maryland and Virginia will establish annual quotas
for their commercial fisheries.
IMPLEMENTATION 2.2.3
1990
PROBLEM 2.3
Unrestricted selling and purchasing of striped bass can lead
to commercial transactions that bypass monitoring efforts and
reduce the effectiveness of harvest quotas.
STRATEGY 2.3
Selling and buying procedures and timely reporting
requirements will be established to monitor and regulate
harvest.
23
-------
ACTION 2.3.1
A) Maryland will establish check-in stations for the
commercial sale of striped bass.
B) Virginia dealers and commercial watermen that
harvest striped bass will be required to have a
special permit to sell striped bass.
C) The sale of striped bass caught by recreational
or charter boat fishermen will be prohibited.
IMPLEMENTATION 2.3.1
1990
ACTION 2.3.2
Maryland and Virginia will establish a weekly
reporting system for licensed commercial fishermen,
and a daily reporting system for buyers during the
commercial season. Maryland and Virginia will
provide the Potomac River Fisheries Commission with
information obtained through their mandatory buyer
reporting provisions. The Potomac River Fisheries
Commission will reduce the time period required for
the finfish reporting system from monthly to weekly.
IMPLEMENTATION 2.3.2
1990
PROBLEM 2.4
For striped bass fishing, harvest limits, seasons, time
periods, and areas have varied among the harvesting components
of the fishery (commercial, charter boat, and recreational),
as well as with the particular type of gear used and the
location in the bay. A combination of inconsistent
regulations and a lack of regulation has contributed to
problems of overfishing and enforcement.
STRATEGY 2.4.1
Fishing seasons will be established for the recreational,
charter boat and commercial fisheries. The length of the
season may be adjusted as needed, including when quotas
are reached (see Action 2.1.2), by opening and closing
areas to fishing, or with other actions as appropriate.
Seasons will be consistent among jurisdictions to the
extent possible.
ACTION 2.4.1
A) The District of Columbia will establish a
recreational fishing season within the period June
through December.
24
-------
B) Maryland will establish fishing seasons within
the following periods:
o The commercial gill net season will be within
the period November through March 15.
o The commercial pound net/haul seine/fyke
net/hook and line seasons will be within the
period June through November.
o The recreational and charter boat seasons will
be within the period June through November.
o There may be a May trophy fishery for
recreational and charter boat fishing,
effective May 1991, limited to a single trophy
fish per boat per day.
C) Virginia will establish fishing seasons within
the following periods:
o The commercial netting season will be within
the period September through February.
o The recreational and charter boat seasons will
be within the period June through December.
D) The Potomac River Fisheries Commission will
establish fishing seasons within the following
periods:
o The commercial gill net season will be within
the period November through March.
o' The commercial pound net/haul seine/hook and
line seasons will be within the period June
through December.
o The recreational and charter season will be
within the period June through December.
E) Maryland, the Potomac River Fisheries Commission
and Virginia will annually review the need for a Bay
spawning season fishery in relationship to the issue
of parity with the coastal states.
IMPLEMENTATION 2.4.1
1990
25
-------
STRATEGY 2.4.2
Establish time periods when fishing is allowed to aid law
enforcement and monitoring.
ACTION 2.4.2
Maryland will prohibit commercial fishing on
weekends and at night during the transitional
fishery.
IMPLEMENTATION 2.4.2
1990
STRATEGY 2.4.3
Maryland, the Potomac River Fisheries Commission and
Virginia will maintain appropriate striped bass fishing
areas.
ACTION 2.4.3
Maryland will continue to restrict fishing for
striped bass in spawning areas and rivers, and
spawning reaches as defined in COMAR 08.02.05.02.
Virginia will continue to restrict fishing within
the spawning reaches defined in VMRC Regulation 450-
01-0034. The Potomac River Fisheries Commission will
continue its prohibition on gill netting or striped
bass fishing during April and May throughout the
entire Potomac River during the transitional
fishery.
IMPLEMENTATION 2.4.3
In effect. .
STRATEGY 2.4.4
The District of Columbia, Maryland, the Potomac River
Fisheries Commission and Virginia will establish
recreational and charter boat creel limits consistent
with ASMFC guidelines and dependent on length of season.
ACTION 2.4.4.1
The District of Columbia, Maryland, the Potomac
River Fisheries Commission and Virginia will
establish creel limits for the recreational and
charter boat fisheries of up to five (5) fish per
person per day within the established season.
IMPLEMENTATION 2.4.4.1
1990
26
-------
ACTION 2.4.4.2
Maryland may allow one trophy fish per boat during
a May trophy season.
IMPLEMENTATION 2.4.4.2
Open
PROBLEM 2.5
Inadequate or untimely information on fishing effort and
catch can result in quota overharvest.
STRATEGY 2.5
Maryland, Virginia and the Potomac River Fisheries
Commission will establish monitoring programs to provide
timely knowledge of harvest and effort data.
ACTION 2.5.1
Maryland, the Potomac River Fisheries Commission and
Virginia will monitor harvest for the striped bass
fishery by one or a combination of the following:
o Utilize daily trip tickets for commercial and
charter fishermen.
o Conduct port sampling of commercial vessels.
o Conduct onboard sampling of commercial catches.
o Utilize check-in station sampling to
characterize exploited stocks.
o Require dealer logs
o Maintain Natural Resource Police activity
reports.
o Utilize aerial overflights to estimate
recreational effort.
o Conduct port and onboard sampling of
recreational vessels.
o Conduct telephone surveys to estimate
recreational participation.
o Utilize mail surveys to estimate recreational
catch and effort.
o Utilize an enhanced National Marine Fisheries
Service survey and/or Chesapeake Bay Stock
Assessment Committee recreational monitoring
data.
IMPLEMENTATION 2.5.1
1990
27
-------
ACTION 2.5.2
The District of Columbia will conduct an angler
survey to determine striped bass fishing effort and
harvest.
IMPLEMENTATION 2.5.2
1990
PROBLEM 2.6
Chesapeake Bay fishery agencies must be able to adequately
address ASMFC requirements and have appropriate authority to
manage the fishery in a timely manner. Inconsistent
enforcement policies could lead to interjurisdictional
management problems; enforcement capabilities must be adequate
to deter striped bass fishery violations.
STRATEGY 2.6.1
The District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia will
establish regulatory procedures that allow for: 1)
recognition of and incorporation of ASMFC requirements
into state management, and 2) a periodic cycle of public
review of management options. The Potomac River Fisheries
Commission will promulgate regulations necessary to
comply with the ASMFC and Chesapeake Bay Striped Bass
Management Plans.
ACTION 2.6.1
Maryland will propose legislation to authorize
timely management actions and will develop
guidelines for regulations. Virginia will
promulgate regulations for timely management and
seek legislation to correct any deficiencies if
noted.
IMPLEMENTATION 2.6.1
1990
STRATEGY 2.6.2
An assessment of enforcement practices and capabilities
will be conducted.
ACTION 2.6.2
The District of Columbia, Maryland, the Potomac
River Fisheries Commission and Virginia will adopt
consistent enforcement policies for the striped bass
fishery throughout the Chesapeake Bay. Strategies
to address enforcement needs will be developed.
28
-------
IMPLEMENTATION 2.6.2
1990
Problem 3 - Stock Assessment and Research Needs: Maryland's
moratorium on striped bass fishing in its portion of the Chesapeake
Bay has allowed several aspects of the species' life history to be
quantified. Migration rates, maturity schedules and mortality rates
are important pieces of information which have been recently
revised and allow a more accurate assessment of Chesapeake Bay
stocks. Additional information is needed to protect and enhance
Chesapeake populations.
Strategy 3- Stock Assessment and Research Needs: The Chesapeake Bay
Stock Assessment Committee (CBSAC) will continue to improve the
coordination of stock assessment pursuant to the Chesapeake Bay
Stock Assessment Plan. Stock identification studies should be
expanded, especially for the Chesapeake & Delaware Canal and along
the coast, to provide information on stock mixing. The contribution
of hybrids and hatchery produced fish to the wild population needs
to be determined. A review of hooking mortality and other by-catch
mortality rates would allow greater precision in establishing
fishing mortality controls. Studies on larval survival and growth
in relation to environmental variables would provide a better
understanding of the factors affecting year class strength.
PROBLEM 3.1
Information on the health of Chesapeake Bay stocks of striped
bass must be kept up-to-date; accurate identification of Bay
and coastal stocks is critically needed.
STRATEGY 3.1
The jurisdictions will continue to obtain stock
information on striped bass in the Chesapeake Bay.
ACTION 3.1
The District of Columbia will continue monitoring
aspects of striped bass population dynamics.
Maryland will continue surveys of the spawning and
premigratory striped bass stock in the Chesapeake
Bay. Virginia will initiate surveys of its spawning
stock of striped bass. Collection of tissue and
scale samples to augment tagging information and
stock identification will be considered.
IMPLEMENTATION 3.1
DC - On-going; MD - On-going; VA - 1990.
29
-------
PROBLEM 3.2
Additional information is needed on fishing and natural
mortality of striped bass, reproduction and early survival,
and environmental factors affecting adult striped bass.
STRATEGY 3.2
Efforts will be made to improve our understanding of
factors that affect reproduction and recruitment to the
fishery.
ACTION 3.2
The District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia, in
cooperation with federal agencies, will review and
update existing data, and initiate new studies, that
target: striped bass reproduction and early life
history, especially in relation to environmental
parameters; natural mortality; and catch-release
mortality induced by various fishing methods.
IMPLEMENTATION 3.2
Variable, depending on project.
Problem 4 - Declining Water Quality: Surveys of striped bass
spawning areas have shown traces of heavy metals in amounts high
enough to cause concern. The degree to which these substances
affect egg and larval development and survival is not well defined.
Dissolved aluminum and pH interactions are also known to affect
early life stages. Good water quality in spawning areas is critical
for the survival of striped bass eggs and larvae, however the
relative roles of water quality factors and number of adult
spawners in determining levels of juvenile production need to be
defined. High levels of contaminants in tissues of some coastal
adult striped bass (i.e. Hudson River stocks) pose health risks for
consumers. Low dissolved oxygen in the Chesapeake Bay during the
summer may limit some striped bass habitat.
Strategy 4 - Declining Water Quality: Adequate spawning and nursery
areas with good water quality are critical for striped bass
survival. Although causes for the decline in reproduction may
differ between years and between spawning areas, several water
quality aspects are identified as reducing survival of young. State
and Federal studies will continue to examine the effects of
environmental contaminants on striped bass stocks.
PROBLEM 4.1
As a result of their migratory nature, striped bass utilize
a variety of habitats. Each life stage, i.e., egg/larvae,
30
-------
juvenile, non-migratory sub-adult and adult, and migratory
sub-adult and adult, has specific habitat requirements. These
specific water quality and habitat parameters have not been
well defined. Non-point sources of pollution continue to be
a problem for all living resources in the Chesapeake Bay.
STRATEGY 4.1
Identify those water quality factors, both natural and
man-induced, which affect striped bass reproduction and
survival, and focus on the control of those factors.
ACTION 4.1
The first four action items are commitments under
the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement. The DCFM, MDNR,
PRFC and VMRC are not the agencies responsible for
carrying out the actual commitments, but are
involved in setting objectives of the programs to
fulfill the commitments. The achievement of these
commitments will lead to improved water quality and
enhanced biological production that can only benefit
striped bass populations. The DCFM, MDNR, PRFC and
VMRC fully support these commitments.
1 - The first commitment adopted under the 1987
Chesapeake Bay Agreement was a report titled,
"Habitat Requirements for Chesapeake Bay Living
Resources". This document listed the habitat
requirements for selected target species including
striped bass. The report is being revised and
updated by a workgroup of the Living Resources
Subcommittee. When complete in May, 1990, the
habitat requirements contained in the report will
be used to aid managers in improving water quality:
a) Assist in the revision of water quality
standards and criteria as needed,
b) Develop a Habitat Requirements Use Report
which will detail resource needs by river
segment,
c) Assist in the 1991 Nutrient Re-evaluation
by providing living resource habitat
requirement for use in the 3-D Model (The model
will compare existing water quality with the
habitat requirements and project whether the
requirements would be met under various
nutrient removal scenarios), and
d) Assist in the implementation of the
nutrient, toxics and conventional pollutant
control strategies by identifying critical
habitat needs.
31
-------
2 - Development and adoption of a basinwide plan
that will achieve a reduction of nutrients entering
the Chesapeake Bay:
a) Construct public and private sewage
facilities.
b) Reduce the discharge of untreated or
inadequately treated sewage.
c) Establish and enforce nutrient and
conventional pollutant limitations in regulated
discharges.
d) Reduce levels of nutrients and other
conventional pollutants in runoff from
agricultural and forested lands.
e) Reduce levels of nutrients and other
conventional pollutants in urban runoff.
3 - Development and adoption of a basinwide plan for
the reduction and control of toxic materials
entering the Chesapeake Bay system from point and
nonpoint sources and from bottom sediments:
a) Reduce discharge of metals and organic
compounds from sewage treatment plants
receiving industrial wastewater.
b) Reduce the discharge of metals and organic
compounds from industrial sources.
c) Reduce levels of metals and organic
compounds in urban and agriculture runoff.
d) Reduce chlorine discharges to critical
finfish areas.
4 - Development and adoption of a basinwide plan for
the management of conventional pollutants entering
the Chesapeake Bay from point and nonpoint sources:
a) Manage sewage sludge, dredge spoil and
hazardous wastes.
b) Improve dissolved oxygen concentrations in
the Chesapeake Bay through the reduction of
nutrients from both point and nonpoint
sources.
c) Continue study of the impacts of acidic
conditions on water quality.
d) Manage groundwater to protect the water
quality of the Chesapeake Bay.
e) Continue research to refine strategies to
reduce point and nonpoint sources of nutrient,
toxic and conventional pollutants in the
Chesapeake Bay.
32
-------
5 - The development and adoption of a plan for
continued research and monitoring of the impacts
and causes of acidic atmospheric deposition into
the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. This plan
is complemented by Maryland's research and
monitoring program on the sources, effects, and
control of acid deposition as defined by Natural
Resources Article Title 3, Subtitle 3A, (Acid
Deposition: Sections 3-3A-01 through 3-3A-04):
a) Determine the relative contributions to acid
deposition from various sources of acid
deposition precursor emissions and identify any
regional variability.
b) Assess the consequences of the environmental
impacts of acid deposition on water quality.
c) Identify and evaluate the effectiveness and
economic costs of technologies and mitigative
techniques that are feasible to control acid
deposition into the Chesapeake Bay.
IMPLEMENTATION 4.1
Variable, depending on project.
33
------- |