The purpose of this series will be to raise some questions and hopefully, get people thinking about what we are experiencing this season. We know there will be many who totally disagree. That is as it should be. However, we feel the questions need to be raised and discussed to let readers decide for themselves.

   There are many differences of opinion as to what is taking place this season. Many feel that it’s the weather, some feel it’s the lack of bait, still others believe that the water is just too warm. There’s a good possibility that it may be a combination of many factors. One thing is for certain; there are not as many fish this year as the last few seasons

   Are there really as many stripers as we believe there are? And if so, what happened to them this season? Is it just a bad season or is it a sign of worse things to come. The chances are it really could be just a bad year. They happen. If it is, then all this will be just more time wasted on striped bass politics. Then again, the chance is equally as good that it may be another decline and it’s better to start asking the questions now than to wait and regret the outcome latter.

   To make sense of it all, it is necessary to look at management practices over the last ten years and then in following segments, share what people on the water are seeing and what they think.

   In the last few years we have heard every superlative in the English language used to describe the current state of our striped bass fishery. Unbelievable, incredible, amazing, explosion, astonishing and so on. I myself have been astonished at the number of fish I’ve seen at times. But there is another side to this story. A side, which over the years has been forgotten, and many refused to pay much attention to. Only then, with all the facts, can we make an informed decision and put aside the extremely effective propaganda that has swamped our media. It just may be that things are not quit as rosy in "Striperville" as we are being led to believe.

   The question before us is: are there really historically high numbers of striped bass in the fishery as we are being told? The figures show that there WERE more stripers from the time the moratorium went into effect until 1989. Keep in mind that more fish is actually a relative term. The numbers of fish hadn’t increased by much at all. We just weren’t harvesting as many. At least not legally.

   From 1989 until the end of 1994, the figures had fallen. The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) own figures showed a decline in the numbers of stripers caught in the commercial catch statistics, per unit of effort. This was happening while stock allocations were being increased. At that time, the bottom line was, they were fishing harder for fewer fish. Problem was, few if any people paid much attention.

   Another statistic that was missing from the equation and not being considered at the time was the mortality of illegally caught fish. Many experts agreed that the illegal by-catch of the ocean and inshore shad fishery along with the by-catch of the dogfish fishery was at least TWICE the allowed commercial harvest. How long did anyone believe that that could continue and not have an adverse impact on the fishery?

   Again, the question is are there really more bass? Well, the answer is complicated and it depends on whose side you are viewing it from. From the perspective of our fisheries managers and commercial fishermen, there was far too many bass swimming around unmolested. In their eyes, those fish were just begging to be caught, boxed and sold!

   What we had witnessed since the moratorium was an increase in school fish that HAD been protected. When you add something to nothing, you wind up with more than you had. They used 1980 as the base line of the recovery date. There weren’t many bass around in 1980. The problem is when you start believing that it is more than you’ve EVER had and that is where we are right now. The protection of those fish, (from 84-89) is gone!

   Those who were close to striped bass management conservation and politics agreed that the fishery was far from being recovered to historically high levels. In an ASMFC Newsletter, Fisheries Focus, Volume 3, Issue 6 of 1994, it stated that as of January 1st, 1995, the Striped Bass Management Board would declare the Atlantic Coast Striped Bass stock fully recovered. They did that. But recovered from what? Recovered from the 1980 base line when the stock was depleted and prior to the protection of the 1982-year class, which formed the basis for the recovery.

   This so-called recovery assessment is based on two ridiculous theories. One stated that information showed that female striped bass spawning stock recovering (key word- recovering- not recovered) to historically high levels observed in the 1960’s and early 70’s. At the time, biologists agreed that just because females were or have been observed on the spawning grounds was absolutely no guarantee that the females will: (1) spawn, (2) that successful spawning will take place, (3) that the males will even show up and (4) that proper environmental conditions will exist at the time of spawning to guarantee a successful year class. Bottom line! They were guessing!

   Another foolish assessment was that since the 1993 Young-of –the Year (YOY) was a very high 39.8 and since the 1970 Y.O.Y. was a mere 30 and it carried the fishery for 10 years, then IN THEIR OPINION, the 1993 year class should be able to sustain the fishery for at least 10 more years all by itself. This assumption was so full of holes it was incredible.

   First, they were once again guessing! Second. The 1970-year class was bottoming out by 1976 and by 1980 almost gone due to intense pressure. Third. The commercial fishermen of 1998 as compared to his predecessor of the 70’s are capable of strip mining the ocean clean. Forth. . They never calculated the tremendous increase in recreational fishermen during the 1990’s and only recently began looking at the mortality of recreationally caught fish. Instead their answer has been to increase the commercial quota.

   An article, in "Wildlife Conservation Magazine", dated June 1994 described the EXACT SAME SCENARIO that is taking place with our striped bass stock. Fishery Managers were telling commercial fishermen in the Canadian Maritimes that there was nothing wrong with the North Atlantic cod fishery and that the stock was healthy. They increased the quotas for five consecutive years, even though the catch was drastically declining. When researchers finally went to sea for 30-days aboard one of the most modern research vessels on the planet they returned and stated, and I quote, "We feel that the probability is 95 percent or maybe higher, that the northern stock of Atlantic Codfish is EXTINCT. When stock recovery is mentioned by the ASMFC, they refer to it as being recovered from 1980. (SFI Bulletin 1993) What happened to the previous 25 or 30 years? Is it or has it recovered to those levels? Many think the answer is NO!

   In a Jersey Coast Anglers Newsletter dated May 1994, vice President Gary Caputi gave testimony at congressional hearings held in Washington, on the authorization of the Atlantic Coast Striped Bass Conservation Act. Gary gave this example of how insane this talk of full recovery was. Quote. "In 1950 an 1951, tractor trailer loads of striped bass were netted in the Toms River in New Jersey and sent to market as "by-catch" of a nonexistent shad fishery. (There was never any shad run in the Toms River). Fish stocks in this area are no where near the high levels of those days, but even if you could, fishery managers would not allow you to take them claiming the fishery could not sustain such an enormous harvest. Striped bass a recovered fishery- by whose perception? By who’s standards?" UN-quote.

   Saltwater Sportsmen Magazine ran a story in 94’ reported by outdoor writer Joe Arlington, regarding research done by Dr. David Secor, a research scientist at the Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies (CEES) Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, that he confirmed several missing generations of striped bass in the Chesapeake Bay. Dr. Secor analyzed ear bones, known as (Otoliths) taken from the heads of large stripers (over 36-inches) during the 1992 Spring Trophy season. These rings in the ear bones are counted much the same way as trees are dated and are excepted (scientifically) as being extremely accurate. His research failed to turn up one single specimen spawned between 1972 and 1981. Almost ten years!

   Since the ASMFC is using the base years of (72 to 79) to regulate the commercial harvest-when it declared stripers fully recovered in 1995, it would seem only logical, in the face of Dr. Secor’s research, that they are allowing harvest figures to be used that it now seems was wiped out. How can you set harvest figures, relating to a fishery that no longer existed?

   Eleven years ago biologists conducted a study of the fishery concerning spawning success. Previously, it was accepted that stripers spawned in their fifth or sixth year and between the sizes of 22 to 28-inches. The new research indicated that this was no longer true and females were now spawning at 36-inches or higher. That is where the 36-inch size limit came from in the early 90’s. It was supposed to give the bass a chance to spawn at least once before they were removed from the stock. Why then did the Commission lower to coastwide size limit to 28-inches for recreational anglers?

   In 1989 we had lots of 36-inch fish. We were told that 1990 would be the year of the 40-inch fish. It never happened. Then the limit was lowered to 34 –inches and all the 36-inch fish disappeared. Then it went down to 32, 30 and 28-inches and each lowering brought less and less large fish. As the quality of our fishery dropped so did the number of spawning bass capable of having young. (Their research, no one else’s).

   Then in 1989 came the so-called BIG YEAR CLASS. The state of Maryland and the Commission were bombarding the media with the good news that the striped bass YOY index had hit 25. There were a lot of people who said-hey- let’s wait here- these figures are wrong and the fish that they were getting were coming from only two sites in the whole Chesapeake system. This controversy made it all the way to a congressional hearing.

   At those hearings, Maryland Senator, Gerald W. Wenegrad, asked DNR officials in that hearing, "What is the compelling state interest in reopening a fishery under a moratorium? What not wait another year? Maryland’s reopening a fishery, signals to Atlantic coastal states, ‘Go at the fish.’

   Captain Jim Price of the Chesapeake Bay Acid Rain Foundation testified, "There is no compelling reason to reopen the fishery. We are not starving. We have no need for this fish." When he finished his statement he read a statement in the record by retired DNR biologist, Joe Boone, who designed the YOY index that was used for 35 years. "The 1989 juveniles do not compose a dominant year class because they are not evenly distributed throughout the bay."

   Price continued. "I find it hard to believe that following six years of the lowest reproduction ever recorded, that a species which had reached the point of total collapse in 1984 could be restored to a level that would even allow a limited fishing at the present time.

   Robert E. Lick, of the New Jersey Marine fisheries Council said, "I hope this Committee can determine why the ASMFC is so hell-bent on easing the restrictions on fishing for striped bass and ignoring the tremendous outcry of protest from most user groups."

   When you read the rest of the congressional record it is easy to determine that they already had their minds made up and were thumbing their noses even at congress.

   Then, John Turner of the USFWS was asked what he thought the 1990 index would be and could he make any predictions on its success. Turner testified that he predicted the 1990 YOY stock would hit 18.2 with a range between 5.7 and 55.5. What in hell kind of prediction is that? A fifty point margin? As it turned out HE WAS WRONG the 1990 index was only 4.1! These people are managing our fishery? The only protection of those fish was from 1984 to 1989 and now that’s gone. Once the fish began to show up in good numbers it was just too much to watch so many fish swimming around not boxed and iced down for market.

   Members of Stripers Unlimited, headed by Bob Pond, took part in that survey too. They tried telling the survey workers that the numbers were wrong. Bob told them that the Hamburg Bar site was never used before and there was no documented numbers to show how it related to the rest of the bay for either that year or over a long period of time. . They were told to mind their own business.

   We now have to look at why that year and the number 25 became so significant. Under Amendment 4 of the Recovery Act, the law stated that before the fishery could be re-opened and restrictions relaxed, it would be necessary to have a three-year average of at least eight (8), before the fishery could even be considered to be recovered. Biologists had determined that this was the safest possible "lowest level" we could tolerate. That meant that any combination of numbers that averaged out to eight could trigger an opening of the fishery. If you looked at the YOY figures of 87 and 88’, it was easy to calculate what the 1989 number had to be. Seventeen was needed to give an average of 8., they came up with 25.2 and presto—the fishery was reopened!

   Now comes the biggest deception ever perpetrated on the American angling public. It was common knowledge in those years that the figures were wrong and extremely inflated. In 1989 a JCAA representative testified before congress stating the 1989 YOY index was faulty data and should not be used to reopen the fishery. Later,in 1993, managers voted to downgrade the 1989 index drastically because they SUDDENLY determined that the index was indeed faulty. I personally spoke with two biologists in 1990, two full years before they publicly admitted it was wrong, who said the index was lowered to 14.5 but it was probably closer to seven or eight. At the time both refuse to be quoted for fear of loosing their jobs.

   Now any reasonable person has to ask himself-why? Why did it take so long for them to admit, publicly, they had made a mistake? Almost three years later! The fact is they knew much sooner but wouldn’t release the information. Under the Recovery Act, the law stated that the three-year running average must attain eight. Why wasn’t the fishery shut down when the average no longer equaled eight? Even at 14.5 it still couldn’t be legally opened; seventeen would have been the triggering number. There were very few people who opposed this bogus call and even fewer who paid any attention. The following years of 90 an 91 were terrible, then 92 showed slight improvement but still nothing equaled a three year average of eight. You have to look back at 1973, 74 and 75 to come up with a three year average of eight. The answer was really simple. Maryland’s governor in 89’, William D. Schaefer was under intense political pressure from the commercial industry to reopen the fishery.

   We also now have a new system of gauging striped bass populations and spawning success. This became necessary so a trigger could be found to reopen the fishery because the YOY indices used for over 35 years would have never permitted it to happen.

   In a Nick Karas outdoor column, re-published in the Jersey Coast Anglers Newsletter, Mr. Karas states: "When index figures wouldn’t support more relaxation of restrictions, it changed the method of calculating spawning success. (They were meaning the commission). The young-of-the-year index is no longer used and only referred to as a guideline. They effectively threw out 35 years of striped bass spawning figures. Mr. Karas continues: "Because this still was not enough to make a bold statement of recovery, it then insisted that the last 35 years of spawning indices were not a reliable way to judge the population and switched to the biomass approach. This is an estimated weight of the entire population over a fixed period of time." Mr. Karas stated that this recovery is merely propaganda.

   This new biomass approach is something in itself. It makes no sense to me at all. I can only equate it to, it’s as logical as pulling into a gas station and telling the attendant, "Filler’ up with Pepsi". There are many that believe that this recovery plan is based on guesswork, estimates, dice rolling and tarot card readings.

   In 1989 when the fishery was reopened, commercial fishermen were given 20-percent of their historical catch and the nets, trap, gillnets and Electro-magnetic fish seekers went back into the water. At the same time, Maryland’s commercial watermen were granted what is termed "special consideration" because they are a producing state and were allowed to fish at 40 percent of their historical level, which is approximately 1.5 million pounds back in 1989. For 57 years, the historical catch for the Chesapeake

   Bay from 1929 to 1985 was 2.3 million pounds. In 1998 the Chesapeake catch has grown to 5.5 million pounds and the Virginia catch to 3.4 million pounds for a whopping total of 8.9 MILLION POUNDS going to market. That’s not counting the figures for all other fisheries up and down the coast. Now you tell me how long this recovery is going to last.

   Enter 1999. After last year, most of us believed that this year would be tremendous. Instead the exact opposite happened. It hasn’t been all that good at all. I’ve talked to anglers, guides and captains all up and down the coast and all are saying the same thing. What happened to all the stripers? Especially the bigger fish?

   Brad Burns, noted angler,author of LL Bean’s "Fishing for Striped Bass", and striper advocate told me this is the worst year he’s seen in the Keenebec River in Maine.

   "Three year’s ago we would see big schools of fish in the Keenebec, we don’t see that anymore. Only little ones. (fish). Brad also feels that the quality of fishing has gone down the last four years. He also felt that we are seeing a population of bass that is being stressed to the limit.

   Capt. George Kelly has lived on the Thames River for almost 60 years. He told me that after the spring fishery, he’s never seen the river so bad. He said it’s been like pre-moratorium when there were no fish.

   Connecticut guides have also had it rough. Many have gone to canceling trips, as I have myself, in hopes of the fall being better. All these professionals just didn’t forget how to fish or where to find fish.

   For 1999, I’ve doubled my gas consumption, tripled the mileage traveled on the water, extended my days and my catch rate has dropped in half. More time and more effort, to catch 50 percent less fish. I think something is wrong with that picture.

   Tom Fote of the Jersey Coast Anglers Association told me that fishing in New Jersey wasn’t all that bad this summer. But he also cautioned that most of their fish in the summer come from the Hudson and Delaware River where netting is still prohibited. The Chesapeake fish blow right by them in the spring. Keep in mind also that there is a bill to reopen the Hudson to commercial fishing again.

   The reports I received from Long Island confirm what Tom Fote told me. The fishing isn’t all that bad but once you get west of Nowank, Conn., it starts to go down hill.

   Keith Walters of Maryland, noted author of "Chesapeake Striper Fishing", outdoor writer and long time striper advocate and conservationist told me fishing in Maryland also stinks; yet there isn’t anything being said about it. Keith worked with Bob Pond of Stripers Unlimited and Jim Price of Maryland for years on striped bass issues and knows what he’s talking about. He related how the average commercial catch has gone from 2.3 million pounds up to 5.5 million. At the same time, managers threw the sportsmen two fish at 18-inches. Generous huh? It seems that they haven’t learned from the last time that you can’t take all these fish and not have an adverse impact on the fishery. If you take all the 36-inch fish out of the fishery, then there isn’t any spawners left to replenish the stock. THEIR RESEARCH AND SCIENCE NO ONE ELSE'S.

   Keith stated that a lot of the catch is not being reported and sold illegally. One commercial fisherman was just caught with five pick-up trucks loaded with 10,000 pounds of striped bass that did not conform to current regulations. That is: no properly tagged, improper nets, illegal sets etc. What’s disturbing is his assessment that the average guy who goes out after work or on weekends are complaining that they can’t even catch two 18-inch fish! Imagine! The very place where we’ve all been told that there are so many bass you can walk on the water over them. Where are they?

   They told us the 96’ year class was some where around the 50 mark. We should be up to our butts in 18 to 24 –inch fish. We are not seeing any. So you tell me where they all went?" Keith was upset to say the least. He also noted that saltwater fishing licenses in Maryland are dropping off because the fishing is so bad. "There are no keeper fish and the limit is only 18-inches." Keith said.

   Al Caola and I also had a conversation regarding this subject. Al is a shore guide in Westerly and book author on striped bass and baitfish. Al said the thought we were just seeing a return to more normal conditions and that we may have gotten spoiled over the last few seasons. At the time when we spoke I was inclined to agree with him, that is until I started digging a bit further and doing more research. The Maryland information I received shed a whole new light on the problem.

   So just what is it that is happening? Is it the weather? Is the water too warm? How about the bait? Do we have enough? Is it just an off year and it’ll recover in the fall or next year? Did they go somewhere else? If so-where? Are they all lying offshore in 100 feet of water? And if so, when will they move?

   In an article published in the Washington Post in May of this year, author Angus Phillips recounts how the fishery in the Chesapeake has taken a nose dive in the last five years. He tells of all the 15 to 25 pound fish there were from 1990 to 1995. The year the stock was declared recovered. And then, since that time how the fishery has gone down now that 5.5 million pounds of stripers are being netted, instead of the 750,000 pounds in 1990. He also noted that as of June 1^st the minimum size of striped bass in Maryland dropped to 18-inches.

   In the Annapolis Yacht Club Spring fishing tournament, twenty boats caught three fish and only two were keepers. This- in the very place where there are supposed to be countless numbers of stripers.

   Capt. Buddy Harrison, out of Tilghman Island, stated," It seems like this is the worst spring we’ve had in the charter industry since the moratorium." "I think there are just too many rocks (stripers) being caught commercially and it needs to be curtailed. They need to go less, less, less. Not more, more more."

   When I spoke with Gary Diamond he didn’t hold back a bit when I asked him what he thought. Gray is a Fisherman writer and Washington Post outdoor reporter.

   "We’ve killed em all! What’s so hard to figure out about that? He asked. " They’re fishing harder than ever before for bigger fish and they are killing all the spawners. More fish than ever are being killed in the Chesapeake. He said.

   "What we have down here is a whole bunch of small fish trying to survive in a sewer tank, with no food. We’ve lost 20 percent of our submerged aquatic vegetation just this year and over 80 percent in this century. We don’t have any bunker here either, they’ve wiped them out too."

   Gary continued, "I predicted this eight years ago and everyone said I was crazy. NO one wanted to listen to any of the facts. In 1998 we fell 500,000 pounds short of meeting the recreational quota and over 600,000 pounds short for the commercial quota. Bottom line! They’ve wiped em out again and with the condition of the bay as it is today; we may not get lucky this time like before.

   "If fisheries managers were to put a management plan in effect on mosquitoes and flies, there wouldn’t be anymore to swat at." Joked Gary.

   Gary also told me that research being conducted by Jim Price of the Acid Rain Foundation on the red sores and lesions the fish are exhibiting indicates that the fish are starving to death for lack of food. Plain and simple.

   "In 1989 the average weight of the rock in the bay was 8.7 pounds that has dropped to 2 pounds in 1999, over a 30 percent decrease. Tell me these fish aren’t in trouble. Gary said he wished he had more pleasant information to share but this was the cold hard reality of the situation.

   Another well-known figure in our area we spoke with was Tom Boyd. Tom was a founder of the Connecticut Outdoor Recreational Coalition and past president of Conn/RI Fly fishing Association. In Connecticut, when he speaks people usually listen.

   "Striped bass are the most regulated fishery on the face of the earth. How can they make so many mistakes in managing them? He said. "When they switched from the old YOY index to the V.P.A. (Virtual Population Analysts) the bio-mass approach, they thought we had six million fish in the fishery. Then they realized they made a mistake and said the 93 year-class was only 1.5 million, then re-adjusted it again to two million. That’s a four million fish error. The 93-year class was supposed to he huge and carry the fishery for five or six years. I don’t see it. They had to cancel the ASMFC meeting in Providence, RI because of the foul-up so the numbers could be checked over again. When you look at their estimates in other fisheries the biomass estimates have been off by as much as 25 to 30 percent. Their figures make no sense to anyone. I think it was done so we couldn’t understand them. I don’t believe they really know how many fish are out there. Judging from this season and what I’ve learned from other professionals in the business, I’d say they have made one hell of a blunder. The striped bass just might go the way of the codfish, pollock, haddock, and everything else that swims. If this proves to be true, I pray to God that we hold their feet to the fire this time and go for gamefish status once and for all. It’s time to end this atrocity.

   The problem with convincing fishermen in Eastern Connecticut and Rhode Island is that most anglers don’t realize that almost half of our fishery comes from the Hudson River. The other half comes from the Chesapeake. The Hudson has been closed since 1976 due to PCB contamination and has a relatively healthy striper stock.

   Well known Rhody surf fisherman, Dave Pickering, is a well-respected outdoor writer/ photographer, and lecturer. His articles are well known to Fishermen readers. I spoke with Dave to get his insight and what he has observed this season. "There aren’t a lot of schoolie’s around." He said. I’m fishing places now that should be loaded with school bass and it’s not. I’ve probably caught a third less fish this year than in previous years. And, I’m not seeing any keepers.

   Surprisingly, Dave’s figures and mine almost match in numbers of fish we are not seeing and the lack of sizes also. Remember that he fishes from shore and I fish from a boat.

   I remembered an article he wrote for the Fishermen some years ago about how he caught fish in the early 80’s when everyone gave up. At the time no one believed him because everyone thought there weren’t any fish at all. But what he experienced was a comeback of the Hudson River stock. In 1979 and 1980 those fish would have been big enough to migrate. Again, remember that the fishery was closed in 1976. Our fishery here in Rhody is made up of roughly 50 percent Hudson River fish." He said. The fish we have seen this year are probably Hudson fish if your information is right. But David quickly pointed out that this year is worse than any of those years (79-83) even for schoolies. "Maybe the water is too warm." He said "There certainly isn’t any bait around and I’m sure that doesn’t help any. It’s really hard to figure." Dave then paused, "Then again, maybe this fishery isn’t as healthy as we are being led to believe."

   The forage base is the last part of this equation that is just now being look at by researchers. Hopefully, they won’t take too long to find an answer. Some scientists have theorized that we may be raising too many fish with too little bait. One such theory states that if a bulging population of striped bass, bluefish and weakfish meet a diminishing amount of forage base all at once, we’ll have a catastrophic environmental catastrophe on our hands. Now you’ve gotta wonder. How in God’s name are they going to manage something like that?

   I’ll now add my two cents worth. As far as the water being too warm, I feel that is just old wives tales. For six years I’ve consistently taken fish out of three feet of water or less all summer long. Sometimes the temperature gauge is reading in the eighties. If the bait is present and the salinity of the water is high enough the fish will be there.

   I’m sure someone is going to ask me what I think over all. Well, I find it hard to believe that all these people I spoke to are wrong. Almost everyone, no each and everyone is a well respected, fishermen, conservationist, writer and activists. The information I found in print is or has been public record. In fact, I was amazed at how easy it was to come across. No one paid any attention to it when it came out the first time.

   I think we should also keep in mind that even though this has been a major mini-series, I’ve left out tons of information, testimony, facts, figures, and meetings and on and on. There just wasn’t enough room to report all of it. Most of it is not good news and doesn’t make happy reading.

   If all this information is correct and there is indeed another striper decline taking place then our focus should be on saving the Hudson River stock. We need to fight like mad-rabid-dogs, to make sure that the netting in the Hudson River remains closed. We also need to demand that these managers be held accountable. Because after fifteen years and millions of dollars of taxpayers money later we deserve a better answer than OOPS! Sorry we made another major blunder!

   I think we have to keep all this in perspective and realize how things have changed in the last five years. The numbers of bigger fish has dropped drastically. Yes, there are lots of 12 to 15-inch fish and a good number of 24 to 29 inch fish. That does not make for a healthy fishery. And if the information on the Chesapeake is accurate and I believe it is, then what is going to happen to our fishing next year or in two or three years? Once again, you can not remove all the big fish from a fishery and not have serious consequences

   If you’d like to read more about this and just how corrupt fisheries management really is, even in the face of overwhelming support for keeping the fishery closed the entire proceedings of opening the Maryland commercial fishery in January of 1990, can be purchased for $4.25 from: Congressional Sales Office, Main Government Printing Office, Washington D.C. 20402-9315. Order serial #101-68 dated January 31,1990, Stock No. 552-070-079-93-9.