Tom Dakota ASMFC MAMFC meetings in DEC

[dales529]

It is unfortunate that Tom decided to delete hie thread because it had 300 views and only 1 response. Here is a guy VOLUNTEER that spent 3 years of research and analysis on his own time and dime. The amount of views and responses to "drama" are huge compared to the real drama.

Tom sent emails to 130 members of the SSC (science and statistical committees), MC (monitoring committee), TC (technical committee), ASMFC, MAMFC and NJMFC and deserves a better response.

His data which he has posted here in numerous threads has gotten a little push back which we expected but has opened more dialogue among these committees than I have seen in years,

Having said that at today's webinar meeting:
The MC still does not recognize that the regs taking primarily female flounder is an issue in the biomass.

Slots were discussed but a slot would only increase harvest, increase mortality and mandate shorter seasons. Again the slots discussed were 17 to 19" again ignoring the gender issue.

The general consensus from the Committees is also that the system is broken, stock assessment is difficult , the Bigelow trawls system is as broken as the boat and MRIP data and I quote" is being used at fine scales for
which it was not designed, with high uncertainties in the estimates at these levels, increasing the uncertainty in the outcomes of the measures set"

As well the email trail has included responses from the commercial side with some very interesting facts and there are those that propose to work with recs as the system is broken.

While we cant give you a copy and paste to send as they only count the petition or same text letter as 1 public comment, we implore you to get on board with this and send comments.

At the very least support Tom's efforts here and we will try to provide a place for your comments to be heard

[Chelsea-Sea]

I am sure that the email or address has been provided but maybe give it again?

[pectoralfin]

If Tom could provide a summary of his findings, I will send it out to the elected officials and others to get their support and have them contact the proper individual in NMFS.

[Rocky]

I have read a lot of Toms detailed findings and they seem to be falling on deaf ears. The continuation of the same fishery management plan will only continue the decline of the fishery.

Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is what they call management unfortunately! :mad:

[dakota560]

Pectoralfin I'll reply later today and provide the MAFMC link. Tied up right now.
Rocky my friend, they're set in there ways and until we change the management paradigm nothing will change. My plan is to keep fighting the battle based on their own data to accomplish just that.

[dakota560]

Information regarding the joint Commission / Council meeting being held December 9th thru 12th is available on the MAFMC website. Link is:

http://www.mafmc.org/council-events/december-2019-council-meeting.

The information for posting comments is contained on the page you should be brought to and is as follows:

Monday, December 9, 2019 - Thursday, December 12, 2019
The Westin Annapolis - 100 Westgate Circle, Annapolis, MD 21401, Telephone 410-972-4300

Meeting Materials: Briefing documents will be posted below as they become available.

Public Comments: Written comments on meeting agenda items may be submitted using the online comment form linked below. Comments may also be submitted via email (to cmoore@mafmc.org), mail (to 800 North State St., Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901), or fax (302-674-5399). All written comments must be received by 11:59 p.m. on November 27, 2019 to be included in the briefing book. Comments received after this date but before 5:00 p.m. on December 5, 2019 will be posted as supplemental materials on the Council meeting web page. After that date, all comments must be submitted using the online comment form linked below.

Online Comment Form

Webinar: For online access to the meeting, enter as a guest at: http://mafmc.adobeconnect.com/december2019

If you want your comments included with the briefing materials which is sent out to all Commission and Council Members before the meeting, deadline as mentioned above is 11:59 pm 11/27 or this upcoming Thursday Thanksgiving. Follow the above instruction if you plan on making comments, easiest and most effective is using the online comments form or as mentioned you can send your comments to Dr. Chris Moore via his email listed above. Dr Moore is the Executive Director for MAMFC.

Comments received after the 27th but before 5:00 pm 12/5 will be reflected in Supplemental Materials on the meeting page so they can be viewed along with the agenda for this meeting, difference is they are not in the briefing material which the decision makers receive so by default getting comments out by this upcoming Thursday is the best means of insuring your comments are in a document all the Commission and Council Members receive.

Any comments received after 12/5 but before the meeting are effectively comments of public record and not as visible or attached to the meeting.

Not sure when the briefing materials will be posted which will include my latest summary 5 page document I emailed to the 130 Members and associated people involved in the industry. It's the document which summarizes the analysis I've done and the reasons behind the stock increasing 900% between 1989 to 2003 and more important the reasons driving the fisheries decline by 40% to 50% since. Anyone planning on making comments, which I implore as many people as possible doing, please send me your email address and I'll email you the document which your comments should reference. Or you can just email me at smith.tom560@gmail.com directly and I'll provide the same. Read the documents before you provide your comments, it will provide you the baseline information in your reply.

We're losing another fishery. The lack of logic involved in decision making is epidemic but if we stop trying we fail. I wouldn't be spending the time doing what I am if I didn't think it will eventually make a difference. I want to inundate the Commission / Council with as many comment as possible, it's one of the best tools in our tool shed right now to not only voice our concerns and frustrations with policy decisions but have them as part of public record in meeting documents and stands a better chance as Dave mentioned of not falling on deaf ears is it's based on marine fisheries own data.

If you wish to listen in to the meeting, the webinar address is above. Summer flounder recommendations by the Advisory Panel will be included in the meeting on Tuesday, 12/10 between 3:30 and 5:00 pm.

I'll be checking my PM's and email consistently over the next 4 to 5 days so As soon as I receive any requests, I'll forward you a PDF of the document all Commission / Council Members received along with a longer document send to the Joint meeting in October at Durham NC which has more detail if anyone is interested.

I can't emphasize enough, as Rocky mentioned, our efforts to a large degree have fallen on deaf ears. But as Dave mentioned, there's been more discussion with people in high level positions and across industry lines over the last two weeks than ever before. It's movement which means it's positive. Long battle ahead but we need to continue laying the foundation and your comments will go a long way doing that.

Reading my material will take between 5 - 10 minutes if you read the shorter readers digest version. Maybe a half hour if you read both documents I send you. If you have questions regarding either, email me and I'll email back or call you to discuss if you provide your number.

Providing a public comment based on the materials and analysis presented should take no more than 15 minutes so if everyone has an hour to help save a vital fishery and have your opinion heard, it's an hour well worth the effort and we all have that right. This is one platform with no excuses not to use.

The over riding message is the following. With increased size limits placed on the recreational community coupled with selective harvest of larger fish commercially with higher market prices (even though they've maintained a 14" minimum) to mitigate the impacts of severe cuts in their catch quotas, larger sexually mature fish with a high percentage consisting of female breeders have been harvested over the last two decades. Age classes being harvested are primarily 3 - 6 year old fish, all sexually mature and a majority potentially as high a 5:1 females to males.

That change in catch composition has led to a significant alteration of SSB (Spawning Stock Biomass), the future of any fishery which has in turn led to a crash in recruitment, new fish coming into the stock.

Harvest of larger fish both recreational and commercial have also substantially increased discard rates and mortality rates assigned are killing quotas.

The key to changing the fate of the fishery is in the Commission and Council's hands making decision which will revert catch composition back to the harvest of smaller fish as was the case in the 80's and 90's when age classes 1 and 2 were almost exclusively being harvested as opposed to the older age classes today. Catch which consisted of an almost 2:1 ratio of males to females and more sexually immature fish. The same regulations which fueled a 900% increase in the spawning stock over the 15-yr period 1989 to 2003.

That's the extreme readers digest version but it is what's happened to this fishery and status quo which the Advisory Panel and Monitoring Committee are recommending to the Commission and Council for 2020 will perpetuate the decline in this fishery at an even more accelerated pace.

PLEASE GET INVOLVED, WE ALL NEED TO DO WHAT WE CAN EVEN IF WE BELIEVE THE ODDS ARE STACKED AGAINST US. My work is intended to save the fishery for future generations both commercial and recreational. As I said earlier, if we don't act, we fail and this fishery will take the same path as the winter flounder fishery which it's already showing signs of for many of the same reasons. Please do what you can and you can all do more than you think.

Hopefully my inbox gets filled up today with PM's and emails.

[1captainron]

Thank you Tom for all your countless hours of hard work and time put into this, it is much appreciated.....

However, as we all know the way the system works, it's not about data, not abut people's livelihoods or the fact that people just want to fish, it's about the $$$$.

You can bet your ass if we have a few hundred thousand to toss at one of these political hacks running the country, we'd have a voice. Drug companies, Special interest do it everyday and we can't do a dam thing about it.

Just the way the world works. :mad:

[dakota560]

Thank you Tom for all your countless hours of hard work and time put into this, it is much appreciated.....

However, as we all know the way the system works, it's not about data, not abut people's livelihoods or the fact that people just want to fish, it's about the $$$$.

You can bet your ass if we have a few hundred thousand to toss at one of these political hacks running the country, we'd have a voice. Drug companies, Special interest do it everyday and we can't do a dam thing about it.

Just the way the world works. :mad:

The proverbial however or but in a reply is usually never a good thing. Captain Ron, you know I respect your opinion and everything you've done for the fishery so I hold your comments and opinions in high regard.

It's about the $$$$ has been said as long as size limits started increasing, possession limits and catch quotas were being slashed both recreationally and commercially and the fishery has been in a state of decline since 2004, yet nothing ever happens. So in the absence of funding, which the community is no closer to raising today than in past, in your opinion is their an alternate course we should be considering or should we simply throw in the towel.

I ask that question out of no disrespect. I ask it because history has proven recreational interests can't align themselves and money can't or hasn't been raised. In the absence of funds and failures on the scientific and political fronts, I decided using the approach I'm using as a means of drawing attention to the Commission, Council, Technical Committee and AP members as well as the general public in an effort to raise awareness, force the issues outlined in my analysis to be acknowledged and opined on and maybe as a result create change in the management of not just the summer flounder stocks but other stocks as well. Whether it works or not, that chapter has yet to be written.

We have five choices, wait for funds which are probably not forthcoming, wait for a political approach which has fallen on deaf ears forever, wait for a scientific approach to refute marine fisheries data and models which has had the same outcome as the political approach, give up or try something different. Telling Washington they're data and science is wrong or trying to outmaneuver them legally is beyond a David and Goliath approach. It's a dead on arrival approach which is why it's failed and why I chose to take a different path. I'm not challenging marine fisheries data, which is not the same as saying I agree with it either. I'm using it to reveal trends which are at the detriment of the fishery to help guide and focus discussions with the Commission and Council, an approach different than what anyone else has used previously to my knowledge. My focus hasn't been recreational at the expense of commercial, commercial at the expense of recreational, it's been how do we reverse the declining trend the fishery as a whole has been on since 2003 to reverse fortunes, grow the biomass and benefit all parties involved.

In my humble opinion, that's a worthwhile strategy as opposed to waiting for money to come in from who knows where, continue to employ the same political and or scientific approaches which have not worked or throw in the towel and do nothing. Doesn't mean I don't respect and appreciate what others have done or they should stop trying, just means those efforts and the methodologies employed over a prolonged time frame have failed the fishery and it's constituents so I elected to use a different approach. As I said, the last chapter is yet to be written and if there's a door number 6 we should be considering, I'm all ears.

[Rocky]

Please don't give up trying Tom. If you do that it means they win, and then we will all lose for sure.

[Ry609]

Got my comments in. Squeaky wheel gets the grease.

[Brewlugger]

Just wanted to bump this up. The deadline for our comments to be heard at the December meeting is tomorrow. Please take this opportunity to have the council include your comments.

[hartattack]

A 2-line email to 'cmoore@mafmc.org' takes no time and speaks volumes for our future.

Here's a short/sweet easy to understand message that I've sent. Please copy/paste/send. . . .

Please consider a “slot” regulation for Fluke this year so that recreational anglers are no longer forced to remove the larger female breeders from the stock. Also please consider a commercial ban on Fluke landings during their winter Spawn off-shore. . . Thanks, ______ _______ (New Jersey recreational fisherman)

[No Keepers]

Comment sent.

[dales529]

My comments sent and thanks to all that did.
Guess Toms work for 3 years doesn't warrant 5 minutes of your time of those that didn't respond.
Then you will say "Why did we get screwed again and why no slot" Simple answer its YOUR Fault.

Considered Slot 17" to 19" one fish bag coast wide possibly a 2 bag with a much shorter season. Doesn't address gender or basically do anything so our gift will be status quo for 2020 / 2021. Scraps again

[june181901]

Comment sent.

[BigRock44]

Thank you Tom and everyone involved for your worthwhile efforts. I will get on this tonight and have my voice heard!

[dakota560]

Thanks sincerely to the few of you (you know who you are) who posted comments on the MAFMC website. Brewlugger, thanks so much for trying to rally others to do the same in spite of the outcome. Your efforts are very much appreciated.

In spite of the embarrassingly few comments made, I would ask everyone to review the attached link which contains the briefing materials posted today under Tab 12 for the 3:30 to 5:00 Summer Flounder 2020 Summer Flounder Specifications portion of the meeting on December 10th by Kiley Dancy. The first 23 pages contain Fisheries Management memorandums regarding Summer Flounder, Scup and BSB and recommendations being made by the Advisory Panels and Monitoring Committees for 2020 regulations. It'll give everyone an idea of what we're up against not just with summer flounder but the management of stocks in general.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/511cdc7fe4b00307a2628ac6/t/5ddd90b75e1d641741e87913/1574801599286/Tab12_Summer-Flounder-Rec-Measures_2019-12.pdf

It'll also give you an idea of the exchanges with Commission and Council Members through emails which were also included by Kiley Dancy and the thought process we're dealing with. I personally had exchanges with three different Council Members regarding recruitment, all having a completely different view of the problem ranging from the data is bad due to lack of resources to accurately quantify the number (resource issue for the largest most well funded institution in the world, the US Federal Government, involving a multi billion dollar industry), to the biomass has too many fish which is causing reproduction to decline (interesting perspective which the data 100% refutes), to we have no idea what's happening but if it continues expect more cuts. This in addition to the Monitoring Committee's position that the almost exclusive harvest of female breeders is having no negative impact on the fishery so no need for a slot. The lack of logic and positions not supportable by their own data is at epidemic levels.

I've been a Member of this site for quite some time. I was one of the many for a long time who complained about regulations. Then I went to the Galloway meeting with Dan (Hammer4Reel) and everything changed for me. I'm a CFO by trade and by definition more left-side minded or analytical and fishing is one of my many passions. So I decided to use my left sided skills and start analyzing mountains of data using fishery management's own data and approach this differently than others before me have. Not politically, not scientifically. Didn't introduce new data, which doesn't mean I accept their data as correct, just means I used it to identify trends and changes within the fishery over the last 35 or so years to determine why a once thriving fishery has been failing since 2003. Something clicked at that meeting and like Forrest Gump I started running and never stopped.

Why? I want to assist fishery management in how they might be able to better manage stocks. Not just summer flounder but all fisheries. I know that's another way of saying changing how State and Federal government functions which is to some degree a fool's dream but I decided I'd rather try and fail as opposed to not trying. I want both recreational as well as commercial people to enjoy and benefit from this resource for years to come. I want party boats and for hire owners to have hope for the future. I want our kids and grand kids to enjoy the same resources I did with my father when I was growing up. I want recreational fishing to last and I want generations of commercial families who've made a living harvesting the ocean's bounty to continue doing so. In order for that to happen, fisheries have to survive and no parties rights to access should be at the expense of the others or the fishery as a whole.

But quite possibly the biggest reason I got involved was to try giving all of us collectively a platform supportable by data to have our voices heard. Change begins with awareness, awareness begins with communication and communication begins with us. I probably have over 1,000 hours of time into the analysis, documentation, correspondence, meetings over the last 2 - 3 years and I did that willingly. Not asking for recognition, a pat on the back, a spot light on my efforts, nothing at all along those lines. I'm looking for change in how a fishery that's been failing since 2003 in every aspect to be managed differently and reverse it's fortunes which would benefit us all. Declines anywhere from 35% to 50% in the last 17 years in just about every aspect of the fishery including the overall biomass population, spawning stock biomass, catch levels, egg production, recruitment statistics, gender composition etc. The only thing increasing is size fish being harvested and discard rates because of bad regulatory decisions and it's absolutely killing the fishery yet management appears to have us on the same path for 2020 and 2021 which will not only guarantee continued declines it'll accelerate them. This fishery if you read the attached link as I said to the Commission and Council Members will end with the same fate winter flounder did. 35-yr. trend analysis doesn't lie and with the same policies in place it guarantees that fate.

We complain about the regulations being forced down our throats but we complain more about not having a voice. I gave everyone an opportunity on this site to have that voice. Had bigger aspirations to open it up to social media but that never materialized. Aside from a handful of people who commented who I thank immensely, the opportunity to share that voice, your opinion was overwhelmingly ignored. That's not a fisheries management issue, that's an issue within the recreational fishing community and as Dave mentioned that's a golden opportunity which comes up only once or twice a year to have our voices heard and what takes maybe 15 minutes of your time was not important enough to a majority of the members on this site.

This fishery without major changes in the regulations will fail. Every passing year, below average recruitment will further damage the biomass. Every year of harvesting older age classes (larger fish predominantly females) will further reduce the gender composition of the spawning stock. Translated the stock's reproductive capacity will become further impaired causing further declines in subsequent year recruitment levels and the cycle will continue from there. Add to that insanely higher levels of discards due to size regulations on the recreational side and the selective harvest of larger fish commercially due to regulatory cuts in catch quotas and the fishery stands no chance of recovering or being deemed sustainable.

We had our chance to voice our opinions. Most, not all, chose to let that chance slip by. In doing so we by default accept fisheries management of this stock and the crumbs we're thrown every year and the on-going sacrifices we're asked to make. We'll unfortunately have to live with the consequences of that decision. Maybe it's time to stop running, very sad to say the least. There's a very applicable saying, "Actions speak louder than words". For anyone who takes offense to this post, just remember it when summer flounder starts being discussed in the same discussions as winter flounder, cod, weakfish, mackerel, whiting etc..

[Brewlugger]

So we have council members saying 'We have no idea what's happening but if it continues expect more cuts' and "The biomass has too many fish which is causing reproduction to decline". Tom I was able to rally a couple comments last night at the eleventh hour , but sadly not as many as I hoped for. Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

[No Keepers]

Thank you Tom. Keep up the good work.

Everybody should read the email string.

The lack of comments is not surprising. I believe most don’t comment because they believe it’s a done deal. As a municipal employee with 30 years of experience they are right. However, what most don’t realize is that their comments do count. When they develop next years regs, your 2020 comments will be reviewed and time may prove them to be correct. So when you comment the goal should not be to change this years regs, but to influence the 2021 - 2025 regs.

Happy Thanksgiving

[Rocky]

I can't help but be pissed off about this so called "Fishery Managment". If a football team keeps loosing they make a change before it is too late so they can win the game, the ASMFC and MAMFC continue to wear their blinders and stay the course on the road to certain disaster.

They keep going in the same direction of devastating decline and they expect a different result, are you kidding me? The proof is in the pudding and it is time for a change my friends.

[hammer4reel]

I can't help but be pissed off about this so called "Fishery Managment". If a football team keeps loosing they make a change before it is too late so they can win the game, the ASMFC and MAMFC continue to wear their blinders and stay the course on the road to certain disaster.

They keep going in the same direction of devastating decline and they expect a different result, are you kidding me? The proof is in the pudding and it is time for a change my friends.


Sooner or later guys will realize they don’t care about the loss of recreational fisherman

They want to sell every fish in the sea.
.

It’s not about the commercial fishery, it’s about political gain.
And padding their pockets