Bluefish regs not looking good for next year

[porgylber]

And the hits keep on coming. Just received this notice from the RFA. A freaking disaster.

Mid-Atlantic Council just voted to reduce bluefish bag limit to 3 for shore and private anglers and 5 for for hire sector. All based on flawed MRIP data butting up against ACLS which have no place in fisheries management for the recreational sector. ACLS are a Commercial tool not designed for a trending regime like MRIP. FEDS are out of control and we cant get other groups on board to fight this insanity.

[dales529]

The whole meeting was a disaster IMHO. Fluke 4 @ 19 May 15 to Sept 15 but possible NJ will maintain 3 @ 18"

More to come.

[Capt Joe]

As present local draggers:mad: 4000 lbs of Fluke and 2000 Seabass weekly no problem towing Mudhole just east of SRR out to west wall, being helped by eastern and LI rigs.:mad:

[reason162]

If only the feds can take over striper management they might stand a chance of surviving.

[mikdel]

And the hits keep on coming. Just received this notice from the RFA. A freaking disaster.

Mid-Atlantic Council just voted to reduce bluefish bag limit to 3 for shore and private anglers and 5 for for hire sector. All based on flawed MRIP data butting up against ACLS which have no place in fisheries management for the recreational sector. ACLS are a Commercial tool not designed for a trending regime like MRIP. FEDS are out of control and we cant get other groups on board to fight this insanity.

Bluefish haven't been looking good last few years. Seem to be only a spring run for bigger blues mia in fall. They used to be mixed in with the striper fall run not so now. Surf guys used to do well with them in the fall. Summer boats used to slay them day and night trips not so now. Hardly any night boats now something had to be done. As for the flounder breeders are the target again. Makes no sense. Summer flounder will end up being shut down.and you will be forced to buy them at the market or eat them at restaurants of which both are supplied by the comms.

[Honger]

https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/56cfd657f699bb26fa0fd57b/1498831552467-8BKZTBKC5E6DCQYKSNQG/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kLPsNzgBBpD3A5PAQwJo8BdZw-zPPgdn4jUwVcJE1ZvWQUxwkmyExglNqGp0IvTJZamWLI2zvYWH 8K3-s_4yszcp2ryTI0HqTOaaUohrI8PI41l_Pe9fyBaekZfUk960Kh y1m2oRHa3Y9wlDhO0RW_YKMshLAGzx4R3EDFOm1kBS/Deck+Full+of+Bluefish.jpg?format=500w
https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/56cfd657f699bb26fa0fd57b/1457674698514-X2M6LR7EJTZ48EPPCUGP/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kOocpZx0xlvWaMfujuqmZxF7gQa3H7 8H3Y0txjaiv_0fDoOvxcdMmMKkDsyUqMSsMWxHk725yiiHCCLf rh8O1z5QHyNOqBUUEtDDsRWrJLTmujyyI7Frso6MRdplGTbhDu XZECgQPB9cqfz5W6M2bbtdO48clcURN-OsvwxYNGXR/full_cooler.jpeg
I'm sure every ounce of it was put into good use.

[WhaleFart]

They lookin good to me

[AndyS]

When was the last time "things looked good"

[Detour66]

when was the last time "things looked good"
1980!

[dakota560]

Traveled 9 hours and spent probably $200 in tolls to witness first hand how corrupt the fishery management process is. As Dave mentioned, the meeting was a complete disaster as far a the outcome of regulations are concerned. The ability for the Council and Committee to insulate itself from any other external influences is a work of art. And this is after they spent the better part of Monday discussing their 5-yr strategic plan which included increases focus on "stakeholder" communication, transparency, communication and involvement from the public. All complete BS.

Here's a few comments from the Summer Flounder presentation:

MC Comments: Biological Implications of
Size Limits
Several ongoing trends in stock
dynamics over past 10-15 years:
– Slower growth rates for both sexes
– Reduced mortality rates overall have
allowed fish of both sexes to live
longer/grow larger
– Males living longer/growing to larger sizes
– Sex ratio shifting closer to 50/50 for
larger fish


– MC does not believe there is necessarily
cause for concern about current
recreational harvest of females and

Assessment work exploring sex-based
modeling:
– Most total fishery catch now appears to be
male, due to factors described on previous slide
– On an absolute basis, removals of females
are far less than they were a decade ago due
to lower F rates
– Effects of recreational measures and
selectivity on recruitment unclear

– Fish over 24" primarily females, fish under 24" inches 50 / 50 proportion of males and females

YOU'LL LOVE THIS SLIDE

– 67% of trips and 45% of fish harvested in
2018 were angler-trips landing only 1
summer flounder
– Affected by size limits & availability of
legal sized fish
– Higher harvest per angler would likely
occur under slot depending on bag limit

67% OF ANGLER TRIPS AND 45% OF RECREATIONAL LANDINGS INVOLVED THE RETENTION OF ONE SUMMER FLOUNDER!

So what does the Board and Council recommend, another inch increase in size limits but hey we could get a bump in possession from 3 to 4 even though 67% of the anglers in 2019 only landed one keeper at 18". If Fishery Management really wants to help recreational community, they should make the 2020 regulations 10 fish possession limit at 28", this way harvest levels should decrease by about 95%. That's where this is headed so why wait.

Almost every comment mentioned above in the presentation contradicts data published earlier this year in the 66th stock assessment. Now this new data is the result of 10-15 year trends! Where was that data when the stock assessment was published? The extent of BS is epic. Why......it supports the position they want which is past decisions made aren't harming a fishery currently in a 17-yr decline and increased recreational minimums allows even more fish in the biomass to be transferred to the exclusive harvest of commercial operators. That assumes state conservation equivalency measures don't negate that from happening but yet to be determined.

THIS IS AWESOME LOGIC
– Slot limits would impact yield per recruit
over time
– If mortality too high within slot, not
enough survive through to higher sizes
– Protecting large females in rec. fishery
does not reduce their availability to
commercial fishery (likely to increase it)

Slot was discussed between 17" and 20", again a disproportionate amount which would be females in spite of their new found BS that fish under 24" have a 50/50 sex ratio. So if we're still harvesting mostly females at a slot range that simulated current size minimums, how would that benefit the fishery?

ARGUABLY THE MOST TELLING COMMENT IN THE PRESENTATION OF WHERE THEIR PRIORITIES ARE
Protecting larger females in recreational fishery does not reduce their availability to commercial fishery (likely to increase it)

I agree but then why has the same governing body increased recreational size limits from 13" in the 80's, 14's in the 90's to 18" and 19" inches today while commercial operators can harvest 14" fish. Same exact argument with a different policy decision. Answer is it makes about 35 million more fish in the biomass exclusively available to harvest by commercial operators. Recreational anglers throw them back, commercial operators either harvest or kill them later in the year during the spawn / fall migration or while wintering offshore. So the same arguments allows the shift of ~35 million fish in the biomass to be harvested exclusively by commercial concerns, causes most recreational anglers to go home with empty coolers but is a key reason why a slot limit wouldn't work because it would increase availability of the continued harvest of larger fish commercially. Hows that for sound reasoning!

Game is absolutely rigged. Our own state Commission and Council representatives are as much to blame but I won't get into that since I don't want this post deleted. What I will say without mentioning names is they are collectively as much to blame if not more in killing this resource and taking it away from the recreational community. Just do your research, see what associations they're affiliated with and decide who each of you want to be affiliated with or who you want to support.

The fishery experienced it's most explosive growth when size limits between recreational and commercial were the same and either 13' or 14" yet we not only won't consider reverting back to those regulations, we can't even get the Monitoring Committee to consider one slot fish without years more analysis. Never experienced a more dysfunctional governing body in my entire career and if they were in the private sector every one of them would have been fired by now for decisions made which have caused declines in the fishery over the last 17 years. Declines in the biomass, SSB, recruitment levels, gender composition of SSB and catch levels. The only two tings which have increased are size fish being harvested and discard rates which are through the roof as a result.

17-yr decline, status quo measures, two terms which should never be used together yet our distinguished governing body continues down the same path (only worse with this years 50% commercial increase). Hows that for logic? Based on the rate of decline in the areas mentioned over the last ten years, this fishery has 4 maybe 5 more years until emergency measures are adopted and then everyone should expect the same type fishery as winter flounder. 2 fish at by then probably 23".

Feel sorry for the people whose livelihoods depend on this fishery, another nail was placed in their coffins yesterday.

One last comment re bluefish. They started with a motion of a 16" across the board minimum which would have put an end to kids fishing for snappers. Thank the lord one Member pointed that out and the motion failed. But that was the initial motion recommended.

Process is completely out of control and biased to commercial harvest and political agendas.

[dakota560]

1980!

Close Detour. 1989 to 2003 before recreational size limits sky rocketed and commercial operators were cunningly given a substantially larger percentage of the biomass for their own harvest when recreational size minimums exceeded their 14" minimum. Funny how in 1997 the legislation increasing the commercial size limit to 14" and the mandate to increase mesh sizes by 1/2" was sold as a conservation effort.

In reality, the real reason which you can see in the data is increasing mesh sizes accommodated the harvest of larger size fish with higher catch values. Had nothing to do with conservation. While I agree some smaller fish will get through larger mesh sizes, when the cod end of nets get plugged up, mesh sizes don't matter one bit and everything trapped in the nets is coming on board. Commercial operators retrieve the nets, unload the entire catch on board, reset their nets first, start the sorting process of fish they're retaining and then toss back by-catch or fish not meeting size minimums or fish with lower market values. So figure an hour to hour and a half per tow, nets coming up primarily during fall and winter months from deeper depths, cold air temperatures, fish lying on decks while nets are re-set and continuing to sit on deck while the desirable catch is stowed away which will take another hour. Any summer flounder or by-catch caught in a net and not retained goes back dead, think about the waste involved in the process and vessel trip reports report on average about 15% discard rates which fisheries management assigns an 80% mortality factor to. Discard rates are most likely well over 100% in the commercial fishery and discard mortality is likely 100%.

Now factor in the lost egg production of the fish being harvested which is in the TENS OF TRILLIONS and that's why the fishery is in a 17-yr decline. Yet the Monitoring Committee fails to acknowledge a relationship between the severe declines in recruitment and the increased harvest of older age classes being mostly females so they change their position that most fish under 24" are 50/50 males:females and a large percentage of today's catch are males. Total BS. This is now in their own words a 10-15 year trend within the fishery which contradicts every aspect of the data included in the 66th Stock Assessment published 8 months ago in April of this year! THE ENTIRE GENDER COMPOSITION OF CATCH AND THE BIOMASS HAS CHANGED IN 8 MONTHS CONTRADICTING EVERY OTHER STUDY REGARDING SEX, LENGTH AND AGE COMPOSITION CONDUCTED AND NOW MALES AND FEMALES WHILE SMALLER ARE LIVING LONGER AS WELL. GUESS THAT'S BECAUSE THEY'RE RELENTLESSLY BEING POUNDED YEAR ROUND OR BECAUSE THERE WERE TWO MALES SLIGHTLY OVER 20" HARVESTED IN A RECENT TRAWL COMMENTED ON IN THE OCTOBER MEETING WERE 20-YR. OLD FISH EXTRAPOLATES OUT TO A DEFINITIVE STATEMENT THAT MALES AND FEMALES ARE ATTAINING LARGER SIZES AND LIVING LONGER. TWO FISH IN A BIOMASS OF 122 MILLION AND THAT CONSTITUTES A DEFINITIVE TREND! This is the BS being fed the general public by the Advisory Panel, Monitoring Committee and being used to set policy decisions by the Commission and Council.

Reality is they're lying to the public, changing models and data to support the results lobbyist funds are paying for. Truth is I could have walked into the meeting yesterday insisting it was Tuesday and they would have taken the position that recent trends suggest it's actually Wednesday or Thursday so sit down, stop asking questions, check your brain at the door or you'll be asked to leave.

[AndyS]

Bottom line.

[Detour66]

Close Detour. 1989 to 2003 before recreational size limits sky rocketed and commercial operators were cunningly given a substantially larger percentage of the biomass for their own harvest.
Reality is they're lying to the public, changing models and data to support the results lobbyist funds are paying for. Truth is I could have walked into the meeting yesterday insisting it was Tuesday and they would have taken the position that recent trends suggest it's actually Wednesday so please sit down, stop asking questions and check your brain at the door. It clearly appears to me that they are trying to put an end to salt water recreational fishing all together while commercial fishing will go on unchanged or even increased. Something radical has to be done soon or it will be all but over!

[dakota560]

It clearly appears to me that they are trying to put an end to salt water recreational fishing all together while commercial fishing will go on unchanged or even increased. Something radical has to be done soon or it will be all but over!

Detour I couldn't agree more and I'll leave it at that. I'm not one to break the law and not abide by the regulations but when it's this obvious what's happening I'm also not one to be taken advantage of and have a resource I've enjoyed my entire life be taken away by politicians and given to the commercial industry. 17 yr decline and commercial operators get a 50% increase in quota last year while recreational get shit on because of unproven MRIP data which changed past recreational catch estimates between 200% and 300% and we're penalized. 200% to 300%, what does that say about the data decisions are being based on. If new MRIP is correct, old MRIP was completely wrong. 200% to 300% percent fluctuations in data collection says one thing, the methods being used are out of control. New MRIP could be equally as unrepresentative as old MRIP statistics but fishery management uses them to reduce catch for the recreational sector while observed discard rates on commercial trips are off the charts and ignored in arriving at their catch quotas.

This process has been rigged to destroy the fishing rights of recreational fisherman while politicians and Committee / Council Members get fat and happy horse trading our resource for their own benefits.

[bulletbob]

Is it just coincidence that for the past several years I have been seeing a LOT more pan size Blues , about 12-15 inches on ice in large grocery store fresh fish departments??. Thats up state NY btw, far from the ocean. I see a LOT of them on ice up here these days. I often see them in 2 packs, fish of maybe a pound each, gutted, heads on fins clipped,, "Dressed" I think is the retail term.
In white styro trays, wrapped by machine in plastic, and actually looking quite fresh with bright eyes, gills, and good body color.. they are NOT that cheap, maybe $11-12 for 2 12 inch blues...

I could be wrong, but the mania these days for salt water fish has increased the market for fish such as Bluefish that in the past no one would buy at a fish market.. At least not most people..
So if there is an increase in demand for Blues, there will certainly be no shortage of netters all too happy to keep the newfound market demand satisfied.. until they are gone, or close to it,,,,, same as it ever was. bob

[chrislars]

You mean the non-existent inshore bluefish of the last 3 years? The usual party boats didn't even target them the past 2 summers because there weren't any within 30 miles like they were so many summers before! Even the exploratory trips to the reefs didn't find any to make it worthwhile to go the next day. Sounds like the big blues are staying farther off shore, but I was surprised to not see them mixed in with the big stripers this fall since it was a normal run of large fish. Night blues might be done! Didn't look like any epic trips that we even had as recently as 5 years ago. So, the day boats had to target sea bass and fluke all summer where they normally go for blues. I'm sure that didn't help any data...:(

[Merle31483]

Bluefish are a gross fish to eat most of them yellow eyed demons go to waste anyway cause they taste like shit the thing they should do away with the the damn bonus tags for stripers. We preach conservation but yet we kill a "slot fish " at 24 " come on people if we use these tags on these small fish how in the hell are they gonna mature to breeding size? For party boats to get 150 tags a season it's not limited to 1 person that same person can come back tomorrow and get another tag WAKE UP do the right thing and release the so called slot bass and screw the tags makes me sick

[bulletbob]

Bluefish are a gross fish to eat most of them yellow eyed demons go to waste anyway cause they taste like shit the thing they should do away with the the damn bonus tags for stripers. We preach conservation but yet we kill a "slot fish " at 24 " come on people if we use these tags on these small fish how in the hell are they gonna mature to breeding size? For party boats to get 150 tags a season it's not limited to 1 person that same person can come back tomorrow and get another tag WAKE UP do the right thing and release the so called slot bass and screw the tags makes me sick

You might not like them, but a lot of people do, especially the small ones.. Enough people buy them these days that the commercial fishery for them has expanded and we are seeing the results in fewer Blues out there to fish for... bob

[dakota560]

You might not like them, but a lot of people do, especially the small ones.. Enough people buy them these days that the commercial fishery for them has expanded and we are seeing the results in fewer Blues out there to fish for... bob

Bob I totally agree. If there's a market foreign or domestic every fishery will be exploited to extinction. I've prepared smaller size bluefish up to maybe 5 lbs that were gutted, iced and not left on the deck to fry which were very good table fare. I have a friend who makes a bluefish pate, if you ever tasted it you'd never know you were eating bluefish. It's off the charts phenomenal and unfortunately a well guarded recipe otherwise I'd share it with the board.

Either way, the issue I have with marine fisheries among many is if regulations were working, there would never be a need to adopt such radical measures we're seeing more and more in today's fisheries management. They've been managing these stocks for years and the recent changes with porgies, bluefish and there position with summer flounder are just another example of how out of control they are. The fact the Monitoring Committee was considering a 3 fish bag limit and changed to status quo should make everyone pause and think about the lack of thought process involved with these Committees.

Monitoring Committee "Scup possession limit of 50 is too onerous so lets have a 55% percent decrease in harvest on a healthy fishery and make the possession limit 3 so we can put everyone out of business. A few weeks later, on second thought the fishery is healthy so let's maintain status quo."
If anyone isn't concerned about that range of thought process and what almost transpired in a healthy fishery, you should be.

As I said they are absolutely out of control meaning the MC, AP, Council and Commission and the public and fisheries are paying the consequences.

[dales529]

If only the feds can take over striper management they might stand a chance of surviving.

No One I know, fishing groups I associate with, fish with as friends or hire to take us fishing doesn't care about sustainable fisheries and conservation. When policy / process starts creating the "facts" instead of the 'facts" creating policy / process is where I / we have an issue and sadly now that includes the "science" behind it all. Thats your FEDS

[dakota560]

When policy / process starts creating the "facts" instead of the 'facts" creating policy / process is where I / we have an issue and sadly now that includes the "science" behind it all. Thats your FEDS

Dave couldn't have said it any better or agree more. Here's how the Monitoring Committee works.

Monitoring Committees
Overview
Each of the Council’s fishery management plans (FMPs) has a Monitoring Committee which is responsible for annually reviewing the best available data and recommending commercial and recreational measures designed to assure that the target mortality level for each fishery managed under the FMP is not exceeded. The Council and its Committees consider Monitoring Committee recommendations (along with input from the SSC, advisory panels, and the public) during the annual specification-setting process for each fishery.

AND THE PUBLIC, COULDN'T BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH, HAS TO BE A TYPO.

Ultimate policy decisions are made by the Commission "Board" and Council. Here's the composition of the MC for demersal species:

Summer Flounder, Scup, Black Sea Bass
Kiley Dancy, MAFMC
Julia Beaty, MAFMC
Karson Coutre, MAFMC
Alex Aspinwall, VA Marine Resources Commission
John Carmichael, SAFMC
Peter Clarke, NJ Div of Fish and Wildlife
Steve Doctor, MD DNR
Emily Gilbert, NOAA/NMFS
Dustin Leaning, ASMFC
John Maniscalco, NY DEC, Marine Fisheries
Jason McNamee, RI Div of Fish and Wildlife
Caitlin Starks, ASMFC
Mark Terceiro, NMFS/NEFSC
Sam Truesdell, MA DMF
Greg Wojcik, CT DEP
Rich Wong, DE Div of Fish and Wildlife
T.D. VanMiddlesworth, NC Div Marine Fisheries

This is supposed to be checks and balances when you have a majority of the MC made up of members of MAFMC and ASMFC as well as Dr. Mark Terceira Northeast Science Center's lead scientist responsible for producing a majority of the data being questioned. This is self monitoring as opposed to checks and balances.

How about an independent MC comprised of both Commercial / Recreational / Industry experts (elected officials, not appointed as someone's pawn) who Monitor the science, have the authority to challenge it (accountability) and make recommendation based on data they agree with to the Commission and Council for policy decisions. Objective checks and balances and the Commission / Council / NOAA still have final say but there's a level of objectivity and accountability in the mix which doesn't exist today. The fact it make sense is precisely why it will never be considered because the propaganda machine will lose control and that will never happen with commercial lobbying efforts and political agendas at large.

[dakota560]

Taking bets now that next years fluke season will make this years season look stellar with the increase quota commercial operators received this year. The carnage taking place right now off shore if witnessed would bring us to tears.

Everyone is talking on the other thread about why NJ tog fishing is lackluster compared to last year and blaming NY having a season opener six weeks earlier.

Take the same concept, why do you think commercial have six seasonal quotas and the fall / winter months have the highest quotas within those six. Fish are concentrated in the winter and easy targets. In the fall they're once again concentrated in their offshore migration and closer than where they'll ultimately winter further offshore so hit them again only this time during the spawn. Hence highest seasonal quotas in those months. Commercial can and do harvest year round so as fish move inshore in the spring, commercial have the first shot as opposed to recreational. No different than the analogy being made between NY and NJ relative to tog. Commercial has no closed season per se unless seasonal quotas are attained and then they have allowable by catch quotas.

Look at the attached link for NJ Commercial Harvest guidelines issued by NJEPA.

https://www.state.nj.us/dep/fgw//pdf/2019/marlet-smrflndr_quota2019.pdf

In particular, look at the quota for January 6 through February 28 and September 1 through October 31. In total 60% of the annual harvest with 30% during the primary spawn and 30% when the biomass is at its most concentrated levels and most vulnerable to commercial harvest offshore. Imagine the amount of discard thrown back dead on these deep water trips with winter air temperatures. Summer months are light because the fish are spread out, less concentrated and more difficult to catch. November fish are still moving further east so why make more trips in November and December involving greater distances and higher operating costs when you can wait until January and February when the biomass reaches their wintering grounds and commercial operators can absolutely beat them up, keeping the prime market sizes and killing the rest.

This is why the fishery is in a free fall decline without chance of recovery and why yesterdays decision by Commission and Council is so devastating.

Again taking bets as bad as 2019 was for summer flounder, I guarantee 2020 will be worse. And if regulations don't change for 2021, that season will make 2020 look stellar. It has to, there's not one reason why it wouldn't and the stock's reproductive capacity has been so damaged it can't recover on it's own.

Thanks Wilbur Ross, thanks Mike Luisi and Chris Moore, thanks Dr. Mark Terceiro, thanks Adam Nowalsky who is now Chair of the ASMFC Summer Flounder Board and Tom Fote. You're collectively all doing a fantastic job destroying another fishery by adopting status quo measure for 2020 in a fishery that's been declining significantly under your oversight over the last 17-yrs., not only ignoring the data that supports that statement but introducing new data trying to rationalize or conceal the poor decisions made over the past two decades causing that decline. Hope each of you rest comfortably at night realizing you're destroying countless businesses and people's livelihoods with your policy decisions and lack of accountability governing this fishery. 17 year decline, let's keep doing the same thing. Someone needs to help me understand that management philosophy.

[tuna john]

Dakota thanks for all the info and your time invested. I wrote letters sent comments to board as I'm sure others have done. Clearly it falls on deaf ears, is there really anything we can do? If the group above who has some respectable people aren't helping us seems fight is all but lost. I don't condone it but seems just gonna force people to poach and there isn't enough enforcement so chance of getting caught are small, and people aren't going to just stop fishing. Sad sad sad

[pectoralfin]

What is RFA and CCA position on this? They seem to be very quiet about it.

[dakota560]

Here's another question I'd love to hear the BS answer for if an AP or MC Advisors or any of our esteemed NJ Representatives on the Commission / Council are looking on. Following excerpt was from Kiley Dancy's presentation:

– 67% of trips and 45% of fish harvested in
2018 were angler-trips landing only 1
summer flounder

If true, how is it that recreational harvest for this year is projected to be ONLY 8% under the RHL (Recreational Harvest Limit)?

The answer I'm sure the Board would give is "Well I would have to attribute that to angler effort per MRIP being three times greater than expected so its offset the reduced harvest of number of fish lander per angler trip".

That's the unsupported BS answers the public gets when questions are asked which challenge fisheries data. Then ask for hire, party boat and tackle shop owners how much their businesses increased this year for summer flounder.

Starting to get the picture?

The above statement says we're essentially at a one possession limit today based on how the governing body has used size minimums to regulate harvest and in the process shifted a substantial portion of the biomass eligible for harvest from recreational to commercial. If the 19" size minimum prevails in 2020, I estimate approximately 37.5 million fish of a harvestable biomass (fish over 14") estimated at maybe 55 million fish to be exclusively available to commercial operators due to differences in size minimums between both groups. That means the recreational community not only gets the short end of the stick with 40% of the ACL (Annual Catch Limit) but in addition we have access to maybe 30% of the harvestable biomass to fill those quotas.

How's that for a fair and equitable allocation of the resource and tell me where the problem is in the fishery.

Two articles in attached links I'd ask everyone to read regarding the North Carolina Commercial Summer Flounder Fishery.

http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/Summer-Flounder

http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/13summerflounderssr11

First article:

The winter trawl fishery is the primary commercial fishery for summer flounder in North Carolina and occurs from winter (December) to early spring (April) making up nearly 99 percent of the total annual landings since 2008.

Take note of the relationship for recreational between landings and releases, spread is insane. Also take notice of the drop off in numbers of juvenile fish since, you guessed it, 2008.

Now read the following excerpt from the second link:

Habits and Habitats – Summer flounder are estuarine dependent members of the left-eyed flounder family that also include southern flounder and Gulf flounder. Summer flounder migrate offshore and south during fall and winter, and inshore and north during early spring and summer. Summer flounder spawn from November through March when water temperatures are between 53 degrees and 67 degrees. Larval summer flounder enter inlets and settle on sandy bottoms in higher– salinity areas of estuaries. After or towards the end of their first year, summer flounder move into ocean waters to spawn and join the coastal migratory groups.

99% of the NC commercial harvest occurs right in the middle of the spawn which is later in southern states than northern due to water temperature differences. Then compare that to the drop off in recruitment statistics.

The same fate lies in store for the concentrated biomass located off our local waters. You couldn't ask for more data to draw that conclusion yet the powers to be continue promoting the harvest of older age classes and offer no protection whatsoever to the spawn or the biomass when it's at it's most concentrated levels in the winter months.

There's been complete incompetency managing this fishery and we're all paying the price. You can't have this degree of decline in the fishery over the period of time discussed and expect the fishery to survive more than another 5 years without an overhaul to the regulations both recreationally (size minimums) and commercial (catch composition, protection of the spawn and protection of the biomass in their offshore wintering locations). If all four don't happen, this fishery is sadly coming to an end and think about the consequences that will have on both the commercial and recreational community.

[dfish28]

So out 50 to 70 miles out going for tuna, where the mass of the sand eels have been chilling, who wasn’t trolling and did not catch a slammer blue??, and where’s the weakfish, ohh same area🤔

[bunker dunker]

some of the weakfish,bluefish and bonito fishing is going on right now.crazy
fishing.

[reason162]

No One I know, fishing groups I associate with, fish with as friends or hire to take us fishing doesn't care about sustainable fisheries and conservation. When policy / process starts creating the "facts" instead of the 'facts" creating policy / process is where I / we have an issue and sadly now that includes the "science" behind it all. Thats your FEDS

Sure, we all claim we "care," yet I hardly hear the for-hire industry supporting more stringent regs, no matter the species.
From fluke to stripers to now bluefish, the science is always wrong. The argument always run one way and not the other.

The Overfished assessment came down in Sept, and before year's end we're looking at 3 - 5 limit for 2020. Some
complain that's actually not proactive enough, but compared to the species managed by ASMFC it's lightyears ahead in terms of efficiency.

Oh and no room for BS "conservation equivalency," lb for lb paybacks for 2021. That's how it should be done, and looking at the feds' track record
compared to ASMFC it's hard to argue which approach works for the resource.

[Capt John]

Someone want to answer a question for me.
NOAA is a subdivision of what department? The Department of Commerce? And who's the head of that department?

[dakota560]

Someone want to answer a question for me.
NOAA is a subdivision of what department? The Department of Commerce? And who's the head of that department?

Department Of Commerce, Wilbur Ross.

[Capt John]

Thanks Dakota for your response. That explains it all. What the hell is NOAA doing under the Department of Commerce......you guessed it...BUSINESS AND BIG MONEY for the fishing industry.

Another couple of years and our waters (NJ) will follow the same route as winter flounder and weakfish....EMPTY AND EXTINCT. Very sad. :mad:

If I were in charge, NOAA would be a subdivision of the Department of the Interior....yes? no? or am I missing something here.

Once again....you seem very knowledgeable about fishing issues and thanks for your input.

[dales529]

Sure, we all claim we "care," yet I hardly hear the for-hire industry supporting more stringent regs, no matter the species.
From fluke to stripers to now bluefish, the science is always wrong. The argument always run one way and not the other.

The Overfished assessment came down in Sept, and before year's end we're looking at 3 - 5 limit for 2020. Some
complain that's actually not proactive enough, but compared to the species managed by ASMFC it's lightyears ahead in terms of efficiency.

Oh and no room for BS "conservation equivalency," lb for lb paybacks for 2021. That's how it should be done, and looking at the feds' track record
compared to ASMFC it's hard to argue which approach works for the resource.

While I have always respected your dedication to conservation it appears your opinion is a little short on facts. How often do you discuss this with the for hire industry or are you getting your information from this or other fishing sites? Tom Smith and I have emailed, spoken in person with and telephoned members of the for hire industry, commercials and Co Ops, Rec Fishing groups and believe me the story is much different than the Fed Stock assessments. Tom as you know has also been directly involved with NOAA and the Councils.

The recreational "for hire industry" just wants to have fair shake and has taken cuts in bag and season for a long time while their on the water experience of fisheries is flat out IGNORED yet Commercials get liberalization on quotas and access to fish recs have to release. For hire want season length with a reasonable bag and regs that allow all species to flourish without having to fish for just one at a time. Not unreasonable.

Now add in Federal Trawl Surveys. Fact the FED new state of the art Bigelow Trawl boat barely leaves the dock as its always broken down, the millions of dollars trawl nets purchased with tax payer dollars are too money sensitive to trawl "rocky" bottom or they get damaged so trawls on open sandy bottom come up empty DUH. For hire boats have offered to help with the surveys as they are out there anyway and again IGNORED.

So do you believe the new FED narrative that 18" to 24" Summer Flounder are 50% male? Most who fillet these fish know that its maybe 1% male to female but what do we know. Do I need to bring up the MRIP that states shore based anglers caught more summer flounder than private boats and for hire boats?

That just screams of a convenient narrative to combat SSFFF/ Rutgers Sex Study and years of angler concerns that breeders are being removed from the stocks via forced regulation. Funny you certainly believe that when it comes to stripers. Maybe next year 50lb bass with fat stomachs just ate too much and there are not really any eggs in there regardless of facts.

Exactly what track record do the FEDS have in our waters that you are speaking of that have rebuilt our resource?

[dakota560]

Thanks Dakota for your response. That explains it all. What the hell is NOAA doing under the Department of Commerce......you guessed it...BUSINESS AND BIG MONEY for the fishing industry.

Another couple of years and our waters (NJ) will follow the same route as winter flounder and weakfish....EMPTY AND EXTINCT. Very sad. :mad:

If I were in charge, NOAA would be a subdivision of the Department of the Interior....yes? no? or am I missing something here.

Once again....you seem very knowledgeable about fishing issues and thanks for your input.

Capt John,

Here's your answer and believe it or not it's because of Nixon!

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/01/why-noaa-commerce-department

Many agree fisheries management should fall under the Department of Interior, the article in the attached link explains why it doesn't. Politics within politics if you will. To compound the issue, there apparently exists significant issues between the various Technical, Science, Advisory Committees and the Commission and Council itself, more politics within the political framework.

Add to that the priority of the DoC to drive Commerce and the amount of lobbyist funds I can only imagine changes hands to promote the commercial industry its no wonder the scales of justice are as imbalanced as they are.

Tom

[Capt Sal]

If only the feds can take over striper management they might stand a chance of surviving.

PLAIN STUPID STATEMENT!! There talking bluefish and less government involvement and you want more federal management???? Get real!

[Capt Sal]

Bluefish are a gross fish to eat most of them yellow eyed demons go to waste anyway cause they taste like shit the thing they should do away with the the damn bonus tags for stripers. We preach conservation but yet we kill a "slot fish " at 24 " come on people if we use these tags on these small fish how in the hell are they gonna mature to breeding size? For party boats to get 150 tags a season it's not limited to 1 person that same person can come back tomorrow and get another tag WAKE UP do the right thing and release the so called slot bass and screw the tags makes me sick

Another misinformed know it all. Why no slot fish expert??

[Capt Sal]

Sure, we all claim we "care," yet I hardly hear the for-hire industry supporting more stringent regs, no matter the species.
From fluke to stripers to now bluefish, the science is always wrong. The argument always run one way and not the other.

The Overfished assessment came down in Sept, and before year's end we're looking at 3 - 5 limit for 2020. Some
complain that's actually not proactive enough, but compared to the species managed by ASMFC it's lightyears ahead in terms of efficiency.

Oh and no room for BS "conservation equivalency," lb for lb paybacks for 2021. That's how it should be done, and looking at the feds' track record
compared to ASMFC it's hard to argue which approach works for the resource.

Again "THE FOR HIRE" people are the bad guys. There the ones who pay for this site not you. This is just your opinion and it ain't worth shit!!I am glad there are not more people like you on this site you are trying to ruin.

[bunker dunker]

easy Sal,your gonna blow a gasket!!!!! some folks just don't get it.relax and enjoy.

[bulletbob]

They are being overfished, but I don't think its the "for hire" guys... They fish for blues a lot less than they did at one time, yet the blues are still MIA..

I blame the fact that they have simply become a target of netters, and a lot more are being sold to eat than years ago.. We recs were no bargain either for way too long, taking huge garbage cans full of huge blues home and either letting them rot or using them for fertilizer.. Blues should come back strong unless they keep getting wiped out as 12 inch ' panfish " by commercial netters looking to turn a buck.. Never thought we would see this with blues, yet here we are... bob

[Capt Sal]

easy Sal,your gonna blow a gasket!!!!! some folks just don't get it.relax and enjoy.

Not in my nature lol

[Honger]

Again "THE FOR HIRE" people are the bad guys. There the ones who pay for this site not you. This is just your opinion and it ain't worth shit!!I am glad there are not more people like you on this site you are trying to ruin.

What a short sighted answer, without everyday users who generate traffic for this site you dont have a platform to advertise on.

[reason162]

While I have always respected your dedication to conservation it appears your opinion is a little short on facts.

I don't want to disparage Tom's dedication, god knows he's put in countless hours into his interpretation of the data. Has the Rutgers study passed peer review? I really have nothing to say about fluke until that happens (or fails to happen). Personally my gut feeling is that climate change is playing a huge role in our fluke fishery, and that once fully understood that phenomenon will fill some gaping holes in the data we are experiencing now. Correct me if I'm wrong but you wouldn't be as surprised as many on this forum if that turns out to be the case.

But back to feds vs state management. Here's from NOAA's website...46 stocks rebuilt as of 2019: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/population-assessments/fishery-stock-status-updates

I freely admit one of the sources of info I read is Charles Witek's blog. Anyone who is interested in the process should give his writings on the subject serious consideration: http://oneanglersvoyage.blogspot.com/

As Capt Sal pointed out, there tends to be a chorus of agreement on management issues here. I don't enjoy being contrarian, but I do think open, civil discourse is important, and that internet thought bubbles tend to result in mistakes.

[reason162]

Again "THE FOR HIRE" people are the bad guys. There the ones who pay for this site not you. This is just your opinion and it ain't worth shit!!I am glad there are not more people like you on this site you are trying to ruin.

Lol as eloquent as ever. Hey Capt, if Gerry shuts this down please don't PM me again :)

[Capt John]

Capt John,

Here's your answer and believe it or not it's because of Nixon!

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/01/why-noaa-commerce-department

Many agree fisheries management should fall under the Department of Interior, the article in the attached link explains why it doesn't. Politics within politics if you will. To compound the issue, there apparently exists significant issues between the various Technical, Science, Advisory Committees and the Commission and Council itself, more politics within the political framework.

Add to that the priority of the DoC to drive Commerce and the amount of lobbyist funds I can only imagine changes hands to promote the commercial industry its no wonder the scales of justice are as imbalanced as they are.

Tom

Tom,

The article you sent me.."Why NOAA Is in the Commerce Department
By Jeffrey Mervis Jan. 13, 2012 , 2:28 PM was a real eye opener to say the least. How in the world you had access to that article amazes even me....bravo.

So even today we (recreational fisherman...private boaters and the for hire group) are paying a dear price for Nixon's paranoia...very sad.

I would have thought that over the past 40 years or so, someone would have corrected this horrible situation, but then again, who cares about a bunch of fishermen.

Sadly, the for-hire group is getting smaller and smaller every year, generating less and less income for the state of NJ. When Fluke, which happens to be the major draw for recreational anglers to our state vanishes, so will MANY other businesses....the domino effect.

Did I hear you say Winter Flounder...what's that?

Tom, once again, many thanks for your input on this issue. As a life long resident (60+ years) of NJ and an avid and pretty damn good angler, it's sad to know that my grandchildren may never experience the joy of a day on the water (GOD'S country) like I do. I love my country and I love NJ, but something has to change soon....very soon.

[dakota560]

I don't want to disparage Tom's dedication, god knows he's put in countless hours into his interpretation of the data. Has the Rutgers study passed peer review? I really have nothing to say about fluke until that happens (or fails to happen). Personally my gut feeling is that climate change is playing a huge role in our fluke fishery, and that once fully understood that phenomenon will fill some gaping holes in the data we are experiencing now. Correct me if I'm wrong but you wouldn't be as surprised as many on this forum if that turns out to be the case.

But back to feds vs state management. Here's from NOAA's website...46 stocks rebuilt as of 2019: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/population-assessments/fishery-stock-status-updates

I freely admit one of the sources of info I read is Charles Witek's blog. Anyone who is interested in the process should give his writings on the subject serious consideration: http://oneanglersvoyage.blogspot.com/

As Capt Sal pointed out, there tends to be a chorus of agreement on management issues here. I don't enjoy being contrarian, but I do think open, civil discourse is important, and that internet thought bubbles tend to result in mistakes.

Last I heard about Rutgers Length and Sex study is it was rejected by Peer Review because it consisted of one year which I believe was 2016 and wasn't considered because the period reviewed was too short in duration. I haven't heard anything since so others might have more current updates.

I know this wasn't directed at me but I'll state my opinion again on climate change. We'd be foolish to not acknowledge it's real, a problem which needs to be addressed and is contributing to environmental changes world-wide but I still don't believe it's the cause of the severe decline in the fluke fishery. I believe the attached chart is.....decline in recruitment. In many ways this one chart summarizes what has occurred in this fishery. Harvest of older age classes began both recreationally and commercially in 1997. Gender composition of the biomass decreased significantly starting in 1997. Discard rates increased substantially starting in 1997, especially commercial rates. Recruitment levels began collapsing in early 2000. Fishery peaked in 2003 and has been on a declining trend between 30% - 50% in every key aspect since. As recreational size limits began increasing in the late 90's, shortly thereafter biomass and SSB experienced respective declines. Targeting larger fish commercially brought harvest during the fall spawn into the equation and harvest of larger sexually mature fish during winter months when they're staged off-shore. Precisely why the chart illustrating recruitment to SSB (Spawning Stock Biomass), a marine fisheries chart on page 451 of the 66th SAW if anyone's interested, showed an immediate and substantial reduction in survival of new recruits which started in 1997, one the fishery has never recovered from. Climate change didn't start in 1997 and even so wouldn't have caused a decline in a years time in the relationships I've outlined in my analysis.

As far as Charles Witek is concerned, I don't deny he's a intelligent person. But when someone publicly discounts my work and my abilities simply because of my professional trade as a Chief Financial Officer or as he put it a "corporate bean counter", I can't take his opinions seriously. Science creates data, someone has to interpret that data before management decisions can be made. I guess in Mr. Witek's ultimate wisdom being a Corporate Attorney better positions him to analyze information other than someone who has honed his skills in that arena for more than 35 years. I can't take someone's work seriously if their judgement of character and capability is that short sided. I NEVER introduced new data, I analyzed existing data developed by science for trends to identify changes in a fishery that went from explosive growth for a sustainable period of time to a prolonged decline over night.

As far as NOAA's website and 46 stocks rebuilt, I'd add an asterisk. I believe fishery management does a lot of good work but they don't have answers for all the worlds problems themselves AND MSA states specifically public input should be factored into the management process. ITS NOT. They won't allow it because they don't want their work being challenged or their data questioned. That's a serious issue for a Governance body managing a public resource. If you look at the list of 46 stocks rebuilt, it includes summer flounder, bluefish and porgies (scup) which the Monitoring Committee two weeks ago recommended a 3 fish limit or 55% reduction before having a change of heart and recommending status quo coast wide which is a 50 fish bag limit in NJ. That range of change within a week should concern everyone about their thought process. Any stock listed that has Gulf of Maine or George's Banks listed, realize the fishery recovered because 6,600 square miles of the banks were closed due to the over harvest by commercial operations in 1994. PLEASE read the following two articles in the attached links because its in my opinion indicative of the extent and speed of the destructive nature of commercial harvest especially with today's technologies. Doesn't mean commercial concerns don't have equal rights to harvest the resource, it means they don't have the right to destroy the fishery or habitat in the process:

https://www.amnh.org/explore/videos/biodiversity/will-the-fish-return/the-sorry-story-of-georges-bank

https://www.encyclopedia.com/environment/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/georges-bank-collapse-ground-fishery

This excerpt in the second article will provide some idea of how quickly commercial operations can destroy a fishery and the necessary habitat that supports it.

In 1994 the National Marine Fisheries Service found that the Georges Bank cod stock had declined by 40% since 1990, the largest decline ever recorded. Furthermore, the yellow tail flounder stock had collapsed. In a given year, only eight out of 100 flounder survived and the breeding population had fallen 94% in three years. WORTH REPEATING......BREEDING POPULATION FELL 94% IN THREE YEARS!

NOW YOU DON'T HAVE TO BUT BELIEVE ME WHEN I TELL YOU CLIMATE CHANGE IS NOT THE PROBLEM FACING SUMMER FLOUNDER. When the banks were closed due to commercial greed, every commercial operator had to target a different species in order to survive. Think maybe that had an impact on winter flounder and summer flounder and who knows what other species. Other species had to be targeted to compensate for the Banks closure and the impact that had on commercial catch values. Change the food chain and balance that exists in the ecosystem and you change the entire ecosystem.

Reason I think you like being contrarian otherwise you wouldn't be so good at it. I don't mean that sarcastically, in order for change to occur there needs to be healthy debate and will always be opposing thoughts which I personally believe is healthy. If we don't discuss these issues and cause change, I think status quo is going to hurt many people and fisheries which doesn't have to happen.

[FishingSinceIWasThree]

https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/56cfd657f699bb26fa0fd57b/1498831552467-8BKZTBKC5E6DCQYKSNQG/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kLPsNzgBBpD3A5PAQwJo8BdZw-zPPgdn4jUwVcJE1ZvWQUxwkmyExglNqGp0IvTJZamWLI2zvYWH 8K3-s_4yszcp2ryTI0HqTOaaUohrI8PI41l_Pe9fyBaekZfUk960Kh y1m2oRHa3Y9wlDhO0RW_YKMshLAGzx4R3EDFOm1kBS/Deck+Full+of+Bluefish.jpg?format=500w
https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/56cfd657f699bb26fa0fd57b/1457674698514-X2M6LR7EJTZ48EPPCUGP/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kOocpZx0xlvWaMfujuqmZxF7gQa3H7 8H3Y0txjaiv_0fDoOvxcdMmMKkDsyUqMSsMWxHk725yiiHCCLf rh8O1z5QHyNOqBUUEtDDsRWrJLTmujyyI7Frso6MRdplGTbhDu XZECgQPB9cqfz5W6M2bbtdO48clcURN-OsvwxYNGXR/full_cooler.jpeg
I'm sure every ounce of it was put into good use.

I have been reading fishing books since I was a little kid. I read back then that bluefish run in 50 year cycles. Back in the early sixties there were not many blues around. Looks like we are back in that pattern. This is not all about how many fish people can keep. It has more to do with those natural cycles....similar with Weakfish. There are species like blowfish with no regulation at all which have made a comeback. Those Feds seem to care more about showing off their own power than helping us in the USA. They are probably making deals with the UN to ship our fish to other countries for their own personal gain....actually they are definitely shipping our fish to other countries for their own gain. Thank God for Brexit!

[bulletbob]

I have been reading fishing books since I was a little kid. I read back then that bluefish run in 50 year cycles. Back in the early sixties there were not many blues around. Looks like we are back in that pattern. This is not all about how many fish people can keep. It has more to do with those natural cycles....similar with Weakfish. There are species like blowfish with no regulation at all which have made a comeback. Those Feds seem to care more about showing off their own power than helping us in the USA. They are probably making deals with the UN to ship our fish to other countries for their own personal gain....actually they are definitely shipping our fish to other countries for their own gain. Thank God for Brexit!

You are correct. blues were scarce during some periods when I was younger.
I hope that this is just a down cycle... We'll see... bob

[Capt Sal]

Lol as eloquent as ever. Hey Capt, if Gerry shuts this down please don't PM me again :)

No PM. Want everyone to read this. You have a hatred for charter and party boat people trying to make a living. So i wasn't trying to be''eloquent'' lol

[dakota560]

Question for the For Hire and Party Boat Captains. Comment was made in the summer flounder presentation in Tuesday's Joint Meeting presentation on Summer Flounder which said "Most total fishery catch now appears to be male" which personally I believe is complete BS based on what I've witnessed personally. And I'm not concerned with catch, I'm concerned with landings.

I know commercial operators submit VTR's when offloading their catch. What reporting requirements do Party Boats and For Hire vessels have? Is it electronic, paper and what information is included? What I'm getting at is does it currently include landings information and if so does it include sex.

Everyone whose read my comments knows my theory that among other issues we're harvesting too many breeders both recreationally and commercially for different reasons.

I assume most keeper summer flounder are filleted on board and identifying sex is easy. They either have an egg sac or they don't. Is this information currently provided in the reporting requirements and if not would it be possible with the system starting next year if the system allowed for that information to start capturing it or would it be too onerous. I believe it's a critical metric in turning this fishery around so keep that in mind when answering.

What I want to do is quantify based on "real information" what gender fish are being harvested so we're dealing with facts and not innuendo.

Maybe 10 party boats and 10 for hire vessels per state (statistical sample) volunteer and those boats provide the data next year. Mates clean the fish so it should be relatively easy to maintain a log and start capturing the information.

Going to suggest the same with fish processing houses for commercial catch by "objective parties" to quantify the same. This is a key measurement in this fishery which is currently not monitored and theirs opposing opinions all over the board.

For starters, would appreciate hearing from some of our sponsors about the current process, does it include gender which I don't believe it does and would it be possible to track and input next year if the system allowed for that information to be entered. If not, they need to reprogram the input fields which should be simple.

Appreciate your help.

[captainrich]

Question for the For Hire and Party Boat Captains. Comment was made in the summer flounder presentation in Tuesday's Joint Meeting presentation on Summer Flounder which said "Most total fishery catch now appears to be male" which personally I believe is complete BS based on what I've witnessed personally. And I'm not concerned with catch, I'm concerned with landings.

I know commercial operators submit VTR's when offloading their catch. What reporting requirements do Party Boats and For Hire vessels have? Is it electronic, paper and what information is included? What I'm getting at is does it currently include landings information and if so does it include sex.

Everyone whose read my comments knows my theory that among other issues we're harvesting too many breeders both recreationally and commercially for different reasons.

I assume most keeper summer flounder are filleted on board and identifying sex is easy. They either have an egg sac or they don't. Is this information currently provided in the reporting requirements and if not would it be possible with the system starting next year if the system allowed for that information to start capturing it or would it be too onerous. I believe it's a critical metric in turning this fishery around so keep that in mind when answering.

What I want to do is quantify based on "real information" what gender fish are being harvested so we're dealing with facts and not innuendo.

Maybe 10 party boats and 10 for hire vessels per state (statistical sample) volunteer and those boats provide the data next year. Mates clean the fish so it should be relatively easy to maintain a log and start capturing the information.

Going to suggest the same with fish processing houses for commercial catch by "objective parties" to quantify the same. This is a key measurement in this fishery which is currently not monitored and theirs opposing opinions all over the board.

For starters, would appreciate hearing from some of our sponsors about the current process, does it include gender which I don't believe it does and would it be possible to track and input next year if the system allowed for that information to be entered. If not, they need to reprogram the input fields which should be simple.

Appreciate your help.

I love it when someone, who has no clue, volunteers my time and my crews time which I pay for, for their own edification & purposes.
That's why I don't advertise on this site any more!!

[Honger]

Lmao why bother check the sex of fluke? Literally all fluke on fillet tables have eggs in them.

[1captainron]

Tom, I was involved in BOTH Fluke studies, the first one got tossed out because NOAA didn't have their stamp on it even though we tried to get funding from them or anyone else in Fisheries Management. Gregg Hueth (SSFFF) finally convinced us to give them some credit (even though) once again we received No money for the second study.
Long story short, the second report basically backed up the first that over 90% of Fluke over 18 inches are female. All that time and effort doesn't mean a Hill of crap as you can see where we are now!!

As far as reports, I have to fill out a report everyday on what is caught, kept and discarded. Why, you may ask? So the reports can sit in Woods hole and never be looked at...…..All goes back to Money just look what happened in the Gulf with Catch shares. :mad:

[dakota560]

I love it when someone, who has no clue, volunteers my time and my crews time which I pay for, for their own edification & purposes.
That's why I don't advertise on this site any more!!

Capt. Rich I wish you, your family and loved ones a Merry Christmas and Healthy and Safe Holiday Season.

[dakota560]

Lmao why bother check the sex of fluke? Literally all fluke on fillet tables have eggs in them.

I know that, you know that, just about every recreational angler knows that but the scientific community doesn't know that or does and refuses to admit it more likely so wanted to understand the process since regulatory decisions are being based on BS data.

[dakota560]

Tom, I was involved in BOTH Fluke studies, the first one got tossed out because NOAA didn't have their stamp on it even though we tried to get funding from them or anyone else in Fisheries Management. Gregg Hueth (SSFFF) finally convinced us to give them some credit (even though) once again we received No money for the second study.
Long story short, the second report basically backed up the first that over 90% of Fluke over 18 inches are female. All that time and effort doesn't mean a Hill of crap as you can see where we are now!!

As far as reports, I have to fill out a report everyday on what is caught, kept and discarded. Why, you may ask? So the reports can sit in Woods hole and never be looked at...…..All goes back to Money just look what happened in the Gulf with Catch shares. :mad:

Capt. Ron I'm already aware of what happened or didn't happen with SSFFF's work but thanks for pointing it out. Just wanted to understand the process to figure out if there's a different way of attacking the problem refuting the bad data driving policy decisions and effecting party boat owners like your self and the recreational community at large.

Thanks for explaining the process in an adult manner and not replying like a petulant child who just lost his binky.

[hammer4reel]

I love it when someone, who has no clue, volunteers my time and my crews time which I pay for, for their own edification & purposes.
That's why I don't advertise on this site any more!!


It’s attitude like yours why the business you cry about is falling apart .
Really tough to keep track while filleting fish males/females and giving an accurate live representation of what’s truelly being caught ?

Guys with no skin in the game bust their ass to try and help the recreational fishery get better for everyone . Not making a dime from it.

Guys like you who should be glad they are trying , instead you mock them while sitting on your ass doing nothing .
.