JCAA Fundraiser

[Angler Paul]

All,

I'd like to thank everyone who donated and let others know that this Facebook fundraiser will end on 12/7. Even $5 or $10 would be greatly appreciated. I am only going to do this fundraiser once a year so you won't see it again for a while. For those who rather not make a donation online, a check may be made out to JCAA and mailed to 1594 Lakewood Rd., Unit 13, Toms River, NJ 08755 Thanks!

JCAA has struggled financially this year just as many other businesses have. We were unable to hold many of our fundraising events and therefore lost thousands of dollars of income. More specifically, we had to cancel our Beefsteak and Sportsperson of the Year dinners and our traditional fluke tournament. The Saltwater Fishing Expo was also canceled along with a number of smaller shows where we usually sell lots of raffle tickets. Further, most of our member clubs were not able to donate as much as they normally do due to their fundraisers being canceled as well. Therefore, we have to appeal to you as individuals to help us out. JCAA is a charitable 5019(c)3 organization so any donations are tax deductible.

JCAA has fought hard for recreational anglers and the marine resource in the past and will continue to do so in in the future. In order to continue our work on these issues and better represent you, we need your help in our fundraising efforts. We are currently giving input on the upcoming bluefish amendment as well as the upcoming fluke, sea bass and scup amendment. There may be a new striped bass amendment coming up too. We are working to protect our stocks of menhaden and other forage species. We are heavily involved and had quite a bit of success with access issues this year despite the covid-19 restrictions. We always work to have sustainable fisheries but it is a constant fight to seek fair regulations for the anglers of our state. We have attended many meetings, participated in conference calls, written letters, made phone calls and met with various key individuals about these issues and more. We are fighting to stop the mining of our offshore lumps to prevent the destruction of vital marine habitat. We are seeking ways to provide much needed funding to the NJ Marine Fisheries Bureau. We are also pushing hard for improved science so that our fisheries can be better managed. We need your help in ensuring the success of these important issues. We also have a youth education program and events where we take handicapped kids and disabled veterans fishing. We are one of the very few recreational salt water advocacy groups that work exclusively for New Jersey anglers. As in past years, our fundraising efforts have a strong influence on our budget and what we can accomplish throughout the year. It costs money to send delegates to meetings, to meet with legislators, print newsletters, pay office expenses and fund day-to-day operations. This Giving Tuesday Fundraiser will extend through 12/7. We appreciate your anticipated support!



To donate online through Facebook go to:

https://www.facebook.com/donate/647453662592866/10222537013687451/

Paul Haertel JCAA Board Member, Past President

[dakota560]

Paul I appreciate the efforts of JCAA on behalf of the NJ recreational fishing community. That said, people donate to organization, when possible, for two reasons. They believe in the cause or they believe their money will fund positive change in JCAA's case in fisheries management as well as the fair allocation to the recreational fishing community. Fund raising, more than anything else, is driven by donors seeing positive results from their contributions.

That said, every stock you mentioned in your original post, fluke, sea bass, bluefish, scup and even striped bass have seen significant declines to the recreational fishing community in terms of either the allocation, the biomass itself or in the case of fluke both.

Arguably, stripers and fluke are two of the most important salt water stocks to New Jersey and a high percentage of the Mid-Atlantic States. Striper regulations this year were amended to address the decline in the stock and over harvest of large breeders. Fluke on the other hand have been on at minimum a decade long substantial decline, arguably for the same reason as stripers with no protection to the spawning stock, with no change in sight to regulations used to recklessly manage the fishery. In addition to the impacts to the fishery, the recreational angling community at large has made substantial sacrifices resulting only in shortened seasons, increased size restrictions, reduced possession limits and a completely unacceptable and inequitable allocation of the biomass.

Since arguably the most important salt water fishery to the state has been failing for the better part of two decades and the recreational angler for all practical purposes is operating under a one-possession limit due to the use of elevated minimum size limits to handicap catch, what is JCAA’s philosophy to address the fact the recreational community has basically lost this fishery.

I learned in business a long time ago results and not effort are what matters most or matters at all. No one rightfully cares about effort if the results aren’t there. Clearly in many of these fisheries, none more than fluke, have the results not been there with the consequences of those failures landing squarely on the chin of the recreational angling community.

What is JCAA’s position to address the problems to this fishery prospectively and what in your or the organization's opinion caused these declines to occur or the benefits of this fishery to shift from both the recreational and commercial sectors to almost exclusively the commercial sector alone.

Appreciate the courtesy of a reply as I’m sure many on the board would be interested in the organizations plans of how our funds will be used to address the above-mentioned problem. In 2018, we all said "Enough is Enough". When are those words going to actually mean something and what is JCAA prepared to do to make that happen?

[Capt John]

Ooooooo this ought to be good.

[Stanton327]

Paul I appreciate the efforts of JCAA on behalf of the NJ recreational fishing community. That said, people donate to organization, when possible, for two reasons. They believe in the cause or they believe their money will fund positive change in JCAA's case in fisheries management as well as the fair allocation to the recreational fishing community. Fund raising, more than anything else, is driven by donors seeing positive results from their contributions.

That said, every stock you mentioned in your original post, fluke, sea bass, bluefish, scup and even striped bass have seen significant declines to the recreational fishing community in terms of either the allocation, the biomass itself or in the case of fluke both.

Arguably, stripers and fluke are two of the most important salt water stocks to New Jersey and a high percentage of the Mid-Atlantic States. Striper regulations this year were amended to address the decline in the stock and over harvest of large breeders. Fluke on the other hand have been on at minimum a decade long substantial decline, arguably for the same reason as stripers with no protection to the spawning stock, with no change in sight to regulations used to recklessly manage the fishery. In addition to the impacts to the fishery, the recreational angling community at large has made substantial sacrifices resulting only in shortened seasons, increased size restrictions, reduced possession limits and a completely unacceptable and inequitable allocation of the biomass.

Since arguably the most important salt water fishery to the state has been failing for the better part of two decades and the recreational angler for all practical purposes is operating under a one-possession limit due to the use of elevated minimum size limits to handicap catch, what is JCAA’s philosophy to address the fact the recreational community has basically lost this fishery.

I learned in business a long time ago results and not effort are what matters most or matters at all. No one rightfully cares about effort if the results aren’t there. Clearly in many of these fisheries, none more than fluke, have the results not been there with the consequences of those failures landing squarely on the chin of the recreational angling community.

What is JCAA’s position to address the problems to this fishery prospectively and what in your or the organization's opinion caused these declines to occur or the benefits of this fishery to shift from both the recreational and commercial sectors to almost exclusively the commercial sector alone.

Appreciate the courtesy of a reply as I’m sure many on the board would be interested in the organizations plans of how our funds will be used to address the above-mentioned problem. In 2018, we all said "Enough is Enough". When are those words going to actually mean something and what is JCAA prepared to do to make that happen?

Hey Dakota, Imagine how much worse it could be if people like Paul and other organizations didn't fight the fight for us??!! You say you have learned things in business...then you should know if you dont have $$$ to lobby with then you are pissin in the wind my friend!! IMO kind of a cheap shot at a guy who devotes a lot of god damn time and effort to get what we get! Thanks JCAA for all your effort for us!

[Gerry Zagorski]

A few things come to mind here in any organization such as this and let me start by saying this is not directed at Dakota. He is very passionate about the fisheries and has some very strong opinions on it and I respect and appreciate that...This is more directed at others who are considering joining or supporting the JCAA or any similar organization.

- Lead, follow or get out of the way... That is to say if you're passionate about something and have a better idea and the energy to form an organization that meets your specific mission or agenda then form one. If not then join and or support one. Sitting on the sidelines is another choice and many do but if you're not involved then don't fight the organizations trying to make a difference.

- Don't throw the baby out with the bath water...Over time, any organization you join or support you're going to have difference of opinions with and they can be big or small... It's the same with work, families, clubs, circles of friends and organizations. If the differences are small, you overlook the things you don't like since the overall relationship, the direction it's heading and what you get out of it outweigh them. If the differences are big you leave or don't get involved with them. It's a personal choice.

- Restrictive fishing regulations are not caused by these organizations, they happen to be at the scene of the crime and it's guilt by association. Something doesn't happen to your liking and it's the groups fault? The enemy is not the group it's the underlying system of how these regulations are set.

- If you want to make a difference you have to be organized or be part of an organization. One person or in some cases one organization acting alone is difficult. This is why you sometimes see organizations that typically oppose each other get together and support one and other when it's to their mutual benefit. On certain issues they cooperate and on others they don't.

Having said that, do you're own homework and find out what these organizations are about. Remember to look at the big picture and don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

You can read about the JCAA here https://www.jcaa.org/About.htm

[dakota560]

Gerry thanks for your comments.....you clearly get it.

Stanton and Capt. John, your combined posts will probably do more to lock this thread than my post and the questions I asked. In no way was I derogatory to Paul or the JCAA, actually the opposite as I thanked them for their efforts.

As Gerry pointed out, lead, follow or get out of the way. Anyone who knows me on this site knows the amount of time I've invested over the last three years to reverse a very concerning trend in the summer flounder fishery. I've reached out to SSFFF, RFA, ASMFC, MAFMC and many other marine fisheries agencies, organizations and industry leaders to address the downward trajectory that fishery has been on in the hopes of benefitting the fishery and recreational and commercial sectors.

Stanton if you take offense to me asking Paul, the JCAA or any organization their strategy on how to improve a particular fishery which has been decimated and almost made inaccessible to the recreational angler, that's your right. But you have no greater right to that opinion than I do to asking the questions I did if someone is asking me for a donation.

Money is important, how that capital is spent is equally if not more important. If something doesn't change, these fisheries as well as our pastime will be lost and countless businesses will be out of business.

In 2018, 92% of directed angler trips coast-wide specifically for summer flounder resulted in the harvest of 1.3 fish on average per angler. And those statistics don't include angler trips where no fish were harvested. How much worse can it get than that for the recreational sector? Again I didn't and don't blame Paul or the JCAA for that, my question is what is the Associations position on the problems hamstringing the fishery and plans going forward to address them. That's a fair question to ask, not an indictment on Paul or the Association.

[Angler Paul]

All,
Let me start by saying that I was not offended at all by Dakota’s comments and questions. However, I do appreciate Stanton’s support and Gerry’s spot-on comments. That having been said I will answer the questions as best as I can and I’ll also be glad to answer any others as well.
For starters, JCAA is an organization of clubs. Our positions are not determined by our President or our board but rather by our clubs. Each club has one vote and one or two representatives from each club are encouraged to attend our monthly meetings. Any club may bring an issue up and may make a motion for JCAA to take a particular position on that issue. If the majority of clubs vote in favor of the motion it becomes the JCAA position until a revised or different motion is passed.
We would all like to see healthier fish stocks particularly with fluke and stripers as I agree they are the two most important species for the recreational anglers of New Jersey. JCAA always fights for sustainable fisheries as well as fair and equitable quotas and regulations. We believe that the best way to have sustainable fisheries is through an ecosystem management approach. The last couple of years, we have actually been making some headway on this. Fisheries managers are beginning to finally realize the we can’t have all of our fisheries at peak periods of abundance at the same time. We need to look at the ecosystem as a whole and do our best to protect and enhance our environment, improve habitat, keep our waters clean and protect our forage base as well.
There are new amendments in the works for Summer Flounder, Sea Bass and Scup as well as Striped Bass. These amendments could very well result in a change of allocation between the commercial and recreational sectors and probably among the different regions or states as well. We always believed that the 60/40 split favoring the commercial sector was wrong and this may be our opportunity to change it. You mentioned the “Enough is Enough” campaign that in my opinion actually worked as it got us out of the region with New York and Connecticut that we had been forced into by the ASMFC. We accomplished that because all the major groups worked together to do that. When we all work together we can move mountains and that is what we have to do now.
Paul

[dakota560]

Paul,

I currently do and have always appreciated your efforts, opinions and comments. Thanks for the courtesy of a well thought out reply, very much appreciated.

This may not be the time or place but I'm going to take advantage of it anyway. The key to the summer flounder fishery in terms of a fair and equitable allocation goes beyond the quota allocation between commercial and recreational itself. It pulls size minimums and MSA into the discussion. MSA is outdated by about 40 years and needs to be brought into this decade. Case in point, in the example I used for 2018 with the statistics supporting a 1.3 average harvest per angler trip, if the recreational sector were given 30% more of the annual quota for 2018, the same amount of fish would have been harvested recreationally even with a higher quota. In other words if the recreational sector was given 99% of the annual quota but state size minimums were left unchanged, we'd still harvest the same amount of fish as were harvested with the current 40% recreational quota allocation. To say it differently, the recreational community will not benefit from a revised quota amendment unless size minimums are adjusted simultaneously because ultimately size minimums dictate harvest for the recreational community.

Marine fisheries has an annual 25% natural mortality rate assigned to this fishery, meaning 25% of every age class is assumed to die from natural causes annually not fishing related. Now add in discard mortality from both commercial and recreational discards which I personally believe on the commercial side are significantly greater than reported. If you do the math, that means approximately 70% of summer flounder ages 0-3 die before an opportunity for them to be harvested. That is an absolutely insane statistic and unconscionably bad regulations. The current regulations allow or actually promote younger year classes to die of natural causes or discard mortality while commercial selectively harvest larger fish with greater market prices and the recreational community is mandated to harvest larger fish due to the regulations. So the regulations in place governing this fishery in essence promote allowing an extremely high percentage of younger age classes to die before reaching a size to harvest while mandating or incentivizing the harvest of the breeding population which is a formula for disaster and what's brought us to the doorstep of a collapse in the fishery in the not-too-distant future. This fishery thrived in the late '80s and '90s because we did the exact opposite of what today's current regulations promote which is harvest the smaller fish and allow the breeders to perpetuate the fishery.

If that message doesn't get out and we don't start protecting the spawn and breeding stock in this fishery, the fishery itself can't be sustainable and everyone loses. That's the overarching message and issue I'd like to see organizations like JCAA addressing with leadership from people like Paul.

You'll have my donation within a week. Again thanks for your efforts and your unwavering commitment to Fisheries Management.

Sincerely....Tom

[Angler Paul]

Paul,

I currently do and have always appreciated your efforts, opinions and comments. Thanks for the courtesy of a well thought out reply, very much appreciated.

This may not be the time or place but I'm going to take advantage of it anyway. The key to the summer flounder fishery in terms of a fair and equitable allocation goes beyond the quota allocation between commercial and recreational itself. It pulls size minimums and MSA into the discussion. MSA is outdated by about 40 years and needs to be brought into this decade. Case in point, in the example I used for 2018 with the statistics supporting a 1.3 average harvest per angler trip, if the recreational sector were given 30% more of the annual quota for 2018, the same amount of fish would have been harvested recreationally even with a higher quota. In other words if the recreational sector was given 99% of the annual quota but state size minimums were left unchanged, we'd still harvest the same amount of fish as were harvested with the current 40% recreational quota allocation. To say it differently, the recreational community will not benefit from a revised quota amendment unless size minimums are adjusted simultaneously because ultimately size minimums dictate harvest for the recreational community.

Marine fisheries has an annual 25% natural mortality rate assigned to this fishery, meaning 25% of every age class is assumed to die from natural causes annually not fishing related. Now add in discard mortality from both commercial and recreational discards which I personally believe on the commercial side are significantly greater than reported. If you do the math, that means approximately 70% of summer flounder ages 0-3 die before an opportunity for them to be harvested. That is an absolutely insane statistic and unconscionably bad regulations. The current regulations allow or actually promote younger year classes to die of natural causes or discard mortality while commercial selectively harvest larger fish with greater market prices and the recreational community is mandated to harvest larger fish due to the regulations. So the regulations in place governing this fishery in essence promote allowing an extremely high percentage of younger age classes to die before reaching a size to harvest while mandating or incentivizing the harvest of the breeding population which is a formula for disaster and what's brought us to the doorstep of a collapse in the fishery in the not-too-distant future. This fishery thrived in the late '80s and '90s because we did the exact opposite of what today's current regulations promote which is harvest the smaller fish and allow the breeders to perpetuate the fishery.

If that message doesn't get out and we don't start protecting the spawn and breeding stock in this fishery, the fishery itself can't be sustainable and everyone loses. That's the overarching message and issue I'd like to see organizations like JCAA addressing with leadership from people like Paul.

You'll have my donation within a week. Again thanks for your efforts and your unwavering commitment to Fisheries Management.

Sincerely....Tom

Regarding your comment about the harvest remaining the same unless the size limit is reduced I’d have to say, not necessarily. Seasons could be lengthened or bag limits increased, both of which would increase harvest. Personally, I’d prefer a season that extended further into the fall. Some of the best fluke fishing I’ve ever had was in late September and October. Right now there is too big of a gap between when fluke season ends and sea bass season begins. Inshore fishermen are left with little to fish for during that gap. On the other hand many people in southern NJ would like to see the season open earlier so they could enjoy their good early season fishing like they used to. Longer seasons also reduce the pressure on other species as well. We all have our opinions as to what should be done so we will just have to see what we can do when we have an opportunity to change things. I agree that the MSA is outdated and needs to be revised and have some flexibility built into it.
You raise some valid points. We could debate size limits all day and I’m not saying I disagree with you. However, it is interesting to note that back in the 80’s this fishery was rebuilt primarily with smaller fish in the ssb. In fact, summer flounder begin spawning at about 10” so they have a number of spawns before they can be harvested. Of course, you can argue that bigger fish lay more eggs, have better genetics, etc. Another interesting thing I noticed it the some of the best spawning years were when the ssb was very low. Does that mean we should take the ssb down further by harvesting some of the smaller fish and then see what happens?
Lastly, thank you for your kind words and pledge to help us out a little.

Paul