NJ Fluke/Black Sea Bass 2022

[pddmd]

The New Jersey Marine Fisheries Council Fluke and Black Sea Bass Committees will be meeting with their advisors at the end of August. We would like to get input from recreational anglers on how this years regulations have effected their seasons. Bag, size, slot, seasons, we are interested in hearing input. To have your opinions included in the informational packet distributed for the meeting, please email your thoughts to the following address before 8/28.
Thank you

marinefisheriescouncil@dep.nj.gov

[hammer4reel]

The New Jersey Marine Fisheries Council Fluke and Black Sea Bass Committees will be meeting with their advisors at the end of August. We would like to get input from recreational anglers on how this years regulations have effected their seasons. Bag, size, slot, seasons, we are interested in hearing input. To have your opinions included in the informational packet distributed for the meeting, please email your thoughts to the following address before 8/28.
Thank you

marinefisheriescouncil@dep.nj.gov

Curious what kind of feedback you have already heard ?

Def stinks throwing back a lot of 20-22” fish to look for slot fish Oceanside .

Also curious how many fish are being caught between 17 and 17 1/2” as 99% of the slot fish we have had are 17 1/2- 17.99 .

And we gave up ALOT. To gain the extra 1/2” of slot .

;

.

[Togfather2530]

Curious what kind of feedback you have already heard ?

Def stinks throwing back a lot of 20-22” fish to look for slot fish Oceanside .

Also curious how many fish are being caught between 17 and 17 1/2” as 99% of the slot fish we have had are 17 1/2- 17.99 .

And we gave up ALOT. To gain the extra 1/2” of slot .

;

.im curious as to what regs you would like. If you want to save the breeders all the big fish should go back anyway. Maybe the best regs would be 3 fish between 15-17”. I don’t know. I’m curious to how many people out there are still keeping 3 over 18 just because lol.

[hammer4reel]

im curious as to what regs you would like. If you want to save the breeders all the big fish should go back anyway. Maybe the best regs would be 3 fish between 15-17”. I don’t know. I’m curious to how many people out there are still keeping 3 over 18 just because lol.

Regs were supposed to go to 3 fish at 17 1/2”
Instead we got the slot size starting at 17”

We are throwing a lot of fish back Oceanside to find smaller fish .
When it takes throwing back 10 fish over 20” to find 2 slot fish the mortality quote will have us over fishing by ridiculous poundage .

Us throwing those fish back fishing the same areas where the commercial guys are dragging isn’t doing ANYTHING to help the fishery .
.
While slot limit may help guys fishing in bays and rivers it’s not doing anything Oceanside .

Limit should have been 3 fish over 17” everywhere 120 day season . . Allows those catching smaller fish to use that small fish quota, and those fishing deeper water to take from the larger size quota .
Season going to 150 days didn’t do anything to help the fishery either .


.

[pddmd]

Right now I believe we are most interested in how this years regulations have effected anglers. The dialogue on next year will really heat up in the Fall. As anyone who listened in on the meeting that decided the regs knows, the Council was swayed by the #s of public comments. This is an opportunity to be on the record with your thoughts on the 2022 season. I'm hoping that the Council will be more proactive in getting public input. Send an email with your thoughts and it will be considered.

[hammer4reel]

Being a few members of the council changed the preferred option before the meeting . I doubt the handful of extra callers wanting the slot option truelly made the difference .

Many people were fine with the option of 3 fish at 17 1/2” going into the meeting had no reason to call .
Including thousands who signed the petition against the slot option .
.
It’s quit apparent that even if the option for the longest season had been 1 fish at 30 inches , we may have seen that . As length of season was a bigger driver than the actual bag limit .

If anything this years regs showed it def is important for fisherman to get more involved from start to Finish in the regs making process .

.

[Gerry Zagorski]

For those of you who don't know, the person who started this post is Dr Pat Donnelly who is a Sportfish Representative on the the NJ Marine Fisheries Council.

For those of you who don't know how the process works, a simple way to look at this is the state gathers feedback now and will submit options to be reviewed and approved over the winter and the ones that pass review are the ones we choose from in the spring for next years options and final regulations.

Submitting comments now gives you the potential for your preferred options/opinions to be reviewed and can influence the options submitted for review and to eventually choose from in the spring.

So, speak up now or your opinions/preferred options may not make the list of final options that get considered this coming spring.

I think some useful information would be to let the council know if your commenting as a private or for hire and how the current regulations have effected your personal fishing or how it's effected your business.

EG I'm a for fire or private and I fished more or less days then I did last year and how the regulations negatively or positively effected your fishing or in the case of for hire, your business...

Please feel free to chime in here Dr Pat and thanks for posting this here..

[AndyS]

We need offshore sea bass in January and February again with a bag limit of 25 !!!

[Gerry Zagorski]

We need offshore sea bass in January and February again with a bag limit of 25 !!!

You need to go here and email your comments officially marinefisheriescouncil@dep.nj.gov

[pddmd]

Thanks Gerry
While a couple of our Councilmen hijacked the vote, the vote for this season depended on swing votes from Councilmen who waited and counted the comments. People have long said that the decisions were made before the meeting, and public comment means little. I can assure you that was not the case here. This is a chance to tell the committee how these regulations have impacted you. We will not have catch data available for a few months. I have been speaking to bait and tackle shops, party boat captains, and recreational anglers but we need to do a better job of reaching out to get opinions.

Thanks for the opportunity

[Gerry Zagorski]

Thanks Gerry
While a couple of our Councilmen hijacked the vote, the vote for this season depended on swing votes from Councilmen who waited and counted the comments. People have long said that the decisions were made before the meeting, and public comment means little. I can assure you that was not the case here. This is a chance to tell the committee how these regulations have impacted you. We will not have catch data available for a few months. I have been speaking to bait and tackle shops, party boat captains, and recreational anglers but we need to do a better job of reaching out to get opinions.

Thanks for the opportunity

Happy to help Pat and hope people take the time to comment….

[JMo1986]

Sent mine. Thanks all.

[dales529]

Thanks Gerry
While a couple of our Councilmen hijacked the vote, the vote for this season depended on swing votes from Councilmen who waited and counted the comments. People have long said that the decisions were made before the meeting, and public comment means little. I can assure you that was not the case here. This is a chance to tell the committee how these regulations have impacted you. We will not have catch data available for a few months. I have been speaking to bait and tackle shops, party boat captains, and recreational anglers but we need to do a better job of reaching out to get opinions.

Thanks for the opportunity

Applaud your effort to get ahead of this and will send an email:
One thing I would recommend is that the council provides the options as it should but take NO position on a preferred option until after the public comment period at the end of the meeting. This will keep people engaged throughout the meeting rather than assuming a preferred option will be instituted and they dont have to participate like last year.

While you may see effects from anglers on this year "slot" fishing the rivers, back bays etc its only a small part of the story.

As Capt Dan said ocean side is a different story and in my opinion to early to tell until catch reports / mortality data comes in. We all know MRIP but my hope is if catch is up on the slot than mortality is down 1 to 1 on slot landings but will be up on 18 " and overs so time will tell. MRIP does a poor job on recreational fishing effort as well but you know that.

Also you have north vs south to contend with.

Thanks for posting this.

[TomKaye]

Thanks for that link Gerry. I have commented to fisheries council.
I agree 100% with Captain Dan, as I fish back bay as well as oceanside. Unfortunately I did not specify any recommendation.

I commented on the fact that states should get together on fluke & sea bass
regs. It's just crazy the disparities between NY NJ CT RI and MA.
Many of us occasionally fish all of these waters.

Why can't they get on the same page ?

[Gerry Zagorski]

Applaud your effort to get ahead of this and will send an email:
One thing I would recommend is that the council provides the options as it should but take NO position on a preferred option until after the public comment period at the end of the meeting. This will keep people engaged throughout the meeting rather than assuming a preferred option will be instituted and they dont have to participate like last year.

While you may see effects from anglers on this year "slot" fishing the rivers, back bays etc its only a small part of the story.

As Capt Dan said ocean side is a different story and in my opinion to early to tell until catch reports / mortality data comes in. We all know MRIP but my hope is if catch is up on the slot than mortality is down 1 to 1 on slot landings but will be up on 18 " and overs so time will tell. MRIP does a poor job on recreational fishing effort as well but you know that.

Also you have north vs south to contend with.

Thanks for posting this.

Great suggestion Dave.... A few more
- Public meetings should continue to be held via webinar so more people can be more involved and gain a better understanding of the process which is a mystery to many.
- There has to be a better, more transparent and timely way to gather and account for public input. Seems like every year there's only a few day window once the state options are approved and decided for people to write in comments for their preferred final option. Verbal comments are taken at the final meeting but it's not like they are officially tallied and for whatever reason, some people with opinions don't speak up and their opinions are not accounted for. I know NJDEP a few years ago did a public pole which was submitted last minute and caused quite a stir. Not sure why that was but I think having an electronic pole is a great way to gather and account for public opinion since we are deciding on what is a public resource.
- On the North vs South front, if the council is making the final decision on behalf of the public, there should be fair and equitable representation on the council from the north and south and that's not the case right now.

As with any decision there is no way to please everyone. This years Fluke regs are no exception and opinions are divided. Hard core ocean fishermen both private and charter for hires don't like the current regs. The more leisure private and party boat for hires seem to like the regs since they and their patrons have an opportunity to take home more fish than they used to.

My bottom line here, regardless of my personal preferences, is to see our regulations serve the majority. That can only happen when people are more informed, are more involved and the process becomes more transparent.

[hammer4reel]

Great suggestion Dave.... A few more
- Public meetings should continue to be held via webinar so more people can be more involved and gain a better understanding of the process which is a mystery to many.
- There has to be a better, more transparent and timely way to gather and account for public input. Seems like every year there's only a few day window once the state options are approved and decided for people to write in comments for their preferred final option. Verbal comments are taken at the final meeting but it's not like they are officially tallied and for whatever reason, some people with opinions don't speak up and their opinions are not accounted for. I know NJDEP a few years ago did a public pole which was submitted last minute and caused quite a stir. Not sure why that was but I think having an electronic pole is a great way to gather and account for public opinion since we are deciding on what is a public resource.
- On the North vs South front, if the council is making the final decision on behalf of the public, there should be fair and equitable representation on the council from the north and south and that's not the case right now.

As with any decision there is no way to please everyone. This years Fluke regs are no exception and opinions are divided. Hard core ocean fishermen both private and charter for hires don't like the current regs. The more leisure private and party boat for hires seem to like the regs since they and their patrons have an opportunity to take home more fish than they used to.

My bottom line here, regardless of my personal preferences, is to see our regulations serve the majority. That can only happen when people are more informed, are more involved and the process becomes more transparent.

Current logistics make the webinar ineffective .
While 1000 people can join in , many will not be able to voice a concern due to limited time .
Anyone talking more than a moment quickly are cut off . .
Has to be a better electronic count of what those involved want to see .
If 1000 are on there , 1000 should be able to show their preference. Electronic count done right then and there .
.
Since the state can’t argue that enforcing different reg sets is an issue anymore after this years debacle .
Time to try and correct more than one issue at a time .

Bays and rivers having an early start day is beneficial , as well as opening southern waters earlier .
Split seasons just make sense.

Raritan bay should try and have uniform rules between NY and NJ so the whole bay is fishable .

Ocean fishery should not lose fishing days due to an early start . Should have a later start and end date .
Fair and equitable distribution of the quota .

.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Thanks for that link Gerry. I have commented to fisheries council.
I agree 100% with Captain Dan, as I fish back bay as well as oceanside. Unfortunately I did not specify any recommendation.

I commented on the fact that states should get together on fluke & sea bass
regs. It's just crazy the disparities between NY NJ CT RI and MA.
Many of us occasionally fish all of these waters.

Why can't they get on the same page ?

Yes Tom, it is kind of screwy when you fish in areas with state boarders. However, I think state sovereignty is a good thing since it gives states the ability to make their own decisions on what's best for their state. Point in case, look what happened not too long ago when NJ decided to go out of compliance and not be forced to go with 19 inch Fluke. NY was OK with that but we were not and if we were not separated from NY, that never could have happened.

You also need to consider how the fisheries vary from State to State. EG a 19 inch Fluke in places like Montauk or MA is not too difficult while it's more difficult here in NJ, especially in the southern parts of our state and in the bays and rivers. States also need to be held accountable for their actions or inaction's. If as an example NY over fished, why should NJ have to suffer for that or visa versa.

In my opinion, the more local a decision can be made the better since it has more chances of reflecting what locals want.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Current logistics make the webinar ineffective .
While 1000 people can join in , many will not be able to voice a concern due to limited time .
Anyone talking more than a moment quickly are cut off . .
Has to be a better electronic count of what those involved want to see .
If 1000 are on there , 1000 should be able to show their preference. Electronic count done right then and there .

.

Mark this day on your calendar folks... Dan and I actually agree on something :D

[dales529]

Mark this day on your calendar folks... Dan and I actually agree on something :D

X2 Agree with Dan!

[dales529]

OK so here is your chance to make the difference you all crave! We need a representation from North Jersey. Not naming anyone but plenty of you have had plenty to say about all of this so now is your chance to be heard louder than a keyboard. Just saying

From: Brust, Jeffrey [DEP] <Jeffrey.Brust@dep.nj.gov>
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2022 9:40 AM
To: Brust, Jeffrey [DEP] <Jeffrey.Brust@dep.nj.gov>
Subject: NJ Marine Fisheries Council vacancies

Good morning, everyone. The NJ Marine Fisheries Council is looking to fill two vacancies – one recreational seat and one public / at-large seat. The link below will take you to the full vacancy announcement and description, with information on how to apply. Please feel free to share this link widely. Thank you for your assistance with this matter. Any questions, please let me know.

https://dep.nj.gov/njfw/news-2022-08-19-marine-fisheries-council-seeking-applicants/

Jeff



Jeffrey Brust
Bureau Chief
New Jersey DEP Fish and Wildlife
Bureau of Marine Fisheries
360 N New York Rd (street)
PO Box 418 (mail)
Port Republic, NJ 08241
Phone: 609.748.2030

[hammer4reel]

OK so here is your chance to make the difference you all crave! We need a representation from North Jersey. Not naming anyone but plenty of you have had plenty to say about all of this so now is your chance to be heard louder than a keyboard. Just saying

From: Brust, Jeffrey [DEP] <Jeffrey.Brust@dep.nj.gov>
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2022 9:40 AM
To: Brust, Jeffrey [DEP] <Jeffrey.Brust@dep.nj.gov>
Subject: NJ Marine Fisheries Council vacancies

Good morning, everyone. The NJ Marine Fisheries Council is looking to fill two vacancies – one recreational seat and one public / at-large seat. The link below will take you to the full vacancy announcement and description, with information on how to apply. Please feel free to share this link widely. Thank you for your assistance with this matter. Any questions, please let me know.

https://dep.nj.gov/njfw/news-2022-08-19-marine-fisheries-council-seeking-applicants/

Jeff



Jeffrey Brust
Bureau Chief
New Jersey DEP Fish and Wildlife
Bureau of Marine Fisheries
360 N New York Rd (street)
PO Box 418 (mail)
Port Republic, NJ 08241
Phone: 609.748.2030


According to those in the know .
There have been a few applications sitting on the Governors desk for many months .
And even with constant letters being sent to fill those seats it hasn’t happened as it’s not on his to do list .

[dales529]

According to those in the know .
There have been a few applications sitting on the Governors desk for many months .
And even with constant letters being sent to fill those seats it hasn’t happened as it’s not on his to do list .

So the answer is to give up? Maybe a call to Jeff Brust. Just saying it takes a lot a legwork sometimes to get answers but easy to post a complaint. NOT saying YOU Dan but you get where I am coming from. Would think you would make a good council member though.
Same applications for Seats didnt get filled under Christie either. PUBLIC recreational anglers have to fight for everything so do so if you really want change. Or just keep posting complaints

[pddmd]

FYI
When the Summer Flounder committee meets, there are 20 advisors involved. The advisors are chosen by the Executive committee to apropriately represent anglers geographically, rec/for hire, party vs private... By statute 20 is the maximum. The committee communicates with the advisors to establish a dialogue. The committee preferred option comes about from a consensus, and constitutes a motion to move dialogue forward to the full Council.
The full Council then incorporates the information, meeting with biologists, fisheries managers, law enforcement, committee reports, and public input, to make a decision.

I voted against the majority of public comment on fluke because i felt the other factors outweighed the comments. We are charged with evaluating all of the information.

Also
My application for reappointment sat in Trenton for 3 years before any action.
phone calls, emails, etc finally got something done