2023 Fluke Regs Finalized

[Angler Paul]

2023 FLUKE REGS FINALIZED! Much to the dismay of the majority of fluke fishermen in our state, we are being forced by ASMFC/MAFMC to have the exact same fluke regs as last year. This includes the season, bag and size limits. There is nothing at all our state can do about it. The NJBMF was all set to consider other options but they cannot do it. Please do not blame them. This applies to all states, it's not just New Jersey.
Paul Haertel, JCAA Past President

[hammer4reel]

Nothing should be final without the whole process being met .
Given regs with no options is a total collapse of the procedure.

Slot regs sucked for way more anglers trips than it improved .

Reason we got these bullshit regs in the first place was a few council members decided what was best for them selves last year.

Also hearing those same individuals didn’t want the surveys from FG to be used in the process as their findings didn’t align with keeping the slot .
I believe over 70% sending responses back were moot in favor of the slot .
So IMO stating the councils hands were tied may not be accurate .
Waiting to see how PD felt this actually went through again as I believe he wasn’t in favor of any of last years changes .

.

.

[pddmd]

So
The New Jersey Marine Fisheries Council Fluke committee met to discuss possibilities for 2023. It is accurate to say that our hands are tied, but they are bound not by the state but by the new Harvest Measures method. The Mid Atlantic Council and ASMFC have chosen this method to "soften" the changes that occur each season. That being said, they developed a model that was only approved recently, and there is not enough time to apply it for 2023. We were supposed to have a 10% increase, then data showed a 10% decrease needed. The Council/ASMFC decided status quo for 2023.
I am obviously disappointed in this approach. 2022 was hijacked but we have always had the chance to come back to the table. We have been told that this is a one time thing, and that next year will be back in our hands.
I'm furious that there is no public input on this. I'm angry that they treat us with a "No catch reduction so you should be happy" attitude. I had made a motion that the March meeting of our Council be moved to a larger venue in Central NJ to get better statewide input but that is not pertinent now.
obviously I will do my best to keep the NJF group apprised of any upcoming issues

[hammer4reel]

So
The New Jersey Marine Fisheries Council Fluke committee met to discuss possibilities for 2023. It is accurate to say that our hands are tied, but they are bound not by the state but by the new Harvest Measures method. The Mid Atlantic Council and ASMFC have chosen this method to "soften" the changes that occur each season. That being said, they developed a model that was only approved recently, and there is not enough time to apply it for 2023. We were supposed to have a 10% increase, then data showed a 10% decrease needed. The Council/ASMFC decided status quo for 2023.
I am obviously disappointed in this approach. 2022 was hijacked but we have always had the chance to come back to the table. We have been told that this is a one time thing, and that next year will be back in our hands.
I'm furious that there is no public input on this. I'm angry that they treat us with a "No catch reduction so you should be happy" attitude. I had made a motion that the March meeting of our Council be moved to a larger venue in Central NJ to get better statewide input but that is not pertinent now.
obviously I will do my best to keep the NJF group apprised of any upcoming issues


Thanks for the input Pat .

[Gerry Zagorski]

So
The New Jersey Marine Fisheries Council Fluke committee met to discuss possibilities for 2023. It is accurate to say that our hands are tied, but they are bound not by the state but by the new Harvest Measures method. The Mid Atlantic Council and ASMFC have chosen this method to "soften" the changes that occur each season. That being said, they developed a model that was only approved recently, and there is not enough time to apply it for 2023. We were supposed to have a 10% increase, then data showed a 10% decrease needed. The Council/ASMFC decided status quo for 2023.
I am obviously disappointed in this approach. 2022 was hijacked but we have always had the chance to come back to the table. We have been told that this is a one time thing, and that next year will be back in our hands.
I'm furious that there is no public input on this. I'm angry that they treat us with a "No catch reduction so you should be happy" attitude. I had made a motion that the March meeting of our Council be moved to a larger venue in Central NJ to get better statewide input but that is not pertinent now.
obviously I will do my best to keep the NJF group apprised of any upcoming issues

Thanks Pat

[tautog]

When the government makes decisions on what they think is the best available science, expect the average person to get screwed. Vote for clowns over and over, and you get a big circus.

[hammer4reel]

When the government makes decisions on what they think is the best available science, expect the average person to get screwed. Vote for clowns over and over, and you get a big circus.

Until accountability is enforced , and our actual legal system is fixed it’s never getting better .

Top politicians are now Kings , they do as they please even when against every law we have .

They are greasing each other’s bank accounts while we pay for it all .


We give away billions in graft with the wave of a pen instead of full representative vote .

.whole system is broke , and they love that it is .

.

[Togfather2530]

It’s understandable your frustration given it was taken out of our hands. I’m my opinion the fluke fishing was TERRIBLE last year and has been getting worse for the about the last decade (since we were forced to keep the larger breeders). I don’t get why everyone wants to be able to keep more and more fish or more laxed regs. I’m sure this view will get some people worked up. I think if you’re really concerned about the fishery people should just start practicing catch and release with the given regs we have to deal with. This fishery has only declined

[Duffman]

It’s understandable your frustration given it was taken out of our hands. I’m my opinion the fluke fishing was TERRIBLE last year and has been getting worse for the about the last decade (since we were forced to keep the larger breeders). I don’t get why everyone wants to be able to keep more and more fish or more laxed regs. I’m sure this view will get some people worked up. I think if you’re really concerned about the fishery people should just start practicing catch and release with the given regs we have to deal with. This fishery has only declined

Just curious where you’re fishing out of? Only reason I ask is because you’ve stated last season was terrible in multiple posts.

[Jigman13]

Just curious where you’re fishing out of? Only reason I ask is because you’ve stated last season was terrible in multiple posts.

I had a banner year from shore. The problem was finding under 18" fish!

[Gerry Zagorski]

It’s understandable your frustration given it was taken out of our hands. I’m my opinion the fluke fishing was TERRIBLE last year and has been getting worse for the about the last decade (since we were forced to keep the larger breeders). I don’t get why everyone wants to be able to keep more and more fish or more laxed regs. I’m sure this view will get some people worked up. I think if you’re really concerned about the fishery people should just start practicing catch and release with the given regs we have to deal with. This fishery has only declined

Well if you believe the data on the attachment, the leading indicators Recruitment and SSB are trending up and Fluke seem to be rebuilding. SSB which is Spawning Stock Biomass meaning the number of fish that are at an age where they can reproduce and recruitment meaning how many new fish were spawned. More breeders and more fish being born is good indicator of what's to come.

If the fishery is truly recovering and we're not in the doom and gloom phase like were were in the 90s when they put on the breaks with stricter regulations, why not give us more access and more liberal regulations? w

To me it it all comes down to access an having choices.

By access I mean the most favorable regulations (bag limits, fish length and number of days to fish) that we can get to what is a public resource that unlike in the past, seems to be rebuilding.

If you get more favorable access you have more choices. If the season is open longer you have more days you can choose to fish for something or not. If the size regulations are more liberal you have a chance to keep something for the table or you can choose to release them. As far as catch or release, I feel this is a personal choice based on your personal preferences or circumstances.

As far as killing the breeders, I don't think we should have regulations targeting only the larger fish we need to sustain the fishery but it's not like someone has a gun to your head and you have to keep those fish. There are however some issues with people who want to keep their limit and our current regulations forces them to catch and release a lot more fish to fill their limit which means more discards and the potential to kill more fish.

I don't pretend to have any magical answers here. The fact is no matter what our regs are, someone is not going to be happy so you wind up someplace in the middle and each side has to compromise.

For me, I just want to be able to fish for something as many days as I can and a have a realistic opportunity to keep something for the table if I choose to.

[reason162]

Rebuilding doesn't mean rebuilt. God forbid we actually err on the side of caution and be conservative about liberalizing regs until we're on more solid ground. I would like to see the regs go back to 18" - that 1" slot is nonsense on so many levels.

And btw, the "science" does not see an issue with larger size regulations. None of the studies pushing lowering size limits as a way to increase recruitment has passed peer review. Keep in mind that if the size limit went to 16", you have no idea if you're killing a 16" male or 16" female. A larger size limit, one can argue, at least gives harvested females multiple spawning cycles under their belt before being killed by anglers.

In terms of recruitment fluke seem to be very similar to striped bass, in the sense that very few females can contribute the entirety of offspring in any given year class. The entire biomass is also steadily trekking northwards. Release mortality is also likely to be much higher than currently understood (iirc multiple studies are being conducted now on delayed mortality across different species).

Focusing on lowering size limits - and arguing that that will actually result in more fluke down the road seems unwarranted and myopic. I get why "industry" voices would (conveniently) call for keeping smaller fish...but the average angler with no vested interest beyond conserving the fishery for future generations should view these attempts with a healthy dose of skepticism.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Rebuilding doesn't mean rebuilt. God forbid we actually err on the side of caution and be conservative about liberalizing regs until we're on more solid ground. I would like to see the regs go back to 18" - that 1" slot is nonsense on so many levels.

And btw, the "science" does not see an issue with larger size regulations. None of the studies pushing lowering size limits as a way to increase recruitment has passed peer review. Keep in mind that if the size limit went to 16", you have no idea if you're killing a 16" male or 16" female. A larger size limit, one can argue, at least gives harvested females multiple spawning cycles under their belt before being killed by anglers.

In terms of recruitment fluke seem to be very similar to striped bass, in the sense that very few females can contribute the entirety of offspring in any given year class. The entire biomass is also steadily trekking northwards. Release mortality is also likely to be much higher than currently understood (iirc multiple studies are being conducted now on delayed mortality across different species).

Focusing on lowering size limits - and arguing that that will actually result in more fluke down the road seems unwarranted and myopic. I get why "industry" voices would (conveniently) call for keeping smaller fish...but the average angler with no vested interest beyond conserving the fishery for future generations should view these attempts with a healthy dose of skepticism.

Hard to discount the points you made Reason... I could form a hard argument with or against you but at the end of the day, it's not what we think that changes things. It's what the system spits out, how the people in the system interpret it and the what wiggle room in the laws they are governed by.

[Skolmann]

I had a banner year from shore. The problem was finding under 18" fish!

Agree 100%. Caught over 3 dozen 18”+ fluke from shore (biggest was 24”s) and can only recall catching 3 in the 17-17.99” slot.

[dales529]

Hard to discount the points you made Reason... I could form a hard argument with or against you but at the end of the day, it's not what we think that changes things. It's what the system spits out, how the people in the system interpret it and the what wiggle room in the laws they are governed by.

This is exactly the issue thanks Gerry! Most think that logic, science and many other factors are in play that can or will be considered. Reality is that while the above is an ongoing process it ONLY factors in SOME logic. SOME science and SOME angler input ( which is scarce on the formats that do get looked at).

[hammer4reel]

Rebuilding doesn't mean rebuilt. God forbid we actually err on the side of caution and be conservative about liberalizing regs until we're on more solid ground. I would like to see the regs go back to 18" - that 1" slot is nonsense on so many levels.

And btw, the "science" does not see an issue with larger size regulations. None of the studies pushing lowering size limits as a way to increase recruitment has passed peer review. Keep in mind that if the size limit went to 16", you have no idea if you're killing a 16" male or 16" female. A larger size limit, one can argue, at least gives harvested females multiple spawning cycles under their belt before being killed by anglers.

In terms of recruitment fluke seem to be very similar to striped bass, in the sense that very few females can contribute the entirety of offspring in any given year class. The entire biomass is also steadily trekking northwards. Release mortality is also likely to be much higher than currently understood (iirc multiple studies are being conducted now on delayed mortality across different species).

Focusing on lowering size limits - and arguing that that will actually result in more fluke down the road seems unwarranted and myopic. I get why "industry" voices would (conveniently) call for keeping smaller fish...but the average angler with no vested interest beyond conserving the fishery for future generations should view these attempts with a healthy dose of skepticism.

If you go back to all the documents when the bag limits were 8 fish at 16” there never was a recruitment problem .
Every time the limit pushed 18” and above recruitments def showed a drop .
So to say the science doesn’t show a negative effect keeping fish over 18” is incorrect .
And honestly that’s the bigger issue NMF doesn’t want to admit their own Data shows clearly that harvesting primarily female fish is what’s causing the recruitment problems .

.

[reason162]

If you go back to all the documents when the bag limits were 8 fish at 16” there never was a recruitment problem .
Every time the limit pushed 18” and above recruitments def showed a drop .
So to say the science doesn’t show a negative effect keeping fish over 18” is incorrect .
And honestly that’s the bigger issue NMF doesn’t want to admit their own Data shows clearly that harvesting primarily female fish is what’s causing the recruitment problems .

.

What was the size limit in the years preceding the 90s collapse? 14.5"?

Rec regulations isn't the only input into this system. Many factors involved. That's why the NC fleet retained all that historical quota with no fluke off their coast for over a decade.

[NoLimit]

If you go back to all the documents when the bag limits were 8 fish at 16” there never was a recruitment problem .
Every time the limit pushed 18” and above recruitments def showed a drop .
So to say the science doesn’t show a negative effect keeping fish over 18” is incorrect .
And honestly that’s the bigger issue NMF doesn’t want to admit their own Data shows clearly that harvesting primarily female fish is what’s causing the recruitment problems .

.

The new regs are great. There are no male fish over 18" and that left us with killing breeders - the males died of old age or in a commercial net.

[hammer4reel]

What was the size limit in the years preceding the 90s collapse? 14.5"?

Rec regulations isn't the only input into this system. Many factors involved. That's why the NC fleet retained all that historical quota with no fluke off their coast for over a decade.



Those cutting houses have a great deal of political pull .
But hearing that may soon change .
Many states are tired of having large parts of their quota from state waters heading back to NC .
They are crushing areas and other economy’s to fill just their own .
May soon be laws in place that fish caught within our boundaries must only be landed in NJ , Ny , Mass etc .
Not sure how they stop what’s actually going on beyond the normal 3 mile state line . But seems local commercial fisherman in each state are pushing to retain their areas quota , instead of the big commercial fleets getting it all .

.

[reason162]

Those cutting houses have a great deal of political pull .
But hearing that may soon change .
Many states are tired of having large parts of their quota from state waters heading back to NC .
They are crushing areas and other economy’s to fill just their own .
May soon be laws in place that fish caught within our boundaries must only be landed in NJ , Ny , Mass etc .
Not sure how they stop what’s actually going on beyond the normal 3 mile state line . But seems local commercial fisherman in each state are pushing to retain their areas quota , instead of the big commercial fleets getting it all .

.

Agreed and hope it happens, but my point is these fish are moving north, 20 30 years ago the bulk of the biomass was indeed off the NC coast, that's how they got their quotas to begin with. Now we're at the southern range of the fishery. You can't expect that significant a shift w/o seeing year to year changes in landings for both rec and comms - it's not just a direct correlation of rec size regulations changing by a few inches over the decades.

When NY went 20 and 21" in the aughts the fluking was phenomenal - esp for big fish. I lost count of 6lb+ fish I had those years, with several 8s in the mix - all from a rental skiff with no electronics. But I am hesitant to say the larger size limit was the only cause, since western sound fluke has traditionally been cyclical and those regs put a lot of boats either out of business or targeting other species.

[Togfather2530]

Just curious where you’re fishing out of? Only reason I ask is because you’ve stated last season was terrible in multiple posts.

Shark River. All I’m saying is we had to work our asses off to try to catch fluke this year most days. Sure u have some good days but overall it’s way down. That’s not just from me but mostly everyone else I talk to agrees.

[hammer4reel]

Shark River. All I’m saying is we had to work our asses off to try to catch fluke this year most days. Sure u have some good days but overall it’s way down. That’s not just from me but mostly everyone else I talk to agrees.

We fish out of shark river . Disagree it was hard to find fluke .
Most days we threw back fish for hours looking for fish that fit the slot ..

If it had been 3 over 18” last year we would have been done before 10 every trip out .

.

[tautog]

If you don't want to catch fluke, it is very easy to catch fluke. Damn things are always getting in way of sea bass and porgies. Biggest issue I see with a lot of fishermen is they keep fishing the spots that were good 10 or 15 years ago. Spend at least half of your day exploring new areas. For whatever reason, I usually do well under 15 feet or over 55 feet. Places that used to be paved along the beach, haven't had that many for at least 5 years. Don't even bother with Ambrose.

[Duffman]

. Don't even bother with Ambrose.
:l
YES! You are 100% correct. Waste of time! :D

[Capt Sal]

Until accountability is enforced , and our actual legal system is fixed it’s never getting better .

Top politicians are now Kings , they do as they please even when against every law we have .

They are greasing each other’s bank accounts while we pay for it all .


We give away billions in graft with the wave of a pen instead of full representative vote .

.whole system is broke , and they love that it is .

.

Do you think there is graft in politics??? LMFAO THEY WAY TO WELTH IS POLITICS!!!!