cut next year's summer flounder catch by 10 percent

[AndyS]

Saw this one coming :mad:

http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/news/press/cape_may/fishing-councils-likely-to-cut-next-year-s-summer-flounder/article_c91604fa-f3c7-11e1-b9c5-0019bb2963f4.html

[Ismellfishy]

Yea not exactly a shocker there. An increase in sea bass would be nice, maybe we can get rid off one of these two week fall closures

[Life's A Beach]

We were told that @ the captain's meeting for the Leonardo Fluke Tournament. Seems the juvenile fish that are to be next years/next couple years' keepers just aren't there.

So start the season later, end it quicker, raise the size limit back to 18" and lower the creel limit. Just make sure you put enough money into the system to pay the unemployment to all the fish-for-hire guys you're gonna put out of business.:(

[1captainron]

Doesn't matter all the hard work that went into proving the system wrong....we put Egg on their face, and now they will get the last laugh.

It's not about the fish people........they simply want us off the water, out of business and no recreational fishing.
Read about the next push for Saving Habitat, sounds like closed area's coming to a reef near you!:mad:

[buckfin732]

Yet most of the Fish-for-Hire guys raved and even wanted a lower size limit with a decreased bag limit.They cant have their cake and eat it to:eek:.Capt Adam said what Lab just stated.We had a fishery rebuilt and we took a half inch off and kept 3 less fish what did you think was going to happen.We were going to go over quota if we went over quota 2 years ago with 18" bag at 8 fish.The people that set these rules have not one care in the world for you or me .I work over 75 hours a week am never late paying my taxes or any bill for that matter.I take care of my faimly follow the law and support my country every chance i get.I try and help anyone that i can and even help some people that dont appericate it.My 2 outlets for stress are fishing and hunting just like many of you.What do we get for being good Americans and good Stewards of the Land and Sea we bend over and take it up the tail pipe again.The question we have to ask ourselves is when is it enough when are we fed up enough to do something about it.I guess we havent reached that point yet cause its the same old same old.The REC. guys get screwed over and over.:mad: PS This post is not directed at you Capt Ron dont want you to think that since you Are a For-hire-guy

[socks]

.....and if we kept the regs the same as last year????????????????

[JOHN D]

good, fluking in jersey may actually become good again
.

[Capt. Lou]

We were told that @ the captain's meeting for the Leonardo Fluke Tournament. Seems the juvenile fish that are to be next years/next couple years' keepers just aren't there.

So start the season later, end it quicker, raise the size limit back to 18" and lower the creel limit. Just make sure you put enough money into the system to pay the unemployment to all the fish-for-hire guys you're gonna put out of business.:(

Jeez, wonder if the lack of juvenile fluke has anything at all to do with our population of doggies!
We all have probably caught them in every bay , river & estuary known to man.
Hard to believe that those doggies that are considered endanger by our NSoAA buddies don't have a hand in this latest lack of juvenile fluke!

[GOTCHA1224]

**** them all now i will kill everything

[buckfin732]

Saying NJ doesnt have a good fulke fishery is just stupid plain and simple.John D tell me were the fishery is better i would love to know.Sure NY comes close but no state on the east coast has a better fishery for fluke IMO.Remember its not the arrow its the indian :eek:

[Sidewinder]

I said it as soon as I saw you guys give up 3 fish for a 1/2 reduction and longer season... Welcome to the Hell that we in NY have suffered for over 5 years...

Never give up your creel limit, thats like giving up your life line, there is no one to blame now but yourselves for thinking you could get back from these scumbag *******s that are the regulators.

Just so you know Cass Sunstein, he is the Regulatory Czar and he is a ****ing nut bag.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaJ8VXYdBrg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoiHIbwRhSo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flfHZgT-SeI

Marching orders from up top...

[CaptTB]

I said it as soon as I saw you guys give up 3 fish for a 1/2 reduction and longer season... Welcome to the Hell that we in NY have suffered for over 5 years...

Never give up your creel limit, thats like giving up your life line, there is no one to blame now but yourselves for thinking you could get back from these scumbag *******s that are the regulators. Precisely. Could not have said it better (actually, I did say it on this very board months ago before Fluke started, but few were listening)

The quota was already cut for the year we are still fishing in and we said there was not enough quota to do what people wanted.

Nevermind, I am tired of spending inordinate amounts of time dealing with fisheries issues only to be told by people who never read a piece of paper, went to a meeting or looked something up on line that they know best and I should stay out of it because I am "one of those Bogans"

Next time listen to those that have been doing this shit (fisheries management, not just fishing) for 20+ years.

PS - Not saying NJ's regs are the reason for the cut, only that the geniuses that wanted to drop the bag limit and shorten the season to drop a shitty half inch now have nowhere to go but DOWN, DOWN DOWN and we start from a much worse position.

Everyone pray the roulette wheel known as MRIP does not come up with NJ's color this year and we may skate by, there is always the chance that MRIP won't come close to what we actually catch (and hopefully lower, not higher)

[Jigsmith]

A lot of us saw this coming. You didn't have to be a genius to see it.

[Sidewinder]

A lot of us saw this coming. You didn't have to be a genius to see it.

What did you do about it? Thats the question...

[SaltLife1980]

Just cant win.. No matter what we do, in the long run we are the ones getting the short end of the stick.. Nick said it best in his post..

Idk what else to say besides this is BS.. They are never happy.. they will be happy when we cant fish anymore

[Life's A Beach]

What did you do about it? Thats the question...


SOME of us went to the selection meeting in Toms River and voiced OUR opinion(s). The "Board" made their decision DESPITE what the majority stated they preferred.

On a personal note: I hope those that stated they were willing to give up creel limit to get a smaller size limit are man enough to now say their decision was short-sighted and flawed?


http://www.njfishing.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43811&highlight=fluke+poll

[hammer4reel]

In what has been probably the best fluke season in the last five years with the amount of quality fish around , I dont think lowering the size limit to 17 1/2 really did that much as most fish were 17 or well over 18 , going by what we caught.
so if anything lowering the bag limit by 3 fish should have kept our landing poundage lower as if it had stayed at 8 there would def have been ALOT more fish kept, and the pounding would have been much higher.

curios to see how the new landing numbers reflect that

[Sidewinder]

The creel limit should be 6 fish and size 14" and better.

You can not cull, once you catch your limit, that's that.

Also you must handle the fish with care as if it was your effing baby, I see too many effing idiots handle fish as if it was worthless, some mates too.

You want a good fishery? Well start policing your clientele and show them the proper way of handling their shorts and release them with care...

[captadamnj]

The current decision on quota was coming long before any decision was made about 2012 regulations. The 2013 quota is completely unrelated to 2012 regulations. You simply can't relate the two because, at this time, they are completely unrelated. 2012 catch will be integrated in future quota management decisions, but not the 2013 quota. Anyone who makes the argument next year's quota is tied to this year's regulations is grossly misinformed.

What will happen is in December, our 2012 PROJECTED landings will be compared to the 2013 quota. (Irregardless if our 2012 -> 2013 quota went up or down.) If 2012 landings are lower than 2013 quota, we will have the chance to liberalize. If landings = quota, regs will still be same. If landings are greater than quota, then we will reduce.

Keep in mind that the regs for this year were DESIGNED to significantly increase landings from 2011 (by nearly 40%).

As Tony correctly stated, landings numbers are nothing but a roulette wheel or a crap shoot. Any system that samples less than 1% of what it is supposed to be calculating is catastrophically insufficient for to the number management of anything.

If anyone would like to further discuss management, call or e-mail, thanks.

[Capt Sal]

The current decision on quota was coming long before any decision was made about 2012 regulations. The 2013 quota is completely unrelated to 2012 regulations. You simply can't relate the two because, at this time, they are completely unrelated. 2012 catch will be integrated in future quota management decisions, but not the 2013 quota. Anyone who makes the argument next year's quota is tied to this year's regulations is grossly misinformed.

What will happen is in December, our 2012 PROJECTED landings will be compared to the 2013 quota. (It won't matter whether our 2012 -> 2013 quota went up or down.) If 2012 landings are lower than 2013 quota, we will have the chance to liberalize. If landings = quota, regs will still same. If landings are greater than quota, then we will reduce.

Keep in mind that the regs for this year were DESIGNED to significantly increase landings from 2011 (by nearly 40%).

As Tony correctly stated, landings numbers are nothing but a roulette wheel or a crap shoot. Any system that samples less than 1% of what it is supposed to be calculating is catastrophically insufficient for to the number management of anything.

If anyone would like to further discuss management, call or e-mail, thanks.
Thank you for informing the people who just don't know or read the valuable info posted here.Before anyone rants they should know the facts.A good way would be to attend a meeting.

[DMac]

I knew this was coming once we lowered size limit. Next year my guess would be 18 or 18.5 with 4-5 fish and shorter season. Southern guys gained nothing but one year. I agree nj is best fluking overall on east coast and I fishes for them from Maryland to mass.
I agree with sidewinder about handling short fish. They should never be handled roughly as they are our future. I would bet 95+% of my fish are surviving release. Only reason I'm say maybe 5 percent die is because there are occasionaly ones that get snagged on side of gill plate. I never net fish under 20" flipping then into my hand never touching boat is much better plus I care to remove hook quickly and carefully.

[captadamnj]

I knew this was coming once we lowered size limit.

Again -

The current decision on quota was coming long before any decision was made about 2012 regulations. The 2013 quota is completely unrelated to 2012 regulations. You simply can't relate the two because, at this time, they are completely unrelated. 2012 catch will be integrated in future quota management decisions, but not the 2013 quota. Anyone who makes the argument next year's quota is tied to this year's regulations is grossly misinformed.

[Sidewinder]

The current decision on quota was coming long before any decision was made about 2012 regulations. The 2013 quota is completely unrelated to 2012 regulations. You simply can't relate the two because, at this time, they are completely unrelated. 2012 catch will be integrated in future quota management decisions, but not the 2013 quota. Anyone who makes the argument next year's quota is tied to this year's regulations is grossly misinformed.

What will happen is in December, our 2012 PROJECTED landings will be compared to the 2013 quota. (Irregardless if our 2012 -> 2013 quota went up or down.) If 2012 landings are lower than 2013 quota, we will have the chance to liberalize. If landings = quota, regs will still be same. If landings are greater than quota, then we will reduce.

Keep in mind that the regs for this year were DESIGNED to significantly increase landings from 2011 (by nearly 40%).

As Tony correctly stated, landings numbers are nothing but a roulette wheel or a crap shoot. Any system that samples less than 1% of what it is supposed to be calculating is catastrophically insufficient for to the number management of anything.

If anyone would like to further discuss management, call or e-mail, thanks.

When you give up creel and length of season for lower size limits you will absolutely **** yourself.

I understand trends and how they manipulate the numbers and dangle regs that seem great at the time but it's like Mc Donald Burgers at the time of eating it tastes great then you realize later, Great? Yeah not so much.

The Bottom line is no matter what, you guys in NJ will get screwed just like we got reamed in NY.

Good Luck with that... Do you know how many Boats we lost in Long Island because of these regs?

I am a big picture guy and no matter how you come to your conclusion when your are screwed, you are screwed...

And bud you guys in NJ are screwed I see 4 fish and 18 1/2 inches in your future. ;)

[DMac]

Captadamnj,

In my post I stated nothing about quota for 2013 simply stated that with lowering our size limit I knew they would say we had a higher landings in 2012 than 2011 hence why I wanted to stay at 18.

Captadamnj. Could you tell me how many additional keepers this helped you with this season, bc I personally can say very few and threw 90+ percent of 17.5-18 back bc didn't need them.

Since you were driving force behind lovering size and creek can you say you still support your decision?

Not attacking you just a question.

Sidewinder unfortunately your right. I knew it was mistake. I think we might only go to 18, but 18.5 is definately possibility and then southern boats will really be screwed bc they said they needed 17.5 so bad..

[shrimpman steve]

And bud you guys in NJ are screwed I see 4 fish and 18 1/2 inches in your future. ;)

and you seem happy about it. is it a NJ Vs. NY thing?

As LAB said, we can only voice our opinion, then the board does what it wants to do. you think they listen to our opinion? No way.

But to gloat that we will be affected like NY was sounds you think we deserve it because we are NJ not NY.

Just sayin.

[Sidewinder]

and you seem happy about it. is it a NJ Vs. NY thing?

As LAB said, we can only voice our opinion, then the board does what it wants to do. you think they listen to our opinion? No way.

But to gloat that we will be affected like NY was sounds you think we deserve it because we are NJ not NY.

Just sayin.

Actually, while we were suffering in NY I heard many a NJ guys say good better them then us.

This isn't a NY vs NJ thing there is no comparison, NJ has been invade by us so there is no rivalry, NY hands down is better! :p :D

But seriously you guys moaned about your regulations so much but you didn't head the warning signs that you were next. It was coming a mile away a giant red flag and while you were crying over only being allowed 8 fluke we in ny had 2 fluke at 21 effing inches.

Think about it, you were able to keep 18" fluke we were throwing fish back at 20 7/8" roughly 3lbs a piece, and you guys were crying about your regs.

I believe NY, CT, and NJ should all have the same regulations period.

[Skolmann]

I believe NY, CT, and NJ should all have the same regulations period.

If that is your true belief, why stop there.... why shouldn't CT & RI have the same regulations of NJ & Del. And to go one step further, RI. & Mass. be the same as should Del. & MD. etc. etc.

Sorry the one size fits all concept doesn't work with me, just my IMHO.

[Knot Guilty]

In addition to the boxes of red noses for the clowns who gave back size and fish,
I now have tissues so you can dry your eyes. Foresight is armor against the unknown.
Thanks and look alive in the future.

[GOTCHA1224]

Captadamnj,

In my post I stated nothing about quota for 2013 simply stated that with lowering our size limit I knew they would say we had a higher landings in 2012 than 2011 hence why I wanted to stay at 18.

Captadamnj. Could you tell me how many additional keepers this helped you with this season, bc I personally can say very few and threw 90+ percent of 17.5-18 back bc didn't need them.

Since you were driving force behind lovering size and creek can you say you still support your decision?

Not attacking you just a question.

Sidewinder unfortunately your right. I knew it was mistake. I think we might only go to 18, but 18.5 is definately possibility and then southern boats will really be screwed bc they said they needed 17.5 so bad..
capt. adam didnt you persuade the 17.5 inch size. from what i understand the 18 inch and 6 fish was highlighted at the meeting until you persuaded the council?

[Irish Jigger]

So everyone remembers what they chose when the regulations were posted.


http://www.njfishing.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43811

[Sidewinder]

If that is your true belief, why stop there.... why shouldn't CT & RI have the same regulations of NJ & Del. And to go one step further, RI. & Mass. be the same as should Del. & MD. etc. etc.

Sorry the one size fits all concept doesn't work with me, just my IMHO.

There you have it... Instead of working together this failed mentality is part of the problem, thanks! :)

[captadamnj]

In my post I stated nothing about quota for 2013 simply stated that with lowering our size limit I knew they would say we had a higher landings in 2012 than 2011 hence why I wanted to stay at 18.


Which is exactly what is supposed to happen. In a perfect world, the regulation changes will increase landings from 2011 to 2012 by nearly 40%. That is what our liberalization was intended to accomplish.


Could you tell me how many additional keepers this helped you with this season


In FOUR dedicated fluke trips this year (I just don't do much fluking), I have landed 89 keepers. 26, 30, 16 and 17. Keepers between 17.5" and 18" on those trips were, respectively, - 2, 1, 3, 7. So 13 of 89 keepers have been as a result of the change in regs for me.


Since you were driving force behind lovering size and creek can you say you still support your decision?


Well thank you for your "driving force" comment, but I don't think that is entirely accurate, polls on numerous sites saw varying interest in change in regs and there were plenty of people that spoke in favor of 17.5" at the NJ meeting, including Tony Bogan's cousin Ray.

The trip where I had 30, that was a 6 person limit. We quit early at the request of the party. Almost all keepers were over 20". So having the 5 fish bag limit was conservationally beneficial and the people were beyond satisfied. One of the four days resulted in a nice box of fish thanks to the 17.5" size limit. I have gotten numerous calls, texts and e-mails from folks that have gotten "a few more fish" as well as people that are more enthusiastic about going fishing as their prospects of getting a keeper are better. Word from this board and in person contacts from up north all reiterate similar sentiments as what hammer4reel posted, so many fish are over 18" that the 5 fish creel limit is more effective at constraining landings this year.

So yes, I absolutely and unequivocally stand by my support of going to 17.5". Many, many people have seen a benefit while the consequence of the lower creel limit has an overall lesser effect on fewer people.

As I stated long ago, I understand there are a number of sharpies on this board that can catch 8 18" fish, and my hat is off to them. They can voice their discontent with the regs, but for them, the 5 fish creel limit should be constraining harvest and making moot the argument of "I knew 17.5 in. size limit would dramatically increase landings".

[Sidewinder]

In FOUR dedicated fluke trips this year (I just don't do much fluking), I have landed 89 keepers. 26, 30, 16 and 17. Keepers between 17.5" and 18" on those trips were, respectively, - 2, 1, 3, 7. So 13 of 89 keepers have been as a result of the change in regs for me.

Well thank you for your "driving force" comment, but I don't think that is entirely accurate, polls on numerous sites saw varying interest in change in regs and there were plenty of people that spoke in favor of 17.5" at the NJ meeting, including Tony Bogan's cousin Ray.

The trip where I had 30, that was a 6 person limit. We quit early at the request of the party. Almost all keepers were over 20". So having the 5 fish bag limit was conservationally beneficial and the people were beyond satisfied. One of the four days resulted in a nice box of fish thanks to the 17.5" size limit. I have gotten numerous calls, texts and e-mails from folks that have gotten "a few more fish" as well as people that are more enthusiastic about going fishing as their prospects of getting a keeper are better. Word from this board and in person contacts from up north all reiterate similar sentiments as what hammer4reel posted, so many fish are over 18" that the 5 fish creel limit is more effective at constraining landings this year.

So yes, I absolutely and unequivocally stand by my support of going to 17.5". Many, many people have seen a benefit while the consequence of the lower creel limit has an overall lesser effect on fewer people.

As I stated long ago, I understand there are a number of sharpies on this board that can catch 8 18" fish, and my hat is off to them. They can voice their discontent with the regs, but for them, the 5 fish creel limit should be constraining harvest and making moot the argument of "I knew 17.5 in. size limit would dramatically increase landings".

1.) Ok so why should you have a say in anything fluke if you do 4 trips a year?

2.) You stated- "So having the 5 fish bag limit was conservationally beneficial and the people were beyond satisfied. "

How many shorts did you catch between 14" and 17", lets say it was 10:1 shorts to keepers. How many of those fish are alive now? (around 14" the fluke probably mated once or twice already this is why I am asking)

3.) You know as well as I do that the numbers offered are a dangling carrot to starving people. This is a type of vote where the fisherman always loses, yet you know this and say you are for the fishermen... Hmmmm.

You know that regardless of the harvest those numbers they gave you to pick from was a joke, pick what you picked and pushed hard for it to go through from what I have just heard, and when you go over raise the size lower the creel. Same goes the other way, not reach your target and they can come and say the fluke are on the decline and do the same thing as before raise size lower creel.

You end up in the same spot no matter what. Its funny for a guy preaching "know the facts" you sure hided a lot of things there Capt. I don't trust guys like that do these things, here in Brooklyn we call people like this rats, snakes.

[Capt Sal]

1.) Ok so why should you have a say in anything fluke if you do 4 trips a year?

2.) You stated- "So having the 5 fish bag limit was conservationally beneficial and the people were beyond satisfied. "

How many shorts did you catch between 14" and 17", lets say it was 10:1 shorts to keepers. How many of those fish are alive now? (around 14" the fluke probably mated once or twice already this is why I am asking)

3.) You know as well as I do that the numbers offered are a dangling carrot to starving people. This is a type of vote where the fisherman always loses, yet you know this and say you are for the fishermen... Hmmmm.

You know that regardless of the harvest those numbers they gave you to pick from was a joke, pick what you picked and pushed hard for it to go through from what I have just heard, and when you go over raise the size lower the creel. Same goes the other way, not reach your target and they can come and say the fluke are on the decline and do the same thing as before raise size lower creel.

You end up in the same spot no matter what. Its funny for a guy preaching "know the facts" you sure hided a lot of things there Capt. I don't trust guys like that do these things, here in Brooklyn we call people like this rats, snakes.
And your post is still up?Don't need this kind of thing.What have you done to help the cause?Monday morning quarterback!!!

[socks]

1.) Ok so why should you have a say in anything fluke if you do 4 trips a year?

2.) You stated- "So having the 5 fish bag limit was conservationally beneficial and the people were beyond satisfied. "

How many shorts did you catch between 14" and 17", lets say it was 10:1 shorts to keepers. How many of those fish are alive now? (around 14" the fluke probably mated once or twice already this is why I am asking)

3.) You know as well as I do that the numbers offered are a dangling carrot to starving people. This is a type of vote where the fisherman always loses, yet you know this and say you are for the fishermen... Hmmmm.

You know that regardless of the harvest those numbers they gave you to pick from was a joke, pick what you picked and pushed hard for it to go through from what I have just heard, and when you go over raise the size lower the creel. Same goes the other way, not reach your target and they can come and say the fluke are on the decline and do the same thing as before raise size lower creel.

You end up in the same spot no matter what. Its funny for a guy preaching "know the facts" you sure hided a lot of things there Capt. I don't trust guys like that do these things, here in Brooklyn we call people like this rats, snakes.
Well said, couldn't agree more!

[Angler Paul]

I just want to point out that New York has very tough regulations now because of their poor management decisions in the past that caused them to exceed their quotas thereby forcing them to have their current strict regulations. Thankfully the NJMFC made wiser choices which resulted in us not exceeding our quotas in most years.
We are all getting ahead of ourselves for next year. As Adam said we do not know what the results of the survey will show. However, those interested need to get more involved by voicing thier opinions to those who manage our fisheries rather than just complaining here.
I too was unhappy with this years regualtions that were set by the commercial representatives on our NJMFC against the recommendation of the fluke advisory committee and the recreational representatives on the council. It is very unfair that there are more commercial representatives on the council than recreational ones.

Paul Haertel
2nd VP JCAA

[captadamnj]

1.) Ok so why should you have a say in anything fluke if you do 4 trips a year?

Only fish a handful of fluke trips per year because of what the size limit has historically meant to anglers south of Barnegat, very few legal fish. Used to target fluke much more, but simply can't take people's money to bring them home with an empty fish box. Since fluke is not the bulk of my business, it also allows me to make objective decisions about what regulations will mean to the greatest number of people. Most find that input beneficial, YMMV.


How many shorts did you catch between 14" and 17", lets say it was 10:1 shorts to keepers. How many of those fish are alive now?

The 2 better days we've had very few shorts, 2 throwbacks per keeper. The 2 days with keeper catches in the teens 5 - 1 throwbacks to keepers. I think we've gut hooked 3 fish this year. Very low mortality.

This is a type of vote where the fisherman always loses

The direction of this thread is where the fishermen always lose. What is anyone fighting about in this thread, to say "I'm right" about a system that uses as it's basis a less than 1% sampling rate? There is no "right" about a system like that. The system is broke, and when we the fishermen continue to fight like this it only demonstrates that we aren't more than pawns in the game.

Its funny for a guy preaching "know the facts" you sure hided a lot of things there Capt.

Hiding? 609-618-0366. Give a ring, if I don't pick up please leave a message and I'll be sure to get back to you. Thanks, and have a pleasant evening.

[Inishmore3]

The frustration is that the RFA supported the 2012 regulations when it seems most of the folks do not. The people send their money to the RFA because they are told the RFA is the voice of the people.

The other frustration I think the folks are having is the RFA tells you if it was not for us, things would be worse. When the government closed sea bass on October 4, 2009, what was worse than that? Again, what was worse than that? And don't tell the people well, it got better. I am talking about that day. October 4, 2009. We had a sudden closure of sea bass and fluke had been closed for some time.

2013 seems like another reduction for fluke. Maybe the RFA could tell the people what the action plan is to fight this. How will the RFA use the people's funds to combat the impending 2013 fluke situation? People send you checks and go on fishing trips that donate to RFA. I think you owe the people an explination on how you will combat this impending situation. And who knows, maybe it can be a win. Maybe a loss. But at least tell the people where their money is going to combat this and other reduced fishery seasons. You owe it to the people who donate to the RFA.


I don't think the other gentleman is trying to fight you, I think he is just so frustrated with these threats from the government about reduced season and such while at the same time the RFA asks for money to keep America fishing.

I am not trying to fight you either, I am just trying to stop the current fight. I think all the people are asking is come clean with what their money is being used for.

[Sidewinder]

I just want to point out that New York has very tough regulations now because of their poor management decisions in the past that caused them to exceed their quotas thereby forcing them to have their current strict regulations. Thankfully the NJMFC made wiser choices which resulted in us not exceeding our quotas in most years.
We are all getting ahead of ourselves for next year. As Adam said we do not know what the results of the survey will show. However, those interested need to get more involved by voicing thier opinions to those who manage our fisheries rather than just complaining here.
I too was unhappy with this years regualtions that were set by the commercial representatives on our NJMFC against the recommendation of the fluke advisory committee and the recreational representatives on the council. It is very unfair that there are more commercial representatives on the council than recreational ones.

Paul Haertel
2nd VP JCAA

Paul with all do respect, we did not go over anything. Actually we were under in many seasons, and the funny thing about one particular year where we lost half the fleet and actually had a 2 week closure in the middle of our fluke season mind you with only half a fleet so not many boats for all of LI actually targeting fluke we went over and it was For 2009, the minimum size limit was 21 inches, compared to 20.5 the year before. The bag limit was two fish, down from four. Additionally, there was a split season:

Open: May 15 – June 15.

Closed: June 16 – July 2.

Open: July 3 – August 17.

Closed thereafter.

And we still went over because of BS Data from the MRFSS, that boarded vessels and took numbers down in surveys.

Care to challenge these facts? :)

[Sidewinder]

The frustration is that the RFA supported the 2012 regulations when it seems most of the folks do not. The people send their money to the RFA because they are told the RFA is the voice of the people.

The other frustration I think the folks are having is the RFA tells you if it was not for us, things would be worse. When the government closed sea bass on October 4, 2009, what was worse than that? Again, what was worse than that? And don't tell the people well, it got better. I am talking about that day. October 4, 2009. We had a sudden closure of sea bass and fluke had been closed for some time.

2013 seems like another reduction for fluke. Maybe the RFA could tell the people what the action plan is to fight this. How will the RFA use the people's funds to combat the impending 2013 fluke situation? People send you checks and go on fishing trips that donate to RFA. I think you owe the people an explination on how you will combat this impending situation. And who knows, maybe it can be a win. Maybe a loss. But at least tell the people where their money is going to combat this and other reduced fishery seasons. You owe it to the people who donate to the RFA.


I don't think the other gentleman is trying to fight you, I think he is just so frustrated with these threats from the government about reduced season and such while at the same time the RFA asks for money to keep America fishing.

I am not trying to fight you either, I am just trying to stop the current fight. I think all the people are asking is come clean with what their money is being used for.

Very well written and said! :)

[shrimpman steve]

right wrong or indifferent, I must thank Adam for all the time he puts into this. it is what I call a "thankless job". you can never please everyone, but I am sure his intentions are to keep us fishing.

[JIMMY L]

The frustration is that the RFA supported the 2012 regulations when it seems most of the folks do not. The people send their money to the RFA because they are told the RFA is the voice of the people.

The other frustration I think the folks are having is the RFA tells you if it was not for us, things would be worse. When the government closed sea bass on October 4, 2009, what was worse than that? Again, what was worse than that? And don't tell the people well, it got better. I am talking about that day. October 4, 2009. We had a sudden closure of sea bass and fluke had been closed for some time.

2013 seems like another reduction for fluke. Maybe the RFA could tell the people what the action plan is to fight this. How will the RFA use the people's funds to combat the impending 2013 fluke situation? People send you checks and go on fishing trips that donate to RFA. I think you owe the people an explination on how you will combat this impending situation. And who knows, maybe it can be a win. Maybe a loss. But at least tell the people where their money is going to combat this and other reduced fishery seasons. You owe it to the people who donate to the RFA.


I don't think the other gentleman is trying to fight you, I think he is just so frustrated with these threats from the government about reduced season and such while at the same time the RFA asks for money to keep America fishing.

I am not trying to fight you either, I am just trying to stop the current fight. I think all the people are asking is come clean with what their money is being used for.
Don't expect the RFA to worry too much about our fluke problems.Right now they are(along with the commercial fleet) preparing to spend your money endorsing their wealthy friend Mitt.

[CaptTB]

The frustration is that the RFA supported the 2012 regulations when it seems most of the folks do not.Wrong. The RFA NJ Chapter did not take a position on the 2012 regulations. There was even an entire thread about the 2012 regs on this very site where that was pointed out numerous times and even discussed. Please, let's stick to the FACTS.

The other frustration I think the folks are having is the RFA tells you if it was not for us, things would be worse. When the government closed sea bass on October 4, 2009, what was worse than that?Gotcha, so when something bad happens that automatically negates any good that has been done right? So sick of you people with the "What have you done for me lately" attitude as if nothing is being fought or done just because something does not go the way YOU think it should.

Get a clue.


And don't tell the people well, it got better. I am talking about that day. October 4, 2009. We had a sudden closure of sea bass and fluke had been closed for some time. Right, so the feds closed a fishery suddenly, so that is the RFA's fault. Gimme a break. What exactly did you do about it? I know for a fact you did not do a ****ing thing. The simple fact is that some things can be dealt with proactively but when the feds act unilaterally then those issues have to dealt with re-actively(is that even a word?):D, it is called life, welcome to it. No one, no organization nor group of people has control over an emergency closure, that is why it is called an emergency. N one but the feds have access to the landings data as it is collected, so no one but they can see what is coming or what the data says is coming. My 15 year old understands this, perhaps I should have him come on here and explain it to you. That is one of the dumbest comments I have ever read, and that is really saying something.

2013 seems like another reduction for fluke. Maybe the RFA could tell the people what the action plan is to fight this. How will the RFA use the people's funds to combat the impending 2013 fluke situation? People send you checks and go on fishing trips that donate to RFA. I think you owe the people an explination on how you will combat this impending situation. And who knows, maybe it can be a win. Maybe a loss. But at least tell the people where their money is going to combat this and other reduced fishery seasons. You owe it to the people who donate to the RFA.
So pick up the phone and ask the questions and you will get an answer. You talk as if there is some big secret but that is a lie and you know it. Both the chapters and National are only a phone call or e-mail away, try it before you come onto a website and spout off on topics of which you obviously have little knowledge.

By the way, I neither work for nor get paid by nor have any connection to the RFA other than I am a dues paying member.

I am not trying to fight you either, I am just trying to stop the current fight. I think all the people are asking is come clean with what their money is being used for.Come clean?? THAT is a direct accusation that there is something being hidden or dirty. Do you even understand how the RFA works? How any 501 works? If you wish to know what is being done with the money go to the websites, read the newsletter, pick up a phone, hell request their financials, IT IS PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE.

This guy is a joke. Adam, I wouldn't give this guy the time of day if I were you, he obviously has an agenda and is flat out full of shit when he says in one breath he is "not trying to fight you" and in the other says the RFA needs to "come clean" with what is being done with the money.

Tool.

[CaptTB]

Don't expect the RFA to worry too much about our fluke problems.Right now they are(along with the commercial fleet) preparing to spend your money endorsing their wealthy friend Mitt.Sure, because the RFA only does one thing at a time.

First off, RFA National through the PAC deals with political campaigning. RFA and SSFFF and a host of other groups have been dealing with Fluke constantly for years. Sorry if it is not fast enough or working the way you wish it would, but the fact remains that the work has never stopped, just the support from people like you.

[bunker dunker]

this going back and forth is really not helping us at all.we need to find out why they want the reduction and by what data is being used to back it.there are allot of peeps from this site that really worked there butts off for the rec guys.lets stick together and get some answers.capt tb is right,change dose take time.

[Angler Paul]

JCAA is continuously working on issues such as this. For those who may be interested JCAA has a monthly meeting that a representative from each member club may attend. For an issue such as fluke regulations any representative may make a motion to support any particular option. Each club that has a representative present may vote on the motion and if it passes that is the position the JCAA will support. This year the vast majority of our clubs voted to support the 18" size limit, 8 fish bag limit and longer season. There are no hard feelings towards clubs that prefered a different option and in fact they were encouraged to voice their opinions at public hearings. This year I spoke on behalf of the Berkeley Striper Club and JCAA at various advisor's meetings and public hearings. Below are the points I made in regard to the fluke reguations this year. Unfortunately, the NJMFC did not choose this option. We need more fishermen to get involved so please consider joining a club, the JCAA or any other organization that takes an active role in supporting recreational fishermen.

Paul Haertel
2nd VP JCAA

Eleven Reasons to support the fluke option that will allow us to fish for fluke from May 5th – October 21st with an 18” size limit and a bag limit of 8 fish.
by Paul Haertel

1.) Having a longer season is most beneficial for our various fisheries. When the fluke season is closed many fishermen are forced to target other species. On the front end of the season when the fluke season is closed, I see party and charter boats that rarely used to fish for stripers now fishing for them on a daily basis. At times they absolutely hammer them and stripers cannot sustain this type of pressure for too much longer. Then on the back end of the season when fluke season is closed and particularly when blackfish and sea bass seasons are also closed, many boats are fishing offshore wrecks, targeting cod and pollock, two species that are just starting to make a nice comeback. Again, it is doubtful that these species can withstand this added pressure. We urge you to consider the effects that a shorter season for one species may have on other species.

2.) It is imperative that we have a fluke season that will extend well into October because the other species that we normally fish for then will be closed. More specifically, blackfish will be closed from 9/1 to 10/17. Then from 10/18 to 11/15 we will only be able to keep one blackfish. Compounding the issue further it the fact that fishing for sea bass is expected to be closed from 10/15 to 11/1. In recent years stripers have not been arriving in force until November so if the fluke season is not open into late October there will be virtually nothing for surfcasters and inshore fishermen to fish for. If there is nothing to fish for in our state at that time, some of us will fish in others states or not fish at all. It is particularly important for surfcasters to be able to fish for fluke late into the fall as many of us believe that our best chance of catching a couple keepers occurs during the fall mullet run. The Governor’s Cup Fishing Tournament is in October. This tournament usually attracts approximately 1000 fishermen who pay $25. each to enter. The proceeds go towards important issues such as providing how to fish seminars, kids fishing events and purchasing special handicapped wheel chairs that are capable of riding on the beach. It is sad that in most recent years, fluke had to be removed from the tournament due to the season being closed and now for the first time since its inception blackfish will not be eligible because the season is closed.


3.) The fall is a time when many of those who target doormats have a good chance at success. The big fish have fattened up over the summer and are on the feed as they stop at wrecks and rough spots as they migrate offshore. As is the case with surf fishermen, this traditional fishery has been taken away from the trophy fishermen for a number of years.

4.) Keeping the size limit and bag limits consistent from year to year will result in more accurate statistics. We have been fighting for better fisheries science and this is one way that will help.

5.) Keeping the size and bag limits the same is better for law enforcement. Changing size
and bag limits virtually every year confuses many of the more casual fishermen. Our conservation officers end up spending a lot of time explaining the new regulations to those individuals. Our C.O.s try to be fair with everyone which is why they take the time to do this. However, with the limited number of C.O.s that we have it would be better if they had more time to track down poachers and other violators rather than having to take the time to explain new regulations.

6.) A longer season is better for the economy simply because it gives everyone regardless of whether they are surfcasters, private boaters or charter boat fishermen more days to fish. For example consider the impact it might have on tackle stores, who cater to surf fishermen, if their customers are left with nothing to fish for in October.

7.) Weather is more of a factor when the seasons are shorter. A sustained period of bad weather can be disastrous during a shortened season. A longer season provides everyone with more of an opportunity to reschedule trips that had been cancelled due to bad weather.

8.) Higher bag limits are better. Dropping the bag limit to 5 fluke might hurt participation somewhat. People spend a great deal of money for gas, bait and tackle. Though the days where people catch their limits of 8 might be infrequent, many realize that after a number of slow days they might have a really good day when they do in fact limit out. Also, once the bag limit is dropped it becomes difficult to raise it again in the future.

9.) A 17 ½” – 18” fluke is really hard to catch. I was out on the water many days last year and in fact logged in 182 trips for the NJ anglers survey. I might have caught 5 or 6 fluke between 17 ½” and 18” the entire season. I would much rather be able to keep 8 larger fluke on good days rather than keeping a few extra small ones during the season. In reality there are a lot of short fluke around but there are not too many in the 17 ½” – 18” range, rather it is public perception that there are. Many fishermen return home from a fishing trip and might honestly believe that the bulk of their shorts were 17 1/2” to 18” but in actuality many were much smaller. I guarantee you if we drop the size limit to 17 ½” then these same fishermen will be saying all they caught were 17” – 17 ½” fish. Ok, so you think I am wrong on this and there were really an abundance of 17 ½” to 18” fish around last year? That would be even better because by this year they will be all 18” plus fish and we will be able to keep them anyway.

10.) Enacting the option with a 17 ½” size limit will not only result in us having to reduce the bag limit from 8 to 5 but will reduce the number of days we are allowed to fish from 170 to 147. It is simply not worth losing 3 fish from our bag limit and 23 days of fishing just to be a able to keep a few more 17 ½” – 18” fish during the season.


11.) There is a more likely chance that we will exceed our quota if we drop to a 17 ½” size limit. Should that happen, the overage will be deducted from next year's quota. I checked the charts and found that the 17 1/2" option results in liberalization of 37% with MRFSS data and 94% liberalization with NJVAS data. Option 2 (18" fish) results in 34% liberalization with MRFSS data and 54% liberalization with NJVAS data.

[CaptTB]

Paul, thanks for the shameless plug and self promotion.

[SaltLife1980]

The frustration is that the RFA supported the 2012 regulations when it seems most of the folks do not. The people send their money to the RFA because they are told the RFA is the voice of the people.

The other frustration I think the folks are having is the RFA tells you if it was not for us, things would be worse. When the government closed sea bass on October 4, 2009, what was worse than that? Again, what was worse than that? And don't tell the people well, it got better. I am talking about that day. October 4, 2009. We had a sudden closure of sea bass and fluke had been closed for some time.

2013 seems like another reduction for fluke. Maybe the RFA could tell the people what the action plan is to fight this. How will the RFA use the people's funds to combat the impending 2013 fluke situation? People send you checks and go on fishing trips that donate to RFA. I think you owe the people an explination on how you will combat this impending situation. And who knows, maybe it can be a win. Maybe a loss. But at least tell the people where their money is going to combat this and other reduced fishery seasons. You owe it to the people who donate to the RFA.


I don't think the other gentleman is trying to fight you, I think he is just so frustrated with these threats from the government about reduced season and such while at the same time the RFA asks for money to keep America fishing.

I am not trying to fight you either, I am just trying to stop the current fight. I think all the people are asking is come clean with what their money is being used for.

Well put and written.. Makes Sense.. What is the RFA going to do?



Not starting any issues just wondering the same thing

[Sidewinder]

Send me your money and come to my meeting

No reply to my facts?

[Angler Paul]

Paul with all do respect, we did not go over anything. Actually we were under in many seasons, and the funny thing about one particular year where we lost half the fleet and actually had a 2 week closure in the middle of our fluke season mind you with only half a fleet so not many boats for all of LI actually targeting fluke we went over and it was For 2009, the minimum size limit was 21 inches, compared to 20.5 the year before. The bag limit was two fish, down from four. Additionally, there was a split season:

Open: May 15 – June 15.

Closed: June 16 – July 2.

Open: July 3 – August 17.

Closed thereafter.

And we still went over because of BS Data from the MRFSS, that boarded vessels and took numbers down in surveys.

Care to challenge these facts?


Sidewinder, The info. I posted about NY making poor management decisions that resulted in them exceeding their quotas came from the NJMFC. I believed them to be correct but do not have the time to research prior years to see when NY exceeded its quota and when it did not. I don't doubt what you said either and I certainly agree that the real problem is the "fatally flawed data" that we have all been complaining about for years.

[Sidewinder]

Like a Politician true to form... We did not go over once.

[GDubya07]

We go over - We dont go over - Doesnt matter we will get screwed right wrong or indifferent - they dont want us on the water - period

With the economy the way it is - less boats in the water - less participation - declining sales - but yet we still overfished -

Has less to do with the season and keeping our fishery healthy - than it does with politics

I support the RFA and SSFFF also

GDubya- :cool: