Lot of people are working hard to address the failing health of this fishery and disproportionate allocation of the resource. What I mean by disproportionate allocation, commercial in my estimation has access to harvest between 35 - 40% more of the existing biomass than recreational because of the disparity of being able to retain 14" fish relative to 18" for NJ and 19" for NY, Ct and RI even though they're harvesting larger fish than historically. Defeats the entire purpose of a 14" minimum size limit to mitigate dead discard which has clearly not happened. Recreational community can catch 14" - 18" / 19" fish, have to release them so commercials harvest them and to add insult to injury we're penalized 35% for discard mortality, a mortality rate I believe to be significantly higher than actual. Add to that a 60/40 allocation of annual catch quotas in favor of commercial concerns coupled with the 40% increase in their quota this year relative to status quo for the recreational community based on a speculative new means of quantifying historical recreational catch through MRIP and we're getting the proverbial short end of the stick.

Commercial landings (catch which is retained) based on scientific published data or best available science in the stock assessment shows a 96% decline in the harvest of age class summer flounder 2 yrs and younger between the years 1982 and 2012. Basically those younger smaller fish are no longer being harvested commercially yet their population of the biomass between the same period has declined by 45%. It should be exploding higher. That is a statistically material and staggering relationship moving in the wrong direction. WHAT'S HAPPENING TO THIS AGE CLASS OF FISH WHICH MAKES UP 61% OF THE OVERALL PUBLISHED BIOMASS IN 2012, last year this level of detail was provided for.

Remember based on NEFSC's lead scientist Mark Terceiro, recruitment wasn't declining so where are all these fish going. If NMFS's position is recruitment is not down, the ONLY plausible explanation is there being killed off and I don't for a second believe natural mortality or predation is the reason. If it is, conduct a study and prove it. Average 100% dead discard in five years on observed trawls is a much more believable explanation. These fish are being killed commercially in the process of harvesting larger fish with greater catch values. If there's a more plausible explanation, someone needs to disclose it because the data doesn't support the findings or conclusions.

In my opinion, the only way we change the management of this fishery is by challenging their own data with inconsistencies or relationships which have radically changed or make no sense. That's where the battle needs to be fought if there's any chance nursing the fishery back to health. Introducing new data is not practical or even an option. This fishery thrived for 13 years between 1989 and 2002 and has been on a steady decline over the last 17 years. The answer is in the data but being ignored. Million dollar question is will fishery management ever make the necessary changes to revive the fishery or pass the buck and continue hiding behind the provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act enacted 43-yrs ago.