Bunker / Billfish,
There's no logic in how this fishery is being managed. Pick your poison of why basic concepts are ignored. MSA, incompetence, alternate agenda, credibility (failure to admit mismanagement of fishery), power, money, greed, arrogance, politics etc. My opinion, a combination of all the above.

Basic problems, other than MSA, of why this fishery continues to fail. Assumption in models, right or wrong, has 25% mortality every year from natural causes. Natural meaning predation (cormorants, dog fish, stripers, sea bass etc.) and sickness. In addition, discard mortality rates are assumed at approximately 2% annually of the total biomass or slightly over 30% of landings. Combined, natural and discard mortality run at about 28% of the biomass per year. A key reason in my opinion why this methodology for managing the fishery will never work. Almost 90% of landings in today's fishery consists of age classes 3-yrs. and above. For comparison sake, in the 80’s and 90’s those age groups made up less than 15% of yearly landings. We're harvesting the wrong age classes today, all sexually mature fish and a proportionately higher percentage female. Recreational size minimums are at the center of that change in the fishery both recreationally and commercially. It's interesting to note that the increased size fish harvested commercially bears a direct relationship to the increase in size minimums over the years to the recreational angling community. In other words the fish that the recreational community are being forced to release are subsequently being harvested by commercial operators for their higher market value. Increased size minimums to the recreational sector has been a very ingenious means of fisheries management removing access to a significant portion of the biomass from the recreational sector for the benefit of the commercial sector resulting in exclusive access for that sector to all fish in the biomass ranging between 14" to 18" - 19". Recruitment has declined over the last 15 years to historical and unprecedented lows and scientists scratch their heads and wonder why.

Do the math. Assume this year’s recruitment class is 100 fish. First year we lose 28% to mortality or 28 fish. Second year starts with 72 fish, lose another 28% or 20 fish bringing that age class to 52 fish remaining after 2 years. Third year we lose another 28% or 15 fish bringing the population to 37 fish after 3 years. We essentially lose around 63% of every recruitment class by age 3 before those fish begin to be harvested. What other fishery is managed this way AND allows commercial harvest during the spawn when recruitment has literally imploded over the last two decades with no pre-emptive efforts to address that decline. Not only are there trillions of eggs destroyed in that process every year but Marine fisheries has absolutely no sense on what impact commercial harvest is having on the overall efficacy of the spawn. It's unconscionable management at both the Federal and State level hang their hats on MSA legislation and compliance yet insist on regulations that have absolutely destroyed the spawning biomass, devastated recruitment levels, shifted substantial access rights between sectors and allow unabated netting in September and October providing no protection whatsoever to the spawn. That's the leadership mentality we've been governed by far too long.

We went from harvest the young and protect the breeders to let the younger age classes succumb to natural and discard mortality while harvesting almost exclusively the mega breeders. Doesn’t paint a pretty picture. I’m concerned about the future of this fishery. Almost every year this past decade, annual recruitment fell short of natural and fishing mortality meaning there were more fish removed from the biomass than additions. Under those circumstances, it's a statistical impossibility for the fishery to recover and we can thank current regulations for that after 25 years of sacrifice. Haven't read where MSA or the subsequent reauthorization mentions anything about continuing with failed management practices to the detriment of the fishery. I wouldn't get too up in arms or excited about Option 1 or 2, in the big picture they don't really matter. We're squabbling over crumbs.

Fisheries management would rather ignore the facts and keep their heads in the sand as opposed to acknowledging and rectifying their poor decisions. Nothing will change and we'll be having these same discussions every year until a completely different methodology is employed managing this stock.