I'll put this in terms a 3-yr old can understand just for your benefit. Difference in size minimums between NJ (18"), NY and CT (19") and the commercial size minimum of 14" gives the commercial sector approximately 40 to 45 million more fish to harvest than recreational anglers. That's a fact based on the data from science you so vehemently defend.

There is a significant difference in market prices between small, medium, large and jumbo fish. Commercial operators will harvest larger fish with higher market values and discard smaller fish. If you believe they're throwing back higher market value fish and keeping lesser market value smaller fish of 14", you should consider counseling. Look at the attached chart from the 57th assessment and see how commercial discard mortality as a percentage of landings exploded when commercial operators starting selectively targeting larger higher market value fish. Those percentages are nothing less than tragic. If you need help finding that information since I know you struggle with this, those tables are on pages 124, 125, 128 and 129 of the 66th SAW. Almost 100% in 2001, 85% in 2006, 140% in 2007, approxmately 100% in 2008 and 60% in 2009. Those statistics come from official observers on board vessels. In 2007 alone on observed trips, if the commercial sector harvested1,000,000 lbs, they killed an additional 1,400,000 lbs of smaller fish and tossed them overboard in the process. And you would ask us to believe they kept smaller fish fetching maybe $1.25 a lb. back at the docks and discarded larger fish at maybe $5. a lb. because they are bound by a 14" size minimum. And you call my narrative dubious.

I never said commercial are targeting larger fish because of the 14". I said they're targeting them because of higher market values which for the third time is called SELECTIVE HARVEST. And they're able to do so because recreational are forced to release those same fish due to bloated minimums which in turn commercial harvest to maximize catch values. Unless of course you want us to believe they're actually trying to minimize catch values by retaining smaller fish. Because recreational has no choice but to release them, it's not referred to as SELECTIVE HARVEST.

If per your argument 14' fish were forced on commercials to reduce hygrading and discards, which is laughable, why not force it on recreational anglers to cause the same result. It's called a slot and the recreational community has been asking for one for years. A request that has fallen on deaf ears for all those years. We can catch 3 fish at 18" per day but not 3 fish at 16", reduce the insane 10 to 1 discard ratio we're currently operating at and save a million or more female breeders in the process but that's not plausible because of these moronic regulations.

Maybe they're better at deploying their gear, maybe there are larger fish represented in the population, or some combination thereof. Or maybe they're simply destroying another stock. Nets have no conscience. Do yourself a favor, before opining on any of this talk to guys who've worked on commercial boats and ask them how this all works and how much waste is involved in the commercial fishery. Then do yourself a favor and research what happens with discard mortality when SELECTIVE HARVEST is involved. Then come back and we can have an intellectual fact based debate.

IDGAF about the draggers, but whatever else is wrong with fisheries management re fluke the 14" comm min size is not part of it. It was a step in the right direction to limiting waste. You couldn't be more wrong about limiting waste. The attached graph completely blows your statement out of the water. Dead discard mortality percentages are at record highs so I guess per you federal observers data must be dubious as well.

Attached Thumbnails