So where are the big blackfish

[Togfather2530]

So reading between the lines of all the threads and my own experiences this year it’s been a struggle to put a limit of 15” keepers together this year. No bigger fish which I like to catch but usually always release anyway. So who has a story of anything sizeable 10# +. Last year there was plenty. This year nothing so far.

[Togfather2530]

When guys catch 10# fish u hear about it. Vague reports mean small fish and a bs picky scratchy bite.

[bigal427]

I had a couple of fish over 10 pounds the 2 weeks before it opened up to 5 fish. I think it's all about the conditions wind direction and seas. The big fish are always there but don't always bite. Been to wrecks and caught noting but smaller fish and went back the next day to the same piece and the big ones came out to play

[Gerry Zagorski]

Originally Posted by bigal427

I had a couple of fish over 10 pounds the 2 weeks before it opened up to 5 fish. I think it's all about the conditions wind direction and seas. The big fish are always there but don't always bite. Been to wrecks and caught noting but smaller fish and went back the next to the same day to the same piece and the big ones came out to play

What bigal said^^^^

Lots of reports of short action but I’ve also seen several reports of 10 pound plus fish and most are still fishing inshore. Many larger fish are also typically caught on deeper wrecks which get fished later on in the season when water temps drop.

[reason162]

The other possibility is that they are being fished out:



Note the date on that survey...zero action taken on the rec side. At least NY is starting a tag program for comms.

Sedentary and extremely slow-growing...if any fish deserves a slot limit, it's tog.

[dales529]

Originally Posted by reason162

The other possibility is that they are being fished out:



Note the date on that survey...zero action taken on the rec side. At least NY is starting a tag program for comms.

Sedentary and extremely slow-growing...if any fish deserves a slot limit, it's tog.

Also consider that these numbers are NOT cut in stone just because they are numbers. Here is the latest MC (monitoring committee ) report on gender analysis on summer flounder and in general slot limits.
And I quote
Potential Biological and Socioeconomic Impacts of Slot Limits The MC discussed the potential biological impacts of slot limits and whether there are signals in the fishery data and assessment that are cause for concern regarding potential population dynamic 2 effects of the recreational fishery selectivity. Overall, the MC does not see a clear signal that managers should necessarily be concerned about recreational harvest of females. There are several ongoing changes currently being observed in the stock in terms of growth rates, sex ratios, and other dynamics. Growth rates for both sexes have slowed, and the sex ratio for larger fish has been shifting closer to 50/50. The biggest fish, over about 24 inches, are still mostly all females, but up to that point the sex ratio in the survey data is closer to 50/50. There have been several changes in stock dynamics over the last 10-15 years, including decreased mortality rates, slower growing fish, and male fish living to older ages. Much of the discussion about sex ratios and sex-specific mortality in the recreational fishery is based on the work of Morson et al. (2015)1 , the sampling for which was conducted in 2010 and 2011. This study compared recreational and commercial fishery sampling data to trawl survey data and found that the sex ratio and the sizes and ages in the commercial fishery closely matched that of the trawl surveys. In contrast, the length and age frequency and sex ratio in recreational fishery, especially in the southern region, didn't closely align with that of the trawl surveys or commercial fishery, and was more heavily weighted toward females. This study unfortunately represents a limited snapshot in time. During development of the last stock assessment, survey data was used to determine the sex of commercial and recreational fishery catch to test the application of sex specific models. The result was that most catch in these fisheries are now male, due to the factors described above including changes in growth rates and sex ratios. However, this is based on using the trawl survey data to determine the sex of the recreational catch which makes an assumption about survey and fishery equivalency. On a relative basis, the contention that the recreational fishery is removing too many large females does not appear to hold true, and in absolute terms , because total catch and F rates have decreased substantially in recent years, the fisheries are removing about half as many females (and males) as a decade ago. Assessment scientists have attempted to model a stock-recruitment relationship for this species for decades and have been unsuccessful given that the relationship is essentially flat. Thus, it's difficult to draw any conclusions about the extent to which spawning stock biomass influences recruitment. There seem to be many factors that may be affecting recruitment including environmental factors. In summary, the MC discussed that it does not seem that recreational measures and resulting mortality are causing big females to be "wiped out," and it is not clear whether they are directly affecting recruitment. It is worth noting that slot limits implemented over the course of several years would be expected to effect recreational selectivity and yield per recruit in the assessment model, although several years would be needed to see this effect. Slot limits may result in removing too many fish at smaller sizes without leaving enough to survive all the way through the slot, dissipating potential biological benefits. Another important point about moving to a slot limit is that protecting larger fish in the recreational fishery does not reduce access to these fish in the commercial fishery, and in fact is likely to increase the availability of larger fish available for the offshore commercial trawl fishery.

This data is currently being disputed by the Science side as well as the process side. Most council members do NOT support this data as it has more unkown variables than known. All of a sudden years of research on the gender / age composition of summer flounder is in a state of flux? 18" to 24" fluke are now magically 50% male? You can read the above for yourself but by their own admission the data is far from clear yet we are regulated on it anyway

The same can be said for TOG and WILL be an ongoing debate as Recs have taken it on the chin for way too long based on "faulty" science/ data on most species.

Politics have played a larger role than Science for our fisheries and its getting exposed. Debate is the key in all studies, NO ONE has gotten this right yet but a slow movement towards accountability from fisheries management in all of the data has been started. Just wish we had more support


More to come after the meetings next week in Annapolis MD

[reason162]

Originally Posted by dales529

All of a sudden years of research on the gender / age composition of summer flounder is in a state of flux? 18" to 24" fluke are now magically 50% male?

...

The same can be said for TOG and WILL be an ongoing debate as Recs have taken it on the chin for way too long based on "faulty" science/ data on most species.

That is a surprising development in the discourse re fluke, will wait for your post after the next meeting.

However, I'm not wedded to a tog slot if the science says otherwise. It makes sense to me on an instinctive level, but instincts and gut feelings are often wrong in the face of data...whatever they need to do to rebuild the stock is fine as long as it's based on science and not politics or "economical impact."

I'm not dogmatic about how they rectify the situation...as long they do it. The inaction by the ASMFC re tog is unconscionable.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Originally Posted by reason162

That is a surprising development in the discourse re fluke, will wait for your post after the next meeting.

However, I'm not wedded to a tog slot if the science says otherwise. It makes sense to me on an instinctive level, but instincts and gut feelings are often wrong in the face of data...whatever they need to do to rebuild the stock is fine as long as it's based on science and not politics or "economical impact."

I'm not dogmatic about how they rectify the situation...as long they do it. The inaction by the ASMFC re tog is unconscionable.

And so is the way we Recreationals have been treated with Black Sea Bass. An overbuilt fishery and the commercials get an increase but we still suffer with the same old open and closed seasons? The entire system is jacked from stock assessment survey to MRIP and that goes for every fishery...

Sad thing is we have no idea if a fishery is overfished...

[dales529]

Originally Posted by reason162

That is a surprising development in the discourse re fluke, will wait for your post after the next meeting.

However, I'm not wedded to a tog slot if the science says otherwise. It makes sense to me on an instinctive level, but instincts and gut feelings are often wrong in the face of data...whatever they need to do to rebuild the stock is fine as long as it's based on science and not politics or "economical impact."

I'm not dogmatic about how they rectify the situation...as long they do it. The inaction by the ASMFC re tog is unconscionable.

What to me IMHO is that a document like I posted can even be generated and submitted to the public / councils with admitted unclear data and be submitted for regulation with an economic impact on 100's of thousands anglers/ for hire boats along the coast. This HAS TO STOP

[reason162]

Originally Posted by Gerry Zagorski

Sad thing is we have no idea if a fishery is overfished...

It really is your choice to disregard the survey data.

Or are you saying fish stocks are unknowable?