SSFFF Fluke Progress

[Gerry Zagorski]

A long road and a long read but definitely some great news here....

For those of you who have not been involved in the fight for sensible Fluke regulations, there are 2 ways to challenge the system, either by political or scientific means.

The the SSFFF (Save Summer Flounder Fisheries Fund) chose the scientific route to get involved in the ongoing issues we have with Fisheries management, who tend to hide behind the using "best available science" for Fluke stock assessments. This in turns leads to our regulations and to that end the SSFFF funded the Sex Structured Model referenced below that will now be considered in future stock assessments!!!

For those of you who have been involved, thank you for your generous and tireless and continued support of the SSFFF. As you'll see below we are making some progress.... It's been a long road but we finally have a seat at the table!!

To the leaders of the SSFFF who volunteer their time, thanks to your determination and long term vision. you got us there!!

More work to be done so if you haven't already or would like to give more support to the important work being done by the SSFFF, please click here
http://www.ssfff.net/id65.html


The SSFFF Official New Release below:


SSFFF Science team Participates in Stock Assessment Workshop

Save the Summer Flounder Fishery Fund (SSFFF) has some exciting news; the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is now in the process of reviewing the Sex Structured Model created by Doctor Patrick Sullivan, recently presented at the Stock Assessment Workshop (SAW) on January 29, 2018.

With funding provided by SSFFF and is contributing partners , renowned fisheries researchers Dr. Mark Maunder and Dr. Patrick Sullivan presented their finding to NMFS staff at the Summer Flounder Stock Assessment Workgroup. The ultimate goal is to improve the accuracy of the next stock assessment and consequent management advice.

During the past 10 years, Dr. Maunder has been working on fluke population research for SSFFF and his work has been highly successful in developing important findings that have helped stave off significant quota reductions. Based on ten years of research conducted by the SSFFF team of scientists, the group now believes that the present stock assessment does not represent the best available science. A new and comprehensive stock assessment model which incorporates the latest findings is critically important to help manage this important fishery. Scientific experts like Maunder and Sullivan will broaden the capacity of the program to implement the improvements necessary for creating the best possible stock assessment.

It is SSFFF’s hope that new sex and length catch composition information, that extensive onboard studies completed last year by teams from both Cornell and Rutgers Universities and funded by SSFFF will lead to NEW management actions that allow spawning females a better degree of protection.

The process for developing the next summer flounder benchmark assessment is just starting and SSFFF assessment experts will have significant input into the process at an early stage to ensure that stakeholder voices are heard while there is still time! The NMFS stock assessment process will benefit from new ideas as well as incorporating new and current information to help ensure the best and most accurate results.

Both Dr. Maunder and Dr. Sullivan attended the “Model Comparison Workshop” at SAW from January 30 through February 1, 2018 at Woods Hole, MA. This event is the first in a series of meetings that will eventually lead to a new stock assessment. Dr. Maunder presented three SSFFF commissioned reports, (1) A Concise Guide to Developing the Most Modern Fishery Stock Assessment Models, (2) The Importance of Sex Structure in Future Fisheries Stock Assessment Models, and (3) Developing Better and More Accurate Population Reference Points for Summer Flounder. Dr. Sullivan and his team have spent the last four years reviewing all available information and developing a new model which was also presented at the workshop. These reports detailed the SSFFF science team’s general advice on stock assessment model development as well as very specific suggestions to improve summer flounder management. The report discusses previously unimplemented recommendations made by Dr. Maunder and other independent reviewers, and it identifies new advances in the stock assessment process. According to SSFFF, Maunders work in conjunction with Dr Sullivan’s model development will ultimately provide a fresh approach and foundation for the development of an upcoming summer flounder stock assessment.


SSFFF appreciates the efforts of all the individuals and groups that have provided financial support over the past 10 years. The Board would like to say Thank You to every angler, charter and party boat captain and small businessman that reached into his pocket to support better science and more reasonable regulations. Special recognition must be made to the generous donations made by Point Pleasant Charter Boat Association, the American Sportfishing Association, United Boatmen of New Jersey, the New York Marine Trades Association, NJFishing.com, the New York Sportfishing Federation and the Recreational Fishing Alliance for their continued support throughout the process.

Without these groups it would have been very difficult to accomplish our goals!

Our job is not done yet and we may need additional funds to see this project to the goal line but SSFFF is committed to completing its mission and insuring that our coastal summer flounder population is managed with the best and most advanced scientific tools available.


Thank you,
SSFFF Board

Gerry,

Very good news. Most of us, myself included, want change immediately but government moves at it's own pace. The fact that SSFFF has this on the agenda is significant progress. My opinion is NMFS knows what the problem is but as mentioned admitting it now also admits they've mismanaged the fishery in past. They'll do it their way to save face. New model needs to be developed and approved with sex and size factored in which I imagine will take a few years before substantive change occurs involving possession and size legislation. Believe we're on the right path.......finally. But be patient and please continue funding the associations which got us here because the fight is still ahead of us. Until breeders are protected, this problem does not go away and hopefully the models prove that out. Without the benefit of science, it doesn't take a Rhodes Scholar to realize back in the late 1990's when the possession limits were 300% greater than today, size limits were half of what they are today and no significant commercial winter fluke fishery existed, the biomass was at unprecedented historical highs both in SSB and recruitment, levels which have not since been attained. Just need organizations with the correct interpretation of the data and the right agenda to assist the politicians and committee members with a plausible means of changing the regulations they imposed while saving face in the process. If it takes two to three years so be it but for anyone listening two things are imperative to turn this fishery around. Slot limits is one but equally if not more important close this fishery to commercial harvest while the fluke are migrating offshore during their primary spawn period. Nature will take it from there.

When politics are involved, the only way to create change is by having a seat at the table and I'm guardedly optimistic through the efforts of SSFFF, RFA and others we might actually finally have that. Gerry thanks for posting and SSFFF / RFA thanks for your continued efforts to protect the fishery for all our benefits.

[hammer4reel]

Tom while I agree with much of what your saying.
There are still bigger questions to answer.
Such as what is the actual amount of females vs males in the current body of fish . Is it 1/1 or is it 100/1.
are we really catching more female fluke because their are more of them to be caught ??
according to the boats that did the trawl studies the sexs of fish were not intermixed.
they either caught females or males , not both at the same time .

which makes it possible that when were are catching from a group of fish it is predominantly one sex.

we don't want to believe any numbers NMFS gives us, yet everyone wants us to believe their exact numbers for biomass currently available.

I think ALL new data needs to be researched, and their whole NMFS model trashed as its based on BS info entirely.

I think what really has happened is they have reached the size limit where guys are still catching the same amount of fish as they did in the past, but most don't meet the size limit for KEEPER sized fish.
so with less in the box they will believe the numbers are down.

if we really want ot believe we shouldn't keep 18" plus sized fish due to them being spawning fish , should the limit be all fish under that size, and all fish that make it to 18" be released.

Last summer was the best local fluke fishing in many years.
But that is very skewed as the commercial fishery was shut down the entire summer. It allowed ALOT more fish for us to catch .

Lots of variables and very little correct info to make a real determination on whats really going on .

Its time NMFS did real work on managing the ocean fishery for ALL fish

Dan,

Anyone can look at the fishery and argue any angle twenty different ways. I try using the most common sense approach and look for trends, not single year data points. In the simplest of terms, a fishery has to have more recruits every year than harvest to be sustainable. There's a twenty-five year trend recruitment is down, it didn't happen overnight and it's continuous. Down over 80% which is an astonishing statistic! If there's more females today in the biomass than twenty years ago than the male fish must be sterile or gay. Or maybe commercial netting in the fall is completely destroying the spawning process. Two significant things have occured in the last twenty years, increase size limits and increased commercial fishing pressure at the absolute worst time of year. Coincidence.....don't think so but if the powers to be who regulate this fishery changed their methodology five years ago we'd know the answer by now. We know from the statistics, twenty-five years of statistics, current management methodology isn't accomplishing it's desired results, change it. This can be a parallel process, doesn't have to be a serial one. If more data is needed, collect it but that doesn't have to be at the expense of a secondary approach to reverse the trend line of annual recruitment. Introduce a slot, shut down the commercial fishery during the fall / winter spawn, monitor the results for a few years and approach this problem from multiple angles. Makes no sense not to when we have 15 - 20 years of data strongly suggesting the current management of the fishery could in fact be causing the exact problem we're trying to resolve.

[hammer4reel]

Tom you totally avoided the ?

WHY after its pretty much proven their data collection is not accurate should we believe any of that 25 years of data is even worthy of basing biomass.

Their own study boats have told them they are doing trawl studies in areas in which they are not going to find fish in the first place.

Your a statistics guy , BAD DATA IN = BAD DATA OUT

if I wanted to show how many cows were in a state I wouldn't be checking horse barns.

NMFS admitted their Science isn't accurate, so how can we base Biomass on them.
Their erroneous data is being used to support their findings of lack of fish.
Yet commercial landings as well as recreational catch doesn't match that.

Where commercial guys used to have to run 60 miles to catch a daily limit , last year they were not traveling 5.
They fished their season quota in DAYS due to there being so many fish around .

If there was alack of fish around it would have taken them their whole season to find and catch them.

Landings are REAL numbers , and accurately show whats out there. all their biomass charts are bullshit.

[Solemate]

You are so correct Dan

Dan don't believe I did. If you read the Rutgers study, I believe it says 95% of fluke at 18 or 18.5 inches are females.........fact based on independent study. If NY, NJ and CT make up ~83% of the recreational harvest and our limits are 18 inches, isn't it safe to assume almost the entire recreational harvest are primarily females, common sense would lead you to that conclusion.

NMFS data is inaccurate but break that down. Catch data for both recreational and commercial is more likely than not wrong for two reasons. MRIP doesn't work and commercial catch is GROSSLY understated. Google the Cod Father if you’re not sure. If you believe culling and dead discard at sea isn't a significant problem, then you have more faith in commercial operators than I do. 60, 70 maybe 80% premium for larger fish brought back to the docks, smaller fish are going back dead and not reported in trip logs. Again, females are being harvested. Why keep three 14" fluke that fetch $3 / lb when you can replace them with a 27" fish that brings 70% - 80% higher price.

Was NMFS checking for cows in horse barns when SSB increased from 7,000 metric tons in '89 to 52,000 metric tons in '02.........don't think so. Last reported SSB was ~35,000 metric tons, still a significant number but reducing as catch levels / quotas are being slashed. Don't think the issue is there looking in the wrong places. Fish have tails, they swim, bait have tails, they swim, water temperature changes, which influences movements but these same things have been happening every year for years. Think the commercial catch this year if you recall early reports was due to inshore waters being cold and fluke staging further offshore in concentrated schools. That's why the commercials loaded up so quickly. Does that in and of itself mean the biomass is healthy or could it mean it was highly concentrated this year for a variety of reasons, colder water temperatures being one.
No one is discussing or paying attention to what I consider to be the most alarming statistic of the fishery, recruitment numbers tanking. They've absolutely crashed over the last twenty or more years and if you plot size increases mandated by NMFS to relative recruitment per metric ton of SSB and correlate it to Rutgers sex and size study there's a very compelling argument to be made.

Could there be contributing factors, you can't say that's not a possibility. I believe female composition of SSB has been destroyed by two factors: size increases and the commercial winter fishery while fluke are spawning. They've been tracking in an inverse manner for almost twenty years. Size limits go up, recruitment levels go down and plot it against Rutgers study it accelerated right at the intercept of when Rutgers study said most fluke were females. Coincidence.....don't believe it.

Could other factors be involved....have to admit they could. Cormorants eating young fluke when they're in estuaries, could be part of it. Those birds eat massive amounts every day. Do bunker filter larvae and has the resurgence of bunker impacted recruitment, don't know but can't be ruled out. Is the winter commercial fishery destroying the spawn, killing eggs and stressing out breeders......all possibilities? Are there environmental issues in primary estuaries killing the larvae.......can't rule it out. Point is no body is addressing the tumultuous decline in recruitment and what's causing it. The singular focus is catch and the manner catch is being managed in my opinion is further contributing to the decline in recruitment.

Dan as you said you can throw all the science out and it'll be ten more years of two fish quotas still without the knowledge of why recruitment has been annihilated. I'd prefer to deal with the known rather than the unknowns. Fact we are harvesting almost exclusively female fluke. Fact dead discard by commercials is a serious issue without oversight. Fact the build up of a fall / winter commercial fluke fishery during their offshore migration at the peak of the spawn is quite possibly the most irresponsible decision NMFS has made. Fact regardless of what you do with catch limits, if sufficient recruits are not added into the fishery every year we will never have a sustainable fishery. Fact RRS (relative recruitment strength) a term the self appointed conservationist of the universe Charles Witek can't conceptualize, has dropped in the last 25 years by more than 80% and until that problem is understood and remedied, this fishery will not rebound.

Would I agree to regulations that all fluke over 18" be released.....absolutely. I think every part boat and most recreational fisherman would agree. Through a slot or other manner breeders need to be protected.
For two to three years, NMFS should close the fishery to recreational and commercial during the offshore migration, sometime beginning early September and either late October or into November. If commercials were not allowed fish over 18", the issue with culling and dead discard will be significantly reduced. Figure out what killed recruitment numbers over the last 25 years, correct it and this fishery rebounds as it did between '89 and '02. Don't and it continues it's slide.

[hammer4reel]

Once again . I agree we are keeping more females than males. Of you remember it was me that questioned Kirby about that exact data they want us to believe.

BUT are fluke eggs, 1/1 are they 10/1 or 100/1 no one knows, and that's an important part of the equation .
Not everything is a 1/1 breeding, are their naturally more females born to sustain the fishery ??

you continually talk about hygrading. which isn't happening the way you want to believe.
First hand knowledge is they just increase their net size to only catch the bigger fish. They don't want to throw anything back dead.

unlike you I don't believe the sky is falling with the fluke fishery.

I think they increased the size limit to the point where most guys are throwing back 10 fish for every fish they keep of legal size. That is the limit was still 16/17 '" guys would say it was better than ever.

same amount of fish being caught as before.

I know last summer we traveled way less and caught WAY more fish than most of the years past. Many days catching a boat limit in the first few drifts.

SAY what you want but actual fish caught and recorded are a hell of a lot more accurate than the mystery math NMFS wants to use as their basis for limits.

I can agree their harvest should be shut down during breeding time, but you also are killing breeding fish right before they leave catching them in September.. so where do you draw the line

Dan I'm less concerned with the size of today's SSB, other than the impacts it has with MSA, than I am with the failing recruitment statisitics from ~'95 through current. If recruitment is unstable and declining, nothing will sustain the fishery......that's common sense. Then the "steepness" theorists will say the stock is steep and will sustain itself, 25 years of history proves otherwise.

Where do I draw the line in September......someplace other than where it's drawn right now when recreational anglers seasons are closed and commercials are loading up on concentrated schools of spawning fluke......the future of our fishery. As I've said, it's not just their catch, does anyone fully understand what impact this has on the overall spawn itself. Are fish being stressed, eggs released prematurely, eggs killed by the netting process. How the data shows this fisheruy has a major recruitment problem and commercial netting is allowed unabated is a disgrace.

[hammer4reel]

Originally Posted by dakota560

Dan I'm less concerned with the size of today's SSB, other than the impacts it has with MSA, than I am with the failing recruitment statisitics from ~'95 through current. If recruitment is unstable and declining, nothing will sustain the fishery......that's common sense. Then the "steepness" theorists will say the stock is steep and will sustain itself, 25 years of history proves otherwise.

Where do I draw the line in September......someplace other than where it's drawn right now when recreational anglers seasons are closed and commercials are loading up on concentrated schools of spawning fluke......the future of our fishery. As I've said, it's not just their catch, does anyone fully understand what impact this has on the overall spawn itself. Are fish being stressed, eggs released prematurely, eggs killed by the netting process. How the data shows this fisheruy has a major recruitment problem and commercial netting is allowed unabated is a disgrace.

I totally agree fish being ready to spawn should be left to do so.
Always felt that about the striped bass kill in the spring also .

BUT when we catch more fish than ever, how can we argue their trawl study numbers are not totally inaccurate.

how can a dragger that has worked the ocean for 30 years tell you, twenty years ago we had to drag all night for miles to meet our quota for the day.
Now we do it in a half mile in one drag.
That is an actual poundage of fish caught, then and now.

They claim by their catch there have never been more fish around than right now.
Yet NMFS doesn't catch what they feel they should in a trawl study and the want to tell us their aren't enough fish left in the ocean.

How about all the early part of the season having stomachs full of their last fall young.
Been happening in the Raritan bay the last four or five years. fish caught in the back stomaches are stuffed with baby fluke from the previos fall spawn.
the young were there, but will never be counted because they were eaten.

is the whole trawl study finding bad because their really is a lack of bait around, and everything including fluke are eating the small fluke ??

so man factors that its bullshit that money isn't spent to accurately find out whats going on