2022 Final Summer Flounder and Seabass Regulations - NJFishing.com Your Best Online Source for Fishing Information in New Jersey

Gerry Zagorski · #1 04-08-2022, 11:55 AM

Summer Flounder is 2 fish between 17 and 17.99 and 1 fish 18 and over 5/2 - 9/27

Seabass 13 inches all season long
- 10 fish 5/17 - 6/19
- 2 fish 7/1- 8/31
- 10 fish 10/7 - 10/26
- 15 fish 11/1 - 12/31

TwoDDs · #2 04-08-2022, 12:03 PM

Is the fluke opener 5/22 or 5/2 as previously noted in your prior post?
Thanks.

frugalfisherman · #3 04-08-2022, 01:00 PM

At least they picked the seabass one that made sense.

Gerry Zagorski · #4 04-08-2022, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwoDDs

Is the fluke opener 5/22 or 5/2 as previously noted in your prior post?
Thanks.

Thanks for picking that up DD, corrected to 5/2

pectoralfin · #5 04-08-2022, 05:17 PM

Is that the final rule? Two fish between 17 and 18 inches and one over 18?
I guess it will increase the mortality that everyone is worried about.
It's going from a bad is situation to a worse one. They're slowly forcing us out.
As a aside, why is it we never hear about the mortality rate for the commercial sector? I would guess it would be near 90 percent.

Gerry Zagorski · #6 04-08-2022, 05:45 PM

Here are my thoughts on Fluke, take them for what they're worth and as one person's opinion.

I think in the data and in part, Dakota's analysis steered the committee and council towards lowering the size limits and getting a slot option on the table. As you may have also heard on the call and on this site, a slot has been talked about for many years but never possible before since it was not allowed in the framework of the management system for Fluke. That and somehow we got a 16% liberalization (which I still can't believe) so we had a bit more wiggle room without having to give up days and still meet our conservation equivalency. That's the good news...

The bad news is some got what they wanted and others did not. While my personal preference because of where, how and when I fish was option 3, which gave us a wider slot range, albeit a shorter season but more days than last year and my 2nd preference would have been option 1.

The process was a lot more complicated this year than it had been in the past and there was no time allotted for written public comment without delaying the timing of setting the regs. That was a disappointment, not sure it would have changed anything but it might have steered the council towards what the majority of people wanted but here again some wouldn't have got what they wanted.

I have to say I got quite an education this year thanks to Adam Nowalsky from the ASMFC and Peter Clarke our marine biologist for the state. We also got involved way earlier in the process than in years past and that is a must. If all you do is get involved when the state is deciding which option to pick, you have no way to influence the options.

Lastly, I appreciate you all getting involved and voicing your opinions on the action items we posted here and speaking up at the meetings, even though they might disagree with mine. The bigger picture and what I want most for all of us, is for people to get educated and involved and fight for what they want while protecting the fishery. The process certainly is not perfect but we'll continue to pick away and fight our way through it.

Lead, Follow or Get out of the way!

Gerry Zagorski · #7 04-08-2022, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pectoralfin

Is that the final rule? Two fish between 17 and 18 inches and one over 18?
I guess it will increase the mortality that everyone is worried about.
It's going from a bad is situation to a worse one. They're slowly forcing us out.
As a aside, why is it we never hear about the mortality rate for the commercial sector? I would guess it would be near 90 percent.

I don't agree we went from bad to worse... We did get more days of fishing than last year and at the same time, we made a step in the right direction by lowering the size limits which I think most agree is the right direction for the stocks. Do I like the option that was chosen, no I have my own preference based on when, where and how I fish...

As far as the commercial, not within the states control but I would bet you a dollar that it's taken into consideration. People complain about them taking 14 inch fish which is way lower than our regs but if you put it at say 18 or 19, they'd be discarding dead 14 -18 or 19 inch fish to fill their quota and wasting the resource by discarding them. The other things is they are way more closely monitored than us and when their quota is met they get shut down. In contrast we rely on MRIP to calculate our assumed landings, which as we all know is a total crap shoot...

Having said all this I do think we need to get the commercial season changed to protect the fish offshore while they are spawning but that's another conversation.

frugalfisherman · #8 04-08-2022, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gerry Zagorski

Here are my thoughts on Fluke, take them for what they're worth and as one person's opinion.

I think in the data and in part, Dakota's analysis steered the committee and council towards lowering the size limits and getting a slot option on the table. As you may have also heard on the call and on this site, a slot has been talked about for many years but never possible before since it was not allowed in the framework of the management system for Fluke. That and somehow we got a 16% liberalization (which I still can't believe) so we had a bit more wiggle room without having to give up days and still meet our conservation equivalency. That's the good news...

The bad news is some got what they wanted and others did not. While my personal preference because of where, how and when I fish was option 3, which gave us a wider slot range, albeit a shorter season but more days than last year and my 2nd preference would have been option 1.

The process was a lot more complicated this year than it had been in the past and there was no time allotted for written public comment without delaying the timing of setting the regs. That was a disappointment, not sure it would have changed anything but it might have steered the council towards what the majority of people wanted but here again some wouldn't have got what they wanted.

I have to say I got quite an education this year thanks to Adam Nowalsky from the ASMFC and Peter Clarke our marine biologist for the state. We also got involved way earlier in the process than in years past and that is a must. If all you do is get involved when the state is deciding which option to pick, you have no way to influence the options.

Lastly, I appreciate you all getting involved and voicing your opinions on the action items we posted here and speaking up at the meetings, even though they might disagree with mine. The bigger picture and what I want most for all of us, is for people to get educated and involved and fight for what they want while protecting the fishery. The process certainly is not perfect but we'll continue to pick away and fight our way through it.

Lead, Follow or Get out of the way!

Gerry are you Kamala Harris's speech writer on the side?

Rocky · #9 04-08-2022, 07:17 PM

These new regs will not help the future of the fishery plain and simple.

If you believe they will you are obviously clueless or are on the short term benefit bus towards this fisheries demise!

tautog · #10 04-08-2022, 07:40 PM

17"-17.99" fish are still overwhelmingly female so that doesn't really help the fishery. Also most fishermen suck at measuring so the 1" slot will be a ticket bonanza. Then they will say we overfished and will give us 3 fish at 19" with a short season next year. Luckily I care as much about this limit as the speed limit on the Parkway.