How many going to fluke meeting

[hammer4reel]

So how many guys going to show up at the meeting Thursday evening ?

[togzilla]

I'll be on the webinar

[Fishin Dude]

Attending online, I'm convinced the decision is already made and they are just going through the steps. Many changes over the past 20 years, from 8 fish at 16.6 inches with a 156 day season, to this. Heard promises, attended meetings, rallies, donated $$$ to the cause, still getting hosed, still fishing. I'm also in on the State Trout Meeting Webinar scheduled on the same night, not to further divide or anything I'm sure.

[pddmd]

I'll be there
I can promise you things have not been decided

[Gerry Zagorski]

Attending via webinar and for those of you who don’t know, pddmd ^^^ is one of the council members who gets to decide the regulations.

[Broad Bill]

I agree with Gerry, PDDMD is one of the good guys. I'll say it up front, I'm not attending the meeting and here's my reason. We go through this process every year and the discussions which should matter most are never discussed, and that's what's best to nurse the fishery back to health and address egregious issues caused by outdated regulations used for the last two decades. No one ever discusses fisheries management which is the exact opposite of how fresh water fisheries are managed. These meetings, I'm sorry to say, don't accomplish what you'd hope they would. They're a requirement of MSA and if decisions haven't been made, when they are they'll be made as always for reasons that have nothing to do with the management of the stock. So where I agree an official decision hasn't been made, the foundation of that decision has and it has nothing to do with how many people attend the meeting in person or virtually or what those people have to say. This starts with the federal government having their heads in the sand and favoring commercial catch values and the lack of focus on actual fisheries management and the states are essentially forced to follow the trickle down effects of a federal system which bases their decisions on sectors, heavily slanted towards the commercial sector, and not what's best for the stocks under their management. I spend my time on matters that can benefit from my involvement, these meetings don't check that box. Some will say that's a defeatist attitude, history will support it's a realistic attitude. That's the frustration the general public and recreational community has with this process and it's well supported because basically every year we get screwed.

[dales529]

Comments submitted and will be attending via webinar.

[tautog]

I will wait for the sea bass meeting next year and be bringing 2 flasks and bail money.

[dales529]

Originally Posted by Broad Bill

I agree with Gerry, PDDMD is one of the good guys. I'll say it up front, I'm not attending the meeting and here's my reason. We go through this process every year and the discussions which should matter most are never discussed, and that's what's best to nurse the fishery back to health and address egregious issues caused by outdated regulations used for the last two decades. No one ever discusses fisheries management which is the exact opposite of how fresh water fisheries are managed. These meetings, I'm sorry to say, don't accomplish what you'd hope they would. They're a requirement of MSA and if decisions haven't been made, when they are they'll be made as always for reasons that have nothing to do with the management of the stock. So where I agree an official decision hasn't been made, the foundation of that decision has and it has nothing to do with how many people attend the meeting in person or virtually or what those people have to say. This starts with the federal government having their heads in the sand and favoring commercial catch values and the lack of focus on actual fisheries management and the states are essentially forced to follow the trickle down effects of a federal system which bases their decisions on sectors, heavily slanted towards the commercial sector, and not what's best for the stocks under their management. I spend my time on matters that can benefit from my involvement, these meetings don't check that box. Some will say that's a defeatist attitude, history will support it's a realistic attitude. That's the frustration the general public and recreational community has with this process and it's well supported because basically every year we get screwed.

BB: Keep in mind this is as I am sure you are aware a NJMFC meeting and their obligation is to decide on the options dictated by ASMFC and MAMFC to be compliant so no reason not to weigh in on the options at this meeting.
The larger issue as you stated is on the federal level but we all can at least support the for hire, tackle shops and related service industries that could benefit most from the options dumped down to our state.
I opt for # 32 / 3 @ 18 / 145 days ,the longest season for economic and moral support to those NJ industries.

The Feds admit MRIP data on the recreational side is flawed up to 40% relative to NJ recreational effort, mortality and landings so it appears NJ recreational fishing for summer flounder has little to no proven effect on recruitment or biomass of the stock.
While I don't like the options for the overall stock this meeting is what's available for NJ at this given time and the rest is another battle which I agree we have been fighting way too long with little results on the Federal level.

Either way NJ Rec Fishermen should still make comments and attend the meeting to support the best option in their opinion so NJMFC can hear and make the best decision possible. I hope its what appears to be overwhelming support for option #32.

Having said all that I understand that the whole "keeping 18" females " is against rebuilding a stock in decline and agree with your opinion that protecting the spawn and further commercial regulation is mandatory just remain in my opinion its not this meeting.

[hammer4reel]

Originally Posted by dales529

BB: Keep in mind this is as I am sure you are aware a NJMFC meeting and their obligation is to decide on the options dictated by ASMFC and MAMFC to be compliant so no reason not to weigh in on the options at this meeting.
The larger issue as you stated is on the federal level but we all can at least support the for hire, tackle shops and related service industries that could benefit most from the options dumped down to our state.
I opt for # 32 / 3 @ 18 / 145 days ,the longest season for economic and moral support to those NJ industries.

The Feds admit MRIP data on the recreational side is flawed up to 40% relative to NJ recreational effort, mortality and landings so it appears NJ recreational fishing for summer flounder has little to no proven effect on recruitment or biomass of the stock.
While I don't like the options for the overall stock this meeting is what's available for NJ at this given time and the rest is another battle which I agree we have been fighting way too long with little results on the Federal level.

Either way NJ Rec Fishermen should still make comments and attend the meeting to support the best option in their opinion so NJMFC can hear and make the best decision possible. I hope its what appears to be overwhelming support for option #32.

Having said all that I understand that the whole "keeping 18" females " is against rebuilding a stock in decline and agree with your opinion that protecting the spawn and further commercial regulation is mandatory just remain in my opinion its not this meeting.

This meeting is about our access to the fishery while maintaining the 28% cut
.
All approved option meet the standard being imposed for rebuild .

So now it’s all about how we want the seasons access to break down .

.