ASMFC-ACRONYM-Always Slashing Migratory Fish Concentrations

[WESTWIND]

That's what ASMFC means to the hook and line fishermen. Why do we always get the short end of the stick???? ASMFC seems determined to destroy the charter/head boat industry and discourage the private boaters and surf fishermen with the continued slashing of what we can keep, how many we can keep and what diminished size we can keep. While allowing the commercials greater allotments with smaller fish (aka 14 in fluke). Where is the fairness to all of it. Why not equally share in the allotments with the same allowable size limits (again 14 in fluke for example while the hook n liners have a minimum is 18 in). Where are our NJ Congressmen in all of this? Where is Pallone , screaming for a fairness in the distribution? He has had many , many years and nada. The size limits have increased , the seasons have been shortened and the bio mass for both fluke and seabass is overwhelming to name two. When will this despicable doctrine of unfair and unequal distribution of our fish resources end????

[reason162]

14" comm size limit for fluke is to prevent high grading. It's a conservation win.

And there is no commercial impact on striped bass to speak of. The rec take is the vast majority in this fishery.

[togzilla]

Originally Posted by reason162

14" comm size limit for fluke is to prevent high grading. It's a conservation win.

And there is no commercial impact on striped bass to speak of. The rec take is the vast majority in this fishery.

14" comm size limit for fluke is to prevent high grading. It's a conservation win.........
Can you elaborate what high grading is and why it's a conservation win?

[reason162]

Originally Posted by togzilla

Can you elaborate what high grading is and why it's a conservation win?

Bigger fluke are worth more money, so the draggers would throw back (dead) smaller fish to leave room in their quota for bigger fish. The 14" min means they HAVE to take anything over 14", and once they fill their quota they go home.

[StriperChef]

Bigger fluke are definitely not worth more money. Plate sized filets are primo take for commercial guys. To big of fish means you have to cut down filets to make proper portion sizes and odd looking cuts. As for commercial damage in the striper fishery, you are correct there is zero in new Jersey but the same cannot be said for most other states!

[Chelsea-Sea]

It has finally happened! We are fighting ourselves, exactly what they want from us. If we fight amongst ourselves we lose in the end, no unity. They give us tidbits and we accept them and say thank you. Cut us back we grumble and say thank you
Just keep fighting each other and you can just go buy your wine and cheese to enjoy on your boat while sitting at the dock, we’re all fools!

[reason162]

Originally Posted by StriperChef

Bigger fluke are definitely not worth more money. Plate sized filets are primo take for commercial guys. To big of fish means you have to cut down filets to make proper portion sizes and odd looking cuts. As for commercial damage in the striper fishery, you are correct there is zero in new Jersey but the same cannot be said for most other states!

Bigger fluke are worth more money, that's why they high grade. The whole thing is well documented, and the push for 14" min was a response to that behavior.

NJ's striped bass comm quota goes to the bonus tag program, which apparently hasn't been fully utilized. You'll see this as part of the "conservation equivalency" calculus for the new regs, I guarantee it.

Coast wide the commercial take is something like 3-5% of the total harvest, AND many of those quotas haven't been met in recent years. But of course, the bass are all offshore migrating through the canyons

Originally Posted by reason162

Bigger fluke are worth more money, so the draggers would throw back (dead) smaller fish to leave room in their quota for bigger fish. The 14" min means they HAVE to take anything over 14", and once they fill their quota they go home.

Reason162 the only part of your post which is true are larger fish to an extent have greater market prices. 18" to 20'" are the prime commercial fish targeted which based on Rutgers Sex and Length study equates to 80% to 90% females being harvested, all sexually mature with significantly greater levels of egg production capacity then younger age fish. The future of the fishery in other words. Jumbo's are sold to the sushi markets and the very large breeders with little to no market value are thrown back dead. Almost all females with the highest egg production capacity.

In 1997, Fishery Specification Plan changed the commercial minimum from 13" to 14" and mesh sizes were increased 1/2" which was sold as a conservation measure to release smaller less sexually mature fish but appears based on catch statistics to have been a smoke screen to harvest larger more valuable fish. An elective reaction from commercial operators in 1997 when their landings decreased by almost 50%. If your landings are impacted 50%, you harvest larger higher market value fish to compensate in protecting ex-vessel values (commercial catch values) and that's exactly what happened. Sold as conservation, but ended up reaping havoc to the fishery in the form of higher discard rates, selective harvest of older sexually mature fish primarily females, a material alteration in SSB, weakened recruitment strength of the stock, lower recruitment levels and a declining biomass since 2004 which is not capable of recovering on it's own merit. This change in the fishery is over twenty years in the making and will continue until regulations are changed. 50% increase in commercial catch quotas this year and for 2020 and 2021 will only compound the problem and guarantee a continued decline in the fishery. There's no logical reason to think otherwise and marine fisheries data supports it.

"Conservation you say", you'd have to be smoking crystal meth to believe that. "Have to retain 14" fish and then retain their quota and go home", you're on Kool-Aid overload. Look at the attached charts and since 1997 explain the surge in the harvest of older age classes commercially, the absolutely incomprehensible increase in discard rates to catch (from trawls with fishery management observers on board no less so you can imagine the rates on unobserved trawls) and corresponding increase in ex-vessel values all at the expense of the fishery and subsidized by recreational discards. Because of the size differentials under the facade of conservation you speak of, commercial operators enjoy the benefit of harvest rights to approximately 35 million more fish from the biomass than the recreational community . 80% of the commercial harvest in 2017 consisted of age classes 3 to 7 years old, highly disproportionate percentage females and none 14". Younger age classes which at one time made up almost exclusively their annual harvest are now collateral damage in the process of harvesting older age classes with higher market values. Killing already materially impaired younger age classes due to depressed recruitment levels in the pursuit of harvesting older age classes which will guarantee recruitment levels become further depressed is not a formula for success and is certainly not a definition of "Conservation"

All these FACTS are from fisheries management and contained within the 66th Stock Assessment Report. If you're going to make posts about conservation or anything else, at least fact check your information first. Your comments mislead the public more than educating them to what's really happening in this fishery.

Reason162 to your post on the striped bass thread which was closed that anglers can load up on porgies for food. Don't think that's going to happen as the Monitoring Committee "MC" is recommending a 59% reduction for 2020 with one of the options involving reduced possession limits from 50 fish to 3. If that goes through, think about the consequences. And when the porgy fishery closes down, we can all target bluefish. Problem is the MC is recommending a reduction there as well from 15 fish to 3 as well. And again a majority of this is being driven by the outputs from the new MRIP system which the Technical Committee themselves characterize as having a high degree of uncertainty. But lets use the outputs regardless to drive decision making in proposing draconian cuts which will result in countless business failures.

At some point the question needs to be asked, "If fishery management policy decisions and regulations have been effective over the last 20 or more years, why the need for such drastic and continued cuts in catch?" Cuts of this magnitude result only when a process is largely out of control and ineffective or by acts of nature. Don't believe any of this relates to acts of nature so by default draw your own conclusions.