JCAA Alert - FLUKE Hearing

[RussA]

Originally Posted by Ttmako

Here is my take.
The proposed amendment is about allocating the harvest limit. I’m concerned the limit is artificially low because of extremely poor effort and catch estimates. The new MRIP survey data is just as poor as the MRFSS data.
The next time you are surveyed, either in person or over the phone, tell them how infrequently you go out and how little you catch. They take the data and extrapolate it to the registered fisherman in your area. This is not a time to boast and tell them how much you fish and catch. If the regulators insist on using a flawed methodology, then we need to provide them with our "poor effort" statistics.
Instead of debating slicing up the artificially low allowable catch, regulators would be better off accurately measuring effort and landings data.

Actually that is incorrect, regulators are playing a game and no mater which way you state how you did the outcome will always be the same.

NJ will end up in the same shape NY was in.

[Ttmako]

Please explain why its incorrect?

[RussA]

Originally Posted by Ttmako

Please explain why its incorrect?

Because it has been done both ways, and still the same outcome.

What organization are you from?

[Bigadam119]

It's a double edged sword with them. If we report catches are down then fish stocks must be down. If catches are up, we overfished. It's a joke!

[Ttmako]

Originally Posted by RussA

Because it has been done both ways, and still the same outcome.

What organization are you from?

I'm part of the pissed off fishermans group.
I also belong to the RFA.

[SaltLife1980]

Originally Posted by Bigadam119

It's a double edged sword with them. If we report catches are down then fish stocks must be down. If catches are up, we overfished. It's a joke!

Couldnt agree more.. So lets just not report.. Say we were whale watching, not fishing..