Some Comments on Fluke

[shrimpman steve]

I guess I am the unpopular one, I leaned towards #5 in the pole.

My thoughts were simple and not for me, but for my kids. I took them a few times last year and it was very sad watching them throw back fish and say "why can't we keep that one?". Personally I thought 5 fish was enough for me. As far as never getting them back, I don't know if I agree. I know it will be tough, but look at NY. They got a reduced size last year and a fish back.

Lets just hope there are no nor'easters to screw up October.

[Kevin Bogan]

Would anyone want to guess the yield on an 18" fish filleted? My guess, 1lb 4oz. I filleted thousands of them, never weighed one, but assume I'm close.
5X 1 lb 4 oz = 6lbs. 4 oz + or- depending on the true yield at approx $12.00 lb. retail market value = nearly $70 worth of fillets, FRESH!!! Sounds good to me. Now, get a bag of 50 hardshell clams, 2 bags of Tater tots, some chips and dip on sale, an 18 pack Miller light for $13.99 and you could throw the party of your life! Sounds good to me.
Many here would go to Great Adventure, spend $4,5 per ride, a movie for $12, go to a bar and leave a big tip, we will be fine with the new regs.
I like the idea that the people down south who fish the bays/rivers get a better shot at a few keepers, the extended season helps everyone, and the customers that fish party boats get a better chance at keepers.
IN SEARCH OF THE FLAT ONES

[CaptTB]

Originally Posted by Life's A Beach

Understood Adam

Does RFA have a position on the subject?

Does SSFFF?

Mike, I took it for granted that from all your involvement with SSFFF over the years you would know we have never taken a position on an individual states' regulations. (attending dinners, fundraisers etc.)

Here is my post from another thread on the fluke option chosen just a few clicks down from this one....

Originally Posted by CaptTB

While I understand people's frustrations not just this time but every time regs are chosen let me just clarify something:

SSFFF has said since day one that we are NOT about an individual state's regulations. SSFFF did NOT take ANY position on fluke regulations for NJ or any other state. SSFFF has NEVER given ANY official or unofficial position on ANY specific regulations for ANY state, NJ included.

Our goal was to make sure there ARE regulations from which to choose in the first place as opposed to simply being shut down or given next to nothing in the way of being allowed to fish for EVERYONE that fishes for Fluke, not just in NJ.

While those of us that started the organization may have come from NJ we have always focused our efforts on the science and politics of FLUKE, period. Not NJ fluke, not NY fluke, etc.

I know no one was knocking SSFFF or anything like that, I just wanted to clarify that there were not two groups in opposition because SSFFF did NOT advocate for ANY option for Fluke regs....we never have and never will.

While individuals who may be part of any number of organizations, including SSFFF, may have spoken in favor of one option or another I can assure you that no one was speaking for SSFFF.

As I and others from SSFFF have said before: "No point in arguing over how you like your eggs cooked if the government is going to take away all of your eggs. Our job is to make sure we have enough eggs to actually debate the best way to cook them!"

[buckfin732]

The commerical guys put their money with lobbist who produce for the money they are given.We give our money to the "We dont have a Offical opnion"RFA that is just glad that we have a season.Maybe we should take a lesson from the commerical guys and back a lobbist instead of pissing our money away IMO.

[Ryan W]

Originally Posted by buckfin732

The commerical guys put their money with lobbist who produce for the money they are given.We give our money to the "We dont have a Offical opnion"RFA that is just glad that we have a season.Maybe we should take a lesson from the commerical guys and back a lobbist instead of pissing our money away IMO.

Please tell me how much you donated so that when you decide to stop "pissing your money away" I can write a check out of my own pocket to pick up the slack.


You're telling me the RFA doesn't produce? They're completely not "just glad we have a season", they want the most quota/poundage for us RECREATIONAL anglers to have. The allowable poundage went UP this year and went UP last year too thanks to RFA/SSFFF. As you can tell from this thread, people who support the RFA are divided among options. Dmac likes one option, myself Adam and others like another option, and Tony,Howard and others like yet another choice. They all have valid reasons for their opinions and certainly should voice them along with their reasons. Why on earth should the RFA come up with an "official position" that represents what only a fraction of their members think? No matter what option they support only a fraction of their membership agrees with it. If you like a particular option so strongly, go to the meeting and speak. That's called "Democracy" where the committee listens to people comment and picks an option based on that. The committee didn't make some backroom deal, they listened to who showed up and made their choice based on that. That's what democracy is all about.

[buckfin732]

Well get ready to dust off the check book then Ryan because i donate $200.00 a year and last year my business donated $200.00 also.Trust me i know alot of people that feel the way i do.I own a small business and can not get away much but i trust that a group like the RFA would have fishermans best intrest at heart.But they proved that is not true when you give bag limit away knowing that you will never get it back.If it is so much easier to catch 17.5 fish like the south jersey guys are saying then landings are going to be way up and what does that lead to overfishing.But here is the rub,even the flawed science guys are saying the stock is rebuilt so why on earth did we have to lose fish even at 17.5 we could of kept it at 8 fish bag .That is what the RFA should be fighting for. You tell me when is the last time that you seen a bag limit go back up with out us spending a shitload of money for Private people to come in and evaluate the stock.What happens when the people that fish get tired of spending money for little return and stop donating.Then what no money to debunk the bad science and we are even worst off then we are now with losing 3 fish.

[DMac]

Bottom line I was in favor of any option that kept the size at 18 and 8 fish.
I would have been fine not even changing it from previous year in hope storm like Irene wouldn't come shut it down. The majority of the vote even though it was fraction of entire member list felt that way too. I know the desire to possibly keep a few fish from 17.5-18, but I don't see it honestly making that much of a difference, but I will track it and admit if I was wrong. Considering releasing them all for others to take home.

[Ryan W]

Originally Posted by buckfin732

Well get ready to dust off the check book then Ryan because i donate $200.00 a year and last year my business donated $200.00 also.Trust me i know alot of people that feel the way i do.I own a small business and can not get away much but i trust that a group like the RFA would have fishermans best intrest at heart.But they proved that is not true when you give bag limit away knowing that you will never get it back.If it is so much easier to catch 17.5 fish like the south jersey guys are saying then landings are going to be way up and what does that lead to overfishing.But here is the rub,even the flawed science guys are saying the stock is rebuilt so why on earth did we have to lose fish even at 17.5 we could of kept it at 8 fish bag .That is what the RFA should be fighting for. You tell me when is the last time that you seen a bag limit go back up with out us spending a shitload of money for Private people to come in and evaluate the stock.What happens when the people that fish get tired of spending money for little return and stop donating.Then what no money to debunk the bad science and we are even worst off then we are now with losing 3 fish.

I'll dust off my checkbook, it's a better use of my time than trying to reason with you.

[Detour66]

I like the new rules.... just fine with me. 5 @ 17.5 is plenty of fish and who's not to say you will not catch bigger fish! 3 guys on the boat = 15 fish if all limit out... that's more than enough fish to fillet and eat! I threw back so many 17.5's the last few years it wasn't even funny. Finally some good news IMHO!

[JOHN D]

lets not forget that 17.5 is the MINIMUM size limit, if you guys dont like the reduced size (like myself) you dont have to keep them just take the bigger ones and throw the 17.5 inchers back.