NY 2024 Fluke Regs Split Season

[Gerry Zagorski]

3 fish @ 19 inches 5/4 - 8/1
3 fish @ 191/2 inches 8/2 - 10/15

[hartattack]

The ASMFC combines Connecticut and New York into a single region for summer flounder management purposes. This year, that caused some issues, as Connecticut favored a smaller (19") minimum size, reduced (3-fish) bag, and shorter (essentially mid-May through mid-September) season while New York, largely driven by its for-hire and fishing tackle industries, favored a larger (19 1/2") minimum size, the current-2023 (4-fish) bag, and a far longer (April 1-October 31) season. After many negotiating sessions, the states forged a compromise which included a 19-inch minimum size for the period May 4-August 1, and a 19.5" minimum size for the period August 2-October 15, with a 3-fish bag limit throughout the season. Such regulations meet the required 28% reduction, and was adopted by both states.

[Broad Bill]

Originally Posted by hartattack

The ASMFC combines Connecticut and New York into a single region for summer flounder management purposes. This year, that caused some issues, as Connecticut favored a smaller (19") minimum size, reduced (3-fish) bag, and shorter (essentially mid-May through mid-September) season while New York, largely driven by its for-hire and fishing tackle industries, favored a larger (19 1/2") minimum size, the current-2023 (4-fish) bag, and a far longer (April 1-October 31) season. After many negotiating sessions, the states forged a compromise which included a 19-inch minimum size for the period May 4-August 1, and a 19.5" minimum size for the period August 2-October 15, with a 3-fish bag limit throughout the season. Such regulations meet the required 28% reduction, and was adopted by both states.

Again the problem I have with all this is it makes no sense to harvest what will clearly be almost exclusively females and discard percentages will increase. And before anyone posts this gives females a season or two more to spawn consider the fact we're removing the super breeders from the stock which hurts the long term prospects of the fishery. Juvenile females reaching sexual maturity are said to produce up to 400,000 eggs a year, a 19 1/2 female is a 5 -7 year old fish producing upward to 2 million or more eggs a year. They shouldn't be the fish being targeted either recreationally or commercially. Regulations and moronic policy makers and politicians are targeting the recruitment engine of the stock and wonder why recruitment levels are approaching 50 year lows. Answer is they're idiots.

If you applied the same logic to stripers, the regulations would be retain only fish 40" or larger which was proven to be a failed management practice and why the regulations were changed last year to a 28" to 31" slot. For the same reason, why would NMFS or anyone else believe killing the large breeders in this stock have any different impact?

This is all about moving more of the biomass and higher market value fish to the exclusive harvest of the commercial sector to subsidize cuts in their quotas and create longer seasons for the recreational sector to spend more money. Short term idiotic decisions creating serious long term consequences to the stock. It has zero to do with fisheries management and what's best for the stock. Everyone wants longer seasons but not when they come at the expense of the fishery. That's extremely short sided thinking which will eventually fail.

How long does anyone think any fresh water fishery would last if there were no stocking programs and the regulations mandated the harvest of only the large breeders. There wouldn't be a freshwater fishery left in the state and then include the added pressure of a commercial fishing presence.

All those 19 1/2 fish NY caught during late September and October 31 will have a million to two million eggs in them. Absolute &^$%#@$ stupidity.

[NoLimit]

Originally Posted by Broad Bill

Again the problem I have with all this is it makes no sense to harvest what will clearly be almost exclusively females and discard percentages will increase. And before anyone posts this gives females a season or two more to spawn consider the fact we're removing the super breeders from the stock which hurts the long term prospects of the fishery. Juvenile females reaching sexual maturity are said to produce up to 400,000 eggs a year, a 19 1/2 female is a 5 -7 year old fish producing upward to 2 million or more eggs a year. They shouldn't be the fish being targeted either recreationally or commercially. Regulations and moronic policy makers and politicians are targeting the recruitment engine of the stock and wonder why recruitment levels are approaching 50 year lows. Answer is they're idiots.

If you applied the same logic to stripers, the regulations would be retain only fish 40" or larger which was proven to be a failed management practice and why the regulations were changed last year to a 28" to 31" slot. For the same reason, why would NMFS or anyone else believe killing the large breeders in this stock have any different impact?

This is all about moving more of the biomass and higher market value fish to the exclusive harvest of the commercial sector to subsidize cuts in their quotas and create longer seasons for the recreational sector to spend more money. Short term idiotic decisions creating serious long term consequences to the stock. It has zero to do with fisheries management and what's best for the stock. Everyone wants longer seasons but not when they come at the expense of the fishery. That's extremely short sided thinking which will eventually fail.

How long does anyone think any fresh water fishery would last if there were no stocking programs and the regulations mandated the harvest of only the large breeders. There wouldn't be a freshwater fishery left in the state and then include the added pressure of a commercial fishing presence.

All those 19 1/2 fish NY caught during late September and October 31 will have a million to two million eggs in them. Absolute &^$%#@$ stupidity.

That is 110% true and the proof is that everyone kept more last year and the males did not die of old age.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Originally Posted by hartattack

The ASMFC combines Connecticut and New York into a single region for summer flounder management purposes. This year, that caused some issues, as Connecticut favored a smaller (19") minimum size, reduced (3-fish) bag, and shorter (essentially mid-May through mid-September) season while New York, largely driven by its for-hire and fishing tackle industries, favored a larger (19 1/2") minimum size, the current-2023 (4-fish) bag, and a far longer (April 1-October 31) season. After many negotiating sessions, the states forged a compromise which included a 19-inch minimum size for the period May 4-August 1, and a 19.5" minimum size for the period August 2-October 15, with a 3-fish bag limit throughout the season. Such regulations meet the required 28% reduction, and was adopted by both states.

And this is exactly why it's great that NJ has the ability to set it's own regulations. Hoping we take it one step further and as discussed in the last NJMFC meeting, divide the state into north and south so each part of the state can get closer to what serves them best....

[dales529]

Originally Posted by Gerry Zagorski

And this is exactly why it's great that NJ has the ability to set it's own regulations. Hoping we take it one step further and as discussed in the last NJMFC meeting, divide the state into north and south so each part of the state can get closer to what serves them best....

X2 on that exactly. While NJ never technically went out of compliance back in the day we did get our own region and ability to set our own regs. Granted not perfect but the compromise certainly left NJ better options than if we stayed with NY and CT

[Broad Bill]

Originally Posted by dales529

X2 on that exactly. While NJ never technically went out of compliance back in the day we did get our own region and ability to set our own regs. Granted not perfect but the compromise certainly left NJ better options than if we stayed with NY and CT

Either way the regs from a relative perspective and based on the pathetic option to choose from might appear great but truthfully they suck. There's nothing at all about the management of this fishery that makes any sense whatsoever. If you disagree, tell me what fisheries management has done to promote the future growth of this stock with decisions they've made over the last two decades?

[dales529]

Originally Posted by Broad Bill

Either way the regs from a relative perspective and based on the pathetic option to choose from might appear great but truthfully they suck. There's nothing at all about the management of this fishery that makes any sense whatsoever. If you disagree, tell me what fisheries management has done to promote the future growth of this stock with decisions they've made over the last two decades?

I don't disagree about the regs failure to promote stocks, I was only stating that given what is handed down then becoming our own region was most beneficial rather than a tri state region which not only appears great it is great for the for hire business and recreational opportunity here in NJ.

Fisheries management is a whole other issue and given all your posts, all the groups and all the meetings on the federal level with LOBBYING and recreational support/ donations (albiet nowhere near enough) has never scratched the surface for change. We have discussed this often.


Below is another group that believes they are right but reading through you can see the BS management and monitoring issues that they say are done but really not accurate.
https://www.riverkeeper.org/blogs/wh...-is-declining/

[Gerry Zagorski]

Originally Posted by Broad Bill

Either way the regs from a relative perspective and based on the pathetic option to choose from might appear great but truthfully they suck. There's nothing at all about the management of this fishery that makes any sense whatsoever. If you disagree, tell me what fisheries management has done to promote the future growth of this stock with decisions they've made over the last two decades?

It's seems every fishery that the feds manage has declined... Even a broken clock is right twice a day..

I will say our state people are doing a good job recently on what we get to decide. I'm also encouraged by their comments and some of the changes they are working on in the future.. Where meetings are held, more transparency and their desire to get the public more involved.

[Broad Bill]

I agree gentlemen, the states are hamstrung based on what comes down from the feds. NMFS is an absolute disaster. I wasn't coming at the state agencies, that's not where the problem is. My point is at the end of the day we're forced to choose from a set of options, none of which have the best interests of fisheries in mind.