Action Needed - 2014 NJ Fishing Regulations - NJFishing.com Your Best Online Source for Fishing Information in New Jersey

Gerry Zagorski · #1 01-20-2014, 05:23 PM

As you all know, there is an ongoing threat jeopardizing our recreational fishing rights here in NJ. Fishing regulations that determine how many fish, what size and during what time of year you can fish for them. These regulations can potentially restrict people’s ability and desire to fish and this in turn will affect the small local business that serve the NJ fishing community as well. We currently have 603,000 fisherman in the state of New Jersey that generate around $1.1 billion dollars of revenue and our voices need to be heard.

As responsible fisherman, we want to advocate conservation and support fishing regulations which assures the long term sustainability of our fisheries for future generations. To do otherwise would be irresponsible. What we don’t want is flawed methods and science that falsely assess the stock, as well as politics determining the health of a fishery which leads to unnecessary and or punitive regulations. That is exactly what is happening as the powers to be decide what our fishing regulations will be for 2014 in NJ and I’d like to ask for your help.

Fighting the flawed methods and science and the politics behind them is a much bigger task and although this is an issue we are attempting to address long term, there are short term issues we need to address to get the most favorable regulations we can for 2014 in NJ. These regulations are currently up for public comment and this is where we need everyone’s help.
For many years NJ has been able to have some leeway in our State regulations as do other states. This is not to say we can ignore the federal mandates for managing the stock but at least we have some local input to come up with fair and balanced regulations we deem appropriate for our state.

Right now the Federal Government is proposing state management be dropped in favor of regional management. Regional management means whatever region you are in, the states in that region would need to come to a consensus on the regulations. This could include multiple states and we feel this is a move in the wrong direction since we lose the flexibility to set our own State regulations.

The other move they are pushing for is to not allow quotas that are not met to be transferred to other states. Our opinion is to leave the quota transfers in place so in the event that the quotas are not met in one state they can be transferred to another.

If you are in agreement with this stance, I would encourage you to do a few things before 1/24/2014 which is the deadline for public comment and for our voices to be heard:

- Copy and paste the text below and send it to the following email address krootes-murdy@asmfc.org

- In order to spread the word further and get as many people in your personal network to submit comments, help us by sharing this post on your Facebook page. Just click on the blue F on the top of this page and it will put a link to this thread on your Facebook page. Alternatively you could copy the link to this post http://www.njfishing.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66834 into a facebook post.

- If you know people or organization or businesses not on Facebook, copy and paste the link to this thread http://www.njfishing.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66834 and send them a personal email asking for their support. Hotels, restaurants, local Chambers of Commerce, Town Councils the list is endless.

Thanks in advance for doing this. Our fishing rights, our States economy and the local small businesses that rely on our sport are at risk here. We need to take action NOW!!

Copy and Paste the Text Below

(Insert Your Name and Address)
As a one of 603,000 recreational salt water fisherman in the state of NJ which represents $1.1 billion in sales revenue, I would like to voice my support of Option 2 within the Draft Addendum XXV to the Summer Flounder, Scup, Black Sea Bass Fishery Management Plan. This would specifically allow states to lend or give their underutilized quotas to states in need of fish to offset exceeding of their annual harvest target or to liberalize their regulations.

Under Option 2: Utilization of Additional RHL, once states with the opportunity to liberalize their recreational fishery in 2014 have finalized their management plan, any other state would be allowed to request access to the recreational harvest limit (or RHL) that is not going to be utilized by that state.

Based on the 2013 recreational harvest information coming from the Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP), there are six Atlantic Coast states which can liberalize their regulations in 2014 based on last year's numbers, with three states that will be forced to take a reduction in harvest. Because Massachusetts significantly fished under their RHL in 2013 according to MRIP, that state can take a 304% liberalization, while North Carolina in turn can liberalize upwards of 195%. Massachusetts anglers fished for 132 days in 2013 on a 16-inch size limit, while North Carolina's season was open year-round with a 15-inch size limit. Considering that North Carolina especially can't liberalize their season, size and bag much more than that, there should be additional quota available to states in need under Option 2 measures in the current addendum.

I’m also concerned about the push to create regions of shared limits, particularly because of the 'accountability measures' which were hardcoded into the Magnuson Stevens Act back in 2006. In 2013 for example, MRIP showed that Connecticut went over RHL to the point that that state must make a 67% reduction in harvest, while New Jersey must take 21% and New York 15% in 2014. Based on the punitive nature of the 'accountability measures' and the payback mechanisms in the law, if MRIP shows a similar overharvest in 2014 in that region, instead of sharing an 18-inch size limit these same states could end up looking at 19- to 20-inch size limits in years ahead as payback.

I further oppose Regionalization that causes undo economic harm to my state already devastated by Hurricane Sandy and reduces my rights as an angler to fishing opportunities based on Arbitrary Flawed data to a rebuilt fishery which is NOT overfished and where overfishing is NOT occurring.

As far as Black Sea Bass, I am also opposed to coastwide federal regulations and support the current regional measures.

I would hope that efforts be redirected to Magnusson Reform and a better Landings Data Collection program which is needed sooner than later.

Thank You.