Bluefish regs not looking good for next year

[WhaleFart]

They lookin good to me

[AndyS]

When was the last time "things looked good"

[Detour66]

Originally Posted by andys

when was the last time "things looked good"

1980!

Traveled 9 hours and spent probably $200 in tolls to witness first hand how corrupt the fishery management process is. As Dave mentioned, the meeting was a complete disaster as far a the outcome of regulations are concerned. The ability for the Council and Committee to insulate itself from any other external influences is a work of art. And this is after they spent the better part of Monday discussing their 5-yr strategic plan which included increases focus on "stakeholder" communication, transparency, communication and involvement from the public. All complete BS.

Here's a few comments from the Summer Flounder presentation:

MC Comments: Biological Implications of
Size Limits
Several ongoing trends in stock
dynamics over past 10-15 years:
– Slower growth rates for both sexes
– Reduced mortality rates overall have
allowed fish of both sexes to live
longer/grow larger
– Males living longer/growing to larger sizes
– Sex ratio shifting closer to 50/50 for
larger fish


– MC does not believe there is necessarily
cause for concern about current
recreational harvest of females and

Assessment work exploring sex-based
modeling:
– Most total fishery catch now appears to be
male, due to factors described on previous slide
– On an absolute basis, removals of females
are far less than they were a decade ago due
to lower F rates
– Effects of recreational measures and
selectivity on recruitment unclear

– Fish over 24" primarily females, fish under 24" inches 50 / 50 proportion of males and females

YOU'LL LOVE THIS SLIDE

– 67% of trips and 45% of fish harvested in
2018 were angler-trips landing only 1
summer flounder
– Affected by size limits & availability of
legal sized fish
– Higher harvest per angler would likely
occur under slot depending on bag limit

67% OF ANGLER TRIPS AND 45% OF RECREATIONAL LANDINGS INVOLVED THE RETENTION OF ONE SUMMER FLOUNDER!

So what does the Board and Council recommend, another inch increase in size limits but hey we could get a bump in possession from 3 to 4 even though 67% of the anglers in 2019 only landed one keeper at 18". If Fishery Management really wants to help recreational community, they should make the 2020 regulations 10 fish possession limit at 28", this way harvest levels should decrease by about 95%. That's where this is headed so why wait.

Almost every comment mentioned above in the presentation contradicts data published earlier this year in the 66th stock assessment. Now this new data is the result of 10-15 year trends! Where was that data when the stock assessment was published? The extent of BS is epic. Why......it supports the position they want which is past decisions made aren't harming a fishery currently in a 17-yr decline and increased recreational minimums allows even more fish in the biomass to be transferred to the exclusive harvest of commercial operators. That assumes state conservation equivalency measures don't negate that from happening but yet to be determined.

THIS IS AWESOME LOGIC
– Slot limits would impact yield per recruit
over time
– If mortality too high within slot, not
enough survive through to higher sizes
– Protecting large females in rec. fishery
does not reduce their availability to
commercial fishery (likely to increase it)

Slot was discussed between 17" and 20", again a disproportionate amount which would be females in spite of their new found BS that fish under 24" have a 50/50 sex ratio. So if we're still harvesting mostly females at a slot range that simulated current size minimums, how would that benefit the fishery?

ARGUABLY THE MOST TELLING COMMENT IN THE PRESENTATION OF WHERE THEIR PRIORITIES ARE
Protecting larger females in recreational fishery does not reduce their availability to commercial fishery (likely to increase it)

I agree but then why has the same governing body increased recreational size limits from 13" in the 80's, 14's in the 90's to 18" and 19" inches today while commercial operators can harvest 14" fish. Same exact argument with a different policy decision. Answer is it makes about 35 million more fish in the biomass exclusively available to harvest by commercial operators. Recreational anglers throw them back, commercial operators either harvest or kill them later in the year during the spawn / fall migration or while wintering offshore. So the same arguments allows the shift of ~35 million fish in the biomass to be harvested exclusively by commercial concerns, causes most recreational anglers to go home with empty coolers but is a key reason why a slot limit wouldn't work because it would increase availability of the continued harvest of larger fish commercially. Hows that for sound reasoning!

Game is absolutely rigged. Our own state Commission and Council representatives are as much to blame but I won't get into that since I don't want this post deleted. What I will say without mentioning names is they are collectively as much to blame if not more in killing this resource and taking it away from the recreational community. Just do your research, see what associations they're affiliated with and decide who each of you want to be affiliated with or who you want to support.

The fishery experienced it's most explosive growth when size limits between recreational and commercial were the same and either 13' or 14" yet we not only won't consider reverting back to those regulations, we can't even get the Monitoring Committee to consider one slot fish without years more analysis. Never experienced a more dysfunctional governing body in my entire career and if they were in the private sector every one of them would have been fired by now for decisions made which have caused declines in the fishery over the last 17 years. Declines in the biomass, SSB, recruitment levels, gender composition of SSB and catch levels. The only two tings which have increased are size fish being harvested and discard rates which are through the roof as a result.

17-yr decline, status quo measures, two terms which should never be used together yet our distinguished governing body continues down the same path (only worse with this years 50% commercial increase). Hows that for logic? Based on the rate of decline in the areas mentioned over the last ten years, this fishery has 4 maybe 5 more years until emergency measures are adopted and then everyone should expect the same type fishery as winter flounder. 2 fish at by then probably 23".

Feel sorry for the people whose livelihoods depend on this fishery, another nail was placed in their coffins yesterday.

One last comment re bluefish. They started with a motion of a 16" across the board minimum which would have put an end to kids fishing for snappers. Thank the lord one Member pointed that out and the motion failed. But that was the initial motion recommended.

Process is completely out of control and biased to commercial harvest and political agendas.

[Merle31483]

Bluefish are a gross fish to eat most of them yellow eyed demons go to waste anyway cause they taste like shit the thing they should do away with the the damn bonus tags for stripers. We preach conservation but yet we kill a "slot fish " at 24 " come on people if we use these tags on these small fish how in the hell are they gonna mature to breeding size? For party boats to get 150 tags a season it's not limited to 1 person that same person can come back tomorrow and get another tag WAKE UP do the right thing and release the so called slot bass and screw the tags makes me sick

[FishingSinceIWasThree]

Originally Posted by Honger

I'm sure every ounce of it was put into good use.

I have been reading fishing books since I was a little kid. I read back then that bluefish run in 50 year cycles. Back in the early sixties there were not many blues around. Looks like we are back in that pattern. This is not all about how many fish people can keep. It has more to do with those natural cycles....similar with Weakfish. There are species like blowfish with no regulation at all which have made a comeback. Those Feds seem to care more about showing off their own power than helping us in the USA. They are probably making deals with the UN to ship our fish to other countries for their own personal gain....actually they are definitely shipping our fish to other countries for their own gain. Thank God for Brexit!

[bulletbob]

Originally Posted by FishingSinceIWasThree

I have been reading fishing books since I was a little kid. I read back then that bluefish run in 50 year cycles. Back in the early sixties there were not many blues around. Looks like we are back in that pattern. This is not all about how many fish people can keep. It has more to do with those natural cycles....similar with Weakfish. There are species like blowfish with no regulation at all which have made a comeback. Those Feds seem to care more about showing off their own power than helping us in the USA. They are probably making deals with the UN to ship our fish to other countries for their own personal gain....actually they are definitely shipping our fish to other countries for their own gain. Thank God for Brexit!

You are correct. blues were scarce during some periods when I was younger.
I hope that this is just a down cycle... We'll see... bob

Question for the For Hire and Party Boat Captains. Comment was made in the summer flounder presentation in Tuesday's Joint Meeting presentation on Summer Flounder which said "Most total fishery catch now appears to be male" which personally I believe is complete BS based on what I've witnessed personally. And I'm not concerned with catch, I'm concerned with landings.

I know commercial operators submit VTR's when offloading their catch. What reporting requirements do Party Boats and For Hire vessels have? Is it electronic, paper and what information is included? What I'm getting at is does it currently include landings information and if so does it include sex.

Everyone whose read my comments knows my theory that among other issues we're harvesting too many breeders both recreationally and commercially for different reasons.

I assume most keeper summer flounder are filleted on board and identifying sex is easy. They either have an egg sac or they don't. Is this information currently provided in the reporting requirements and if not would it be possible with the system starting next year if the system allowed for that information to start capturing it or would it be too onerous. I believe it's a critical metric in turning this fishery around so keep that in mind when answering.

What I want to do is quantify based on "real information" what gender fish are being harvested so we're dealing with facts and not innuendo.

Maybe 10 party boats and 10 for hire vessels per state (statistical sample) volunteer and those boats provide the data next year. Mates clean the fish so it should be relatively easy to maintain a log and start capturing the information.

Going to suggest the same with fish processing houses for commercial catch by "objective parties" to quantify the same. This is a key measurement in this fishery which is currently not monitored and theirs opposing opinions all over the board.

For starters, would appreciate hearing from some of our sponsors about the current process, does it include gender which I don't believe it does and would it be possible to track and input next year if the system allowed for that information to be entered. If not, they need to reprogram the input fields which should be simple.

Appreciate your help.

[chrislars]

You mean the non-existent inshore bluefish of the last 3 years? The usual party boats didn't even target them the past 2 summers because there weren't any within 30 miles like they were so many summers before! Even the exploratory trips to the reefs didn't find any to make it worthwhile to go the next day. Sounds like the big blues are staying farther off shore, but I was surprised to not see them mixed in with the big stripers this fall since it was a normal run of large fish. Night blues might be done! Didn't look like any epic trips that we even had as recently as 5 years ago. So, the day boats had to target sea bass and fluke all summer where they normally go for blues. I'm sure that didn't help any data...

[Capt John]

Someone want to answer a question for me.
NOAA is a subdivision of what department? The Department of Commerce? And who's the head of that department?