2024 and 2025 Fluke Options Poll

[hammer4reel]

Originally Posted by Broad Bill

Does the March meeting really matter? The below schedule is from the 2023 NOAA Management Track Assessment Report. Hammer I'd appreciate it if you didn't go ballistic for posting data or schedules real policy decisions are being based on. Note the change in landings between 2013 and 2022 between the commercial and recreational sectors. The commercial sector went from 5,696 metric tons landed in 2013 to 5,683 metric tons in 2013 or essentially status quo. Their catch values however, as they've targeted the harvest of larger higher market value fish, have actually increased over that same window. Main reason recruitment and the spawning stock have taken huge hits. The recreational sector, on the other hand, has declined from 8,806 metric tons in landings for 2013 to 3,916 in 2022, an almost 60% decline and based on the options we're faced with for 2024 and 2025 which mimic 2021 regulations or 6.35 million lbs. in landings, we're headed for an approximate 70% decrease relative to 2013. That would be the lowest landings level for the recreational sector in five decades short of one year in 1989 when landings were 2,566 metric tons. To put that in perspective, in the 80's the commercial sector averaged annual landings of 30 million lbs. or 13,500 metric tons a year. The fishery has never recovered from that onslaught.

So 3 fish at 17.5" with a shorter season, 3 fish at 18" with a longer season, a paper thin slot, no slot, different regulations for southern and northern NJ or different regulations for shore based anglers versus party boats and for hire, does it really matter in the big picture?

Decisions have already been made regarding 2024 and 2025 and March's meeting is simply a check the box procedural requirement based on MSA. We can't fight Town Hall, certainly can't fight the Federal government or compete with the commercial sectors funds and lobbying efforts. I don't mean to be a wet rag but whatever is said or decided at the March meeting is irrelevant to the damage already done to this fishery over the last 25 years and it's only getting worse.

Unless the states can come up with a way to stop commercial boats from fishing in Federal waters and taking those landings back to states such as NC . I honestly could care less .
I see NO reason for recreational fisherman to throw back fish those boats end up taking .
Every year they try and put cut backs on the backs of recreational fisherman while allowing a total disregard to those fleets .

I truelly don’t understand how the small commercial fisherman aren’t up in arms about it .
As I said here a ton of times , a NJ based boat can catch 3000 pounds a week while a NC boat can fish right next to them and take 30000 a week .
Makes ZERO sense .

Quotas in States no longer having a fishery need to be addressed . As their only taking from all the rest of the states’


AND if you really look at those numbers can you honestly believe recreational discards are double what the commercial are ?
Thats saying they discard 1/10 , and we discard 1/4
Bad info in , bad info out

[Broad Bill]

Hammer we're in complete agreement on this. No way are recreational discards anywhere near commercial discards in either absolute numbers or as a percentage of catch or landings. North Carolina and Virginia make up just about 50% of the annual commercial harvest and I assume the 7 day boats you're referring to are from those states. They destroyed the southern stock, fish primarily during fall / winter months as well as during the spawn when fish are in highly concentrated schools and most vulnerable to netting. The waste from their netting I'd bet the ranch exceeds their entire catch quota for the entire year which is a disgrace in how this fishery is being managed. And yes, fish the recreational sector are forced to release are harvested or killed by commercials in their offshore migration in the fall, inshore migration in the spring or while stacked up wintering offshore. It's exactly the same reason we lost the winter flounder fishery, no stock can be pounded year round and during the spawn and survive. This one won't either so truthfully next week's meeting to me is anti-climatic because decisions as always have already been made and none of the options will address what's ailing this fishery if management doesn't address commercial regulations and the multitude of negative impacts their practices are having on the stock. In the big picture once again, the recreational angler is going to get the proverbial short end of the stick and nothing is being done for two more years to address the issues effecting the fishery.

[Broad Bill]

Originally Posted by hammer4reel

AND if you really look at those numbers can you honestly believe recreational discards are double what the commercial are ?
That's saying they discard 1/10 , and we discard 1/4
Bad info in , bad info out

Here's the problem. Your numbers based on what I posted are correct, that is what they assume. Their own discard statistics from federal observers prove commercial numbers reported on trip reports and used in setting quotas are wrong.

Two other issues. With lower recreational possession limits of 3 coupled with the ridiculous paper thin slot the last two years, if you catch 20 fish in a day trying to get your three keepers and their models assume one of those 20 die, you're already at a 1:3 or 33.33% dead discard to landings percentage. If the models assume three die, then the ratio is 3:3 or 100% dead discards to landings which translated means the recreational quota would be set at 50% landings and 50% discard mortality. Meaning the recreational harvest limit "RHL" would decrease substantially leading to more reduced possession limits, further increases to size limits or even shorter seasons. It's the insanity of how these models work and how the unfathomable use of size minimums to manage the fishery have not only hurt the stock but backed the recreational sector into a corner. In the words of the Perfect Storm, "It's not going to let us out!"

Commercial on the other hand have statistics which show actual dead discard to landings is substantially higher than what operators report on their trip reports. Instead of addressing those issues or charging the commercial sector with those higher percentages in establishing quotas, NMFS swept those statistics under the carpet. The mortality percentage NMFS uses in their models assumes 80% mortality of discards that come up in the nets. Does anyone with a brain honestly believe that translates into as you said 1 dead discard for every 10 fish harvested. I'd bet since size plays such an integral part in commercial fish harvested and catch values, the actual ratio is greater than 1 dead discard for every 1 fish harvested for the commercial sector which would exceed 100% of landings. The negative implications of this alone on the fishery are enormous.