NOAA is both right and wrong about Fluke

Originally Posted by gnuisance

I think climate change is a factor as well. I hesitate to bring that up here because this crowd doesn't want to hear about it and the entire thing devolves into a climate change debate.

What I really want to talk about is why aren't the fluke here this year and what is the solution for sustainable summer flounder fishing moving forward? Everyone blames the commercial by catch situation but nothing ever changes. Do these guys have any accountability? How can we start the process of making sure they have some?

Read my post. If the powers to be can address the significant market price fluctuations between smaller and larger fluke, hygrading (dead discard) is eliminated immediately. Simultaneously there should be a complete fishery closure during the primary spawn September thru November. Give every breeder another year to drop eggs as opposed to having commercials pound them on their off shore migration without understanding the impact this has on the entire spawn process. Like I said in my earlier post, check out the off loads at the Coop if you want a first hand look at what's going on, you'll be shocked and pissed when you see the size fsih being harvested. What you won't see are all the fish we released throughout the season tossed back dead in the process of retaining the larger more value breeders. The fishery is being destroyed and the targeting of larger fluke by commercials along with the associated discard that process generates coupled with 15 - 20 years of mismanagement by NMFS with size limit increases is 95% of the reason this fishery is failing. Don't have to look anywhere else.

[Rocky]

Originally Posted by dakota560

What the crowd wants to hear are proposed changes based on facts and not summise, conjecture or theories which is precisely what climate change and steepness are....theories. NMFS scientists themselves are divided on it's relevance. The facts overwhelmingly show a much more definitive and prolonged trend killing this fishery caused by the same failing management philosophies of NMFS. As I said the facts are there for anyone interested in reviewing them.

Amen my friend.

[FISHGERE]

I have given up fluke fishing, really is a joke this year, a waste of time. commercial guys killed it vacuumed the ocean floors. they want us off the water.

[Irish Jigger]

I spoke with a "commercial guy" over the weekend and he has not only given up on fluke this season do to no fish in the area, but his conch pots as well. He's raking clams a few days a week and working on a squid boat to make a days pay. It's not just us recreational guys having a slow season. Water temps are off.

[bulletbob]

Time for rod and reel ONLY commercial fishing... Strict quotas like us recreational guys have... Yes the catch will only be a fraction, but prices for available fish will skyrocket.... If people want fresh flounder fluke, etc, either pay the price as you must with expensive prime beef, lobster, shrimp, scallops, or eat tilapia or farm raised salmon...

[stevelikes2fish]

Could it be that the majority of fluke took a more northern path this year, heading straight up to New York waters and beyond during their annual migration from out east. Is it part of a new cycle because of changing currents, etc. I don't know. What I do know is if you look at the reports from new York, long Island and Montauk plus mass., looks like they are having one hell of a year. Hell, just saw a report from a 6 pack out of mass., 6 fluke 9 pounds or better.
As far as NOAA......,,Never On About Anything.......just my cents....

[SaltLife1980]

I hate to be that guy but my Friends down here in LBI that work the dragger are getting their 500 pounds in 4 tows.... The fish are there. Just have to get that temp up and bait to move in

[reason162]

Originally Posted by dakota560

Recruitment numbers (BASED ON NMFS"S OWN DATA) show a steady and sharp decline over the last 25 years to the magnitude of an 80% decrease in strength. These are the facts presented by NMFS, not mine or third party.

Dakota, I also read your posts with great interest. I am not dismissing out of hand the sex ratio theory, but there is countering evidence which you do seem to dismiss, that fluke is indeed a particularly steep species and therefore resistant to sex ratio imbalance. I think the Rutgers study will shed light on squaring that circle, but the fact is there might not be a conflict to resolve within those parameters if there are larger forces at play. Climate change would most certainly have an impact on fluke migration/recruitment/abundance, as it does on every species on earth. My assumption is that even if true, whatever effect the sex ratio imbalance is on recruitment, the effects of climate change largely eclipses.

I know I don't need to point out to you the difference between causation and correlation, but for the benefit of the forum: the "perfect inverse relationship" you plot between size regulation and recruitment is firmly in the first camp, and could very well be irrelevant IF the causation lies elsewhere, ie global climate change. I wish you were correct, that fisheries management alone is to blame, or that regulations account for the majority of poor recruitment. If that is the case, the solution is relatively easy.

Is it just me or is anyone else picking up on the dichotomy of reasons effecting fluke. Climate change (aka global warming) is thrown out as often as any other explanation but at the same time we talk about how the bite is off because the water is too cold. That argument comes up almost as often as climate change. South wind, bottom temperatures dropped, water too cold, fluke just sitting on the buck tail not committing etc. etc. Fish swim, bait moves and fish spread out but in my opinion nothing that supports the fact that an SSB that's 500% greater at 34,250 metric tons in 2015 compared to 1989 when it was a mere 7,000 metric tons is struggling to sustain itself. The biomass is there, it's not in Maine. Catch levels even at a paltry 15% of SSB compared to years ago when recreational and commercial harvest approximated 60 - 70% of SSB annually and the fishery can't sustain itself. We've lost almost 85% of the reproduction strength of the biomass translating into significantly less new fish being introduced yearly to repopulate the biomass even at today's reduced catch levels.

Originally Posted by reason162

Dakota, I also read your posts with great interest. I am not dismissing out of hand the sex ratio theory, but there is countering evidence which you do seem to dismiss, that fluke is indeed a particularly steep species and therefore resistant to sex ratio imbalance. I think the Rutgers study will shed light on squaring that circle, but the fact is there might not be a conflict to resolve within those parameters if there are larger forces at play. Climate change would most certainly have an impact on fluke migration/recruitment/abundance, as it does on every species on earth. My assumption is that even if true, whatever effect the sex ratio imbalance is on recruitment, the effects of climate change largely eclipses.

I know I don't need to point out to you the difference between causation and correlation, but for the benefit of the forum: the "perfect inverse relationship" you plot between size regulation and recruitment is firmly in the first camp, and could very well be irrelevant IF the causation lies elsewhere, ie global climate change. I wish you were correct, that fisheries management alone is to blame, or that regulations account for the majority of poor recruitment. If that is the case, the solution is relatively easy.

Reason appreciate your reply and position. When I look at the data holistically I come to a different conclusion. If climate change were the primary culprit, in my opinion we wouldn't have seen a resurgence in SSB from 1989 to 2002 with a sudden reversal and continued decline ever since. The biomass is there, but it's declining every year and at an accelerated rate. Could climate be effecting egg reproduction, can't rule it out. I'd bet the build up of a winter commercial fishery and the biomass being pounded during the spawn has caused considerably more harm in the reproductive process itself and significantly higher levels of unreported dead discard. These fish years ago once they started migrating off shore went untouched for the most part, today they have no safe haven.

NMFS has tried the same failed approach for the last 20 years to the point they said the stock was rebuilt in I believe '10 or '11 and they're wrong. They've been wrong with their management approach and they're still wrong today. Let's wait and see what next year holds in store with the regulations (going to be a disaster) and what the next stock assessment tells us even with chain sweep technology. Hope I'm wrong but in my opinion we're on the wrong path and managing the fishery to a collapse.