2022 Final Summer Flounder and Seabass Regulations

[pectoralfin]

If I catch a 19" fish and then a 22" fish which one do I throw back?
And I wonder how many fish has to be caught to get the slot limit?
I admittedly am not as knowledgeable about this situation as others on this site, but I see the mortality increasing which you know will be held against us in the future.

[frugalfisherman]

Originally Posted by pectoralfin

If I catch a 19" fish and then a 22" fish which one do I throw back?
And I wonder how many fish has to be caught to get the slot limit?
I admittedly am not as knowledgeable about this situation as others on this site, but I see the mortality increasing which you know will be held against us in the future.

Keep them both.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Originally Posted by frugalfisherman

Gerry are you Kamala Harris's speech writer on the side?

I resent that remark, I'm not Kamala fan and don't lean her way... You sir seem to have an opinion on things here but were you involved at all trying to get what you wanted? Did you speak up for the option you favored on the call or did you think someone else would ?? I didn't hear you if you did....

If you didn’t then that’s your bad, not mine and I have no patience for people who won't and don't stand up for themselves other than jumping on here and flexing their keyboard muscles.

If I've misjudged you I apologize, if I didn't you got exactly what you deserved, an option you didn't like and complaining about it here doesn't do squat.

If you decide to respond here please lets us all know what you did to help your own cause.

[reason162]

Originally Posted by Gerry Zagorski

I resent that remark, I'm not Kamala fan and don't lean her way...

You should resent the fact that this guy, since I've joined the forum, openly calls for people to poach and is proud of it.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Originally Posted by pectoralfin

If I catch a 19" fish and then a 22" fish which one do I throw back?
And I wonder how many fish has to be caught to get the slot limit?
I admittedly am not as knowledgeable about this situation as others on this site, but I see the mortality increasing which you know will be held against us in the future.

Mortality rates are assumptions in a table somewhere and if you want to question them that's a different discussion. Those assumptions are not at the state level, they are at the federal and BTW I don't agree with those assumptions either.

Right now this whole system and how we set our regulations, at least on the recreational side is based on prior year MRIP and there is an assumption on mortality for throw backs. The stock status does not figure into this which is my mind is totally crazy...

Look at Seabass, a fishery that has been totally rebuilt for many years and we got a 20%reduction. At the same time we have Fluke which has not been rebuilt but because of MRIP data we got a 16% liberalization??

This is why I support recreational reform conversations going on right now.... It's the stock status and not unreliable assumptions like MRIP which should govern our regulations. We might as well be spinning a roulette wheel to decide what our regs need to be...

This is IMHO is what needs to change and this does not happen on a state level, it happens and is tying to happen at a federal level and change the way the feds manage our fishery.

We seem to always seem to want to react and treat the symptoms which show up once a year a state level... What we need to do is treat the cause, which is changing how our fisheries are managed and get involved on a federal level.

Sorry for the long post and this is not directed at you... It's a general statement and my opinion of how and where we need to focus our attention to really change things. This is a federal, not a state issue.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Originally Posted by reason162

You should resent the fact that this clown, since I've joined the forum, openly calls for people to poach and is proud of it.

Thanks for trying to have my back but name calling is a foul here as it should be so you might want to revise your post. You and me have not agreed on things in the past just like me and Frugal. Frugal calling me Kamala or you calling Frugal a clown is not how I want to run things around here. Lets try and keep things civil…

[reason162]

Originally Posted by Gerry Zagorski

Thanks for trying to have my back but name calling is a foul here as it should be so you might want to revise your post. You and me have not agreed on things in the past just like me and Frugal. Frugal calling me Kamala or you calling Frugal a clown is not how I want to run things around here. Lets try and keep things civil…

Point taken, though if you ask me someone who advocates breaking the law in post after post is a much darker stain on this forum.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Originally Posted by reason162

Point taken, though if you ask me someone who advocates breaking the law in post after post is a much darker stain on this forum.

Thanks but people are entitled to their opinions here but where I tend to draw the line is name calling.

Enough said and lets move on, agreed?

[frugalfisherman]

Was wondering how much trolling I had to do to get a response. Since I don't know anything about doing any webinars the only thing I could do is go on this site and try to get others not to screw things up. Didn't work out. Sorry you didn't get my joke Gerry. Didn't mean to offend you. Harris is known for "word salad" a lot of words and not much said. Your statement I referred to was just that. The only thing I got out of it was you blamed this fiasco on Dakota (no wonder we haven't heard from him). Sort of like high fuel prices are Putins fault. So I said are you a speech writer for Kamala Harris on the side. Get it. Don't worry about anyone insulting me. I'm used to it. That word poacher has such negative connotations. Let's use enhanced retention. It is our only means of protest.