Fluke Regs - Who was behind it??

[DMac]

Originally Posted by Gerry Zagorski

Well this is getting really interesting now.. People with differing opinions, pass the popcorn....

IMO if you didn't speak up at the meeting or get involved along the way and just typed it here, your opinion didn't matter.

Wasnt given opportunity to speak at meeting, and i took involvement to whole new level, but i would never say anyone's opinion doesnt matter that is what divides us as a fishing community.

Its truly sad what is occuring the fact that the meeting was only listed on NJD F&W website 2 days prior did not give much time for people to become informed and many didnt attend bc many were assured option 1 17.5 @ 3 fish was preferred and almost set in stone.

Thats all im going to share right now as I have been very busy fighting this in spare time after work obligations

[hammer4reel]

Originally Posted by Skolmann

So 10% of fisherman should dictate what the other 90% can keep ? Explain that to me.

Are there not other species you could target ? I mean after, all the sudden everyone with a 21’ boat has gone tuna crazy.

Let me ask you this, does the average fisherman go fishing for the sole reason of putting food on his table/freezer or go for the whole overall experience (being on the water, catching fish <both legal and sub legal sized>). Because if you answer that it’s solely to provide food then they need to take a remedial economics 101 course.

I’m in 100% agreement with you re the increase in the weekly commercial allowance. That’s a complete slap in the face to every aspect to the recreational fisherman.

Has nothing with that 10 percent dictating the season . It’s those 10% that understand how bad we just got jammed .

We could have had 3 fish at 17 1/2’’ and fished for everything larger included .

The slot we got only gave you (2) fish allowed under that 17 1/2” and took away everything larger .
You gave up 9 years of age classes to get just those fish between 17 and 17 1/2 “ .
How can’t you understand that difference .

I pushed for a lower size limit so guys could take a few fish home on all those trips where guys just catch shorts instead of losing them to mortality throwing them back .

How many guys are going to want to throw back bigger fish on all those trips when they are fishing on a pod of fish 18” to 24” ?

.
You can’t pick out the good , without seeing the bad.

.

[hammer4reel]

Originally Posted by bigjamaica

Hello Dan, just curious, did you comment during the call that night?
I listened to most of it, and commented on sea bass, but, I did not comment on fluke.
I only remember hearing two other party boats from my area commenting. (It's possible there were more but, I did not hear them)
One of them, seemed to liked the slot option that was chosen.
The other one, (who I thought would pick three at 17.5 or greater, said: "he liked the idea of a longer season. However, I don't believe he ever picked an option.
I know from years of attending fisheries meetings there was always a desire, by many people, to have a slot fish. But, we never did get one.
My original intentions were to speak in favor of three fish at 17.5 in.
After listening to many of the comments I decided to abstain, and let's the chips fall where they may.
I would have been fine if they had picked the three at 17.5, but, I can't say that I'm upset at the choice they did make.
BTW, I had no input concerning any of the options, prior to the NJ council meeting. I am currently not on any advisory board, and never have been for fluke or sea bass
To the OP: if there was some "Nefarious plot" to pass the current option vs. 17.5"/3, I don't personally know of any party boats, or real charter boats that would have been behind that.

I had to work a shut downs in a data center that night, so didn’t get to talk at that meeting .
But had discussed with Adam at great length all the negatives of this chosen slot 2 weeks before .

There is no way with all recreational boats targeting 66% of our catch coming from less than 1 “ of age class fish this can benifit us .
.
There aren’t enough 17-17.99 fish out of all the fluke in the ocean .

I understand why party boats at first look would like having those fish being thrown back every year available . But what happens when your throwing back lots of larger fish after you reached a limit of over 18” fish . You fish in thirty feet of water hoping to find smaller fish ? .

So as I said in another post 66% of everyone’s catch has to come from a very small portion of all available fluke .

Would be like saying you can only keep see bass from 12 .1” to 13” for 6 of your 10 fish limit . And throw back all the 13.1 to 18” fish that you get in the same area .


.To get a chance at 17 to 17 1/2” fish to give up 66% of what’s available between 17 1/2 and 30 “ IMO a huge loss .
Throwing back larger fish to find 2 short fish , that makes no sense .


IMO The mortality throw back that will be charged against us this year , throwing back both short and large fish is going to effect us for years .

.
.

.

[Rocky]

If that one meeting decided our future fluke fishery the people who make the regs need to be replaced.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Originally Posted by DMac

Wasnt given opportunity to speak at meeting, and i took involvement to whole new level, but i would never say anyone's opinion doesnt matter that is what divides us as a fishing community.

Its truly sad what is occuring the fact that the meeting was only listed on NJD F&W website 2 days prior did not give much time for people to become informed and many didnt attend bc many were assured option 1 17.5 @ 3 fish was preferred and almost set in stone.

Thats all im going to share right now as I have been very busy fighting this in spare time after work obligations

What I meant was your opinion was not taken into consideration if you didn't give or had an opportunity to give it at the meeting. And yes, I agree that their needs to be a better way and more time allotted for taking, receiving and accounting for public comments. The NJMFC is still going to do what it thinks is best but this is what drives more transparency in the process and we can and should do a better job in that area of the process. We also need to get the 2 open spots on the council filled so we have a more diverse and rounded council.

[Skolmann]

Originally Posted by hammer4reel

But what happens when your throwing back lots of larger fish after you reached a limit of over 18” fish . You fish in thirty feet of water hoping to find smaller fish ? .




.

What happened in the past when you had your 3 #5+ fluke in the box or your charter was limited with 20+“ fluke and we’re only a few hours into your trip ? Did you continue to fish for fluke and release them all (if so, wouldn’t that lead to an increase in mortality) ? Did you call it a day and head in ? Did you proceed to target another species ?

I’d venture to say that some party boats/charter boats if they are fortunate enough to get a boat limit of 18” or better fluke they’ll target another species (sea bass, bluefish perhaps). Most anglers who fluke fish on party boats are looking to bring something home for the table and I don’t think too many would be upset if they had some fluke and sea bass in their cooler.

As I stated at the end of my original post, “ I go out on the water to escape stress not trying increase it.

Just my opinion and certainly not speaking for anyone other than myself.”

Outside of the commercial harvest increase (which IMHO will have a greater effect on the overall fluke population), I’m OK with the new regs. Not overly thrilled nor overly disappointed with the new regs.

[tautog]

If we had decent sea bass limits, the strict fluke limit wouldn't be too bad. Mixed bad fishing is largely a joke for large portions of the year. As it is now, pressure is being placed on fewer species, while others are overpopulating. Even the once great ling fishing in the area is poor because boats can't sea bass fish for large parts of the year.

[1captainron]

QUOTE=Skolmann;

I’d venture to say that some party boats/charter boats if they are fortunate enough to get a boat limit of 18” or better fluke.......

Now that right there is funny!! Boat limit of 18inch Fluke.......

[Skolmann]

Originally Posted by 1captainron

QUOTE=

Now that right there is funny!! Boat limit of 18inch Fluke.......

One can always hope 😉.

See you soon.

[pddmd]

The Council did not double the commercial quota. The commercial quota for wave 1 was dramatically underfished so the trip limits were increased to permit the allotted harvest. The Council does not have the authority to increase/decrease quota. The 2022 quota is set by Midlantic Council and ASMFC.