Fluke Stock Theory

[TwoDDs]

Originally Posted by Broad Bill

Dave lets get a few thing clear. Kiley Dancy and Dustin Learning at the time were staff members and all calls or correspondence had to go through them. That was the job. Dustin Learning took over for Kirby Rootes-Murdy who is now a Renewable Energy Program Specialist at Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. Kiley and Dustin were a pleasure to deal with and very helpful but they weren't decision makers. The key decision makers and state representatives were the ones I referred to as never replying or engaging in issues raised.

Not sure my work was censored, really? Look at the following link which has material I sent as part of briefing materials for the November 2019 meeting to discuss 2020 measures. Pages 31 through 101 is essentially all my work, analysis and emails with over a hundred people involved with the management of this fishery.

https://static1.squarespace.com/stat...es_2019-12.pdf

Fast forward to 2021 and the below link I sent on November 30, 2021 discussing measures for 2022. The briefing materials included my email and only the URL with my analysis meaning anyone looking at a hard copy of the briefing material only saw the URL and not the content. My email is on page 25.

https://static1.squarespace.com/stat...es_2021-12.pdf

Shortly afterward in 2022, the voice you love, Chair Mike Luisi, adopted a resolution where he himself determined what material would be included in briefing materials and it was strictly limited to short comments. That ended my analysis which I submitted from being included in either the briefing material or supplemental materials. In addition, all emails of Council, Committee and Staff Members were removed from the site. That change was made because I was Andy Dufresne in Shawshank Redemption sending a letter a day asking the state for funding for the prison library. My work was censored from that point on.

I have absolutely no problem with my work being Peer Reviewed so I'm not sure where that notion is coming from as everything I've submitted in my analysis of the stock is predicated on data which is a result of systems and protocols which have already been Peer Reviewed.

In my opinion, pounding ASMFC and MAMFC is what I did for the better part of five years resulting in zero. If you recall, if the Council Member you refer to is who I think it is, remember he said and I quote "You can send as many charts and emails as you want, it won't make any difference whatsoever". I'm not wasting time doing that again.

"Suck it up", you're kidding me right? Whatever amount of time you think I've put into trying to change the fate of this fishery, triple it. What I've said is NMFS and the agencies tasked with managing this stock don't like people like me playing in their sandbox. I never said I didn't want to play in theirs, I've actually said the exact opposite. I want to work with NMFS, ASMFC, MAMFC, NJMFC. I'm not the roadblock my friend. You've said it yourself a hundred times, no one has ever said my analysis and conclusions are wrong, they just don't want to acknowledge I might be right.

So I'll ask you the same question you asked Dan and me. How do we get an audience to push this forward. I look at the people on the advisory panel and ask myself why this fishery is in the condition it is. Steve Witthuhn NY for hire, great guy with the same concerns I have and who I've shared all my analysis with. Michael Waine, ASA recreational who we've discussed. Greg Hueth, recreation Big Mohawk. W Howard Bogan, for hire. Charles Witek, recreational. And if you look at the Committee Members, there's some big names there including the Chair. This is my concern about the solution going through ASMFC or MAMFC because these are talented people intimately involved in the industry with different backgrounds and perspectives and yet we sit here looking at a dying fishery. I agree with Dan, the fight needs to be at the federal level and needs to focus on the problems facing the fishery as opposed to politics, economics, season lengths and quota allocations. The question is how do we get there as no one I've met ever wants or can arrange that discussion with NMFS.

I truly try keeping the faith and shying away from a fatalist attitude but please don't make posts suggesting I haven't been the open minded one here and reached out hundreds of times trying to create constructive dialogue with all these people. Remember, Jim Donofrio said the paper I put together when I first got involved, which was published in the Fisherman Magazine, was the best representation of the fishery he'd ever seen. Everyone from RFA and SSFFF including Jim Hutchinson agreed with that statement. Then politics got in the way and it died on the vine due to no lack of effort by me. So I'll re-engage if there's a clear path forward but as I said I believe we need a joint effort with commercial leadership, have everyone agree there's a serious problem with this stock and work together on a comprehensive plan to manage the fishery differently than it's been managed over the last two decades.

Until there is a lawsuit by the recreational sector, nothing will change.
I think everything that we've witnessed to date, everything that you've personally experienced to date, has made that abundantly clear.
Unfortunately, HOPE is not a strategy.

[dales529]

Originally Posted by Broad Bill

Dave lets get a few thing clear. Kiley Dancy and Dustin Learning at the time were staff members and all calls or correspondence had to go through them. That was the job. Dustin Learning took over for Kirby Rootes-Murdy who is now a Renewable Energy Program Specialist at Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. Kiley and Dustin were a pleasure to deal with and very helpful but they weren't decision makers. The key decision makers and state representatives were the ones I referred to as never replying or engaging in issues raised.

Not sure my work was censored, really? Look at the following link which has material I sent as part of briefing materials for the November 2019 meeting to discuss 2020 measures. Pages 31 through 101 is essentially all my work, analysis and emails with over a hundred people involved with the management of this fishery.

https://static1.squarespace.com/stat...es_2019-12.pdf

Fast forward to 2021 and the below link I sent on November 30, 2021 discussing measures for 2022. The briefing materials included my email and only the URL with my analysis meaning anyone looking at a hard copy of the briefing material only saw the URL and not the content. My email is on page 25.

https://static1.squarespace.com/stat...es_2021-12.pdf

Shortly afterward in 2022, the voice you love, Chair Mike Luisi, adopted a resolution where he himself determined what material would be included in briefing materials and it was strictly limited to short comments. That ended my analysis which I submitted from being included in either the briefing material or supplemental materials. In addition, all email addresses of Council, Committee and Staff Members were removed from the site. That change was made because I was Andy Dufresne in Shawshank Redemption sending a letter a day asking the state for funding for the prison library. My work was censored from that point on.

I have absolutely no problem with my work being Peer Reviewed so I'm not sure where that notion is coming from as everything I've submitted in my analysis of the stock is predicated on data which is a result of systems and protocols which have already been Peer Reviewed.

In my opinion, pounding ASMFC and MAMFC is what I did for the better part of five years resulting in nada. If you recall, if the Council Member you refer to is who I think it is, remember he said and I quote "You can send as many charts and emails as you want, it won't make any difference whatsoever". I'm not wasting time doing that again.

"Suck it up", you're kidding me right? Whatever amount of time you think I've put into trying to change the fate of this fishery, triple it. What I've said is NMFS and the agencies tasked with managing this stock don't like people like me playing in their sandbox. I never said I didn't want to play in theirs, I've actually said the exact opposite. I want to work with NMFS, ASMFC, MAMFC, NJMFC. I'm not the roadblock my friend. You've said it yourself a hundred times, no one has ever said my analysis and conclusions are wrong, they just don't want to acknowledge I might be right.

So I'll ask you the same question you asked Dan and me. How do we get an audience to push this forward. I look at the people on the advisory panel and ask myself why this fishery is in the condition it is. Steve Witthuhn NY for hire, great guy with the same concerns I have and who I've shared all my analysis with. Michael Waine, ASA recreational who we've discussed. Greg Hueth, recreation Big Mohawk. W Howard Bogan, for hire. Charles Witek, recreational. And if you look at the Committee Members, there's some big names there including the Chair. This is my concern about the solution going through ASMFC or MAMFC because these are talented people intimately involved in the industry with different backgrounds and perspectives already yet we sit here looking at a dying fishery. I agree with Dan, the fight needs to be at the federal level and needs to focus on the problems facing the fishery as opposed to politics, economics, season lengths and quota allocations. The question is how do we get there as no one I've met ever wants or can arrange that discussion with NMFS.

I truly try keeping the faith and shying away from a fatalist attitude but please don't make posts suggesting I haven't been the open minded one here and reached out hundreds of times trying to create constructive dialogue with all these people. Remember, Jim Donofrio said the paper I put together when I first got involved, which was published in the Fisherman Magazine, was the best representation of the fishery he'd ever seen. Everyone from RFA and SSFFF including Jim Hutchinson agreed with that statement. Then politics got in the way and it died on the vine due to no lack of effort by me. So I'll re-engage if there's a clear path forward but as I said I believe we need a joint effort with commercial leadership, have everyone agree there's a serious problem with this stock and work together on a comprehensive plan to manage the fishery differently than it's been managed over the last two decades.

Hey no way am i saying you are the problem/ exactly the opposite. Visited the hundreds of emails we sent together to all the various agencies and sciencetists ( some more science than others LOL) We / YOU got pretty high up the food chain! Then it stopped ( not censured ) as there was changeover in players and the old ego train. Doesn't mean we give up.

What I meant by "suck it up" is that you know how this game is played. You have to be able to hear you are wrong before they realize you are right and spoon feed a little at a time so they think they figured it out on there own! Sucks but maybe gets the results we all are after.

Made some phone calls today and will call you with some higher ups willing to discuss and re-evaluate your data. Will call you later today and hopefully we can get an in person meeting together as the concensus is YES Fishery Management needs a complete overhaul. MSA is outdated and someone including a peer review scienctetist needs to write a whole new management plan.

While the call for lawsuits may be justified its just not practical and will go nowhere.

[Broad Bill]

Originally Posted by dales529

Hey no way am i saying you are the problem/ exactly the opposite. Visited the hundreds of emails we sent together to all the various agencies and scientists ( some more science than others LOL) We / YOU got pretty high up the food chain! Then it stopped ( not censured ) as there was changeover in players and the old ego train. Doesn't mean we give up.

What I meant by "suck it up" is that you know how this game is played. You have to be able to hear you are wrong before they realize you are right and spoon feed a little at a time so they think they figured it out on there own! Sucks but maybe gets the results we all are after.

Made some phone calls today and will call you with some higher ups willing to discuss and re-evaluate your data. Will call you later today and hopefully we can get an in person meeting together as the consensus is YES Fishery Management needs a complete overhaul. MSA is outdated and someone including a peer review scientist needs to write a whole new management plan.

While the call for lawsuits may be justified its just not practical and will go nowhere.

I agree with everything said and would love to have an in person meeting with people capable of carrying the bucket up the hill. I'll share my work with anyone at NEFSC or NMFS who will review it objectively and be more than happy to discuss my analysis based on their own data which was the intention from the beginning and share my calculations, historical trend analysis and conclusions. Anyone who looks at this objectively will realize the preferred use of increased size minimums to "manage" the recreational sector set in motion a chain effect of consequential damages to the biomass, gender composition of the stock, declines in the biomass and SSB and historically high discard mortality rates and historically low recruitments levels bringing us back to levels not seen since the 90's. After 30-40 years of management , we're killing the two things most important to the sustainability of any fishery, the breeding population and recruitment. No fishery survives without both and this one is certainly feeling the effects of decades long policy decisions negatively impacting both.

[hammer4reel]

Originally Posted by Broad Bill

I agree with everything said and would love to have an in person meeting with people capable of carrying the bucket up the hill. I'll share my work with anyone at NEFSC or NMFS who will review it objectively and be more than happy to discuss my analysis based on their own data which was the intention from the beginning and share my calculations, historical trend analysis and conclusions. Anyone who looks at this objectively will realize the preferred use of increased size minimums to "manage" the recreational sector set in motion a chain effect of consequential damages to the biomass, gender composition of the stock, declines in the biomass and SSB and historically high discard mortality rates and historically low recruitments levels bringing us back to levels not seen since the 90's. After 30-40 years of management , we're killing the two things most important to the sustainability of any fishery, the breeding population and recruitment. No fishery survives without both and this one is certainly feeling the effects of decades long policy decisions negatively impacting both.

Watch this , just know in advance you will probably puke .

https://youtu.be/NRdxVQhcrYs?si=3TxABrGWb0jrlv-j




.

[Broad Bill]

Dan while beyond appalling it's actually not surprising. North Carolina and Virginia are brutally corrupt states. It's what you and I have been saying for years. Any stock with a commercial presence in their own waters or any coastal stock they have a commercial interest in is at risk. They'll take the last fish until there's no more to take without giving it a second thought and everyone else pays for their corruption which isn't only fisheries management although they routinely turn a blind eye. It's corrupt elected officials on the take and a group of businesses who make a living bribing politicians to profit from a public resource. It's a completely broken system used by politicians who have the authority to make decisions and pull strings to become extremely wealthy. And after watching this video, no one should have any doubt, in the case of summer flounder, what happened to the Chesapeake stock which at one time was the most southerly part of the biomass. It was wiped out by NC and Virginia commercials and for years now they've taken their show on the road and will destroy every part of the remaining northern biomass.

Was especially interested in a few things. People who buy commercial licenses can retain countless summer flounder a day themselves for personal use while the recreational sector is shut down. Commercial licenses can be leased for profit to someone who knows nothing about commercial fishing. Third and maybe the most poignant is the statement that inshore trawling by commercial concerns causes discard mortality which exceeds the entire recreational quota AND goes unreported and not counted against the commercials annual quota. Can you imagine what happens during the winter offshore in the depths these schools are being harvested from. And we wonder why the fishery has fallen off the cliff. It only takes a minority of bad apples to rape the ocean, kill juvenile age groups and destroy a fishery. Selective harvest and regulations that give preferential treatment to the commercial sector will ultimately kill every stock. And in North Carolina it apparently is done completely in the open and not only allowed for but promoted by state politicians and enforcement agencies. Absolutely ^&$%#@! unreal!

Anyone interested in how the corrupt process we call fisheries management works should watch the video.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Originally Posted by hammer4reel

Watch this , just know in advance you will probably puke .

https://youtu.be/NRdxVQhcrYs?si=3TxABrGWb0jrlv-j




.

Wow probably one of the most depressing, eye opening and informative fisheries mismanagement pieces I've ever seen.

Although it's mostly focused on NC, if you care about fishing and how it's managed and stacked against recreational fishing this is a must watch video!!

If nothing else just listen to the 17:30 to 18:30 section... What is a public resource is basically handed over to commercials for their personal gain.

[hammer4reel]

Originally Posted by Gerry Zagorski

Wow probably one of the most depressing, eye opening and informative fisheries mismanagement pieces I've ever seen.

Although it's mostly focused on NC, if you care about fishing and how it's managed and stacked against recreational fishing this is a must watch video!!

If nothing else just listen to the 17:30 to 18:30 section... What is a public resource is basically handed over to commercials for their personal gain.

I have been saying it for years . It’s not only a NC issue .
It’s those long range boats that are fishing everything from NC up through Massachusetts.
Those 7 day boats hit Massachusetts waters early when fish are moving in .
Their limits were lowered , but 2 years ago they would catch 80 thousand pounds of squid . And 30 thousand pounds of fluke per boat for a 5-6 week period .

Nj boars could fish outside 3 mile line right next to them .
Nj boats were catching 3000 a week , while NC boats were catching 30000.

.they destroyed their fisheries , and have moved onto everyone else’s .

The rest of the states need to grow a set of balls and push for federal changes to protect their states interest .

.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Originally Posted by hammer4reel

I have been saying it for years . It’s not only a NC issue .
It’s those long range boats that are fishing everything from NC up through Massachusetts.
Those 7 day boats hit Massachusetts waters early when fish are moving in .
Their limits were lowered , but 2 years ago they would catch 80 thousand pounds of squid . And 30 thousand pounds of fluke per boat for a 5-6 week period .

Nj boars could fish outside 3 mile line right next to them .
Nj boats were catching 3000 a week , while NC boats were catching 30000.

.they destroyed their fisheries , and have moved onto everyone else’s .

The rest of the states need to grow a set of balls and push for federal changes to protect their states interest .

.

Yep!

[Broad Bill]

Originally Posted by hammer4reel

I have been saying it for years . It’s not only a NC issue .
It’s those long range boats that are fishing everything from NC up through Massachusetts.
Those 7 day boats hit Massachusetts waters early when fish are moving in .
Their limits were lowered , but 2 years ago they would catch 80 thousand pounds of squid . And 30 thousand pounds of fluke per boat for a 5-6 week period .

NJ boars could fish outside 3 mile line right next to them .
NJ boats were catching 3000 a week , while NC boats were catching 30000.

.they destroyed their fisheries , and have moved onto everyone else’s .

The rest of the states need to grow a set of balls and push for federal changes to protect their states interest .

.

Add insult to injury, the commercial allocations between states has been a bone of contention for years and to my knowledge is still based on commercial landings from the 1980's while the demographics of the stock has completely changed. Precisely why North Carolina and Virginia still have ~50% of the annual commercial quota which is a travesty. In 2019, New York sued NMFS, NOAA and the Secretary of Commerce for that exact reason for the unfair and outdated allocation of quotas between states. Link attached:

https://www.savingseafood.org/news/l...lounder-quota/

Ruling was made in 2023 against New York based on the grounds that regardless of where the stock is currently located, southern states who built their fisheries on this stock shouldn't be penalized by having their allocation percentages from 50 years ago reduced simply because the stock migrated north because of climate change. How's that for sound logic! Destroy their local fishery because of greed, keep their same allocation percentage of the quota based on landings from five decades ago and now destroy what's left of the last remaining northern stock. Political corruption within states, politics within the governing agencies, politics between states regarding quotas, politics between the commercial and recreational sectors and politics at the federal level and in the federal judicial system. How exactly does a fishery survive when the focus of all the agencies tasked with managing these public resources is on everything but managing the stock. It's all about politics, economics, power, control, corruption and greed. At the end of the day, when it comes down to fundamental fisheries management for the preservation and betterment of stocks, who exactly is keeping that scorecard?