Anyone know the fluke options for 2019 yet

[hammer4reel]

Tom as you know we brought this info right into that original meeting when I said to Kirby if we had to rely on his estimates as the only available science .
Their own data proved their increase in size limit was what was hurting the fishery .
If their data was correct all your charts show it again ten fold .

But let’s look at it a few other ways .
Their numbers on catches on recreational side are estimates, not factual.
Their trawl studies are compounded estimates, ( what proof is there they were getting an accurate trawl study ?)

Only REAL data we have is commercial harvest.
Actual count .(historical data)

IMO that is more accurate data than estimates .
Commercial guys I know that have fished our area for over 30 years have 30 years of actual landings .

Up until four seasons ago their fluking season had them fishing from BI TO FIRE ISLAND to meet their quotas.
In the last four seasons they are catching their quota within 10 miles of port .
And in other seasons they can’t get away from the fluke while working other species.
More fluke than ever in their careers .

How can NMFS numbers be accurate based on that .

Now what is the actual break down on TOTAL fluke in the ocean .
Are 50% less than 18” and 50% larger than 18”
Or are 85% under 18” and 15% over 18”

IMO the 18” limit was the magic number to have us fishing for a smaller body of fish .
If the limit was 16 1/2” right now everyone would be saying it’s the best fluke fishing ever as LOTS of guys are catching boat loads of 17-17 1/2” fish .

Very possibly the same amount of fish caught as in the 90’s . Just less keepers

What is the actual breakdown of fluke fry, are they 50/50 or are their naturally more female fry .
A great deal of real research needs to be done either scenario . It’s time a more accurate understanding of what’s really going on is done .

As in either scenario the 18” limit is a mistake .

But it needs to be done using real data , not estimates...
.

Tom as you know we brought this info right into that original meeting when I said to Kirby if we had to rely on his estimates as the only available science .
Their own data proved their increase in size limit was what was hurting the fishery .
If their data was correct all your charts show it again ten fold .

But let’s look at it a few other ways .
Their numbers on catches on recreational side are estimates, not factual.
Their trawl studies are compounded estimates, ( what proof is there they were getting an accurate trawl study ?)
No matter what system is used trying to quantify recreational catch as I mentioned will be based on estimates at best and subject to scrutiny which is why the new MRIP is as arbitrary as the old system used and why recreational should never have been penalized 40%. In my opinion, and I know we disagree on this, last years fluking in the ocean was the worst in many years. May, June, July were horrible and only August through the September close were respectable. My son and I had three fluke charters cancelled because the fluking was so bad. I know you put a lot of effort into fluking, know commercial guys with information and have a strong network so I wouldn't base the average year for most on your results. Most people would agree '18 was a down year fluking yet with the new MRIP we get penalized 40%.

Only REAL data we have is commercial harvest.
Relative to recreational I agree commercial has a process, in and of itself as far as how accurate that process is I couldn't disagree more. We know what's counted, we don't know what's not. Remember it ONLY took 30 years for F&G to find out Carlos Raphael aka "Codfather" under reported 800,000 lbs of fish over a three year period and had been doing so for over 30 years. Only reason F&G found out is because IRS brought them in under a money laundering sting operation when he was attempting to sell his business. Commercial catch I would argue with dead discards and unreported catches is less accurate than recreational because that's where the money is and it's almost entirely on the honor system with limited enforcement resources.
Actual count .(historical data)

IMO that is more accurate data than estimates .
Commercial guys I know that have fished our area for over 30 years have 30 years of actual landings.

So do a lot of recreational guys. Commercial harvest limits went from a high of ~22.2 million fish in 1988 to ~2.6 million in 2017, last year of data in 66th SAW. And as mentioned in the assessment, the biomass is more heavily concentrated than ever in our own back yard so your comments support the data in the assessment.

Up until four seasons ago their fluking season had them fishing from BI TO FIRE ISLAND to meet their quotas.
In the last four seasons they are catching their quota within 10 miles of port. In the last four years their quotas have been slashed significantly by as much as 50% as have recreational, don't forget that point. BUT as I mentioned, the ex-vessel price has increased so much their catch values are greater today even based on reduced catch. It's called supply and demand elasticty pricing. Check out the attached chart.

And in other seasons they can’t get away from the fluke while working other species. More fluke than ever in their careers.

Same answer as above

How can NMFS numbers be accurate based on that.
I actually believe NMFS numbers support your arguments. Question for you, how can any fishery go from overall catch of 90% of sexually immature fish to in excess of 95% of sexually mature fish and sustain itself with most of those fish per the Rutgers Sex and Length Study known to be female breeders. Only one answer.....it can't. There's ~650 commercial boats targeting fluke in the 13 major ports making up the Mid-Atlantic region, tell me what impact the commercial harvest that size fleet is having on a highly concentrated biomass of fish during it's primary spawn. When someone can answer that question with data and facts, I'll stop bringing up the 90% decline in relative recruitment strength and the long term impact it's having on reproduction and this fishery.

Now what is the actual break down on TOTAL fluke in the ocean.
Are 50% less than 18” and 50% larger than 18”
Or are 85% under 18” and 15% over 18”

Have no idea but common sense a harvest consisting of ~95% sexually mature fish, with a substantial amount of that catch being females and the remainder larger males will not sustain any fishery with the pressure this one has on it. Based on what you catch, they're all 27" females. Based on what everyone else catches, they're all 17 7/8" and 75%/25% females / males.

IMO the 18” limit was the magic number to have us fishing for a smaller body of fish .
If the limit was 16 1/2” right now everyone would be saying it’s the best fluke fishing ever as LOTS of guys are catching boat loads of 17-17 1/2” fish.

I agree, as with everything NMFS related, the 18" size was a means of managing catch and nothing else. There's been no remedial measures I'm aware of ever taken other than catch management through reduced quotas, shortened seasons, increased size limits and decreased possession limits. What else has been done.....nothing.

Very possibly the same amount of fish caught as in the 90’s . Just less keepers

What is the actual breakdown of fluke fry, are they 50/50 or are their naturally more female fry.
A great deal of real research needs to be done either scenario. It’s time a more accurate understanding of what’s really going on is done.
I disagree. What basis would there be to believe the mix of egg production between males and females has changed since SSB exploded higher between '89 and 2002? None. Nature will find a way if we stop
$?@#&*! with it.


As in either scenario the 18” limit is a mistake.

Couldn't agree more.

But it needs to be done using real data, not estimates.

We have a proven track record of what works over a 13-yr period, '89 - 2002. That's all we need. We will NEVER have acurate recreational catch data and as mentioned while I have faith in commercial catch that's counted, it's what's not counted that no one can quantify. It all comes down to recruitment and properly managing catch through trial and error. We have the answer but for some reason opted to ignore and deviate from it in the early 2000's. We need to work our way back thoughtfully to the regulations we had in place then around a 14 - 15.50 size with more liberal possession limits. Not suggesting we immediately go back to the same catch quotas from those years, we should assess impact on recruitment and adjust once we see SSB increasing. We should also close commercial harvest commensurate with recreational's season end in September through late October or preferably late November for a few years until the 25-year collapse in R relative to SSB has been corrected. Not doing so is negligent management on NMFS and ASMFC's behalf. How they can say recruitment is down for six years, don't know why and simultaneously propose a 40% increase in commercials harvest in '19 is unconscienable. Sorry I'm not going to play politics, the fact that's being proposed is disconcerting.

[hammer4reel]

Here’s why actual catches say different .
Recs claim bad seasons , commercial guys claim lots of fish around .

What changed WE THROW ALL FISH UNDER 18” BACK 100%.
They still can keep that size fish as their size limit didn’t change.
All fish we used to keep are now there for them to catch .
A mixed catch of some females and ALL the males .

While we fish for the smallest piece of the pie , that is also being targeted by the commercial fleet .
The whole pie.


What every scenario agrees on is 18” is the wrong size for the fishery.
It doesn’t equally split the harvest between commercial and recreational fisherman.
18” makes us keep too many females while having a large mortality charged on throwbacks .

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results .

IMO all three scenarios show the size limit should be reduced to 17”

Been saying that for 3 years and it falls on deaf ears .


As far as fluking last year . We had another great season, as did many of our friends .
Ask Jerry if he thinks there are no fish around , as you know it’s a daily crush for guys working that find the body of fish .
His catches daily showed there were plenty of fish around.

.

[Capt Sal]

Originally Posted by hammer4reel

Here’s why actual catches say different .
Recs claim bad seasons , commercial guys claim lots of fish around .

What changed WE THROW ALL FISH UNDER 18” BACK 100%.
They still can keep that size fish as their size limit didn’t change.
All fish we used to keep are now there for them to catch .
A mixed catch of some females and ALL the males .

While we fish for the smallest piece of the pie , that is also being targeted by the commercial fleet .
The whole pie.


What every scenario agrees on is 18” is the wrong size for the fishery.
It doesn’t equally split the harvest between commercial and recreational fisherman.
18” makes us keep too many females while having a large mortality charged on throwbacks .

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results .

IMO all three scenarios show the size limit should be reduced to 17”

Been saying that for 3 years and it falls on deaf ears .


As far as fluking last year . We had another great season, as did many of our friends .
Ask Jerry if he thinks there are no fish around , as you know it’s a daily crush for guys working to find the body of fish .

.

I think the mortality rate is very high. It is a shame to release 17'' fluke that swallowed the hook and you know they won't make it.

Originally Posted by hammer4reel

Here’s why actual catches say different .
Recs claim bad seasons , commercial guys claim lots of fish around .

What changed WE THROW ALL FISH UNDER 18” BACK 100%.
They still can keep that size fish as their size limit didn’t change.
All fish we used to keep are now there for them to catch .
A mixed catch of some females and ALL the males .

While we fish for the smallest piece of the pie , that is also being targeted by the commercial fleet .
The whole pie.


What every scenario agrees on is 18” is the wrong size for the fishery.
It doesn’t equally split the harvest between commercial and recreational fisherman.
18” makes us keep too many females while having a large mortality charged on throwbacks .

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results .

IMO all three scenarios show the size limit should be reduced to 17”

Been saying that for 3 years and it falls on deaf ears .


As far as fluking last year . We had another great season, as did many of our friends .
Ask Jerry if he thinks there are no fish around , as you know it’s a daily crush for guys working that find the body of fish .
His catches daily showed there were plenty of fish around.

.

GZ or JP? If you meant Gerry Z, I should ask Joey since he says he always catches more fish and is Mom's favorite. Asking JP is senseless since he catches 1,000 fish every trip not matter what the species. Have nothing but respect for him and his operation but he has too have sold his soul to the devil to post the numbers he does and is certainly not representative of an average angler's daily catch. Again most anglers (and please chime in here) in my opinion would say '18 was a tough season only bailed out with the fosh that came in during August and the stub period we had in September. Like I said, we had three fluke charters cancelled with reputable charters cancelled because the fishing was that bad.

I agree with everything stated above other than 17" size. Based on Rutgers study, that size translates to about a 70/30 ratio females to males, still way too high. And remember these are minimum sizes, size harvested is always greater. At 15.5" in Rutgers study, ratio of males to females was basically 50/50. A 15.5" male is about a 4 year old fish and sexually mature, a 15.5" female about 3 years old since they grow faster and also sexually mature. We need to get the harvest back to younger fish either sexually immature or with substantially less egg production capacity to jump start recruitment and get SSB tredning back in the right direction. The population of larger breeders (both males but especially females) who have maintained this fishery for years has to be rebuilt before anything changes. Again '19 proposed regulations are digging the hole deeper.

[dales529]

Originally Posted by Capt Sal

I think the mortality rate is very high. It is a shame to release 17'' fluke that swallowed the hook and you know they won't make it.

Capt Sal as an experienced Charter guy I will take you at your word but WHY in todays age of tackle would a 17" fish have to swallow a hook. I fish on many Charters ans PB boats and ALL fish released swim to live another day.
Now if you are saying that an occasional 17" fish swallowed a hook well thats different story but not the dead discard NOAA says at 33%

[hammer4reel]

According to this article were getting screwed for a 3 year period this time.

Betting the Overfishing is the mortality rate they charge us with throwing back shorts, at what they claim is 33%..


https://www.app.com/story/sports/out...rs/3153388002/


.
think its time for a few hundred to show up at another council meeting , and push for a slot fish as we suggested 3 seasons ago .

>

Slot is one of many things which needs to be presented and discussed and we need data to support our arguments otherwise as before they'll simply be viewed as opinions and fall on deaf ears. Believe me when I tell you this, the proposed regs we were just handed will further hurt this fishery, that's the primary fact we need to speak to. Not just for recreationals, not just for commercials (even if they benefitted from a 40% increase), not for Party and or For Hire Charters but for returning this fishery to a healthy sustainable stock for everyone. We need to organize and not just show up and I'd be happy to work with the powers to be to coordinate that effort. If collectively we don't change our focus from a short term year over year to a long term remediation plan to rebuild this fishery back to health, we're simply going through the motions and becoming more and more frustrated each passing season.

[hammer4reel]

Originally Posted by dakota560

Slot is one of many things which needs to be presented and discussed and we need data to support our arguments otherwise as before they'll simply be viewed as opinions and fall on deaf ears. Believe me when I tell you this, the proposed regs we were just handed will further hurt this fishery, that's the primary fact we need to speak to. Not just for recreationals, not just for commercials (even if they benefitted from a 40% increase), not for Party and or For Hire Charters but for returning this fishery to a healthy sustainable stock for everyone. We need to organize and not just show up and I'd be happy to work with the powers to be to coordinate that effort. If collectively we don't change our focus from a short term year over year to a long term remediation plan to rebuild this fishery back to health, we're simply going through the motions and becoming more and more frustrated each passing season.

Totally agree .
Imo all available info no matter which they want to look at show the 18" size limit is only going to continue to hurt this fishery .
Being given a 33 % mortality on throwbacks makes no sense to continue throwing back fish for Zero gain .

.
.

[Capt Sal]

Originally Posted by dales529

Capt Sal as an experienced Charter guy I will take you at your word but WHY in todays age of tackle would a 17" fish have to swallow a hook. I fish on many Charters ans PB boats and ALL fish released swim to live another day.
Now if you are saying that an occasional 17" fish swallowed a hook well thats different story but not the dead discard NOAA says at 33%

Not all 17'' fluke swallow the hook. Not every angler uses a large bucktail or a bigger hook with Gulp.There are many novice anglers on private,party,and charter boats. Many people fish Raritan Bay and the preferred bait are killies on a kalin hook.I agree a larger hook should be used.It ia proven fact that 10% of the fishermen catch 90% of the fish. Not every boat owner has the ability to fish the ''sticky stuff'' with bucktails.It is the same on a head boat.Lot of snags and many anglers do not buck tail. Most PB capts do not even cary small kalin -off set English hooks.It is the same for stripers.Once you have a limit it should be all circle hooks.