Bluefish regs not looking good for next year

[Capt John]

Thanks Dakota for your response. That explains it all. What the hell is NOAA doing under the Department of Commerce......you guessed it...BUSINESS AND BIG MONEY for the fishing industry.

Another couple of years and our waters (NJ) will follow the same route as winter flounder and weakfish....EMPTY AND EXTINCT. Very sad.

If I were in charge, NOAA would be a subdivision of the Department of the Interior....yes? no? or am I missing something here.

Once again....you seem very knowledgeable about fishing issues and thanks for your input.

[dales529]

Originally Posted by reason162

Sure, we all claim we "care," yet I hardly hear the for-hire industry supporting more stringent regs, no matter the species.
From fluke to stripers to now bluefish, the science is always wrong. The argument always run one way and not the other.

The Overfished assessment came down in Sept, and before year's end we're looking at 3 - 5 limit for 2020. Some
complain that's actually not proactive enough, but compared to the species managed by ASMFC it's lightyears ahead in terms of efficiency.

Oh and no room for BS "conservation equivalency," lb for lb paybacks for 2021. That's how it should be done, and looking at the feds' track record
compared to ASMFC it's hard to argue which approach works for the resource.

While I have always respected your dedication to conservation it appears your opinion is a little short on facts. How often do you discuss this with the for hire industry or are you getting your information from this or other fishing sites? Tom Smith and I have emailed, spoken in person with and telephoned members of the for hire industry, commercials and Co Ops, Rec Fishing groups and believe me the story is much different than the Fed Stock assessments. Tom as you know has also been directly involved with NOAA and the Councils.

The recreational "for hire industry" just wants to have fair shake and has taken cuts in bag and season for a long time while their on the water experience of fisheries is flat out IGNORED yet Commercials get liberalization on quotas and access to fish recs have to release. For hire want season length with a reasonable bag and regs that allow all species to flourish without having to fish for just one at a time. Not unreasonable.

Now add in Federal Trawl Surveys. Fact the FED new state of the art Bigelow Trawl boat barely leaves the dock as its always broken down, the millions of dollars trawl nets purchased with tax payer dollars are too money sensitive to trawl "rocky" bottom or they get damaged so trawls on open sandy bottom come up empty DUH. For hire boats have offered to help with the surveys as they are out there anyway and again IGNORED.

So do you believe the new FED narrative that 18" to 24" Summer Flounder are 50% male? Most who fillet these fish know that its maybe 1% male to female but what do we know. Do I need to bring up the MRIP that states shore based anglers caught more summer flounder than private boats and for hire boats?

That just screams of a convenient narrative to combat SSFFF/ Rutgers Sex Study and years of angler concerns that breeders are being removed from the stocks via forced regulation. Funny you certainly believe that when it comes to stripers. Maybe next year 50lb bass with fat stomachs just ate too much and there are not really any eggs in there regardless of facts.

Exactly what track record do the FEDS have in our waters that you are speaking of that have rebuilt our resource?

Originally Posted by Capt John

Thanks Dakota for your response. That explains it all. What the hell is NOAA doing under the Department of Commerce......you guessed it...BUSINESS AND BIG MONEY for the fishing industry.

Another couple of years and our waters (NJ) will follow the same route as winter flounder and weakfish....EMPTY AND EXTINCT. Very sad.

If I were in charge, NOAA would be a subdivision of the Department of the Interior....yes? no? or am I missing something here.

Once again....you seem very knowledgeable about fishing issues and thanks for your input.

Capt John,

Here's your answer and believe it or not it's because of Nixon!

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012...rce-department

Many agree fisheries management should fall under the Department of Interior, the article in the attached link explains why it doesn't. Politics within politics if you will. To compound the issue, there apparently exists significant issues between the various Technical, Science, Advisory Committees and the Commission and Council itself, more politics within the political framework.

Add to that the priority of the DoC to drive Commerce and the amount of lobbyist funds I can only imagine changes hands to promote the commercial industry its no wonder the scales of justice are as imbalanced as they are.

Tom

[Capt Sal]

Originally Posted by reason162

If only the feds can take over striper management they might stand a chance of surviving.

PLAIN STUPID STATEMENT!! There talking bluefish and less government involvement and you want more federal management???? Get real!

[Capt Sal]

Originally Posted by Merle31483

Bluefish are a gross fish to eat most of them yellow eyed demons go to waste anyway cause they taste like shit the thing they should do away with the the damn bonus tags for stripers. We preach conservation but yet we kill a "slot fish " at 24 " come on people if we use these tags on these small fish how in the hell are they gonna mature to breeding size? For party boats to get 150 tags a season it's not limited to 1 person that same person can come back tomorrow and get another tag WAKE UP do the right thing and release the so called slot bass and screw the tags makes me sick

Another misinformed know it all. Why no slot fish expert??

[Capt Sal]

Originally Posted by reason162

Sure, we all claim we "care," yet I hardly hear the for-hire industry supporting more stringent regs, no matter the species.
From fluke to stripers to now bluefish, the science is always wrong. The argument always run one way and not the other.

The Overfished assessment came down in Sept, and before year's end we're looking at 3 - 5 limit for 2020. Some
complain that's actually not proactive enough, but compared to the species managed by ASMFC it's lightyears ahead in terms of efficiency.

Oh and no room for BS "conservation equivalency," lb for lb paybacks for 2021. That's how it should be done, and looking at the feds' track record
compared to ASMFC it's hard to argue which approach works for the resource.

Again "THE FOR HIRE" people are the bad guys. There the ones who pay for this site not you. This is just your opinion and it ain't worth shit!!I am glad there are not more people like you on this site you are trying to ruin.

[bunker dunker]

easy Sal,your gonna blow a gasket!!!!! some folks just don't get it.relax and enjoy.

[bulletbob]

They are being overfished, but I don't think its the "for hire" guys... They fish for blues a lot less than they did at one time, yet the blues are still MIA..

I blame the fact that they have simply become a target of netters, and a lot more are being sold to eat than years ago.. We recs were no bargain either for way too long, taking huge garbage cans full of huge blues home and either letting them rot or using them for fertilizer.. Blues should come back strong unless they keep getting wiped out as 12 inch ' panfish " by commercial netters looking to turn a buck.. Never thought we would see this with blues, yet here we are... bob

[Capt Sal]

Originally Posted by bunker dunker

easy Sal,your gonna blow a gasket!!!!! some folks just don't get it.relax and enjoy.

Not in my nature lol

[Honger]

Originally Posted by Capt Sal

Again "THE FOR HIRE" people are the bad guys. There the ones who pay for this site not you. This is just your opinion and it ain't worth shit!!I am glad there are not more people like you on this site you are trying to ruin.

What a short sighted answer, without everyday users who generate traffic for this site you dont have a platform to advertise on.