Fluke Stock Theory

[Broad Bill]

Don’t want to cannibalize other threads so starting a new one about the state of the fluke fishery from my perspective based on reports, time on the water, and research I’ve done for almost 10 years now. South winds, regulations, cold water, harvesting the breeding stock, impact of commercial fishing, no protection for the spawn, year round commercial pressure, advancements in commercial fishing technology, substantial build-up of the offshore winter commercial fleet especially from southern states like North Carolina and Virginia, increases in wholesale prices for larger fish, regulations mandating the harvest of larger sexually mature age groups or the mega breeders of the stock, bias by regulatory agencies favoring the commercial sector and insane amounts of commercial discard mortality etc. are all factoring into the decline of this fishery.

As many have said in prior posts, we’ve had south winds forever. The frequency of south winds is what’s changed this year but the Jersey Shore and south winds have always gone hand in hand and it no doubt effects the bite. Years ago, they usually came up in the afternoon coinciding with rising air temperatures throughout the day. This year they seem to be an all-day occurrence and for weeks on end. I remember years ago fishing the Long Branch pier when we’d be hammering fluke of all sizes every cast. If the wind shifted to the south, the bite stopped immediately as if someone hit a switch. The impact can be that extreme and happen that quickly. I’ve seen it too many times to believe it’s a coincidence. BUT with that said, if shorts are feeding, larger specimens should be as well. The problem we’re seeing is the older age class groups of this stock have been pounded far too long, regulations have caused that portion of the biomass to materially decline and there’s no stock that can sustain itself under those conditions as recruitment levels are destroyed which is what we’ve seen over at minimum the last decade.

Fish are still being caught. Problem is with continued emphasis on harvesting 18” and larger fish both commercially and recreationally, the stock has gone through a transformation of age groups and gender composition. On water studies support both and aren’t disputable. The biomass overall has declined otherwise we wouldn’t have seen a decrease in commercial quotas this year from 15.5 million lbs. in 2023 to 8.8 million lbs. in 2024 or a 43% decrease. Half that commercial quota is allocated to Virginia (1.8 million lbs.) and North Carolina (2.4 million lbs.) who harvest almost exclusively during the fall / winter months off our coast. That decrease in commercial quota alone should concern everyone as that sector has always received preferential treatment in the management of this stock so if they’re taking that degree of a haircut from NMFS, what does that tell us about the overall health of the fishery. When conditions are more favorable, you’ll see fish caught but the biomass isn’t there anymore. That’s a leading indicator a fishery is in decline and coupled with the fact the larger age groups are disappearing from the stock for multiple reasons, this stock has a limited and bleak future.

We can talk about the impacts a slot, size slot, the fact the last two year NJ had a ridiculously thin 17” - 18” slot, which by the way tremendously helped party and for hire vessels, may have led to the elimination of an age group but I don’t agree with that theory. As far as I know, NJ is the only state that implemented a slot. NJ has approximately 23% of the recreational quota and if we think the NJ slot based on those numbers killed an entire age group, I disagree that two years for one state with a slot and a 20% portion of the recreational quota would have that dramatic an impact. At the same time, if you adhere to that theory, you'd have to agree for the same reason that harvesting 18" plus fish since 2008 due to size minimum regulations has had the same impact on the mega breeders of the stock.

Look at the below chart (first graph) which I’ve posted here before. Black bars are on board federal observer percentages of commercial discard to landings, even though it says catch. Blue bars are percentages from operator’s VTR (Vessel Trip Reports) to landings which operators are required to provide every trip on an honor system basis. They can put any percentage on the VTR they wish and its completely unsubstantiated. Chart was from the 57th stock assessment and removed from every stock assessment since because of the picture it paints about the waste commercial netting causes in this fishery. In 2006, 2007 and 2008, dead discard was reported by independent observers at 85%, 145% and 95% of landings. Commercial landings (in lbs.) for those years were 13.9 million, 10 million and 9.2 million. That means for those three years alone if NMFS used their own observers discard percentage statistics for dead discard mortality as opposed to arbitrary VTR percentages from commercial operators which you know are intentionally understated, the commercial sector killed 11.8 million, 14.5 million and 8.75 million pounds of less desirable fish or 35 million pounds in total to harvest 33 million pounds. More than 100% discard mortality in the harvest of their allowable quota. If the fish discarded averaged 1.5 pounds, the future of the fishery, in three years the commercial sector killed 23 million fish in the process of harvesting 33 million pounds of higher value fish!

Notice how the range changes between blue and black bars in 2000. Why? Because when size minimums started being used in the recreational sector to handicap recreational harvest and ultimately push 14” to 18” fish to the exclusive harvest of the commercial sector, commercial operators started harvesting those larger more valuable fish and killing the younger age classes caught in their nets. It’s called “selective harvest” and it will always result in substantially higher discard rates and waste in any fishery.

A table I created from stock assessment data (second graph) used to set and manage quotas is attached depicting weight assignments of fish. Most people never get to this level of understanding exactly how the recreational sector is being screwed and the fishery itself is being mismanaged. The table shows unexplained weight disparities of fish caught commercially versus the same age class weights assigned to fish caught recreationally. There's two parts of the analysis, for some reason NMFS assigns different weight values to fish harvested commercially from Maine to Virginia than they do for fish harvested by North Carolina. What makes this disparity even more ridiculous is North Carolina is harvesting almost 100% of their fish from our local waters and weights should be identical to recreational. We’re all fishing essentially the same body of fish at this point other than maybe commercials operating from Gloucester and points north. There’s a 40% to 60% discrepancy in the weights assigned to identical age classes between sectors. If you consider the overall annual quota is allocated 60/40 in favor of the commercial sector along with the fact assigned weight values range between 40% to 60% lower for the commercial fishery for identical age class fish, the commercial fishery is actually getting closer to a 75% allocation of every year’s overall quota versus 25% for the recreational sector. Now add the above discard percentages associated with commercial netting, no closed season during the spawn and NMFS or the NEFSC having no idea what the impact is of commercial netting during the spawn on recruitment coupled with the year round pounding of the stock commercially and the problem this fishery is facing is obvious. The stock is in a freefall and it won’t rebound unless there’s a complete overhaul in how it’s being managed which won’t happen until it’s too late. Anyone expecting this to reverse trend next year because we don’t have a slot in New Jersey this year I think will be very disappointed. And when the commercial fleet does the same to the Mid-Atlantic stock which they did to the Chesapeake stock and move further north to Massachusetts and the last remaining Southern New England biomass, it’s game over.

Sorry to be the wet rag here but it doesn’t take science or a genius to realize you can’t target the breeding population of a stock, kill substantial portions of younger age classes in the process, completely disrupt the spawn without understanding the consequences and have a year round commercial fishery providing no protection to the stock whatsoever and think any fishery will survive those conditions. This fishery will fail unless corrective measure are taken to manage it as opposed to exploiting it. Management doesn’t like using words like “collapse” or “fail” but that’s exactly what we’re witnessing and will continue to experience with this stock.

[JettiCrawler85]

Great post Broad Bill!

Sitting on the couch right now with not a thing to do. I would be fishing but it’s been total crap!

Maybe I’ll go sink some crabs and try to muster up a Tog.

Time to break out the tip ups and rearrange the jet sled. Get me on the ice!

Oh wait - there won’t be any of that this year either!

SMH !!!

[hammer4reel]

If your info was accurate (which I don’t believe it’s even close )
Then NMFS would have to take those ridiculously high discards into account in landings .
Just like they add release mortality into ours .

They don’t just drag and drag until their nets are over full . And then throw back as many dead fish as they keep .
To them every fish is money .

Actually look at reports from Long Island and all the states above us .
Why are they experiencing the best fluke fishing they have ever seen ?

It’s pretty evident there is a movement of the main biomass of this fishery .

The movement that should have been filling in here. Was absolutely crushed by the commercial fleets from the Carolina’s .
.

While fishing here def isn’t good by any means , this year there has been more commercial presence in our area than ever . And they definitely are catching their weekly quotas here .
So fish are here , even if recreational guys aren’t catching

[Broad Bill]

Originally Posted by hammer4reel

If your info was accurate (which I don’t believe it’s even close )
Then NMFS would have to take those ridiculously high discards into account in landings .
Just like they add release mortality into ours .

They don’t just drag and drag until their nets are over full . And then throw back as many dead fish as they keep .
To them every fish is money .

Actually look at reports from Long Island and all the states above us .
Why are they experiencing the best fluke fishing they have ever seen ?

It’s pretty evident there is a movement of the main biomass of this fishery .

The movement that should have been filling in here. Was absolutely crushed by the commercial fleets from the Carolina’s .
.

While fishing here def isn’t good by any means , this year there has been more commercial presence in our area than ever . And they definitely are catching their weekly quotas here .
So fish are here , even if recreational guys aren’t catching

H4R, I'm not makin the discard information up, the graph is from federal on board observers. Who should we believe, you or someone whose job includes among other things monitoring discards and compliance among commercial vessels? My money is on the on board observers.

NMFS would have to take these ridiculously high discard numbers into account in their landings. This says the man who has maintained all these years every number published by NMFS can't be correct but now this number had to be added to commercial landings why, because you say so. First it should be added to discard mortality, not landings, and second if you do the research it wasn't reported as you know what commercial landing have been running at commercially for years. I'm sure NMFS just posted the information to piss off the commercials and open themselves up to another lawsuit by that sector.

I agree, to them every fish is money. But at the same time every fish that brings the highest catch value back at the dock is more money. This coming from someone who not long ago posted that commercials target the largest fish because that's where the money is. Can't have it both ways my friend. I'm sure their nets aren't geared to catch only the largest and miss the massive amount of younger age classes that become collateral damage and tossed back overboard dead. NEFSC maintains an 80% mortality rate for commercial discards per tow. I'm sure it's higher and in the winter it's 100% as fish harvested are taken care of first and then the fish being discarded are shoveled overboard. How many fish coming up from 100 plus ft. depths in 30 degree temps do you actually think survive after being towed around and left on deck for a half hour?

It’s pretty evident there is a movement of the main biomass of this fishery. The movement that should have been filling in here was absolutely crushed by the commercial fleets from the Carolina’s .

Thank you, you're making my point. Commercials are killing the southern portion of the biomass in our waters and eventually they'll be forced to move north when they do the same thing to our local biomass they did to the Chesapeake biomass years ago. Then they'll have no choice but to move further north and target the last remaining biomass that's left. The northerly biomass isn't growing, the southerly portion is contracting, exactly what I've been saying. And I thought you said the biomass wasn't back filling here because of New Jersey's recreational slot limit, now you're saying it is in fact because of local commercial pressure which I agree with among other things. Got it, thanks for the clarification and getting it right.

Again yes there's more commercial presence this year than ever and they are catching their quotas which were reduced by 43%. You honestly believe they're keeping smaller less valuable fish after taking a 43% haircut in quota. It's economics 101 my friend, and you question the accuracy of my information and opinions. Not going to get into a debate, stated my theory and time will tell whether it's correct or not but as I said, this fishery can't be managed the way it is and survive.

Name one other fishery that kills all breeders, has a year round commercial presence, kills millions of younger age classes in the processes, pounds the stock not only during their spawn but year round, has insane amounts of waste involved and God only knows how much illicit netting is taking place and I'll be more prone to listen to your arguments. Just name one fishery which has survived those conditions? That shouldn't be a difficult request for someone of your talents and pulse on the fishery.

[reason162]

Originally Posted by hammer4reel

Actually look at reports from Long Island and all the states above us .
Why are they experiencing the best fluke fishing they have ever seen?

I agree that the biomass is shifting north, but asides from a couple of SS bays the fluke fishing in NY and northern states has been abysmal this year.

[Broad Bill]

Originally Posted by reason162

I agree that the biomass is shifting north, but asides from a couple of SS bays the fluke fishing in NY and northern states has been abysmal this year.

Roger I agree the biomass is and has always been moving north. I believe it's a natural progression of the fish which do get through the gauntlet of commercial netting and get larger, enhanced by less fishing pressure for now overall in northern waters and to some degree which is difficult to quantify warming ocean temperatures. With that said, I believe geographical expansion of the stock is not what we're talking about here to your point about abysmal fishing north of here, I think it's as I've been saying for years symptoms of a fishery in dire trouble.

[hammer4reel]

Originally Posted by Broad Bill

H4R, I'm not makin the discard information up, the graph is from federal on board observers. Who should we believe, you or someone whose job includes among other things monitoring discards and compliance among commercial vessels? My money is on the on board observers.

NMFS would have to take these ridiculously high discard numbers into account in their landings. This says the man who has maintained all these years every number published by NMFS can't be correct but now this number had to be added to commercial landings why, because you say so. First it should be added to discard mortality, not landings, and second if you do the research it wasn't reported as you know what commercial landing have been running at commercially for years. I'm sure NMFS just posted the information to piss off the commercials and open themselves up to another lawsuit by that sector.

I agree, to them every fish is money. But at the same time every fish that brings the highest catch value back at the dock is more money. This coming from someone who not long ago posted that commercials target the largest fish because that's where the money is. Can't have it both ways my friend. I'm sure their nets aren't geared to catch only the largest and miss the massive amount of younger age classes that become collateral damage and tossed back overboard dead. NEFSC maintains an 80% mortality rate for commercial discards per tow. I'm sure it's higher and in the winter it's 100% as fish harvested are taken care of first and then the fish being discarded are shoveled overboard. How many fish coming up from 100 plus ft. depths in 30 degree temps do you actually think survive after being towed around and left on deck for a half hour?

It’s pretty evident there is a movement of the main biomass of this fishery. The movement that should have been filling in here was absolutely crushed by the commercial fleets from the Carolina’s .

Thank you, you're making my point. Commercials are killing the southern portion of the biomass in our waters and eventually they'll be forced to move north when they do the same thing to our local biomass they did to the Chesapeake biomass years ago. Then they'll have no choice but to move further north and target the last remaining biomass that's left. The northerly biomass isn't growing, the southerly portion is contracting, exactly what I've been saying. And I thought you said the biomass wasn't back filling here because of New Jersey's recreational slot limit, now you're saying it is in fact because of local commercial pressure which I agree with among other things. Got it, thanks for the clarification and getting it right.

Again yes there's more commercial presence this year than ever and they are catching their quotas which were reduced by 43%. You honestly believe they're keeping smaller less valuable fish after taking a 43% haircut in quota. It's economics 101 my friend, and you question the accuracy of my information and opinions. Not going to get into a debate, stated my theory and time will tell whether it's correct or not but as I said, this fishery can't be managed the way it is and survive.

Name one other fishery that kills all breeders, has a year round commercial presence, kills millions of younger age classes in the processes, pounds the stock not only during their spawn but year round, has insane amounts of waste involved and God only knows how much illicit netting is taking place and I'll be more prone to listen to your arguments. Just name one fishery which has survived those conditions? That shouldn't be a difficult request for someone of your talents and pulse on the fishery.

How longs it been since you actually caught a fluke , and filleted it ?
Even when we had the slot the last two years all the fluke had eggs in them .
There were no males out of hundreds of fish we caught .

Newer study’s believe males hardly come inshore . So should we make it a minimum of 15 miles before you’re allowed to fluke ?

I agree they allow commercials to fish at times when they are stacked up , and easier to catch including the spawn .
But you’re constantly stretching even your own imagination to double or triple what actually happens .

Fg monitors pretty well what goes on here with local boats , not so sure how well with out of state boats .

As far as them only catching their quotas because it was lowered , there are more boats fishing here daily than ever .
Reason is most guys that scalloped now aren’t because of those quota cuts .
Fluke is the only thing available , so they are doing that .

.
I also didn’t say fish weren’t filling in here because of the slot .
I said the absence of age class fish that would be 18” was hammered the last two years .
Plenty of fish above 19” and under 17”

Data charts are only as good as the info used to make them .
Your data is always skewed , and that’s why it never got the traction it should have recieved .

[hammer4reel]

Originally Posted by reason162

I agree that the biomass is shifting north, but asides from a couple of SS bays the fluke fishing in NY and northern states has been abysmal this year.

I definitely don’t agree with that .
Ny, RI and Massachusetts have been having awesome fluking this year .
Many claiming the best ever .

Massachusetts normally has a slow period from mid June to August .
They have had solid catches weekly .

[reason162]

Originally Posted by hammer4reel

I definitely don’t agree with that .
Ny, RI and Massachusetts have been having awesome fluking this year .
Many claiming the best ever.

I don't know what to say - that is the polar opposite from what I hear from people who fish from Montauk on north (regular patrons of party/charter boats + captains).

[Broad Bill]

Originally Posted by hammer4reel

How longs it been since you actually caught a fluke , and filleted it ?
Even when we had the slot the last two years all the fluke had eggs in them .
There were no males out of hundreds of fish we caught .

Newer study’s believe males hardly come inshore . So should we make it a minimum of 15 miles before you’re allowed to fluke ?

I agree they allow commercials to fish at times when they are stacked up , and easier to catch including the spawn .
But you’re constantly stretching even your own imagination to double or triple what actually happens .

Fg monitors pretty well what goes on here with local boats , not so sure how well with out of state boats .

As far as them only catching their quotas because it was lowered , there are more boats fishing here daily than ever .
Reason is most guys that scalloped now aren’t because of those quota cuts .
Fluke is the only thing available , so they are doing that .

.
I also didn’t say fish weren’t filling in here because of the slot .
I said the absence of age class fish that would be 18” was hammered the last two years .
Plenty of fish above 19” and under 17”

Data charts are only as good as the info used to make them .
Your data is always skewed , and that’s why it never got the traction it should have received .

How long has it been since I've caught and filleted a fluke, July of this year.
What's your point?

I've always said most fish over 18" are females so not sure what your comment is responding to. You can revisit all my prior posts if you wish. Do males typically stage offshore more than females, maybe that's today's conventional wisdom after all these years but it's not what Rutgers study showed. When's the last time you filleted a fish under 18" to see if it was male or female? Couldn't be later than 2007 which was the last time the minimum size limit was less than 18" in New Jersey at 17". I do however know back then many fish that size and smaller when the regulations allowed the recreational sector to harvest those smaller sizes many more fish being harvested were males and yes that was from filleting many fluke.

An 18" male fluke is about 8-9 years old, how many male fluke do you think in todays world actually live that long between natural mortality and year round commercial onslaught? About five years ago, two male fluke were given honorable mention in trawl studies in a presentation Kiley Dancy gave in Delaware. Their sizes were 20" and 21"! Even if males have a tendency of staging more offshore which I'd question, harvesting 18" plus fish will continue killing off almost exclusively female breeders which will be the ultimate death of this fishery.

Stretching my imagination, really. Question, when party boats catch hundreds of shorts and return to the docks with 7 keepers, how many of those same fish do you think commercials would kill if they worked that same patch of fish. I know commercials can keep 14" and up but that's not the size they're after, they retain the largest fish to get the highest catch value. So if you think federal observer numbers are wrong and commercials are reporting accurate discard percentages on VTR's or their discard to landing ratio is anywhere near what's being reported, you can keep believing that delusion.

FG monitors landings, they have no idea what discards at sea are and they're too stretched out to control illegal harvest by commercials. It's a problem in every state and one boat can do tremendous damage to the stock. Codfather and more recently Montauk FV New Age, owner operator Christopher Winkler, to mention a few. Black market commercial netting is rampant.

Commercials only catching their quota because it was lowered, I'm not even sure what you're responding to since I never brought that up. I do agree that fluke are getting pounded more than ever because of cuts in other fisheries so we agree on that.

I used NMFS data against them to illustrate the flaws in their policies. My essential conclusions were increased size limits to recreational pushed more access of the overall fishery to commercial at the recreational sector's expense. That's a fact. I showed that increases in size minimums had a direct correlations every year since 2000 to reductions in the proportion of females to males in the stock based on their own studies. That's a fact and one anyone whose fished this stock will attest to. And as the female population got clobbered, recruitment followed suit. That would seem to be common sense, kill the breeders and recruitment will suffer dearly. Females grow larger and live longer, a fact that's been supported by many independent studies so when you increase minimums and incent selective harvest by the commercial sector to maximize catch values as quotas are being cut, you're asking for huge problems.

I'm not a construction worker and don't profess to be. You're not a technical or analytical guy so don't try to be. I've done more research on this fishery than you ever will with select data I believe is representative of the fishery, passed peer review, years on the water, sources I have in the industry and common sense. Do I believe MRIP is accurate, not at all. Do I believe 25% natural mortality is accurate, I have no idea. Do I believe recreational discard percentages are correct, I think anything involved with MRIP is questionable at best. But my analysis isn't made up of that data. The trends I've shown in the fishery coinciding with regulations, changes in the biomass, reductions in size and possession limits, reduction in recruitment etc. are reflective of what we're seeing in the fishery so if you wish to opine on something you know nothing about that's your prerogative. My work turned a lot of heads but never got the traction it deserved because it challenged the decisions being made managing this fishery which showed those decisions are actually hurting it more than helping it and being made for the benefit of economics and not fisheries management. Politics in other words. You think Mark Terceiro, Mike Luisi, Kiley Dancy, Chris Batsavage, Chris Moore, Brandon Muffley, or any of the other decision makers from NMFS, NEFSC, ASMFC or MAMFC will admit to their mistakes over the last two decades managing this fishery or any other? Too much money changing hands. Doesn't work that way, just as Michael Waine from ASA decided to play politics instead of addressing the issues we discussed with him years ago.

Instead we've gone from one of the most robust fisheries ever to continued declines in the biomass, quotas and regulations to the recreational sector over the last two decades coinciding with the continued use of increased size minimums as the preferred method to manage recreational catch. This year's massive quota cuts, an abysmal season to date and you want us to believe this happened because of what? Since you probably filleted more fish than me this year, almost all females I'm sure, I'll bow to your ultimate wisdom of the fishery as to why this is all happening and what needs to be done to correct it. I'll do that if you answer the one question I asked in my earlier post which is name one fishery being managed the same way this fishery is which is sustainable and growing. You can't because there aren't any.