Flounder

[gtijoe]

20 or so years ago flounder fishing was great in shark river. Just moved back to NJ and I'm curious if it still exists?

[tautog]

Yes but it is usually better in the Fall. Nowhere is all that great anymore as flounder fishing has been declining for decades.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Same in the Navesink and Shrewsbury rivers too..

Most of the Flounder being caught these days are out on the deep wrecks in the Mudhole and in the middle of the summer too..

Not a lot of participation in the fishery either since the limit is 2 @ 12 inches so most are fishing for them while deep wreck fishing for other species..

[TomKat]

Winter flounder stock not rebounding.Even with 2 fish limit for years.Any thoughts.

[Jigman13]

Commercial dragging and habitat deterioration. Silting and dredging of inlets to access back bay habitat severely impact migration routes. Add to that commercial dragging and you have a recipe for disastrous fall out of a species.

I get them from shore in the way back of the Raritan Bay, but its pain-staking.

[Capt. Debbie]

Maybe a one fish limit will rebound an inshore fishery dead for decades in NJ? Better yet... we bring one with us and throw it in. LOL

Originally Posted by TomKat

Winter flounder stock not rebounding.Even with 2 fish limit for years.Any thoughts.

Originally Posted by TomKat

Winter flounder stock not rebounding. Even with 2 fish limit for years. Any thoughts.

In the early 80's the summer flounder fishery collapsed. To compensate for quota cuts made by fisheries management, commercial concerns with multi species permits set their sites on other species including winter flounder. Fishery has never been the same with current catch and stock levels about 10 - 15% of 80's levels. There are inshore habitat issues due mostly to continued over development as mentioned earlier, but that's not what caused a four decade decline. For all practical purposes, winter flounder (especially the SNE/MA stock) is an exclusive commercial fishery today with only occasional incidental recreational catches on deep water mudhole trips as by-catch while targeting other species. In the below charts, look at the increase in commercial harvest in the 80's and the associated decline in recruitment (60 million to 5 million) between 1980 and 2010.

Following charts reflect what occurred with catch, recruitment, spawning stock biomass and the fishery in general over the last four decades. Rest is history. No different than ling, whiting, cod, mackerel, weakfish and many other fisheries. You get the picture.

If you want to understand fishery management perspectives, read the following excerpt from the last winter flounder stock assessment in 2017:

The winter flounder commercial fishery was once a highly productive industry with annual harvest up to 40.3 million pounds. Since the early 1980's, landings have steadily declined. Total commercial landings of all three stocks combined (Gulf of Maine "GOM", SNE/MA and Georges Banks "GBK") dipped to 3.5 million pounds in 2010. Commercial landings have risen since 2010 due to increased quotas in 2011 and 2012 in the GOM stock, and the lifting of the SNE/MA moratorium in 2013 by NOAA. States, however, have maintained a restrictive commercial trip limit of 50 pounds and a recreational bag limit of two fish in state waters of SNE/MA.

Stock Status: The 2017 GOM operational stock assessment indicates overfishing is not occurring and the stock biomass is unknown. However, biomass reference points remain unknown and overfished status cannot be determined. The 2017 SNE/MA operational stock assessment indicates the stock is overfished, but overfishing is not occurring.

Stock and landings are down 85% - 90% since the 80's, yet overfishing is not occurring. How can a governing body tasked with managing a resource use the phrase "overfishing is not occurring and the stock biomass is unknown" simultaneously? The statements are mutually exclusive. Fail to understand their perspective. Stock assessments and the associated results are the report card of the effectiveness of policy decisions. How these statistics are overlooked or ignored at the detriment of a once thriving and valuable fishery is inexcusable. Lot of resources are committed to the collection of data representing "best available science". How that effort results in these policy decisions and essentially the ruination of an important fishery which thrived for years is the question anyone with half a brain should be asking.

[bulletbob]

I have read that Cormorants swallow small ones down one after the other, non stop.. LOTS and lots of cormorants out there these days.. Wonder if they might be a factor??? bob

Originally Posted by bulletbob

I have read that Cormorants swallow small ones down one after the other, non stop.. LOTS and lots of cormorants out there these days.. Wonder if they might be a factor??? bob

Bob hope all is well. I've seen Commorants coming up with one flounder after another in the back of Shark River. Fish ranging in size from keepers to postage stamps. Are they a contributing factor to the decline of flounder and every inshore species, I would have to think they are. But recruitment levels declining 90% annually from 60 million to 5 million, the associated destruction of another spawning stock biomass (same as what were experiencing in the summer flounder fishery) in addition to skyrocketing catch levels in the '80s that weren't managed properly are the key drivers causing the demise of this fishery.

[Blind Archer]

Back in the day, the flounder caught in the west end of the Raritan bay would be gorged to the point of expelling clam necks all over the boat. Commercial clamming in that end of the bay has removed much of the clam since then. No food ...no fish.