NJ Saltwater Fisherman Forums
NJ Saltwater Fisherman => Fisheries Management => Topic started by: Capt. Ed on July 20, 2007, 09:09:30 AM
-
Hi All,
Word has gotten out that the NMFS is talking about a 40% quota cut for the 2008 season.
This is even before the numbers for 2007 come out. On water observation would lead one to believe that NY, NJ and Delaware, at least, will overfish their quota.
This has brought outrage on Capitol Hill, especially to Rep. Jim Saxon who helped author changes to the Magnuson-Stevens Act that was suppose to stabilize the quota.
Rep. Saxton promised us that the 2008 quota would be 19.2 million pounds; 2009 would increase to 22.7 million pounds; and 29 million pounds by 2012.
Even though the stock biomass has doubled since 1993 and the spawning stock biomass has nearly tripled, NMFS is proposing to vitrually halt all fishing, recreational and commercial, with this quota.
How can this have been so mis-managed? What will lawmakers do? Are the fish already rebuilt to maximum levels given the depletion of the estuaries?
One thing is sure, this will not get resolved quickly.
If the scientists at NMFS are the "best and brightest," someone should be looking at the schools that issued their degrees!
Stay tuned!
Capt. Ed
-
wow... :o
-
:'( :'(
Thanks for keeping us up to date Capt. Ed
-
Here we go again ::)
-
Oh boy.. I dont undertand the rationale.. Could some please explain??
-
Hi Flukedood,
In short, the NMFS is trying to rebuild the fluke population to a level "guessed to exist through computer models" back in the 1930s. That would be somewhere around 200 million pounds, give or take a few million pounds.
They have a timeline to do it via the Magnuson-Stevens Act. There are also tons of environmental groups armed with lawsuits in hand if that number is strayed from.
It has lead to a battle every year since 1994 over quota. That is just the overall quota, not how comms vs recs split it or how it is allocated to states.
This will get ugly ... it is a possiblity, and I stress a possibility, that after they figure out the quota and the 2007 data comes in, that there will be little or no quota left for 2008.
Of course, there is a ton of finger pointing to how this could have happened, but ... HERE We ARE!
Scary,
Ed
-
Typical governmental operation. The blind leading the blind.
Also falls into the Peter Principal. "In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence." I think these people are there.
-
wow, So this could possibly mean no season for 08?? That is truly sad..the financial impact is unthinkable..
-
Hi Flukedood,
Little or no season if NMFS gets there way and that still does not mean we are out of the woods for 2009 and beyond.
Right now, it is estimated that there are 110 million (give or take a few million) pounds of fluke. That would mean they would have to nearly double the population by 2013 to be in compliance with the law (Magnuson-Stevens). There are no provisions in Magnuson-Stevens for what happens if the target is not met.
There is also case law that says the plan in place, yearly, must have a 50% chance of contributing to the population growth.
Add to this mess that they:
1. Do not know the historical highs to begin with.
2. The collected data is flawed but it is the "best available science."
3. We need to double the population in the next 5 years.
4. The estuaries are 50% destroyed from 1950 levels.
All leads to court, eventually, in my mind.
Yes, it is a possibility that lawmakers will be involved so anything can happen. This time I am sure that someone may want to challenge any "deals" cut in court.
Yes, your 2008 and beyond fluke seasons are in jeopardy! No melodrama here. I have sat in too many of the NMFS, JCAA and RFA meetings to know this is not good.
As far as financial impact, it is clear to me they do not care!
Capt. Ed
-
Wow they dont care about the domino affect finacially it will have?? Head boats, bait stores, I mean The list can go on and on ..
this is very sad.. I really hope they can come up with some kind of compromise.. And there is no changing/ modifing the magnum Stevens act?? I mean is it me or does the fluke population seem pretty stable?? and the want to double the biomass in 5 years?? Seems a little extreme to me..
-
Again,, were's the data from the commercial industry?? What about all the dead loss from their quota!!
I hate to say this but what a joke!!!..
Punish the recreational fisherman!!!
-
Hi Joe,
Recs. are an easy target because there is little or no organized opposition ... we need a good lobbyist or, this sounds absurd, but a saltwater license to show how many people actually fish instead of just estimates. Ouch!
Flukedood - They just renewed the Magnuson-Stevens Act last year (they do it every 10 years). What happens when a fish is determined to be "overifshed" is that there becomes a 10 yr. plan to rebuild it. That has been going on since 1994 or so with fantastic results (nearly doubling the biomass and tripling the spawning biomass). However, the goal they set back when this started was flawed. They chose a number of 200 million pounds or so, despite no evidence that the fishery had this many fish. It is a guess and they have been basing all there decisions on this guess for 10 years.
The Magnuson-Stevens Act is suppose to look at the financial hardships involved, but the environmental lobby (Pew Trust among others) are so strong and organized that they are afraid of lawsuits.
I say, let's go to court!
Capt. Ed
-
Hi All,
I just read Ed's post and John Geiser's article in the Hook, Line And Sinker. Both mentioned that the mark everyone is focusing on is the 1930's biomass figures. They say with computer models they have an idea of what it was back then. In my way of thinking if you use even a slightly different model to figure this out the statistics will be skewed and flawed making them unrealistic and useless as a benchmark.
There are so many variables to take into consideration today that would make those figures useless as well. A for instance, the bays and estuaries that once harbored pristine spawning grounds are being deteriorated to the point that some if not most are irreversible or would take decades to repair and many of us would never see their return in our life time.
If you have any concerns about what to do now is the time for some it is too late but later is better than never.
Write or call or e-mail your state Representative and voice your opinion.
Here is Jim Saxton's web site e-mail like I do and did to add a voice to his arsenal of weapons to use when he represents us.
http://www.house.gov/saxton/
Don't stick your head into the sand on this one it is too mismanaged and I think most of us realize this. So in plain language JUST DO IT!!! If you choose to just sit there wringing your hands and do nothing you are part of the problem. Sorry for the wake up call :P
Happy Catching
Paul
-
40% cut!!! Jersey will have something like a 20" minimum, 3 bag limit and a 10 week season!! Damn, this is getting BAD!!!!
-
Hi Paul,
Many thanks!
One more thing guys. If you think this stops at Fluke you are not thinking on a bigger picture.
When the Fluke become more restricted, we, as fisherman, will target other species. What will they be?
Well, Stripers for a part of the Spring and maybe into the Summer. But, they have their own problems, especially if we do not fix the menhaden issue on an oceanwide basis.
Some will say we should target Blackfish. Well, that plan is not acceptable because even stiffer rules will be coming down the pike because they are not recovering at all and are already under a similar rebuilding (i.e. "overfished") plan.
Some will say Sea Bass. Very good and that will work for a while. Then the tremendous pressure will have negative impact on that fishery. The spiral downward continues.
Some will say Ling offshore. Yes, it is a possibility but now you are travelling 20+ miles to fish.
Some will say Bluefish. OK - but how many trips can you take of those.
Some will say tuna. They are harshly restricted and in danger of collapse themselves.
Some will say sharks. They are harshly restricted and in danger of collapse. themselves.
Some will say swords. They are far offshore and a night fishery that few are really equipped to pursue.
You all can get my point. We are in a downward spiral that may not be recoverable for a long time.
We face the following:
1. Regulations pushing us offshore further and further to find other species to fish.
2. We are heading for a trophy fishery or even "Catch and Release."
3. We have been asked to sacrifice and the sacrifices are not be rewarded.
There are few answers. The one that is easiest to do is to get involved. Get educated. Hold your Representatives and Senators in Washington, DC accountable.
Time to step off the soap box,
Capt. Ed
-
Hi Duffman,
It will be worst than that!
The Fluke fishery is "overfished." That is why there is a "plan" in place. There is early data to show that many states including NJ, NY and Delaware are "overfishing." That is bad as harsher penalties kick in.
For example, if they allocate 11 millions pounds next year (which is roughly a 40% cut), they then can take the amount of fish that were "overfished" in 2007 away from the 2008 quota.
We then have to split the quota with the comms 60 comms vs. 40 recs. we then hav to allocate to all the states in the eastern seaboard.
You are thinking right but not steep enough!
Capt. Ed
-
Where and when do they usually hold meetings?? I have not really been involved but I would like to start to get involved as much as I can
-
Hi Flukedood,
You have taken the first step. You are asking good questions!
I will be posting meetings and times as we go along.
Oh yeah, most meetings are not local to NJ (but they try to get one in here). ANother problem with the way the "system" works.
I have been a part of this mess for a long time. I will try to share any background I have.
There are many better people to do so but I think I am a good start.
BTW, even though I have had my disagreements with the JCAA and RFA over the years, they are, right now, our only hope of representation! They will need more money, members and volunteers.
Capt. Ed
-
Hi All,
BTW ... I belong to the National Environmental Trust (Pew Trust) and a few other "environmentalist mailing lists.
Why?
Some of their causes are good and reasonable. SOme of them are not and I want to know what they are doing.
For example, this week, they are pressuring key Representatives and fisheries people about Oceans 21 (wait until you hear about that one) and the new quotas as called out in Magnuson-Stevens.
They are well organized; motivated; and have a lot of money. This will be a formidible fight!
Below is the letter.
Thanks,
Capt. Ed
______________________________________
Dear Ed,
[Note: We normally don't send two emails in one week, but this
issue has a sudden deadline.]
In January, Congress responded to public pressure from citizens
like you and passed a strong new law to end overfishing and put
ocean wildlife on a course toward healthy population levels. But
without strong rules from the National Marine Fisheries Service,
the federal agency responsible for enforcing the new law,
Congress' action will be meaningless.
Send a message to your representative asking him or her to sign
on to a letter calling on the National Marine Fisheries Service
to enact strong new rules to protect fish and fishermen by
ensuring sustainable fish populations through well-informed
decision-making.
The Representative must consider the issue and sign the letter
on or before Friday the 20th, so time is of the essence. Thanks
for your help!
You can take action on this alert via the web at:
http://actionnetwork.org/campaign/ocean_ecosystems/5eu37nr1dtn8et?
Visit the web address below to ask your friends to help.
http://actionnetwork.org/campaign/ocean_ecosystems/forward/5eu37nr1dtn8et?
We encourage you to take action by July 20, 2007
Urge Your Representative to Conserve Fish and Ocean Ecosystems
INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPOND VIA THE WEB:
If you have access to a web browser, you can take action on this
alert by going to the following URL:
http://actionnetwork.org/campaign/ocean_ecosystems/5eu37nr1dtn8et?
Your letter will be addressed and sent to:
Your Congressperson
----THIS LETTER WILL BE SENT IN YOUR NAME----
Dear [decision maker name automatically inserted here],
As you are aware, numerous recent scientific studies have come
to the conclusion that our oceans are in trouble and we need to
chart a new direction to fix them. Two blue-ribbon commissions,
the Pew Oceans Commission and the U.S. Commission on Ocean
Policy reached this conclusion. In January 2007, President Bush
signed the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
Reauthorization Act. This important law took several steps
forward to protect our oceans and marine fish populations while
ensuring continued fishing opportunities. For example, the new
law strengthens the role of science in fisheries management and
seeks to end overfishing once and for all.
However, your good actions won't result in on-the-water
protections for marine fish populations unless the National
Marine Fisheries Service writes strong rules to implement the
new law.
Please sign on to a letter being circulated by Representative
Nick Rahall (D-WV) to the fisheries service calling on them to
enact strong new rules to protect fish and fishermen by ensuring
sustainable fish populations through well-informed
decision-making.
----END OF LETTER TO BE SENT----
Sincerely,
Ed Marut
--------------------------------------------------
If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for
National Environmental Trust at:
http://actionnetwork.org/nationalenvirotrust/join.html?r=SdzUZo11zkBEE
--------------------------------------------------
This message was sent to emgoofy@yahoo.com. To modify your email
communication preferences or update your personal profile, visit
your subscription management page at:
http://actionnetwork.org/nationalenvirotrust/smp.tcl?nkey=5eu37nr1dtn8et&
To stop ALL email from National Environmental Trust, reply via
email with "remove or unsubscribe" in the subject line, or use
the following link:
http://actionnetwork.org/nationalenvirotrust/remove-domain-direct.tcl?ctx=center&nkey=5eu37nr1dtn8et&
-
Was saying all last year that regardless of what regs they put in place for NJ 2007, with such a reduced Rec TAL, we'll overfish them and be in dire straits for 2008+.
-
Hi Ed,
Boy that is scary.
Oceans 11, is that the plan Australia has been playing around with?
http://www.acfonline.org.au/uploads/res_marine_oceans_11.pdf
Or is there something closer to home that we should be aware of?
Happy Catching
Paul
-
Hi Paul,
Oceans 21 (sorry for the typo before) ...
Oceans Conservation, Education and Strategy for the 21st Century Act (H.R. 2939)
It is a law being circulated that basically says that the Ocean needs to be treated as a whole ecosystem. It adds more layers of Mis-Management all under the guise that it will help fisheries management.
BTW, Jim Saxton is on of the four people who introduced this legislation ... maybe this week woke him up!
Please see short, executive summary in the Word document attached to this post.
I do not think it has a link to any other initiative around the world.
Ed
-
This is very sad and getting ridiculous.
-
I would still fish for fluke in the 2008 season. Forget them t^ I dont even quite understand what this 40% quota is. Will someone explain what it means ? A NO fluke season is just ridiculous.. lets take a stand to this and walk around with posters on the streets!!!
Fish On
-
HMMM.. well, there isn't any way to put this without controversy. I hate these restrictions, but I can't let it prevent me from being on the water. I don't fish for a living, so this will not affect me as much as the Charter companies. BUT, if they tighten up on the limits, we can still catch and release. Most of us here fish for the sport and the meat, they can try to take the meat away from us but they can't take the SPORT part away from us. Look at the fresh water fisherman... they catch and release all the time. Trust me, I want the meat as well as the next guy, but I will never let them take the SPORT away from me. I know Charter companies don't agree with this,,,, but please hear me, I am not agreeing to this either. As a sport fisherman, I need to be on the water one way or another...
-
Yeah, basically the best feeling is to have that fish hit your pole and to set the hook. That is the most fun about it, being able to get a keeper size fish is just a bonus!! t^
P.S
Even though Fluke is amazing to eat ;D
I think everything will be alright
Fish On
-
Yeah, basically the best feeling is to have that fish hit your pole and to set the hook. That is the most fun about it, being able to get a keeper size fish is just a bonus!! t^
P.S
Even though Fluke is amazing to eat ;D
I think everything will be alright
Fish On
for us, the sport fisherman, I agree with you fishon, unfortunatly we share our sport with people who make a living. This is a debate where I have to stand in the middle with. I don't agree with all the changing with size and bag limits of fish, BUT... I can't let them take it out of my soul, which is where I agree with you fishon.. Now that your back, I will let you know next time im on the boat, you can join me..
-
I really don't know what to say. i'm all for conservation and more times than not will throw a fish back that is considered just legal. fluke fishing is not my thing but it does seem that 90% of fisherman do target this specie and keep their share. now thats fine with me, it's not cheap running a boat nor is tackle and bait. it's great to stock the freezer and be able to eat our harvest as our ancestors did for survival. what I would like to see are the cold hard facts. I know there are some coastal states that do actual surveys. they grid the ocean floor and count all life for each area and come back the following year and do the same thing. I feel our local species deserve the same attention and believe our local species deserve it.
I don't know the facts about our striper's but heard we nearly lost them 20 something years ago and through conservation they are back in good numbers. was this for real? did the authorities do an actual survey? I'd love to have faith in our leaders and believe their actions have saved species from extinction but would love to read the actual facts for their actions.
-
one other thing...."they" want to use 1930 as a benchmark for fluke population? ok, fine but what about the other species in the food chain? do they know if there will be enough food for the fluke to eat or are they going in blind and hope they all have enough to eat and thrive?
-
Hi Hareball,
Exactly!
How one can set goals for one specific species without taking into consideration the interaction of all species and the state of the water and estuaries is beyond reasonable.
Also, you knows what the biomass was at any point of time, never mind back in 1930.
Nick - I agree with your position. I just feel bad for the people who try to stretch their money by catching some fish for themselves and/or their families.
The void between the haves and have nots just keeps getting wider in this country.
Ed
-
Certain things I can agree with.. If they raise the size limit of fish, then that can give the fish one more year of maturity and possible one more year of breeding which inturn will help the population grow. Unfortunatly with the abundance of bluefish, sand sharks, skates, etc... that will each the young fluke, this also hurts the population of fluke. Think about how many eggs are laid per fish, then think about how many survive. The bag limit is also a factor. If I catch 2 good keepers, thats all I personally need for the table, 4 if I am feeding my family. To catch alot of fish and putting it in the freezer is a waste for me. If thats the case, I will go to the store and buy frozen fish. I do not freeze fish. The best part of being a fisherman is that you get a chance to eat the freshest fish you can every want. Beats any market.
-
Hi Nick,
Well put ... I am much the same.
The one thing that I cannot understand is why they keep increasing the size limit. At first, it sounds like the right thing to do.
However, the bigger the fluke, the higher the probability that it is a female, and a sexually mature one at that.
You would think they would put a slot of say 14 to 18 inches (I think the comms get 14 inch fish but I may be wrong - is it 12???). Then you stand a chance that some males and females are taken.
The big problem with me is that this has been going on for the better part of 10 yrs. and these folks still cannot make a good decision.
Oh well ... back to fishing in the AM.
Are you going out? If so, best of luck!
Ed
-
Hi All,
I have to agree with everything that has been said here but I hope everyone realizes that just by raising quotas weather it be by size or limit is not going to fix the overall problem. It is like putting gum in the crack in the dam. Yeah, it might hold for a while but sooner or later the dam will burst.
We and I mean everyone especially those who have the power to make change have to look at the system and realize the problem does not solely lie with the fishermen be they recreational or commercial. The root of the problem starts way up stream (sorry for the pun)so to speak. Our rivers and estuaries are being bombarded with from fertilizers rich in nitrogen, sewer runoffs, animal feces leaching into small creeks, simply put, over population is taking its toll. We allowed out towns to grow at alarming rates and this is the price we have to pay. Our bays are slowly dieing which means the rich spawning grounds for many species could be no more.
I hate to get political but here lies another problem. Why do towns have to grow so large along the coastline of our country? Because that is how most small towns get their revenues, TAX THE MASSES. Look around and you will find that most coastal towns do not have large industry to fill their coffers to defray the cost of local infrastructures. Plus there is a little known fact why towns grow so large and it is called affordable housing. Most towns rely on grants handed out to local towns if they factor into their building plan affordable housing.
Yes, I is great living in or near a coastal area I have been in Toms River since 1967 and have seen it grow from a small township to the 10th largest municipality in the state. With all that population encroaching the watershed sooner or later it had to reach its ecological limit. Where humanization has overtaken the ecosystems ability to fight back.
All I am trying to say is that there is more to this than meets the eye. We have to change our ways of thinking but not to go to extremes like the environmental wackos would have us do.
Moderation here will go a long way to fix the problem without being over zealous and have us swing the pendulum too far to the right only to have it swing back and hit us in the back while we were not looking.
Get involved is the key to help solve this disaster waiting to happen. Talk, discuss, create a plan of action you feel comfortable and follow it. Don't bury your head in the sand on this one, there is a lot at steak here.
Sorry for the long post again...
Happy Catching
Paul
-
Hi Paul,
It could not have been said better. Actually, I have never seen it better said in so few lines!
Capt. Ed
-
As the song says "nothing from nothing leaves nothing"
They are well on the way to killing what is left of the recreational sport fishery, and at the same time allowing the commercial side just go merraly along.
(I am not bashing commercial fishermen, as three generations of my family made their living at it)
Several times I have written to the various fisheries management with Data I have from my father and great Uncles commercial logs, spanning40 some years. You can clearly see the differant fish cycles, just like the tides they peak and then ebb. A deaf ear was turned, I have been involved with JCAA and RFA only to see them rebuffed.
Some say well we will just catch and release, the problem is that depending on the species and how the fish is handed (and most handle them badly) you have between a 20-40% mortality rate. Just handling a fish you break the slime barrier and the get a fungus that will kill them.
Not that I agree (but can fully understand) The system is forcing the average person into breaking the regulations.
A man takes his family on a Charter or Party boat spends hard earned cash to go home with not enough fish to feed the family. Granted most are just doing it for enjoyment, but some actually count on getting a bucket of fish.
I have people on my boat catch 60 fish and can only keep 10 of them, 10 divided by 4 comes to 2.5 fish per person, and how many of the throwbacks died that could have been put to use?????
AS they said on the Little Rascals "hey where you goin? I don't know but I'm on my way!"
-
TOOT TOOT, here comes the political railroad.
The fishery management is going the same route FEMA has been going for years. They are relying to heavily on the perceived education of a certain group of people and not enough on the talent that comes from the school of hard Knox (and yes education). The big problem is how do you get those in power to stop burying their noses so deep up certain influential groups butts that their eyes have turned brown.
I could tell you stories about emergency management that could make your head spin. Another story another time. But the scenario is the same those that speak the loudest and carry the big stick win. The little guy does not stand a chance. But a bunch of little guys together might have a chance. We have to come up with the right weapon and hit the most vulnerable spot.
Paul
-
TOOT TOOT, here comes the political railroad.
The big problem is how do you get those in power to stop burying their noses so deep up certain influential groups butts that their eyes have turned brown.
We have to come up with the right weapon and hit the most vulnerable spot.
Paul
Paul, that would be by voting these idiots out of office. Make it know through newspaper articles and any media possible why these individuals were voted against. We have to make it perfectly clear that if you screw with us, you will be the one who gets it in the end. If their management was sincere and affective, it would be a different story. But to allow a handful of unknowedgable people dictate what can be done is intolerable.
-
It is scary but that is the way this country is run. Most of the departments state, county, and local are run by incompetents that got to their position through either political ties or family power. Just take a walk through any government building and talk to anyone or call on the phone and you become instantly aware they have no clear answers about anything.
This state is so corrupt it is scary to think how we function at all.
Paul