NJ Saltwater Fisherman Forums
NJ Saltwater Fisherman => Fisheries Management => Topic started by: Capt. Carl on February 11, 2012, 06:51:09 PM
-
Below are the summer flounder measures approved by the ASMFC Board for 2012. This is what will be discussed at next weeks NJMFC Advisors meeting. Remember not all these options might be put forward and there could be other options presented.
New Jersey 2011 Harvest Target: 1,335,000 fish 2011 Landings: 787,234 fish 2012 Harvest Target: 1,090,407 fish Alteration for 2012: 38% liberali,,,zation 2011 Regulations: Minimum Size: 18� Possession Limit: 8 fish Open Season: May 7-September 25
Proposed 2012 Measures: Option Min Size, Bag Limit, Open Season Liberalization %
1.. 18 inch @ 8 fish...May 7 - September 25 0%
2... 18 inch @ 8 fish... April 28 - October 14 32%
3... 18 inch @ 8 fish....April 7 - September 23 32%
4....18 inch @ 8 fish.... May 5 - October 21 32%
5....17.5 inch @ 5 fish... May 5 - September 23 29%
6 ...17.5 inch @ 5 fish... April 29 - September 23 38%
7 ...17.5 inch @ 5 fish... May 5 - September 29 38%
Im good with 5,6 or 7....
-
Ya know i really wouldnt mind 4 only because i really like the later fall season.
but i also agree 5,6,7 are good options
-
4?....... sept was bad enuf last year!....lol
How bout option 8....5 fish at 17.5 inches...no closed season
I didnt see that one on the list! 5hrug
-
Ya know i really wouldnt mind 4 only because i really like the later fall season.
but i also agree 5,6,7 are good options
whs I really like that late season fluking
-
5 6 and 7 t^
-
#2 should be the winner t^
-
1 thru 4 is great if you like to extend the time of catch and release.. with half of those becoming crab food..
-
4 t^
-
The later season of 2012 would have been good if "Irene" didn't come and screw it all up.
2 or 4.....
-
5 6 or 7!!! must of caught over a 100 fluke last year at 17.5
-
Below are the summer flounder measures approved by the ASMFC Board for 2012. This is what will be discussed at next weeks NJMFC Advisors meeting. Remember not all these options might be put forward and there could be other options presented.
New Jersey 2011 Harvest Target: 1,335,000 fish 2011 Landings: 787,234 fish 2012 Harvest Target: 1,090,407 fish Alteration for 2012: 38% liberali,,,zation 2011 Regulations: Minimum Size: 18� Possession Limit: 8 fish Open Season: May 7-September 25
Proposed 2012 Measures: Option Min Size, Bag Limit, Open Season Liberalization %
1.. 18 inch @ 8 fish...May 7 - September 25 0%
2... 18 inch @ 8 fish... April 28 - October 14 32%
3... 18 inch @ 8 fish....April 7 - September 23 32%
4....18 inch @ 8 fish.... May 5 - October 21 32%
5....17.5 inch @ 5 fish... May 5 - September 23 29%
6 ...17.5 inch @ 5 fish... April 29 - September 23 38%
7 ...17.5 inch @ 5 fish... May 5 - September 29 38%
Im good with 5,6 or 7....
NONE of the above--5,6,7, will get everyone there limit!! ( If you believe the 2,000,000 anglers that the fish was 17.9999999999---And I do-honest fishermen) With the allocation lowered --will equal overfishing and limit reached buy Aug.1st.and close the season due to overfishing.
Now if you do believe in all these 17.9999 fish--no-one should have a problem getting
6 fish@18 inches this year.
OK beat me up on the post BUT-I for one had not seen many fish between 14 and 17 inches last year-wonder where they went smk.
6 fish@18 would be my choice.
And I will agree wit surfjockey--Irene had a lot to do with last year slt
-
As IKAT said, none of the above.
No real need to debate what it should be as they will only rule on what is presented to them, the 7 choices from the list, and no other input will be taken at this point.
But with that said, I see no reason to have a closed season. After all, for the majority of the closed season you will not be fishing for or catching fluke anyway. No one fishes for fluke in Dec, Jan, Feb, March or April so why close it? The times when the season is closed and you may catch a fluke, Oct and May, if it was open you would be able to harvest one or two that you may luck into and it would do very little harm to the population. So, what is the harm in keeping it open and having that warm, fuzzy feeling that they are doing something for us.
So, my ideal (?) regulation would be one at 17 1/2" and four at 18+. You would then satisfy those who demand (rightly so) their one for the dinner plate and have a low chance of going over our quota.
-
Joe...i see u agree with my " option 8 "
Dennis...curious why you would decide to take a 2 fish bag reduction from the current regulations with no size limit adjustment?
-
Joe...i see u agree with my " option 8 "
Dennis...curious why you would decide to take a 2 fish bag reduction from the current regulations with no size limit adjustment?
You Know why--8-18 inch fish is too too much for anybody----IF your coming back to fish again ????
This being said as 17.50 to 18.00 fish--My biggest concern is the people that TAKE these fish home and
never EAT them-just because they don't RESPECT the fishery. As a charter Capt. you know I respect you as to ---You will not let anyone overfish what they came for.
And as I said in my post the 2 fish reduction @ 18 should not hurt anyone--IFFFFFFF----ALL THOSE 17.99999999999999's are 18 now---AND if they survived????? nosmly 5hrug
I wish there was a way to control how many fish EVERYONE TAKES--but it won't happen
You know how long I have been out of the water--AND I am sick to see carcauses of small fish in dumpsters as I have seen it the last --ONLY 2-years
On a final Note--It really erks me to talk to (SOME) people that I asked How did you do today--And the response I get is we limited out--and i ask how did you cook and eat them--AND the reply I get -is DON"T KNOW thud
The words TAKE WHAT YOU NEED--is long gone
Sorry for the rant!!!!
-
But with that said, I see no reason to have a closed season. After all, for the majority of the closed season you will not be fishing for or catching fluke anyway. No one fishes for fluke in Dec, Jan, Feb, March or April so why close it? The times when the season is closed and you may catch a fluke, Oct and May, if it was open you would be able to harvest one or two that you may luck into and it would do very little harm to the population. So, what is the harm in keeping it open and having that warm, fuzzy feeling that they are doing something for us.
Joe I think if they didn't close the season at some point then this would leave a door open for the commercial guys. Just my Thought
-
Every year we say the same thing...All those 17.9's are gonna be legal next year. Then next year comes, and YAY!, more 17.9's. fcp
-
As Capt. Birch Once said to me... " If you closed Rabbit Season. That Doesn't mean you will have all 10lb Rabbits running around in a few years"
They know what they're doing.. anything to stop us from fishing nosmly
-
option #8 gets my vote. 5 fish @ 18 would be ok also.
-
...But...a few of those 17.9's will be able to go in the cooler if one would so choose with a size reduction! ;D
-
I would take any of them. I don't need 8 fish though.
-
Carl--Is that right with the 5 fish--Cause on the ASMFC site it says 4 fish @ 17.5
Just asking bud
Table 4. Sample Options for New Jersey’s 2012 Summer Flounder Recreational Fishery
Sample
Option
Size Limit
(inches)
Bag
Limit Open Season
# days
open Liberalization
A* 18 8 May 7 – Sept 25 142 0%
B 18 8 April 28 – Oct 14 170 32%
C 18 8 April 7 – Sept 23 170 32%
D 18 8 May 5 – Oct 21 170 32%
E 17.5 4 May 5 – Sept 23 142 29%
F 17.5 4 April 29 – Sept 23 148 38%
G 17.5 4 May 5 – Sept 29 148 38%
* Option A = 2011 regulations
-
Yep....thanks Dennis...i typed 5's instead of 4's .....this changes the game a little i would say.....not sure now on the bag limit....although i still think 17.5 inches is the size to go with....rather would see 5 fish at that #
-
I would not focus on the number of keepers (at 18" anyway) so much. The factor they use when determining the quota is that the average catch of keepers per man per day is 1.5 fluke at the 18" size. Therefore, they can give you a 100 fish limit at 18" and it would have absolutely no effect on the quota caught. I checked my records for the past couple of years and they are pretty much spot on with the 1.5 keepers per man per trip. At least on my boat it was that way (at an average, some days were better, some days were worse).
I don't know the average catch per day they would figure at a lower size limit but I would bet it would double going by all the almost made it fish we threw back. And that is only a guess on my part. It that were the case we would hit our quota about half way thru the season.
-
I can agree with the 1.5 per man per trip ,my count was down till ikat gave away that secret spot , ;D
-
I can agree with the 1.5 per man per trip ,my count was down till ikat gave away that secret spot , ;D
YEA YEA YEA Rich You mean the not so secret spot anymore smk
nts Crazy drift there nts
-
I would not focus on the number of keepers (at 18" anyway) so much. The factor they use when determining the quota is that the average catch of keepers per man per day is 1.5 fluke at the 18" size. Therefore, they can give you a 100 fish limit at 18" and it would have absolutely no effect on the quota caught. I checked my records for the past couple of years and they are pretty much spot on with the 1.5 keepers per man per trip. At least on my boat it was that way (at an average, some days were better, some days were worse).
I don't know the average catch per day they would figure at a lower size limit but I would bet it would double going by all the almost made it fish we threw back. And that is only a guess on my part. It that were the case we would hit our quota about half way thru the season.
IRISH--this is just about what I was trying to say--Now if they lower the bag limit to 4 what are they going to do next year--Like NY 2 fish @ 20 +
Just look @ the winter flounder 2@12--And yes I know the winter flounder got overfished-hence the ban on the draggers in certain areas a few years back.
I think you are right about the 1.5 PP and I think it would not only double but triple at 4 fish.
2 @ 17.5 and 4 at 18--or whatever???
The problem still comes down to inforcement-not happening!!
-
The problem still comes down to inforcement-not happening!!
t^ t^ You hit the nail on the head IKAT
-
The frustrating part is this....Dennis....you said it yourself....at 17.5 inches the keeper per man # will triple...maybe quadruple.....i want to know why year after year everyone says with all the 17 inch fish i caught this year....next year should be great!....then next year comes and it still is a 1.5 keeper per man average 5hrug
Lets face the reality....we have had crap regulations for the last 6 years between size limits and 3 month seasons....the populations are at the highest they have been in years and stable..... Give me a season where i can go out and have a legit chance of bringing 3 or 4 keepers home for the plate.....give the surf fisherman a season they can bring some meat home for the table.....give the people who dont own boats at all, but still go rent the skiffs at our local marinas, a shot to bring home fish in the shallow waters of the bay without putting themselves at risk trying to go further than they should to get a keeper. time to reap some damn rewards in my book
-
Carl, you are absolutely right about giving the fisherman some meat to bring home.
The silly amount of flounder that are out there...well, we all know the amount of 17s we are throwing back. But under the regs/quota they are giving us, we need the best mix between size and numbers. It is really the quota that dictates that. We need a higher quota to get the size/bag quota on par with what it should be.
-
Carl, You know from all of our conversations about this-I would be all over a 16--16.5 size not 17.5.
I am with you 100% on getting everyone there "FAIR" share of fish.
But now in this day and age we have to watch who/whom is making these regs. and what "they" are trying to do with them. So, I am older but been fishing the Raritan, Nav. and Barney since 1956 except for the 10 years I missed 14 without a boat.I was there to watch the people migrate to NJ and Do understand the need for regs (just not what we are getting now)just by the numbers of people in the state now.
In my opinion there first mistake was making these regulations without thinking HOW to enforce them!!!
If you think I don't know about your "FRUSTRATION"--Ask some of us about when the regs. were more lenient used to KEEP fish for how much meat they had -NOT just because the were LEGAL size--So our old 10 fish limit did not matter as we were happy with 5-6 fish with some weight to them.
Just an example tell me why the winter flounder season opens in MARCH 5hrug 5hrug
there's your regs.--OF course there aren't any thud used to fish for them in Dec.--March-And you know I did that RECON trip in Dec.-2010 and tons of them around.
Now as you said--What good will it do to have 17.5 @ 4 fish-and as you said and no 17.5 fish again!!!!!
As I said to you on the phone-The people that go on the charter-head-party boats--When they see 4 fish-I don't think will be good for any buss.
We can debate this forever but as been posted and look at last years options "they did what they wanted anyway) even with all the Great people that went to the meeting and gave legit info for the regulations. Go to the ASMFC site and look what the base there findings on as per there last meeting--the charts are there--Want to talk about Frustration cfzd
Here is the link to the pdf file-click bookmarks--nj--page 37
http://asmfc.org/
-
Option 2 looks good.
-
Carl,
Option 4........hands down. For a couple of guys in the business, I, for one, want to be on the water with fluke as long as possible. And so do you! Your option "8" will NEVER HAPPEN, but I'm sure you're just joking on that. Once again, I looking at this strickly from a business point of view. I'm sure there are people who will choose any number of those options to best fit their agenda.
But for the benefit of the "greatest" number of fisherman on the water and for the greatest amount of time with the most in demand fish we have here in NJ, option 4.
Just my thoughts Carl.
-
Carl,
Option 4........hands down. For a couple of guys in the business, I, for one, want to be on the water with fluke as long as possible. And so do you! Option "8" will NEVER HAPPEN. I'm sure you're just joking on that. Once again, I looking at this strickly from a business point of view. I'm sure there are people who will choose any number of those options to best fit their agenda.
But for the benefit of the "greatest" number of fisherman on the water and for the greatest amount of time with the most in demand fish we have here in NJ, option 4.
Just my thoughts Carl.
clp clp clp clp
-
I guess we will know soon what it will be 5hrug
If you want to hear the people that do this
Just log into there meeting Here
https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/695704801
-
really, how many people need a 8 limit per person. Can you honestly eat 8 fish inbetween fishing trips. If you want more, go more often. With that said, I would take a 4 fish limit with a 17" size limit and a long season. This isn't a choice though.
so, the alternative, longer season, less fish, so 5,6,7 will work for me, but I also have to look hard at number 4 with the extended season.
-
This is a topic 5hrug which everyone sees it differently. If the 1.5 per man is the number that is holding true over all you have to look at it like this. When you have 6+ people aboard the numbers per man will be lower, when i go out its normally myself and or 1 other person so if a boat with 6 guys catches 9 fish at 1.5 per man. and another boat with 2 guys catches 9 fish its 4.5 per man so maybe the total number of fish per boat is more important than fish per man. 5hrug
-
This is a topic 5hrug which everyone sees it differently. If the 1.5 per man is the number that is holding true over all you have to look at it like this. When you have 6+ people aboard the numbers per man will be lower, when i go out its normally myself and or 1 other person so if a boat with 6 guys catches 9 fish at 1.5 per man. and another boat with 2 guys catches 9 fish its 4.5 per man so maybe the total number of fish per boat is more important than fish per man. 5hrug
Al-Not to confuse you --The 1.5 is an average per angler. So if you fished 10 days and the 2 guys got 9 fish total--You would be at 0.9 fish.
As Capt.Carl and I posted these OPTIONS are not in stone yet.
Below from the minutes of that meeting
Although not presented, other dual
size/bag limit options with a 1-fish bag and 17.5-inch minimum size / x-fish bag and 18-inch
minimum size will be developed using the methodology that is accepted by the Technical
Committee.
page 4
Please keep in mind that the options in this proposal reflect possibilities. NJ’s Marine
Fisheries Council Summer Flounder Committee and its advisors will meet in March to
recommend to the Council the option(s) for 2012. The Council will meet in April to select an
option. The option they select may or may not be one of the examples provided, but it will have
been developed using the methodology(ies) that are accepted by the Technical Committee and
approved by the Management Board.
The Technical Committee recommends precautionary measures be used when developing
management options. While crafting the sample options listed in Table 4 and 5b, the following
concerns were considered:
Percent Standard Error (PSE) for NJ’s 2011 harvest estimates is 9%.
2010 and 2011 recreational summer flounder harvest estimates may be underestimated.
The 38% allowed liberalization represents the difference of the 2012 target in relation to
the 2011 harvest estimate.
The 2011 regulations were developed to achieve the 2011 target.
The 2012 target is 18% less than the 2011 target.
Constraining the season has been effective for reducing harvest, the converse is also true;
i.e.: in 2003 NJ increased season by 34-days and the harvest increased 80%.
Bag/size limit table from 2007 was utilized for calculating percent liberalizations.
Year class strength of 2008 and 2009
Target fishing effort declined significantly in 2011
Notes:
NJ’s 2011 summer flounder recreational regulations:
18” size limit; 8-fish bag limit; open season from May 7 to September 25.
NJ’s 2011 recreational summer flounder target = 1,335,000 fish
NJ’s 2011 preliminary recreational summer flounder harvest estimate = 787,234 fish
NJ’s 2012 recreational summer flounder target = 1,090,407 fish
-
1.. 18 inch @ 8 fish...May 7 - September 25 0%
2... 18 inch @ 8 fish... April 28 - October 14 32%
3... 18 inch @ 8 fish....April 7 - September 23 32%
4....18 inch @ 8 fish.... May 5 - October 21 32%
5....17.5 inch @ 5 fish... May 5 - September 23 29%
6 ...17.5 inch @ 5 fish... April 29 - September 23 38%
7 ...17.5 inch @ 5 fish... May 5 - September 29 38%
My biggest problems with these 'regulations' is that that they are never fair. Shore fisherman do not average 1.5 fish per day at 18". Its just too big of a size, so basically all the fish are taken by boat guys primarily in the Ocean or large bays. I'm stuck with the problem of taking home 2-3 fish a season....its just tons of throwbacks. As the size limits keep going up the only way to bring anything home is via a boat. I would say 16" would get me an average of 1.5 per man a day. 18" is ridiculous. I wish there was a way to have bigger size regulations for boats in the ocean since they are bringing in the majority of the quota. I'm stuck with basically catch and release as it is
-
1.. 18 inch @ 8 fish...May 7 - September 25 0%
2... 18 inch @ 8 fish... April 28 - October 14 32%
3... 18 inch @ 8 fish....April 7 - September 23 32%
4....18 inch @ 8 fish.... May 5 - October 21 32%
5....17.5 inch @ 5 fish... May 5 - September 23 29%
6 ...17.5 inch @ 5 fish... April 29 - September 23 38%
7 ...17.5 inch @ 5 fish... May 5 - September 29 38%
My biggest problems with these 'regulations' is that that they are never fair. Shore fisherman do not average 1.5 fish per day at 18". Its just too big of a size, so basically all the fish are taken by boat guys primarily in the Ocean or large bays. I'm stuck with the problem of taking home 2-3 fish a season....its just tons of throwbacks. As the size limits keep going up the only way to bring anything home is via a boat. I would say 16" would get me an average of 1.5 per man a day. 18" is ridiculous. I wish there was a way to have bigger size regulations for boats in the ocean since they are bringing in the majority of the quota. I'm stuck with basically catch and release as it is
Im not sure where your fishing but some areas i fish im casting at the beach and there casting at me and though were not filling the coolers both sides are catching. I fished only from shore untill last year when i got a boat and even though its a little harder moving around theres keepers there.
-
Im not sure where your fishing but some areas i fish im casting at the beach and there casting at me and though were not filling the coolers both sides are catching. I fished only from shore untill last year when i got a boat and even though its a little harder moving around theres keepers there.
I am fishing in Point Pleasant Beach in water an average water depth of 12 feet near the mouth of the inlet. The throwback to keeper ratio can be easily 50 to 1. And there is a lot of 16"-17" fish mixed in. I can also watch 20-30 other fisherman in my area on a daily basis and very few keepers are caught.
If the size limit was 16" with one keeper or two keepers then that would actually put everyone on a much more even playing ground of 1.5 fish per man because then the bay guys would have a fair share at the quota. As of now boat fisherman in the Ocean are taking the majority of the fish home.
-
I understand where your coming from but a 2 fish limit im staying home
-
Im not sure where your fishing but some areas i fish im casting at the beach and there casting at me and though were not filling the coolers both sides are catching. I fished only from shore untill last year when i got a boat and even though its a little harder moving around theres keepers there.
I am fishing in Point Pleasant Beach in water an average water depth of 12 feet near the mouth of the inlet. The throwback to keeper ratio can be easily 50 to 1. And there is a lot of 16"-17" fish mixed in. I can also watch 20-30 other fisherman in my area on a daily basis and very few keepers are caught.
If the size limit was 16" with one keeper or two keepers then that would actually put everyone on a much more even playing ground of 1.5 fish per man because then the bay guys would have a fair share at the quota. As of now boat fisherman in the Ocean are taking the majority of the fish home.
2 fish at 16" im staying home as well... Thats barely a meal for me ;D i just got back from Burger king i ate 6 or 7 burgers i need more than a 2 fish limit fcp
and i fish the bay ALOT and trust me they are there! if you know where to find them you can have equal success versus fishing the ocean
-
2 fish at 16" im staying home as well... Thats barely a meal for me ;D i just got back from Burger king i ate 6 or 7 burgers i need more than a 2 fish limit fcp
and i fish the bay ALOT and trust me they are there! if you know where to find them you can have equal success versus fishing the ocean
[/quote]
I will vouch for NJ Guy on the burgers and they look like this >:D
-
As i stated....i will be running shark trips June thru Oct!
-
I remember back in the day when I was younger thinking 6 pack charters were waaay overpriced. Now that I own a boat I realize how stupidly wrong I was, but I did have at least some good reasoning back then. I always figured why bother with paying a charter when I could catch keepers right from the shore. Granted I had little chance at a prized doormat, I was definitely going to have meat. Nowadays it's damn near senseless trying to fluke fish from the shore. You'll still catch them, but you're very unlikely to get keepers with any kind of regularity. Now if I were a charter captain, I would want the regs to stay at 18 inches, this way you're pretty much the only option (other than party boats) for fluke fisherman to catch any keepers. Since I have a boat and am not a charter captain, I wish they would lower the regs down to 17. That way I'm not burning tons of fuel just to get to the deeper waters. Just my 2 cents.
-
As i stated....i will be running shark trips June thru Oct!
If you keep saying this the shark s will be banned next smk
-
Nj guy your probably fishinv right next to me ill see you this season
-
Im not sure where your fishing but some areas i fish im casting at the beach and there casting at me and though were not filling the coolers both sides are catching. I fished only from shore untill last year when i got a boat and even though its a little harder moving around theres keepers there.
I am fishing in Point Pleasant Beach in water an average water depth of 12 feet near the mouth of the inlet. The throwback to keeper ratio can be easily 50 to 1. And there is a lot of 16"-17" fish mixed in. I can also watch 20-30 other fisherman in my area on a daily basis and very few keepers are caught.
If the size limit was 16" with one keeper or two keepers then that would actually put everyone on a much more even playing ground of 1.5 fish per man because then the bay guys would have a fair share at the quota. As of now boat fisherman in the Ocean are taking the majority of the fish home.
2 fish at 16" im staying home as well... Thats barely a meal for me ;D i just got back from Burger king i ate 6 or 7 burgers i need more than a 2 fish limit fcp
and i fish the bay ALOT and trust me they are there! if you know where to find them you can have equal success versus fishing the ocean
And thats part of my point. The mentality of a boat guy not even bothering to go fluke fishing if the limit was 2.Right there that tells me they are taking a giant portion of the fish. I guarantee you no shore based guy would say that because they are lucky to take home 5 a season. When I said "boat in the bay", I just made a general assumption of the boats that fish the bay. I'm sure some sharpe can do well in the bay on a boat and there's a big difference between a guy in a 10' rental boat and a sharpe who is knows every hole cruising around in his 21' Grady White outfitted with sonar. Obviously if you fall in the ladder then you can produce good results just from sheer quantity of fish and covering areas.
I was just using 2 fish per man as an example since 1.5 fish per man was the average per trip they stated. I'm sure you do decent from a boat, i'd be interested to hear what you keeper ratio is, but my eyes don't lie to me when it comes to observing what others are catching and reading the reports since 18" was implemented as a size limit.
There was an interesting thread is on stripersonline from 2010 about this I just found
http://www.stripersonline.com/t/742711/my-throwback-to-keeper-ratio-fluke/120
From reading it 50:1 is about right for shore fisherman...heres some comments;
"I didn't read the whole thread, but 50:1 sounds about right for me during the last few years from the surf"
"Hundreds of fluke caught this year with not one keeper to show for it, from the beaches and jetties. Lots of 17"+ fish, but the only fish I brought home was an 18" fish that an old timer offered me, he wasn't interested in keeping it, so he gave it to me."
"All I know is that I only kept one fish all season. I fish in Coney Island Brooklyn right off the steeple chase pier. I drag and use live bait, must have caught over 100 fish this season but no luck with keepers."
"I would take 50:1. Unfortunately I have a whopping 2 keepers thus far and have caught over 400 fluke. Boat ain't helping. The two keepers I caught were in the bay, 22.5 and 19. Boated over 100 in one day, nada. 17" would change that ratio a lot."
"50:0"
"I don't know what my final count this year was but I got 3 or 4 keepers this summer with hundreds of throw backs and lots of time put in."
"The keeper ratio has been horrible. Mine also is about 150:1 out of 5 days of fishing. Bucktail and gulp."
"My son and i were averaging a keeper on most trips.We fished mostly the inlet or from the beach and we had one day with 90 fluke and not a single keeper."
The funny part is another disgruntled shore fisherman wrote the same thing I did TT^
"Currently they do it by size and bag limits but the keepers are skewed towards boaters since most larger fish stay in deeper water. Sure some come in but the majority are offshore or in deeper channels.
A guy in a boat gets pissed when he can't catch a limit and is still disgruntled when they get 2-3 keepers per person in a trip. A guy in the surf gets pissed when he can't get any keepers all season and is throwing back .5 to 1 inch short fish. In all fairness I think having a different size and bag limit for land based anglers would be the better way to go. If we just lower the size limit for everyone the boaters are just gonna harvest most of those fish before the surf angler has a good shot at them anyway....."
-
fathergll , I agree with you 100% on having different size limits for the shore bound fisherman vs the boat fisherman. I know if I fish close to the beach I will get a hundred fish with maybe one keeper in the bunch.
When I was in N Carolina several years ago there was a size limit for flounder caught in the bay and a larger size limit for the inlet/ocean side fishermen. No reason it can not be done here, but that would have to be done by the regulators.
It could also be a shore bound and boat bound difference in limits and not bay/ocean as it is down south. I guess it's just too much figuring for them to do to consider it. 5hrug
-
I do agree with different size limits for shore and boat but that would all depend on the states ability to enforce it. For me my 4-6 hour trip keeper average is usually 5-9 keepers between my wife and i. Thats not saying we didnt have bad days especially after irene. We also deadstick 6+ rods and bucktail another 2 rods... When im fluking no rod holder is left empty lmao
The only reason i would stay home with a 2 fish limit is because not including any bait or tackle i spend 15-20 thousand dollars a year storing maintaing and fueling my boat. Wouldnt be worth the fuel and hassle for a 2 fish limit
Never heard of having diffferent limits for bays vs ocean and inlet....I was thinking about this the other day what if i went out on my boat right now and went out front and caught a limit of striped bass. I have a 10 mile ride through the bay (where the season is closed) what if i get stopped on my ride home ??? ???
-
I do agree with different size limits for shore and boat but that would all depend on the states ability to enforce it. For me my 4-6 hour trip keeper average is usually 5-9 keepers between my wife and i. Thats not saying we didnt have bad days especially after irene. We also deadstick 6+ rods and bucktail another 2 rods... When im fluking no rod holder is left empty lmao
The only reason i would stay home with a 2 fish limit is because not including any bait or tackle i spend 15-20 thousand dollars a year storing maintaing and fueling my boat. Wouldnt be worth the fuel and hassle for a 2 fish limit
Never heard of having diffferent limits for bays vs ocean and inlet....I was thinking about this the other day what if i went out on my boat right now and went out front and caught a limit of striped bass. I have a 10 mile ride through the bay (where the season is closed) what if i get stopped on my ride home ??? ???
That's why it can't work. No way that can be enforced short of busting people who have legal offshore fish once they get in the bay. Conversely you wouldn't be able to fish the bay, get a couple keepers, then move offshore looking for better grounds. Unfortunately fish don't have signs that state where they're from and they can't talk.
It would create an issue similar to to the NY/NJ Fluke limit differences. Think about the guys who have slips in Jersey City for example. They live in Jersey, come down the river through NY and fish in Jersey in the bay/ocean, but they have no choice but to go through NY waters to get back home. Because of that their only option is to always fish by the more stringent NY rules (2@21 inches) or risk getting busted. With an offshore/inshore difference those of us who travel through the bay would be limited to the bay's restrictions.
-
I personally would go with 5,6,or 7 after last season of releasing over 50 17.5" fluke for the season. When you pay big $ to go out on a party boat and go home with nothing because the fluke were "short" by half an inch or less it makes more sense to go with 17.5 size limit.
-
17.5" is good for size. Im fine with that its the ridiculous bag limits I dont care for. Everyone keeps saying lower the size give the guys some meat to bring home, I dont get that lowering the size limit comes with lowering the bag limit, So ok know the guy has 4 keepers yah, 4 fish just cost him $60- $100. Its still cheaper to buy them :headscra: I dont know maybe its just me.
-
It could also be a shore bound and boat bound difference in limits and not bay/ocean as it is down south. I guess it's just too much figuring for them to do to consider it. 5hrug
I'd say at least start with shore bound and boat bound regulations. To me thats a no brainer. Are they trying to encourage people to jump in boats and use up more gas resources to hang with these regulations?
They could also further expand this by exluding kayaks and rental boats from the larger limits. Maybe larger vessels get only checked for the 18" limit?
The only reason i would stay home with a 2 fish limit is because not including any bait or tackle i spend 15-20 thousand dollars a year storing maintaing and fueling my boat. Wouldnt be worth the fuel and hassle for a 2 fish limit
I understand that and wouldn't blame you for not leaving port for a 2 fish limit. I was just reenforcing my point on who is taking the fish and who isn't. You're catching more keepers in a day than a lot of land based guys do in an entire season. Something is wrong with that considering Fluke has always traditionally been a staple of fishermen in shore durning the summer months.
-
That's why it can't work. No way that can be enforced short of busting people who have legal offshore fish once they get in the bay. Conversely you wouldn't be able to fish the bay, get a couple keepers, then move offshore looking for better grounds. Unfortunately fish don't have signs that state where they're from and they can't talk.
You could still at least seperate land vs boat regulations. Thats a no brainer.
-
That's why it can't work. No way that can be enforced short of busting people who have legal offshore fish once they get in the bay. Conversely you wouldn't be able to fish the bay, get a couple keepers, then move offshore looking for better grounds. Unfortunately fish don't have signs that state where they're from and they can't talk.
You could still at least seperate land vs boat regulations. Thats a no brainer.
Its the nature of the beast the bigger fish are usually in deeper water where you cannot access from land and I feel for you guys on land, however it is what it is. You cant catch BFT or mahi or any big species from the beach either so why does fluke have to be different. I understand what your saying but you cant skydive without a plane, so hop on a boat and catch some keepers and fish for a better shore target species i/e stripers blues from the surf
-
That's why it can't work. No way that can be enforced short of busting people who have legal offshore fish once they get in the bay. Conversely you wouldn't be able to fish the bay, get a couple keepers, then move offshore looking for better grounds. Unfortunately fish don't have signs that state where they're from and they can't talk.
You could still at least seperate land vs boat regulations. Thats a no brainer.
Its the nature of the beast the bigger fish are usually in deeper water where you cannot access from land and I feel for you guys on land, however it is what it is.
Mark my words, somewhere there is a commercial captain quoting that exact same line. Nature of the beast indeed
You cant catch BFT or mahi or any big species from the beach either so why does fluke have to be different.
heh....I knew someone was going to give the exotic species example. Thats the reason I specifically stated "Fluke has always traditionally been a staple of fishermen in shore durning the summer months"
Thats the difference, people catch a lot of fluke inshore, I mean ALOT of fluke and they don't catch Bluefin tuna and Mahi in any where near the quanties of Fluke. Thats a strawman arguement
Riddle me this, what do you propose landbased fishermen/bay fisherman to target durning the summer months? If I want to go fishing at 10am in late July which species is the best bet? Oh and lets not forget theres boat traffic around as well
I understand what your saying but you cant skydive without a plane, so hop on a boat and catch some keepers and fish for a better shore target species i/e stripers blues from the surf
Stripers and Blues? Oh come on fluke is practially the best option in the summer. So the answer is to hop on a boat? nosmly
-
Its a imperfect system i guess bluefish would be the primary target in the summer months... Either that or hop on a boat...
I mean lets be honest fishing from shore for any specie wont produce at the level of a boat. But thats just how it is. I used to be a surf fisherman so i understand your pain but i really think enforcement of these kinds of regulations would be very tricky.
Hey you ever want to hop on my boat for fluke fishing just give me a shout chrz
-
Its a imperfect system i guess bluefish would be the primary target in the summer months... Either that or hop on a boat...
Even Blues are lousy in the summer. I mean by the time mid June comes any decent sized blues stopped blitzing the inlets and shore for the most part
I mean lets be honest fishing from shore for any specie wont produce at the level of a boat. But thats just how it is.
100% true. Its just that fluke is that last option to fill the void in the summer for landbase guys(and rental boats/kayaks)and fluke really has always been a big bay/inlet species and the regs have killed that off for the most part.
Heck give the land based fisherman 16" 2 fish a day and the boat guys can keep the 18" at 8 fish 5hrug
Hey you ever want to hop on my boat for fluke fishing just give me a shout
slt
-
Totally different note how do you only quote certain lines ???
-
Use the insert quote button, its a little white box icon
-
regs are regs. If your fishing from land, just enjoy the sport of fishing. Consider something on the other end of your line a bonus. Fluke is very hard to target from the surf because they are an ambush feeder and you have to drift for them. If you fish Fluke from the beach, it is a lot of work, casting and moving up and down the beach.
I like the statement, you can't skydive without a plane. This is true. If your looking to go fishing, go on the beach and enjoy the sport of fishing. If your looking for meat, jump on a boat and go where the meat is.
Between the cost of tackle, bait etc on the surf, for a couple more bucks, just on a head boat.
Should the rules be different for a skiff who can't fish the ocean, or should the rules be different for a 20' boat that can't head off shore.
I know we are all complaining about the rules and regulation of the fishing industry, but remember this, it is still a sport. Enjoy it for what it is.
NJguy said he wouldn't go out if the fluke limit was 2. I would if the limit was 2. Why? Because I love being out on the water. There are days I get skunked but still have a good time, because I truly enjoy the sport of boating, and fishing.
-
NJguy said he wouldn't go out if the fluke limit was 2. I would if the limit was 2. Why? Because I love being out on the water. There are days I get skunked but still have a good time, because I truly enjoy the sport of boating, and fishing.
Dont worry ill still be out ;D ;D I'll just be in the mudhole >:D
-
That's why it can't work. No way that can be enforced short of busting people who have legal offshore fish once they get in the bay. Conversely you wouldn't be able to fish the bay, get a couple keepers, then move offshore looking for better grounds. Unfortunately fish don't have signs that state where they're from and they can't talk.
You could still at least seperate land vs boat regulations. Thats a no brainer.
I agree, I would have no issue with that. But you can't possibly have different bay, offshore, type of boat limits. Just because my boat is bigger than a kayak shouldn't force me to fish offshore all the time.
-
I agree, I would have no issue with that. But you can't possibly have different bay, offshore, type of boat limits. Just because my boat is bigger than a kayak shouldn't force me to fish offshore all the time.
Well it wouldn't force you to fish offshore. You just wouldn't be included in the smaller regulations. A simple way of seperating vessels would be if you have a motored boat Game and Fish will check you for the current 18" regulations, if not then you fall into the smaller category. I agree seperating the whole bay vs ocean would be a problem as people would violate that
At the end of the day it should be about trying to distribute the catch among the different segements of anglers. Im not talking about worrying about an exotic species like tuna, im talking about looking a the bread and butter fish of the inlets which is the flounder/fluke durning the summer. Infact I would be 100% for land guys having a much lower take home limit as well. 16" maybe 2-3 fish
-
regs are regs. If your fishing from land, just enjoy the sport of fishing. Consider something on the other end of your line a bonus.
I can just picture 10 years from now when the regulations become so outrageous that even boats are becoming catch and release a commerical captain will utter the following;
regs are regs. If your fishing from a recreational boat, just enjoy the sport of fishing. Consider something on the other end of your line a bonus.
Fluke is very hard to target from the surf because they are an ambush feeder and you have to drift for them. If you fish Fluke from the beach, it is a lot of work, casting and moving up and down the beach.
I don't fish for them on the surf. In the Inlet and I don't have to move an inch due to the current
I like the statement, you can't skydive without a plane. This is true. If your looking to go fishing, go on the beach and enjoy the sport of fishing. If your looking for meat, jump on a boat and go where the meat is.
This is exactly why things are the way they currently are. And people wonder why commercial guys don't care either?
Between the cost of tackle, bait etc on the surf, for a couple more bucks, just on a head boat.
For a couple dollars more?...isn't a head boat around $40 minimuim?
-
regs are regs. If your fishing from land, just enjoy the sport of fishing. Consider something on the other end of your line a bonus.
I can just picture 10 years from now when the regulations become so outrageous that even boats are becoming catch and release a commerical captain will utter the following;
regs are regs. If your fishing from a recreational boat, just enjoy the sport of fishing. Consider something on the other end of your line a bonus.
Fluke is very hard to target from the surf because they are an ambush feeder and you have to drift for them. If you fish Fluke from the beach, it is a lot of work, casting and moving up and down the beach.
I don't fish for them on the surf. In the Inlet and I don't have to move an inch due to the current
I like the statement, you can't skydive without a plane. This is true. If your looking to go fishing, go on the beach and enjoy the sport of fishing. If your looking for meat, jump on a boat and go where the meat is.
This is exactly why things are the way they currently are. And people wonder why commercial guys don't care either?
Between the cost of tackle, bait etc on the surf, for a couple more bucks, just on a head boat.
For a couple dollars more?...isn't a head boat around $40 minimuim?
OK --For you guys that are debating --WHAT the regs are going to be--If you missed my last post-it is here-
http://njsaltwaterfisherman.com/forums/index.php?topic=26100.0
Feel free to call or email these people and find out First Hand on how all of this works--And they do want your opinion--I don't have anything to do with it But I do send in my opinions. They also will give the names of organizations that you can email or call for your opinions-Like save the summer flounder t^
-
Why not create specific shore based locations with a 1 fish per day at 17" size limit?
I remember Connecticut doing something to this effect a couple years back.
-
Why not create specific shore based locations with a 1 fish per day at 17" size limit?
I remember Connecticut doing something to this effect a couple years back.
It didnt work out so well and i believe they cut it very fast
-
Why not create specific shore based locations with a 1 fish per day at 17" size limit?
I remember Connecticut doing something to this effect a couple years back.
It didnt work out so well and i believe they cut it very fast
I wonder why it didn't work out? I can understand the problem enforcing that for boats in the bay, but enforcing a smaller size limit for shore based anglers is pretty easy. I'd like to see 16.5" at 2 for shore based guys.
-
Why not create specific shore based locations with a 1 fish per day at 17" size limit?
I remember Connecticut doing something to this effect a couple years back.
It didnt work out so well and i believe they cut it very fast
I wonder why it didn't work out? I can understand the problem enforcing that for boats in the bay, but enforcing a smaller size limit for shore based anglers is pretty easy. I'd like to see 16.5" at 2 for shore based guys.
If a guy sees me loading my cooler in my truck and asks to check and i have 16.5 fish i could just as easily tell him i caught them off the dock.... he cant prove i caught them from my boat 5hrug
-
Why not create specific shore based locations with a 1 fish per day at 17" size limit?
I remember Connecticut doing something to this effect a couple years back.
It didnt work out so well and i believe they cut it very fast
I wonder why it didn't work out? I can understand the problem enforcing that for boats in the bay, but enforcing a smaller size limit for shore based anglers is pretty easy. I'd like to see 16.5" at 2 for shore based guys.
If a guy sees me loading my cooler in my truck and asks to check and i have 16.5 fish i could just as easily tell him i caught them off the dock.... he cant prove i caught them from my boat 5hrug
Get rid of------( from my boat) smk rofla rofla rofla
-
Why not create specific shore based locations with a 1 fish per day at 17" size limit?
I remember Connecticut doing something to this effect a couple years back.
It didnt work out so well and i believe they cut it very fast
I wonder why it didn't work out? I can understand the problem enforcing that for boats in the bay, but enforcing a smaller size limit for shore based anglers is pretty easy. I'd like to see 16.5" at 2 for shore based guys.
If a guy sees me loading my cooler in my truck and asks to check and i have 16.5 fish i could just as easily tell him i caught them off the dock.... he cant prove i caught them from my boat 5hrug
Thats really not a big deal. First that still means you're limited to 2 fish. So the second you decide to keep a 16.5" fish then you are also deciding to bring 2 fish back. On top of that you have to be willing to chance it anyway that the guy doesn't see you coming off the boat. People cheat the system as it is....who the heck is going to stop you now from filleting small fluke at sea, then stashing the meat in some secret compartment in a giant tackle box.