Fluke Landings After the 9/10 Closing

[CapBob]

We have not had a trip  sense the closing of Fluke season were we have no landed several nice fish....I am taking 19-23" Fat-Healthy-Fish.

Naturally all were released

I have been on these waters (Raritan Bay, Sandy Hook) for the past 45 years and have never and I mean never seen Fluking any better.......this alone is the proof needed to discredit the inflated Biomass figure proposed in the M/S Act...........but alas it is like Preaching to the Choir, those that will listen already know and those that don't listen don't care.

 

[Hotrod]

 

[Luna Sea 5]

 

[bukman]

You have smashed the nail.....on the head!!!!

If we (fishermen) were a TRUE minority we could get Rev Al to come to our aid and declare discrimination!!!! 

[mboy]

Yep. Had conversation with my dad yesterday and we have been fishing raritan bay since 1977 and can not remember a better year for fluke.
I rememeber as a kid back in late 70's early 80's avg sized fluke was 13-14". Now the avg size has to be closer to 15-16".

[wb]

Agreed. They're there and fat and hungry. Proved it again yesterday.

[HookAFattie]

The question is...was this just a good year, or was it a good year BECAUSE of conservation?  If conservation is working and is the reason it was so good this year, you can expect that next year would be an even better year, correct? (albeit one with shorter bag / higher size limits / shorter season?)  If that's the case (an even better season) it will be harder for them to further restrict the fluke seasons going forward and even reverting back to bigger bag and smaller size limits would seem likely.  

I can understand the guys who's livelihood depend on the fluke season wanting a longer season as it's money out of their pocket, but for the recreational guys, how can you complain when most will admit that this was the best fluke season they can remember?  Perhaps conservation is working?  Perhaps it is just a coincidence?  If next year fluke fishing is better than this year is it safe to say that conservation is improving the fishing?  How do we really know?

I think that instead of wasting time with politics right now, the best way to go is to get involved with the science and actual studies of the fisheries and the impact of conservation in order to determine a balance.  Coming up with proof of how abundant fluke are on a year to year basis and showing how the fishery has rebounded and how extreme conservation is not needed is the only way to fight for longer seasons and more favorable limits.  Proof first, politics later.

I know it's a pretty complicated issue and there are a lot of factors in play...but I am greatful for the great season we had this year whether it was due to coincidence or conservation.

[Hotrod]

Very Well Said 

[IrishAyes]

HookAFattie,
You have some valid points, expecially with getting involved with the science of the fisheries.  HOWEVER, I believe the politician and the rules makers who have been put in that place by the politicians should be the FIRST ones to get involved with the science of the fisheries.  The way they run the program is with WildAzzGuesses and not science.

This is the reason that we have to get involved with the political side of the issue now.

[bassnblues]

I also think it was the best year for both size and numbers ever. The thought had crossed my mind that maybe all the conservation was doing us some good...only time will tell.

[ped579]

Hi All,

I have to agree with everything said so far but I would add that this board has made it easier to locate fish through our Contacts Forum, putting fishermen together on the water so to speak.  Plus the fact that it is a great deal better knowing what type of bait to use and where to throw the net to get that bait seemed to help as well.

But lets not let our guard down now we still have to be prepared to write letters and go to meetings and support those that are willing to go to bat for us when we can't.

Happy Catching

Paul

[HookAFattie]

HookAFattie,
You have some valid points, expecially with getting involved with the science of the fisheries.  HOWEVER, I believe the politician and the rules makers who have been put in that place by the politicians should be the FIRST ones to get involved with the science of the fisheries.  The way they run the program is with WildAzzGuesses and not science.

This is the reason that we have to get involved with the political side of the issue now.

I agree with you Irish, the point I was trying to make was for people to get the FACTS straight in order to fight the battle as the other side apparently has 'facts and figures' to support their cause.  Would seem that the best way to battle them would be to prove their 'facts and figures' to be incorrect, if they are in fact incorrect.   Once you have that information then go to battle.  A sure recipe for defeat is sending your troops to battle without the proper weaponry and ammunition.

[IrishAyes]

It sounds like we are on the same page HookA.