Quote:
Originally Posted by dales529
BB: Fair points and I wouldn't say most that advocate on behalf of the Fluke stock are celebrating. Just picking the battles as they come and what we can influence. In this case and just my opinion option 32 was what was best for NJ overall, the NJ for hire and related industries that can at least stay in business while the battles outside our NJ Fishery continue. NJ hands were tied on the federal level so this outcome while not a cause to "celebrate" was again in my opinion the best option available for this battle.
Capt. Dan did in fact raise the issue on commercial take to the council so at least it was on record for future consideration but again on your data points on biomass / recruitment is as you stated a federal issue for NOAA, ASMFC, MAMFC and Secretary of Commerce and we all know how that's gone.
Again if MRIP acknowledges a 40% anomaly in fishing effort / harvest and again in my opinion I don't see how these recreational regulations destroy the stock. Yes taking breeders is not optimal but as you state often the correction for the stock is on the commercial side so leave recs out of it and lets fish with conservation as the goal .
|
Couldn't agree more. While I'm happy for the businesses and recreational anglers that count on or enjoy this fishery, I'm equally concerned about the long-term impact these regulations will have on the stock. If they've caused the need for a 28% reduction, right or wrong, for the next two years why would anyone believe the same regulations will not pose a more serious problem when it comes time to discuss 2026 / 2027 regulations. Using the same regulations or making the same decisions and hoping for a different outcome has never worked in my business career and I don't believe it will work here. Hope everyone has a great 2024 season.
