Immediate Action Needed Marine Fisheries Reform

[Gerry Zagorski]

If you're frustrated by the way our fisheries are regulated and managed, I would strongly encourage you to get involved right here right now and support the efforts underway by the RFA and ASA to make some much needed changes.

A meeting/webinar will be held on Monday 3/28 at 6 - 8 PM discussing Marine Fisheries Reform and alternate means of managing our fisheries into 2023 and beyond. It includes the potential for multiyear regulations instead of doing it one year at a time and taking stock status and other key indicators into consideration when setting regulations.

Right now the regulations are set each year by comparing the previous year’s catch to next year’s quota. MRIP data is used to measure the catch and it's then compared to the quota. If the catch data exceeds your quota you get more restrictive regulations, if it's less you get more liberalized regulations. However, the current system does not take stock status into account. Take what recently happened with Black Seabass... A fishery that has been totally rebuilt and yet because of last year’s highly speculative MRIP data we were are forced to take more restrictive measures this year. Fluke on the other hand had lower MRIP catch numbers compared to our quota but is not totally rebuilt and yet we're looking at a liberalization this year.

Kind of screwy right? Stock status need to be figured in so decisions can be made based in some part on the health of a fishery and we should be able to set regulations for multiple years rather than make knee jerk reactions every year based solely on last year’s data.

ACTION ITEM 1 Register to attend the 3/28 meeting here https://register.gotowebinar.com/rt/1135657394291955982 select the 3/28 meeting from the drop down and support the efforts of the reform

ACTION ITEM 2 Sign this petition developed by the ASA in support of the reforms https://keepamericafishing.org/action-center/?v=7516fd43adaa&vvsrc=%2fCampaigns%2f93101%2fRespond

ACTION ITEM 3 Share this post with others by copying and pasting this link https://www.njfishing.com/forums/showthread.php?t=117879

So here is an abbreviated version of the 5 options that will be discussed. If you'd like to read more about each you can find that here in an overview http://www.asmfc.org/files/PublicInput/HCR_FW_addenda_reference_guide_March2022.pdf. There is also a Decision Tree developed by the ASA and the RFA which is meant to help people like you and I understand each of the options and make a more informed decision https://keepamericafishing.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/ASA-Guide-for-HCR-Addendum-Final.pdf

A) No change and keep managing as we have in the past with no consideration given to stock status which includes other key measures.

B) A plan that will consider both quota/vs MRIP and stock status

C,D and E) Rely on model approaches that are still under development and set different tiers/bins of measures of which take stock status into account but also use some combination of other measures like, recruitment, fish mortality, MRIP catch data etc to determine regulations. While that might sound great, the process has been defined in all these options but the measures that result after the process have not been defined and that is cause for concern. One of the proposed models that could be used in all 3 options for determining measures is highly dependent on MRIP so these options could reform the process but the devil could be in the details.

Just so you all know, the RFA is supporting option B because of the current uncertainly in C, D and E.

[Gerry Zagorski]

I've been writing a lot recently about the action items needed to try get people involved in influencing our regulations and fisheries. The reason for the increased frequency is because I learned over time, if you don't get involved early and at key points in the process, many of the most important decisions have already been decided. Let me give you an example...

Most like me used to get involved in the meetings and take an interest in the spring when NJ met to decide our Fluke and Seabass regulations. By the time that meeting occurred the feds and the regional committees already decided what the regulations options would be and the State as well as you and I had to choose from the options that passed federal and regional reviews. At those meetings you'd hear things out of frustration like "Why don't we have a slot Fluke" or "Why are we getting penalized with a 27% reduction on Seabass when the fishery is totally rebuilt"?

I'll tell you why, it's because we got involved too late in the process.

Thankfully we got involved earlier this year due in large part to the convenience of webinars which I hope will continue. We now have a Slot Fluke Option on the table for the first time ever. We went from a 27% reduction in Seabass to a 20% reduction. Do we claim a victory here? No, but it is movement in the right direction and you can't turn a big ship on a dime.

All those action items for those meetings helped but we are talking about the "Mother of All Action Items" here, Recreational Reform. Timing is everything and when opportunity knocks for larger changes that's when you can affect the most change. This reform could actually change the way fisheries are analyzed and managed at a federal level where all the key decisions are made and long before the options get to a state or regional level when it's too late.

If you were to only choose one thing to get involved in the next few years, this would be the one.

There are people at a state and regional levels as well as national organizations like the RFA and the ASA that are trying to support you and me and we need to support them. Please put some wind in their sails and get involved right now.





​

[Joey Dah Fish]

Done

[Gerry Zagorski]

Done

Thanks brother at least there's 2 of us

[Detour66]

Let's get the ball rolling!!

DONE and shared on varies FB NJ saltwater fishing groups!

[Pennsy Guy]

DONE

[togzilla]

Done. I have not been to involved in the politics of fisheries management over the past years with work and kids but I am fed up and ready for a fight. Something has to change now!

[dales529]

Registered, signed and shared. Thanks for your work on this Gerry!
This is the kind of change we have been after for years. Hope it comes about but it shouldn't be from a lack of effort on Recreational fishermen.

Les go boys and girls, sign on to change!

[dakota560]

Gerry you'll take exception to this post but I've never been one to not share what I believe in. First we had Magnuson Stevens Act "MSA, then we had the Reauthorization of the MSA, then we had the Modern Fishing Act in 2018 which was going to save the recreational fishery, then we had Trump and Wilbur Ross who were going to save the day and now we have the Recreational Reform Initiative "RRI" which is the newest call to arms flavor of the day' "Mother of all Action Items" which in my opinion will result in another sounds good does nothing form of legislation. As I've said many times before, these legislation without tangible change in fisheries management is the equivalent of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

In the 80's and 90's when most stocks were healthy, prolific and showed no signs of failing, we had MSA which was legislated in 1976. Other than the winter fisheries cod, ling, whiting, mackerel etc which our own government bartered with Russia and destroyed, fish stocks in general were healthy.

None of the above legislation has really done much to improve the management of fisheries. It's my biggest issues with these legislations. We focus on sound good initiatives which never translate to actionable items or philosophical improvements to better manage the stocks that help the stocks themselves as opposed to the commercial sector.

Here's a link for RRI

https://www.mafmc.org/actions/recreational-reform-initiative

Tell me what the three Management Actions are going to do to address the issues I've laid out for summer flounder. Actually first explain what the three initiatives even mean other than spin doctoring. Answer is nothing. Have to love #3, sector separation, which translated means for-hire and party boats who have wanted for years to separate themselves from the regulations of the recreational sector will be up for consideration meaning being governed by separate regulations and further divide the sector. It's what we all know as "Divide and conquer".

This is all rhetoric and like previous legislative enactments, the fishery still reports up under the Commerce Department and decisions will be based on economics and not the health of fisheries. How will RRI address ridiculous recreational size minimums, how will it address a 50% decline in the female population of the stock, how will it address a 40% decline in the spawning stock, how will it prevent harvest by commercial operators decimating the spawn, how will it address monumental weight disparities between sectors valuing annual landings, how will it address discard rates that could choke a horse. It won't.

Gerry in your own words how will RRI be any different than the other flavor of the day legislative pronouncements over the last two decades guaranteed to improve fisheries management and provide greater access rights to the sector . MRIP will continue which is a major problem. Marine fisheries is trying to quantify something that quite simply can't be quantified.
Recruitment can't be quantified due to resource limitations, a statement from a Commission Member, fix that. Discard mortality from Federal observers reports 200% to 300% greater percentages than numbers reported through the honor system by commercial operators on vessel trip reports and the numbers are ignored, fix that. We don't need new legislation, we need management to start using the data science has provided us and change the data which is obviously wrong as in MRIP catch statistics

When commercial feels like they've been screwed with policy decisions, they don't go to Congress and create another feel good act, they take legal action to get what they want and it works. The recreational sector and organizations which supposedly support that sector need to take a page out of the commercial sectors play book as opposed to authoring another sound good legislative pronouncement which has zero impact when you consider the provisions and limitations or restrictions of MSA.

You believe RRI is a game changes and is going to change fisheries management, it's not.

Here's another link from ASA:

https://saltwaterguidesassociation.com/the-magnuson-stevens-act-in-limbo-at-the-mid-atlantic-fishery-management-council/?unapproved=5017&moderation-hash=08234480f21c1b01751e40cddec2c655#comment-5017

Here's an excerpt from the ASA article:

"The Council and Board were quick to approve a 16.5% liberalization in the summer flounder fishery, despite signs of decline in recruitment. Recruitment has remained generally below average this past decade, and the reason is not known." 16.5% liberalization will be absorbed with higher levels of discard mortality and bad MRIP catch statistics. "Signs of decline in recruitment", ten years of well below average recruitment taking the fishery back to 1980 levels is not signs, it's reality. Reasons unknown, a child could figure out the reason, the data is there but unfortunately doesn't fit marine fisheries narrative and is being ignored.

Apparently you need to be blind and or incompetent to be part of fisheries management. Recreational size limit increases destroyed this fishery and NMFS won't admit it until it's too late. Identify another fishery that targets the harvest of the spawning stock with a preference for large female breeders, kills recruitment in the process, operates at unprecedented levels of discard mortality and provided no protection to the spawn and then tell me how ASA, NMFS or anyone else can make the statement recruitment has been below average for years and the reason is unknown. The answer for below average recruitment is as plain as could be and we don't need a hundred scientists spelling it out. Kill the spawning stock, kill recruitment, kill the fishery. How will RRI change our approach to fisheries management which is the question everyone should be asking. Until politics are put aside, fisheries management is just a catch phrase used when conveniently needed to cover someone's ass.

Going to send my email to Hughes, Leonard and Waine from ASA to address specifics which need to be addressed in one fishery, not sign a petition which will create another feel good legislation to save the world so some politicians can get re-elected and line their pockets. I'll bet you today RRI gains no traction as past legislation has not and does little if anything to improve the rights of the average recreational fisherman other than further divide the sector with this sectional separation. That approach has been tried for years without luck, it's been long overdue to change the approach.

And to your statement "The current system does not take stock status into account", I disagree with that statement. Read the article in the attached link from NOAA and how OFL "Over Fishing Limits" are arrived at which are based on stock assessment in fisheries where stock assessments are performed. Then look at the attached chart from marine fisheries which graphically explains the process in which quotas are set, even though they deviated from it for 2022 by going from landings based to catch based in certain situations.

https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/southeast/sustainable-fisheries/frequent-questions-annual-catch-limit-monitoring.

We still focus on quotas, season lengths and allocations, none of which are managing fisheries. You can have all the reauthorizations, new legislation, access and RRI's of the world but in my opinion until we address stock health and start managing fisheries instead of political and industry driven agendas, nothing will change and personally I want no part of it because it's just smoke and mirrors and a monumental waste of time.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Tom I can understand your frustrations and you are absolutely correct, the system is broken and its been broken for a while.

Should we be concerned that the Recreational Reform is just another way to perfume the pig for the sake of change and nothing will change? Absolutely and Adam expressed the same concern which is why he and the RFA want others and the public to get involved to support option B and not C, D or E because they are not fully baked. There's a lot of uncertainty in them that when the details do get filled, we very well could be back close to where we were in the past.


As far as Stock Status, I think we are both correct, they do figure into setting quotas as you mentioned, but are not a factor when setting measures as I tried to say.

Lastly, I think in the end we're both looking to do the same thing, change the way the fisheries are managed. You can continue down your path and do what you believe is best and I won't question it because it's one path . I'll continue to go down my path and would appreciate you not dissuading people from taking it. We're both trying to get to the same place, just taking different paths.

[tjd24]

Done.

[baseballman]

Tom I can understand your frustrations and you are absolutely correct, the system is broken and its been broken for a while.

Should we be concerned that the Recreational Reform is just another way to perfume the pig for the sake of change and nothing will change? Absolutely and Adam expressed the same concern which is why he and the RFA want others and the public to get involved to support option B and not C, D or E because they are not fully baked. There's a lot of uncertainty in them that when the details do get filled, we very well could be back close to where we were in the past.


As far as Stock Status, I think we are both correct, they do figure into setting quotas as you mentioned, but are not a factor when setting measures as I tried to say.

Lastly, I think in the end we're both looking to do the same thing, change the way the fisheries are managed. You can continue down your path and do what you believe is best and I won't question it because it's one path . I'll continue to go down my path and would appreciate you not dissuading people from taking it. We're both trying to get to the same place, just taking different paths.

All valid points from the OP and your response Gerry. That said, I think the "you take your path and I'll do my own thing" response - which you may not even realize - is one of the major issues the rec fishing industry faces.

The "business" of recreational fishing has depth and is multi-faceted...bait & tackle shops, charters and party boats, tackle and apparel manufacturers, recreation fisherman like us posters...but overall, it is incredibly disorganized! This is where the commercial fisherman do circles around us and will always have better representation and lobbying.

Regretfully there is little interest in uniting and finding common ground to bolster the recreational fishery. Lots are trying, but very few are able to put their egos or differences aside.

[dakota560]

Lastly, I think in the end we're both looking to do the same thing, change the way the fisheries are managed. You can continue down your path and do what you believe is best and I won't question it because it's one path . I'll continue to go down my path and would appreciate you not dissuading people from taking it. We're both trying to get to the same place, just taking different paths.

Gerry I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from which path they choose, I'm trying to share facts to avoid people from making decisions with inaccurate or incomplete information and being disappointed later they may have made the wrong choice. Completely different scenario.

ASA had a chance three years ago to step up and turned their back on this fishery as did others. Think it's important for people to know who they're dealing with, what they're contributions have been and what to expect. That's full disclosure, not dissuasion.

Again I personally think it's important to understand how RRI will address one issue causing the summer flounder stock to decline substantially over the last decade. Either the data is wrong or the stock is in trouble as I've said all along. And I'm sorry if I don't believe marine fisheries when Mark Terceiro says miraculously recruitment corrected itself after 25 years of data show it flatlined and will continue to do so because we're harvesting the breeding stock of the fishery.

Striped bass regulations changed because we targeted the large breeders and as expected recruitment crashed. Black sea bass regulations are changing because even though the biomass is strong, recruitment is trending in the wrong direction. Why then can't or won't management address the regulations in the summer flounder fishery with well below average recruitment classes since 2011 clearly caused by regulations mandating the harvest of older age classes killing the breeding stock. How will RRI change that, by creating a separate sector for the for hire and party boat fleet or determining quotas every three years as opposed to every year? Those changes, if the fabric of this bill, will have no impact whatsoever on the management or health of stocks which is what ultimately drives quotas and regulations. Can we at least agree on that?

[dakota560]

All valid points from the OP and your response Gerry. That said, I think the "you take your path and I'll do my own thing" response - which you may not even realize - is one of the major issues the rec fishing industry faces.

The "business" of recreational fishing has depth and is multi-faceted...bait & tackle shops, charters and party boats, tackle and apparel manufacturers, recreation fisherman like us posters...but overall, it is incredibly disorganized! This is where the commercial fisherman do circles around us and will always have better representation and lobbying.

Regretfully there is little interest in uniting and finding common ground to bolster the recreational fishery. Lots are trying, but very few are able to put their egos or differences aside.

I'm not going to mention organizations or names because I don't want the post deleted or thread locked. If all the individuals and organizations mentioned have used strategies or assisted in the adoption of legislation so effective over the past twenty years, why are so many fisheries in the condition they're in and why have access and harvest rights for the recreational sector been stolen away seemingly ever year over that same timeframe.

People are entitled to their opinions. Personally I think bills like RRI, the Modern Fishing Act, MSA Reauthorization are reshuffling the deck when the deck needs to be thrown out and replaced and we'll leave it at that.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Regretfully there is little interest in uniting and finding common ground to bolster the recreational fishery. Lots are trying, but very few are able to put their egos or differences aside.

Can't argue that point, I will however say we must keep on trying at all levels and when opportunities present themselves, within federal fisheries management or anywhere else for that matter, we need to get behind them...

There are 2 ways to affect change. You get involved politically to force tops down change and with the federal fisheries management at a process and staff level to affect bottoms up change. The RFA and the ASA work closely together locally and federally in both areas. Sadly neither organization gets the attention they deserve due in part to apathy and the sense that nothing will change so people don't get involved.

This is not directed at you, it's directed at the people who have thrown in the towel and given up the fight. To me it's pretty simple..... Lead, follow or get out of the way!

There are people I talk to on weekly basis, many of which are volunteers that care deeply.... When they say they need help, the least we can do is help them. They're people just like you and me and need all the public support and encouragement that a simple gesture like signing a petition or sending a public comment or commenting on a post that says "done". This puts some wind in their sales serves to let the powers to be know that we are behind them.... So why not do that?

[HDMarc]

Done, thanks Gerry for keeping us all advised of what's going on

[dales529]

To be honest here I personally am sick and tired of all the BS between recreational fishermen and including the for hire Industry. I have spent 14 years volunteering my time for fundraising $$ for SSFFF, RFA , Marches on Washington , Lobbyists state and Federal, Fishing access etc etc.

Gerry is right, be part of the problem or part of the solution or get out of the way!

Until Recreational Fishermen can agree to solidarity and unite on even just one cause I know what I have learned is nothing will change.

Take the shot when it presents itself like this, be counted as a united mass group in unity, go for a small win in this case some change, get that and then add to it. But instead fight amongst ourselves and the process always wins as we have zero threat so zero say.

Commercial is a well unified group , well funded and probably laugh at our disparity.

I am as close to done as I have ever been and not for a lack of fight but a lack of support

[dakota560]

To be honest here I personally am sick and tired of all the BS between recreational fishermen and including the for hire Industry. I have spent 14 years volunteering my time for fundraising $$ for SSFFF, RFA , Marches on Washington , Lobbyists state and Federal, Fishing access etc etc.

Gerry is right, be part of the problem or part of the solution or get out of the way!

Until Recreational Fishermen can agree to solidarity and unite on even just one cause I know what I have learned is nothing will change.

Take the shot when it presents itself like this, be counted as a united mass group in unity, go for a small win in this case some change, get that and then add to it. But instead fight amongst ourselves and the process always wins as we have zero threat so zero say.

Commercial is a well unified group , well funded and probably laugh at our disparity.

I am as close to done as I have ever been and not for a lack of fight but a lack of support

Dave I couldn't agree more and when certain people on this site and the organizations they represent complain about unity and solidarity among the commercial sector, they need to take a very close look in the mirror regarding their own actions over the years. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones as they say.

You my friend have been steadfast in your commitment and beliefs regarding fisheries management and conservation. Others are supportive as long as it supports personal agendas and translates into some type of personal benefit to them or the organizations they represent.

Commercial sector doesn't have those concerns since all oars are rowing in the same direction, largest share they can get of fishery resources and maximize catch values. That's it. No politics and no bullshit. Why does anyone think they sue Marine Fisheries as often as they do?

Here's the link to the articles by Mark Terceiro, one of the Lead Scientists at Woods Whole for Northeast Marine Science Center, titled "The Summer Flounder Chronicles, Science, Politics and Litigation, 1975 - 2000. It's not light reading but will give an idea of how the commercial sector uses the courts to combat Federal regulations when the recreational sector for the most part does not.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227024786_The_summer_flounder_chronicles_Science_p olitics_and_litigation_1975-2000

[Gerry Zagorski]

Tom - I'm a pretty patient guy trying to do what I can to help things along. I know you fought hard and put a lot of work and passion into our Fluke Fishery which I totally appreciate and give you the latitude to do here but you seem to want to undermine me and the groups I support at every turn.

Feel free to fight your fight and choose your battles but I don't have the energy and patience any longer to answer and debate every post I start and you respond to.

I leave the posts you start alone and as far as I'm concerned, we're on the same team but have a different path/perspective on how to accomplish it. You need to extend the same courtesy to me...

This is not about who is right and who is wrong, at this point it's about getting along. Your passion and mine, along with my personal sanity trying to keep up with you are on a collision coarse and that needs to stop.

You might have the energy but I don't. Are you picking up what I'm laying down here or should we just part our separate ways?

[dakota560]

Tom - I'm a pretty patient guy trying to do what I can to help things along. I know you fought hard and put a lot of work and passion into our Fluke Fishery which I totally appreciate and give you the latitude to do here but you seem to want to undermine me and the groups I support at every turn.

Feel free to fight your fight and choose your battles but I don't have the energy and patience any longer to answer and debate every post I start and you respond to.

I leave the posts you start alone and as far as I'm concerned, we're on the same team but have a different path/perspective on how to accomplish it. You need to extend the same courtesy to me...

This is not about who is right and who is wrong, at this point it's about getting along. Your passion and mine, along with my personal sanity trying to keep up with you are on a collision coarse and that needs to stop.

You might have the energy but I don't. Are you picking up what I'm laying down here or should we just part our separate ways?

Gerry I think our philosophies and more so our tactics have changed over the years. I delivered on a silver platter the answers to the summer flounder fisheries struggles to organizations you associate with and they not only turned a blind eye on it but in certain cases trashed it because it conflicted with their politics. That combination will never improve fisheries management. Every post I've made on this site regarding fisheries management has always been supported with facts from marine fisheries. If I can't post those findings here than yes we should go our separate ways so please remove my login rights to the site.

That said, I appreciate all the years and wish you nothing but the best.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Gerry I think our philosophies and more so our tactics have changed over the years. I delivered on a silver platter the answers to the summer flounder fisheries struggles to organizations you associate with and they not only turned a blind eye on it but in certain cases trashed it because it conflicted with their politics. That combination will never improve fisheries management. Every post I've made on this site regarding fisheries management has always been supported with facts from marine fisheries. If I can't post those findings here than yes we should go our separate ways so please remove my login rights to the site.

That said, I appreciate all the years and wish you nothing but the best.

I wish you the same and you are welcome here, just don't pile on to my posts and create your own... If you're cool with that we're all good.

[dakota560]

Most members here are interested in fishing and nothing else, as it should be. I've done more analysis on this fishery than anyone has and the fishery and sport we love is under attack and being lost. I've tried creating awareness through data how the Summer Flounder stocks is being mismanaged exposing the groups responsible for that mismanagement. Everything, and I mean everything, has been supported by pouring through research reports and stock assessments and building tables for the last five years. We're losing the fishery and access and harvest rights of many fisheries because most in the recreational sector have different agendas and management is ignoring the same data science has worked hard to develop to push their own agendas. I've tried unifying recreational groups through data, knowledge and awareness on this site only to have my work ignored due to politics and personal agendas.

It's just a matter of time before our ideologies clash again so while I appreciate your offer, I'm done here. Please delete my login.

Again thanks for the platform and all the good years, but as with everything in life it's time to move on.

[Dclark2]

sent

[Rocky]

Most members here are interested in fishing and nothing else, as it should be. I've done more analysis on this fishery than anyone has and the fishery and sport we love is under attack and being lost. I've tried creating awareness through data how the Summer Flounder stocks is being mismanaged exposing the groups responsible for that mismanagement. Everything, and I mean everything, has been supported by pouring through research reports and stock assessments and building tables for the last five years. We're losing the fishery and access and harvest rights of many fisheries because most in the recreational sector have different agendas and management is ignoring the same data science has worked hard to develop to push their own agendas. I've tried unifying recreational groups through data, knowledge and awareness on this site only to have my work ignored due to politics and personal agendas.

It's just a matter of time before our ideologies clash again so while I appreciate your offer, I'm done here. Please delete my login.

Again thanks for the platform and all the good years, but as with everything in life it's time to move on.

Love your passion and hard work Dakota. Hope that's not considered piling on.

[hammer4reel]

Love your passion and hard work Dakota. Hope that's not considered piling on.


TOO LATE , Tom has decided to pursue his fight on a different platform .
.
While guys agree that fishery management needs to change ,
That degree of change is different in what people are willing to give up .

What I have seen is many chase the apple , only to choose another road when that apple is available .
Losing on both counts .

Insanity Is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results .

Tom has held stead fast to his beliefs hoping to benefit all with an improved fishery .
Sadly the changes he hopes for would benefit all those fishing for many generations .
.

[dales529]

TOO LATE , Tom has decided to pursue his fight on a different platform .
.
While guys agree that fishery management needs to change ,
That degree of change is different in what people are willing to give up .

What I have seen is many chase the apple , only to choose another road when that apple is available .
Losing on both counts .

Insanity Is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results .

Tom has held stead fast to his beliefs hoping to benefit all with an improved fishery .
Sadly the changes he hopes for would benefit all those fishing for many generations .
.

Dan
Tom and I are not only fishing partners but have over the years and more importantly have become personal friends. No one "chasing the apple" discounts Tom's efforts I Sincerely hope he changes his mind and posts here and everywhere again. The issue is while we all fight the right fight Gerry extended the olive branch and Tom decided to go another route. Its all fine.
No one at any level that fights for recreational fishing has ever NOT held stead fast in the same beliefs as TOM or others and ALL involved want the benefit of change for many generations. While it hasn't happened yet its still the goal and by no means the definition of insanity although it sometimes feels that way.
There are processes in place like it or not that have to be challenged and fought on a certain level. It just is! RFA / ASA / Gerry and myself are involved within that sector and trust me ALL are trying. The past failures are all only procedure within the government but we are crawling closer. Again it just is.

Any change to fishery management as small as it might seem is a good thing and part of that crawl. Would all like the massive change per Tom' s Documents of course. Can it happen / Sure/ Will it happen I wish I could say yes

[Gerry Zagorski]

Dan
Tom and I are not only fishing partners but have over the years and more importantly have become personal friends. No one "chasing the apple" discounts Tom's efforts I Sincerely hope he changes his mind and posts here and everywhere again. The issue is while we all fight the right fight Gerry extended the olive branch and Tom decided to go another route. Its all fine.
No one at any level that fights for recreational fishing has ever NOT held stead fast in the same beliefs as TOM or others and ALL involved want the benefit of change for many generations. While it hasn't happened yet its still the goal and by no means the definition of insanity although it sometimes feels that way.
There are processes in place like it or not that have to be challenged and fought on a certain level. It just is! RFA / ASA / Gerry and myself are involved within that sector and trust me ALL are trying. The past failures are all only procedure within the government but we are crawling closer. Again it just is.

Any change to fishery management as small as it might seem is a good thing and part of that crawl. Would all like the massive change per Tom' s Documents of course. Can it happen / Sure/ Will it happen I wish I could say yes

I couldn't agree more... This is a marathon and not a sprint and any small victory or change we can make until someone somewhere sees the light is a good thing. Me, I'm all about short term tasks and small achievable goals. Tom, he's all about the bigger picture long term change and goals. That doesn't make him or me wrong, it makes just makes us different.

[hammer4reel]

I couldn't agree more... This is a marathon and not a sprint and any small victory or change we can make until someone somewhere sees the light is a good thing. Me, I'm all about short term tasks and small achievable goals. Tom, he's all about the bigger picture long term change and goals. That doesn't make him or me wrong, it makes just makes us different.

Gerry respectfully , there hasn’t been ANYTHING Accomplished but smoke and mirrors since the beginning of SSFFF which is over a decade of unaccomplished short term goals .
LOTS of hard work that didn’t truelly get more than a perk by those in charge .

Google the marine summary card from 2007 till 2022 and one look shows all the fisheries we cherish have gone to shit due to mismanagement .

Status quo a few years ago when we should have pushed then for a slot , lost us another 2 fish .
Bogus fish counts took away the additional quota we were supposed to get last year .
.
The reason nothing has changed is our government is doing nothing to protect anything but the jobs of those ruining the fishery .

Until a real lawsuit happens , those people remain in control of a sinking ship .

Just a few more years of unaccomplished short term goals will have us fishing for dogfish .

.

[hammer4reel]

Dan
Tom and I are not only fishing partners but have over the years and more importantly have become personal friends. No one "chasing the apple" discounts Tom's efforts I Sincerely hope he changes his mind and posts here and everywhere again. The issue is while we all fight the right fight Gerry extended the olive branch and Tom decided to go another route. Its all fine.
No one at any level that fights for recreational fishing has ever NOT held stead fast in the same beliefs as TOM or others and ALL involved want the benefit of change for many generations. While it hasn't happened yet its still the goal and by no means the definition of insanity although it sometimes feels that way.
There are processes in place like it or not that have to be challenged and fought on a certain level. It just is! RFA / ASA / Gerry and myself are involved within that sector and trust me ALL are trying. The past failures are all only procedure within the government but we are crawling closer. Again it just is.

Any change to fishery management as small as it might seem is a good thing and part of that crawl. Would all like the massive change per Tom' s Documents of course. Can it happen / Sure/ Will it happen I wish I could say yes

Dave the insanity point is all the hard work and effort that the feds ignore .
Everyone (me included ) want to believe sooner or later they have to admit poor management of the resource is their mistake .
It’s never going to happen , as they skew numbers any way thry want to . And ignore anything that proves their numbers wrong .
MRIP is a huge flaw in the process
Mortality’s of 40 percent is bullshit .
Catching tons of fish in the middle of hurricanes is bullshit ..
So instead of just choosing now , why not choose once the other methods are finalized .
Choosing an option now binds us into something that possibly is no better .

Yet then it will be thrown back at us saying WE got to make this choice .
I want to see all the finished options , not just add stock health which is still based on poor Data
.
Common sense is never going to happen at the federal level until they need to prove those numbers in court .

Continuing to fight them the same way that’s failed for over the last 15 years instead of pushing a harder road IMO is insanity .


.


.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Dave the insanity point is all the hard work and effort that the feds ignore .
Everyone (me included ) want to believe sooner or later they have to admit poor management of the resource is their mistake .
It’s never going to happen , as they skew numbers any way thry want to . And ignore anything that proves their numbers wrong .
MRIP is a huge flaw in the process
Mortality’s of 40 percent is bullshit .
Catching tons of fish in the middle of hurricanes is bullshit ..
So instead of just choosing now , why not choose once the other methods are finalized .
Choosing an option now binds us into something that possibly is no better .

Yet then it will be thrown back at us saying WE got to make this choice .
I want to see all the finished options , not just add stock health which is still based on poor Data
.
Common sense is never going to happen at the federal level until they need to prove those numbers in court .

Continuing to fight them the same way that’s failed for over the last 15 years instead of pushing a harder road IMO is insanity .


.


.

Hard to argue with what you said Dan... I just don't see a path to haul the feds into their own courts when all these fisheries management issues stand behind "the best available science". It would be expensive and very messy. I could be wrong but I think we might have a better chance improving the science and changing the way they use and interpret it.

[hammer4reel]

Hard to argue with what you said Dan... I just don't see a path to haul the feds into their own courts when all these fisheries management issues stand behind "the best available science". It would be expensive and very messy. I could be wrong but I think we might have a better chance improving the science and changing the way they use and interpret it.

Same way the commercial guys do .
We all know THEIR available science is destroying the fisheries ( not just fluke )
The amount of money all these fisheries are worth to the community money needs to put into preserving them with CURRENT available science .
Not the bullshit they post now , incorrect landings , MRIP that are impossible to be correct .possibly by millions of pounds .
Weights of fish of the same age class being lighter on the commercial quotas etc than those same fish on the rec side .
IMO their own info which TOM continues to present absolutely shows better science is needed (and already available ) . And current collections of data are destroying efforts to rebuild the stocks .

The fisheries have a $$$$$ pinned to them . And due to the losses to the recreational fishing community a major overhaul in DATA is needed .

After all the money spent the last 15 years to show better data . IMO it’s time to challenge their data in court . And show new data hasn’t met peer review because it proves the current failures .
It has to leave NMFS hands of hiding behind their data to preserve their jobs .
The fishery has suffered for 15 years or more at this point .
It’s time to CHANGE IT , not hope to mold it differently .


.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Same way the commercial guys do .
We all know THEIR available science is destroying the fisheries ( not just fluke )
The amount of money all these fisheries are worth to the community money needs to put into preserving them with CURRENT available science .
Not the bullshit they post now , incorrect landings , MRIP that are impossible to be correct .possibly by millions of pounds .
Weights of fish of the same age class being lighter on the commercial quotas etc than those same fish on the rec side .
IMO their own info which TOM continues to present absolutely shows better science is needed (and already available ) . And current collections of data are destroying efforts to rebuild the stocks .

The fisheries have a $$$$$ pinned to them . And due to the losses to the recreational fishing community a major overhaul in DATA is needed .

After all the money spent the last 15 years to show better data . IMO it’s time to challenge their data in court . And show new data hasn’t met peer review because it proves the current failures .
It has to leave NMFS hands of hiding behind their data to preserve their jobs .
The fishery has suffered for 15 years or more at this point .
It’s time to CHANGE IT , not hope to mold it differently .


.


Well if you believe in it then go for it Dan! I'll continue to work from the bottom up and you and Tom can work from the top down and hopefully we meet in the middle and get something done in our lifetimes.

And to my point way above, the only thing I'm after is for us not to argue and divide ourselves about which path is the correct one since both are trying to achieve the same goal. We're all on the same team here...

Make sense?

[hammer4reel]

Well if you believe in it then go for it Dan! I'll continue to work from the bottom up and you and Tom can work from the top down and hopefully we meet in the middle and get something done in our lifetimes.

And to my point way above, the only thing I'm after is for us not to argue and divide ourselves about which path is the correct one since both are trying to achieve the same goal. We're all on the same team here...

Make sense?

Gerry it’s not about division .
It’s about working together in a more beneficial way .

If we adopt fisheries reform B , All that is being done is still allowing NMFS to use incorrect data to still be used to create our fishing seasons .

Bad data in bad data out .
MRIP DATA is so unbelievably wrong the way it’s being done so it’s bad data .
Allowing NMFS to also do erroneous stock assessments makes it even worse .
Proof of that is current sea bass regs .

Once that choice is made and it doesn’t work , it’s another step backwards .
How many steps backwards do we take ?

We went to that original meeting with Kirby Roots , went backwards lost 3 fish
We marched twice in Washington , went no where seasons shortened
We went out of compliance , lost 2 more fish .
SSFFF spent countless hours and money , went no where .
Now pushing for a slot , and they keep delaying the meetings .

And while I know many of the guys pushing for B very well , I don’t see how they honestly can think that giving NMFS 2 places to give invalid science credibility is going to work .

Right now this fishery has suffered for 15 years , it won’t last another 5 if serious changes don’t happen .
It will become a commercially driven fishery without any recreational input .



.
.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Gerry it’s not about division .
It’s about working together in a more beneficial way .

If we adopt fisheries reform B , All that is being done is still allowing NMFS to use incorrect data to still be used to create our fishing seasons .

Bad data in bad data out .
MRIP DATA is so unbelievably wrong the way it’s being done so it’s bad data .
Allowing NMFS to also do erroneous stock assessments makes it even worse .
Proof of that is current sea bass regs .

Once that choice is made and it doesn’t work , it’s another step backwards .
How many steps backwards do we take ?

We went to that original meeting with Kirby Roots , went backwards lost 3 fish
We marched twice in Washington , went no where seasons shortened
We went out of compliance , lost 2 more fish .
SSFFF spent countless hours and money , went no where .
Now pushing for a slot , and they keep delaying the meetings .

And while I know many of the guys pushing for B very well , I don’t see how they honestly can think that giving NMFS 2 places to give invalid science credibility is going to work .

Right now this fishery has suffered for 15 years , it won’t last another 5 if serious changes don’t happen .
It will become a commercially driven fishery without any recreational input .



.
.

I'm all for working together in a beneficial way and I agree with you but it's seems to me it's your way or the highway...

[Angler Paul]

Gerry,

Thanks for all the work you did on this. JCAA fully supports your position as well. I signed the petition and shared your post on the JCAA FB page and then shared it with more than 60 other groups. I also emailed it to our member clubs and a few press reporters. It's disappointing that many people say it's a waste of time to comment to our fisheries managers because they have their minds made up and don't care about what we have to say. That may be true but we will never succeed if we don't try. Though I am often frustrated by their actions or lack thereof, I have no intentions of giving up.

Paul Haertel
JCAA Past President/Board Member

[Rocky]

I'm all for working together in a beneficial way and I agree with you but it's seems to me it's your way or the highway...

I did not read that myself, but we do need to stop doing the same thing over and over again with the same declining results year after year imo.

We have known that there was a problem for many years now and their fix is not working so lets get a new mechanic in here before it is too late!

[Gerry Zagorski]

Gerry,

Thanks for all the work you did on this. JCAA fully supports your position as well. I signed the petition and shared your post on the JCAA FB page and then shared it with more than 60 other groups. I also emailed it to our member clubs and a few press reporters. It's disappointing that many people say it's a waste of time to comment to our fisheries managers because they have their minds made up and don't care about what we have to say. That may be true but we will never succeed if we don't try. Though I am often frustrated by their actions or lack thereof, I have no intentions of giving up.

Paul Haertel
JCAA Past President/Board Member

Thanks Paul appreciate you rallying the troops and getting behind this!

[hammer4reel]

Pretty sad turnout . Most I saw online was 59. And only 50 stayed until the end .
.
Also pretty sad when they have a formal document to vote on , and it’s half baked.

.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Yep and this is exactly why we were suggesting option B.

[hammer4reel]

Yep and this is exactly why we were suggesting option B.

Which is more than likely right where they wanted to lead you .
.
Option B based on not enough information come other 3 choices .
Yet a choice was still made without enough information about the other choices .
And when Jimmy asked if those choices seemed better at a later time could we go to them the answer was yes but it would have to reopen everything the same way as is took years to get to this ..

Before any choice gets made everything should be complete and on the table for real review .

But they already tapped the card they wanted everyone to turn over .

.

[AndyS]

Pretty sad turnout . Most I saw online was 59. And only 50 stayed until the end .
.
Also pretty sad when they have a formal document to vote on , and it’s half baked.

.

Ever been to a Freshwater Forum meeting held by State biologists at the Hackettstown hatchery, lucky if 20 people showed up. The guys will pour into the Saltwater Fishing Show but won't attend a meeting.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Pretty sad turnout . Most I saw online was 59. And only 50 stayed until the end .
.
Also pretty sad when they have a formal document to vote on , and it’s half baked.

.

I hear you Dan but 59 is actually pretty good and we had a fair amount of comments, many of the meetings I attend you get 1 or 2.

But yes, it was disappointing at this stage of the process not to have details on the CDE options. I wonder where some of the other states came out on that. I'll see if I can find out.