What's the deal with the RFA????

[Abrasion]

Has anyone ever looked at their finances? Does anyone have any concrete information on what these guys actually do? Here's the kicker....Draw whatever conclusions you wish.

Link to Public tax forms: http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/223/223417550/223417550_201512_990O.pdf

Gerry here Abrasion....I see you conveniently edited your original post and took out your accusation that the RFA was only spending $4426 on lobbying referencing one line item in the report in your original post. You created a shit storm here with your false accusations and when you're proven wrong, you go back and remove it to try and cover your tracks?

Not the way we play around here....So let me ask you...What's your deal or do you want us to make our own conclusions based on false accusations?

[Ahab123]

UNREAL...............:mad::mad::mad:

[Rocky]

You can't believe everything that you read on the internet, but say it ain't so.

[Abrasion]

Those forms are filed by the RFA. It's their tax returns

[Offshoreafflicted]

Take the time to read and understand the entire document. The highest paid employee makes 84k and they spent over half of the revenue in direct support of their stated mission. A big part of what they do is travel to all of the meetings to represent recreational fisherman and that requires full time employees, travel expenses etc.

Take a minute and dig a little deeper before you post something that can be damaging to an organization that is trying to help us.

[Abrasion]

I'm not making any conclusions, I'm simply providing the link to publicly available information. People can draw whatever conclusions they wish.

[ScowardNJ]

I would assume that a major part of the job description IS lobbying. So an 84K a year position would hopefully be spending a good bulk of their time working on their mission.

[togzilla]

Do you think people work for free? Just because an organization is non profit does not mean the people who work for it work for free! I'm surprised they only spent that little on lobbying which is exactly what recreational fisherman need. I guess if you find their expenses unreasonable then you can contribute to another organization representing the recreational fisherman. Is there one more organized and better funded to meet our needs??? There's the JCA but they only represent NJ

[Gerry Zagorski]

So here are some facts for everyone and some thoughts....

As a point of reference here are what some people in the NRA are paid:

As for salaries, fifty-six people in the organization earned more than $100,000 in 2010—and 10 made more than $250,000. Lapierre does not top the list. Kayne B. Robinson, the executive director of general operations does. He was paid just over $1 million. Lapierre was second, pulling in $970,000 in reportable and estimated comp.

Chris W. Cox, the executive director of the group’s lobbying efforts, was third. He earned just over $666,000.

What does the RFA spend on lobbying?

Don't just look at 11- D, that $4626 is what was spent on external lobbying. In other words what was spent on external activities like contributing to fund raisers for our political allies.

You need to look at Column B on page 10.... Column B is Program Service Expenses. Program Service Expenses in are expenses undertaken to directly to advance the purpose of the organization which is to protect recreational fishing interests. If you look at the total in line 25, you see that total expenses were $480k and Program Expenses were $367k.

That means that the RFA spent $367k or 76 cents of every dollar on political action and lobbying.

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water

At the end of the day I can understand people's frustration with the regulations being what they are. The question is what would they be if we didn't have the RFA fighting in Washington for us... The next question is what other National organization is there to support us? Find me one or organize one and I'll be happy to help.

Yes we do have local organizations and they are important to represent our interests here in NJ. But local organizations have little to no Washington support or influence so they end up helping decide how we carve up the measly quotas that Washington and NOAA throws us... That's a vicious cycle that will not change unless changes are made in Washington.

If you don't want to support the RFA that's your choice.... There are people who do and let's not deter them from doing so. Lets also not throw people who are trying to help under the bus and who happen to be at the scene of the fisheries management crisis we have on our hands now.

If you'd like to know how some of our anti fishing adversaries feel about the RFA, take the time to read some of these excerpts in a paper they published.

Founded less than a decade ago, RFA proposed from the beginning that the problems facing recreational anglers were political in nature and would require a political solution. Its mission statement begins “Create a national grassroots, political action organization to safeguard the rights of saltwater anglers ....” It is structured in a way that it can endorse/oppose candidates and participate in unlimited lobbying. This was by design, as its
founders felt a 501(c)(3) structure would be too “restrictive.”
RFA has never shied away from a fight and has ruffled more than a few feathers.

However, it has in a very short period of time shown the ability to gain access to key people in the Administration, Congress, and certain state legislatures. When RFA formed, Representative James Saxton (R-NJ), who represented a district with both recreational and commercial fishermen, often split the difference on difficult fisheries management and allocation issues. He cared about conservation, but worked hard to keep all his constituents happy. RFA used its whole suite of political tools (electoral, lobbying, grassroots and communications) to show Mr.Saxton, as well as other representatives and senators, that there was widespread constituent
support for anglers’ issues and he would be well served to support them. When the participants at a fundraising event, including Mr. Saxton, had to walk past picketing recreational fishermen, who otherwise would have been inside making a donation, the point was driven home. Mr. Saxton has since become a champion for RFA and recreational anglers.

Personal contact and grassroots lobbying is RFA’s focus. Executive Director Jim Donofrio likes to say that “Democracy is not a spectator sport.” He has found that people have a tendency to forget what a great system we have and need to be reminded. He adds, “We make it easy for them to participate in Democracy.” RFA publishes a newsletter and maintains a web page, in part, to keep its members informed and engaged. It recognizes the power of
grassroots lobbying is in the grassroots. The organization has three registered lobbyists who lobby only on behalf of RFA. Like NFI and CCA, its lobbyists work to establish and maintain close, long-term relationships with members of key committees and their staffs. And they spend a considerable amount of time in members’ offices.

RFA has had a number of successes, including the “Battle of Charleston.” In this particular case, its goal was to prevent pelagic longliners from using the Charleston Maritime Center as a home port. RFA was alerted to the problem by local members. By the time the organization became involved in the situation, the commercial fishermen already had the endorsement of a popular mayor and other important people in Charleston. RFA responded by
organizing a grassroots effort. The group did not attack the mayor, but rather voiced concerns and “re-educated” him along with the Parks and Recreation commissioners. Ultimately, through lobbying and grassroots, the mayor reversed his position and the longliners were not allowed
into Charleston. The commercial industry filed a lawsuit against the city and RFA. RFA and the city defeated the lawsuit. Today, longliners are not docked at the Charleston Maritime Center.

A key aspect of RFA’s strategy is to build strategic alliances with other groups, in particular fishing clubs. RFA recognizes that it needs members in a particular state to back up its lobbying efforts. Thus, the organization helps local groups or clubs understand that the action of a single member of Congress is not enough, and that, by teaming with RFA, which can
bring broader support, those local groups are more likely to win. Those that would quibble over how many members RFA actually has are missing the point that RFA is broadening its base, which in the long run, can be far more powerful than only expanding membership.

Final Report 111
Lessons Learned: : RFA recognized from the start that the problems anglers face are political and require a political solution. It uses a full suite of political tools to build political champions who will introduce legislation for it and block legislation it opposes. Its strength comes from a mix of limited electoral involvement, personal-contact lobbying, and the ability to mobilize its base. Moreover, RFA knows how to pick a battle, figure out what it needs to get done, and take steps to get there. Finally, RFA has a constant presence on Capitol Hill, state legislatures, and federal agencies, and this presence pays off in policy success.

[Joey Dah Fish]

I help support the RFA in a few areas. I don't agree with everything they do but over all I believe they are a useful tool. I was extremely disappointed with their response on the fluke regs at the Avalon meet earlier this year. I thought we were going to fight to the death for status quo. What we ended up with was not a win for our season at all. There was a small step forward in getting 18" UN like everyone else the got 19". I do not hold the RFA responsible for our regs nor in my opinion should anyone else. But where I have a problem is their lack of an on the record response the they were totally against this deal made between NJ and the Fed. I will continue to do what I can do help them any way I can but I was also state my disappointments along with that. I won't ask anyone not willing to support them to do so nor will I ask anyone to not support them. They do some good where no one has. All I ask of people is understand the problems fully and be informed before making your choice.

[Cuz]

Do you think people work for free? Just because an organization is non profit does not mean the people who work for it work for free! I'm surprised they only spent that little on lobbying which is exactly what recreational fisherman need. I guess if you find their expenses unreasonable then you can contribute to another organization representing the recreational fisherman. Is there one more organized and better funded to meet our needs??? There's the JCA but they only represent NJ

Only represent us the fishermen in N.J. Thank God for them! And they do it totally with VOLUNTEERS. So it can be done not paying anyone the money taken in from supporters. I'm all in 100%.

[bbfisherman]

The more organizations representing the rec. fishing community the better. We need all the help we can get.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Only represent us the fishermen in N.J. Thank God for them! And they do it totally with VOLUNTEERS. So it can be done not paying anyone the money taken in from supporters. I'm all in 100%.

Yes, thankfully we have people willing to volunteer their time Cuz. However, you can't fight well funded adversaries who have paid staffs in Washington with local NJ volunteers.

I volunteer my time locally too but no way would I be willing to devote myself to it full time and park myself in Washington. Heck, I wouldn't even do it if you paid me since it's not my profession and I couldn't stand being in that swamp.

My house needs a new roof and I could probably do the job myself if set my mind to it. But why do that if I can take that same effort to earn money doing what I do as a profession and pay a professional roofer to do the job?

If you want to fight in the political arena you have be in the arena and equipped for the fight.... That takes time, dedication, money and skills which don't come free.

[Dave A]

Only represent us the fishermen in N.J. Thank God for them! And they do it totally with VOLUNTEERS. So it can be done not paying anyone the money taken in from supporters. I'm all in 100%.

I guess you worked for free for all those years before you retired...:confused:

[wrktoomuch]

As for salaries, fifty-six people in the organization earned more than $100,000 in 2010—and 10 made more than $250,000. Lapierre does not top the list. Kayne B. Robinson, the executive director of general operations does. He was paid just over $1 million. Lapierre was second, pulling in $970,000 in reportable and estimated comp.

If I'm seeing this right right, these are obscene salaries for an agency that is funded by donors. They certainly help, but I would be questioning my pastor if he was driving a Bugatti!

[bhackemup]

Yes, thankfully we have people willing to volunteer their time Cuz. However, you can't fight well funded adversaries who have paid staffs in Washington with local NJ volunteers.

I volunteer my time locally too but no way would I be willing to devote myself to it full time and park myself in Washington. Heck, I wouldn't even do it if you paid me since it's not my profession and I couldn't stand being in that swamp.

My house needs a new roof and I could probably do the job myself if set my mind to it. But why do that if I can take that same effort to earn money doing what I do as a profession and pay a professional roofer to do the job?

If you want to fight in the political arena you have be in the arena and equipped for the fight.... That takes time, dedication, money and skills which don't come free.
Can I hit the "Like" button a couple of times? (Well said)

[dakota560]

Fisheries management is a politically driven matter and the only way to alter it is through legislative and scientific means. RFA, SSFFF and others are what we have and THANK GOD they give their time and effort, whether paid or on a voluntary basis, to fight the battle most others simply complain about. We've all had our fill of broken promises from NMFS, ASMFC, ineffective management philosophies and continued cuts and no one is happy with present state but the fight either continues or we lose the rights to this resource.....it's really that simple. Recreational fisherman are David fighting Washington or Goliath. David won once, we will eventually but not by criticizing the people and groups representing us trying to invoke change. They're not the problem, the politicians and lawyers in Washington who horse trade our resource for their own benefit are and eventually we'll win out but it'll take more time. There are many people working behind the scenes to save this fishery for our benefit, questioning their heart or effectiveness is simply playing into the hands of the politicians who are stealing the resource from us and destroying it in the process. I'll give anyone the benefit of the doubt to voice their concerns if they one have been involved and two do so constructively. To be on the outside looking in without the benefit of knowledge implicitly taking shots at the people and groups who care and do most about our dilemma is in my opinion one of the primary issues continuing to hurt the recreational fishing community as a whole. There are those who act, and there are critical observers and every one of us has that decision to make. My opinion, one of the worse traits anyone can have in general is not get involved yet complain about the results of the people who do. It's easy to sit back and judge others as opposed to rolling up your sleeves and trying to make a difference. I applaud RFA, SSFFF and any other group representing our interests for their conviction, fighting our battle against overwhelming odds and trying to save this fishery so my children and grandchildren can enjoy it the way I did with my father and grandfather.

[Cuz]

I guess you worked for free for all those years before you retired...:confused:

I volunteered all over besides working. I've have started and directed a children's fishing derby for thirty two years FOR FREE. Sure, like everyone else, I had a job that paid the bills. So do you and others that you employ. But I didn't make a second career off donations. It's a sore button with me that people do that or have an attention to jump on board and grab some of the loose change that can come available down the road by worming their way into position to do so. You know what I mean. It happens in all big money business.

[Gerry Zagorski]

I volunteered all over besides working. I've have started and directed a children's fishing derby for thirty two years FOR FREE. Sure, like everyone else, I had a job that paid the bills. So do you and others that you employ. But I didn't make a second career off donations. It's a sore button with me that people do that or have an attention to jump on board and grab some of the loose change that can come available down the road by worming their way into position to do so. You know what I mean. It happens in all big money business.

Exactly.... It's big money and big business and nothing you are going to do to change that.... You either put on your big boy pants, get organized and fight like they do or sit on the sidelines and fight over scraps they decide to throw you.

Point in case, and put your personal views on gun laws aside..... Would you agree that the NRA is effective in fighting for their members interests? If so wouldn't you want the same for fishermen's rights? Well that takes money and salaries Cuz...

[Abrasion]

Well at least the NRA is effective......

[Dave A]

I volunteered all over besides working. I've have started and directed a children's fishing derby for thirty two years FOR FREE. Sure, like everyone else, I had a job that paid the bills. So do you and others that you employ. But I didn't make a second career off donations. It's a sore button with me that people do that or have an attention to jump on board and grab some of the loose change that can come available down the road by worming their way into position to do so. You know what I mean. It happens in all big money business.

You just don't get it. The RFA has salaried employees that work solely for them, it is their only job. And, there are many other people that also help by volunteering their time. But for you to think it is wrong to work fulltime for the RFA and get compensated is unrealistic. I helped Jim Donofrio start the RFA...to date I have collected $0.00 in compensation and donated close to $10,000 over the past 22 years. However, I have been around enough to know that in order to get things done there must be a core group of full time compensated employees. You can hold an employee accountable but try doing that with a volunteer.

[dales529]

Well at least the NRA is effective......

Really that's your comeback? Gerry and others patiently and courteously explained in depth where and how you mis-interpreted your original post of the tax return.

I wont bore all the others with yet another explanation about the differences between the NRA and RFA. Do the math yourself this time and you explain it to me.

What you should be doing is sending in your apology letter along with your membership dues for mis -representing the facts and the RFA.

I will say its sad that fishermen want to complain about donations vs compensation for an organization that if anything needs 10 x the money it gets and uses when they wont stand up against the other "donation" called taxes that compensate our politicians and NOAA. Peta and Pew all have compensated workers. So its ok for us to fund the organizations ,pay their salaries for taking our fishing rights away but not OK for the one group fighting for us:confused:

[Gerry Zagorski]

Well at least the NRA is effective......

Interesting this is all you had to say......

A) The NRA has 5 million members with some deep pockets. They have 56 employees in their ranks making over $100K and lot more making less. They also reportedly spent $3.2 M on lobbying in 2016.

B) The NRA happens to have the constitutional law in their favor to defend their position, the 2nd Amendment which is the right for people to keep and bear arms.

C) In contrast we have the law working against us, Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.

D) If you'd like some results from the RFA (which oh by the way has a budget and number of employees that gets lost in rounding compared to the NRA) here's a few and there are many more.

- Avoided a NJ saltwater license.

- Got bunker reduction boats out of our state waters.

- Got the EEZ zone to continue to be closed for Stripers which prohibits harvesting commercial and recreational harvest of Stripers in Federal waters. Could you imagine what would have happened to Striper stocks if commercials were allowed to fish Federal waters?

- Involved in avoiding a Fluke closure a few years ago working in partnership with the SSFFF by forcing NOAA to give us an extension with the science provided by the SSSFFF.

- Got the support of Senators Bill Nelson- FL and Jim Inhof-OK to introduce and support the Modern Fishing Act and are working on others. This would amend Magnuson to allow us access to rebuilt stocks (Sea Bass and others). It also would allow the NFMS to manage us differently then commercials... We are currently being measured by poundage. Each year they give us poundage for quota, they also increase the size of the fish which leads to us artificially over fishing every year. Larger fish weigh more so multiply harvest numbers by a heavier fish and you've over fished. Larger fish also works against us from a discard and morality ratio. You're throwing back more fish since you can only keep larger ones so they assume more fish are killed an that counts towards your quota. The larger the fish the more mortality... Crazy right??

- If you're a Tuna fisherman you benefited from the RFA getting in front of the White House staff who were about to pass a law which would have protect White Marlin fishing habitat. Sound good since we want to protect the White Marlin but in reality, it would have restricted fishing for Tuna in areas that were deemed inhabited by White marlin... The RFA paid $25k which was donated by Viking Yachts to get that audience and ultimately kept our canyons open for Tuna Fishing.

So Abrasion - Other then attempting to disparage the RFA and giving me the opportunity to set the record straight for others, what have you personally done to help the cause?

Finally, if you want to continue fishing I suggest you lead, follow or get out of the way, or go spread your venom elsewhere.

[bulletbob]

Problem is, we have a LOT of fishermen that would call any type of "protest fishing" poaching , and would be all too happy to report it.
I am amazed by the numbers of good knowledgeable fishermen that are very happy with increased presence of those that are helping shut down salt water fishing.. Glad they are boarded while fishing,, and happy that there are authorities out there , "watching out for us", keeping us safe", "protecting the resource".. Deny it if you'd like , but its a common theme right on these pages... bob

[Abrasion]

Loans and other payables to current and former officers, directors, trustees,
key employees, highest compensated employees, and disqualified
persons Complete Part II of Schedule L . . . . . . . . . 387,015


Can somebody explain this line on the return? It's on Form IX. A Loan?

Gerry here - A loan from an individual to use as seed money to get the RFA started....

And Abrasion - You are now banned from posting.... Tired of wasting my time defending the RFA against your witch hunt.... I have better things to do.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Fisheries management is a politically driven matter and the only way to alter it is through legislative and scientific means. RFA, SSFFF and others are what we have and THANK GOD they give their time and effort, whether paid or on a voluntary basis, to fight the battle most others simply complain about. We've all had our fill of broken promises from NMFS, ASMFC, ineffective management philosophies and continued cuts and no one is happy with present state but the fight either continues or we lose the rights to this resource.....it's really that simple. Recreational fisherman are David fighting Washington or Goliath. David won once, we will eventually but not by criticizing the people and groups representing us trying to invoke change. They're not the problem, the politicians and lawyers in Washington who horse trade our resource for their own benefit are and eventually we'll win out but it'll take more time. There are many people working behind the scenes to save this fishery for our benefit, questioning their heart or effectiveness is simply playing into the hands of the politicians who are stealing the resource from us and destroying it in the process. I'll give anyone the benefit of the doubt to voice their concerns if they one have been involved and two do so constructively. To be on the outside looking in without the benefit of knowledge implicitly taking shots at the people and groups who care and do most about our dilemma is in my opinion one of the primary issues continuing to hurt the recreational fishing community as a whole. There are those who act, and there are critical observers and every one of us has that decision to make. My opinion, one of the worse traits anyone can have in general is not get involved yet complain about the results of the people who do. It's easy to sit back and judge others as opposed to rolling up your sleeves and trying to make a difference. I applaud RFA, SSFFF and any other group representing our interests for their conviction, fighting our battle against overwhelming odds and trying to save this fishery so my children and grandchildren can enjoy it the way I did with my father and grandfather.

BINGO!! Thanks for that Tom... You obviously get it and know you've been personally involved in this fight...

This is a very emotionally charged issue and people's livelihood and pass times are at stake. They are mad and I get that. I'm mad too.

People want things to change but their anger is misdirected. It should be directed at the laws and the people governing the fishery, not the people and organizations trying to change that.

Yes we want results but it's not going to happen overnight or if we continue the in-fighting. We have to be united and support one and other or we play into the hands of our adversaries.

I happen to be a supporter of the RFA and the SSFFF. That does not mean I dislike, disagree with or disparage other like minded organizations. It means that's where I choose to focus my time and efforts. I choose these 2 since I believe that long term change comes from a combination of politics and policy. The laws need to change that govern our fisheries (RFA) and the policy/science needs to change on how the fisheries are managed (SSFFF).

Are there egos and personalities involved... You bet there are but they are all are grounded in a passion and swagger that is needed to lead the fight and get things changed.

[bbfisherman]

You have too much patience Gerry. I would have banned Abrasion much sooner. Why go on a fishing web site and knock an organization fighting for the rec fishing industry. I wonder what Abrasion has done to help the rec fisherman except troll. Thanks everyone who has defended the Rfa.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Problem is, we have a LOT of fishermen that would call any type of "protest fishing" poaching , and would be all too happy to report it.
I am amazed by the numbers of good knowledgeable fishermen that are very happy with increased presence of those that are helping shut down salt water fishing.. Glad they are boarded while fishing,, and happy that there are authorities out there , "watching out for us", keeping us safe", "protecting the resource".. Deny it if you'd like , but its a common theme right on these pages... bob

And rightfully so.... The people who do enforcement are not the ones we have issues with, it's the people creating the regulations.

Hate the regs, not the people enforcing them, they're just doing their job.

[reason162]

You have too much patience Gerry. I would have banned Abrasion much sooner. Why go on a fishing web site and knock an organization fighting for the rec fishing industry. I wonder what Abrasion has done to help the rec fisherman except troll. Thanks everyone who has defended the Rfa.

Right, there's the solution: ban anyone who dissents until NJfishing is a perfect echo chamber for the chorus.

[Joey Dah Fish]

Right, there's the solution: ban anyone who dissents until NJfishing is a perfect echo chamber for the chorus.

Being a constant combative instigator and pass judgement on organizations in addition too insinuating wrong doing is not only not productive it borders on slander. I'd like to think you and Abrasian are decent people that are frustrated with our regs. So please refrain from instigating. It would be much appreciated thank you

[reason162]

Being a constant combative instigator and pass judgement on organizations in addition too insinuating wrong doing is not only not productive it borders on slander. I'd like to think you and Abrasian are decent people that are frustrated with our regs. So please refrain from instigating. It would be much appreciated thank you

Do you actually think everyone here is or ought to be "frustrated" with the regs?

Thank you for proving my point. You as an administrator for this site, making it abundantly clear that any dissent from the vocal majority opinion is "instigating." There was a time I considered NJfishing to be an open forum for discussion, but that's obviously not the case any more.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Right, there's the solution: ban anyone who dissents until NJfishing is a perfect echo chamber for the chorus.

Reason - A few things here to clear the air.

- Opinions are one thing, casting false accusations are another. You can come and state your opinion but if you do, give your reasons.... EG: Cuz has an opinion that differs from mine on the RFA. Although I disagree with that opinion, he stated that he did not want to give his money to them because they have people on the payroll. What he didn't do was try and discredit them by making false accusations like "look at the loans on line xxx of this report" and walk away after throwing the grenade. If Abrasion had done is homework before posting something like that, he would have found the truth. Since he did not, I have to waste my time and others to defend it??

- Some people come here and just instigate... They add no value to the site other then causing drama and more work for me trying to contain it. If that's all someone wants to do they are not welcome here.... Could I have banned Cuz from the site or removed his posts because we have a difference of opinion? I could have however, not only did Cuz give his reasons, he contributes to and adds value to the site by responding to people's questions, putting up fishing reports etc. His sole purpose is not to instigate. Same holds true for your Reason.. Yes we likely have differences of opinion but looking at your posts, you add value to the site.

(Hey Cuz :D)

- I also have a pet peeve for people who are always negative. You know the type... Never anything good to say and the same person in a meeting that seeks to tear others down, says it can't be done and at the same time is not willing to roll up their sleeves and do anything themselves other then complain or disparage. Lead, follow or get out of the way.

Lastly - Don't pick on my little brother Joe or I'll have to tell my Mom ;)

[reason162]

Reason - A few things here to clear the air...

Gerry, point taken, and thanks for your response.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Gerry, point taken, and thanks for your response.

Glad we were able to find some common ground here Reason and thanks for your response too...Just so you know, I really do struggle with and take no joy in banning someone here. It's a measured decision I make over time, not based on one post or an opinion that differs from mine, but on the whole of a person based on what they post and how they conduct themselves.

A dirty job but someone has to do it :(

[TomKaye]

To me, the whole point of this thread is summed up as follows:

Quote Gerry : "That means that the RFA spent $367k or 76 cents of every dollar on political action and lobbying"
Decent ROI on my small contribution. Much better than most.

I am a small contributor but will continue to send my few bucks annually to RFA and SSFFF

I'm afraid of missing someone, but THANK YOU to guys like Dales, Dakota,
Captain Ron & you Gerry for all you guys do. I hope our heirs can enjoy the sport we all love.

Tom K.

[Gerry Zagorski]

To me, the whole point of this thread is summed up as follows:

Quote Gerry : "That means that the RFA spent $367k or 76 cents of every dollar on political action and lobbying"
Decent ROI on my small contribution. Much better than most.

I am a small contributor but will continue to send my few bucks annually to RFA and SSFFF

I'm afraid of missing someone, but THANK YOU to guys like Dales, Dakota,
Captain Ron & you Gerry for all you guys do. I hope our heirs can enjoy the sport we all love.

Tom K.

Thank you Tom. Every little bit helps and so does your encouragement.

[Joey Dah Fish]

Do you actually think everyone here is or ought to be "frustrated" with the regs?

Thank you for proving my point. You as an administrator for this site, making it abundantly clear that any dissent from the vocal majority opinion is "instigating." There was a time I considered NJfishing to be an open forum for discussion, but that's obviously not the case any more.

I think almost every one of us here are frustrated with the regs. I think it's important do what we can to change them.

[Gerry Zagorski]

And I would add even if you think the fishery is in trouble, you should be frustrated with the regs and how the Fluke fishery has been mis managed for 30 years now. If you believe their numbers, the fishery was in good shape and the bio mass was on the rise until they started increasing our size limits. Their data, not mine.

[dakota560]

NJDEP announcement July 24, 2017

The 2017 Season 5 Summer Flounder (Sept-Oct) by-catch fishery will open on September 1, 2017 with a by-catch trip limit of 100 pounds. By-catch landings may not exceed ten percent, by
weight, of all species landed and sold. The 2017 Season 5 (Sept-Oct) directed fishery will open on Sunday, September 3, 2017
with a directed trip limit of 250 pounds six days a week or 750 pounds two days a week or 1,500 pounds one day a week.

If you have any questions, please contact the Bureau of Marine Fisheries at 609-748-
2020.

Recreational season closes 9/5/17 and the fall offshore commercial fishery is just ramping up right at the heart of their offshore migration which happens to coincide with the prime spawning period.

Excerpt from Division of Fish and Wildlife: Fluke can grow to a length of more than 30 inches and weigh in excess of 20 pounds, although 1 to 3 pound fish are more typical with an 8 pounder being considered large. The New Jersey State Record was set in 1953 and weighed 19 pounds, 12 ounces. Juvenile fluke grow very fast and can reach a length of 9 to 12 inches during their first year. A 15 inch fluke is generally in its third year of life and will weigh between one and two pounds.

Most fluke are sexually mature in their third year and spawn in the fall or early winter while migrating offshore or on their wintering grounds. The number of eggs a female fluke has is directly proportioned to her size, with large fish being able to release as many as 4 million eggs in a single season.

These fish migrate in highly concentrated schools during the fall journey to their offshore wintering grounds. It's no different than why we see an influx of fish in July and August on full moon tides which bring large bodies of fish in from the east. Highly concentrated schools, primary spawn, recreational fishery closed yet these fish get pounded by commercials this time of year every year. Years ago there wasn't a winter offshore fishery for fluke, now there's a year round market. As mentioned, with the significantly higher prices larger fluke fetch at market, larger fish are being harvested and the smaller fluke being caught in the same trawls are tossed overboard dead. I can assure you the 1,500 lbs of allowable harvest one day a week will be comprised of predominantly the larger more valuable breeders which are the future of our fishery. How many smaller fish we all released throughout the summer are killed hygrading commercial catches? And that doesn't begin to factor in the negative impact this fall / winter fishery has on the spawn by destroying eggs or stressing out the spawning stock biomass. All this while recruitment statistics show over an 80% relative decline over the last 25 years. Someone please explain the logic in allowing this practice to routinely occur every year while the fishery continues it's decline. Money and politics........inexcusable.

We should all be concerned with the mismanagement of this fishery in spite of what our political beliefs are. We're being asked to believe a 25-year trend will miraculously alter it's course and reverse itself by applying the same management methodologies of managing catch limits through size increases which is precisely whats created the problem we're faced with today. 2017 regulations will do nothing other than perpetuate and further intensive that problem.

For the record, in general I believe in the need for fisheries management and conservation efforts. World is too large and technology too advanced for resources to sustain themselves without some form of oversight in most cases. However there's a responsibility that goes along with that charter and when a governing body delivers the results NMFS and ASMFC have over the trailing 15 years as SSB has steadily been declining it's time for a change. The ONLY way we get there is through political and scientific avenues. It's precisely why efforts from groups like RFA and SSFFF should be applauded and not questioned. Based on their continued and ongoing efforts, we stand a chance. Without it, we have zero voice and no hope whatsoever.

I mentioned in an earlier post if you thought '17 regulations were bad, get ready for '18. Expect another 30 - 40% cut visa vie size limit increases, possession limit reductions, overall quota reductions, shortened season etc. It's the equivalent of Ground Hog Day. Until a slot limit is introduced, breeders are protected and the unabated harvest of fluke primarily during their offshore migration and spawn are eliminated, this fishery will continue it's decline and head toward a complete collapse.