Where the heck are the Fluke?

Originally Posted by bulletbob

My opinion is that wherever they are, they aren't going looking for colder water..
BTW, I had no idea about this commercial 40% quota increase that was was posted on this thread... Thats catastrophic if true.
I would love for someone to enlighten me on this ... bob

Bob......here's a link to an article written by Dan Radel with APP which attempts to explain to 40% increase.

https://www.app.com/story/sports/out...rs/3153388002/

Two statements you should note:

The logic is recreational fishermen actually caught closer to 7.69 million pounds of fluke in 2018 than 4.4 million pounds because there are more fluke in the ocean than models used in past benchmark assessments reported.

AND

The reason for the disparity is because new data points were used in the 2018 benchmark stock assessment for summer flounder. Mail-in surveys were used to gather fishing effort from anglers in the Marine Recreational Information Program, or MRIP, instead of phone calls. The mail-ins "reported much higher catches of summer flounder than were estimated," said Kirby Rootes-Murdy, the senior Fishery Management Plan coordinator for the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission.

So in other words more fish in the stock assessment but recreational quota remains status quo because historical recreational catch numbers which were based on "BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE" used by highly competent scientists with all that schooling, training and data collecting/modeling expertise are now saying they GROSSLY under-estimated recreational catch in previous models. That should give everyone an idea of what "best available science" actually means. It's an extremely relative term which is essentially a disclaimer that the data regulatory decisions are being based on could be materially wrong but it's best available. And this is all because recreational catch numbers based on MRIP are now being collected through mail in replies as opposed to phone calls. And I'm sure a 99% confidence level was assigned to that statement the same as the numbers used in previous models which by default NMFS is now saying are materially wrong.

Stock goes down, recreational anglers take a hit. Stock goes up, we still take a hit based on guesstimates just as speculative as the older version of MRIP while commercial operators received a 40% increase. An increase equivalent to in excess of $10,000,000 in incremental catch values subsidized by the harvest of larger fish recreational anglers are mandated to release. 14" - 17.99 for NJ, 14" to 18.99 for NY, Ct and RI.

But rest assured, this all passed Peer Review so our concerns should be put to rest. Only other industry which can be so far off with forecasts and models without question is the Weather Bureau. They report up under NOAA and the Department of Commerce as well so makes perfect sense.

I agree we need science, but accepting it face value when the fishery is in a prolonged 17 year decline in all aspects (recruitment, catch levels and the biomass in general) is as illogical as thinking we don't need science at all. But blind faith isn't the answer either. Unfortunately this is a David and Goliath situation and I doubt David is winning this one.