![]() |
|
![]() | ![]() | |
![]() | ![]() | |
![]() | ![]() | |
![]() | ||
|
|||||||
| NJFishing.com Fisheries Management/Regulations This board is closed for posting but will serve as an archieve for all Fisheries Management and Regulations posts from other boards. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
8 fish bag limit.. and 18in.. I agree.. The longer season is worth the extra 1/2in and bag limit.. loose 23 days and 3 fish just to keep only 5, 17 and 1/2in fish is crazy.. Last season was one of the best.. There is no need to drop size limit..
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Personally, I think 8 fish is a lot. 6 fish with a lower size limit would be fine as very few people limit with 8 anyway. People would still pay to keep 6.
Almost all of our "options" are 8 at 18" with various different season lengths. How were these season lengths determined? I don't understand how size and bag can remain the same under such varying season lengths. Go ahead and keep the season long but how about this: up until around Memorial day limit the bag to 1 fish at 17". This will cover incidental catches. (Like doormats trolled on Stretch plugs) From then on 6 fish at 17". There are a lot of 17-18 inch fish out there from my experience working deck. Also, there is no law against releasing big fluke...something to consider in non-pool, non-tournament situations. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Smaller size limits will probably cause us to overfish our allotted tonnGe, which would in turn limit future seasons. Early slots are to confusing to keep track of,stausquo 18" fish, plenty around.
I'm not for giving up season length for shorter fish , you may fish yourself into a corner, look at NY! |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Well said Angler Paul. You can speak for me and many others.
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Wouldn't a longer season and a bag limit of 8 fish put a lot of pressure on the fluke and hurt future size and bag limits.
![]()
__________________
I FISH! I VOTE! I MARCHED!!! 2x MEMBER OF THE MONGER NATION |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
When the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act was imposed and a finite time frame to rebuild fluke stocks that have fell to a record low was implemented, they gave themselves a 10 year time frame starting in 2000. IMHO by 2007 the stock was rebuilt but to them they still needed more, so the kept this charade going and then said well we will not make the 10 year deadline so lets impose stricter laws. These people are idiots and if you think for one second the fluke stock isn't rebuilt, you need to go fluking more often. This isn't about the stocks any longer it is like I have stated before about politics... |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Their numbers are skewed PERIOD. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|