Looks like we should have taken 3 @ 19"

[dales529]

Originally Posted by Gerry Zagorski

Just heard from Dales.... The 3 @ 18 went to a vote and it was turned down. As it stands now, they said we need to agree to 3 @ 19 with the longer season or we will be deemed out of compliance.

Not sure what's going to happen.... I guess we continue with our appeal and take our chances or we fall in line....

Much more to follow here.

Gerry, didn't mean to mislead you if I did. Its not that the 3@18" 104 days was voted down. What the motion that passed states is that we have until May 21 to institute option 5 OR meet conservation equivalency with the 3@18" 104 day season. That is now up to the technical committee to approve or disapprove next week. If they disapprove it than whats next is kind of open at this point.
By May 21 if we don't institute regulations that meet the mandates than a letter goes out saying NJ is out of compliance. Again what happens then will be forthcoming as it happens.
So once again we wait until next week before anything is official.

[Ttmako]

I was listening this morning and tried to do a play by play.
NJ offered 3@18 and would rescind out appeal.
The whole process is very confusing.
Again, Adam Nowalsky did an excellent job in representing on our behalf. We are truly lucky to have him on the council.

I'm not sure how this will play out but it seems the council is determined to find us out of compliance.

The one thing that is crystal clear, is NJ Rep. Tom Macarthur failed to help our cause. He was repeatedly asked to help with our cause and he failed to show us any support. He did sign 2 letter on our behalf, but never came to a meeting or advocated to Commerce Secretary Ross on our behalf.
The guy flat out lied and is not worthy of being reelected.

[Rocky]

Originally Posted by Ttmako

The one thing that is crystal clear, is NJ Rep. Tom Macarthur failed to help our cause. He was repeatedly asked to help with our cause and he failed to show us any support. He did sign 2 letter on our behalf, but never came to a meeting or advocated to Commerce Secretary Ross on our behalf.
The guy flat out lied and is not worthy of being reelected.

Are you 100% positive that Macarthur didn't contact the commerce secretary?

[Ttmako]

Originally Posted by Rocky

Are you 100% positive that Macarthur didn't contact the commerce secretary?

He wrote a letter along with a few other representatives.
I have been in contact with his office pretty frequently. I pleaded with him to go and meet with Mr. Ross. I told him who to speak with to become informed. It was all teed up for him. All he had to do was show up.
So, yes other than signing a letter that someone else wrote, I m confident he didn't meet with Mr. Ross.
In addition, last night I received a call from his office and they told me and I quote "there is nothing he can do to help you".
What did his office tell you?

[Chris G]

Any news on sea bass? Did I read correctly that we are getting royally screwed in the fall???? Again???

[Rocky]

Originally Posted by Chris G

Any news on sea bass? Did I read correctly that we are getting royally screwed in the fall???? Again???

Yep. 5 fish, a shorter season, and no lube.

[Walleyed]

Originally Posted by Rocky

Yep. 5 fish, a shorter season, and no lube.

That's going to kill the December offshore sea bass trips....no one is going to want to pay that much money for 5 fish.

[Chris G]

Originally Posted by Rocky

Yep. 5 fish, a shorter season, and no lube.

Wow. What a joke.

Pathetic.

[Ttmako]

For the record,
I don't think we should have stuck with 3@19".
This was certainly worth a fight and the effort many put forth.
This still isn't over.
There is a rather lengthy protocol that needs to be followed when out of compliance.

[frugalfisherman]

Either way i,m not throwing back a fluke alive!!