Survey of Summer Flounder Anglers

[bulletbob]

Originally Posted by AndyS

WOW, I can't believe the responses I am reading regarding this survey.
These young college folks bust their humps trying to get as much accurate information as they can and all people want to do is push them aside.
Have you ever sat down and actually talked to some of these great people ?
I have been working side by side with Rutgers MCS for over 5 years now monitoring the American Shad on the Raritan river, the amount of data is mind boggling. I do not even go to Rutgers but they embraced me with open arms because I was some one with local knowledge. If I remember correctly this mountain of information is then handed to the NJDEP, there the decisions will be made.
Everyone caved in when the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT wanted a Saltwater Registry but you throw mud at the local scientists..................
FYI: There are also Black Sea bass surveys going on as well as data from the mud flats in Louisiana and a group just returned from Mongolia with fish data.
In turn these scientists discuss their finding with other scientists world wide in order to draw conclusions.

So your conclusion is this -
State =Good
Feds= Bad...

Do you really think the state of NJ will act in the best interest of recreational fishermen?.. They won't discuss conclusions with federal agencies that will
"enact appropriate regulation"?... c'mon....

[Adrenalinerush]

Originally Posted by bulletbob

So your conclusion is this -
State =Good
Feds= Bad...

Do you really think the state of NJ will act in the best interest of recreational fishermen?.. They won't discuss conclusions with federal agencies that will
"enact appropriate regulation"?... c'mon....

Its an institution of higher learning conducting a survey to garner data.

[bulletbob]

Originally Posted by Adrenalinerush

Its an institution of higher learning conducting a survey to garner data.

Understood..

And under NO obligation to share the aforementioned "data" with those that paid for the research ,,

Might I make that assumption? - or no?

[Adrenalinerush]

Originally Posted by bulletbob

Understood..

And under NO obligation to share the aforementioned "data" with those that paid for the research ,,

Might I make that assumption? - or no?

If they are gathering data and sharing it that's not a good thing? I have an idea, lets not share the data, yes, that's a better idea. That way when decisions are made you can complain that no one was surveyed or consulted.

So, are you inferring that simply because Rutgers is an institution that is public they must be corrupt? That there is no sense is giving them data from a survey because the data will be twisted and misused. You seem like a fairly intelligent guy but I'm sorry you not making a lot of sense here.

[AndyS]

The Feds scare me more than the State.
Like I said these young scientists talk to others not only around the US but worldwide in order to draw conclusions. Look into the AFS.

[dales529]

Survey DONE. Dont waste an opportunity. There is no conspiracy theory here.
Rutgers has shown nothing but to do some real science based research with SSFFF , Black sea bass, on the water surveys, and now this while ALWAYS seeking input from the recreational community.

This is a GOOD thing. I for one would love to see the results of a mortality survey based on NJ angler input and would hope our for hire fleet would join in the process.
Currently we lose hundreds of thousands of pounds of Fluke quota based on a Federal speculative mortality rate of 10% .

There is always a chance we may hear some data we dont want too ( I for one believe the mortality rate is less than 2% ) but at least its an effort to gather real data rather than the norm.

I cant fish and live thinking science based efforts fall into the conspiracy black hole and paranoia of some of these posts. They willingly gave you their credibility and contact information. Call/ email and ASK until you are satisfied.

Thanks Max / Dr Doug and look forward to hearing the results of your work.

[NoLimit]

Originally Posted by AndyS

The Feds scare me more than the State.
Like I said these young scientists talk to others not only around the US but worldwide in order to draw conclusions. Look into the AFS.

Andy - they have all the data they need. They have targeted breeders for 40 years and now there is no fluke left. It is as simple as that and any research on side issues is fiddling while Rome burns.

Bob,

I actually enjoy your posts so don't take it that I'm coming at you. We just have completely contrary opinions about this matter. Please read the Fisherman article per the attached link (Gerry I hope I can post it here, if not delete and I apologize) https://www.thefisherman.com/index.c...2&ParentCat=19 and tell me it's not more likely for some positive change to come out of Rutgers study than not. Again are there guarantees here.....never. But among other things we need information to support our position to create change in this or any fishery and I believe in this particular case and in the long run this study will prove very instrumental in the legislative powers adopting a slot limit. That's my opinion, opposing opinions are probably as steadfast in their beliefs as I am in mine. Nothing wrong with a healthy debate.

Tom

Bob I actually enjoy your posts so don't take it that I'm coming at you. We just have completely contrary opinions about this matter. Please read the Fisherman article per the attached link (Gerry I hope I can post it here, if not delete and I apologize) https://www.thefisherman.com/index.c...2&ParentCat=19 and tell me it's not more likely for some positive change to come out of Rutgers study than not. Again are there guarantees here.....never. But among other things we need information to support our position to create change in this or any fishery and I believe in this particular case and in the long run this study will be instrumental in the legislative powers adopting a slot limit. That's my opinion, opposing opinions are probably as steadfast in their beliefs as I am in mine. Nothing wrong with a healthy debate.

You cannot harvest exclusively female fish in any fishery and expect sustainability. You don't need a degree in Fisheries Management to realize that. And for the advocates of the Steepness Theory, their logic and statements are completely flawed. The decline as people on that side of the argument have stated is not a six-year decline. Summer flounder egg reproduction has steadily and consistently been declining over the last 25 - 30 years to the point it's been obliterated. And the trend line on the decline corresponds with the inverse trend line with size limit increases. The higher the size limit, the lower egg reproduction statistics. It started and accelerated around 2002 as we approached the 17" limit which is the cross over point in Rutgers study that proves almost all fluke beyond that size captured were in fact females. They are absolutely right on point with their findings and conclusions. Just don't see how a study of that nature can be viewed negatively. I share your frustrations in general but believe this is one situation that will ultimately benefit our cause.