2010 Fluke Reg ??????

[Life's A Beach]

The Last Email Announcement you received in regards to the Summer Flounder Regulations for 2010 was premature. We are still waiting on more details and information.

[1captainron]

State by State 14 to 3 was the vote....we still are going to give up a few more days of fishing though. Most likely Memorial day weekend, another kick in the Ass regardless of this vote. Could have been much worse, but that still doesn't make me feel any better...Capt. Ron

[CaptTB]

CaptainRon said it. Whatever e-mail you guys got was only part of the motion. Whomever sent it missed the very first sentences in the motion about conservation equivalency (state by state)

The council must always, if going for state by state, still give a non-preferred coastwide option and a default precautionary measure, whoich are the other two things listed.

However, the vote was overwhelmingly in favor of state by state. Now we wait to hear what NMFS approves. Let us not forget that the RA stated on the record she was in favor of coastwide and was one of the three votes against consv. equiv.

[1captainron]

Tony,
I don't get it.. a 14 to 3 vote and yet NMFS can still change it!!!! What the hell is the sense in the vote in the first place!!!
More BS to worry about.

[howarda780]

NMFS is not in Gloucester, its 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

[CaptTB]

Originally Posted by 1captainron

Tony,
I don't get it.. a 14 to 3 vote and yet NMFS can still change it!!!! What the hell is the sense in the vote in the first place!!!
More BS to worry about.

The council only makes a recommendation to NMFS, it does not have any authority to do anything more than that.

The original intent was to have a group of "experts" from various parts of the fishery (commercial, recreational, scientific, administrative) sit down and use their collective knowledge and expertise to give quality advice to the organization charged with managing the fisheries (in this case, NMFS) By having people from all corners of the fishery putting their heads together you would have the best advice possible and the service could then make its decision based on what it could comfortably feel would be the best available information.

We all know now how that system has been totally subverted.

[1captainron]

Yes, originally everyone on the council was involved in FISHING or Science, some form of a vested interest, commercial fishing, rec fishing ....
They have now all been replaced by enviro's, and the head enviro is running the show...........WERE SCREWED!!! ANARCHY 2010.....

[shrimpman steve]

i'll take two patches! aaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrr me hardies!

[Foul Hook]

The original intent was to have a group of "experts" from various parts of the fishery (commercial, recreational, scientific, administrative)

So Captain am I correct to assume that this means that "we" as the rec group have to out lobby the commercial group (who has deep pockets), fight the "flawed" data group (with the ssfff) and out litigate the admin group to get a favorable outcome for the common angler?If this council is in charge of giving advice to the NMFS then where do we apply the pressure, at the council level or the NMFS level. And in your opinion where are we really getting screwed?, at which level.

[penn50w]

Originally Posted by 1captainron

State by State 14 to 3 was the vote....we still are going to give up a few more days of fishing though. Most likely Memorial day weekend, another kick in the Ass regardless of this vote. Could have been much worse, but that still doesn't make me feel any better...Capt. Ron

Could have been worse? Losing 4 more fish to you is only a little worse off? That's a loss of 67% in my book. How many more days and fish are we going to lose? I told you last year that this was going to happen and you said I was being to negative - not in those words! When are you guys going to wake up. They have a mind set and no matter what you do, you lose. Do away with the Pew, maybe you stand a chance. Penn