Hot topic for discussion

I

imrich

Member
exMember
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
RO Number
12903
Messages
329
Now here's a hot topic for discussion. Strictly hypothetical, but I'm interested to see what you all think. Is it ok to disregard the size limits and keep an occasional fish for a species you know is plentiful and in no danger of being overfished. Knowing well that the data and science used to determine those restrictions are flawed and the policy is in place due mostly to the lobby of special interests. Now, I have always done my part and towed the conservation line and stuck ardently by the sizes and limits set, but with all I'm reading lately about the broken fisheries management, the clamp down on the recreational sector while the commercial fisherman get to steam full speed ahead I must say, I'm tempted to keep a few for the table. I remember the limit being 14 on fluke, not so long ago and I have a hard time abiding by present day restrictions when I know for dam sure that there are plenty of fluke in the ocean. What's your take on the situation?
 
My car is geared for the autoban. Does that mean I can cruise at 140mph on the thruway and stay out of jail? Seriously the car gets better mileage above the US speed limits.
If you break the law and get caught, expect to pay the fines. I've heard people say they keep small fish to cut up and use for bait. Certainly this is as bad as it gets but what is the difference?
 
NO!!! Limits are set for a reason .... there are plenty of Pheasents in N. Dakota, the limit is 3 .... there are days when you can see 100+ .. the limit is still 3. I know plenty of folks ignore the limit, makes me wonder what other rules they think it's OK to ignore.
 
Rich, I see your side on this one. Think of it this way, the LI charters were forced to take their boats to NJ waters so that their guests could keep 17.5" fluke, and they could make a living. The boats burn twice as much fuel for the trip, but that doesn't factor in conservation. Do you think the smart fluke know to stay in NY?
 
I'm going to play devil's advocate here. Let me start by saying neither have I kept any short fluke, nor do I intend to. But, in light of the recent season closure, when it was agreed to go to a higher size limit to prevent closure. And, due to the fact that the closure only applies to recreational fisherman while the draggers, who are the reason for the decline in the first place get to harvest all the fluke they want. Am I the only one who sees something wrong here. If fishing for anymore fluke will do such damage and the fishery has to be shut down NOW, why are the draggers allowed to fish while you and I must stop. Does anyone think a group who fishes with rod and reel can possibly take more fish than a group who fish with nets. And lets not forget the overall allocation. 60% to the commercial gang and only 40% for you and I. Historically I believe the harvest has been 30% commercial and 70% for the recreational angler, but I'm not sure. Either way you can thank the lobby for that inequity. Now lets look at the science. First off, the whole goal of this is to get the biomass back to the historical levels before they were deemed overfished. Trouble is, no one knows for sure what that number is. So what did they do? They guessed. Then, as if that wasn't bad enough, they picked an arbitrary, inflexible timeline to reach this mystical number, with no chance for review if it were found that the stock was recovering nicely, as it has been proven they are. Now I am all for conservation and proper management of resources and have always done my part and followed the rules to make sure there were plenty of fish and clean open spaces for the present and future to enjoy. But what is happening today is just wrong. As a Long Islander, I should expect to be able to go out with my family for a fun day of fishing and catch a few fish for dinner. So I say again. If you know for a fact there are plenty of fish, that the stock is healthy and growing each year, and the only reason limits are what they are is due to bad management and unrealistic timelines. Do you keep an undersized fluke, knowing that if you do you are not damaging the stock, or do you throw it back?
 
Weasel you make a good point, but I thought regardless of where the fish is caught, once you enter NY waters, the NY limit applies. I would think this would prevent boats from NY doing that. I'd also like to say, I'm not in favor of keeping undersized fish or encouraging anyone to do it, although I'd be less likely to blame them if they did. The law is the law and should be followed, but something has to give before we're banned from taking fish from a sea full of them. We're not responsible for their decline and we all work hard and pay high taxes to live on this Island. We should be able to enjoy and make use of a wonderful natural resource.
 
I never do and never would, but what about the fact that many fish despite taking care and precautions, may be damaged and will die when released anyway? So it's an inch short of an arbitrary size limit and you throw it back to become seagull food.
 
I can't spell, so one can assume I can't measure very well :)

Walter
 
NY Weasel said:
quote:
Rich, I see your side on this one. Think of it this way, the LI charters were forced to take their boats to NJ waters so that their guests could keep 17.5" fluke, and they could make a living. The boats burn twice as much fuel for the trip, but that doesn't factor in conservation. Do you think the smart fluke know to stay in NY?
Click to expand...


Sorry, but that is incorrect. The regulations are a POSSESSION limit. That means that you have to abide by the regulations that are in effect for the state where you LAND the fish, no matter where you CAUGHT the fish.

LI charters, if they went to NJ to catch the fluke, could not land them in NY LEGALLY. While in NJ waters, they could have the 17.5" fish on board, but once back in NY waters, if boarded, they would be in violation and therefore issued a summons.

This occurs fairly frequently in the NY Bight (NY Harbor area where vessels from NY and NJ fluke fish in some very productive waters (Ambrose Channel and Tin Can Grounds) that require crossing artificial state boundaries. Also occurs in Long Island Sound where the season, limits and sizes differ as well.
 
Rich, maybe I misunderstood the local guys, but more than a few times this summer I heard of the Jersey run charter trips; pay a little more, but better chance of going home with fish. I'll have to ask the Nautical Mile captains that one this week. I think I even saw ads in Nor'East magazine about NY to NJ runs. Once again, you make total sense, maybe I had too many pops at the bar when I overheard them bitching about the 19.5" rule.
 
imrich- To answer your hypothetical question, I am leaning toward keeping a few badly hooked shorts for the table in the future unless this insanity is reversed.

I and other anglers like John C and Louis D have played by the rules for a number of years now. Each year we have been given less cards to play with, and less of an ante in the pot to play for, but we still played by the rules.

I speak only of myself about the
"cheating". This is a lot more serious than just the fluke fishery. This is the first time that NY has attempted, and probably will close down a fishery on a "voluntary" basis. It is bad precedent and you have to wonder what else and with what other type of fish they might try this.

The impact is not just not going to be felt by anglers.

I am a boat owner because I like to fish. Some of you also like to fish but many of you are owners for the cruising/pleasure aspect of boating. This action being undertaken will effect a lot of marine related businesses. Frank and Dick's, Bergen Point, Babylon Gas docks will all probably reduce operations or shut down completely. A lot of the marinas that some of you dock your boats in, will lose a lot more business. The marine suppliers will lose business and be forced to raise prices to meet their overhead and boaters will bear the brunt.

You all know that this year with the high fuel costs, a lot of boats never got splashed. This is bad news for everybody.
 
I'm a fisherman and a conservationist. The rules state what they state and there's another body that enforces them. It's black and white to the DEC. Plus they've added a bunch of new personnel that will be enforcing those rules. i'd say that Murphy's law will inflict as much punishment as you can endure plus...I've been boarded twice this year. once by local bay constable doing a 'safety' inspection and the other a DEC officer. If I'd had short fish on me i would have been fined. btw, fines go up quickly if you are a repeat offender. Since i use live bait often i must be aware of those regs and abide by them as well.

that being said...go to the Shinnecock Canal and you will see many people violate the rules by keeping dozens of snappers or small porgies and fluke. Kinda frustrating because you know its happening everywhere.

I make sure that if I'm fishing for a regulated fish that i use hooks that easily corrode so if i do happen to gut hook a short that if it's too deep i just cut him loose bruce and re-rig.

my .02
 
and last Monday i caught over 40 fluke and they were all 19.25". Spent 2.5 hrs with only a large sea bass to take home. Not sure how they are counting keepers but i'm not seeing large fish or taking home my limit at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top