Scales and Tales

“Dear Tom,

“The new fluke regulations stink!” The unreasonably high (20.5”) size limit for the summer flatties is bound to turn people away from fishing. Add in the current high price of fuel at the dock and you’ve got a double-whammy.

“If I thought the fluke population was truly in trouble, I would have no problem supporting more strict regulation. However, it is obvious to most recreational anglers that there are plenty of fish around. I work in a south shore tackle shop and receive constant fishing reports. Many anglers are hooking 20, 30 or even more fluke each trip, with catches made both in the bays and in the ocean. Most of the fish have to be thrown back as they measure less than 20.5 inches – but there doesn’t appear to be a shortage of fluke on any front.

“Simply put, the data is a joke. It’s undoubtedly inaccurate. I realize that fisheries managers are bound by law to use the ‘best data available,’ and to act to manage the resource based on that data, but when it is obvious that the 'the best data' is wrong something has to change.

“The bureaucracy in charge has proven itself inept. If the data is so far off, it should be their job to come up with a better way of gathering accurate information. The only way to prompt such change is to let them know we will hold them accountable. I urge all recreational anglers to contact their legislators, congressmen, senators – even the governor - and let them know how you feel. Attend fisheries management meetings and make some noise. If you aren’t willing to stand up for change, bad decisions will continue to be the rule and your prospects of taking home a fish for dinner now and then will grow less and less each year.

“- Chuck Adams, Causeway Bait and Tackle, Wantagh, NY.”

“Tom,

“As captain of an open boat, it is hard to find anything positive in the new fluke limits. The bureaucrats have turned this fishing almost into pure sport. Still, there are plenty of fish around and although you may need to toss most of them back, your chances of catching the biggest fluke of your life have never been better.

“I think anglers need to look at fluke fishing differently than in the past. If you are trying to equate a trip with how much table fare you’ll bring home, you’ll likely end up disappointed. If, on the other hand, you rate the trip on how much action and fun you had, you’ll probably head home very satisfied. Think of it like golf; you play 18 holes and go home with nothing more than a score card – but you judge the day on how well you played, time spend with friends, and the overall enjoyment of the outing.

“Come on out and enjoy a day for the sake of fishing. Have fun hooking-up, being with friends and family and challenging yourself to catch your biggest fluke or sea bass ever. If you end up heading home with some fillets, so much the better.

“Sincerely,

“Captain Dennis Kanyuk (Super Hawk, Point Lookout)”

“Hi Tom,

“I really enjoy your Newsday fishing column. Thanks for the update on this year’s fluke regulations.

“As a simple lay person that fishes - and especially enjoys targeting fluke - I eagerly awaited this year's regulations. Last year we would have to cull through 40, 50 even days of 100 fluke to get a couple of 19-1/2" keepers. What are they thinking with 20-1/2" minimums in 2008?

“As a recreational angler, I am not privy to the scientific data that the decision makers use as a base for the regulation changes. I have to rely on observation, anecdotal experience and common sense. I have a few questions that maybe the fisheries management people could help me understand:

“1. It seems to me that a slot limit would make more sense. Especially if, in the process of trying to get that keeper, there will be a lot of (16” - 20") shorts caught. Shorts are often gut-hooked and anglers are not surgeons - so the majority of these fish will die. Why not allow one or two gut-hooked fish in the 16"+ range?

“2. If the biology of a fluke presents that the larger fish are usually the healthiest
- and female - why stress the gene pool by targeting these fish?

“3.How is it justified that a commercial dragger can keep fish of lesser size - but a kid fishing with his grandfather in the safety of the bay or on the backside of an inlet must release almost every fluke caught?

“4. Where are the data to support that keeping four fluke at 20-1/2" will have less of a negative impact on the fishery than (3 or 4) fish of mixed sizes? How about spreading out the lifecycle?

“5. Our surrounding states have what seem to be more reasonable fluke regulations. Why are NY's rules so draconian?

“Thanks,

“- Ed Behan
“Blue Point, Long Island, NY”

“Dear Outdoor Tom,

“It’s disturbing to see a 6-1/2” difference between the 2008 fluke size limit for New York’s commercial fishermen (14”) and the recreational size limit (a whopping 20-1/2”).

“I feel strongly that fisheries managers lulled the recreational fishing community into a false sense of security, back in 2007, by convincing us there would be a full season of fluke fishing if we agreed to an increased size limit at that time – then they shut us down anyway. What’s to stop them from cutting the fluke season short again this year after we have – once again – agreed to increase the minimum size of the fish we take home?

“As for a potential saltwater license, I would offer my support if assured that the money collected was to be earmarked directly back to the fishing resource to improve fishing habitat, enforcement, stock status, data collection, angler access, etc. Unfortunately, I have no faith that the money will be used for such purposes. More likely, it will be added to a general fund and ‘raided’ when the state needs cash – which is just about all the time.

“I enjoy the coverage. Thanks for keeping the recreational community informed.

“- Ken Morse, Tight Lines Bait and Tackle, Sag Harbor, NY”

Long Island's summer flounder season is well underway at this point and anglers are enjoying fast action at most ports - even if keepers have been tough to find. To be sure, there are more legal fluke being creeled than most would have thought. Still, anglers have a lot to say about the new regulations - and about the proposed saltwater fishing license. Consider some of the following messages I've received in recent weeks:

“Dear Mr. Schlichter,

"I have been both an experienced recreational fisherman as well as a professional fillet man/production manager employed at the Fulton Fish Market for more than twenty years. This particular combination has presented me with a dual viewpoint of the commercial catch, as well as my personal experiences with rod and reel.

“My livelihood is no doubt dependant on the commercial catch. It is fact that fluke landed from New Bedford, RI, NJ, NY and, especially from Virginia and the Carolinas, are the primary source of flatfish during the winter months. I have personally filleted hundreds of thousands of pounds of these fluke over the past twenty years. Restrictions on the commercial catch of fluke as well as most other species of flat fish, while intending to preserve the stocks, have also lead to tons of dead by-catch shoveled over the side while pushing the businesses of fresh fish and fillet to the verge of extinction. All that being said, the concept of recreational anglers decimating the fluke population one fish at a time while we may purchase 3000 pounds of medium-sized fluke usually no bigger than 14-18 inches - three times a week - is, in my opinion, beyond absurd.

"I in no way mean to point a finger at the commercial catch or wish to see it restricted any further. Instead, I point at the various agencies charged with the management of this most valuable resource, and what appears to me to be a fragmented approach lacking unification and common sense. I thought this view from the other side might offer you a different perspective on the 20.5” size and two fish fluke limits.”

"- Vincent DiPalma"

"Dear Tom,

“With our Nation’s current sad economy and the ever increasing crude oil mockery – the timing for the Saltwater License issue couldn’t be worse. Sadly, we are living in a world of uncertainty and we just have to take the hits as they come. I’ve been fishing for many years and have witnessed the evolving cycles and the entire biomass mishaps. With the current laws and regulations, I feel the fishing industry will be in a complete halt in less than ten years!

"I believe that the sport fishing world needs desperate help in many areas. For starters, we need enforcement, better research, reporting assessments, and a balanced distribution (for all commercial and recreational parties) with intentions to preserve and protect our fishery.

"However, I just hope that the funds derived from the proposed license do not end up in our state’s desperate stimulate budget package where recreational anglers get nothing for it (in other words, “general funds” or the 'black hole.')

"All in all, I do believe we need help and if the saltwater license funds are dedicated and will help our fishing economy, thus preserving the sport, I will endorse it wholeheartedly. But if the funds are to be mishandled, I will have no other choice but to swallow another created hard found fee.

“- 'Crazy' Alberto Knie
"Sportfishing Contributor / Consultant, Lindenhurst, NY"

“Dear Outdoor Tom,

“Most fishermen know we were out-maneuvered by an extremely well-funded charitable trust, preventing the Magnuson Act from being an important conservation law. Instead the act will cause great harm to both commercial and recreational fishermen. The spirit and intent of the law, which is to protect fisheries, is at first glance, noble. But the arbitrary rebuilding goals and inflexible language will bring an end to a tradition that is older than the very government that passed the law.

“If fluke stocks were truly in trouble I would not be writing to you. There is only a perception of fluke stocks being in trouble. I believe this perception came about by unethical scientists bought and paid for by a large charitable trust fund. The demanding language of the law was a manifestation of this science. It is a severe ethical breach of scientific protocol for a scientist to tailor and skew the results of a study to meet the needs of the organization paying for the research. I remember reading the interpretations of a study published in all the daily newspapers while the Magnason Act was being debated. It stated the total collapse of all fisheries was eminent in the very near future. This interpretation was published in newspapers and not in scientific journals. There was no peer review prior to its publication. The interpretation was used to support passing of the Magnason Act. The research was later rebuked by many reliable scientists because of a flaw in collecting the data.

"I have been fishing both commercially and recreationally for over forty years never have I seen as many fluke or heard as many stories about abundant numbers of fluke up and down the coast, as I do these days. When I started out as a deckhand in the early 1960’s, I heard stories of fluke being caught in the 1950’s but didn’t see any until the 1970’s.

"Prior to operating my own party boat, The Osprey IV, I bought and sold the catch of four draggers working out of Port Jefferson. There would only be an occasional fluke mixed with the other fish in their catch. It wasn’t until the early '80’s that there was sufficient fluke to make it a directed fishery. Draggers are not the enemy, currently they are only allowed to keep 90 pounds of fluke. There are many steel hulled draggers rusting at the dock because the regulations do not allow them to keep enough fish to run the boats profitably.

"The current fluke travesty is so complex, I am sure someone will write a thesis for a PHD on it. We have a serious problem to address. It is hard to amend or overturn a law once it is passed. Making this particularly difficult is the belief that this law is based on valid science. The science is flawed but the law calls for the use of the “best available science.” It makes no exceptions for science that is flawed. Flawed or not, many Senators and Congressman received money and endorsement from these trust and conservation organizations. Therefore they are reluctant to risking being against conservation. We need to work out our differences with commercial fishermen. Fighting the commercial fishermen takes time and resources away from the real culprit - ignorance of the magnitude of the fluke biomass and the unethical tactics of the conservation groups.

"Just to put the 20.5 inch fluke limit in another perspective: I worked on a cattle ranch during college. If the rancher sold his best and biggest breeders and kept only the small cows and bulls, what kind of herd would he have in a few years?

"Tom this will have to be categorized as my opinion because I did not have time to document all of my sources. If one had the time, they could, and would, find that what I am saying is true.

"Regards,
"- Captain Stew Cash (Osprey IV, Port Jefferson)"

"Dear Tom,

"A saltwater license is not a bad idea, even though everyone knows our good friends in Albany will surely find a way to divert as many $$ as possible from the originally-intended recipients.

"No, the biggest problem with a SW license is that it will be a regulatory nightmare unless NY, NJ, CT, RI and perhaps, MA, can all agree on the following points:

"A) Uniform possession/size limits, at least in areas of contiguous boundary waters, and

"B) Reciprocal recognition of each State's licensure.

"As long as the contiguous States reserve the right to set their own regulations in their territorial waters, they will just as surely enact legislation adding fines for fishing without a license in 'their' waters, and predatory and retaliatory 'enforcement' actions will ensue - not to mention adding yet another layer of onerous licensing fees for non-resident anglers.

"A regional license is the only sane approach, and a regional task force needs to be created to hammer-out the details. And that means possession/size limits guided by real science, real statistical data, and an eco-systemic management plan. Moreover, input from BOTH recreational and commercial interests needs to be advisory only. Vested interests should have NO say in the final management determination.

"Sincerely yours,
"- Richard E Steinberger, MD, Oakdale NY"