he conservation equivalency system, implemented by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) for summer flounder management, was originally intended to provide flexibility while maintaining conservation goals. However, analysis reveals that it has significantly and persistently created disparities and consequences that undermine both the equity and effectiveness of summer flounder management.
Here's how conservation equivalency policies have impacted the equity and effectiveness:
Impact on Equity
The system has resulted in inequitable fishing opportunities for anglers across New York (NY), New Jersey (NJ), and Connecticut (CT).
• Regulatory Disparities:
◦ Size Limits: For 9 out of 10 years between 2015 and 2024, New Jersey has maintained an average 1-2 inch size limit advantage over New York and Connecticut. For instance, in 2024, NJ had an 18" limit while NY/CT had 19-19.5". In 2018, NY/CT general waters had a 19-19.5" minimum, compared to NJ general waters at 18".
◦ Bag Limits: While uniform in 2014 (5 fish), NJ maintained a 5-fish limit in 2015-2016 when NY/CT dropped to 3 fish. From 2017-2024, NJ's special zones often provided more liberal bag limits.
◦ Season Lengths: New Jersey typically has shorter seasons, but these are often compensated by more liberal size and bag limits.
◦ Special Management Zones: New Jersey further enhances opportunities through zones like the Delaware Bay Zone (consistently 1-2" smaller size limits) and Island Beach State Park (often 2-3" smaller size limits than NY/CT), along with Enhanced Shore Programs not available in NY/CT. An extreme example from 2018 shows NJ's Island Beach State Park with a 16" minimum and 2 fish, while NY/CT general waters had 19-19.5" minimum and 3-4 fish.
• Angler Disadvantage and Economic Impacts:
◦ Reduced Harvest Opportunities: NY/CT anglers face an estimated 15-25% reduction in keeper fish due to more restrictive regulations, leading to increased discards, discard mortality, and reduced angler satisfaction.
◦ Real-World Inequity: The Ambrose Channel highlights this disparity, where an angler on the NY side must discard an 18" fish, but the same angler just 50 feet away on the NJ side can keep it, despite fishing the same stock.
◦ Business Impact: Charter and party boat operations in NY/CT are disadvantaged by more restrictive regulations, creating a competitive disadvantage where clients may choose NJ boats. This leads to economic loss from reduced bookings and customer satisfaction.
◦ Coastal Community Impact: Tourism is affected as anglers choose destinations with more liberal regulations, impacting local businesses (tackle shops, marinas, restaurants) and shifting fishing-related economic activity from NY/CT to NJ.
• Allocation vs. Stock Distribution Mismatch:
◦ Outdated Allocations: The system relies on outdated 1998 baseline allocations, which granted NJ approximately 40% of the allocation, while NY received 17.5% and CT a minor share.
◦ Scientific Evidence of Stock Shift: Research indicates a shift in summer flounder distribution due to climate change and stock rebuilding. Historically, the bulk of the population was off southern NJ, but it is now off Northern NJ, the south shore of Long Island, and Rhode Island.
◦ Resulting Disparity: NY/CT anglers face the most restrictive regulations despite an increased local abundance of fish in their waters, while NJ maintains liberal regulations despite fewer local fish compared to historical levels. This means NY anglers are disadvantaged by the most restrictive regulations despite having more local fish.
Impact on Effectiveness
The conservation equivalency system has also led to management inefficiencies and challenges, hindering its overall effectiveness.
• Enforcement and Compliance Challenges:
◦ Boundary Issues: Different regulations for the same stock just 50 feet apart in areas like the Ambrose Channel (NY/NJ) create significant boundary enforcement issues. Similar issues exist in Long Island Sound (NY/CT) and Delaware Bay (NJ/DE).
◦ Angler Confusion: The complex and varying regulations across states lead to angler confusion and uncertainty.
◦ Increased Violations: This confusion contributes to both intentional and unintentional non-compliance, imposing a "nightmare" burden on enforcement officers.
• Data Accuracy and Reliability Issues:
◦ MRIP Data Problems: The system relies on Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) data, which suffers from significant problems. MRIP surveys are designed for coastwide estimates, where the Percent Standard Error (PSE) is adequate (around 8.2%), but state-level estimates have a substantial margin of error (15.7-19.4%), and wave/sector-specific estimates are often "effectively worthless" (70-100%+ PSEs).
◦ Specific Examples: For instance, New Jersey's 2015 data (used for 2016 regulations) showed PSEs ranging from 15.9% to 79.9% across different waves, and Connecticut's sector-specific regulations in 2016 had PSEs between 70.2-101.9%.
◦ Stock Assessment Uncertainty: Revisions to MRIP data have shown new estimates to be 1.5 to 3 times higher than old estimates, leading to significantly different stock abundance estimates and hindering accurate stock assessments.
◦ ASMFC Concerns: The ASMFC Monitoring Committee itself has noted high PSEs and "frustration with the inaccessibility of MRIP data," recognising that these data limitations impede effective management decisions.
• Fundamental Design Flaws and Violation of Principles:
◦ Sample Size Fragmentation: State-by-state management requires precise state-level data, but MRIP surveys are not designed to provide this, leading to unreliable estimates.
◦ "Gaming the System": States exploit imprecise data to justify favourable regulations, and ASMFC rarely denies conservation equivalency requests if "paper calculations" show equivalency, even when real-world harvest differs significantly from projections.
◦ Violation of Scientific Principles: The Magnuson-Stevens Act mandates that an "individual stock of fish shall be managed as a unit throughout its range." Conservation equivalency directly fragments this management across state lines for the same stock, going against this principle.
◦ Ignored Recommendations: The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council warned in 2017 against complex measures and recommended a new approach prioritising consistency, but these warnings have not been heeded, and substantial error continues to plague MRIP estimates.
In conclusion, the conservation equivalency system has failed to achieve its stated goals, creating a system of persistent inequities that disadvantage NY and CT while providing unjustified advantages to NJ anglers. It relies on inadequate data, ignores scientific recommendations, and violates fundamental management principles, proving to be far better in theory than in practice.
