Fluke. Seabass, Porgy Regs 2024

Not sure what this means: These measures are only intended to be used for states/regions which do not comply with the conservation equivalency process.

I assume this means that it is a suggestion and if NY does not come up with something “equivalent” we have to go with their regulation??
 
BoatGuy said:
Not sure what this means: These measures are only intended to be used for states/regions which do not comply with the conservation equivalency process.

I assume this means that it is a suggestion and if NY does not come up with something “equivalent” we have to go with their regulation??
Click to expand...
Yeah, kinda sorta. It's complicated, but it should be no surprise that scup should be seeing a huge reduction in bag limits. The party boats have been pounding the crap out of them for the past 4 or so years to make up poor fishing/restrictive limits on fluke and BSB. At the behest of the For Hire fleets, the regulators have been kicking that can down the road for years and now it's payback time.

It's unfortunate, but the long-standing Party Boat business model of "C'mon board to fill the freezer" is now running up against severely diminished fish stocks. We're quickly approaching a "Come to Jesus" realization...
 
Are they saying the new reulations for fluke will be...
"Precautionary default measures include a 20-inch minimum size, 2 fish possession limit, and open season from July 1-August 31."

I fish the Port Jeff area (Long Island Sound). I noticed some time ago that May and June I caught my bigger fish. As Crazy Alberto explained to me, the squid move through. By July all the big fish have moved out and continue to follow the squid. I am sure opening the season in July is not by mistake. I rather they just close the season. This stinks.
 
Roccus7 said:
Yeah, kinda sorta. It's complicated, but it should be no surprise that scup should be seeing a huge reduction in bag limits. The party boats have been pounding the crap out of them for the past 4 or so years to make up poor fishing/restrictive limits on fluke and BSB. At the behest of the For Hire fleets, the regulators have been kicking that can down the road for years and now it's payback time.

It's unfortunate, but the long-standing Party Boat business model of "C'mon board to fill the freezer" is now running up against severely diminished fish stocks. We're quickly approaching a "Come to Jesus" realization...
Click to expand...
As usual they wait until the fishery is is in such bad shape and then blame the fishermen for the problem, instead of putting bag limits in place while the population is still healthy so the limits would not have to be so restrictive that it dont pay to go out.
 
Double Trouble said:
As usual they wait until the fishery is is in such bad shape and then blame the fishermen for the problem, instead of putting bag limits in place while the population is still healthy so the limits would not have to be so restrictive that it dont pay to go out.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more, but the other part of "as usual" is the second the regulators start talking about restrictive limits all aspects of the industry start screaming bloody murder that they're being put out of business.

One of my old bosses used to say, "If it's a big problem and you don't do something about it right away, it ends up disappearing"
 
S
Roccus7 said:
Yeah, kinda sorta. It's complicated, but it should be no surprise that scup should be seeing a huge reduction in bag limits. The party boats have been pounding the crap out of them for the past 4 or so years to make up poor fishing/restrictive limits on fluke and BSB. At the behest of the For Hire fleets, the regulators have been kicking that can down the road for years and now it's payback time.

It's unfortunate, but the long-standing Party Boat business model of "C'mon board to fill the freezer" is now running up against severely diminished fish stocks. We're quickly approaching a "Come to Jesus" realization...
Click to expand...
Scup and Sea Bass fishing have never been better........ can't understand the reduction on scup..........
 
OVERBORED said:
S
Scup and Sea Bass fishing have never been better........ can't understand the reduction on scup..........
Click to expand...
The extremely generous bag limits over the past 4 or so years are putting the hurt on the population. Because of severe bag limits and tough fishing for fluke , BSB, stripers and tog, they've become the "Go To" fish for people intent on filling the freezer,

Yeah, there's lots of them, but keep it up and their won't be. @Double Trouble put it very succinctly, keep doing that, and they're won't be any.
 
the regulators are clueless if striped bass was an emergency what are flounder weakfish bluefish if you catch fish because they become available you get areduction this is what happens when the regulators sit at a desk and are arrogant enough to think they know how many fish are in the ocean
 
Computer models can predict a lot of things............biomass isn't one of them!

Right now the Sea Bass are stacked up on wrecks from 180ft and deeper. Scup are anywhere from 40-90 fathom.

Problem is, you will never see a research vessel sampling in January when the fish congregate on the shelf and are easiest to assess.............
 
OVERBORED said:
If it wasn't for scup, MANY boats would be out of business. That said, most could probably live with 15-20 fish........
Click to expand...
They certainly have made it through worse. But the only people that I know who fish for scup are looking to put food in the fridge. 15- scup for $75 could hurt.
 
george said:
They certainly have made it through worse. But the only people that I know who fish for scup are looking to put food in the fridge. 15- scup for $75 could hurt.
Click to expand...
True, but $75 for a skunking hurts a lot worse.

I've learned to never calculate how much my "caught" fish dinners actually cost. It's a number I don't want to see, but when looked at as how much does it cost enjoy being on the water, it seems to be quite a bargain...
 
Roccus7 said:
True, but $75 for a skunking hurts a lot worse.

I've learned to never calculate how much my "caught" fish dinners actually cost. It's a number I don't want to see, but when looked at as how much does it cost enjoy being on the water, it seems to be quite a bargain...
Click to expand...
I agree withyou there. But scup is a subsistence fishery for most.

I just did a $400 a man grouper trip for two fish! It's too simple not to calculate :)

$100 per fillet
$200 a fish.
 
Double Trouble said:
Well then we could wait until they cant be found like they did with winter flounder.
Click to expand...
No comparison my friend. Also, keep in mind that winter flounder are flourishing. Just not in our polluted bays. They've moved offshore now and commercials are catching their full quotas.

Please don't get me wrong, I'm a fish first guy. Always have been and always will be. But Im also an advocate for recreational fishing.

The best thing for was scup would be no one fishing them at all. I realize that the govt tries to get it right, but sadly they're stuck at their desk looking at numbers that in most cases are correct about 50% of the time.

I'm doing this for over 35 years now and I can say that the micro managing of this, and other fisheries, with constant regulation changes, is obviously not the answer. It has never worked and never will.
 
Roccus7 said:
True, but $75 for a skunking hurts a lot worse.

I've learned to never calculate how much my "caught" fish dinners actually cost. It's a number I don't want to see, but when looked at as how much does it cost enjoy being on the water, it seems to be quite a bargain...
Click to expand...
As is often the case I have mixed feelings about this issue. I agree completely with Roccus that recreational fishing should never be judged by the amount of fish one comes home with at the end of the day. I'm quite sure many of us learned long ago from whomever introduced us to this wonderful sport that it is the total experience that really matters.

On the other side of the coin, I have to look at things from my customers perspective as well. I do run a fair number of Scup Charters every year for groups of various interests and economic strata. For the most part, families with young kids and real hard-core light tackle enthusiasts love battling the large Spawners we are blessed with in the Peconics each spring and they are fine going home with just a handful of fish per person for their efforts.

But I also have a few groups that are really scraping together every dollar and count on making a big catch to offset some their own costs to feed themselves and their families. In fact, I often give these guys a break on the fare just to make things bit easier on them. Given the size of most Scup, even our spring Jumbos, it takes a lot to make a decent meal. A severe reduction in bag limit would definitely be a hardship on those folks.

I'm also puzzled about George's comment about a possible 15 fish bag limit. The proposed changes are calling for a 10% reduction, but 15 is half the current limit. I know it will be calculated by some "fudge factor" of total pounds of estimated harvest but that still seems like too steep a cut. Plus, I read they are also considering reopening the Federal waters for recreational harvest but at a 40 fish bag limit. What am I missing?
 
📱 Fish Smarter with the NYAngler App!
Launch Now

Members online

Total: 467 (members: 16, guests: 451)

Fishing Reports

Latest posts

Latest articles

Back
Top