Fluke Season 2026 Analysis

[BroadBill]

Agreed, but let’s remember who is putting together the numbers. It’s very highly educated people, many with PhD’s in various marine related areas. Very often working in under paid government jobs. They are dedicated professionals, and they collaborate with many of our other top universities that have specialized focus in the same areas. I seriously doubt these people have any dog in the fight, and go about their work in a non-political manner.

That said, I feel confident in saying that politics do enter the discussions of those setting policy. And some of the politics are good, and some are not so good.

Very well said and I completely agree. Please remember the institutions who are putting these numbers together completely missed the 80's summer flounder collapse, their data and or policy decisions destroyed the winter flounder fishery and much of our overall ground fishery (whiting / ling / pollack / cod etc.) some time ago and for that matter what we're currently experiencing with the striper fishery and others. At the same time, they should be applauded for success stories. Door swings both ways.

I assume you've read or are familiar with Mark Terceiro's Summer Flounder Chronicles titled: The summer flounder chronicles: Science, politics, and litigation,
1975–2000. It's a good read along with his three other editions. He touches on what you and I are discussing.

I believe in science and that scientists have good intentions. I think they get it right most of the time but not all the time. Before they're scientists their humans and therefore not perfect as none of us are. Good representative data ignored or used the wrong way by decision and policy makers is as bad if not worse than bad data used for any purpose including fisheries management. I think in more cases than not and certainly in the case of the summer flounder stock, the later is the problem. But sometimes as with MRIP the data being used isn't representative of the fishery. Again I'll put all this together in a more comprehensive coherent reply within the next week or so.

Have a safe trip to California and enjoy your winter in Florida.

BB

 

[hawk375]

wow you people have a hard time understanding catch and release fluke is not working as far as calling the people who come up with this being the best science minds in country haven't been to many meetings who ever believes they know how many fish are in the ocean still has santa coming at Christmas

 

[Kona]

I question the data for rec fishermen. I’ve never been surveyed in my 50 years of running a boat , neither have my 2 brothers with 80years between them or my late father with 65. Shinnecock and Peconic.

 

[MakoMatt]

Very well said and I completely agree. Please remember the institutions who are putting these numbers together completely missed the 80's summer flounder collapse, their data and or policy decisions destroyed the winter flounder fishery and much of our overall ground fishery (whiting / ling / pollack / cod etc.) some time ago and for that matter what we're currently experiencing with the striper fishery and others. At the same time, they should be applauded for success stories. Door swings both ways.

I assume you've read or are familiar with Mark Terceiro's Summer Flounder Chronicles titled: The summer flounder chronicles: Science, politics, and litigation,
1975–2000. It's a good read along with his three other editions. He touches on what you and I are discussing.

I believe in science and that scientists have good intentions. I think they get it right most of the time but not all the time. Before they're scientists their humans and therefore not perfect as none of us are. Good representative data ignored or used the wrong way by decision and policy makers is as bad if not worse than bad data used for any purpose including fisheries management. I think in more cases than not and certainly in the case of the summer flounder stock, the later is the problem. But sometimes as with MRIP the data being used isn't representative of the fishery. Again I'll put all this together in a more comprehensive coherent reply within the next week or so.

Have a safe trip to California and enjoy your winter in Florida.

BB

Our understanding of the Winter Flounder collapse from the 1980’s I think is substantially different today from that what we believed almost 50 years ago. In particular as it relates to Long Island, and the residential development of the south shore. Between the barrier islands, and the mainland, we dug drainage canals through the marshlands for both drainage and misquote control. If you lined all these drainage canals in a row it would stretch from NY to California. Misquote’s were an enormous problem, and tons, upon tons of insecticides, including DDT were sprayed by aircraft over the entire marsh. I believe those are some of the reasons today that Winter Flounder are struggling to recover.

And another one, Stony Brook University has conducted research as to why the Winter Flounder cannot rebound. In non scientific terms, the biomass is small, and they appear to colonize in small family groups. They are not reproducing at sustainable levels due to inbreeding.

Who’d thunk that back in the 80’s?

And I’m sure in 50 years from now there will be many things people will look back on and laugh as what we thought was proven science today.

I was not familiar with Mark Terceiro’s Summer Flounder Chronicles. I did a little reading and unfortunately I can’t make much of it. It reminds me of some of the papers my PhD family members write. I cannot understand a word of it. For the benefit of some of the members, here is a sample of his chronicles………

“The single-sample NeEstimator results indicated that N e could not be accurately estimated from linkage-disequilibrium patterns and that the signal could not be distinguished from sampling variance. However, coalescent-based demographic modelling using the joint site frequency spectrum revealed a substantial decline and subsequent recovery in summer flounder effective population size, consistent with population dynamics recorded by stock assessments of this species (Terceiro, 2001). we used serial sampling and SFS-based demographic modelling to demonstrate that very recent demographic events (~10 generations ago) are detectable. ...”

 

[MakoMatt]

I question the data for rec fishermen. I’ve never been surveyed in my 50 years of running a boat , neither have my 2 brothers with 80years between them or my late father with 65. Shinnecock and Peconic.

I’ve been surveyed a couple of times. I also participate in the NMFS Apex Predator Shark Tagging Program which provides valuable information to NOAA.

 

[Kona]

In the late 70’s and through the 80’s we also participated in the shark tagging program with 800+ tags out there and perhaps 50 returns.

 

[Kona]

One blue shark at large for 6 years , return was from Portugal! That blue dog covered some ground! Had some 7 days in the same general area , and a couple 2 years in the same spot, 30 fathom fingers SE of Shinnecock.

 

[MakoMatt]

In the late 70’s and through the 80’s we also participated in the shark tagging program with 800+ tags out there and perhaps 50 returns.

We probably started sometime in the 80’s and I still continue to participate today. Can only guess but probably tagged well over 1,000. I also participate in the Tuna Tagging Prigram.

 

[MakoMatt]

One blue shark at large for 6 years , return was from Portugal! That blue dog covered some ground! Had some 7 days in the same general area , and a couple 2 years in the same spot, 30 fathom fingers SE of Shinnecock.

A VERY LOT of my returns came back from commercial fishermen who worked near the Azores, which is near Portugal. Always Bluedogs.

I never had a Mako, Thresher, or BFT return.

 

[BroadBill]

Our understanding of the Winter Flounder collapse from the 1980’s I think is substantially different today from that what we believed almost 50 years ago. In particular as it relates to Long Island, and the residential development of the south shore. Between the barrier islands, and the mainland, we dug drainage canals through the marshlands for both drainage and misquote control. If you lined all these drainage canals in a row it would stretch from NY to California. Misquote’s were an enormous problem, and tons, upon tons of insecticides, including DDT were sprayed by aircraft over the entire marsh. I believe those are some of the reasons today that Winter Flounder are struggling to recover.

And another one, Stony Brook University has conducted research as to why the Winter Flounder cannot rebound. In non scientific terms, the biomass is small, and they appear to colonize in small family groups. They are not reproducing at sustainable levels due to inbreeding.

Who’d thunk that back in the 80’s?

And I’m sure in 50 years from now there will be many things people will look back on and laugh as what we thought was proven science today.

I was not familiar with Mark Terceiro’s Summer Flounder Chronicles. I did a little reading and unfortunately I can’t make much of it. It reminds me of some of the papers my PhD family members write. I cannot understand a word of it. For the benefit of some of the members, here is a sample of his chronicles………

“The single-sample NeEstimator results indicated that N e could not be accurately estimated from linkage-disequilibrium patterns and that the signal could not be distinguished from sampling variance. However, coalescent-based demographic modelling using the joint site frequency spectrum revealed a substantial decline and subsequent recovery in summer flounder effective population size, consistent with population dynamics recorded by stock assessments of this species (Terceiro, 2001). we used serial sampling and SFS-based demographic modelling to demonstrate that very recent demographic events (~10 generations ago) are detectable. ...”

View attachment 120426

MM

As it related to your comments about winter flounder, I couldn't disagree more and the data from the regulatory bodies support that position. The summer flounder regulations and insane quotas in the 80's caused the collapse of that fishery as it was completely mismanaged. The below piece is from NOAA and ASMFC per the following link.

Google Search

Commercials with multi species permits turned to winter flounder or "blackbacks" to supplement lost income when summer flounder quotas were slashed. It took but a few years for that fishery to be irreparably damaged and never recover. It's not about drainage canals and mosquitos unless you can provide proof that explanation has any credibility at all. Otherwise its just another unfounded theory. Did it contribute, maybe. Was it even close to the primary reason for the collapse, no at all. Did recreational harvest contribute, yes but recreational and commercial harvest levels were allowed by data from science and the decision makers who used that data to set cataclysmically ineffective and damaging policies and quotas. Review the attached charts from the latest winter flounder stock assessment illustrating the immense commercial landings from the GOM and MA/SNE stocks in the 80's when the regulatory bodies allowed commercial to exploit that stock after they destroyed the summer flounder fishery. Again no different than what's happening now with the summer flounder stock. Increase landings of the wrong age classes, kill the breeders, decimate recruitment, destroy SSB and the biomass as a whole and kill the fishery. No fishery can survive under regulations that not just allow but cause that to happen and the fluke fishery is on that course right now. The data is there, the policy decisions being ,made are to benefit the commercial sector and have zero to do with managing the health and longevity of the stock. Note, winter flounder recruitment went from over 160 million annually in 1981 to around 20 million annually in 2019 because the regulators allowed the SSB to be destroyed. And keep in mind recreational fisherman, as with the fluke fishery, have access to the winter flounder stock for maybe three months out of the entire year while commercials pound both stocks year round.

The Interconnected Collapse
• Summer Flounder Collapse: By the mid-to-late 1980s, summer flounder stocks along the Atlantic coast were decimated due to heavy, unregulated fishing, forcing fishery managers to implement strict commercial quota cuts.
• Commercial Redirection: In response to these strict fluke quotas, commercial draggers and operators holding multi-species permits shifted their effort directly onto winter flounder (often sold as "blackback" or lemon sole) to supplement their lost income.
• The Perfect Storm: This sudden surge in commercial pressure hit winter flounder right as the species was already facing massive, unregulated recreational harvest. For context, commercial landings had historically peaked at 40.3 million pounds annually. Under the combined weight of targeted commercial netting and relentless angling, recruitment (the number of young fish surviving to adulthood) plummeted by 1984.

And here we go again full circle which will be addressed in my follow up within within the next few weeks. The summer flounder fishery around '87 / '88 was destroyed due to completely ineffective regulations. As a result, commercials targeted the winter flounder fishery and destroyed that fishery within a few short years. Much like ling and whiting in the 70's and 80's, no one thought those fisheries would ever disappear. And then they did. And when the winter flounder stock was depleted, NMFS used size minimums to give the summer flounder fishery, after a decade long rebuild of the stock under much different regulations, back to the primary harvest of the commercial sector through the use of size minimums so they could destroy it a second time.

FYI, I mentioned Mark Terceiro's Summer Chronicle which has some very insightful information discussing why data from science and policy decisions don't always mesh and frequently end up in litigation from well funded commercial lobbying interests. You choose to take a one paragraph excerpt which sounds like it's written in Latin and post it as an implied representation of the entire narrative. If we can't have open, honest and holistic discussions, supported by facts, it's pointless having any exchange trying to understand how another extremely valuable fishery is, in my opinion, once again on the brink of failing.

I have no desire to talk about science or scientists, as I stated my research and analysis uses data that comes from NEFSC, NMFS and ASMFC under Peer Reviewed protocols so lets not get hung up on how intelligent, under or overpaid scientists are or how badly they're treated by the government. None of that is relevant, no one cares and it has no bearing on the current status of the stock, how we got here and most important the future viability of this fishery under the means it's currently being managed or mismanaged.

Agreed?