Mr. Colvin distributed tabular and graphical information on the biological reference points that presently guide management of summer flounder or fluke.  One table displayed the rate of fishing mortality and estimated summer flounder stock biomass for each year for the past decade, in reference to the biomass threshold and biomass target for this species, 46,323 metric tons and 92,645 metric tons, respectively.  Mr. Colvin pointed out that, since 2004, the estimated total stock biomass of fluke has been above the biomass threshold (but not far above).  Under the Sustainable Fisheries Act (SFA), the fluke stock must be rebuilt to the biomass target level (92,645 mt) by 2010.  He noted that, beginning in 1996, fluke biomass grew steadily and reached the biological threshold in 2004, but it has not grown since 2004.

Since 1996, the estimated rate of fishing mortality on fluke has always exceeded the threshold/target rate of 0.276.  This despite the fact that, every year, a catch quota is adopted for fluke which, if not exceeded, should assure that the rate of fishing mortality is at or below the fishing mortality rate target.  Actual fishing mortality rates have consistently been higher than they were supposed to have been.

Since the late 1990's, fluke estimated total stock biomass and spawning stock biomass had been consistently increasing, showing progress toward reaching the stock rebuilding target by 2010.  However, in the last two years, fluke total biomass has stopped growing and the estimated spawning stock biomass has actually decreased.  Mr. Colvin further noted that, for the past 5 years, fluke recruitment has dropped and this has very strong ramifications for setting the annual harvest quota.  It is not really possible to sustain an increase in stock biomass when the number of recruits in the fishery is declining.  Stock scientists believe that the primary explanation for the recent decline spawning stock biomass and the plateauing of total fluke biomass is this recent decline in recruitment.  

The above stock condition information and trends have left managers in a quandary as to how to address future fluke harvest quotas.  Three major problems surfaced:

• recruitment is down and this itself will result in lower harvest quotas
• looking in retrospect, the way the quota has been historically calculated leads of a persistent exceedance of the fishing mortality target for fluke
• current estimated stock biomass is approximately 50% of the target biomass, which by law must be reached by 2010, only three years away; what measures are necessary to get the biomass growing again and growing at a rate that would double the biomass in this short a period of time? 

After reviewing this information, Mr. Colvin suggested that, no matter how you look at it, the news on fluke is not good. He believes that the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) may identify some appropriate fine-tuning of the reference points.  What these adjustments might be will be clearer after the upcoming meeting of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC).  The SFA, containing the 10-year stock rebuilding requirement, is under consideration for reauthorization.  The U.S. Senate has passed a reauthorization bill.  The Natural Resources Committee of the House of Representatives has reported a reauthorization out of committee and sent it on to the floor of the House.  Mr. Colvin stated that it was unlikely, in his view, that the House would act on this bill before the November election.  Any differences in SFA reauthorization bills passed by the two houses would be resolved in a conference committee.  The 10-year building requirement may or may not be changed as a result of this reauthorization process and the discussion surrounding it. 

Councilor Freierman commented that industry members and industry scientists had criticized the fluke stock rebuilding target as arbitrary and unachievable; a species stops reproducing once the marine ecosystem is not capable of sustaining greater numbers of that fish and she believe the information cited above demonstrates that this situation has now been reached with the fluke population.  She spoke against setting arbitrary stock targets in such important matters; she hopes fishery management will not operate like this in the future.

Mr. Pat Augustine, ASMFC Commissioner from New York, said that he wanted the Council to know that one option that had been put on the table by the Regional Administrator of NMFS was a coastwide quota for fluke of 5.2 million pounds for 2007.  The Fluke Technical Advisory Committee came up with a suggested 2007 fluke quota of 13.5 million pounds.  In their report, they recognized and voiced concern about the major negative impact this large a drop in the annual fluke quota would have on fishermen both recreational and commercial.  Mr. Augustine expressed hope that everyone interested or involved in the fluke discussions will not jump to conclusions about the probable severity of the reduction in the quota that will occur in 2007 and the impact this will have on the fisheries for fluke; the final tale has yet to be told on this issue.

Mr. Colvin stated that the consistent exceedance of the fishery mortality (F) target for fluke every year is a worrisome problem.  Regardless of what people think of the attainability of the stock rebuilding target, DEC can’t exceed the F-target and can’t knowingly set a quota that they know will exceed it.  Why is the rate of fishing mortality (F), consistently higher that it is projected to be?  Mr. Colvin stated that be believes the answer must be that actual removals of fish from the population by fishing are substantially higher than the annual quotas that have been established.  He suggested the creation of a special task force put into place, which should include law enforcement, scientific advisors and fishermen, charged with determining why the actual rate of removal of fish from the fluke population under a certain set of management measures cannot be more accurately and reliably predicted.  He feels that this approach would be easier and better than reducing the annual fluke harvest quota by over one third in an attempt to achieve the biomass target on time.

Mr. John Mihale and Mr. Raoul Vincent, commercial fishermen, suggested it would be worthwhile to look at other possible reasons for the recent declines in such predation by species on the upswing (e.g., cormorants, dogfish, seals, etc.).  In their view, it should not be assumed that fishing is the prime problem in this decline.  They believe natural predators are likely having a very series impact on fluke abundance.  Arnold Leo from the Town of Easthampton stated that fishermen want to see more flexibility and more level-headed decision making when dealing with the fluke quota.

Mr. Colvin stated that a new vision for fluke management needed to be developed.  This vision will be based on information received collectively from North Carolina to Massachusetts and encompass the activities, interests and concerns of commercial fisheries, recreational fisheries and the for-hire fisheries.  As the clock starts to move forward on Amendment XVI to the fluke interstate fishery management plan, Mr. Colvin cited the need for all parties to the fluke fisheries in New York to work together to come up with an agreed-upon approach that DEC can then take to ASMFC and to advocate for New York's specific needs in fluke fishery management.

 

Page last modified Friday, November 3, 2006 by George E. Carroll