REDUCED EXPECTATIONS FOR SUMMER FLOUNDER

A few weeks ago, I wrote a largely upbeat piece about the new fluke stock assessment, which brought mostly good news.

I noted that the assessment found that the stock was neither overfished nor subject to overfishing, that the stock was more productive than previously believed and that, as a result, the 2019 recreational harvest limit, which had previously been set at 5.15 million pounds, was going to be boosted all the way up to 7.21 million—about a 40% increase.

That was all true.

Then I predicted that

“unless something very unexpected happens, we can expect to see recreational summer flounder regulations significantly relaxed this year.”

That, unfortunately, seems to have been wishful thinking.

Because when I wrote those words, I had forgotten all about the revision to the National Marine Fisheries Service’s revision of the recreational catch and effort estimates, which the agency released last July.  Those revisions generally showed that recreational harvest for all species was higher than previously believed.

2018 recreational summer flounder regulations were based on 2017 landings, which were estimated pursuant to the old, now-obsolete methodology.  So when it looked as if those regulations successfully kept landings below the target 2018 target, and even well below landings in 2017, it also looked like those regulations could be relaxed to meet a target that was more than 2 million pounds higher.

But that’s where the revised estimates come into the picture.  

As I said, they reveal that recreational landings are higher than previously believed.  Thus, it turns out, 2018 landings, although substantially lower than those in 2017, whether measured in fish or in pounds, were actually much higher than the 2018 recreational harvest limit.  And that’s OK, because the new benchmark assessment tells us that, when all of the numbers are updated, the 2018 recreational limit was more than a little too low.

In fact, the 2018 landings were about 7.20 million pounds, almost perfectly congruent with the 7.21 million pound recreational harvest limit that the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council staff is recommending for 2019.  If that recommendation is accepted, 2018 regulations should carry over into 2019 without any material change.

We will not see any relaxation.

That all assumes that ASMFC and the Mid-Atlantic Council decide to set recreational harvest limits in the same way that they have set them before, on a year-by year basis.  Should that be done, and should nothing change, we’ll then be looking at 7.21 million pounds in 2019, 7.92 million pounds in 2020, and 8.85 million pounds in 2021. 

However, fishery managers are also considering setting more stable annual catch limits, which will be calculated by averaging the Allowable Biological Catch over a three-year period.  If that were done, we would see a somewhat higher recreational harvest limit, 8.02 million pounds, this year.  Under such scenario, the 2020 limit would be nearly unchanged, at 7.95 million pounds, while the 2021 limit, at 7.98 million pounds, would be substantially lower.   Such an averaged approach would allow more fish to be taken this year, and might have a beneficial side effect, in the form of stable regulations for as much as three years.  But such stability wouldn’t be assured, as 2020 regulations will always be impacted by the level of landings in 2019, while the 2021 recreational harvest limit could well be modified in response to a stock assessment update being released sometime in the next two years.

Of course, when it comes to fisheries issues, things are never quite that simple.

Coastwide, 2018 landings were almost exactly equal to the proposed 2019 recreational catch limit.  But in individual states, landings varied quite a bit, some above, some below the individual state or regional targets.

The greatest variation occurred in the bi-state region that includes New York and Connecticut.

In 2017, New York anglers landed around 1,185,000 summer flounder (revised figure); Connecticut landed about 121,000.  That was less than those states were permitted to land in 2018, so they were allowed to relax their regulations a bit for last season.  As a result of such relaxation, Connecticut anglers harvested about 40,000 fish more in 2018, but New York landings dropped to about 560,000; thus, the bi-state region fell well short of what it was allowed to catch last year (again, after the 2018 data and catch limit are converted into the “common currency” used to reconcile pre-July 2018 estimates and post-July 2018 revisions).   

Thus, if New York’s 2018 landings were some sort of aberration, either statistical or otherwise, and pop back to 2017 levels this year, there is a very good chance that the entire coast will overfish this season, even if all of the states retail the same regulations that they had in 2018.

To make the matter a little more interesting, normally states that either exceed or underfish their allocations by a significant amount in the previous year are either required (in the case of excess) or allowed (in the case of underage) to revise their regulations in order to bring landings closer to their allocation target.  But if Connecticut and New York are allowed to do that this year, as a result of last year's underharvest, it would also lead to coastwide overfishing—even if New York landings wouldn’t have reverted to 2017 levels without any regulation change.

So given those possibilities, just what does “status quo” regulations mean?

Does it mean that every state is required to keep the same regulations in 2019 that it had the year before, even if that means that the Connecticut/New York region will either not come close to catching its full allocation (if landings are similar to 2018), but could cause the coast—but not the bi-state region—to overfish this season (if landings revert to 2017 levels)?

Or does it mean that every state is allowed to keep the same percentage allocation in 2019, which would allow Connecticut/New York to relax its regulations in order to land its full share (based on 2018 landings), even though that could lead them to overfish (if landings reverted to previous levels), and would force other states to reduce their landings in order to keep coastwide recreational harvest under 7.21 million pounds?

Either approach could lead to overfishing.  The former probably carries less risk, but it also probably less equitable. 

The latter makes it more likely that anglers in the Connecticut/New York region land their full allocation, but it also makes it more likely that anglers, when assessed on a coastwide basis, will overfish.

Arguments could be made for either outcome, and there could be a debate when representatives from the Mid-Atlantic Council and ASMFC meet on March 6 to address the matter. Status quo regulations is, by far, the most likely result.

That means we won't see new regulations in 2019.

But for most anglers, at least throughout much of the Connecticut/New York region, if we at least see a few more legal fluke—something that’s far from guaranteed—2019 will still be better than last year.