If you brought in a short

[crosseyedbass]

If you hauled in a short and you know it is not going to make it back in the water do you keep it or throw it back anyway?

[gjb1969]

well it suck to kill a short but its not worth the fine so it gos back:argue: but we should not keep the big breeders eather the fish in the middle:)

[Frankiesurf]

Absolutely 100% throw it back.A short is a short whether it is dead or alive. The law is the law. The DEC officer that sees it won't care whether you killed it on the retrieve or in the bucket it is just a short.

[nitestrikes]

The law is the law. The DEC officer that sees it won't care whether you killed it on the retrieve or in the bucket it is just a short.

And because there is no way to prove to them it was dying when you brought it in, it has to go back. They can't give 500 other guys with that same story a break, so they can't give you a break.

[surfstix1963]

Back it goes not worth the fine,the crabs will eat it and they get a meal balance of nature.

[seamonkey]

Throw it back. Why would you take the chance of getting caught?

Party boat crew accused of illegal fluke fishing

Officials: Crew used small fish as bait

By Kevin Penton • KEYPORT BUREAU • August 20, 2009

BELMAR — State wildlife officers working undercover as anglers have accused the captain and first mate of a party boat of illegally killing undersized fluke to use as bait to boost the chances of their customers catching bigger fluke.




Five customers on the boat, identified as the Big Mohawk, were issued summonses for what the officers said were fishing violations, according to a statement by the state Division of Fish and Wildlife.

The captain and owner of the boat, Christopher W. Hueth, 48, of Spring Lake; first mate James R. Dugan Jr., 50, of Belmar and another crewman, Michael A. Worrall, 32, of Hamilton face thousands of dollars in penalties if convicted of summonses issued for a variety of violations witnessed by undercover officers, the release said.

The division said that during a deep-sea excursion Saturday, the officers saw other fishermen keep undersized fluke — also known as summer flounder — and throw the short fish onto the fillet table, where the crew chopped them up for bait.
"The fish were then filleted while crewmen repeatedly bragged that the Big Mohawk caught more fluke than other party vessels because it used summer flounder as bait," the release said.
Officers counted at least 25 undersized fluke on the boat that were filleted for use as bait, the release said.

It said that in New Jersey, recreational fluke must be a minimum of 18 inches long, and only six are allowed to be caught by a person each day. The rules were implemented to ensure that the summer flounder stocks are not overfished.

Hueth received summonses for discarding fluke parts before docking and for filleting fish under the minimum size limit, state officials said. If convicted, his special permit that allows party vessels to fillet fish at sea may be suspended for up to for 60 days, the release said.

Dugan was cited for discarding fluke parts and filleting undersized fish, state officials said.

Worrall was cited for selling seven fluke to two patrons, the release said. It said that under state law, fluke can only be sold to an authorized dealer.

Each violation carries a fine of up to $3,000.
Hueth referred questions to his lawyer, Raymond Bogan, who could not be reached for comment.

The five people who were fishing on the boat and the summonses issued to them are:

Jung K. Cha, 56, of Wayne, possessing three undersized fluke.
Jong N. Kim, 56, of Palisades Park, Joseph V. Mercurio, 54, of Newton and Stephen J. Thomas, 56, of Hillside, taking five fluke in excess of the daily limit.
Scott S. Rever, 40, of Basking Ridge, taking one fluke over the daily limit.

The anglers face a $30 fine for each fluke they took illegally.
The conservation officers went undercover after receiving tips about the use of undersized flounder aboard the Big Mohawk, state officials said.

[rockhopper]

You won't catch me keeping any shorts!

[finchaser]

Throw it back,no matter what, plus no matter how bad it looks the fish still has a better shot in the water. If they changed the law most shorts would never see water again as people would say they were all dying.

[storminsteve]

If they changed the law most shorts would never see water again as people would say they were all dying.

What he said, the sad realities of mankind.

[jimbob]

This has always been a tough question. I fish plugs and I have hooked fish that were overly agressive and had the plug completly in thier mouth and one or more of the treble hooks got lodged in the gills. If a fish is bleeding from the gills it is believed to be a fatal injury. It seems that it is criminal on a moral level to cause such an injury and waste the fish by throwing it back to go belly up. In thrty + years I have let some fish go and they haunt me. Recently in the last three or four years I have kept 2 short fish that were hooked in the gills, I cut the lure from my rod and left it in the fish in case I got checked, maybe they would cut me some slack if not I will rather pay the fine than waste a fish. I asked a D.E.C. officer one time I got checked and he said that it would be up to the officer but he would probably not be lienient.
Two years ago I caught this fish and it changed my mind. This fish seemed healthy with the exeption of this damaged gill which was healed over. Now I am back to trying to revive these fish. I would not want the law to be changed at all.

[basshunter]

I would always throw it back. The reg's are what we all have to follow like it or not.

[clamchucker]

And because there is no way to prove to them it was dying when you brought it in, it has to go back. They can't give 500 other guys with that same story a break, so they can't give you a break.

I think this was one of the best answers. some people if you give them an inch, they will take a mile.