The answer is yes. If a fishery is closed in federal waters it is closed out there and in SC state waters. The only current exception is black sea bass which someone had the foresight to exempt when we were covered up with them in state waters and the federal season was closing in only 3 months.
quote:Eventually the truth about our fisheries will come to light. And when that does happen, lets be sitting on thousands of reefs like AL. In the grand scheme of things, fisheries management is pretty new with unproven models applied incorrectly many times. Eventually they will figure it out.
Originally posted by RealfinIf the feds say that black sea bass or lizard fish or whatever are being overfished and have exceeded their ACL (Allowable Catch Limit), they have the authority to close those fisheries based on the best available science. In other words, we could build private secret reefs or more public reefs, and they might be covered with fish, but if he feds say we can’t bring them home, what have we accomplished?
Hungryneck, are you saying BSB are exempt from fed regs. if they are caught in state waters?
Skinneej, I’m 71. When do you think they’ll figure it out? How many people older than me running around on the ocean in center consoles.
quote:You mean basing your lbs caught on an assumed percentage extrapolated by a SWAG, and then applying it to a pre-determined limit that was also extrapolated based on a SWAG?? #science
Originally posted by skinneejquote:Eventually the truth about our fisheries will come to light. And when that does happen, lets be sitting on thousands of reefs like AL. In the grand scheme of things, fisheries management is pretty new with unproven models applied incorrectly many times. Eventually they will figure it out.
Originally posted by RealfinIf the feds say that black sea bass or lizard fish or whatever are being overfished and have exceeded their ACL (Allowable Catch Limit), they have the authority to close those fisheries based on the best available science. In other words, we could build private secret reefs or more public reefs, and they might be covered with fish, but if he feds say we can’t bring them home, what have we accomplished?
quote:I did not realize that you had that many miles on you...
Originally posted by RealfinHungryneck, are you saying BSB are exempt from fed regs. if they are caught in state waters?
Skinneej, I’m 71. When do you think they’ll figure it out? How many people older than me running around on the ocean in center consoles.
quote:From what I could tell, in the Red Snapper debacle, the whole thing blew up when they discovered 3 fish over 50 years old. Originally, they thought RS only lived 25 years and their magic formula said we could keep 2 per person >= 20". Once they discovered, literally, 3 fish, they plugged the numbers back in only to determine that we are at 3% of "virgin" levels and had been that way for 30 years.
Originally posted by EdistodanielYou mean basing your lbs caught on an assumed percentage extrapolated by a SWAG, and then applying it to a pre-determined limit that was also extrapolated based on a SWAG?? #science
It’s the “age distribution” model that they use on things like hogfish in the keys, goliath grouper, nassau grouper, etc. that are fish trapped in a small range close to large population areas. You apply that same model to a fishery that can double its size in 1 year, and you have issues (the model assumes that “small fish are bad”).
Essentially, they never really understood red snapper and didn’t have any “virgin stocks” to compare to, so they assume that the age distribution should look something similar to something that they do know about (hogs in the keys). This is their grave mistake. And this is why they get ridiculous “conclusions” like “humans have caught 86% of the red snapper in 2016” type of stuff… You use the wrong formula, you get the wrong answer.
Realfin- According to the SCDNR Reg book page 50. If the federal season is closed you can still keep the current bag 5 or greater if fed limit is greater and 13 TL limit if caught in state waters.
Hungryneck, the key words are “if the federal season is closed”.
Skinneej, doesn’t sound too encouraging for anytime soon, does it?
Thanks for your thoughts.
Realfin are you saying I’m to old to be fishing offshore! You may be right! I thaught a bigger boat would make it easer, no I still get beat up.
No! But time is a wasting.
quote:From the perspective that I was talking about, I would think it's going to take quite some time...
Originally posted by RealfinHungryneck, the key words are “if the federal season is closed”.
Skinneej, doesn’t sound too encouraging for anytime soon, does it?
Thanks for your thoughts.
That being said, there is still a bit of hope (maybe)…
Part of these “recovery timelines” have been driven by the Magnusson-Stevens act. I don’t recall the specifics, but it was something like “stock has to be rebuilt in 10 years” or something to that effect. Obviously this drives the annual catch quotas, etc to meet these deadlines…
Recently (like last week), a bill was introduced that offers more flexibility in these timelines. I haven’t reviewed it, but my current understanding is that it could relax some of these driving factors (i.e. allow for longer recovery periods) which might drive the annual catch quotas up a bit.
It may or may not have any affect on Red Snapper. I just really haven’t dug into that yet and can only wildly speculate with the facts I have right now. I anticipate that if someone went through all of this trouble that it’s going to offer some relief somewhere.
Texas great barrier reef program. Thousands of reefs being deployed in designated areas, in state waters (TX state line is 9 miles) and off limits to shrimpers.
http://tpwd.texas.gov/gis/ris/artificialreefs/
http://2coolfishing.com/ttmbforum/showthread.php?t=2075650
Texas has kept their State water endangered red snapper season open throughout the years. Right now in TX waters and Fed waters off of TX, Red Snapper are BEYOND nuisance status. You can’t hardly catch any other fish. They are regularly catching red snapper on the troll over deep structure…something to think about…NFMS/FEDs have royally screwed that fishery up and are doing their best to ruin many others! (AJ’s, etc…)
quote:
Originally posted by steelersfanTX state line is 9 miles
This is certainly a unique advantage. This also happens in FL since their fishery is so close to shore.
To sum up what I’m reading, is it correct that:
A. We do not know enough about our fishery to ensure success if we were to embark upon a major reef building program.
B. We are waiting for the SAFMC to determine what benefit would be derived from the building of reefs.
c. We do not have the funds necessary to build the reefs.
E. We have to have permission from the federal government to build any reefs beyond three miles.
F. we do not have a timeline for any of the above to be accomplished.
quote:
Originally posted by RealfinTo sum up what I’m reading, is it correct that:
A. We do not know enough about our fishery to ensure success if we were to embark upon a major reef building program.
No. That was never said here. These “secret reefs” are proven. Area 51, Area 53, Steinatchee, Alabama, etc. All produce the same results. More HIDDEN structure = more fish.
quote:
B. We are waiting for the SAFMC to determine what benefit would be derived from the building of reefs.
No. They have no interest in building reefs. They only have the power to create restrictions. When you only have a hammer, everything around you looks like a nail. What I am saying is compare THAT to LOCAL (DNR). DNR understands reef building, restocking programs, oyster habitat improvement, etc. Restrictions are a tool in their bag, but not the ONLY tool. DNR has a comprehensive approach. Meanwhile, SAFMC is like a dog without balls that keeps humping legs wondering why it doesn’t produce any puppies…
quote:
c. We do not have the funds necessary to build the reefs.
We have very little budget for this. That’s why I am suggesting one of two options:
- Open it up to private investors (like Alabama)
- NOAA opens up the purse and feeds money into the state. Imagine if NOAA gave $2-3 million each year to SC, GL, FL, NC. We would have hundreds of reefs off our coast instead of 40.
<font size="
When is that meeting at the Town and Country? Buffet there used to be good too, lol.
Wadmalaw native
16’ Bentz-Craft Flats Boat
Sorry. I’m just not willing to let this subject die.
So,Skinneej, when you say SAFMC has no interest in building reefs as part of the solution, do you think they are indifferent, or opposed to the idea?
If they are simply indifferent, the only obstacles would seem to be the Corps of Engineers, or DNR. Is that too simplistic? The
Realfin…please come to the SAFMC meeting and ask these questions of the COuncil. I will be there and hopefully many others and HOPEFULLY SkinneeJ will be there as well. Long discussions on the forum don’t do much unless we unify this discussion in their face at the meeting
There is no financial incentive for the council to build reefs. It would increase fish population and they will no longer have a made up problem to fix.
quote:I'm planning on it.... I'm assuming you are talking about the Sept 13th meeting...
Originally posted by FishnBarrelsRealfin…please come to the SAFMC meeting and ask these questions of the COuncil. I will be there and hopefully many others and HOPEFULLY SkinneeJ will be there as well. Long discussions on the forum don’t do much unless we unify this discussion in their face at the meeting