freefish, keep in mind that our local SCDNR does a fantastic job managing species and we are not required to fill out paperwork on our trips. What makes the federal government so unique? I’m not sure that sending good data into bad models will do anything for the fishery.
skinneej, do you think each state should manage our offshore fisheries? What do you think needs to be changed about current stock assessment models?
Thanks - doing well. I sure miss headboats. It was an easy way for a man to spend a day at sea without buying a boat & all the headaches. I’ve gotten so I like hunting lots more - That ocean whipped my ass so many times! My best to you!
quote:
Originally posted by DeerHntr00Natureboy - hope all is well. I remember working for you and Billy on some of those overnight trips - hard to believe that was over 10 years ago.
Rec catch data should be collected by trained observers that can tell a trigger from a b liner. It would be easy to station an observer at each boat launch & marina and collect catch data. The observers should also note how many days the recs fish or stay at dock due to weather. Log books are(or were) a joke. Back when I never knew a headboat captain that gave accurate information. There was a fear that reported info would be used against fishermen. I never saw a true sheet sent in — ever!
natureboy, I like the idea of trained observers at boat ramps and marinas. There is no reason marine patrol could not do this. Other recreational fishermen have objected to this idea for some reason. Do the rest of you on this thread think natureboy’s idea is a good one?
Thank you for offering a solution natureboy. We need to have honest discussions about how we want our fisheries to be managed. We need to come up with solutions for a few key issues that most open-minded fishermen will support and stand united in our call for them to be implemented. Our freedom to fish will continue to slip away if we do not coordinate our efforts. How many battles throughout history have been won without coordination?
I agree with Skinee, our own DNR does a much better job than the Fed. Council. PERIOD.
You already know my feelings on that matter, we discussed it before, but for those who don’t know “my stance”, here it is.
SAFMC should be disbanded or an least reduced to an advisory role. Each State should be in charge of managing their own fisherys out to the 200 mile line. The funding that is used keep up the Tyrannic SAFMC should be divided to the States for managing the fisheries.
As for collecting data, I already fill out “Wood duck nesting box” surveys, Turkey harvest records, Deer harvest surveys, Migratory bird surveys, and just about every other kind of survey for DNR and FWS. I’ve been checked at the dock by SCDNR biologist during shrimping season and once had a biologist ask to look at our fish but he didn’t care about how many we had but “what we had”… so with all that data that I already send, I would certainly fill out a Monthly harvest survey as in “how many of what species” “sizes kept and discarded” and maybe even “how many times I went or hours spent fishing” I would be willing to answer questions if it was being used to help manage the fisheries. The problem as I see it though is that the SAFMC doesn’t give a rats a$$ about the answers to these questions. They don’t care about managing the fishery but instead want to manage the fisherman.
Has anybody ever been questioned by a SAFMC associated person with the intent on collecting “catch data” on the Rec. side? I know I never have. I did recieve a phone call once from NOAA about HMS covered species but even then, the person was only interested in Tunas, sharks, and such.
218WA Sailfish
The "Penn"sion Plan
When I fished out OC fishing center there were contractors that were around the dock when the fishing was in full swing in the summer months, mainly July and Aug. to record data on catch and sometimes they had a biologist to collect tissue samples and that little ear bone thing for aging the fish. They were there every day and we knew them by first name after seeing them every day, they were not for enforcement but to collect information.(type, numbers and sizes) Mostly college students doing summer work. early in the year we would have to educate them but as the season went on they could tell a Bluefin from a yellowfin from a wahoo which about half of the fed guys couldn’t do. We were checked often as a charter boat. we also had phone surveys monthly for our HMS as well as monthly logs to fill out.
Most guys cooperated but some wouldn’t even talk to them and would run them off.
There were a few years we had to keep all fish on the boat and take the number of Blufin to the fish check point to receive tail tags that had to be in place before any fish could be removed from the boat, Cards were filled out for each fish as to size, general area caught and landing port, most large marinas had tags as did OCFC.
But to answer the question Yes, Recreational guys did contribute to catch data at that time. (mid to late 1990’s)
Jeff
jjfishing, do you know if that data collection effort was led by the state or feds?
RDW, two of the reasons given for not allowing states to manage our fisheries out to 200 miles is that most states cannot act quickly to adjust possession limits or close fisheries when quotas are filled. I only say this so everyone knows some of the issues that need to be addressed if we are going to get state by state quota allocations. It would be good for fishermen to come up with a survey method most people will accept and fishery managers agree can be used in stock assessments. We should also say what we think needs to be changed about the way stock assessments are done.
We need to get more thinking fishermen involved in a discussion about how we want to see our fisheries managed and present our ideas to the council through the Visioning Project process. We do not have to agree on every issue to work together on others so we can all keep our freedom to fish and eat American seafood.
At one meeting I went to,I asked the council how they gathered data.
One reply I got was phone surveys…Tell them to give me a buzz.
Those random phone surveys are an example of the Best Available Science they are using to mismanage our fisheries. I cannot believe how few fishermen think we should work together to solve some of the problems with how our fisheries are managed. Our voices mean very little when a few of us at a time give comments saying different things. Our public servants listen to us when enough of us stand united on an issue like VMS or the massive Amendment 17A and B area closures. Does anyone really think the council would have suspended the 17B closure or removed the proposed 17A closures if they only received a few comments opposing those laws? Does anyone really think the council would have voted unanimously not to pass the VMS law if we remained silent? The Visioning Project provides a chance for us to stop opposing stupid laws and offer positive solutions that benefit all user groups and the resource.
Here is a link to the Visioning Project webpage.
http://safmc.net/resource-library/council-visioning-project
Random phone surveys are poor ways to manage something as broad as a fishery that stretches for thousands of square miles.
I would be happy to fill out catch data cards or even use a phone in or internet card within a week of going out fishing. I would be opposed to them collecting data about where I fished other than what ramp I used or what inlet was navigated to access the ocean. I do see the benefit for them to determine whether I fished off central SC or South Fla.
In exchange for this information, they should be willing to concede to ever bringing up some sort of catch share program or VMS. They should be required to present SOLID BIOLOGICAL DATA before reducing quotas or closing a fishery down.
It seems we are always on the defensive side of things, maybe we should go on Offense for once. Calling for the disbanding of the entire Council and turning it over to the States is a way to go on offense. It won’t happen, but maybe it will make them appreciate the general public fisherman and actually do their job.
218WA Sailfish
The "Penn"sion Plan
AMEN RDW! Great points that reflect insight into the process and reality of our situation.
Would any other recreational fishermen support RDW’s plan for collecting data in exchange for the council agreeing not to bring up VMS or catch shares again?
The observers could be part timers - perhaps students . I think that it would be important to determine how many vessels at a marina are for hire - how many are weekend warriors, how many troll and how many just booze cruise. The fish count would be very important. Also an idea of what is spent $ on fishing within the community. I do support RDW’s plan , but I seriously doubt the council will give it a second thought. From what I’ve seen over the past 30 years + , It seems that real numbers are the last thing the council wants. Manipulated , best available - gives them a pretty free hand to make their own rules.
Wow,i hope the OP got his question answered,gotta a little side tracked…
natureboy, unknown variables make it very easy to manipulate results of stock assessments to a desired outcome. The council will say they can’t afford to collect data at marinas and boat ramps. Working with each state to collect the data might be a better way to go. We should ask our state’s fishery managers and legislators to pressure the council to accept the data or allow interested states to control their own fisheries. Louisiana officials recently called out NMFS for being way off on recreational landings data for Red Snapper. The Red Snapper landings data during last year’s mini season was suspect at best. I am working with the NC Legislature and fishery managers to collect better data and have more control of our offshore fisheries. You have some great legislators in SC that would help you. Maybe NC and SC could team up to push for these ideas.
Please go to the Visioning Project thread if anyone is interested in continuing this discussion.