As a former guide and charter boat operator, the way I always operated was to try to catch enough fish to make the clients happy, but not too many. Take home enough for dinner. Release some more. Need to save some for tomorrow. If I felt like they’d caught enough fish, I’d move to where they wouldn’t catch any more, and tell them I reckon they quit biting.
Guides have a vested interest in saving fish for tomorrow, and for next year. They are probably more conservation minded than most recreational anglers. Their house payment depends on it. At least the ones I’ve met, and I know a few.
Capt. Larry Teuton
Swamp Worshiper
They also fish most days. 1 fish a day times 200 days is 200 dead. They would rather make money than protect SC fish population.
The irony behind this is I recall them bumping up the limit from 2-3 fairly recently!
IIRC, there was a political reason for that increase.
There had been a push at Santee Cooper to change catfish regulations, because they were being severely overfished.
Upstate lawmakers would only vote to tighten the limits on catfish if the redfish regulations were relaxed, because they wanted their constituents to be able to bring home more fish since they went to the trouble and expense of driving to the coast.
They should suspend or limit charter boats from killing species before local residents.
I agree totally and have been a big proponent of this for years. However, you’d be hard pressed to find charter guys regularly loading the 'gloo. Most are conservative at heart and want their fish in their spots for the next time. However, I have seen client + guide limits plenty of times. It would be good if the guide limit was just taken out of the equation. Plain and simple.
I don’t know you, I assume you’re a guide, so it would be nice to get some more input from you.
It would make sense for guides to be advocates for catch and release, they’re not only protecting a resource but protecting their livelihood.
That said, along with the tremendous increase in people fishing the area due to population increase, there’s been an exponential increase of inshore guides.
There are guides who certainly are serious about protecting the resource, then there are the “guides” living off of Daddy’s money who think all they need is a boat, a buff, and a Yeti to be successful. All it takes is a few of those yahoos keeping everything a client sticks a hook into to make substantial dents in established schools of fish.
At this point no one knows for sure why numbers are down, and indeed it may be a series of factors combined ranging from overfishing to pollution runoff to bait being flushed out of inshore waters due to flooding.
Its curious how our numbers are down so much, then you take an area like Venice La, with much more liberal limits,
quote:They should suspend or limit charter boats from killing species before local residents
Charter captains are local residents, as are many of their clients.
quote:They would rather make money than protect SC fish population.
The only way they can continue to make money is by protecting the fish population
Are you by chance related to Toppy Blue?
Capt. Larry Teuton
Swamp Worshiper
The best way to protect them is to stop guiding. Nothing against guides, I know a few and they are all really nice. However I see their pictures and they are killing WAY more fish than your typical weekend fisherman. It’s just true.
Don’t know a Toppy Blue or why you would ask me that question.
quote:
Don't know a Toppy Blue or why you would ask me that question.
No worries, no problem. But guides give many local residents an opportunity to fish who would not have otherwise. Should the only people to be allowed to fish are those who are local to your county and own a boat?
quote:The best way to protect them is to stop guiding.
The solution is to have a common sense approach to sustainable measures to protect. Guides should be required to have a Guide license for the specific targets. Having a Capt. license only insures the passengers are with a test taking competent person… Has nothing to do with the fishery…
Require fishing guides to obtain a GUIDE license, and if they break ethical rules, then they aren’t allowed to guide. Simple. Guides should be required to take CPE on the current issues related to the targeted species on an annual basis.
This way the LLR could limit the number of Guide licenses, and thru an intellectual and experience based gate to have such license. It would greatly improve the image of guides and the profession…
RBF
“Them that can brag without lying, let them brag.”
No worries, no problem. But guides give many local residents an opportunity to fish who would not have otherwise. Should the only people to be allowed to fish are those who are local to your county and own a boat?
I wish…all i’m saying for example is if the limit on cobia is 2 per person, a charter guest should only get to keep 1 unless they are plentiful.
quote:I wish...all i'm saying for example is if the limit on cobia is 2 per person, a charter guest should only get to keep 1 unless they are plentiful.
Most guides, and me, recognized that cobia were in trouble in Broad river 2 years ago and voluntarily quit fishing for them. I haven’t kept a cobia in 2 years, nor has anyone one on my boat.
They should suspend or limit charter boats from killing species before local residents.
I agree totally and have been a big proponent of this for years. However, you’d be hard pressed to find charter guys regularly loading the 'gloo. Most are conservative at heart and want their fish in their spots for the next time. However, I have seen client + guide limits plenty of times. It would be good if the guide limit was just taken out of the equation. Plain and simple.
I don’t know you, I assume you’re a guide, so it would be nice to get some more input from you.
It would make sense for guides to be advocates for catch and release, they’re not only protecting a resource but protecting their livelihood.
That said, along with the tremendous increase in people fishing the area due to population increase, there’s been an exponential increase of inshore guides.
There are guides who certainly are serious about protecting the resource, then there are the “guides” living off of Daddy’s money who think all they need is a boat, a buff, and a Yeti to be successful. All it takes is a few of those yahoos keeping everything a client sticks a hook into to make substantial dents in established schools of fish.
At this point no one knows for sure why numbers are down, and indeed it may be a series of factors combined ranging from overfishing to pollution runoff to bait being
They should suspend or limit charter boats from killing species before local residents.
I agree totally and have been a big proponent of this for years. However, you’d be hard pressed to find charter guys regularly loading the 'gloo. Most are conservative at heart and want their fish in their spots for the next time. However, I have seen client + guide limits plenty of times. It would be good if the guide limit was just taken out of the equation. Plain and simple.
I don’t know you, I assume you’re a guide, so it would be nice to get some more input from you.
It would make sense for guides to be advocates for catch and release, they’re not only protecting a resource but protecting their livelihood.
That said, along with the tremendous increase in people fishing the area due to population increase, there’s been an exponential increase of inshore guides.
There are guides who certainly are serious about protecting the resource, then there are the “guides” living off of Daddy’s money who think all they need is a boat, a buff, and a Yeti to be successful. All it takes is a few of those yahoos keeping everything a client sticks a hook into to make substantial dents in established schools of fish.
Its asinine to me that the state legislature makes laws concerning our fisheries because some upstate person wants to keep more fish when he drives to the coast. DNR should be able to set legislation regarding our fisheries based on science alone. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
They should suspend or limit charter boats from killing species before local residents.
I agree totally and have been a big proponent of this for years. However, you’d be hard pressed to find charter guys regularly loading the 'gloo. Most are conservative at heart and want their fish in their spots for the next time. However, I have seen client + guide limits plenty of times. It would be good if the guide limit was just taken out of the equation. Plain and simple.
I don’t know you, I assume you’re a guide, so it would be nice to get some more input from you.
It would make sense for guides to be advocates for catch and release, they’re not only protecting a resource but protecting their livelihood.
That said, along with the tremendous increase in people fishing the area due to population increase, there’s been an exponential increase of inshore guides.
There are guides who certainly are serious about protecting the resource, then there are the “guides” living off of Daddy’s money who think all they need is a boat, a buff, and a Yeti to be successful. All it takes is a few of those yahoos keeping everything a client sticks a hook into to make substantial dents in established schools of fish.
Man, leave the sight for a week or so, and you miss a bunch! The irony in the SCDNR perspective of the state redfish population is that it is UP from 5 years ago. This is based on catch rate data taken from biologists at ramps, marinas, and charter reports. This alone is the most troubling. I have NEVER been surveyed by SCDNR… EVER. I have to send in my monthly reports as a captain, but have only heard of inshore fish catch surveys until last week. Two nice, very young SCDNR biologists sat at The Marina at Edisto ALL day and surveyed not 1 fishing boat. This seems like a waste of resource, but that is a topic for another discussion. There is absolutely a 0% chance this data is accurate state wide. Catch rates (per boat) are down all over. How do they correlate more overall catches with MORE fishermen equaling a higher population density? You can’t fix a problem before you identify that A) There is one, and B) The actual cause. As stated many times, fishing pressure in my 60 mile area is NOT the root cause. I have watched schools full of slots and oversized fish leave flats over the winter that have been here for 20+ years and never return. We don’t get any out of town guide pressure here anymore because reds are barely targetable. Did we ever get a reason why the catfish went endangered?
I agree with Raddaddy. It’s not the fishermen or guides who are hurting the fish. Saltwater catfish have almost disappeared in the last 5 years and nobody was ever targeting those. People who’ve spent a lot of time on the water over the years have seen a decline in everything, from the bottom of the food chain up. IMO this is caused by an ever increasing use of fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides, parking lot and street run off, mosquito spraying on county wide basis so the tourists don’t get bug bit…increasing waterfront development, golf courses…all that stuff has to hurt. There are not as many crabs, or fiddlers, or shrimp, or mullet as there used to be, or even periwinkle snail in the grass.
If they’d pass a law against using yard chemicals it would probably save a lot more fish than passing more laws on fishermen.
I quickly scanned this thread for references to the Coastal Conservation Association (CCA). Are they not active around here any more? They had a big voice in Florida when this happened there
What CL is alluding to is VERY important and comes from a voice of more saltwater experience than any other active participant on this site to my knowledge. Where are the menhaden numbers as compared to the past? I’m glad he brought up fiddlers. They are not nearly as prevalent as they used to be. I can still catch plenty, but it’s getting tougher every year. Mud minnows, snails, clams are also decreasing in numbers, and I am quite certain over-harvesting is not the cause. Jack Crevalle, 3-6 lb. bluefish, BIG weakfish don’t show seasonably like they used to. These are not well sought after species. Maybe the big ticket item (redfish) numbers spiraling downward will bring attention to a more complex story than most realize.
Interesting thought on the mosquito larvae spraying. They fly over the spoil islands and mass spray for them. The water flows into the creeks, I wonder what it does to the hatchling fish and other creatures at the bottom of the food chain. I was fishing once when one went by and the wind brought that stuff into my eye and it felt like chemical weapons
quote: The water flows into the creeks, I wonder what it does to the hatchling fish and other creatures at the bottom of the food chain.
Do you think it could possibly do it any good? How selective is that poison?
People who have been fishing around here 5 or 10 years have noticed the decline. I’ve been seeing it for 55 years. No doubt in my mind why, and I’m sure not a scientist. It’s easy for the regulators to point their fingers at fishermen, we are an easy target. They won’t point their fingers at waterfront plantations with 5 golf courses.
