Reason not to post fish reports

Saltwater Offshore Discussion
41
quote:
All I am saying is that you are not the one writing the seasons or laws about snapper fishing and unless you convince them about the baitwell technique, it's not going to weigh into their decision about re-opening them up for harvest.

But according to you, they read these forums and use our discussion to base their rules on, so I ask again, how could it hurt? Might give them something useful to consider. And why is it worse than your fishing report?

In one forum you gave a kick butt fishing/catching report :sunglasses: Then in another you say we shouldn’t give fishing reports because the feds use them against us?. I’m still confused. Clarification please on your reasoning?

Capt. Larry Teuton
Swamp Worshiper

42

They are not only using the fact that you post that you catch red snapper, and you are releasing them, they are inferring that since you caught triggers, beeliners, groupers, or any other bottom fish that you are catching and releasing red snappers who have a high mortality rate upon release. I do understand that Im on enemy field when it comes to the whole posting thing but at least for the bottom fishing I think that the negatives out way the positive
On a positive note divers can post pics of all the snappers that they are seeing down there, they cant say that those are being lost to dead loss

43
quote:
Originally posted by Cracker Larry
quote:
All I am saying is that you are not the one writing the seasons or laws about snapper fishing and unless you convince them about the baitwell technique, it's not going to weigh into their decision about re-opening them up for harvest.

But according to you, they read these forums and use our discussion to base their rules on, so I ask again, how could it hurt? Might give them something useful to consider. And why is it worse than your fishing report?

In one forum you gave a kick butt fishing/catching report :sunglasses: Then in another you say we shouldn’t give fishing reports because the feds use them against us?. I’m still confused. Clarification please on your reasoning?

Capt. Larry Teuton
Swamp Worshiper

I never said to not post reports. I said not to post stuff about high bycatch mortality.

Your post about predators is more likely to have them add in another 5-10% predation release mortality.

44

I think we should all agree to not help them one tiny bit and that means to have some common sense and not post anything about any fish on their list. That now includes Grey Triggers.

45
quote:
I never said to not post reports. I said not to post stuff about high bycatch mortality.

I don’t have much of that anymore. As I said, I put them in the live well, let them recover from being reeled up fast from deep water and give them time for their stomachs to go back where they belong. Then move them away from the sharks, cudas and AJs around the boat before releasing them. Easy enough and I get good results. I don’t really care what the college boys at NMFS think about it, if they read this. If they do read it, maybe it will help.

Sending a half dead fish back down, hooked to a weighted release device only insures it’s death IMO. It doesn’t even have a chance to escape.

Capt. Larry Teuton
Swamp Worshiper

46

If the sharks are not swarming your boat and you use a Seaqualizer on the proper rod with the right weight in freespool, they will go down quickly pushing water through the gills and recompressing.

I believe that most will survive. Hell of a lot better than stabbing and hoping. As Barracuda mentioned, perhaps some video of the releases will help prove this. That can and has been done before. After that, it’s just a guess.

Don’t always agree with the tall, Oreo eating not so Skinneej, but think he is spot on here…:sunglasses:

NN

www.joinrfa.org/

47

We’ve talked about these fish release weight tools before in prior threads. Here’s a video of a fish release tool previously posted on CF and the model I used to build mine.

https://youtu.be/oB6oNolIq8g

A fish sent to the bottom, or at least beyond 50 feet, has a much better chance of swimming to the bottom than one that struggles to get below 30 feet with a bloated swim bladder. I take my tool with me on every offshore trip. Yes, it’s a bit of a pain in the ass slow down to drop a fish with barotrauma, but it’s better than having a fish float away.

And to Skinneej’s point, if we all used and bragged about successfully returning fish to the bottom instead of lamenting about the sad fate of a fish floating away, fisherman caused mortality can be largely dismissed.

“I am constantly amazed at the stupidity of the general public.”
~my dad

Equipment:
190cc Sea Pro w/130 Johnson
1- 20 year old (boy of leisure)
1 - 17 year old (fishing maniac)
1 - wife (The Warden)

ECFC

48
quote:
Originally posted by Cracker Larry
quote:
I never said to not post reports. I said not to post stuff about high bycatch mortality.

I don’t have much of that anymore. As I said, I put them in the live well, let them recover from being reeled up fast from deep water and give them time for their stomachs to go back where they belong. Then move them away from the sharks, cudas and AJs around the boat before releasing them. Easy enough and I get good results. I don’t really care what the college boys at NMFS think about it, if they read this. If they do read it, maybe it will help.

Sending a half dead fish back down, hooked to a weighted release device only insures it’s death IMO. It doesn’t even have a chance to escape.

Capt. Larry Teuton
Swamp Worshiper

So then, you acknowledge that I did NOT say to "not post fishing reports"? :smiley:
49
quote:
Originally posted by DoubleN

If the sharks are not swarming your boat and you use a Seaqualizer on the proper rod with the right weight in freespool, they will go down quickly pushing water through the gills and recompressing.

I believe that most will survive. Hell of a lot better than stabbing and hoping. As Barracuda mentioned, perhaps some video of the releases will help prove this. That can and has been done before. After that, it’s just a guess.

Don’t always agree with the tall, Oreo eating not so Skinneej, but think he is spot on here…:sunglasses:

NN

www.joinrfa.org/

One thing is for sure... The mortality rate of Oreos is high in my house...
50
quote:
Originally posted by claim

And to Skinneej’s point, if we all used and bragged about successfully returning fish to the bottom instead of lamenting about the sad fate of a fish floating away, fisherman caused mortality can be largely dismissed.

EXACTLY my point!!!
51

Okay, here are the numbers just to piss you guys off… I’ll post my sources at the bottom, but this is a summary with easy math…

<> What the feds said we could “kill” in 2015 = 106,000 fish (includes NC, SC, GA, FL)
<> What the feds said we “killed” in 2015 = 205,859 fish
<> What the feds say we put in our cooler (i.e. “landings”) in 2015 = 42,510
<> What the feds say we RELEASED in 2015 = 407,489
<> Mortality rates assigned by fed: Commercial = 0.48; Recreational = 0.38; Headboat\Charter = 0.41. Read these as percentages…
<> Feds say RECREATIONAL PRIVATE BOAT RELEASE 288,124.
<> Feds say that out of those 288,124 fish, 112,368 DIED from RELEASE MORTALITY…

<<< LONG PAUSE >>>

This means that EVEN IF WE DID NOT HAVE A MINI SEASON, feds say that our fishing from Jan-December (12 months) our CATCH AND RELEASE efforts KILLED MORE FISH THAN THE TAC of 106,000… In other words, they claim that even without a mini-season, we still killed MORE than allowable. This was their argument when they tried to ban ALL, yes I said “ALL”, bottom fishing seaward of 98 feet.

Now, let’s look at a recent paper comprised of MULTIPLE studies (http://fishbull.noaa.gov/1124/campbell.pdf) performed in the GOM. They claim that mortality rates are no where near this… Let’s assume that 90% of all red snapper in SC are caught in <=50m. That would cover us from the “ledge” to inshore. This paper claims that the mortality rate of recreational fisherman is 0.185 for <=50m depths…

Now, let’s re-run that math…

288,124 * 0.41 = 112,386 fish
288,124 * 0.185 = 53,302 fish

Do you see what happens there when the feds think only 18.5% of the fish die upon release vs 41%? If you said, “Hey, it means we might be allowed to have a mini-season”, then you were paying attention… Of course, this is only for recreational, but I actually did the math to include 0.185 for all recreational and 0.688 for commercial (Table 4), and I came

52

In case you guys didn’t see it in the long summary:

<> Harvested red snapper = 42K (20%)
<> Released (dead) red snapper = 164K (80%)

Sometimes it’s not about what you keep, but what the feds assume die when you release…

Note, that posting, “I put a fish in my cooler” is almost meaningless in this debate. Thus my criticism is on the “I released 5 and they all died, so I wish somebody would let me keep them anyway”. Statements like that are a WMD to fishermen…

If you can’t get 90+% of your red snapper to swim back down, you are doing something wrong…

53

I’ve heard it said several times that the feds end-game is to close huge areas from fishing altogether. My question is, why? What end does that promote? Are they just enviro-whackos who don’t want the fish to endure the pain of being caught? Something just doesn’t add up…

Next time you come in, come heavy, or not at all…

54
quote:
Originally posted by Warbler

I’ve heard it said several times that the feds end-game is to close huge areas from fishing altogether. My question is, why? What end does that promote? Are they just enviro-whackos who don’t want the fish to endure the pain of being caught? Something just doesn’t add up…

Next time you come in, come heavy, or not at all…

oil and gas exploration,thats why they want it all.
55
quote:
Originally posted by Warbler

I’ve heard it said several times that the feds end-game is to close huge areas from fishing altogether. My question is, why? What end does that promote? Are they just enviro-whackos who don’t want the fish to endure the pain of being caught? Something just doesn’t add up…

Next time you come in, come heavy, or not at all…

It's very simple... It's lazy, cheap management... It has nothing to do with oil and gas...

Think about where all of the heat is nowadays… The SAFMC manages 80 species. They have to do “stock assessments” on 80 species, set independent regulations, enforce regulations, enforce MPA boundaries, etc. Even the LEO’s need to carry the regulation book with them. It’s complicated and expensive. You have to know size limits, creel limits, MPA boundaries, bag limits, and seasons. Now ask yourself, “How expensive is it to do 80+ ACCURATE stock assessments every few years?” It’s an administrative nightmare for them…

Or, you could just rope off 80% of the bottom fishing grounds as “no fishing” and you do not need to set independent regulations. Even if you wipe out the other 20% into desert and kill every last fish, they would have successfully managed to protect 80% of the fish. Rope off 80% of the fishing grounds and eliminate per species management. In other words, catch all the grouper you want as long as you aren’t fishing in the MPA. They will likely mimick the Bahamas and put a weight based per trip quota (i.e. 60lbs of “fish” PER VESSEL). Enforcement is easy. Get a laundry basket, dump all the fish in there and if it weighs less than 60lbs, you are good. No more measuring scamps, porgies, snappers, etc.

That’s what this is about. Nothing more, nothing less. Greg Waugh and SEDAR scientists truly believe that these

56

It’s fish shares where someone with deep pockets buys all the rights to sections of the ocean and you and I get to pay this guy to catch his fish.

It’s always about money. Always.

/it’d be nice to know who or what corporation is pushing for this - we probably won’t know who it is until we have to pay someone to go catch a fish.

“I am constantly amazed at the stupidity of the general public.”
~my dad

Equipment:
190cc Sea Pro w/130 Johnson
1- 20 year old (boy of leisure)
1 - 17 year old (fishing maniac)
1 - wife (The Warden)

ECFC

57
quote:
Originally posted by claim

It’s fish shares where someone with deep pockets buys all the rights to sections of the ocean and you and I get to pay this guy to catch his fish.

It’s always about money. Always.

/it’d be nice to know who or what corporation is pushing for this - we probably won’t know who it is until we have to pay someone to go catch a fish.

“I am constantly amazed at the stupidity of the general public.”
~my dad

Equipment:
190cc Sea Pro w/130 Johnson
1- 20 year old (boy of leisure)
1 - 17 year old (fishing maniac)
1 - wife (The Warden)

ECFC

The evidence says otherwise... Catch shares are a SMALL issue compared to MPA's... Why would corporations be pushing MPA's??? Doesn't fit the accusation...

Catch share costs also cut into the profit margin… Will I pay $20 for a catch share of 1 lb of grouper that I will sell for $5 per lb? No… How can they bid up catch shares if the market dictates what fish will sell for?

58

Lazy management makes no sense. A government agency would want 80 studies, not 0. They only get funded for all the “work” they do, not roping off ocean bottom. More active management equals bigger government budget. Something still doesn’t add up.

Next time you come in, come heavy, or not at all…

59
quote:
[i]Originally posted by skinneej The evidence says otherwise... Catch shares are a SMALL issue compared to MPA's... Why would corporations be pushing MPA's??? Doesn't fit the accusation...

Catch share costs also cut into the profit margin… Will I pay $20 for a catch share of 1 lb of grouper that I will sell for $5 per lb? No… How can they bid up catch shares if the market dictates what fish will sell for?

It’s just my guess that MPA’s are a tool to scare people. Threaten closing off all fishing into an MPA UNLESS we go for a catch share system and then everything would be open…to the catch share holder. The catch share holder would have quotas they can catch…just like the crab boats in Alaska. They have catch shares with allowable pounds of quota which can be bought or sold. A few weeks ago the Wizard was complaining that the guy that had a share quota holder cut back on the amount he was willing to sell to the Wizard on a king crab share.

There is no money in closing fishing…no money from licenses, no money in tax revenue from boats and equipment, bait, clothing and everything else involved in the coastal marine industry.

“I am constantly amazed at the stupidity of the general public.”
~my dad

Equipment:
190cc Sea Pro w/130 Johnson
1- 20 year old (boy of leisure)
1 - 17 year old (fishing maniac)
1 - wife (The Warden)

ECFC

60
quote:
Originally posted by Warbler

Lazy management makes no sense. A government agency would want 80 studies, not 0. They only get funded for all the “work” they do, not roping off ocean bottom. More active management equals bigger government budget. Something still doesn’t add up.

Next time you come in, come heavy, or not at all…

If you read the meeting minutes back to the 90's you will see that what I am saying is the truth. There is nothing to "add up". They do not increase budget on the stock assessments. NOAA tries to leech off of state studies any chance they get. State research is usually funded through grants if they are lucky. All SEDAR does is pull studies that the states are doing and determine if they want to use the data or not. They are on a very tight budget, and have stated many times that stock assessments are limited by budget.