Had a chance to release a few 20 pound Red Snapper suffering from barotrauma with a Descending Device. They could not swim back down on their own and would have died without any help. I will be submitting comments for the upcoming SAFMC meeting urging them to reduce Discard Mortality allocations based on voluntary use of Descending Devices. It would be very helpful if other fishermen submitted comments saying they will use a Descending Device on fish that can’t swim back down on their own. safmc@safmc.net
Just be careful “admitting” to a problem that doesn’t really exist… I know you won’t agree with what I am saying, but barotrauma numbers have always been a hot debate and the argument has probably kept our fishery open (remember they wanted to close off the entire SAFMC seaward of 98’)? Basically, if you push these devices as a “need” you are playing into their hands and admitting that there is a barotrauma issue.
And again, I showed you before several times, release mortality is mostly associated with HOOKING mortality. It says so in their own papers.
DeVictor and company are just going to look at you and say, “See we knew there were barotrauma issues. freefish7 is admitting it and he’s basically telling us it’s worse than most people agreed to!!! We need to do drastic measures and close off the eastern seaboard now!”
Roughly 90% of fish that swim back down live while around 10% die from being hooked. Almost every floating fish dies. We have to address this issue or the council collective will with MPAs. It is important to stress that Descending Devices should only be used to assist fish too bloated to swim back on their own.
The council is already allocating over half a million pounds of our Red Snapper TAC to projected dead discards.
What do you think the survival rate of floaters is?
The solution is to make it rare that we are forced by law to discard any fish while doing our part to make sure most Regulatory Discards survive. Most responsible fishermen will not waste a fish that is obviously going to die unless big brother makes them. Nobody is saying you can’t release small fish if you want to keep bigger ones.
I understand most people do not trust our federal fishery management system. Many of you may not want anyone to talk about dead discards. Please THINK about this. The precedent has been set for reducing discard mortality allocations based on voluntary use of Descending Devices by responsible fishermen. http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/D5b_SUP_GMT_POWERPOINT_APR2013BB.pdf
We have the POWER to stop the RA17 MPAs including the Georgetown Hole closure IF enough of us will simply agree to release Warsaw Grouper and Speckled Hind with a Descending Device and submit public comments to the SAFMC saying so. Please do not let anger or apathy keep you from taking such an easy step to preserve our freedom to fish on traditional fishing grounds. I have done the hard work to make this a possibility. All you have to do is send a quick and easy email. You can even copy and paste the words below if you want to.
“I agree to release any Warsaw Grouper or Speckled Hind I catch that cannot swim back down on their own with a Descending Device. Please do not close traditional fishing grounds when there is a proven alternative that will do more to reduce release mortality of these two species than the proposed RA17 MPAs.” safmc@safmc.net
silly question- can barometric trauma be mitigated by venting? or is it more than that? We got a red snapper last time out that was bloated beyond belief. Vented her with a 18-20ga 1.5" syringe and sent her back swimming on her own. If the fish wasn’t vented before we released it probably would have taken a (**() cannonball to descend her, and surely wouldnt have survived without our assistance. ~30# snapper holds a lot less volume of air than even an average warsaw so im curious how this is done with big fish.
Watching any fish float away and being shark food ruins my day, even more knowing it could be avoided by simple methods. And even MORE when big brother tells me i cant salvage a (**() thing on a fish that is 100% going to die.
Off topic but we were in MS fishing and brought a big grouper boat side. Granted it would have taken some backbone to get her into the boat-but surly could have been done. The captain wasn’t about to “lose his boat & truck for bringing a protected species on board” even if that meant the fish would have an exponentially higher chance of surviving the fight. Thats the kind of crap that makes me want to stop bottom fishing.
Isn’t it already a requirement to have a “dehooking device” and a “vent tool” on board when bottom fishing in Federal waters?
218WA Sailfish
The "Penn"sion Plan
quote:That's a loaded question... If I catch 100 bottom fish on my boat, I expect that about 2-3 will be floaters which is 2-3%. I don't care if the SeaQuilizer saves 50% of them. That's only 1.5% of my total catch.
Originally posted by freefish7Roughly 90% of fish that swim back down live while around 10% die from being hooked. Almost every floating fish dies. We have to address this issue or the council collective will with MPAs. It is important to stress that Descending Devices should only be used to assist fish too bloated to swim back on their own.
The council is already allocating over half a million pounds of our Red Snapper TAC to projected dead discards.
What do you think the survival rate of floaters is?
Just a drop in a very big bucket. I will not support any motion unless I know the impact that it has on regulations. Again, if John Carmichael says, “You guys can have a 30 day snapper season if and only iff we pass the Seaquilizer requirement”, then please sign me up. If he says, “Hey, maybe this will save some fish and you can sleep better at night”, sorry, I have better things to spend my money on. I’m not interested in making you or anyone else rich because you bullied the government into passing a law that lines your pockets.
Again, you have so much energy and passion. I just don’t see why you keep barking up this tree. There is nothing up there. I feel like you are concentrating all of your time and energy on something that won’t make an ounce of difference.
I agree with Skinneej. I think all you will accomplish is making the rest of us have to buy a SeaQualizer, along with our venting tool and de-hooker.
Capt. Larry Teuton
Cracker Built Custom Boats
“Ships are the nearest things to dreams that hands have ever made.” -Robert N. Rose
I just wanna know how large of a weight one needs to sink an 80# grouper balloon. haha. Is a venting tool a req here? i have one either way but fl and gulf they removed it from fed req’s then shortly after in state waters. Too many knuckle heads stabbin fish to death i presume.
quote:Yes, you are required to have them on the boat. Finally, after this "great idea", they did some studies on it in the gulf and realized that it didn't really have any impact on the fishery or survival rates. The gulf has repealed the requirement and we are soon to follow (but not yet).
Originally posted by bobdesalvoI just wanna know how large of a weight one needs to sink an 80# grouper balloon. haha. Is a venting tool a req here? i have one either way but fl and gulf they removed it from fed req’s then shortly after in state waters. Too many knuckle heads stabbin fish to death i presume.
Also, just for the record, I was against that too until the appropriate science would be done. It was not. It was passed on a whim, a “gut feeling” just like this one. I know for sure that at least some of the people pushing for the dehooker law had these devices already on the market and probably got a nice little income bump when we were all forced to go out and buy them. Sounds to me like the same thing is happening again.
Also, one more thing on venting… Try to release the fish beside the boat. If it floats, then vent it. Don’t just vent it proactively for no reason. Bottom line, don’t stick it with a needle if it can swim down on it’s own. The bladder will decompress as he get’s deeper on it’s own. Also, I still see people once in a while taking a hook and popping the stomach open thinking it is helping. That kills the fish.
I do like dehookers. Even if it doesn’t help the fish, it keeps you from touching the fish, keeps you from bringing it in the boat, and makes dehooking easier. All serious bottom fishermen should have one of these regardless of what the law is.
I’m quite certain the venting tool requirement has already been removed.
Sea Hunt 207CC,Yam F150
Carolina Skiff (old school model)17’ Suz D50
I have a seaqualizer. and have already used it
.
PROUD YANKEE
Oyster Baron
NMFS = No More Fishing Season
“Back home we got a taxidermy man. He gonna have a heart attack when he see what I brung him”
quote:
Originally posted by Beaufort BoyI’m quite certain the venting tool requirement has already been removed.
Sea Hunt 207CC,Yam F150
Carolina Skiff (old school model)17’ Suz D50
If its been dropped from “federal waters” but mentioned specifically in the gulf- wouldn’t that be all federal waters? east/west coast/gulf? FED is Fed…
skineej-yea i agree, theres no reason to bring a fish over 20# into the boat unless it goes straight to the killbox. can go bad real quick. Only reason ill bring one in to vent/unhook is if its high quartering waves or sharks are literally boat side.
bobdesalvo, it took 3 pounds of lead to send a very bloated 20 pound Red Snapper back down. A downrigger ball should send most fish under 100 pounds back down. I am carrying out some researchers this Sunday to release more Red Snapper so John Carmicheal can have the scientific data he needs to say discard mortality rates can be reduced by X based on Y compliance. We are also planning a trip to target Warsaw Grouper so we can see just how much weight it will take for a BIG fish and how well they survive. The Pacific Management Council has already done these studies on the West Coast and fishermen are seeing the benefits with higher quotas based on lower discard mortality allocations. http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/D5b_SUP_GMT_POWERPOINT_APR2013BB.pdf
I have NO stock in any Descending Devices and have said several times that they can be as cheap and simple as a barbless hook. I’ll send anyone a barbless hook that cannot afford one. Venting is a questionable method that is certainly better than just letting a fish float away. All of the research shows that fish released with a DD have around a 90% survival rate. Just as you would not vent a fish that can swim back down, you do NOT need to use a DD on them. Each fisherman should only have to help a couple of fish each trip. That can add up to tons of quota we could get back simply by doing the right thing. Being responsible fishermen can also help us avoid closures of traditional fishing grounds.
quote:No it doesn't mean that. It only means that if the SAFMC says that it means that. If you can get it in writing that if we adopt this device, they will extend our red snapper season, then I am all about it. I am not going to adopt a device with a *chance* that it *might* give us more quota.
Originally posted by freefish7That can add up to tons of quota we could get back simply by doing the right thing. Being responsible fishermen can also help us avoid closures of traditional fishing grounds.
Circle hooks and dehooking devices did NOT, I repeat did NOT give us any quota back. They were just put into law. Fishermen got nothing back out of it.
skinneej, did you ask the council to give us back any quota based on the circle hook and dehooker mandate? I did and John is considering this in the new Gag Grouper assessment. We will find out what he decides soon. A few more requests would have helped. Do you have any solutions to offer or just predictions of doom? Would you let a 20 pound snapper or grouper float away and die rather than use a simple and effective DD to help it live? Just because a government bureaucracy won’t do the right thing doesn’t mean we shouldn’t.
quote:How many times do I have to go over this with you? I already gave you a solution. I already showed you that the majority of release mortality is due to hooking mortality (according to the science). This means you should be beating down John Carmichael's door getting quota back based on the circle hook law that already went into effect. If they didn't give us quota back then, then it's just a formality that they need to adjust for. Basically you are saying that there was quota left on the table. And, if you don't win that war, there is no reason for you to believe that you will win the Seaqualizer battle.
Originally posted by freefish7skinneej, did you ask the council to give us back any quota based on the circle hook and dehooker mandate? I did and John is considering this in the new Gag Grouper assessment. We will find out what he decides soon. A few more requests would have helped. Do you have any solutions to offer or just predictions of doom? Would you let a 20 pound snapper or grouper float away and die rather than use a simple and effective DD to help it live? Just because a government bureaucracy won’t do the right thing doesn’t mean we shouldn’t.
It’s not doom and gloom. I’ve dealt with these people many times. I know the game. I’m just being a realist. I’ve told you time and time again, if you GET IT IN WRITING, then I will support it. If John Carmichael gives you NUMBERS, SOLID NUMBERS of how much QUOTA will be returned if we use the Seaqualizer, then you will get my attention. It’s INCREDIBLY EASY TO WIN ME OVER. SHOW ME THE MONEY… Don’t pitch to me a “maybe” when a “maybe” doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell. Give me the numbers. Show me the commitment of the SAMFC that they will give us this magic quota if fishermen used the device.
I don’t know what else to tell
quote:Show me the science where it helps. I know that for a SCUBA diver, when he rockets up from the bottom, he is pretty f'ed up and the Seaqualizer isn't going to help him...
Originally posted by freefish7Would you let a 20 pound snapper or grouper float away and die rather than use a simple and effective DD to help it live? Just because a government bureaucracy won’t do the right thing doesn’t mean we shouldn’t.
Again, I don’t know why you believe this to be the “right thing”. First of all, there is no proof that it makes a difference. Second of all, even if you did get him to the bottom, he’s probably easy prey for a predator for hours if not days after. You might be just feeding the sharks. But, you could have done that without using a Seaquilizer. I’m not worried about dead discards. I don’t think they are that big of an impact if you handle fish correctly (leave them in the water and pop hook out with dehooker without touching the fish). And, for the ones that do die, something will eat them and flourish in it’s absence. That same something would have just eaten something else if you hadn’t fed it… Net effect = same thing. In other words, you fed the shark Red Snapper “A” and now he is full and won’t eat Red Snapper “B”. But either way, he was going to eat something.
skinneej, I told you that I did ask John and the council to consider reducing discard mortality allocations based on the circle hook mandate. They are doing it in the Gag Grouper assessment now. I have provided the link to scientific data showing the longterm survival rates for fish released with Descending Devices. This data shows that all floaters die. I am not disputing that most bottomfish survive if they can swim back down. The difference for fishermen and consumers between natural predation and dead Regulatory Discards is that the latter are deducted from our Total Allowable Catch. We have a TAC for Red Snapper this year of almost 700,000 pounds. Recreational and commercial fishermen combined will only get to keep around 100,000 pounds if we are lucky and the rest will be allocated to dead discards.
http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/D5b_SUP_GMT_POWERPOINT_APR2013BB.pdf