Pensacola Fishing Forum banner

141 - 160 of 219 Posts

·
Your mom's a
Joined
·
6,790 Posts
capt.eugene (10/27/2009)Thats Good insight Fred Real good


[sup]Might take a month for some here to understand if ever[/sup]
It is good insight but it doesn't make what they (or SOS backers) are trying to do right. Theoretically, the job of the NMFS, Mag Stevenson, FWC, et all, is to protect the fish stock and ensure a healthy ecosystem and natural environment.

What they really are doing is trying to make their own lives (and in turn jobs) easier by means of sector seperation in order to "count fish" using outdated methods.

If they would apply themselves and develop better methods of counting fish, we'd all win because they'd realize the abundance and could move on to other issues. But that'd require work on their part or admitting that they have been wrong for so long. I don't see either happening any time soon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
159 Posts
Eugene you say you acess the Gulf from Mobile Bay, if you are in Mobile today can you come by my office on Halls Mill Road and explain this to where it might make sense to me?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
363 Posts
JoeZ (10/27/2009)
capt.eugene (10/27/2009)Thats Good insight Fred Real good



[sup]Might take a month for some here to understand if ever[/sup]


It is good insight but it doesn't make what they (or SOS backers) are trying to do right. Theoretically, the job of the NMFS, Mag Stevenson, FWC, et all, is to protect the fish stock and ensure a healthy ecosystem and natural environment.



What they really are doing is trying to make their own lives (and in turn jobs) easier by means of sector seperation in order to "count fish" using outdated methods.



If they would apply themselves and develop better methods of counting fish, we'd all win because they'd realize the abundance and could move on to other issues. But that'd require work on their part or admitting that they have been wrong for so long. I don't see either happening any time soon.


I'd love for their lazy asses to come up with a decent plan of their own. But that hasn't happened and likely won't anytime soon without our pressure.



So who's got suggestions for creating an accurate recreational catch count?

How are we going to convince the feds to do the right thing?

Are we all getting behind RFA, or someone else? Or we just going to argue amongst ourselves?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
490 Posts
Discussion Starter #146
JoeZ (10/27/2009)
capt.eugene (10/27/2009)Thats Good insight Fred Real good





[sup]Might take a month for some here to understand if ever[/sup]


It is good insight but it doesn't make what they (or SOS backers) are trying to do right. Theoretically, the job of the NMFS, Mag Stevenson, FWC, et all, is to protect the fish stock and ensure a healthy ecosystem and natural environment.



What they really are doing is trying to make their own lives (and in turn jobs) easier by means of sector seperation in order to "count fish" using outdated methods.



If they would apply themselves and develop better methods of counting fish, we'd all win because they'd realize the abundance and could move on to other issues. But that'd require work on their part or admitting that they have been wrong for so long. I don't see either happening any time soon.






Sector "Separation" /VMS / E-LOGS / STAMPS or TAGS Are New Methods For the cheapest way of counting fish.



Go get Acceptable New Methods Passed into A new law Using the new SONAR Equipment I have mentioned. Just be ready to Pay a few Million bucks Annually. I will Go with you Soon as I am rich enough to leave the House.



You could Also get them to INCLUDE Artificial Reefs and Oil Rigs in the Stock Assessment that would ADD about One Hundred Twenty Million Pounds

 

·
Your mom's a
Joined
·
6,790 Posts
Counting dead fish on the dock does not tell anyone how many fish are out there. It measures effort, yes.

It doesn't take millions Eugene to count fish. Take some divers trained by FWC/NMFS in actual population counting techniques, drop them on a few hundred reefs and plug it in to a formula.

I've personally video millions of pounds of red snapper. It took about a week and a few hundred bucks in fuel plus a few more for a drop down camera.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Hey Gang,

Steve here...I am extremely hesitant to post on this thread, and I just deleted a long post to make a few simple points:

1. SOS = BAD :nonono:hoppingmad:nonono:hoppingmad:banghead

2. I find myself in agreement with Matt and Capt. Wes.

3. Love the video Josh....says it all:clap

4. FRA anyone?

There were many valid points ( mark made quite a few) and I have been reading and reading to my eyes are about to fall out........................Just a coonass and here's my 2 cents.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
490 Posts
Discussion Starter #150
JoeZ (10/27/2009)Counting dead fish on the dock does not tell anyone how many fish are out there. It measures effort, yes.



It doesn't take millions Eugene to count fish. Take some divers trained by FWC/NMFS in actual population counting techniques, drop them on a few hundred reefs and plug it in to a formula.



I've personally video millions of pounds of red snapper. It took about a week and a few hundred bucks in fuel plus a few more for a drop down camera.


The thing is it sounds good to use a camera but you find that they swim faster than you can count.

And NMFS will shout you down for that Reason.



Get in touch with Auburn U they have been counting for years Published A ton of Papers.



You will still have to get NMFS to use it.



The Professor there named Steve Z has been trying to get them to listen for Years He is a good guy too.



He and DR.SHIPP USED TO BE TIGHT BUT HE SAW THING DIFFERENT than Dr.SHIPP.



Sounds but

Good Luck.
 

·
Praedator
Joined
·
9,927 Posts
capt.eugene (10/27/2009)
captwesrozier (10/27/2009)does anybody know who catches more red snapper per year the recreational angler or the charter boat angler?

By current Data charter boat angler.
You mean the wrong, inaccurate, non-existent, "faith based" data.According to your buddy LB, it has been "faith based" data being used and we can no longer use "faith based" data. So why should we give anyone anything on wrong, inaccurate, non-existent, "faith based" data. We should force the for hire sector to the monitoring without issuing any TAC for just the for-hire sector to get the good data before we start issuing regulations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
490 Posts
Discussion Starter #153
You forget Jon I said current Data



WE have said 2 TWO years of collection then hash it out







YOU know my Brother's Pete and RePete / Pete and RePete / Pete and RePete
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
363 Posts
capt.eugene (10/27/2009)You forget Jon I said current Data



WE have said 2 TWO years of collection then hash it out


So let's be clear. Are you saying collect data without forming a separate charter sector until you have 2 years of accurate and valid data?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
490 Posts
Discussion Starter #155
Realtime yes that was the plan



capt.eugene (10/26/2009)Clay-Doh

I put this in order of relevance For-Ya




capt.eugene (10/25/2009)

Like I said a year ago on here we want to freeze the numbers now.

Collect Data for two years and then Hash it out
After data collecting for two years by the fishermen fishing ( forhire and private rec)



We want what we have Caught in history % wise I don't have it in front of me

But from memory it is something like 49-58% Of the Recreation Tac That is around half.
Numbers used will be history because they will be two years old.

We believe the percent of fish caught by the deferent sectors will not change because of new data.

But if they do you all can go further back if you like.


capt.eugene (10/25/2009)

Real Data Gets you longer seasons and getting fishing back to what it was. without sudden closures
capt.eugene (10/23/2009)

Guys this is what I have been trying to say to you all along. One or Two or Three/ALL [Check's by LEO] Per person are then Averaged thru some Mathematic Formula on All fishing Lic. Stop the B>>>hen to your Senators. and Start volunteering for Some sort of tag/reporting system.give N.M.F.S. the numbers to fix this problem .




:banghead:banghead:banghead:banghead:banghead:banghead:banghead
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
biggamefishr (10/27/2009)
lyle-t (10/27/2009)
capt.eugene (10/24/2009)To much drama Jon besides you will be able to keep your catch under The S.O.S plan.

Hey I have great idea lets go AJ fishing today can't do it that my fault. Lets go get Quick Mess of snapper O hey Can't do that ether Guess that is my fault to.


Be constructive Jon your to smart to keep on Fighting with me.
go ahead and laugh now capt. ... but remember this, as a rec fisherman I have chartered many, many, times and I do have my own boat, but if this thing does pass legislation, I will NEVER again pay a charter capt. and that is a promise
lyle...not all charter captains are for this, so don't take it out on all of them. water hazard, matt mcleod, wes rozier are all charter captains and would love to have your business, and your support against the SOS plan. Just make sure you don't use any of the captains or vessels on this list, and make sure that none of your friends do...feel free to pass it around and tell your friends not to give these people their business either



http://saveoursector.com/supporters/supporters_full.aspx
your right bigamefishr .... I now have a copy of the captains supporting this and I will not hold it against the other guys ... but, I will ask before booking another charter with whoever
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
363 Posts
So Eugene, what prevents you from fishing like a mad dog for 2years to skew the rec/charter ratio to your favor?



Also why do you think the new data won't indicate a new ratio?



And do you know if non-charter rec fishermen are considered as productive as charter fishermen in NMFS calculations, which makes current ratio inaccurate? Or does NMFS claim to not use charter catch numbers to calculate non-charter catch numbers, which means they rely on those very rare rec surveys? Please site referances to prove your point or I and others will surley ignore you reply.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
490 Posts
Discussion Starter #158
reeltime (10/27/2009)So Eugene, what prevents you from fishing like a mad dog for 2years to skew the rec/charter ratio to your favor?



Also why do you think the new data won't indicate a new ratio?



And do you know if non-charter rec fishermen are considered as productive as charter fishermen in NMFS calculations, which makes current ratio inaccurate? (3) Or does NMFS claim to not use charter catch numbers to calculate non-charter catch numbers, which means they rely on those very rare rec surveys? Please site referances to prove your point or I and others will surley ignore you reply.


1: Current Regulation, and Economy = I can only make so many Trips With so Many people.



2:In the current regs by nmfs no they are not as productive (better data will prove one way or the other)



3:( answer do not use) the way I read it. You can check it at the pff Link Nice thread by BOB II called mrfss 101 or Go straight to the mrfss website.

http://www.pensacolahuntingforum.com/fishingforum/Topic449986-2-1.aspx



Good Reading
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
If the SOS Charter Captains are getting an allotment from the REC side. Then They need to provide sworn affidavits from every single customer, including date, time and number of fish caught on the boat for verification or the catch data they provide can be manipulated/falsefied in order for them to get a larger share. Furthermore make to where those customers are the only ones who can catch their fish again in the future unless they release their allotment to another customer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
490 Posts
Discussion Starter #160
Answer two the first 1 Q: WE MIGHT



The VMS(Vessel monitor system) AND Electronic log books connected to the VMS transmitting Position to law enforcement at all times (meaning they can drive straight to me at anytime) Will prevent most anybody from "Cooking the books". Because penalty we ask for would be loss of license (federal reef fishing permit)
 
141 - 160 of 219 Posts
Top