Notices

2017 Snapper Season

Old 05-03-2017, 03:17 AM
  #41  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pascagoula, MS
Posts: 1,089
Default

Originally Posted by trarmer007 View Post
The Feds have not for one second considered the state's app data. Alabama has a lot of headboats and a lot of out of towners that fish. That special segment of data gets its own column in assessing effort. Ala's catch numbers are just multiplication on paper. Remember, at best, the feds "sample" effort and sample "catch", then do a whole bunch of multiplying to guess how much was caught. The feds didn't factor in sea state until this year, and then assume that on those days with a 3.5' rolling chop the maximum number of fisherman are out their just yanking up those precious few snappers.
The Feds actually stated in one of the recently linked articles that they recognized the states had collection dated but it was understated - no reason given why they think that. I'm confident that the real reason is the numbers were too low and wouldn't fit their agenda.
rebelles is offline  
Old 05-03-2017, 04:55 AM
  #42  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 32
Default

Name:  IMG_5304.JPG
Views: 907
Size:  104.0 KB
Hippycpa is offline  
Old 05-03-2017, 06:47 AM
  #43  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Titus AL
Posts: 2,666
Default

Originally Posted by tbaxl View Post
I have found the best way to deal with the feds is a Magma Grill. It's never more fresh than on the boat.
Ah yes! The ole filet and release method!
hhracing26 is offline  
Old 05-03-2017, 08:09 AM
  #44  
Admirals ClubCaptains Club Member Admiral's Club Member
THT sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Pensacola Beach, FL
Posts: 821
Default

This sucks
Don't miss out on the season


See our 3 Day Flash Sale
http://www.thehulltruth.com/fishing-...up-pulley.html
See It is offline  
Old 05-03-2017, 08:26 AM
  #45  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Mistersippi
Posts: 2,564
Default

All you can get!
Attached Images  
JCC123 is offline  
Old 05-04-2017, 01:49 PM
  #46  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,458
Default

maybe we can hire some guys in turbans to run the inlets in pangas from say 4-dark on the weekend..bam we slide right through..
ono loco is offline  
Old 05-04-2017, 02:53 PM
  #47  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Louisissippi Coast
Posts: 12,388
Default

Originally Posted by trarmer007 View Post
Feds had Miss. at 6.6 but the real Miss. collected data had it at 8.8.
[
The arrogance of NOAA to dismiss MS numbers. I have been done with their shit a long time.
Paul Barnard is online now  
Old 05-04-2017, 02:58 PM
  #48  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Louisissippi Coast
Posts: 12,388
Default

Originally Posted by Hippycpa View Post
Table 3. 2016 Gulf of Mexico recreational red snapper landings, by mode and state.
Component
Private Angling Federal For-Hire
FL. 1,711,156. 772,587
AL. 2,018,210. 834,343
MS. 351,753. 147,319
LA. 956,403. 21,188
TX 150,379. 358,567

ACT Quota 3,320,000. 4,150,000
Quota. 2,434,000. 3,042,000

Can someone explain this Table From the report on page 16. Alabama probably has the fewest square miles of water but out catches LA by double? And Texas with 4 per person year round can't match 3 days in Alabama. Could this be a result of Alabama's app based reporting being too accurate?
The AL numbers tell a very important tale. Why are AL numbers so high given their piddly coastline length? Their reef program. Yes, artificial habitat makes that much difference. Since it does, it makes a strong case for more regionalized management like state management. It also begs the question of why NOAA has done right next to zero to help establish habitat. Worse, they have sat idly by while the idle iron program has taken out hundreds of reefs.
Paul Barnard is online now  
Old 05-04-2017, 03:08 PM
  #49  
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3
Default

Dang, looking at the numbers in that table, us Texas boys, need to get out more! I know for a fact there isn't anyone counting fish coming in down in the Rockport \ Port A area of Texas. And they dang sure aren't down in Port Mansfield!
ddmm is offline  
Old 05-04-2017, 06:14 PM
  #50  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pascagoula, MS
Posts: 1,089
Default

Originally Posted by Paul Barnard View Post
The AL numbers tell a very important tale. Why are AL numbers so high given their piddly coastline length? Their reef program. Yes, artificial habitat makes that much difference. Since it does, it makes a strong case for more regionalized management like state management. It also begs the question of why NOAA has done right next to zero to help establish habitat. Worse, they have sat idly by while the idle iron program has taken out hundreds of reefs.
And the AL numbers are even more striking when you consider the short fed season when their 1000+ artificial reefs could be actually fished. With their extended state season, those numbers mean that the vast majority of those fish the Feds are reporting would have allegedly been caught in the much, much smaller number of reefs within 9NM. I found that very hard to believe when compared to the Feds reported MS numbers with about the same size coast line, a longer state season than AL (although fewer anglers going out) and possibly a comparable number of reefs within state waters compared to the number in AL state waters - but the Feds show AL has caught 7 times more fish.

Just another example of when you really look at their information and apply any logic, it just falls apart.
rebelles is offline  
Old 05-04-2017, 06:38 PM
  #51  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Louisissippi Coast
Posts: 12,388
Default

Originally Posted by rebelles View Post
And the AL numbers are even more striking when you consider the short fed season when their 1000+ artificial reefs could be actually fished. With their extended state season, those numbers mean that the vast majority of those fish the Feds are reporting would have allegedly been caught in the much, much smaller number of reefs within 9NM. I found that very hard to believe when compared to the Feds reported MS numbers with about the same size coast line, a longer state season than AL (although fewer anglers going out) and possibly a comparable number of reefs within state waters compared to the number in AL state waters - but the Feds show AL has caught 7 times more fish.

Just another example of when you really look at their information and apply any logic, it just falls apart.
Yeah, so many things simply don't add up.
Paul Barnard is online now  
Old 05-04-2017, 08:53 PM
  #52  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Cajun Land
Posts: 1,234
Default

Just remember.... fillets sink and fish float, unless you poke the eyes out, or so I've heard
meaux fishing is offline  
Old 05-05-2017, 12:05 AM
  #53  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 74
Default

Speaking of Texas and counting to ddmm ---- we don't have that issue here in Freeport. Coast Guard are right there at the corner to the inlet every time you look around. Checking!
Jayfish90 is offline  
Old 05-05-2017, 09:47 AM
  #54  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: SoTex
Posts: 689
Default

I'd bet they start hanging around Port Mansfield, and SPI a lot more this year.
RJTaylor is online now  
Old 05-05-2017, 10:18 AM
  #55  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SE Missouri (with a salt water habit)
Posts: 1,444
Default

Originally Posted by mlanzotti View Post
And here we go into hocus pocus. This reminds me of certain election scenarios where certain democratic strongholds in Chicago were always the last to report results b/c conventional wisdom suggests they were waiting to see how many votes they needed to report...

Predictive covariates considered for regressions on average weight and catch rates were....(6) Google trends data, (7) per capita gross domestic product (GDP), (8) red snapper recreational quota, and (9) fish-able days based on weather.

Let's take this piece by piece...

"Google trends"....
"Google trends (www.google.com/trends/) in searches for the phrase “red snapper season”
between January and March were explored because red snapper catch rates have been shown to
be well predicted by Google search counts (Carter et al. 2015). Search counts are adjusted by
Google to make comparisons between terms easier; each point is divided by the total searches of
the geography and time range it represents, with relative popularity scaled on a range from 0 to
100.

I'm sure this is reliable....hogwash. So let me see...a local TV station creates a series on ridiculous red snapper fishery regulations and the barons who profit from it...people hear about it and want to learn more so they search for it...voila catch efforts go up and seasons go down. Take that you peasants!

"GDP" Macro-trend analysis.
Per capita GDP was included because it is an indicator of the economic status of the United States overall, which may predict the ability of recreational anglers to afford to take trips for red snapper

Key word here is "may". No citational support or statistical analysis given to support this. Average GDP growth 2-3% (except 2008). Voila 3% more fishing effort year over year.

"Fishable Days"
Days with mean wind force measurements exceeding 8.75 m/s (17
knots) or mean wave heights exceeding 1.2 m (4 ft) were not considered fishable.

What percentage of boat owners have craft adequate to fish comfortably/safely in 4' seas. Also note the description "Days". 24 hour in a day. If it's calm overnight and seas are less than 4' that's a fish able day. Never mind if during daylight hours it blows like hell. Not that hard to figure out what days you could fish vs not when over last few years you just have to look at handful of days.

This whole report reminds of bureaucratic tripe. Some seemingly salient points book ending outlandish techniques/methods/ideas create the morass that allows then to rig the system.
Digging little deeper into some of these terms and data used by Feds.

Fishable days defined by seas <1.2m (4ft). If you believe graphs in Figure 2 the Feds consider roughly 70% of days to have been fishable. Pretty generous. Especially since most folks I know with adequately sized boats won't go out and fish on a 4' sea forecast.

Figure 2. Shows a Spawning biomass difference of nearly 700% between Eastern and Western Gulf. 700% difference between East (MS, AL, FL) and West (TX, LA). If this isn't a justification for independent state or at least regional management East/West at Fed level (not that I want this but it's been proposed and studied by Gulf Council for a while now) then I don't know what is. Also I would venture to say biomass differences between AL and Western FL Panhandle are dramatically different than Big Bend/Coast Florida. All things that are obvious to casual observer. I venture to say you can't make the West coast of Florida ARS population match that of Louisiana if you had no fishing. Habitat is different. Biomass will be different. Time for State management.

The deeper you dig into these numbers the more questions continue to arise.....
mlanzotti is offline  
Old 05-05-2017, 10:40 AM
  #56  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Louisissippi Coast
Posts: 12,388
Default

Originally Posted by Jayfish90 View Post
Speaking of Texas and counting to ddmm ---- we don't have that issue here in Freeport. Coast Guard are right there at the corner to the inlet every time you look around. Checking!
They can only enforce federal law, so if you are in state waters and in compliance with state law, you are good to go.
Paul Barnard is online now  
Old 05-05-2017, 11:24 AM
  #57  
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3
Default

Originally Posted by Jayfish90 View Post
Speaking of Texas and counting to ddmm ---- we don't have that issue here in Freeport. Coast Guard are right there at the corner to the inlet every time you look around. Checking!


Thanks for the info Jayfish...
we are heading down to Freeport at the end of May, first time there. Probably head out about 8.9999999999999999NM or so.
ddmm is offline  
Old 05-05-2017, 11:33 AM
  #58  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pascagoula, MS
Posts: 1,089
Default

[QUOTE=mlanzotti;10241559]Digging little deeper into some of these terms and data used by Feds.

Fishable days defined by seas <1.2m (4ft). If you believe graphs in Figure 2 the Feds consider roughly 70% of days to have been fishable. Pretty generous. Especially since most folks I know with adequately sized boats won't go out and fish on a 4' sea forecast.

QUOTE]

Good catch - another example of skewing numbers (in this case basis for their statistics) to fit their agenda.

I would venture to say that their assumption for fishable days is off by a good margin. Most people who have boats that could go fish in true 4ft conditions will not go do it - and that population of boat owner is much smaller than the vast majority of the weekend warriors. I have a boat that "could" do it, but I wouldn't even consider it - same holds true for most of the guys I know with similar rigs. I really want fish on purpose If it is going to be true 3ft seas. My assumption for this model would be that when the forecast shows 2-3ft and snapper season is open, many people will consider going and many do go. However, if it is on the high side of that, saw solid 3ft, I cannot tell you how many times I have seen numerous 20 - 25ft boats start out and turn around.
rebelles is offline  
Old 05-05-2017, 11:41 AM
  #59  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Latimer, MS by way of the MS Sound
Posts: 190
Default

Originally Posted by mlanzotti View Post
Digging little deeper into some of these terms and data used by Feds.

Fishable days defined by seas <1.2m (4ft). If you believe graphs in Figure 2 the Feds consider roughly 70% of days to have been fishable. Pretty generous. Especially since most folks I know with adequately sized boats won't go out and fish on a 4' sea forecast.

Figure 2. Shows a Spawning biomass difference of nearly 700% between Eastern and Western Gulf. 700% difference between East (MS, AL, FL) and West (TX, LA). If this isn't a justification for independent state or at least regional management East/West at Fed level (not that I want this but it's been proposed and studied by Gulf Council for a while now) then I don't know what is. Also I would venture to say biomass differences between AL and Western FL Panhandle are dramatically different than Big Bend/Coast Florida. All things that are obvious to casual observer. I venture to say you can't make the West coast of Florida ARS population match that of Louisiana if you had no fishing. Habitat is different. Biomass will be different. Time for State management.

The deeper you dig into these numbers the more questions continue to arise.....
if they are calling 4' seas "fishable" they have never been in real 4 footers. Like is discussed all the time seems like they like lots of folks are overshooting the wave height by about 1.5 feet. 4 footers unless they are long lazy swells are beating you brains out in the vast majority of boats. Hell 3 footers will beat your tail if they are true 3s. But as we know way to many folks call 1.5s 3-4s and call 2.5s 4-5s so i guess the feds just gonna go with that too....anything to screw us.
jvalhenson is offline  
Old 05-05-2017, 11:44 AM
  #60  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 245
Default

I've got a lot of questions as to how NOAA and the Gulf Council settled on 3 days to fish.
I've attached my PRELIMINARY list of about 85 of them. I plan to call these a-holes and make someone there answer every last one of them. I'll call on my drive to work, lunch break, smoke break, drive home, and every time my anger wells up. I would hope that instead of repeat posting on the HullTruth, each of us will call these folks and demand someone explain it until you feel satisfied with their explanation. I remember a bill passing in Alabama solely because the regular folks were told to call the Governor's office, the number of calls shut down the switchboard. The Governor signed the bill into law. I am not sure NOAA and GC knows just how pissed we are. Share your feelings too, make their day as happy as ours. And if they for one split second give you the slightest blow back, remind them - we pay their salary, they work for us, and those are our MF'ing fish, not their's. They don't care what was said on Facebook. Maybe they'll care when they have to answer on the phone. When I figure out a way for them to answer to my face, I'll pass that along too.

NOAA MARINE FISHERIES Main Line: 727-824-5301

NOAA FISHERIES Assessment & Restoration
Main Phone: 727-824-5391

The Office of the Director of Sustainable Fisheries/Emily Menashes, Director (Acting)
Karen Abrams, Deputy Director (Acting) Phone: (301) 427-8500

CONTACT FOR---the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council

Phone: 813-348-1630
Toll Free: 888-833-1844
Attached Images
trarmer007 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread