360 Tuna Fishers Forum banner

1 - 20 of 82 Posts

·
Member
Joined
·
5,079 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Alabama and Mississippi anglers and seafood lovers who have mistrusted the federal red snapper management program in the past won’t like it any better in the coming year after NOAA Fisheries announced plans to “calibrate” the state’s snapper reporting system to better manage the fishery.
What calibration means in this case is to cut in half,
apparently, and that means far shorter seasons
and reduced bag limits for the popular table fish this summer.


“Under the Gulf Council state management plan, there is a section that says there will be a calibration factor between the federal surveys and what they say about how many fish are landed in each state and what our surveys show are landed,” says Scott Bannon, Director of the Alabama Marine Resources Division (MRD). “Ultimately, NMFS wants to use that calibration number to develop what they call a ‘common currency’ across the Gulf for each state survey.”

Under certain calibration alternatives,
Alabama’s quota for red snapper could go from 1.12 million pounds in 2020
to 547,298 pounds in 2021.


“We’re in disagreement with that, and we are working through the Gulf Council process to find an alternative and not have a dramatic cut in our season,” Bannon said.
“Mississippi’s calibration is larger than Alabama’s,
and they would see a season cut even larger than that.

The other Gulf states, Texas, Louisiana and Florida, would stay similar to last year’s quotas.”

Alabama and Mississippi use federally certified quota monitoring programs that count fish through Snapper Check and (Mississippi’s) Tails and Scales. Alabama developed the Snapper Check program because scientists felt the federal MRIP program was flawed, and now the feds still want to use that program as the standard, Bannon said.

“We’re working to have the state data incorporated into the stock assessments versus the federal data to give us a more realistic look at what’s being harvested.”
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
147 Posts
What tenth amendment... nanny state overreach. Guess them Bama and Miss. organizations better balance out them campaign contributions or else...

D-C
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
6,097 Posts
Nope, not playing. fought this fight for 16 yrs.
Looks like the com's are finally buttering the right palms again.
Gulf Council re-adopting MRIPS after proving it was "bad math' for themselves!
This smacks of payoffs.
But nope, not playing this time. Truth is reds just aren't the best tasting or hardest fighting of the snappers.
Plenty of mangroves and 25 per day aggregate reef fish limit.
that is all.
enjoy.
 

·
Member
Joined
·
5,079 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Nope, not playing. fought this fight for 16 yrs.
Looks like the com's are finally buttering the right palms again.
Gulf Council re-adopting MRIPS after proving it was "bad math' for themselves!
This smacks of payoffs.
But nope, not playing this time. Truth is reds just aren't the best tasting or hardest fighting of the snappers.
Plenty of mangroves and 25 per day aggregate reef fish limit.
that is all.
enjoy.
" The other Gulf states,
Texas, Louisiana and Florida, would stay similar to last year’s quotas.”

All good in Texas,
you might not have electric or natural gas at times,
but you do have your Red Snapper quota.
:)
 

·
Member
Joined
·
5,079 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
What tenth amendment... nanny state overreach.
When natural resources are shared among states,
like fish species that spans several states,
or rivers that flow through multiple states,
the Feds are ALWAYS involved.
Can't have a state deciding how much water or fish
they want, irrespective to the needs of other states "down stream"

If there was no "nanny state overreach" as you like to call it,
California would have no water in many of its rivers,
as other states would have tapped them dry before they got
to the great state of Cali.
Would draining a river before it reaches you
be another form of cancel culture?
:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
147 Posts
Alabama has one of the finest state funded artificial reef programs in the country, the results speak for themselves... let the States develop their own fisheries and their own cooperation zones... The collectivism and over reach pendulum is near maximum...

D-C
 

·
Member
Joined
·
5,079 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Alabama has one of the finest state funded artificial reef programs in the country, the results speak for themselves... let the States develop their own fisheries and their own cooperation zones... The collectivism and over reach pendulum is near maximum...

D-C
I see you have little to no actual understanding of
how fisheries management works.
Too tired to ever teach that again.
So stick with the nanny state, collectivism, and
any other buzz words you learn from Tucker.

:)

PS> Alabama is part of a "cooperation zone"
that is managed by the GULF COUNCIL that incorporates
those 5 states, all in the gulf. What you suggest as a solution,
already exists.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
147 Posts
Yes, the Gulf council will be neutered like Mr. Potato head. keep it local without the slippery slope fed.

D-C
 

·
Member
Joined
·
5,079 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Yes, the Gulf council will be neutered like Mr. Potato head. keep it local without the slippery slope fed.

D-C
Probably the deep state and Biden the Barbarian
getting even for the gulf states supporting...........

:) :ROFLMAO: :devilish:
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
989 Posts
I'm just here to see how many pages this will go 😆. This was one of the longest thread several years ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
If there was no "nanny state overreach" as you like to call it,
California would have no water in many of its rivers,
as other states would have tapped them dry before they got
to the great state of Cali.
While I tend to agree with federal oversight of natural resources, as a Californian Im struggling to understand the "many rivers" in California that come from other states. Except for the Colorado river the vast majority of the rest are from watersheds within the great state of California.
 

·
Member
Joined
·
5,079 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
While I tend to agree with federal oversight of natural resources, as a Californian Im struggling to understand the "many rivers" in California that come from other states. Except for the Colorado river the vast majority of the rest are from watersheds within the great state of California.
Proper terminology would have been watersheds,
thought rivers(stream/creeks/wetlands) would easier for the layman.

"Using public sources of data, we mapped the surface drinking water sources (rivers, reservoirs, lakes, etc.) for 30 million (80%) of California’s residents and the watersheds that supply water to those sources.
We found that California’s drinking water supply system relies on approximately 157 million acres of land spanning 8 states to collect, filter, and deliver water."


The Colorado River provides about 18% of the states water
and about 60% of the water used in Southern California.
Without it, there would be no LA or SD or the farms
of the Imperial Valley.
The river is managed by the 7 states it flows through,
with federal oversight and rules.
Cali has been taking about 20% more yearly than
they should have for the past decade or so,
while at the same time the flow of the river has naturally decreased.


PS> for millennia, the Colorado River emptied into the northern part of
the Sea of Cortez, until the gringos decided to build cities in the desert.
Gringos drank the river dry basically, which stopped the flow to the Sea
of Cortez, and destroyed the estuary that was the breeding grounds for
many species of fish, including the now critically endangered Totoaba,
a croaker that grows to 300 pounds that used to crash the local beaches in large numbers.
Today, there are catch restrictions on this fish.
117900


117901


117902



117903



117904
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
When natural resources are shared among states,
like fish species that spans several states,
or rivers that flow through multiple states,
the Feds are ALWAYS involved.
Can't have a state deciding how much water or fish
they want, irrespective to the needs of other states "down stream"

If there was no "nanny state overreach" as you like to call it,
California would have no water in many of its rivers,
as other states would have tapped them dry before they got
to the great state of Cali.
Would draining a river before it reaches you
be another form of cancel culture?
:)
this works well with some administrations like the past administration, however the current one will take as many rights away as possible in the name of "science"...even though no actual science backs up their lame theories. The gulf states have been managing red snapper effectively for the past few years. MUCH better than the feds. You can't drop a line in TX in water over 100ft without catching snapper.
 

·
Member
Joined
·
5,079 Posts
Discussion Starter #14 (Edited)
this works well with some administrations like the past administration,
however the current one will take as many rights away
Oh my, lets see. What is happening today, is a result of the harvest
and fishery rules that were in place last season, that would be 2020
.
2020 the greatest president and administration ruled the roost,
so their rules and management is the cause or reason for the reduction this year.

Dang HJ, stop with the reality and facts that contradict our reasoning,
we're not going to listen anyway, and believe what we want, facts are fake
unless they support our viewpoint.

however the current one will take as many rights away as possible in the name of "science"...even though no actual science backs up their lame theories.
The science that the Gulf Council uses and follows,
is the science of NOAA, aka the FEDS. So the improved fishery you speak of,
is actually the result of "FED SCIENCE"

States do none of this "science" as its done on a federal level.

As for the lame theories, if they were actually lame,
meaning they don't work,
there wouldn't actually be "too many" red snapper today.
So it seems, they are far from lame, and maybe working better than expected.

Word on the message boards is, Sydney Powell is going to be releasing
The Snapken soon, it is a block buster report with proof of all the Federal
Snapper Fraud that has been occurring in previous years.
Sydney has a fabulous track record, so this should be slam dunk.




The gulf states have been managing red snapper effectively for the past few years. MUCH better than the feds
Past few years, the Gulf Council has been following FEDERAL PROTOCOL and SCIENCE,
like they have always done, and they have ZERO control of the yearly harvest amounts,
as that is provided by the evil FED as well.
In the past few years, the states have started to count the harvest, amount of fish caught
by anglers,
which in many states has shown higher catch rates then when the Fed counted the harvest,
resulting in some states having to shut their seasons earlier that expected due to increased harvest rates
found under state counting.

So, you are correct, that the states are counting how many fish are being removed
from the ocean,better than the Feds did.
The benefit of this,
is SHORTER SEASONS in the states,
due to the quota being used
up faster, under state counting.


Clearly a WIN, so much winning, tired yet?


:)


You can't drop a line in TX in water over 100ft without catching snapper.
Texas has never had an issue with red snapper stocks,
they have the largest population off their coast,
relative to the number of anglers.
How/why the state has had a year round season on red snapper
where other states don't.


You went 0-4 for there sparky :)



PS> BREAKING NEWS
In order to support the plight of the Red Snapper Fishermen,
Mike Lindell is creating a MyPillow Red Snapper Pillow.
available at www.MyRedSnapperPillow.com
117906
 
  • Like
Reactions: jon holsenbeck

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Oh my, lets see. What is happening today, is a result of the harvest
and fishery rules that were in place last season, that would be 2020
.
2020 the greatest president and administration ruled the roost,
so their rules and management is the cause or reason for the reduction this year.

Dang HJ, stop with the reality and facts that contradict our reasoning,
we're not going to listen anyway, and believe what we want, facts are fake
unless they support our viewpoint.


The science that the Gulf Council uses and follows,
is the science of NOAA, aka the FEDS. So the improved fishery you speak of,
is actually the result of "FED SCIENCE"

States do none of this "science" as its done on a federal level.

As for the lame theories, if they were actually lame,
meaning they don't work,
there wouldn't actually be "too many" red snapper today.
So it seems, they are far from lame, and maybe working better than expected.

Word on the message boards is, Sydney Powell is going to be releasing
The Snapken soon, it is a block buster report with proof of all the Federal
Snapper Fraud that has been occurring in previous years.
Sydney has a fabulous track record, so this should be slam dunk.





Past few years, the Gulf Council has been following FEDERAL PROTOCOL and SCIENCE,
like they have always done, and they have ZERO control of the yearly harvest amounts,
as that is provided by the evil FED as well.
In the past few years, the states have started to count the harvest, amount of fish caught
by anglers,
which in many states has shown higher catch rates then when the Fed counted the harvest,
resulting in some states having to shut their seasons earlier that expected due to increased harvest rates
found under state counting.

So, you are correct, that the states are counting how many fish are being removed
from the ocean,better than the Feds did.
The benefit of this,
is SHORTER SEASONS in the states,
due to the quota being used
up faster, under state counting.


Clearly a WIN, so much winning, tired yet?


:)



Texas has never had an issue with red snapper stocks,
they have the largest population off their coast,
relative to the number of anglers.
How/why the state has had a year round season on red snapper
where other states don't.


You went 0-4 for there sparky :)



PS> BREAKING NEWS
In order to support the plight of the Red Snapper Fishermen,
Mike Lindell is creating a MyPillow Red Snapper Pillow.
available at www.MyRedSnapperPillow.com
View attachment 117906
sorry but last I checked, there's not a massive red snapper fishery in California. Sector sharing has screwed the recreational fishermen in the gulf states for years. Feds pitted commercial fishermen against rec fishermen years ago with the majority of the quota going to commercial fishermen. Rather than listening to the feds and their idiotic math, maybe you should actually ask REAL fishermen who live in the area. Commercial fishermen like this guy, bought up all the sector shares and the scraps go to the recreational fishermen. FISH FIGHT - Houston Chronicle The last year of the Obama administration, we were given THREE days to catch snapper in Texas. By the way, the reason we have a year round season is that our shelf is so shallow along the TX coast that nobody catches legal size state water snapper except in winter months (also when the weather doesn't allow fishing offshore most times) or unless you travel to near the Mexican border. (about a 9 hour drive from Houston). Here's your wonderful fed management Red Snapper Count reveals decades of NOAA inaccuracy (ccaalabama.org) Bet we'll get a short season again this year too. Feel free to come here and I'll take you fishing. I dare you to NOT catch snapper when bottom fishing any structure from 90ft-400ft of water. The same goes if you want to take a trip to the panhandle of Florida. Anytime of the year you can have your two person limit of red snapper in 15 minutes. They are NOT overfished no mater what your California calculator says. The Feds and the gulf council take the quota assigned to the recreational fishermen and divide it by the number of fishing licenses sold to determine the number of days allowed. It's ridiculous to think that 2.8 million licenses sold to fishermen in TX equates to every fisherman in the state getting his/her limit every day of the open season. Of that 2.8 million...how many live within driving distance of our coast? I can tell you it's a small percentage. By the way, this is what the current sector sharing is based on Ecologist Special Report: New Zealand's Fisheries' Fraud (theecologist.org)
 

·
Member
Joined
·
5,079 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
sorry but last I checked, there's not a massive red snapper fishery in California.
They are NOT overfished no mater what your California calculator says
I can see you're "special"
Since I never mentioned the word California in my response,
not sure where you are coming up with your Cali rant from,
but that can be expected from uniformed and illogical responses.


Feds pitted commercial fishermen against rec fishermen years ago
with the majority of the quota going to commercial fishermen.
Red Snapper quota is shared in the following manner:
51.5% to the RECREATIONAL
48.5% to the Commercials.
The RECREATIONALS RECEIVE THE MAJORITY of the quota.
Once again, and without breaking your streak, you are wrong.
You have formed your opinion of the situation on complete misinformation.

Dang HJ, again I don't care, I know what I know, and those are the facts,
don't care about your california information or facts, as a real fisherman
I know the real deal, and know more than any fed scientist ever could.



Rather than listening to the feds and their idiotic math, maybe you should actually ask REAL fishermen who live in the area.
So far, it seems the idiotic information is originating from you only at this point.
"REAL" fishermen like yourself, have no understanding, training or knowledge of
fisheries management, yet seem to have all the answers,
yet with none of the facts to actually make an educated decision,
only their often misguided view of the situation.

Kind of a reason why most "real fisherman" don't catch much fish,
they know too much to learn anything,
and thus actually be successful.


As for the rest of your rant, I won't bother,
it is similarly uniformed, based on complete falsehoods like all the previous comments,
and simply illustrates your complete lack of understanding in the situation,
or your desire to actually understand it.

Comes down to, you want what you want,
and all the rest does not matter to you.

When you become King one day, it will work that way for you,
until then, you will unfortunately will have to share with your fellow man.
 

·
Member
Joined
·
5,079 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
The Feds and the gulf council take the quota assigned to the recreational fishermen and divide it by the number of fishing licenses sold to determine the number of days allowed. It's ridiculous to think that 2.8 million licenses sold to fishermen in TX equates to every fisherman in the state getting his/her limit every day of the open season. Of that 2.8 million...how many live within driving distance of our coast?
Can I ask where you obtained this bit of knowledge from?
Did you read that somewhere,
or did you come up with that information or "facts" on your own?

Texas has 1.1 million licensed SW anglers, not 2.8 million as you claim,
nor has it ever sold 2.8 SW licenses in a single year or anywhere close to that number.

Texas does NOT assume each angler is catching their limit of Red Snapper every day
of the year, or base their fishing regulations on such misinformation.
You are correct when you state "It's ridiculous to think that 2.8 million licenses sold to fishermen in TX equates to every fisherman in the state getting his/her limit every day of the open season"
Yes, definitely ridiculous to think what you do,
as it is not even remotely accurate
in any shape or form.
Truly a new level of ridiculous statement I've never heard before on this site.

While I understand REAL and EXPERT fisherman like yourself,
are far too knowledgeable to learn anything,
since they already know it all.
But for those fishermen still maybe learning.......

Texas 2020 Red Snapper Quota
265,105 POUNDS

Which is about 29,500 FISH quota.

So how does
2.8 MILLION anglers taking 365 trips a year, harvesting 4 fish each time,
get divided into 29,500 fish ????

It doesn't, because that is not the way it is calculated,
nor are any of your data points even correct to start with.

But don't let that stop you from complaining about New Zealand
Commercial fishery Sector Sharing to illustrate what is wrong
in the US with Red Snapper Management.
PS> sector sharing has nothing to do with catch allocations between
rec/comm sectors or anything to do with rec fishery management with red snapper.


PPS> Bring on the SNAPKIN, heard the big day is March 20.............
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Can I ask where you obtained this bit of knowledge from?
Did you read that somewhere,
or did you come up with that information or "facts" on your own?

Texas has 1.1 million licensed SW anglers, not 2.8 million as you claim,
nor has it ever sold 2.8 SW licenses in a single year or anywhere close to that number.

Texas does NOT assume each angler is catching their limit of Red Snapper every day
of the year, or base their fishing regulations on such misinformation.
You are correct when you state "It's ridiculous to think that 2.8 million licenses sold to fishermen in TX equates to every fisherman in the state getting his/her limit every day of the open season"
Yes, definitely ridiculous to think what you do,
as it is not even remotely accurate
in any shape or form.
Truly a new level of ridiculous statement I've never heard before on this site.

While I understand REAL and EXPERT fisherman like yourself,
are far too knowledgeable to learn anything,
since they already know it all.
But for those fishermen still maybe learning.......

Texas 2020 Red Snapper Quota
265,105 POUNDS

Which is about 29,500 FISH quota.

So how does
2.8 MILLION anglers taking 365 trips a year, harvesting 4 fish each time,
get divided into 29,500 fish ????

It doesn't, because that is not the way it is calculated,
nor are any of your data points even correct to start with.

But don't let that stop you from complaining about New Zealand
Commercial fishery Sector Sharing to illustrate what is wrong
in the US with Red Snapper Management.
PS> sector sharing has nothing to do with catch allocations between
rec/comm sectors or anything to do with rec fishery management with red snapper.


PPS> Bring on the SNAPKIN, heard the big day is March 20.............
again, sitting in California cutting and pasting from Google on a problem you not only know nothing about, but also really is no concern of yours. Ask ANY fisherman or charter captain in TX, Louisiana, Georgia or Florida and they'll tell you the same thing. Snapper are more plentiful than they'll even admit, the Federal govt has done a piss poor job of effectively managing the resource, the states ARE doing a much better job and the feds pit the commercial fishermen against the recs when we only take 2% of the resource thereby giving recreational fishermen shortened seasons on a quota that is made up by blowing leaves in the air and seeing where they land. Maybe you ought to focus on the homeless population and rampant drug problems in California or the draconian lockdowns your governor has you in rather than spewing nonsense about a resource you don't even fish for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
by the way Texas has 42% of the snapper biomass but 6.2% of the TAC. Just another example of some idiot in DC who has never seen a red snapper let alone fished for one making decisions about something he has no clue about. About as dimwitted as the current POTUS. Again, NOAA and the gulf council only estimate the recreational catches...there is no weighing of fish. This leads to crappy decisions. Even though the states are effectively reporting and managing the resource...the feds seem to ignore the results in favor of special interest groups and the rec fishermen get screwed again on a resource that is teaming with an overabundance of fish.
 

·
Member
Joined
·
5,079 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
again, sitting in California cutting and pasting from Google on a problem you not only know nothing about, but also really is no concern of yours. . Maybe you ought to focus on the homeless population and rampant drug problems in California or the draconian lockdowns your governor has you in rather than spewing nonsense about a resource you don't even fish for.
I live in New York 🍎

I see you have kept your streak alive
of being wrong 100% of the time, congrats!!!!! 🎆🎇🎆🎇🎆

Do you happen to have a relative named Alex that lives in Florida?
 
1 - 20 of 82 Posts
Top