Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerald
Just read all these post.
MG..... the question was asked and we were told that some or all of the power point presentation will be posted on the CPRA [Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority] web site. www.coastal.la.gov I talked with Chuck Perrodin after the meeting and he said it might take a couple of days before he can it it posted. He said to find the information: start by clicking on "calendar". Chuck's phone # is 225 342-7615 or 225 768-8882 cell.
There was a post earlier today about the meeting room was going to be "packed"......and it was. There were quite a few people standing in the back and just a couple of empty seats. I made a ruff estimate that there could have been 250 people there.
In the last few minutes of the meeting [with 30-40 people still there] the subject of using data to decide if limits need to be changed was discussed. I tried to get the speaker to say that the LDWF biologist 10 years ago, when the Big Lake limit was lowered, said that a change is not needed. He said that this was not said by the LDWF.
FYI.... Texas is now consider lowering the Trout limit [on the lower half ?] of their coast. Get this........ because there is major land loss and they think they should lower the limit now. Does that sound like the same "bull" we were told 10 years out about Big Lake. |
Thanks for the report. CCA has also been pushing for additional limit reductions in TX and FL. FL releases enough of their data to see that additional restrictions were unnecessary, and they even recently raised their limit on slot reds slightly, as indicated by the data. TX has been moving consistently toward lower limits. I have not seen the TX data justifying this, but frankly I have not looked as hard, as I have much less interest in Texas regulations compared with Louisiana.
Since there were probably not any Texas government officials at the meeting last night, I would not be overly confident that you received accurate information regarding why lowering the limit is being considered. In the best case, you may have received accurate information regarding why CCA thinks the Texas speck limit needs to be lowered. Since the CCA-TX people also have tremendous influence over CCA-LA, pressing CCA for the data regarding their position on TX and FL changes should be useful in helping discern their true motives moving forward if they try and represent their position to be changed in Louisiana. The TX move lowering the limit on bull reds to one per year is not justified in the data.