Will you continue to Support CCA?

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

Has the explosive removal of oil platforms been banned yet? That causes mass die-offs at one time.

The oil companies are actually willingly donating their rigs to the Rigs to Reefs program, I don't think they should have to make any remediation. They shouldn't have to pay for what the gov't is forcing them to do. They are simply following instructions.

The government isn't forcing them to place the well and drill for oil in the first place, they are forcing them to remove the well after its useful life is over. I do not think the feds are forcing them to use explosive removals. Have the feds banned the alternate removal technologies, or are the oil companies just reluctant to adopt alternate methods because they are more expensive?

It comes down to money. Making sportsman pay more money for lead free ammunition and circle hooks, etc. is reasonable, but making oil companies pay more to remove wells with methods that don't cause massive fish kills is unreasonable?

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

Not unreasonable, if you can come up with a better way, then the oil companies would probably shake your hand

The oil companies define better as cheaper. I would define better as not having a negative impact on sustainable fisheries.

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

This is a long standing law, just like the ban on lead shot, waaaaaay long time ago. Too late to jump on this train

I'm not proposing changing it, but with 20+ years of hindsight, we can prevent repeating some of the mistakes by limiting restrictions of new laws to those demonstrated to be necessary by sound science.

This was an unpublished, unreviewed study from another state. Neither the data nor the methods are available, nor is it known what other game fish are used for comparison. The statement was presented as hearsay at a meeting and cannot even be attributed to a specific scientist, just a vague connection with a Mississippi study. Is this what fish and game laws should be based on in Louisiana?

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

How do you know it (the referenced tag study) was unpublished?

After conducting extensive scholarly searches for all possible published tag studies in tripletail, I came up empty. I reviewed the CVs and publication lists of the authors in Gulf states who have published anything on tripletail in the last two decades - no published tag studies. A google search finally turned up a news report of a tag study in tripletail I emailed one of the scientists on the tag study earlier today, not published.

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

I honestly have not seen the study in reference and do not know if it was published or if it came out of someone's butt, but to answer the question, NO - fish and game laws should be based upon science (in mine and your opinion as well,) but we should also 'err on the side of caution' when science isn't readily available, this is where common sense comes into play. There ARE tripletail studies out there for other states and like I said there is no such thing as a Louisiana tripletail, they are all the same species and all the same population.

So what if we err on the side of caution and implement a law that stays in place for a number of years. Then science shows that some of the restrictions in the law were never necessary. By that point (your above argument), it's water under the bridge and established law "too late to jump on that train."

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

I don't like seeing an animal die that I can not eat, and animals dying from poisoning is not very cool

Dying as a result of catch and release mortality isn't cool either, and many species of fish have release mortalities in the 20-80% range (even with circle hooks and vent tools). I hope no one figures out that sport anglers occasionally hook loggerhead turtles!

Those trumpeting the need for new restrictions to reduce mortality of non-target species mention the successes but seldom the failures. Remember a few years back when the shrimpers had to install the devices to reduce the mortality of juvenile red snapper? And then several years later, they figured out that the shrimp bycatch mortality was not hurting the population. Circle hooks decrease release mortality in some fisheries, but there are other fisheries where their benefits have been shown to be insignificant years after mandating them. And the LA requirement to use steel shot to kill nuisance blackbirds is laughable. I shot hundreds of blackbirds when I raised corn in Ohio, and lead shot is so much more effective, it's not even funny. Farmers should be allowed to use the effective tools in controlling nuisance species.