Thoughts on CCA meeting tonight on state of Calcasieu fishery

[MathGeek]

So, how many attendees were at the meeting?

How did the CCA reps pitch the meeting?

Was the dissatisfaction of the attendees communicated to the CCA reps?

What did Pausina say? Does he understand the need to move toward science-based management? Does he appreciate that the oyster reef destruction is hurting the fishery?

[LAfins]

Left before they got to the oyster part of it. Everything before that was a waste if time.

["W"]

Love this


We can get a 25 to 15 trout reduction with zero science
Triple limits with zero science

But can't stop oyster dredging with tons of science and data ??

Kind of like our president runs things

[Reggoh]

Originally Posted by "W"

Love this


We can get a 25 to 15 trout reduction with zero science
Triple limits with zero science

But can't stop oyster dredging with tons of science and data ??

Kind of like our president runs things

They did admit the 25-15 reduction was not based on the science... He said the fishery was in good condition.

David Cresson said the Tripletail limit was based on the studies of 1 man (i think Dr Harris) who is the premier guru on the subject. Based on his recommendations CCA petitioned for the change and it was passed.

There seemed to be a big push about the oysters. Its possible something positive could come from this meeting in that regard. Specifically with adding back habitat in the form of limestone/concrete/shells. Another part of the oyster issue that was stressed was the leasing. Good points made there.


Sent from my fruity phone

[T-TOP]

Oyster graph plainly states the oysters are suffering since dredging started. The guy there was wl&f. It take legislature to change oyster regs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by T-TOP

Oyster graph plainly states the oysters are suffering since dredging started. The guy there was wl&f. It take legislature to change oyster regs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you happen to remember if the graph included 2014 data?

[jlincecum]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Do you happen to remember if the graph included 2014 data?

had some but wasn't complete. had their stock estimates

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by jlincecum

had some but wasn't complete. had their stock estimates

Awesome, thanks.

[fishwater]

I should have kept going west and gone to the camp rather than sit through that. Head cca guy said there was definite data from Mississippi but could not say where is was published. The oyster discussion was the best part imo. I took it that the game wardens just ticket for over fishing, if I get caught over the limit they can take my boat and license but not oystermen?

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by fishwater

Head cca guy said there was definite data from Mississippi but could not say where is was published.

The triple tail data from Mississippi has not been published or peer reviewed, thus it was only hear-say from the CCA rep who represented it to LWC. And the data on triple tail was life history data from Mississippi waters. There were no life history data or stock assessments from Louisiana waters at all.

We wrote to LWC pointing out that there is available data on triple tail in Louisiana waters (collected by NOAA and other federal groups) and asking them whether the stock data from Louisiana supported imposing the limits. We received no response, and by all appearances, the data from Louisiana waters was not considered.

This is a great example of CCA claiming that their management positions have scientific support, when they do not.

Would it make sense to manage the Louisiana deer herd based on Mississippi data?

[noodle creek]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

The triple tail data from Mississippi has not been published or peer reviewed, thus it was only hear-say from the CCA rep who represented it to LWC. And the data on triple tail was life history data from Mississippi waters. There were no life history data or stock assessments from Louisiana waters at all.

We wrote to LWC pointing out that there is available data on triple tail in Louisiana waters (collected by NOAA and other federal groups) and asking them whether the stock data from Louisiana supported imposing the limits. We received no response, and by all appearances, the data from Louisiana waters was not considered.

This is a great example of CCA claiming that their management positions have scientific support, when they do not.

Would it make sense to manage the Louisiana deer herd based on Mississippi data?

Wish you woulda been there for this. We needed someone more educated on this issue. They didn't like hearing what Nickt87 had to say. He admitted the limit change in 05 was a social issue. The last guy to talk, i don't remember his name, but i didn't like him.

[noodle creek]

Who was who in there?

Oh and they admitted when limit changed in 05 that the trout populations were perfectly fine, and that it was a social issue.

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by noodle creek

Who was who in there?

Oh and they admitted when limit changed in 05 that the trout populations were perfectly fine, and that it was a social issue.

Good to have 'em on record on that.

[Tjethro85]

Originally Posted by noodle creek

Who was who in there?

Oh and they admitted when limit changed in 05 that the trout populations were perfectly fine, and that it was a social issue.

If it's a social issue then it would benefit someone/something. Who/what the hell is benefitting from it?

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Tjethro85

If it's a social issue then it would benefit someone/something. Who/what the hell is benefitting from it?

The guides. They don't have to work as long for a limit.

[jlincecum]

its gonna take a few days for my blood pressure to come down. Did I actually call the COE lady stupid or did it just come across like that? all kinda fuzzy.

CPR and weirs big plan is to just wait on rain because anything else would takes years of planning and red tape, plus they dont own anything they just consult the "committee" pretty sure Chuck said that 68 times

Oysters - there is no way that map with the sonar'd "reef" areas is up to date.

[jchief]

Originally Posted by jlincecum

its gonna take a few days for my blood pressure to come down. Did I actually call the COE lady stupid or did it just come across like that? all kinda fuzzy.



CPR and weirs big plan is to just wait on rain because anything else would takes years of planning and red tape, plus they dont own anything they just consult the "committee" pretty sure Chuck said that 68 times



Oysters - there is no way that map with the sonar'd "reef" areas is up to date.

Yes you did. LOL



I was the guy in the blue FD tshirt that asked about the commission minimum sack limit and the Washout growing so much.

[fishwater]

Whoever the guy that said I didn't come in here with a belt buckle on and and a cowboy hat I am not from Texas haha. He had a lot of good points

[Nickt87]

Originally Posted by fishwater

Whoever the guy that said I didn't come in here with a belt buckle on and and a cowboy hat I am not from Texas haha. He had a lot of good points

That was me, and that was my nicest way of telling that goon that I don't give 2 turds what the hell Texas does with their fishery, especially after you just stated that their creel limit decision wasn't based primarily on scientific data but partially on social premise.

Other than that statement I tried to keep most of my comments black and white and to the point for the presenters to understand and answer as well as the audience to follow. I frown upon anyone that does nothing but rant on the internet and then sit back and watch when they get in front of people that they supposedly want to hang. I understand some feel like it falls on deaf ears but if you're going to take the time to drive over and attend then go ahead and take the opportunity to put them on the hot seat. Interrogation and quarreling can be done in an educated and fair manner and still have a monumental impact.

As for the content provided I feel some of it was eye opening and some of it was redundant and part of the horse and pony show.

My biggest concern leaving the meeting was that they have black and white data and charts explaining that oyster habitat and population is rapidly decreasing and they have done slim to none to protect, conserve, and restore it. Later in the night I voiced that people are in panic because we are hearing of trout limit cuts and we are afraid it is for all the wrong reasons. What makes us think that you have the estuaries best interest in mind? You have already proven that you can't manage and maintain a species that you have concrete data on. How are we supposed to trust and support your decision on trout limits when you say that you haven't collected data on speckled trout since 2010? And that data isn't even region specific!


Overall, I did apprecitate CCA for taking the time to show and put on the meeting. Possibly, if they would have recieved questions and comments from the most concerned the meeting could have been even more informative. You never know what one question or comment can lead to.

[Reggoh]

Originally Posted by Nickt87

How are we supposed to trust and support your decision on trout limits when you say that you haven't collected data on speckled trout since 2010?

I asked about the Speckled Trout Stock Assessments data. The last guy (I think his name was Harry Blanchette?) said that they continually collect data and that they have the data but that it is only posted every 3-5 years.

I asked that question specifically because of all the talk on SC. I couldn't remember what the historical postings of this data was during the meeting so I asked if it was historically posted annually and he said no.

After the meeting I was pondering that response and it hit me that maybe it was historically posted every 3 years in the past? 2004 - 2007 - 2010... Either way if they are saying 3-5 years it should be published soon.