BigBendFishing.Net

My hope was to initiate a conversation about this topic to hear how folks on this forum considered the "situation". I appreciate the well reasoned responses -in most cases.

EddieJoe wrote:The stock assessments conducted by Florida or the Gulf of Mexico Council HAVE considered recreational harvests as well as commercial, so the argument is misleading and frankly disingenuous (perhaps not on purpose).

I find it hard to believe that the Florida or the Gulf of Mexico Council would have the recreational fishermen in its best interest. It might have been considered, but I doubt it was held to the same standard as the commercial fisherman.

But I have always felt somewhat similar to the way the Democrat expressed the recreational fisherman. I have sat out from Econfina or Keaton and counted 40/50 boats. I know it’s unlikely that each boat catches a limit but, if they did on one given day 400/500 trout could be removed and that’s just a one-man limit.

As far as the redfish comment, “Recreational fishing accounts for 93 percent of the redfish (also called red drum) caught in the South Atlanticâ€

I was surprised that there was no discussion earlier on this subject. It was/is my belief that Littoral is in a good position to express a valued opinion and when I saw the opportunity I ask him if he had any comments. I appreciate his initiating the process and perhaps taking a bit of undeserved heat because he may have been perceived to be associated with the report, or because of the passion of a response. I also appreciate those who have indicated that they want the whole story before forming or expressing an opinion. I believe we are ALL interested in this issue, lets stay up with it and be ready to add our voice when its appropriate. Thanks to Littoral and all who responded.

As a side note..... Felicia would make a great speaker for the next NFGFC meeting. After no speaker for the past couple of months I'll bet Beef O'bradys would have to enlarge the room to hold em all!

tc, I had an up-front and personal view also when the net ban started. Most of my family in the big bend were net fishermen. Four and five generations worth of them. It devestated them financially. They had a right to be bitter againt the government and anyone else within striking distance. They were offered ten cents on the dollar for their equipment.

That said...The rec fishermen did have an effect in my opinion. Myself included. Like a lot of other folks who reads this post. I well remember the days of bringing home 150 to 200 trout in a day of fishing. Those fish were never wasted, but still I'm ashamed to say, we over fished.

The point I'm trying to make is, if you've fished by any method, out of the Gulf for any period of time, we are all to blame to some degree.

There are always two sides to every story. I just have the misfortune to have a foot on both sides of this story.

CSMarine wrote:There are always two sides to every story. I just have the misfortune to have a foot on both sides of this story.

CS, It is our fortune that you have a foot on both sides of the story and can give us a view from both sides. You represent a unique and particularly credible perspective.

I to have a foot in both pots CS friends and family that used to net fish and some that still try to make a go of it I have nothing against the commercial fishers, I just don't like studies that attempt to skew the facts in one direction or the other Just give us ALL of the facts without removing this or that to change things to look bad for one side or the other

Wevans, You have an issue with the article as it is written because it didn't give us all of the facts. I agree, but what can you expect. Giving us ALL the facts isn't going to happen in a newspaper article. If there was an attempt to skew the facts in one direction or the other the only real evidence we've considered here is the article in the paper, not the study.
You're taking issue with a study you haven't read. I haven't read it either. Even after we've read it we won't have ALL the facts. What we'll have is data and how it was collected. We can read it and decide if it's valid. The journal Science already weighed in on the articles validity when they published it.
That said, topics like this are so complicated that they will always be up for some debate in terms of management decisions.
That's because we'll never have ALL the facts.

I just don't like articals that attempt to skew the facts in one direction or the other

That better

Littoral. thanks for your time, effort, and expertise on this subject. I got hot about how the media handles NEWS. they did exactly what they intended to do.

I, in no way intended to offend you. You have brought some very useful information to this forum. Please continue to do so.

Thanks,

John.

I think we all are in agreement that the newspaper article stunk...the study is up in the air 'cause no ones read it yet...and we're all just really passionate about our fishing

Yep, what they said yer just gonna have ta learn me a little better Lit "and the meening of the emoticons" ta know that I get pasionate about some things, but am always willing to listen and learn

PS: It seems the later in the day, the more PASIONATE I get

I am certainly in no position to know if any of the statistics presented in the article are accurate or not. However; I don't see how you can make the argument that recreational fishermen / sportsmen don't have a detrimental effect on fish stocks.

It honestly makes me queasy when I am in PC and see the offshore boats start throwing the Grouper and Snapper up on the dock. How can there be that many fish in the Gulf of Mexico?

I aint saying that the Recs don't take a lot of fish Ken! I just don't see them saying that recs take more than half the fish compared to commercial fishers In ONE trip, the commercial guys can take more fish than all of us, on the water at the same time, can take getting our limit!!!Yes they have quotes that are NOT supposed to be passed, but we have limits that are not SUPPOSED to be passed If the recs and commercial people ever agree to limit the other, I will probably kill over dead, right on the spot