BigBendFishing.Net

Comment period open for future management rules on these species if you target them:

http://myfwc.com/fishing/saltwater/rulemaking/comments/

I sent them one this morning. Tell them what you think, it might just help things some.

Why bother? FWC sought input on redfish. By far, input from anglers suggested the redfish fishery was robust. FWC completely dismissed and totally ignored anglers' input and reduced the daily bag limit of reds in the NW Red Drum Management Zone from 2 to 1.

This "solicitation of input" is nothing but politics and window-dressing.

For the catch and filet crowd, redfish were in great shape. For many others, though, the quality of the fishery had been declining since the premature implementation of the 2-fish bag limit in the NW zone. Fortunately the FWC made a prudent correction.

Of these three species the commission is now soliciting input, flounder have a 12-inch minimum with a 10-fish bag limit, while sheepshead must also be at least 12 inches with a 15-fish bag limit. Tripletail have a reasonable bag limit at 2 fish apiece, but the 15 inch minimum should be raised, IMO. I'd also like to see increased minimums for the other two and a lowered bag limit.

Florida's population is expected to increase by millions in the next couple of decades. If the state is going to retain its title as the Fishing Capital of the World, we all are going to have to face the reality that the Gulf of Mexico is not an unlimited "grocery store."

silverking wrote:For the catch and filet crowd, redfish were in great shape. For many others, though, the quality of the fishery had been declining since the premature implementation of the 2-fish bag limit in the NW zone. Fortunately the FWC made a prudent correction.

Of these three species the commission is now soliciting input, flounder have a 12-inch minimum with a 10-fish bag limit, while sheepshead must also be at least 12 inches with a 15-fish bag limit. Tripletail have a reasonable bag limit at 2 fish apiece, but the 15 inch minimum should be raised, IMO. I'd also like to see increased minimums for the other two and a lowered bag limit.

Florida's population is expected to increase by millions in the next couple of decades. If the state is going to retain its title as the Fishing Capital of the World, we all are going to have to face the reality that the Gulf of Mexico is not an unlimited "grocery store."

Within here one can find the summarized results of the FWC recreational anglers' survey on Red Drum:
http://forums.floridasportsman.com/show ... -Says-quot

What scientific evidence/information can you share (with documented factual and supportable proof) that contradicts the recreational anglers' survey results to show that "the quality of the fishery had been declining"?

As for "If the state is going to retain its title as the Fishing Capital of the World", well,...a great BIG step in the RIGHT direction would be for FWC to better manage - and drastically reduce - the number of non-Florida resident anglers with access to Florida's waters.

Rather than FWC selling a fishing license to "every Tom, Dick and Harry" who can pay, it's way past time for FWC to put a "ceiling" on the number of active and valid licenses, beginning with those who don't live in Florida.

2S, I resemble that remark. If more of you feel that way, then Ga. hunting should be just for Ga. hunters. But that's just not right, we all live so close together some of us are gonna cross state lines to fish and hunt. The Gulf is much better fishing than the Atlantic coast, maybe on account of so much silty water over there and 8-10 ft. tide swings. And I don't deer hunt, but I've heard for years that hunting them up here is better. But back to the original thread, there is nothing wrong with lowering some bag limits on certain fish.

Florida:

- non resident fishing licenses (553,853) comprise 35% of all fishing licenses. An annual non resident fishing license (for saltwater) costs $47
- non-resident hunting licenses (15,769) comprise 4% of all hunting licenses. An annual non resident hunting license (for deer) costs $151.50

Georgia:

-non resident fishing licenses (102,906) comprise 13% of all fishing licenses. An annual non resident fishing license (for saltwater) costs $45
-non resident hunting licenses (144,964) comprise 14% of all hunting licenses. An annual non resident hunting license (for deer) costs $205

Based on license sales over 1/3 (35%) of the fishing "pressure" on Florida comes from non residents. In Georgia, less than 1/5 (14%) of the hunting "pressure" comes from non residents.

The non resident costs for an annual saltwater fishing in Florida or Georgia is about the same ($45 or $47). The non resident costs for an annual hunting license (for deer) is significantly greater in Georgia ($205) compared to Florida ($151.50).

If, in Georgia, where non resident hunting "pressure" is less than 1/5 of all "pressure" and Georgia charges non residents significantly more for deer hunting, then in Florida, where non resident fishing "pressure" is more than 1/3 of all "pressure" serious consideration should be given to charging non residents significantly more for saltwater fishing.

Many factors and variables influence population dynamics of fisheries. One of the easiest factors to control is the number of anglers (which always has been and is now without limit because virtually anyone and everybody can buy a fishing license). To help preserve and protect fisheries, regulations of harvest seasons and limits are typically employed, despite such tools being inexact.

A more exacting management tool that could - and should be employed to control "pressure" and harvest would be more careful and precise management of the number of anglers.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
data on licenses 2015 (most current available)
https://wsfrprograms.fws.gov/subpages/L ... ishing.htm
https://wsfrprograms.fws.gov/subpages/l ... unting.htm
info on cost of licenses
https://georgia.gov/popular-topic/getti ... ng-license
http://www.taylorcountytaxcollector.com ... tm#Hunting and Fishing Price List

Didn't take him long to make this about the redfish limit change, I'm suprised it took him this long. I'd say don't feed the troll and he will go away. But he won't until he's run off. Look forward to pages and pages of irrelevant cut and paste information.
I'm with you Capt Dave, 5 fish limit on sheepies and flounder. There is very little meat on a 12" sheepie ( but a 12" flounder fried whole....yum), so I wouldn't mind seeing a slot size increase.

Wish they'd look at the trout population and closing February again.

mpa_72001 wrote:Wish they'd look at the trout population and closing February again.

OMG and I thought this was a fishing forum for fishermen and friends. I hate to ask about the folks from Alabama

mpa_72001 wrote:Wish they'd look at the trout population and closing February again.

In that on-line comment section you can select the above species (flounder, sheepshead and TT) or something else, so you could easily make that suggestion and the reasons why, MPA.

Hey Silverking, all jokes aside I am with you on this one

Here's some of my input already sent to FWC regarding flounder:

Gigging of flounder using artificial lighting should be prohibited - nothing less nothing more than "shooting ducks in a barrel".

Recreational fishing for flounder harvest should be restricted solely to hook and line. Technological advances, as well as lowering costs for commercially available underwater lighting, gives man a grossly-imbalanced and unfair advantage vs. the flounders' God-given natural abilities, behavior and instincts.

And before altering daily bag limits, size ranges, etc., regulations for flounder (or sheepshead or tripletail) clearly demonstrate to and show recreational anglers SCIENTIFIC justification for doing so.

Let's see whether FWC Commissioners pay heed to, or even acknowledge, anglers' input on flounder, sheepshead, tripletail.

Hi 2SALTY, I have just got to ask, do you fish, hunt or own a boat???