So following up on the Gag discussion

This area is for general discussions about fishing, rigging, baits, etc.
Image

Moderators: bman, Chalk, Tom Keels

User avatar
fishinfool
Site Sponsor
Posts: 3094
Joined: June 17th, 2009, 8:58 pm

Re: So following up on the Gag discussion

Post by fishinfool »

doomtrpr_z71 wrote: February 19th, 2024, 10:33 pm So following up, the reason the average length of gags is 160mm is because they count the releases as 0 so that reduces the total length. And it's total length in the data, so adjusting the data to actual catches and averaging the length to per fish instead of total length the data shows an average harvest length of 638mm which is 25in. All of the releases they still count really throws the data all out of whack.

If you break it down to just the samples of grouper season:

10 are ocean greater than 3 miles off shore
657mm average length

16 are west Florida less than 10 miles off shore
611mm average length

11 are west Florida greater than 10miles off shore
504mm average length

So far the samples are all a mix of charters and private boats

Then when you select for inland it gets stupid....

We have our one lucky guy that catches one from shore, but then we have 5 surveys of charters and private boats with catches inland, 508mm average
length.....


It's almost like they are even counting people catching shorts and getting busted with them in the data as a survey.....

The reason the head boat catch estimate was so low is because they only had 2 samples, both were shorts so they were only releases and have a catch of zero.


Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk
Is this data based on roughly 50 samples? If so, how can any reliable estimates be made? I understand how the commercial data can be more accurate due to reported catch logs, but a higher sample rate from recreational anglers would be needed for any reliable data.
doomtrpr_z71
Posts: 802
Joined: March 3rd, 2015, 1:09 pm

Re: So following up on the Gag discussion

Post by doomtrpr_z71 »

fishinfool wrote:
doomtrpr_z71 wrote: February 19th, 2024, 10:33 pm So following up, the reason the average length of gags is 160mm is because they count the releases as 0 so that reduces the total length. And it's total length in the data, so adjusting the data to actual catches and averaging the length to per fish instead of total length the data shows an average harvest length of 638mm which is 25in. All of the releases they still count really throws the data all out of whack.

If you break it down to just the samples of grouper season:

10 are ocean greater than 3 miles off shore
657mm average length

16 are west Florida less than 10 miles off shore
611mm average length

11 are west Florida greater than 10miles off shore
504mm average length

So far the samples are all a mix of charters and private boats

Then when you select for inland it gets stupid....

We have our one lucky guy that catches one from shore, but then we have 5 surveys of charters and private boats with catches inland, 508mm average
length.....


It's almost like they are even counting people catching shorts and getting busted with them in the data as a survey.....

The reason the head boat catch estimate was so low is because they only had 2 samples, both were shorts so they were only releases and have a catch of zero.


Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk
Is this data based on roughly 50 samples? If so, how can any reliable estimates be made? I understand how the commercial data can be more accurate due to reported catch logs, but a higher sample rate from recreational anglers would be needed for any reliable data.
No, the data is based on weighted averages, the caught fish are weighted heavier, the whole 734 is what the data is based on, the 50 are just the samples that are actually relevant and actually caught during the season.

I have the SAS code for the model and I'm going to try and run it on just the relevant dataset during my safety training today since I'll be bored.

Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk

boomhauer
Posts: 129
Joined: January 21st, 2002, 8:00 pm

Re: So following up on the Gag discussion

Post by boomhauer »

We get hosed either way…. If we tell a surveyor we caught a limit, then we are catching too many……. If we say we caught none, then there are no fish so they have to close it.
No win

I can tell you that we have been super thrilled at what we are seeing out there diving…

More big and small gags everywhere
Red grouper steadily returning from last red tide.
Hogfish everywhere
Great numbers of mangos

We dive mostly inside 70 so don’t see big schools of RS , but the ones we see are sows.

Even with the current abundance, we still only want a few nice fish to take home…. Just being out there is great!

Unfortunately the Feds could care less what we are seeing with our own eyes.
John21:6
Posts: 200
Joined: October 14th, 2017, 7:11 pm
Location: Tallahassee

Re: So following up on the Gag discussion

Post by John21:6 »

Great analysis.

Please see if you can forward your analysis to FWC staff or their elected superiors who might care more than FWC staff.
doomtrpr_z71
Posts: 802
Joined: March 3rd, 2015, 1:09 pm

Re: So following up on the Gag discussion

Post by doomtrpr_z71 »

Well I left my laptop and only had my tablet during the meeting, so no stats have been ran and it'll be Friday before I get back.

I have zero issues doing a report to send to the FWC but I have no idea who to send it to.

Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk

User avatar
Red Beard
Posts: 658
Joined: March 16th, 2020, 9:06 pm

Re: So following up on the Gag discussion

Post by Red Beard »

Yeah that’s the thing right?

They (those regulating) supply information from sources that we aren’t sure where from and they don’t give any direct line of communication. With so many councils and boards how do you get it past a middle man to the desk of who needs to see it?

I was taught in school when writing a report to always cite my sources.. apparently this isn’t the case when making federal/state regulations. It’s always been a oneway road; they tell you what to do and give no room for feedback until there is an uproar. They (those making the decisions) only listen to suffice the crowds but go on to make the same bad decisions year after year.

To me it all seems like complete horse manure; we all know there is no way to guesstimate a population of fish from shore and still impossible on the water. (Countless variables) almost like trying to guess how man blades of manatee grass are in any given area.

I know most if not all are willing to make a change to save any fish on the water. But it’s a hard sale when the information given doesn’t add up. If it’s bad show us how; If it’s good show us how.

(Rant with way to many things put in parentheses is over). Hope everyone has a good day and a great weekend.
boomhauer
Posts: 129
Joined: January 21st, 2002, 8:00 pm

Re: So following up on the Gag discussion

Post by boomhauer »

Thinking about making a pop in visit to the new FWC office in Tallahassee….. afraid that if I try to make an appt, they won’t answer or put me off until next winter.
I just want someone to listen !!!
edif
Posts: 76
Joined: February 6th, 2016, 10:27 am

Re: So following up on the Gag discussion

Post by edif »

I think it is Great the path you are following with this might be a good idea to copy the Governor on what you let FWC in on he always seems interested on such matters...just sayin
doomtrpr_z71
Posts: 802
Joined: March 3rd, 2015, 1:09 pm

Re: So following up on the Gag discussion

Post by doomtrpr_z71 »

And speaking of more NOAA data

Image


Take a look at this, they estimate that more fish were caught inland by shore fishermen (8910) than caught within 10 miles of the coast (5983) by charter boats. They figure that 411 were caught inshore on charters. They also figure 10140 were caught on charters offshore greater than 10 miles. They have zero catch on party boats so I don't know how they figured that 8000lbs or so were caught, a WAG I guess.

And look at the inshore numbers with private boats, 14307, how can anyone believe that there were almost more fish caught inshore by private boats than the combined numbers caught by charters. But then again they have figured that 30654 gags were caught by private boats less than 10 miles off shore vs 35208 further off shore. So total catch by private boats was 80170, by the NOAA numbers that works out to an average weight of 17.46lbs per fish caught using their own math from the catch amounts.

I'm curious to see if the model matches that math.

Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk

User avatar
Red Beard
Posts: 658
Joined: March 16th, 2020, 9:06 pm

So following up on the Gag discussion

Post by Red Beard »

I’m enjoying you piece this together. Let’s me know my math is unbiased. Please continue on with this noble quest.
boomhauer
Posts: 129
Joined: January 21st, 2002, 8:00 pm

Re: So following up on the Gag discussion

Post by boomhauer »

Catch data will always have accuracy issues and extrapolation issues. What is actually out there is much more revealing…..
As divers , we have a great feel year to year what is happining with each type of fish. Ups and downs.

The other benefit of the aggregate based limit for reef fish is with the regional variations…. We are fortunate in the big bend in that we overlap all the main reef species…. Therefore, we have more opportunities since the limits are for the whole gulf. Pensacola , for instance , gets punished . Even though there total reef fish biomass May be similar to the big bend… RS make up a huge percentage. So, unless it’s RS season , they are hurting.

Actually, if you added true black grouper and mutton snapper to the aggregate … it would work for the keys and the gulf and really the Atlantic too…. No region would get the short straw. 2 fish and done… 8-9 months of the year….
I think May folks would go fo it.
illinoisfisherman
Site Sponsor
Posts: 90
Joined: February 24th, 2007, 10:19 am
Location: Oak Lawn Illinois

Re: So following up on the Gag discussion

Post by illinoisfisherman »

Really a sad state of affairs
doomtrpr_z71
Posts: 802
Joined: March 3rd, 2015, 1:09 pm

Re: So following up on the Gag discussion

Post by doomtrpr_z71 »

I am not done digging into the data so I havent let it go :-D

I had to get SAS for work to run the code but I'm curious what the numbers come out to with a data set I've edited to make it more real world.
boomhauer
Posts: 129
Joined: January 21st, 2002, 8:00 pm

Re: So following up on the Gag discussion

Post by boomhauer »

I looked at the latest gulf council meeting minutes….. mainly the public comments. No one believes the data and they know it….

Truth is, unless you are looking at commercial landings, it’s hard to have accurate tally.

I feel it is most important to know what’s really out there…. I be been diving since the 80s…. There may be more gags now than then…. Back then people kept everything and filled multiple cooolers.

Goals and expectations should be different now….
2 fish aggregate would be a good start, and is probably low enough that you would always be below the “max sustainable yield”…..

Additionally, interviews with a few reliable quality divers or charter fishermen can tell you what is out there and what the trends are….. 1st hand evidence.

Some times , simple things are the best.
Post Reply