Comments for Closing Commercial Fishing on the Mosquito Lagoon MINWR

2

Replies

  • duckmanJRduckmanJR Posts: 18,208 AG

    So there should be a fee for all or none. Setting commercial use aside, of course.

    Yes... and that said...I don't mind paying....but the total burden is on the hunter (commercial guides aside)...... $25 for 6 hours...sounds like a Disney park :wink
    There are many roads to travel
    Many things to do.
    Knots to be unraveled
    'fore the darkness falls on you
  • duckmanJRduckmanJR Posts: 18,208 AG
    And for the record... I am not sure that they should not close down ALL trout (take) in Brevard / Indian River / St. Lucie counties...both comm and Rec...till they get a handle on the habitat (seagrass) issue. If you read what I wrote about the Trout meetings..you will know I pressured their science guy to elaborate on how they got real time data...since they admitted they cannot get the adult fish in shallow water seines /trawls...and that his theory/ hypothesis that the fish are out in deeper water would require a purse seine.....which they did not do.
    There are many roads to travel
    Many things to do.
    Knots to be unraveled
    'fore the darkness falls on you
  • Cavanaugh68Cavanaugh68 Posts: 291 Officer
    duckmanJR wrote: »
    And for the record... I am not sure that they should not close down ALL trout (take) in Brevard / Indian River / St. Lucie counties...both comm and Rec...till they get a handle on the habitat (seagrass) issue. If you read what I wrote about the Trout meetings..you will know I pressured their science guy to elaborate on how they got real time data...since they admitted they cannot get the adult fish in shallow water seines /trawls...and that his theory/ hypothesis that the fish are out in deeper water would require a purse seine.....which they did not do.

    I did read that. I wish they would close it down until they figured out what was going on too. Honestly, I think this refuge cares nothing about the waters, the hunters, the fish or the fisherman/boaters.

    They care about the visitor center, the manatee deck and blackpoint.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 8,192 Admiral
    duckmanJR wrote: »
    Every one REQUIRES the same infrastructure....roads .... bathrooms.
    They pay ZERO towards that....
    Yeah, he glossed over that part Joe.:)
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 8,192 Admiral
    Just in case there are those that are not sure where we are talking about. (Roughly) The area in Yellow is the Mosquito Lagoon and National Park/Refuge. Run by the Department of Interior. Outside of the Yellow is basically under FWC control. However the USFWS/NPS does what ever FWC says to do when it comes to keeping fish, or data they have. Which should not be. The refuge/CNSS should be having their own independent surveys for that area in yellow.
    Maybe you should get in that wayback machine and find/read the agreement between the state of Florida (long before FWC was formed) and the feds regarding use and which entity controls the rights to those waters..
    It took several years and some $$ to find the old papers, maybe you need to invest more than just some internet posturing.

    kellerci, best available science is what we work off of, come up with a better system and set the fishery management world on fire or...:shrug
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • kellerclkellercl Posts: 880 Officer
    ANUMBER1 wrote: »
    kellerci, best available science is what we work off of, come up with a better system and set the fishery management world on fire or...:shrug

    Well science is what I do for a living. Not specifically marine biology, but still perhaps some day I will get directly involved. Hence my curiosity on the subject. The problem with working as a scientist for government agencies is the pay is rather laughable. But once I am done with the private sector, I could easily see myself getting involved with something I am more passionate about. Fisheries certainly would be of a personal interest, but not till the kids get through college/grad school.

    Edit
    Either way, getting back on topic, I still have a hard time believing the 8,400 lbs. per day is accurate. That would be an insane amount of trout. Over 3,000,000 pounds a year of trout caught by Florida recreational fisherman? Depending on size, but assuming the average is 2 lbs, that is 1,500,000 trout taken out of the water for the dinner plate a year... I suppose it is possible, but my skepticism meter is going berserk.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 8,192 Admiral
    kellercl wrote: »
    Well science is what I do for a living. Not specifically marine biology, but still perhaps some day I will get directly involved. Hence my curiosity on the subject. The problem with working as a scientist for government agencies is the pay is rather laughable. But once I am done with the private sector, I could easily see myself getting involved with something I am more passionate about. Fisheries certainly would be of a personal interest, but not till the kids get through college/grad school.
    yes sir, the state pay is not all that good, the benefit is realized some years down the road if one can stay the course.
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • DayzGonByeDayzGonBye Posts: 70 Deckhand
    kellercl wrote: »

    3,000 trout a day over 365 days a year.... that is 1,095,000 trout kept in the state of Florida per year... yeah bull****.

    Seem right to me. That's only 100 trout over 30 coastal counties.
  • DayzGonByeDayzGonBye Posts: 70 Deckhand
    kellercl wrote: »
    Well science is what I do for a living. Not specifically marine biology, but still perhaps some day I will get directly involved. Hence my curiosity on the subject. The problem with working as a scientist for government agencies is the pay is rather laughable. But once I am done with the private sector, I could easily see myself getting involved with something I am more passionate about. Fisheries certainly would be of a personal interest, but not till the kids get through college/grad school.

    Edit
    Either way, getting back on topic, I still have a hard time believing the 8,400 lbs. per day is accurate. That would be an insane amount of trout. Over 3,000,000 pounds a year of trout caught by Florida recreational fisherman? Depending on size, but assuming the average is 2 lbs, that is 1,500,000 trout taken out of the water for the dinner plate a year... I suppose it is possible, but my skepticism meter is going berserk.

    What is so hard about this? There is 1350 miles of coastline in Florida. It's not insane. A good rec guy can take limits from Tampa through the big bend and to west florida easily when they want to. Until recently you could do the same from Stuart to Jacksonville.
  • DayzGonByeDayzGonBye Posts: 70 Deckhand
    duckmanJR wrote: »
    You are *SAYING* in is not the same thing...because you...have a vested interest. It is EXACTLY the same...

    YOU....are running a business inside a National wildlife refuge... YOU are deriving INCOME from said use...

    The fact is that they have many rules for all different stakeholder groups... I pay dearly for the opportunity...to APPLY to get a permit...to use the NWR for less than 6 hours...and pay $25 for that!...If I can get one.


    Photographers = Free
    Birders = Free
    Hikers / bikers = Free
    Rec Crabbers / fisherman = Free

    Hunters...Oh heck no buddy...you are going to pay ...plenty!

    So, while I understand your position...my "rabbit hole" analogy is to point out that ANY user group can (and will) point a finger and say " What about him? "

    So really, what I am saying is...be careful...the slope can get slippery...

    For the record....I think *EVERYONE who enters...should pay something.... because the infrastructure for that birders Prius..is the same for my pick up truck.

    Great points, comm. guys are just another deflection from the REAL problems facing our fisheries and that is habitat and water quality. By the way I don't fish up there because of all the guide traffic.
  • kellerclkellercl Posts: 880 Officer
    DayzGonBye wrote: »
    What is so hard about this?

    Personally I am bothered by a numerical value, in this case ~3,000,000 lbs. per year, presented unattached. There are no footnotes, no bookmarks, no references... further more I assume this number was calculated via some sort of mathematical model, which means there should be some sort of statistical parameters in association. Such as (but not limited too) Stdev, RSD, 95% CF, t-test... and many others. Perhaps the most important being a p-value demonstrating the "researchers" verified the required sample size was meet.

    So, what I personally find so "hard" to accept is this value being tossed around in the name of science, but yet it couldn't have been reported in a less satisfactory fashion as it relates to standard operating procedures within the field. Go check out some journals if you don't want to take my word for it. The data is being presented sloppy at best, and frankly I am being overly generous. The sloppy nature makes me question the validity and rightfully so. Whomever put that deck together, clearly isn't a scientist. Perhaps the data is correct, again I can say, because they provide nothing other than randomly putting out a number with the expectation that people should just accept it as fact. I don't operate that way. Making up numbers is easy, doing real science isn't. I do not nor will I ever just accept any silly number thrown out there, not unless somebody backs it properly with documentation.

    Lastly I will admit when people form their argument without references/documentation, yeah I automatically assume there is a reason why..... mostly because, more often than not, there a reason.
  • duckmanJRduckmanJR Posts: 18,208 AG
    DayzGonBye wrote: »
    Great points, comm. guys are just another deflection from the REAL problems facing our fisheries and that is habitat and water quality. By the way I don't fish up there because of all the guide traffic.

    I'm just an old dummy....but I know what I pay....and I know who does not pay....:wink
    There are many roads to travel
    Many things to do.
    Knots to be unraveled
    'fore the darkness falls on you
  • gettinwetgettinwet Posts: 1,365 Officer
    duckmanJR wrote: »
    And for the record... I am not sure that they should not close down ALL trout (take) in Brevard / Indian River / St. Lucie counties...both comm and Rec...till they get a handle on the habitat (seagrass) issue. If you read what I wrote about the Trout meetings..you will know I pressured their science guy to elaborate on how they got real time data...since they admitted they cannot get the adult fish in shallow water seines /trawls...and that his theory/ hypothesis that the fish are out in deeper water would require a purse seine.....which they did not do.

    :Agree Until the habitat is restored, trout should be strictly catch and release.
    There are only so many casts in life, so shut up and fish!!
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 8,192 Admiral
    kellercl wrote: »
    Personally I am bothered by a numerical value, in this case ~3,000,000 lbs. per year, presented unattached. There are no footnotes, no bookmarks, no references... further more I assume this number was calculated via some sort of mathematical model, which means there should be some sort of statistical parameters in association. Such as (but not limited too) Stdev, RSD, 95% CF, t-test... and many others. Perhaps the most important being a p-value demonstrating the "researchers" verified the required sample size was meet.

    So, what I personally find so "hard" to accept is this value being tossed around in the name of science, but yet it couldn't have been reported in a less satisfactory fashion as it relates to standard operating procedures within the field. Go check out some journals if you don't want to take my word for it. The data is being presented sloppy at best, and frankly I am being overly generous. The sloppy nature makes me question the validity and rightfully so. Whomever put that deck together, clearly isn't a scientist. Perhaps the data is correct, again I can say, because they provide nothing other than randomly putting out a number with the expectation that people should just accept it as fact. I don't operate that way. Making up numbers is easy, doing real science isn't. I do not nor will I ever just accept any silly number thrown out there, not unless somebody backs it properly with documentation.

    Lastly I will admit when people form their argument without references/documentation, yeah I automatically assume there is a reason why..... mostly because, more often than not, there a reason.
    and this is the "best available science"
    http://myfwc.com/research/saltwater/fishstats/recreational-fisheries/landings



    You could suggest tags for each fish harvested sold by the state for a small fee with the fees collected used for habitat restoration/leo..

    Win win for everyone..
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • kellerclkellercl Posts: 880 Officer
    ANUMBER1 wrote: »
    and this is the "best available science"
    http://myfwc.com/research/saltwater/fishstats/recreational-fisheries/landings



    You could suggest tags for each fish harvested sold by the state for a small fee with the fees collected used for habitat restoration/leo..

    Win win for everyone..

    Thanks for the web link, I'll check it out once I get out of my meetings. I appreciate all the information, this stuff is quite fascinating.
  • bay20bay20 Posts: 1,485 Officer
    I am still trying to understand that people eat mushy trout especially out of the river.
  • dragon baitdragon bait Posts: 5,236 Admiral
    ANUMBER1 wrote: »

    kellerci, best available science is what we work off of, come up with a better system and set the fishery management world on fire or...:shrug

    EPA Chief Scott Pruitt: "Science Shouldn't Dictate American Policy"
    :hairraiser
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 8,192 Admiral
    EPA Chief Scott Pruitt: "Science Shouldn't Dictate American Policy"
    :hairraiser
    lol
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • gettinwetgettinwet Posts: 1,365 Officer
    ANUMBER1 wrote: »
    and this is the "best available science"
    http://myfwc.com/research/saltwater/fishstats/recreational-fisheries/landings



    You could suggest tags for each fish harvested sold by the state for a small fee with the fees collected used for habitat restoration/leo..

    Win win for everyone..

    Here's the problem with the "best" available science copied from the link provided:

    "The MRIP estimates more than 6.6 million recreational anglers took more than 29.3 million saltwater fishing trips statewide in Florida during 2006."

    "On average, field samplers interview 44,000 anglers in Florida annually. Field intercepts are conducted at ramps, marinas, docks, piers, beaches, and other fishing access points."

    That's less than 1% of total recreational anglers and a small fraction of 1% of saltwater fishing trips. And of those, how many were the Duckman Jr's of the world compared to a visiting tourist on a head boat or the beer drinker who tells his wife he is going fishing.....not to mention all fisherpersons are pathological liars when it comes to their preferred hobby. In other words, the term "recreational" angler is pretty broad. Extrapolating out catch/survival rates from that sample size given the wide variety of both anglers and species seems dubious at best.
    There are only so many casts in life, so shut up and fish!!
  • kellerclkellercl Posts: 880 Officer
    EPA Chief Scott Pruitt: "Science Shouldn't Dictate American Policy"
    :hairraiser

    Yeah, well... I prefer to stay out of politics... I'll just say I couldn't disagree more with Mr. Pruitt.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 8,192 Admiral
    gettinwet wrote: »
    Here's the problem with the "best" available science copied from the link provided:

    "The MRIP estimates more than 6.6 million recreational anglers took more than 29.3 million saltwater fishing trips statewide in Florida during 2006."

    "On average, field samplers interview 44,000 anglers in Florida annually. Field intercepts are conducted at ramps, marinas, docks, piers, beaches, and other fishing access points."

    That's less than 1% of total recreational anglers and a small fraction of 1% of saltwater fishing trips. And of those, how many were the Duckman Jr's of the world compared to a visiting tourist on a head boat or the beer drinker who tells his wife he is going fishing.....not to mention all fisherpersons are pathological liars when it comes to their preferred hobby. In other words, the term "recreational" angler is pretty broad. Extrapolating out catch/survival rates from that sample size given the wide variety of both anglers and species seems dubious at best.
    got anything better?
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • kellerclkellercl Posts: 880 Officer
    ANUMBER1 wrote: »
    got anything better?

    I am new to this entire thing, but why can't they just make an optional online survey/fish log? I would be more than happy to participate. I would imagine a great many agree, increasing the 'n' will increase the accuracy of the mean. Seems easy and reasonable to me.
  • duckmanJRduckmanJR Posts: 18,208 AG
    gettinwet wrote: »
    And of those, how many were the Duckman Jr's of the world compared to a visiting tourist on a head boat or the beer drinker who tells his wife he is going fishing.....not to mention all fisherpersons are pathological liars when it comes to their preferred hobby. In other words, the term "recreational" angler is pretty broad. Extrapolating out catch/survival rates from that sample size given the wide variety of both anglers and species seems dubious at best.

    Duckmanjr's of the world? ... Was that some kind of cheap shot at old people? :rotflmao
    There are many roads to travel
    Many things to do.
    Knots to be unraveled
    'fore the darkness falls on you
  • duckmanJRduckmanJR Posts: 18,208 AG
    ANUMBER1 wrote: »
    got anything better?

    Well, yes....my "anecdotal" science...is better than what they present......and....you know it! :wink
    There are many roads to travel
    Many things to do.
    Knots to be unraveled
    'fore the darkness falls on you
  • Reel TealReel Teal Posts: 2,529 Captain
    It wouldn't surprise me if they kicked them out. The refuge wants to manage as little as possible. They hate doing any work. Eventually they will lock the gates on that place unless you have 6 figures to donate every year like the Merritt island wildlife association where 2 of their officers donate over half the funds. Just follow the money and you'll soon see who the handful of people are who want you gone.

    Fishing guides will be next, then rec fisherman. A catch and release guide is nothing more than a professional fish harasser and has probably harassed the same fish more than once.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 8,192 Admiral
    Actually Lane and the regional managers favor keeping the commercial folks in the fuge.

    Not sure what is going on with the duck season though?
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 8,192 Admiral
    kellercl wrote: »
    I am new to this entire thing, but why can't they just make an optional online survey/fish log? I would be more than happy to participate. I would imagine a great many agree, increasing the 'n' will increase the accuracy of the mean. Seems easy and reasonable to me.
    funding is one reason and something about the accuracy of volunteer data? I'm not a biologist or statistician so am not sure.
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • kellerclkellercl Posts: 880 Officer
    ANUMBER1 wrote: »
    funding is one reason and something about the accuracy of volunteer data? I'm not a biologist or statistician so am not sure.

    volunteer data has accuracy concerns, but those concerns are reduced (in some cases minimized) with increased sample size via p-value. Funding is always a problem, too many people want to play but not enough want to pay.
  • wookei100wookei100 Posts: 12 Greenhorn
    I'm from Michigan and me and my wife love to fish Mosquito lagoon, We like to take a fish or two to eat, we put the rest back, I'm just responding to Comercial fishing in the lagoon, I wonder about non targeted fish and how they are affected by this. I will respond to express my feelings, and am against Comercial fishing in the lagoon to FWC, thanks for letting me know about this.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 8,192 Admiral
    wookei100 wrote: »
    I'm from Michigan and me and my wife love to fish Mosquito lagoon, We like to take a fish or two to eat, we put the rest back, I'm just responding to Comercial fishing in the lagoon, I wonder about non targeted fish and how they are affected by this. I will respond to express my feelings, and am against Comercial fishing in the lagoon to FWC, thanks for letting me know about this.

    This is why I don't like you Yankees.. don't move in my hood.. K?
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
2

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file