Comments for Closing Commercial Fishing on the Mosquito Lagoon MINWR - Page 2
REPORTSREGIONSFORECASTPHOTOSBOATINGHOW-TOSPORTFISHGEARVIDEOSSTORE
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 62
  1. #11
    Senior Member ANUMBER1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Ozello Fl.
    Posts
    8,101
    So none of y'all believe that fish and game management should be science or data driven?
    If that's the case then why bother with stock assessments/AP's or any rules at all.

    Ron, I believe that FWC has a far better handle on state waters than the feds do outside of them.
    Rec catch on trout is fairly consistent @ 3 mp/year and make up 98% of the total harvest.

    Yeah, let's make rules based on emotion like the bear hunt debacle.
    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. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    823
    Quote Originally Posted by ANUMBER1 View Post
    So none of y'all believe that fish and game management should be science or data driven?
    If that's the case then why bother with stock assessments/AP's or any rules at all.
    Non sequitur. Nobody has made that claim, the validity/accuracy of the 8,400 lb. of trout a day is being called into question. Your retort that we don't believe in science driven management is deflection and/or moving goal post at best. The short version is you are fighting an argument nobody made. I would personally like to see in detail how that number was derived. I searched via Google and was not able to collaborate your stated value. By all means point me in the right direction.

    Edit
    And for the purpose of clarity, I get FWC's workshop on speckled trout listed the harvest at over ~3,000,000 lbs a year, which equates to ~8,400 lbs a day. My question/curiosity (and likely others as well) isn't the basic math being presented. But the deeper dive on where the 3,000,000 lbs a year estimate came from.

    I noted that the FWC's presentation has absolute no references for their 3,000,000 lbs. a year estimate which I find bothersome. I was taught in graduate school that facts are not presented without references. My publications have dozens upon dozens of references. Anytime I see 'facts' being presented, especially online, without references... my knee jerk reaction skepticism. But to be fair, their numbers could be accurate. I can't say in either direction, because I cannot find a detailed explanation via a protocol on how those numbers where tabulated. Again, by all means point me (us) in the right direction.
    Last edited by kellercl; 08-27-2017 at 11:47 AM.

  3. #13
    Senior Member ANUMBER1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Ozello Fl.
    Posts
    8,101
    The 2015 trout wasn't on their page but here is summary of how they count snook
    http://myfwc.com/research/saltwater/...sh/snook-2015/
    I'm sure that if you contacted FWRI they would be happy to explain their procedures..

    but you won't.
    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.

  4. #14
    Senior Member ANUMBER1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Ozello Fl.
    Posts
    8,101
    Quote Originally Posted by Cavanaugh68 View Post
    So have thousands of local recreational anglers and people that have an interest in "sport" fishing here. And yes we have heard about paperwork from a time and a land long ago. But this is now and things change so we will see what happens there. Like I said, should that happen then a massive push to make trout and drum a game fish will simply solve that with no issues what so ever.

    Also where do you get that number? The 8,400 " sportie" (as you like to call us) harvest in 5.8 days?

    Because I find it almost impossible for your or any one to really know how much trout or black drum a rec angler catches and then "harvests" in a day in Florida. We do not have to report catch logs or tell anyone.

    That is at best a guess of a figure. With a margin of error +/- 99%
    I'll just stick with a legal and binding agreement with the feds from long ago.
    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.

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Sebastian
    Posts
    18,031
    Quote Originally Posted by Cavanaugh68 View Post
    Not even close to the same thing. I fall under the same rules and laws as you do with FWC and Florida. Limits and tactics. So then what about the businesses like photographers inside the refuge? A painter who paints a sunset then sells it at a fair? Tour guides? Kayak rentals? Manatee tours? Bird watching tours? So on? What is the economic impact of that, just stopping all biz in here? There is a big difference in "each" business and what they offer and do, how they do it. Some leave no impact, some do. Some bring a huge economic positive impact to the area. Those are businesses too, that with your thought should go away then, with that rabbit hole?

    Also if they said no more fishing guides out here then so be it. I am 100% good with that. There are other waters to fish. I am talking now about how these fish are going away and not as good as it used to be, and commercial fishing does not help. Again inside the park and refuge. Not on state waters. Federal. And if they did do that, then that would most likely say no more fishing for any one at all. Including you.

    That is the whole point of the post. There is no difference between you going out with a friend and catching 5 fish and me taking a client out to fish and catching 5 fish. You and I both have the same laws to follow. Other than most likely my client has spent money on a hotel, rented a car, paid me, bought gas, ate at a restaurant, paid for airfare, possibly done other things in the area and so on. If the park said your permit now cost $1000(within reason, not $10000. That is like saying it now cost you $100 a day to launch your boat at the ramp) a year, then I would say yes. Along as they enforce all of the illegal pirate guides doing it out here without a permit. Which they do not, at all.

    Getting off subject here. You out of all people just posted in another thread not long ago how the trout are going away and not like they use to be. I am talking about how much of an impact the commercial harvest program has on the refuge and Mosquito Lagoon. I have watched in a few days schools of 5000 black drum just go away when word gets out to where they were to the commercial anglers. That same school would take 1000 recreational anglers to kill them in one day the way the law reads.

    Listen I just wanted people to see what the USFWS is looking at doing and what this means for the future of the Mosquito Lagoon and surrounding waters for recreation fishing.
    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.
    There are many roads to travel
    Many things to do.
    Knots to be unraveled
    'fore the darkness falls on you

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Sebastian
    Posts
    18,031
    Oh...and as for Trout....too bad everyone who reads or types here...didn't go to those Trout meetings...Easier to type...than to *DO*

    I went to 2 of them...just so I could make sure I got my points across...
    There are many roads to travel
    Many things to do.
    Knots to be unraveled
    'fore the darkness falls on you

  7. #17
    Senior Member Cavanaugh68's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    290
    Quote Originally Posted by kellercl View Post
    Non sequitur. Nobody has made that claim, the validity/accuracy of the 8,400 lb. of trout a day is being called into question. Your retort that we don't believe in science driven management is deflection and/or moving goal post at best. The short version is you are fighting an argument nobody made. I would personally like to see in detail how that number was derived. I searched via Google and was not able to collaborate your stated value. By all means point me in the right direction.

    Edit
    And for the purpose of clarity, I get FWC's workshop on speckled trout listed the harvest at over ~3,000,000 lbs a year, which equates to ~8,400 lbs a day. My question/curiosity (and likely others as well) isn't the basic math being presented. But the deeper dive on where the 3,000,000 lbs a year estimate came from.

    I noted that the FWC's presentation has absolute no references for their 3,000,000 lbs. a year estimate which I find bothersome. I was taught in graduate school that facts are not presented without references. My publications have dozens upon dozens of references. Anytime I see 'facts' being presented, especially online, without references... my knee jerk reaction skepticism. But to be fair, their numbers could be accurate. I can't say in either direction, because I cannot find a detailed explanation via a protocol on how those numbers where tabulated. Again, by all means point me (us) in the right direction.
    OK, I am pretty sure they just lump the entire state into one giant statistic. So I am part of a survey program with FWC. Each week, or so they will call me. They will ask me these questions:

    1) Where did I launch at?
    2) How Long did I fish for?
    3) How many people did I take out?

    That is it. So they are "assuming" that say 3 people with me, I launched at Beacon 42 I must have kept 12 trout, 3 redfish, 15 black drum. Then at times you will see a random surveyor standing at River Breeze or somewhere asking the same thing to people as they come back. So it is all up to the people being 100% honest and accurate.

    Just like these BS catch logs we have to fill out each month for the USFWS/CNSS/MINWR. They can easily be "skewed" if someone wanted too. If they were that serious about finding out facts on exactly what is being harvested on the Mosquito Lagoon then they would be asking every single angler to do a catch log monthly out here. Just asking the guides is a joke. Because every single guide I work with, share charters with, fish with are 100% catch and release in the refuge. But the refuge management takes there orders from FWC on what the stats are, and FWC says on the Mosquito Lagoon there are more fish than ever out there.

    But the way they acquire the info from us is broad and so much error involved.

    Personally a fairly easy way with FWC is this. This will at least get a closer idea. Why not sell two types of fishing licenses in Florida. One for possession of species and one for non possession of species. Same cost, so no cost for the public or tax payers. Then have everyone over 65 and under 16 that are not required to have a fishing license register online whether or not they are non or keep.

    They then could say: "Ok last year in Florida 300,000 possession licensees were sold and 253,000 non possession were sold".... For example. Then you have some kind of true data on paper. Because if I had the non keep license I would not be keeping a fish at risk of a ticket. So would most others, be honest.

    However after that still how do you prove that those possession anglers caught their limit, and what species or even wanted to keep fish on certain days. Let alone how many days they actually fish a year.

    I talk to the FWC survey people all the time and the way they do it just allows for way too much error.

  8. #18
    Senior Member Cavanaugh68's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    290
    Quote Originally Posted by ANUMBER1 View Post
    I'll just stick with a legal and binding agreement with the feds from long ago.
    Like I said we shall see about that. Until it goes through litigation and what the program will be stopped while it is held up in court for a decade. Again, next step is to make those a game fish. The refuge has the power to do what they want under the national parks provision. I want to see at the end of this two week comment period what was said and how many it was.

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    823
    Quote Originally Posted by ANUMBER1 View Post
    The 2015 trout wasn't on their page but here is summary of how they count snook
    http://myfwc.com/research/saltwater/...sh/snook-2015/
    I'm sure that if you contacted FWRI they would be happy to explain their procedures..

    but you won't.
    Presumptuous on your part. I'll contact them this week. The fact remains there is a lot of published numbers, most of which have no references. That isn't how science is done.

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    823
    Quote Originally Posted by Cavanaugh68 View Post
    OK, I am pretty sure they just lump the entire state into one giant statistic. So I am part of a survey program with FWC. Each week, or so they will call me. They will ask me these questions:

    1) Where did I launch at?
    2) How Long did I fish for?
    3) How many people did I take out?

    That is it. So they are "assuming" that say 3 people with me, I launched at Beacon 42 I must have kept 12 trout, 3 redfish, 15 black drum. Then at times you will see a random surveyor standing at River Breeze or somewhere asking the same thing to people as they come back. So it is all up to the people being 100% honest and accurate.

    Just like these BS catch logs we have to fill out each month for the USFWS/CNSS/MINWR. They can easily be "skewed" if someone wanted too. If they were that serious about finding out facts on exactly what is being harvested on the Mosquito Lagoon then they would be asking every single angler to do a catch log monthly out here. Just asking the guides is a joke. Because every single guide I work with, share charters with, fish with are 100% catch and release in the refuge. But the refuge management takes there orders from FWC on what the stats are, and FWC says on the Mosquito Lagoon there are more fish than ever out there.

    But the way they acquire the info from us is broad and so much error involved.

    Personally a fairly easy way with FWC is this. This will at least get a closer idea. Why not sell two types of fishing licenses in Florida. One for possession of species and one for non possession of species. Same cost, so no cost for the public or tax payers. Then have everyone over 65 and under 16 that are not required to have a fishing license register online whether or not they are non or keep.

    They then could say: "Ok last year in Florida 300,000 possession licensees were sold and 253,000 non possession were sold".... For example. Then you have some kind of true data on paper. Because if I had the non keep license I would not be keeping a fish at risk of a ticket. So would most others, be honest.

    However after that still how do you prove that those possession anglers caught their limit, and what species or even wanted to keep fish on certain days. Let alone how many days they actually fish a year.

    I talk to the FWC survey people all the time and the way they do it just allows for way too much error.
    The whole thing is interesting. I just question, or at least wonder, about the quality of their numbers. I for one have fished god knows how many hours... I have never once been surveyed, which means there is a bunch of extrapolation happening. Which works if the original data set is representative on the true mean. In this case I would wager a guess it is not. Three questions and only to guides... and that means they know how many trout are being kept.... by everybody? That makes no sense to me. Add the cherry on top that they don't publish any sort of reference or protocol on how the numbers are obtained. Just a bunch of questions spinning around, at least in my head.

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •