Home Conservation Front

Gulf SSC meeting; anyone listen in?

BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
I only caught the end of yesterday and first thing this morning (my tee time wasn't until 11 my time this morning). Anyone hear Sean Powers' presentation of their AL snapper abundance survey and the SSC discussion of that presentation? To quote Arte Johnson's old German soldier skit on Laugh-In: "Very Interesting!"

I won't express my opinion (edit: at this time) as it would bias replies, given my status here, but just curious if anyone else had the opportunity to hear that discussion and what their thoughts were on it.

Replies

  • BubbaII wrote: »
    I only caught the end of yesterday and first thing this morning (my tee time wasn't until 11 my time this morning). Anyone hear Sean Powers' presentation of their AL snapper abundance survey and the SSC discussion of that presentation? To quote Arte Johnson's old German soldier skit on Laugh-In: "Very Interesting!"

    I won't express my opinion as it would bias replies, given my status here, but just curious if anyone else had the opportunity to hear that discussion and what their thoughts were on it.

    I myself was in the MREP workshop the last 3 days listening to folks like John Carmichael and Andy
    make some "Very Interesting" comments themselves. Like John stating that their (NMFS) science which fishery
    managers use may only hit a 50% chance of certainty. What else carries similar odds?

    When I ask Andy about the various state data coming out including Alabama, the response seemed somewhat
    scripted. First it was the level of participation had problems.....then I ask how that compared to MRIP? So that
    being settled He stated that they "Jumped the Gun" in releasing the data, that they should have allowed more time
    to allow the NMFS to scrutinize it. So I ask.....were they wrong? 'Well they may be right, but they should have given it time to work through the system'. was basically the reply. No rejection of their actual findings however,
    apparently more about the timing of their release with MRIP numbers.

    NMFS science.....Flip a coin, the reliability is about the same. Pretty sad.
  • surfmansurfman WC FLPosts: 6,010 Admiral
    They need more time to figure out a way to criticize it, not support it. Simple.
    Tight Lines, Steve
    My posts are my opinion only.

    Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for.  Will Rogers
  • TrippleTailIVTrippleTailIV Posts: 197 Officer
    I missed it. I read the summary and looked at the presentation. All I could figure from those was the abundance of red snapper on/near the artificial reef zone is quite high when compared to natural reefs. The ages of fish seemed mostly to range between 3- 5(ish).

    Makes sense, if you look in an area where it's commonly known to have lots of snapper, you find lots of snapper.

    The question I have is how does this relate to the Gulf abundance. Does this mean, as some have claimed, that AL has 20X the number of snapper as what the NMFS assessment has shown? or does it mean, there is just a lot of snapper in this one area?

    When do the minutes come out?
  • Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,595 Captain
    The Alabama data has stirred up a hornet's nest at the NMFS offices - they are working as hard as they can to discredit the Alabama numbers since they clearly show that the feds' have been pissing on our leg telling us it's raining in order to justify their push to privatize our Public Trust Resources (OUR fish) when their so-called "solution" (Sector Segregation / Catch Shares) is clearly not needed.

    How could the Council even consider moving forward with an action that apportions the fish when the data is so disparate? If the Alabama data is true, then the ramifications are ENORMOUS. It would show that Red Snapper should not be classified as overfished. It would show that we have been fishing perhaps 2-3% of the fish that we should be fishing. It would show that the NMFS has been negligent, corrupt, and/or inept at doing their job and that there should be action taken to dissolve this rogue agency. How could they be SO WRONG for SO LONG on the very basic elements of fisheries management?
  • notreelynotreely Posts: 653 Officer
    A spike in 3 to 5'year old fish that have moved into luxury hi rise condos. They seem to be enjoying the amenities of their new residences and not the bedroom! The goal of the fishery is to have a large population fish in their 20's! If you pound these fish in the next 15 to 20 years without seeing more spikes in population of younger fish coming up behind them you won't rebuild the fishery. Just looked at the presentation , did not listen to the meeting.
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    notreely wrote: »
    A spike in 3 to 5'year old fish that have moved into luxury hi rise condos. They seem to be enjoying the amenities of their new residences and not the bedroom! The goal of the fishery is to have a large population fish in their 20's! If you pound these fish in the next 15 to 20 years without seeing more spikes in population of younger fish coming up behind them you won't rebuild the fishery. Just looked at the presentation , did not listen to the meeting.

    wrong presentation, notreely (I think). I think you're referencing the SEFSC reply to the Thompson graphic she presented at the last Council meeting. Although I did get to hear that discussion as well; it was amusing, to say the least. I was asking about the Dr. Powers presentation on the Alabama survey, which Mr. Hilton has been touting as showing 20X more snapper off AL than NMFS estimates for the Gulf.
  • notreelynotreely Posts: 653 Officer
    BubbaII wrote: »
    wrong presentation, notreely (I think). I think you're referencing the SEFSC reply to the Thompson graphic she presented at the last Council meeting. Although I did get to hear that discussion as well; it was amusing, to say the least. I was asking about the Dr. Powers presentation on the Alabama survey, which Mr. Hilton has been touting as showing 20X more snapper off AL than NMFS estimates for the Gulf.

    Was out of town for a few weeks and had limited internet service. Just listened to Sean powers presentation , seems to me that the great STATE of alabama abundance survey supported the last RS stock assessment. I guess Sean powers and Alabama will have to be added to the conspiracy list.
  • Even Current NMFS numbers do not add up. Roy Crabtree confirmed this only 2 weeks ago. Its the very
    reason the EDF funded groups sued recreational interest. The MRIP's effort numbers when worked into
    the assessments will show more biomass.....but that has not occurred yet This "Lag" time as he called it
    has effort showing as higher, and actually creating an artificially low stock number until the data works
    itself into the assessment numbers. The NMFS is literally using 2 sets of scales to manage with. Those
    suing to effectively shut down recreational access knew this and exploited it. There still begs to be addressed
    the great uncertainty of NMFS data. John Carmichael stated that they shoot for a 50% success rate on their data!
    Might as well flip a coin. MRIP effort numbers is also a continuing problem that has not been addressed. We
    keep hearing that the data is getting better, but have not seen the methodology claimed to improve it actually
    implemented yet. How many years ago was that ordered fixed? Something else recently brought up and had no
    answer to from NMFS....the actual Number of Gulf Red Snapper. Seems the data they use for biomass supports
    much larger average sized fish and even older average age class...but misses the recruitment numbers for increased
    total number. That is a huge difference. Apparently fishermen see more and bigger fish, but the NMFS numbers
    don't necessarily use all of the numbers in their calculations.
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    The NMFS is literally using 2 sets of scales to manage with.

    We keep hearing that the data is getting better, but have not seen the methodology claimed to improve it actually
    implemented yet.

    MRIP effort numbers is also a continuing problem that has not been addressed. How many years ago was that ordered fixed?

    Yeah, the 2013 MRIP numbers are higher than the old numbers because of the new sampling protocol implemented last year. A judge busted NMFS butt for ignoring the new numbers in 2013, since they are improved and include the fixes that were recommended by the NAS. I'm not sure why you keep claiming the fixes haven't been implemented.

    To monitor catches, where catch limits are set based on the old survey method, until the new methods and numbers can be included in new assessments, NMFS is taking those new numbers and reverting them to the old format to determine if the catch limit has been met. Not sure how many times I've heard that presented at Council meetings when I listened in.
  • So tell us, What NRC findings were implemented as ordered by Congress to address the gross overestimation of
    Recreational effort under MRFSS? Maybe it would be better to tell us what has not yet been done as required.
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    So tell us, What NRC findings were implemented as ordered by Congress to address the gross overestimation of
    Recreational effort under MRFSS? Maybe it would be better to tell us what has not yet been done as required.

    MRIP, in place now for 2-3 yr, is the change (which was not ordered by Congress) from MRFSS as recommended by the NRC.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Digital Now Included!

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

Preview This Month's Issue

Buy Digital Single Issues

Don't miss an issue.
Buy single digital issue for your phone or tablet.

Buy Single Digital Issue on the Florida Sportsman App

Other Magazines

See All Other Magazines

Special Interest Magazines

See All Special Interest Magazines

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Florida Sportsman stories delivered right to your inbox.

Advertisement

Phone Icon

Get Digital Access.

All Florida Sportsman subscribers now have digital access to their magazine content. This means you have the option to read your magazine on most popular phones and tablets.

To get started, click the link below to visit mymagnow.com and learn how to access your digital magazine.

Get Digital Access

Not a Subscriber?
Subscribe Now