Home Conservation Front

Shrimping industry question

ChuckcChuckc Posts: 4,397 Captain
What is the expected ratio of shrimp to bycatch? Is it thought to be true that the bycatch includes a large percentage of gamefish?

I like Shrimp as much as the next guy but I do wonder if the impact is worth the benefit.

Replies

  • JaxbchcreeksJaxbchcreeks Posts: 196 Deckhand
    Good question, im curious about this as well.i know they catch alot of whiting and flounder up here in mayport.not quite sure what other species get scooped up alot id like to find out the ratio
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 12,644 AG
    google it, there has been many studies done.
    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.
  • jad1097jad1097 Posts: 9,611 Admiral
    Chuckc wrote: »
    What is the expected ratio of shrimp to bycatch? Is it thought to be true that the bycatch includes a large percentage of gamefish?

    I like Shrimp as much as the next guy but I do wonder if the impact is worth the benefit.


    It is not worth it IMO.


    http://www.fao.org/docrep/W6602E/w6602E09.htm

    http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/advisory_panels/hms_ap/meetings/feb_2009/documents/ted_brds_foster.pdf

    http://ecowatch.com/2014/03/20/dirtiest-u-s-fisheries-exposed/


    http://fishnavy.com/image/20-lbs-of-bycatch-per-pound-of-shrimp/
    FishNavyFilmsShrimpFact4.jpg
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 12,644 AG
    Maybe they should open some of those fisheries back up.
    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.
  • Westwall01Westwall01 Posts: 5,452 Admiral
    When I was actively enforcing these regs in the Coast Guard it was stated that it was roughly 9.5 lbs of bycatch per lb of Shrimp and my experience backs this up give or take
  • ChuckcChuckc Posts: 4,397 Captain
    That's a lot of bycatch for sure. I wonder what our coastline and reefs would look like if commercial shrimping were banned?
  • Luna SeaLuna Sea Posts: 562 Officer
    The shrimpers try to stay away from reefs , they refer them as hangs and loose their gear on them .
  • JaxbchcreeksJaxbchcreeks Posts: 196 Deckhand
    Yea if u have any shrimper buddies you can probly get some good numbers from them.they log all the hangs and snags and alot of them hold good fish like reefs and wrecks that there nets get snagged on.kinda messed up how much bycatch gets tossed tho thats nuts
  • pottydocpottydoc Port Saint JoePosts: 5,165 Admiral
    Luna Sea wrote: »
    The shrimpers try to stay away from reefs , they refer them as hangs and loose their gear on them .

    Yup, a better question would be "What do our sea grass beds and the other bottoms they trawl look like?"
    The answer isn't pretty.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 12,644 AG
    pottydoc wrote: »
    Yup, a better question would be "What do our sea grass beds and the other bottoms they trawl look like?"
    The answer isn't pretty.
    Not really defending shrimpers, mainly because of the gear I lose to them but....

    Have you dove and looked? seriously?

    Off of Homosassa or CR where roller rig bait shrimpers work, then head up to CK and dive inshore where no shrimpers have worked in years..
    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.
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    Chuckc wrote: »
    What is the expected ratio of shrimp to bycatch? Is it thought to be true that the bycatch includes a large percentage of gamefish?

    I like Shrimp as much as the next guy but I do wonder if the impact is worth the benefit.


    http://www.fao.org/docrep/W6602E/w6602E09.htm
    http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/sfa/hm...rds_foster.pdf
    http://ecowatch.com/2014/03/20/dirti...eries-exposed/
    http://fishnavy.com/image/20-lbs-of-...und-of-shrimp/

    Those links are real old. Also, any international group like FAO or ecowatch is including worldwide numbers. Bycatch is much worse in other parts of the world, where TEDs and BRDs are not required. That 20 lb per lb is an oft-quoted worldwide average that is actually incorrectly high.

    I just went to the ecowatch site:
    Southeast Shrimp Trawl Fishery (64 percent discarded)—For every pound of shrimp landed, 1 pound of billfish is discarded; thousands of sea turtles are killed annually.

    64% discarded is about what the numbers below show: 2 lb of discard to 1 lb of shrimp. But, do you really think shrimp trawls catch billfish? Turtles...... they stay within their allowed takes, or NMFS would shut them down.


    For the southeast US, I did a more refined search. The "foster" pdf presentation is a bit old too, and doesn't really address the issue, except to note how much the shrimp fishery in the Gulf has declined. Several years ago, the Gulf Council mandated that shrimp effort in juvenile red snapper areas be reduced by something like 70% or areas would be closed. Since then, effort in those areas has been below the threshold and no area closures were needed.

    I found a couple of other links (some I know because I was involved as an observer in this Congressionally mandated study).

    http://www.gulfsouthfoundation.org/uploads/60_FINAL_REPORT.pdf - here is the Crib Notes answer from this study

    The bycatch to catch ratios produced from this new study were in stark contrast to an often quoted bycatch to shrimp ratio of 10:1. For the Gulf of Mexico, the bycatch to shrimp ratio was 5.25:1.0, and for the South Atlantic it was 4.5:1.0. More importantly, the generalization of a 10: 1 bycatch ratio has often been misquoted to represent the finfish to shrimp ratio when in fact, in the Gulf of Mexico the finfish to shrimp ratio was 4.2:1.0, and in the South Atlantic the ratio was 2.8:1.0. (emphasis added for next statement). BRDs used in the fishery must reduce finfish bycatch by 30% by weight, so those ratios are now <3:1 and <2:1.

    That report was from the late 90s; the following one is from a scientific publication a couple of years ago, but it basically says the same thing.

    http://www.galvestonlab.sefsc.noaa.gov/publications/pdf/938.pdf
    Based on weight extrapolations from species composition samples, bycatch to targeted shrimp (penaeid or rock) ratios by area and target species (Table 8) were 2.5 in the Gulf penaeid shrimp fishery, 4.3 for the South Atlantic penaeid, and 1.4 in the South Atlantic rock shrimp fishery. Finfish to shrimp ratios for these same fisheries were 2.0, 3.2 and 0.9, respectively.

    grouped finfish accounted for 27% (9.4 kg/h) of the total catch, followed by Atlantic croaker at 16% (5.4 kg/h), brown shrimp at 14% (4.8 kg/h), white shrimp at 11% (3.7 kg/h), crustaceans at 7% (2.4 kg/h), seatrout at 6% (2.0 kg/h), invertebrates at 5% (1.8 kg/h), longspine porgy at 4% (1.4 kg/h), and pink shrimp at 4% (1.3 kg/h). All other species accounted for 6% (2.0 kg/h) of the total weight.


    Hope this last paragraph helps answer your question about gamefish.
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    After doing all that, I wonder what you mean by gamefish........ inshore or offshore.

    Some inshore studies include the following:
    http://fishbull.noaa.gov/1002/15steele.pdf

    The standardized mean ratio of finfish bycatch to shrimp biomass for all control net sizes combined was 5.3:1 (range 2.9:1–11.3:1). The standardized mean ratio for the BRD-equipped nets (3.8:1; range 2.5:1–4.9:1) was not
    significantly different but was substantially lower than that of the control nets.

    Numerically, ten finfish species composed more than 92% of the total finfish count, and a single species, the leopard searobin (Prionotus scitulus), composed over 40%. Abundance differed greatly between seasons for nearly all fishes (Table 2). The silver jenny (Eucinostomus gula), hardhead catfish (Arius felis), gafftopsail catfish (Bagre marinus), sand seatrout (Cynoscion arenarius), and silver perch (Bairdiella chrysoura) predominated in the catch during fall. These were replaced during winter by the leopard searobin (Prionotus scitulus), blackcheek tonguefish (Symphurus plagiusa), southern kingfish (Menticirrhus americanus), pinfish (Lagodon rhomboides), and spadefish (Chaetodipterus faber).

    Ten of the finfish species that we captured are important to the recreational or commercial fi shing sectors. These are the southern kingfi sh (Menticirrhus americanus), scaled sardine (Harengula jaguana), striped anchovy (Anchoa hepsetus), bay anchovy (Anchoa mitchelli), spot (Leiostomus xanthurus), spotted seatrout (Cynoscion nebulosus), gulf menhaden (Brevoortia patronus), gulf flounder (Paralichthys albigutta), pompano (Trachinotus carolinus), and permit (Trachinotus falcatus). These species each accounted for less than 1% of the total finfish count, except for the southern kingfish, which accounted for 4.6%.

    Here is one for roller rigs:
    http://sedarweb.org/docs/supp/SEDAR_PW6_RD50_Crawford_etal.2011_FL_BRDRollerFrameTrawl.pdf

    The finfish bycatch stuff is too separated to copy paste. Some statements:

    In the Tarpon Springs samples, pinfish (Lagodon rhomboides (Linnaeus)) predominated in the finfish bycatch, accounting for 64% of the finfish bycatch......

    In the Biscayne Bay samples, the white grunt (Haemulon plumieri (Lacepède)), gulf toadfish, and fringed filefish (Monocanthus ciliatus (Mitchill)) comprised 25%, 21%, and 15%, respectively, of the total number of finfish in the bycatch

    for skimmer trawls in the northern gulf:
    http://www.galvestonlab.sefsc.noaa.gov/publications/pdf/912.pdf

    Based on weight extrapolations from species composition samples by category for both years, all areas, seasons, and depths (Fig. 3), penaeid shrimp dominated the catch at 66%, followed by fish species at 19%, nonpenaeid shrimp crustaceans at 7%, discarded penaeid shrimp at 6%, and debris at 3%.

    Weight extrapolations from the species composition samples for both years, all areas, seasons, and depths (Fig. 5) indicate that white shrimp comprised 49% of the total catch; followed by penaeid shrimp at 17%; Gulf menhaden, Brevoortia patronus, at 8%; blue crab, Callinectes sapidus, at 7%; discarded penaeid shrimp at 6%; debris at 3%; Atlantic croaker, Micropogonias undulatus, and threadfin shad, Dorosoma petenense, each at 2%; and blue catfish, Ictalurus furcatus, at 1%. All other species (54) comprised 5% of the total weight.

    So, either for offshore or inshore, I hope this gives you some idea of local Gulf shrimp bycatch.
  • TrippleTailIVTrippleTailIV Posts: 197 Officer
    another thing to note is observer coverage of the federal fleet is around 1-2%.
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    another thing to note is observer coverage of the federal fleet is around 1-2%.

    Not sure what your point is beside to belittle the reports. 1-2% of 70,000 shrimp effort days annually (a day is defined as 24 hr of dragging, so if a boat makes 1 eight hr drag a night, it takes 3 fishing days to make a shrimp effort day) over 20+ years is still a lot of repetitive, redundant data (species composition doesn't change - species live where they live). That program started in 1993. The effort data is an electronic logbook that covers 100% of the effort of about 1/3 of the fleet.
  • CountryBumpkinCountryBumpkin Fla. Piney WoodsPosts: 1,892 Captain
    BubbaII wrote: »
    Not sure what your point is..................1-2% of 70,000 shrimp effort days annually (a day is defined as 24 hr of dragging, so if a boat makes 1 eight hr drag a night, it takes 3 fishing days to make a shrimp effort day) over 20+ years is still a lot of repetitive, redundant data

    Well lets see if you can understand this point. A 1-2% sampling over a 20 year period does collect a lot of data.

    However it does not negate that you still have a possible 98% uncertainty rate over that same 20 year period.:nono

    Would you turn over your life savings to an investment firm to manage for you based on their 20 year track history from a mere 1-2% sampling of all the funds they have managed? :grin

    Now I'll move aside and let you get back to explaining to us how NMFS did such a great job managing our thriving US shrimping industry.:rotflmao :rotflmao :rotflmao
  • TrippleTailIVTrippleTailIV Posts: 197 Officer
    I think CB makes it clear, but I'll add a bit to it.

    The shrimp observer program was voluntary until 2007 (Amendment 13 for the Shrimp FMP). Up until that time vessels could 'decide' to take an observer or not, which in my mind puts a heck of a lot of bias into any data collected during the period between 1991 and 2007. Additionally, once on the boat, skippers had the habit of telling observers it was a bad idea for them to sample particular hauls on a regular basis. How do I know? Perhaps I was an observer...

    Second, with only 1-2% coverage it's quite easy for those observed boats in the fleet to change their fishing behavior so they don't encounter any species of concern or high levels of bycatch. I'm not saying all boats do this or even large percentage. Yet I maintain this is a distinct possibility it does. Example, if a boat is part of a fleet owned by a single company, it is possible that the company will eat the cost of 'bad' tows just so they meet the requirement of having an observer. Which would, again, bias the discard data collection that is applied to the ELB spatial tracks.

    The Shrimp ELBs do not record bycatch, just location points. Where you can infer what is being caught based on potentially biased observer data, but can in no way validate it. Coverage needs to be at least 10%.

    Bottom line, we need better quantification of bycatch from this fishery to understand how it affects the entire Gulf.
  • saltyseniorsaltysenior Posts: 868 Officer
    I think CB makes it clear, but I'll add a bit to it.

    The shrimp observer program was voluntary until 2007 (Amendment 13 for the Shrimp FMP). Up until that time vessels could 'decide' to take an observer or not, which in my mind puts a heck of a lot of bias into any data collected during the period between 1991 and 2007. Additionally, once on the boat, skippers had the habit of telling observers it was a bad idea for them to sample particular hauls on a regular basis. How do I know? Perhaps I was an observer...

    Second, with only 1-2% coverage it's quite easy for those observed boats in the fleet to change their fishing behavior so they don't encounter any species of concern or high levels of bycatch. I'm not saying all boats do this or even large percentage. Yet I maintain this is a distinct possibility it does. Example, if a boat is part of a fleet owned by a single company, it is possible that the company will eat the cost of 'bad' tows just so they meet the requirement of having an observer. Which would, again, bias the discard data collection that is applied to the ELB spatial tracks.

    The Shrimp ELBs do not record bycatch, just location points. Where you can infer what is being caught based on potentially biased observer data, but can in no way validate it. Coverage needs to be at least 10%.

    Bottom line, we need better quantification of bycatch from this fishery to understand how it affects the entire Gulf.

    it's rumoured that if too much bycatch is in the bag they will poison the observer and say they fell overboard during the night...
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    I think CB makes it clear, but I'll add a bit to it.

    The shrimp observer program was voluntary until 2007 (Amendment 13 for the Shrimp FMP). Up until that time vessels could 'decide' to take an observer or not, which in my mind puts a heck of a lot of bias into any data collected during the period between 1991 and 2007. Additionally, once on the boat, skippers had the habit of telling observers it was a bad idea for them to sample particular hauls on a regular basis. How do I know? Perhaps I was an observer...

    Second, with only 1-2% coverage it's quite easy for those observed boats in the fleet to change their fishing behavior so they don't encounter any species of concern or high levels of bycatch. I'm not saying all boats do this or even large percentage. Yet I maintain this is a distinct possibility it does. Example, if a boat is part of a fleet owned by a single company, it is possible that the company will eat the cost of 'bad' tows just so they meet the requirement of having an observer. Which would, again, bias the discard data collection that is applied to the ELB spatial tracks.

    The Shrimp ELBs do not record bycatch, just location points. Where you can infer what is being caught based on potentially biased observer data, but can in no way validate it. Coverage needs to be at least 10%.

    Bottom line, we need better quantification of bycatch from this fishery to understand how it affects the entire Gulf.

    I might buy a captain doing something odd for a S. Atlantic trip, which is only a few days, but not for a 4-6 wk trip in the Gulf. Fuel is too expensive to "blow one off".

    TTIV....... you say you were an observer. Do you disagree with the texts I quoted in my original post as to species composition? Longspine porgy, croaker, spot, lizardfish, sea robins - what we used to call trash fish - is the dominant bycatch. Whether you have 2% or 10% coverage, that species composition and percentages is not going to change; that's what is on the shrimp grounds.

    I remember someone stating here, a while back, as to how many baby flounder were discarded. Those aren't baby flounder; they're mostly soles (hogchokers), tonguefish (s****h flaps), and fringed flounders (Etropus).

    The original poster stated he'd heard a lot of game fish were taken. I was just trying to let him know they are not.

    CB - NMFS had nothing to do with high fuel prices and cheap imported shrimp dominating the market, which drove the US shrimp fishery to its knees. If FDA had blocked all those tainted imports, it might have been different. A year or so ago, the industry saw increased profits because of lower levels of imports, better prices, and lower fuel costs. That situation has now disappeared again, unfortunately.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 12,644 AG
    I think CB makes it clear, but I'll add a bit to it.

    The shrimp observer program was voluntary until 2007 (Amendment 13 for the Shrimp FMP). Up until that time vessels could 'decide' to take an observer or not, which in my mind puts a heck of a lot of bias into any data collected during the period between 1991 and 2007. Additionally, once on the boat, skippers had the habit of telling observers it was a bad idea for them to sample particular hauls on a regular basis. How do I know? Perhaps I was an observer...

    Second, with only 1-2% coverage it's quite easy for those observed boats in the fleet to change their fishing behavior so they don't encounter any species of concern or high levels of bycatch. I'm not saying all boats do this or even large percentage. Yet I maintain this is a distinct possibility it does. Example, if a boat is part of a fleet owned by a single company, it is possible that the company will eat the cost of 'bad' tows just so they meet the requirement of having an observer. Which would, again, bias the discard data collection that is applied to the ELB spatial tracks.

    The Shrimp ELBs do not record bycatch, just location points. Where you can infer what is being caught based on potentially biased observer data, but can in no way validate it. Coverage needs to be at least 10%.

    Bottom line, we need better quantification of bycatch from this fishery to understand how it affects the entire Gulf.
    Don't be a ***** and play coy, at least own up to your post.

    For all we know you could have been a gay **** star..

    Perhaps.
    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: 12,644 AG
    This is a result of tournament high grading.... Dead red fish everywhere.

    :grin Perhaps.
    001.jpg 98.4K
    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.
  • TrippleTailIVTrippleTailIV Posts: 197 Officer
    ANUMBER ? I didn't realize you tracked Gay ****

    Bubba: I do agree with the numbers, but, what I don't agree with is the small sample size. It would make more sense to have a large sample at first, then reduce based on data. But to start with a low sample and expand that data to such a large effort set, concerns me. Additionally, with the number or TEDs/BRDs that are attached incorrectly and corrected at the dock (good work SeaGrant!) one has to wonder about the number that aren't corrected and the amount of bycatch that results. No, I'm not saying shrimpers do this on purpose, those devices are a pain.

    Given the interest of other Councils and the EBFM concept, seems to me we will need more direct information than assumptions.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 12,644 AG
    ANUMBER ? I didn't realize you tracked Gay ****

    Bubba: I do agree with the numbers, but, what I don't agree with is the small sample size. It would make more sense to have a large sample at first, then reduce based on data. But to start with a low sample and expand that data to such a large effort set, concerns me. Additionally, with the number or TEDs/BRDs that are attached incorrectly and corrected at the dock (good work SeaGrant!) one has to wonder about the number that aren't corrected and the amount of bycatch that results. No, I'm not saying shrimpers do this on purpose, those devices are a pain.

    Given the interest of other Councils and the EBFM concept, seems to me we will need more direct information than assumptions.
    That's what popped up when I googled TripleTailIV :nono
    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.
  • Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,595 Captain
    TrippleTail and ANumber1 - please keep to the issues and lay off the gay BS.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 12,644 AG
    Tom Hilton wrote: »
    TrippleTail and ANumber1 - please keep to the issues and lay off the gay BS.
    no problem
    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.
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    Bubba: I do agree with the numbers, but, what I don't agree with is the small sample size. It would make more sense to have a large sample at first, then reduce based on data. But to start with a low sample and expand that data to such a large effort set, concerns me. Additionally, with the number or TEDs/BRDs that are attached incorrectly and corrected at the dock (good work SeaGrant!) one has to wonder about the number that aren't corrected and the amount of bycatch that results. No, I'm not saying shrimpers do this on purpose, those devices are a pain.

    Given the interest of other Councils and the EBFM concept, seems to me we will need more direct information than assumptions.

    TT-IV

    This is the summary of the work I was involved with over 3 years (voluntary participation):

    From 1993 through 1996, observers logged 2,320 days in southeast U.S. waters aboard voluntarily
    participating shrimp trawlers. Performing both characterization and BRD-evaluation sampling, these
    observers collected information on 3,162 shrimp trawl tows. This included 2,385 BRD tows, 244 TED tows,
    and 533 characterization tows.

    The Councils told the researchers to stop doing characterization tows because the percentages weren't changing; they wanted better BRD data. I don't know about you but a sample size of 1000 per year for 3 years is a darn big sample; you are not going to change percent composition or percent reduction after that many tows.

    The more recent report I cited (mandatory participation) has the following:

    From July 2007 through December 2010, a total of 608 trips were observed (Table 1). For the mandatory component, 10,206 tows targeting penaeid and/or rock shrimp (royal red shrimp excluded due to confidentiality) were sampled during 5,197 sea days of observations, with 9,264 tows (4,763 sea days) in the Gulf of Mexico and 942 tows (434 sea days) occurring in the South Atlantic.

    That is not a skimpy dataset (9000+ tows in 3.5 years is over 3000 a year just in the Gulf). And both reports, based on data 10-15 yr apart, came up with the same answers.

    Simple analogy: how many times do you have to flip a coin to begin to see a 1:1 ratio of heads and tails? How many times do you have to roll a die to start seeing a 1:1:1:1:1:1 ratio of each of the 6 die faces? To that end, how many tows do you need to say longspined porgies are X% of the catch (by weight or number) in the western Gulf?

    Oversampling doesn't give you any better answer other than increased precision (lower confidence intervals), but you don't increase accuracy. Yes, you can be extremely precise and extremely inaccurate (i.e. I can throw all the darts in a small cluster but miss the dart board entirely). Doesn't usually happen.

    More data (excessively large sample sizes - or a census) are not always better.
  • jetty bugjetty bug Posts: 5 Greenhorn
    Destruction of the oculina bank stag corals. Probably one of the best bottom fishing grounds off the coast of Florida where recreational fisherman and fisherwomen have been banned from bottom fishing for decades.
  • BubbaII wrote: »

    I just went to the ecowatch site:
    Southeast Shrimp Trawl Fishery (64 percent discarded)—For every pound of shrimp landed, 1 pound of billfish is discarded; thousands of sea turtles are killed annually.

    64% discarded is about what the numbers below show: 2 lb of discard to 1 lb of shrimp. But, do you really think shrimp trawls catch billfish? Turtles...... they stay within their allowed takes, or NMFS would shut them down.



    Spending 12 years on HMS and now in my 8th year on ICCAT, I have never heard such BS as Billfish bycatch in a shrimp trawl!
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    Spending 12 years on HMS and now in my 8th year on ICCAT, I have never heard such BS as Billfish bycatch in a shrimp trawl!

    Everyone's got an agenda, Ron. Oceana says shrimpers kill 50,000 sea turtles a year. Think there would be any left if that happened?

    Hey, I do remember reading in the paper, many years ago......... an Alabama oyster tonger caught a baby sailfish in Mobile Bay. Lets extrapolate that out by all the tong "grabs" that occur in a season and outlaw oyster tonging vs oyster dredging.
  • surfmansurfman WC FLPosts: 6,022 Admiral
    BubbaII wrote: »
    Hey, I do remember reading in the paper, many years ago......... an Alabama oyster tonger caught a baby sailfish in Mobile Bay. Lets extrapolate that out by all the tong "grabs" that occur in a season and outlaw oyster tonging vs oyster dredging.

    I think that would be a reasonable NMFS method.
    Tight Lines, Steve
    My posts are my opinion only.

    Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for.  Will Rogers
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