Gulf States Unite in Bid to Take Over Red Snapper Management from Feds

[Tightlines667]

Well Lee..your comment about W.Coast Rockfish mis-management modivated ne to attend a few scientific presentations. 

One thing I learned is that the NMFS has been able to successfully integrate state-collected, observer-recorded catch data, and independent habitat-dependent data into its latest RockFish population assesment.  I asked how much data they had, and was surprised to hear WA, OR, & CA have a combined headboat, and 6 pack annual observer data pool of over 150,000 drifts.  They are taking a more proactive approach to weighing recreactional and charter boat catch data, along and integrating state resources, and looking at a finer scale habitat and specific reef-by-reef approach in their population modeling schemes. 

So here is a case of good cooperation between the feds and states regarding pop assesments. 

Not surprisingly, the data shows shifts in certain (not site-specific China Rockfish) species distributions. 

This finer scale approach, along with better representation of headboat and 6-pack data seems a promising model, that the S. Atlantic, and GOM guys might benefit from.

[Tightlines667]

I also caught a few more presentations on the use of recreational survey, targeted, and non-targeted recreational sampling, and headboat/charter boat provided catch data on the E coast of FL, and in the panhandle region.  

One thing the FL state guys demonstrated was tremendous cooperation from the recreational, charter sector.

A second was the close ties (at least with respect to specific size-age clases) between the fed commercial data, and the state rec sector data.  However, not surprisingly, the rec sector showed an obvious bios towards landing larger/older fish, and it was stared that the commercial sector data is biased toward younger/smaller fish.  FL state data suggests, state rec data should be more heavily sampled and included in GOM or region-wide population assesments.  

Also, the pop assesment and related models seem to inadequetly account for habitat-specific, and finer scale differences in a given species.

The other thing is that my friend who worked collecting GOM Red Snapper samples out of Panama City, nust have did too good of a job..since the Fed data is strongly biases and oversampled on bandit reel boats in the region.  There were alot of smaller/younger fish landed and sampled in this sector.

The 3 or 4 age/size class pulses coincidong with favorable conditions coupled with increased restriction, suggest that the management measures are having a population-wide impact as well.

[Rancanfish]

Thank you tightlines for the info and effort.  Respect earned.

[Keta]

So here is a case of good cooperation between the feds and states regarding pop assesments.  

Not surprisingly, the data shows shifts in certain (not site-specific China Rockfish) species distributions.  

We try in Oregon and this is one of the reasons we created OCEAN.  http://www.oceaned.org/

China rockfish have never been "common", the same for quillback this far south, so loosing them is no big deal.  My problem is canaries, blues and yelloweye that are still abundant.  We do need to be conservative when it comes to harvesting fish that are 60-90 years old, yelloweye and other deep water rockfish.

[Tightlines667]

So here is a case of good cooperation between the feds and states regarding pop assesments. 

Not surprisingly, the data shows shifts in certain (not site-specific China Rockfish) species distributions.  

We try in Oregon and this is one of the reasons we created OCEAN.  http://www.oceaned.org/

China rockfish have never been "common", the same for quillback this far south, so loosing them is no big deal.  My problem is canaries, blues and yelloweye that are still abundant.  We do need to be conservative when it comes to harvesting fish that are 60-90 years old (yelloweye) though.

Honestly, I really don't know much about these species
Your attitude towards conserving the long-lived species is commendable.  The crazy thing about most of those long-lived species is that it is believed that they spend the majority of their entire lives on a single reef complex.  They give new meaning to the phrase 'home bodies'.

[Reel 224]

I sometimes wonder if the root cause of the decline of certain species of fish is actually taken into consideration in that we seam to be focused on the angling aspect more then other causes or conditions that has and have, had a tremendous impact over many decades.

To kill the snake, do we cut off the tail or the head? I have read many learned and well articulated views here so far,but how do they apply to the problem as I have just stated it? I'm not trying to be controversial rather then that I'm asking questions to see how much thought is put into this issue from all boarders. Discussion is the beginning, but listening and taking the issues to the test is most important. If we ignore those facts that we think are not important enough to consider then we are failing to do our best efforts.

Joe  

[Keta]

The crazy thing about most of those long-lived species is that it is believed that they spend the majority of their entire lives on a single reef complex.  They give new meaning to the phrase 'home bodies'.

Yup, once they go from zooplankton to fish they stay on the first good structure they find.  Off of Oregon our hard bottom habitat is surrounded by muck and moving to another hard spot rarely happens.

To kill the snake, do we cut off the tail or the head?

We need good biologists and managers with out a political agenda and no political interference.  The health of the resource should always come first.

[Tightlines667]

If you are refering to accounting for non-fishing related affects on species, they are complicated and enumerating the 'causation connection' can be challenging/ problematic, to say the least.  

In recent years there has been a shift towards examining entire ecosystem complexes, and accounting for affects of habitat and oceanographic conditions.  There are many more tools, and datasets available to scientist now days, and many expanded models have been developed to try to integrate everything into one (or several) indice(s).  However, the more factors that are integrated into this broad-sweep monitoring approach, the more assumptions, and uncertainty is introduced.  Ecosystem models and related data sets have been improving.  This approach like any other tool, has its strengths and weaknesses.  It can sometimes enlighten (especially with regards to the long-term/big scale picture), but can also mislead.  

These broad-scope models can be fit/applied to single-species complexes as well to some good affect.  A case in point are the Pacific Salmon.  There is a tremendous amount of data available, and research dedicated to Pacific Salmon (kind of akin to cancer medical research).   In recent years some of these system-wide models have yielded surprising results.  Scientist are sometimes able to predict with some degree of certainty population shifts and even future recruitment and survivability factors.

Your right that when it comes to examining fish, the lense is often directed at fishermen.  But there is a good reason for this.  Fishermen are closely connected to the fish they pursue, and can provide a valuable means of monitoring/sampling that would otherwise be very costly or difficult.  In the other hand using fishing as the only means of monitoring or directed management can be problematic.  Selectivity issues, as well as accounting for habitat, and bottom-up effects immediately come to mind.

Also, bear in mind, I am only talking about science, and monitoring...management is a whole nother ball game.

[Keta]

They do have a relatively good handle on our salmon with the exception of the drainage I live in, salmon do not need 70°+ water as it kills them.  Our river needs to be periodically dewatered, like nature did before the dams, to kill off the massive population of c.shasta and their intermediate host the polychaete worm that kill far too many Klamath Basin fish.  Non basin fish die rapidly when put into our water.

[Tightlines667]

They do have a relatively good handle on our salmon with the exception of the drainage I live in, salmon do not need 70°+ water as it kills them.  Our river needs to be periodically dewatered, like nature did before the dams, to kill off the massive population of c.shasta and their intermediate host the polychaete worm that kill far too many Klamath Basin fish.  Non basin fish die rapidly when put into our water.

Lee, funny thing is I tried to avoid any of the scientific presentations on Salmon, and especially watershed and inland stuff (not an easy task where nearly 50% of the presentations at the Portland-based conference dealt with Salmon).  I happened to catch 2 presentations on the Klamath basin Salmon, and you are absolutely correct...inland watershed management, and hot water and parasites in particular are a major problem.  Getting diverse groups to cooperate and do the right thing for the salmon is a serious challenge, especially when it bears an economic cost.

Your pretty smart for a fishermen

[Keta]

Your pretty smart for a fishermen

I try, it's real hard but I try...

I've tried for years to get the water diverted back to the upper basin wildlife refuges if not to the farms but the eco extremists are clueless and fight doing what needs to be done on the Klamath.  The Klamath system is upside down, it starts in flat land and enters the Pacific through the mountains.  Upper Klamath Lake is a dammed late eutrophic lake, even with the low dam the lake averages 6'-8' deep and is over 5 miles wide and 20 long) that gets over 70° by early July, and should be a large meadow/pasture.  Add the #### from millions of birds, the rich volcanic muck on the bottom (200' deep in some places) and the lake is an algae petri dish.

[Reel 224]

Those Fisherman that you make comment about, lead their lives in other professions as well as you. They are Doctors,Lawyers,Engineers,etc. We have more then the fishing intellect. Even those of us that are farmers also lead other lives like those that I mentioned. You can look at all the models you want but it will not tell you all of the variables that are affecting sea life. As a Field Engineer in civil Engineering, I would often times surprise PE's in our office when dealing with their so called expertise in design and application. Some times it just ain't going to work.  Not only does the problem of Retention of our lakes and streams from dams cause problems, but the many Nuclear Power plants that are discharging cooling water that is as much as 20deg above normal conditions for Streams and bays. We are not looking at the delicate balance of these conditions that man has created close enough. IMO

Joe   

[Newell Nut]

The link below is the typical catch of late on the Pastime princess. If you look closely at the catch the majority is red snappers and we were not even granted a one day season this year. Something is really wrong with the system.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/deepseafishingdaytona/albums/72157658448206851

[Dominick]

Dwight photos 12 and 13 show pretty big Snappers.  Just like Giants baseball wait til next year.  Dominick

[Newell Nut]

Dwight photos 12 and 13 show pretty big Snappers.  Just like Giants baseball wait til next year.  Dominick

Those are babies. You need to drag a 30 pounder off the reef with the tank. That will draw some sweat out of you if it does not cut you off first.  I got a 45 pounder a few months ago that Captain Al said was the largest that he had seen on the Pastime. They do get bigger.