# Ga fishing rules are changing.....



## capt stan (Jun 10, 2009)

Boys if ya like redfishing and trout fishing ya better get ready....... I have heard from an inside source trout creel is gonna be reduced as well as going down to 2 redfish per day.....it's comming.......


----------



## Kevin Farr (Jun 10, 2009)

Well isn't that just great.  

Sounds like we are going to be more like Florida with our limits.  Before we know it, we won't be able to keep anything and we'll have to fish without bait or hooks.  Maybe just go on a fish "watching" trip instead of a normal fishing trip.    


Next thing you know, we won't have any guns and bullets for hunting and everyone will just have to watch the animals and maybe shoot paint balls until someone decides that's not humane or something.   

I'm just thankful that the people in charge (rulemakers) are smarter than everyone else and can make these educated decisions for us.  

Seriously though, I hope and pray that whatever they do, it actually does benefit us as sportsmen.


----------



## pop-gun elder (Jun 10, 2009)

Crap.


----------



## Parker Phoenix (Jun 10, 2009)

capt stan said:


> Boys if ya like redfishing and trout fishing ya better get ready....... I have heard from an inside source trout creel is gonna be reduced as well as going down to 2 redfish per day.....it's comming.......



This is starting to get nasty.....Fedzilla coming after us from every direction from taxes to the fish box.


----------



## mauser64 (Jun 10, 2009)

We're on our own now boys! Live your life the best way you can for you and your family, stay off the radar screen and keep an eye out for big brother cause he's here. Have your escape plan ready!


----------



## RugerHog (Jun 10, 2009)

I wish they would just go ahead and BAN fishing hunting, nascar, guns,skeet shooting, high school football, etc. Then maybe all the spineless people in this state may stand up to the oppression we are being attacked with. There are way to many spineless people right here on GON who do nothing more than whine. They don't show up to support people trying to stop this tyranny.  They just start threads like this one, to see what kind of outrage  they can get from the spineless people among us.


----------



## mauser64 (Jun 10, 2009)

RugerHog said:


> I wish they would just go ahead and BAN fishing hunting, nascar, guns,skeet shooting, high school football, etc. Then maybe all the spineless people in this state may stand up to the oppression we are being attacked with. There are way to many spineless people right here on GON who do nothing more than whine. They don't show up to support people trying to stop this tyranny.  They just start threads like this one, to see what kind of outrage  they can get from the spineless people among us.



Smile when you say that so we'll know your kidding!


----------



## Inshore GA (Jun 10, 2009)

DAGBURNIT!! How soon we lookin at Stan??


----------



## germag (Jun 10, 2009)

RugerHog said:


> I wish they would just go ahead and BAN fishing hunting, nascar, guns,skeet shooting, high school football, etc. Then maybe all the spineless people in this state may stand up to the oppression we are being attacked with. There are way to many spineless people right here on GON who do nothing more than whine. They don't show up to support people trying to stop this tyranny.  They just start threads like this one, to see what kind of outrage  they can get from the spineless people among us.



Pretty strong statement about our membership from a brand new member.

Care to have the spine to explain exactly what you mean by that?


----------



## skiff23 (Jun 10, 2009)

If they can stop us from suppling our self  with the neccesities ,  then they can sell it to us and add tax. It is all abut the money. They aint protecting anything but their big fat wallet!! more goverment means more control means more money for the politicians .   Enough said !


----------



## Parker Phoenix (Jun 10, 2009)

RugerHog said:


> I wish they would just go ahead and BAN fishing hunting, nascar, guns,skeet shooting, high school football, etc. Then maybe all the spineless people in this state may stand up to the oppression we are being attacked with. There are way to many spineless people right here on GON who do nothing more than whine. They don't show up to support people trying to stop this tyranny.  They just start threads like this one, to see what kind of outrage  they can get from the spineless people among us.



OK, I'll bite. What people are you talking about?


----------



## RugerHog (Jun 10, 2009)

germag said:


> Pretty strong statement about our membership from a brand new member.
> 
> Care to have the spine to explain exactly what you mean by that?



For whatever reason, our society has become reactive instead of proactive. Let's look at the red snapper threads, which have all  but died. 

There are probably only 2 or 3 people actually trying to stand up against the govt on the matter, while there are scores of people willing to whine and cheer on the couple of folks. Don't get me wrong. Everyone is upset about it, but not so upset to get involved. In October when they go to their favorite restaurant and order some snapper, they get told we don't have any. You order some grouper, same thing, we don't have any. The fishermen are banned from catching the fish, you are told. Well, at this point, you slam your fist on the table, furious, not at the govt, but at yourself. You realize you had a chance to help stop the ban, but you chose to wait it out, and see what happened.

     In this scenario, you simply did not have the backbone to do what was right.  This is the way probably 98% of people are. It is easy to say that about folks on this board. Sportsmen are some of the worst procrastinators of all. You join the NRA, so someone else can fight for you. You join GCO, because you think it is right thing to do, but don't get involved. You join the RFA because you care about your fishing rights, but you want someone else to do  it for you. Your money is definetly important, but so is your efforts, as equally important.  

    So I guess, it goes without saying, that most everyone is spineless to get involved, and stand up to the govt. A lot of the people who do stand up, do so in fear. They stand up though, because they know it is the right thing to do. Just as when a real christian stands up among liberals and professes their love for Jesus Christ, and what he has done for all of us.  There are a lot of Christians out there, that won't even say grace in a restaurant, because they worry about what others may think about them. Spineless, I say.  The same goes for fishermen.


----------



## mauser64 (Jun 10, 2009)

RugerHog said:


> For whatever reason, our society has become reactive instead of proactive. Let's look at the red snapper threads, which have all  but died.
> 
> There are probably only 2 or 3 people actually trying to stand up against the govt on the matter, while there are scores of people willing to whine and cheer on the couple of folks. Don't get me wrong. Everyone is upset about it, but not so upset to get involved. In October when they go to their favorite restaurant and order some snapper, they get told we don't have any. You order some grouper, same thing, we don't have any. The fishermen are banned from catching the fish, you are told. Well, at this point, you slam your fist on the table, furious, not at the govt, but at yourself. You realize you had a chance to help stop the ban, but you chose to wait it out, and see what happened.
> 
> ...



So....... Why don't you enlighten all of us spineless folks on your high and mighty works in this matter, that would allow you to pass judgement on hundreds if not thousands of people here whom you have not met yet you seem to know so well,


----------



## G Duck (Jun 10, 2009)

RugerHog said:


> I wish they would just go ahead and BAN fishing hunting, nascar, guns,skeet shooting, high school football, etc. Then maybe all the spineless people in this state may stand up to the oppression we are being attacked with. There are way to many spineless people right here on GON who do nothing more than whine. They don't show up to support people trying to stop this tyranny.  They just start threads like this one, to see what kind of outrage  they can get from the spineless people among us.




I guess they got some outrage from you!


----------



## capt stan (Jun 10, 2009)

Inshore GA said:


> DAGBURNIT!! How soon we lookin at Stan??



 I don't have a lock down on the time line but IMHO it's reliable info.... it's comming. I hope I'm wrong. I don't know the following to be true but I have a feeling it has a lot to do with the "redfish" discussions that were hot and heavy a while back. The forces behind it appear to have gained some ground.

Just like a lot of stuff I said was comming a few years back we are and have been getting hit with. Not good news and I don't even target those fish.


How many names can one guy come up with?????


----------



## TenPtr (Jun 10, 2009)

Dang Rugerhog---------- getting pretty aggressive on the old forum here.  That was quite a deliberate judgement you made......might have jumped the gun a bit with the call out.  The ironic thing about your comments is that they are textbook examples of the typical  "all talk,no action" type..........In other words, you just went on a rant about people who talk big like you just did..Spineless?? Perhaps the pot is calling the kettle black??   ...........not saying thats the case but ya never know.  You could be the most "spineless" person on the planet for all we know. 
I have a feeling that "spineless" doesnt apply to you but maybe you should give some credentials to varify your legitimacy as a supportive sportsmen.  


That being said, I agree with what your saying.  No doubt about it.  I doubt you will find anyone on this forum who thinks otherwise.  

No hard feelings by any means.....unless you end up being "spineless"     Welcome to the forum.


----------



## TenPtr (Jun 10, 2009)

Thanks for the info Capt. Stan-   That really suprises me about the trout....much more so than the reds.  I sure wish they would spend this kind of time and money on repairing the water flow in our inlets and creeks.  What use to be rivers with sand/mud bottoms are now silty mud flats covered in marsh....many of which spend half the day totally exposed.  I would think that this would be a top priority.........total habitat destruction......a mess they created.


----------



## PaulD (Jun 10, 2009)

Yeh, I mentioned this about a month ago and nobody spoke up. If you want to do something about it I suggest you do something about Spud Woodard and the CCA. There is money invovled in this one boys. You're inshore rights are up for sale and the price on them is about $30,000, just to let y'all know.

They are talking about the fall time frame for it to change.


----------



## RugerHog (Jun 10, 2009)

Hey Capt Stan, since you are the avid sportsman you are, I want to thank you for your behind the scenes support you have contributed so far to the snapper closure and other related issues. The efforts are so far behind the scenes, that nobody anywhere has a clue about your efforts. The funny thing about names, is there really is no secret. 


Tenptr--I have a feeling that "spineless" doesnt apply to you but maybe you should give some credentials to varify your legitimacy as a supportive sportsmen. 

Just ask Capt Stan, my credentials precede me as far as my internet efforts and other efforts are concerned. I have resolved though, that a couple soldiers can't fight a war, especially when the ones you are fighting for are too busy stabbing you in the back.   It is not worth it to me anymore. I will get my fish one way or the other, and come back and sell them for 50 bucks a pound to people too sorry & spineless to simply fight  for their rights.

That old saying, If you won't stand for something , you will fall for anything, is ever so true.


----------



## dfhooked (Jun 10, 2009)

this is going nowhere fast Rugerhog "sportsman". why don't you let us know your plans and what you are doing to help stop these obstacles facing sportsmen,women and children? If you are barking the talk, why don't you act like a leader and tell folks the how, what and when to prevent said ridiculous closures of any of our beloved hobbies and professions. This would be a great start to your input on a great forum.


----------



## RugerHog (Jun 10, 2009)

dfhooked said:


> this is going nowhere fast Rugerhog "sportsman". why don't you let us know your plans and what you are doing to help stop these obstacles facing sportsmen,women and children? If you are barking the talk, why don't you act like a leader and tell folks the how, what and when to prevent said ridiculous closures of any of our beloved hobbies and professions. This would be a great start to your input on a great forum.



Why you won't show up. Did you go to the lqast couple meetings that were announced numerous times on this forum and other forums. Are you aware that public hearings were held today in Stuart,FL by SAMFC, on the future of snapper fishing,bottom fishing, and the afore mentioned reds& trout? If you are not aware of it, then you have already proven my point. 

The fact that I have gotten under some of your skins, proves my point as well. The ones who I have rubbed a bit, might actually decide the effort to protect your fishing rights might be well worth it. The ones who read and go on, are spineless.


----------



## G Duck (Jun 10, 2009)

RugerHog said:


> Why you won't show up. Did you go to the lqast couple meetings that were announced numerous times on this forum and other forums. Are you aware that public hearings were held today in Stuart,FL by SAMFC, on the future of snapper fishing,bottom fishing, and the afore mentioned reds& trout? If you are not aware of it, then you have already proven my point.
> 
> The fact that I have gotten under some of your skins, proves my point as well. The ones who I have rubbed a bit, might actually decide the effort to protect your fishing rights might be well worth it. The ones who read and go on, are spineless.



Maybe you have been to meetings, if so I would like to know how many. Being a blow hard on the web aint gonna score points with most.  I am aware of a push to decrease the limits on Tripple tail. which I believe did not pass this year , and the current Snapper Issues. This is the first I have heard Trout tied to it.


----------



## germag (Jun 10, 2009)

Well, Rugerhog, you're not making any friends on here. I'd say that if you are trying to get people to go along with you, you need a LOT of help on your persuasion and "people skills". You're just presenting yourself as a jerk on here. I'm pretty sure that's not how you really are...at least I hope not. 

In fact, your attacks and accusations on pretty much the entire forum membership would go a heck of a lot further toward _hurting_ your cause rather than helping it. You have no earthly idea who I am, what I've done, what I haven't done....you don't know a danged thing about me or pretty much anyone else on this forum.

If you treat people with a modicum of respect, you stand a much, much better chance of getting some cooperation....otherwise people will just dismiss you as a loudmouthed blowhard and simply ignore you. Then you've just hurt your cause.

I'm just finding out these things are even happening. I'll certainly get behind the cause and do whatever is in my power, but it certainly isn't due to anything you've said.

You can't judge people because they don't know. That's ludicrous. If you're such the supporter of fishing rights and the opponent to these changes that you claim to be, then I'd say that's _YOUR_ fault....you should be out there making sure everybody knows. So where the heck have YOU been? Certainly not out there spreading the word....I guarantee you there's a LOT of fishermen that don't know about this.


----------



## Hooked On Quack (Jun 10, 2009)

Help me I've fallen, and I can't get up, 'cause I ain't got no spine.  Capt. Stan sir, you have a pm.


----------



## RugerHog (Jun 10, 2009)

germag said:


> Well, Rugerhog, you're not making any friends on here. I'd say that if you are trying to get people to go along with you, you need a LOT of help on your persuasion and "people skills". You're just presenting yourself as a jerk on here. I'm pretty sure that's not how you really are...at least I hope not.
> 
> In fact, your attacks and accusations on pretty much the entire forum membership would go a heck of a lot further toward _hurting_ your cause rather than helping it. You have no earthly idea who I am, what I've done, what I haven't done....you don't know a danged thing about me or pretty much anyone else on this forum.
> 
> ...



If you're such the supporter of fishing rights and the opponent to these changes that you claim to be, then I'd say that's _YOUR_ fault....you should be out there making sure everybody knows. So where the heck have YOU been? Certainly not out there spreading the word....I guarantee you there's a LOT of fishermen that don't know about this


As long as you have been on this forum, I know that you knew about this awhile back. Shall I present you with proof you knew?  I have been a direct part of meetings on the subject of the snapper closure, all over the web, talking with members of the ASWFC, talking with RFA leadership, dealing with media, etc.  Do not sit there for a minute and think I have not done anything. It is people like yourself, who have become spinelss, because you are used to others doing it for you. Now this whole country is going to have to stand up, not just for fishing rights, but survival.
   If you really think I care how I rub people, you are sadly mistaken. Most people this day & time, walk around in a zombie trance, and the only way to get their attention is to slap them silly. Since this is the net, rubbing is the only way to attract some overdue attention.  We have not had any help from a single member of this forum. I guess you have been like others here who support us, from behind the scenes. What a crock of poop.  either you are helping, or you are against the effort.  Frankly I am thru with it, because posting about it on the net has proven useless. In a month or so, when the BAN on Atlantic bottom fishing is enacted, maybe you people will get your heads out of the sand.


----------



## germag (Jun 10, 2009)

RugerHog said:


> If you're such the supporter of fishing rights and the opponent to these changes that you claim to be, then I'd say that's _YOUR_ fault....you should be out there making sure everybody knows. So where the heck have YOU been? Certainly not out there spreading the word....I guarantee you there's a LOT of fishermen that don't know about this
> 
> 
> As long as you have been on this forum, I know that you knew about this awhile back. Shall I present you with proof you knew?  I have been a direct part of meetings on the subject of the snapper closure, all over the web, talking with members of the ASWFC, talking with RFA leadership, dealing with media, etc.  Do not sit there for a minute and think I have not done anything. It is people like yourself, who have become spinelss, because you are used to others doing it for you. Now this whole country is going to have to stand up, not just for fishing rights, but survival.
> If you really think I care how I rub people, you are sadly mistaken. Most people this day & time, walk around in a zombie trance, and the only way to get their attention is to slap them silly. Since this is the net, rubbing is the only way to attract some overdue attention.  We have not had any help from a single member of this forum. I guess you have been like others here who support us, from behind the scenes. What a crock of poop.  either you are helping, or you are against the effort.  Frankly I am thru with it, because posting about it on the net has proven useless. In a month or so, when the BAN on Atlantic bottom fishing is enacted, maybe you people will get your heads out of the sand.



I composed another response to this and then deleted it. I decided that you are not worth the effort nor the possibility of getting banned. If you are an example of the people that I have to deal with and try to work with to fight this, then it's just not worth it. I'll just keep fishing in Louisiana. You are more of a hinderance to your cause than a help. Alienating people by being a jerk to them is not the way to help. Count me out. I'd like to help, but I'm not going to put up with counter-productive, abrasive, loudmouthed, blowhard, arrogant, egotistical nitwits that are supposed to be on my side to do it.

BTW. You can't possibly prove something that's just not true. I have just found out about this ban on bottom fishing and the change in red/trout limits. I don't really care much what you think. You have just run off one more person that might have helped you. Congratulations. Up to this point I never fish the Georgia coast, but I was thinking about it. I don't have to though...I have other places to fish. I certainly would have been willing to do whatever I could though. Not now. Do it on your own.


----------



## TenPtr (Jun 11, 2009)

This is going nowhere fast.  Ruger-  I appreciate what you have done in the past,present, and most importantly the impact you will have on the future. I would go with a more encouraging approach to motivate others rather than the dictator thing you got goin on right now.  Keep doing your thing and others will keep doing theirs, its a joint effort.   I never doubted a word you said in your original few posts.  My intentions were clearly stated......... This is a public internet forum where a vast majority of its member know very little about each other...if anything at all. After a while it basically feels like you know most everyone....atleast their opinions and goals in terms of hunting and fishing.    There are some stand up guys on here, as a matter of fact there are a bunch.  The spineless ones are easy to recognize and typically vanish after a few weeks. They vanish because people get sick of seeing their silly remarks or dictator attitudes.  Your good intentions are being overshadowed by the intensity/commanding impression that being conveyed.  

Enough on that nonsense.  I couldnt agree with you more about the lack of proactive movement.  We currently have a bunch of brainwashed talking heads making decisions for us..running our country, and swiping every penny they can straight from our pockets.....Sadly, its becoming worse with each generation.  Its  far more serious for us outdoorsman than many realize.  Im right there with you all the way on this matter.  People will whine about these issues until its too late.  It takes action to see forward progress, not discussion.  That being said, why point fingers at members who took the time to read this thread??  Obviously they have an interest in the issue involving the potential change in regs....and likely have a positive role in the sport.  The ones that need motivation are not the ones reading this thread.  

Heres my attempt at being exempt from the spineless classification.....my fingers are crossed for your approval.
Right now Im more active in hunting organizations......   I am just getting introduced/familiar to the CCA as my uncle is now president of the Macon Chapter. I have been reading Tide Lines in order to get more up to date on current issues.  I look forward to future involvement in the program.  I spend alot of time down around the St.Andrews sound area.  We have a place on Dover Bluff which is directly across the cumberland river from Cabin Bluff. It was founded by my great grandfather and 2 other men in 1856.  Its a private fishing/hunting club thats very active in coastal conservation.  

This thread needs to go back to the original topic Capt.Stan posted.  If you would like to talk more shoot me a PM Ruger.


----------



## germag (Jun 11, 2009)

Boy...I'm a little slow on the uptake here. Let's think about it a little....brand new member....bashing the people he claims he wants supporting "the cause"...calling people he doesn't know from Adam "spineless" and making all kinds of rash and ridiculous comments and accusations.

It's pretty clear now...."divide and conquer". Rugerhog is actually one of the ones that are pushing the bans and regulations....he's simply infiltrating and trying to cause dissention.


Until tonight I didn't even know what the CCA was....or RFA for that matter. I had to go and google it to find out. I would think that if Rugerhog is really who and what he claims, that he would be posting links on here and trying to educate people as to who the good guys are and who the bads guys are and trying to get people involved rather than to try to intentionally alienate them.

If people like Rugerhog are actually the ones representing the interest of sportsmen, it's easy to see why we're losing.


----------



## RugerHog (Jun 11, 2009)

TenPtr said:


> This is going nowhere fast.  Ruger-  I appreciate what you have done in the past,present, and most importantly the impact you will have on the future.  I never doubted a word you said in your original few posts.  My intentions were clearly stated......... This is a public internet forum where a vast majority of its member know very little about each other...if anything at all. After a while it basically feels like you know most everyone....atleast their opinions and goals in terms of hunting and fishing.    There are some stand up guys on here, as a matter of fact there are a bunch.  The spineless ones are easy to recognize and typically vanish after a few weeks.
> Enough on that nonsense.  I couldnt agree with you more about the lack of proactive movement.  We currently have a bunch of brainwashed talking heads making decisions for us..running our country, and swiping every penny they can straight from our pockets.....Sadly, its becoming worse with each generation.  Its  far more serious for us outdoorsman than many realize.  Im right there with you all the way on this matter.  People will whine about these issues until its too late.  It takes action to see forward progress, not discussion.
> 
> Im currently more active in hunting organizations......DU, QDMA,NWTF,NRA,wheelin sportsmen.   I am just now getting introduced to the CCA as my uncle is now president of the Macon Chapter.  I look forward to future involvement in the program.  I spend alot of time down around the St.Andrews sound area.  We have place on Dover Bluff which is directly across the cumberland river from Cabin Bluff.



Sir the CCA is a crooked organization that is right there with PEW,Sierra club, etc. They claim to represent the fishermen, all the wile contributing  money to the efforts to close these fisheries. I believe people in local clubs too often do not realize what the CCA heads are doing. The CCA some years ago was a worthy org. Now they are just another con game. They are definetly AGAINST Sportsmen. 

Paul, would you please chime in here. I know these guys need more than my word on this matter with the CCA.



This is a public internet forum where a vast majority of its member know very little about each other...if anything at all. After a while it basically feels like you know most everyone....atleast their opinions and goals in terms of hunting and fishing.    There are some stand up guys on here, as a matter of fact there are a bunch.  The spineless ones are easy to recognize and typically vanish after a few weeks. 

This forum is a greta representation of all people across the state. With that said, it is easy to know who you are dealing with. I could have said the same thing about everyone in Walmart or Kroger this evening. People have their heads stuck in the sand, and just hope everything fixes itself.  The problems we face today are going to require soldiers who are willing to sacrifice all that they are to fight the problems we face. A soldier will die for the rights of the rest of us. I do not literally mean die in this case, but being a vet, I do understand what that means literally. So I can take the personal hits from the likes of Germags, etc.  Those kind of people are never going to do anything more than hinder the cause to begin with, and do just what he has said he would do, NOTHING.
  I am thru with it, because action is all that is going to work at this point, and there is only a few of us willing to put action into play. There is simply not enough interests. People would rather watch nascar and ball games, than attend a meeting where people are trying to fight the tyranny we face from fishing to living.  enough said on my part.


----------



## RugerHog (Jun 11, 2009)

germag said:


> Boy...I'm a little slow on the uptake here. Let's think about it a little....brand new member....bashing the people he claims he wants supporting "the cause"...calling people he doesn't know from Adam "spineless" and making all kinds of rash and ridiculous comments and accusations.
> 
> It's pretty clear now...."divide and conquer". Rugerhog is actually one of the ones that are pushing the bans and regulations....he's simply infiltrating and trying to cause dissention.



what a joke . You see the difference between you and I is, I will back up my thoughts without hesitation. I challenge you to come to a meeting and then you can say what you want about me. If you should get off your high horse and actually show up, then you will definetly know where I stand. It will be in front of you and most others on this matter. There are those ahead of me, that I support totally and completely, that appreciate a man of action, not just hiding behind a keyboard, like most people do.


----------



## germag (Jun 11, 2009)

RugerHog said:


> what a joke . You see the difference between you and I is, I will back up my thoughts without hesitation. I challenge you to come to a meeting and then you can say what you want about me. If you should get off your high horse and actually show up, then you will definetly know where I stand. It will be in front of you and most others on this matter. There are those ahead of me, that I support totally and completely, that appreciate a man of action, not just hiding behind a keyboard, like most people do.



No, YOU need to get off the high horse. I came here trying to find out what was going on and see what I could do...NOT to get attacked by someone like you.


----------



## RugerHog (Jun 11, 2009)

germag said:


> No, YOU need to get off the high horse. I came here trying to find out what was going on and see what I could do...NOT to get attacked by someone like you.


----------



## germag (Jun 11, 2009)

RugerHog said:


> Sir the CCA is a crooked organization that is right there with PEW,Sierra club, etc. They claim to represent the fishermen, all the wile contributing  money to the efforts to close these fisheries. I believe people in local clubs too often do not realize what the CCA heads are doing. The CCA some years ago was a worthy org. Now they are just another con game. They are definetly AGAINST Sportsmen.
> 
> Paul, would you please chime in here. I know these guys need more than my word on this matter with the CCA.
> 
> ...



What a crock. If you would spend as much time and effort trying to educate people in a civil manner as you do trying to run them down and personally attack people you don't even know, just because they aren't yet aware of what's going on or what to do about it, you might get something done. You joined this forum, what...2 weeks ago? And you think you know anything about anybody on here? You're the joke, my friend.


----------



## germag (Jun 11, 2009)

RugerHog said:


> what a joke . You see the difference between you and I is, I will back up my thoughts without hesitation. I challenge you to come to a meeting and then you can say what you want about me. If you should get off your high horse and actually show up, then you will definetly know where I stand. It will be in front of you and most others on this matter. There are those ahead of me, that I support totally and completely, that appreciate a man of action, not just hiding behind a keyboard, like most people do.



Yeah, there's a difference between me and you all right, but that ain't it.


----------



## germag (Jun 11, 2009)

RugerHog said:


>



Actually, you're the one doing all the crying and whining on here, newby.


----------



## dfhooked (Jun 11, 2009)

Mr Ruger, where can we meet you at your next meeting???? I would rather take this conversation up at a worthy cause at which point I/we can talk about this in a public forum and see how INVOLVED in the matter you are. I can promise you that if you post a valid meeting myself and one other that has posted will be there.


----------



## TenPtr (Jun 11, 2009)

goin nowhere with this Ruger


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 11, 2009)

Capt. Stan?

Not to derail the awesome job rugerhog is doing in influencing people and making friends but what is the process for changing/setting limits in Georgia?


----------



## Hooked On Quack (Jun 11, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Capt. Stan?
> 
> Not to derail the awesome job rugerhog is doing in influencing people and making friends but what is the process for changing/setting limits in Georgia?


----------



## Otis (Jun 11, 2009)

RugerHog said:


> Paul, would you please chime in here. I know these guys need more than my word on this matter with the CCA.


 
ok, since you asked me to:

1. No one here knows each other much? I would say at least 10 - 20 here know who I am and that my name is Paul.

2. Military tactics work well when teaching recruits, however; you are not dealing with recruits here. Most people have a knowledge of the game they prefer..read..they could careless about your trout. Maybe you should try showing the spread of limiting game as a whole and not just one species. Show a pattern.

3. I doubt you are do everything you say, some perhaps, but I do not know you.

4. I respect everthing Stan says on here, and by you asking for his help with the way you have behaved is an ambarrassment to him I am sure.

5. I respect your opinion, and I wish more people shared your passion for our rights. I do know though, that some people work and do not have time to follow all the politics, thus; we have a network to keep us informed. Thanks for attending the meetings, post the times and places for the next one. Also, be open to suggestions from other people here.

6. Attack me if you want, I am use to it. I have my freedom and won't give it up. Thanks for all you do to perserve wildlife for the next generation.

7. One more thing, I am a member of NRA, GCO and other organizations. I joined them before coming to Korea so they could voice my opinion while I was busy doing other things ..read..serving my country in Korea


----------



## capt stan (Jun 11, 2009)

Hooked On Quack said:


>



I'm not sure what process will be used this time around, But the last time they did it was around 2001 If I remember right. The "meeting" I attented was in  liberty county at the city hall If I remember right. There was a HUGE crowd of about 10 or 12 fishermen that showed up.I remember susan shipman making the comment of how "surprised" she was at the turn out.....Surprized by HOW MANY were there,They didn't expect that much.....

That right there says why they get what they want... It's been that way ever since. no fisherman support.

The focus then was keeping the reds limit up but trying to protect the breeding stock. there were I think, 5 options they were looking at. We all had a say and voted. This was done in other places around the coast as well.

"supposedly" they took the data and their{here we go} best available science along with what the fishermen voted for and made a decision. The slot limit was changed (downsized)and the 5 fish limit remained.

At that time Spud and the rest of the folks at the CRD were all for keeping GA limit for the fishermen and they were just getting started on the ground work with the peach state red fish program, doing surveys /meetings about stocking reds a up in wassaw sound from a hatchery in SC and watching as to what happens. I have heard Spud himself say we have the strongest redfish population on the coast ...MANY times. I really feel he believes that as well.


I also feel......times have changed,he may not have the influence he once had due to state level goverment, budget cuts ect.(JMHO)  

I have since stopped attending all the graysreef,SAFMC, snapper, redfish meetings a few years ago from lack of support from fishermen.I missed very few if any for about 5 or 6 years. In those 5 or 6 years  I did see many empty seats though.....   So to be honest from that time fwd I'm kinda out of the loop.  

 I just got a tidbit of info from a reliable source as to what they are supposedly looking at behind closed doors.(paul D  mentioned this a while back) what I heard ..confirmed it.

It seems as if the focous has changed...not for the better IMHO.


----------



## MOTS (Jun 11, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Capt. Stan?
> 
> Not to derail the awesome job rugerhog is doing in influencing people and making friends but what is the process for changing/setting limits in Georgia?


----------



## germag (Jun 11, 2009)

capt stan said:


> I'm not sure what process will be used this time around, But the last time they did it was around 2001 If I remember right. The "meeting" I attented was in  liberty county at the city hall If I remember right. There was a HUGE crowd of about 10 or 12 fishermen that showed up.I remember susan shipman making the comment of how "surprised" she was at the turn out.....Surprized by HOW MANY were there,They didn't expect that much.....
> 
> That right there says why they get what they want... It's been that way ever since. no fisherman support.
> 
> ...



Capt. Stan,

I'd MUCH rather talk to you about this issue....maybe I can get some straight answers without the unnecessary, ridiculous and juvenile personal attacks.

If someone was interested in joining the effort to curtail these new proposed rules changes, what would be the best way to go about it? Organizations to join? Organizations to avoid? Meetings to attend?

Is it too late already? Can it realistically be defeated at this time? Is it the same people going after bottom fishing and snapper fishing?


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 11, 2009)

O. C. G. A. § 27-4-130.1

(b) The board shall establish open seasons and creel and possession limits within the maximums specified in this subsection and shall establish minimum sizes within the range specified in this subsection; provided, however, that it shall be unlawful to have in one's possession or take from the salt waters of this state any red drum in excess of 23 inches in total length.........

Species                     Maximum             Maximum                       
                             Open                Daily                 Minimum
                            Season               Creel                    Size
                                                  and                         
                                               Possession                     
                                                 Limit                        
  ---------------------------------------------------------------   -------   
 (1)Spanish mackerel  Mar. 16 -- Nov. 30           40          10 -- 18 inches
 (2) King mackerel    All year                     15          15 -- 35 inches
 (3) Cobia            Mar. 16 - Nov. 30            10          20 -- 40 inches
 (4) Red snapper      All year                     20          12 -- 20 inches
 (5) Gag grouper      All year                     20          12 -- 36 inches
 (6) Amberjack        Mar. 16 -- Dec. 31           10          20 -- 50 inches
 (7) Black sea bass   All year                     35           8 -- 15 inches
 (8) Bluefish         Mar. 16 -- Nov. 30           25          12 -- 20 inches
 (9) Sheepshead       All year                     50           8 -- 16 inches
(10) Reserved                                                                 
(11) Reserved                                                                 
(12) Reserved                                                                 
(13) Tarpon           Mar. 16 -- Nov. 30           5           65 -- 90 inches
(14) Atlantic         Jan. 1 -- June 30            5           24 -- 86 inches
sturgeon                                                                      
(15) Red drum         All year                     25                14 inches
(16) Dolphin          All year                     15          12 -- 24 inches
(17)Sand tiger shark  No open season               1          87 -- 140 inches
(18) Small sharks     All year                     4           30 -- 54 inches
composite (Atlantic                                                           
sharpnose,


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 11, 2009)

"The Board" has the limit set currently at 5 per day.

From what I can gather, an assessment of stocks has been ongoing for several years and the results of that assessment, which does include input from fishermen via various input methods, will be used to evaluate future creel limits.

While I am certain the usual suspects will blast my post as they like to do, there are many Captains and other recreational fishermen on the coast who would support a decision to reduce creel limits based on that carefully produced assessment.

One point that is very clear from this thread and the other threads relative to snapper, input by sportsmen in fisheries is as abysmal as it is with input concerning game issues.

Sportsmen generally set on their thumbs until the input opportunity has passed and then howl as if they've been neutered.

Do I think the limits should be lowered?

I have no idea.

Who am I going to trust, those who flail at the wind or those who have done the research and dedicated their lives to the resource?

Easy answer.


----------



## Jim Thompson (Jun 11, 2009)

friendly fella aint he???


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 11, 2009)

Just a quick after thought, just to be clear, I have no idea if the rumor Stan has heard has any validity. I am in no way shape form or fashion implying or agreeing that there is a plan to reduce creel limits.

I will say that when I did a little research into how the limits are set this morning I easily found several articles written by or quoting various Capt. suggesting a reduction in limits. Point being that while there are some here who are upset by a potential decrease there are others who would be happy with same.


----------



## Bitteroot (Jun 11, 2009)

Jim Thompson said:


> friendly fella aint he???



Self inflicted foul hook........ and released in some shark infested MOD water!


----------



## savreds (Jun 11, 2009)

Interesting "discussion". While I haven't had the opportunity to meet Capt.Stan, I know of a few that have and from all indications he is a fine fella. 
Now I don't have a problem with reducing the limits "if" it is needed to protect the fishery. I also know that there is alot of controversy about this issue. 
As far as us "spineless" outdoorsmen, yes I'm one of them, there are many reasons why we can't all be at the meetings and have our nose to the grindstone. Work, family obligations and meeting locations are just a few of the reasons we can't participate. I would love to get involved in all of inner goings on but unfortunaltely, I can't at this stage of life. I really appreciate the people that do have the time and are willing to get involved in looking out for the sportsmans interests.
 I guess I'll have to rely on the kind folks like Stan and some others to help keep us informed and educated until I can get the spine stiffened up!


----------



## germag (Jun 11, 2009)

Jim Thompson said:


> friendly fella aint he???



Like a blue crab.


----------



## notnksnemor (Jun 11, 2009)

Jim Thompson said:


> friendly fella aint he???




I wouldn't get too worked up over him....he probably got that attitude in thedesert as a vet and it makes him shiver so bad he'll have to DASH

Stay tuned...........


----------



## TenPtr (Jun 11, 2009)

Appreciate the info Capt.Stan and MD.    That was some very useful info which answered alot of questions.  Please keep us  updated on the issue and what we can do in terms of support.  I can probably gather some quality info from my uncle who is the current president of CCA Macon chapter.  If so, I will post it on here.


----------



## brown518 (Jun 11, 2009)

I agree this has been an interesting discussion.  A general question to the forum on involvement. Would a letter writing campaign to our state reps, senators, and the WRD/CRD staff have an impact? I understand people's inability to attend all meetings, but my thought is, you have to start somewhere. I've sent letters to Chambliss and Isakson myself about my concern over the proposed SAMFC closure. No responses yet, will have to resend them. I agree, I'll only support limit reductions if our fishery absolutely needs them. They're already low in comparison to Louisiana and Texas.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 11, 2009)

brown518 said:


> They're already low in comparison to Louisiana and Texas.



Actually, I believe our limits on reds and trout are identical to Louisiana and we have a larger "slot" on reds.

The Texas limit for reds is 3 and trout is 10. The slot for reds in Texas is 20-28".


----------



## capt stan (Jun 11, 2009)

brown518 said:


> I agree this has been an interesting discussion.  A general question to the forum on involvement. Would a letter writing campaign to our state reps, senators, and the WRD/CRD staff have an impact? I understand people's inability to attend all meetings, but my thought is, you have to start somewhere. I've sent letters to Chambliss and Isakson myself about my concern over the proposed SAMFC closure. No responses yet, will have to resend them. I agree, I'll only support limit reductions if our fishery absolutely needs them. They're already low in comparison to Louisiana and Texas.


  I have written to kingston and chambliss. recieved e-mails back, but not much content to them. I have done this many times in the past on many issues from fishing to gun rights. I think if they were hit by many fishermen on the same subject that would help  because it would draw attention to the issue.But a few just don't get their attention. IMHO


----------



## Parker Phoenix (Jun 11, 2009)

capt stan said:


> I have written to kingston and chambliss. recieved e-mails back, but not much content to them. I have done this many times in the past on many issues from fishing to gun rights. I think if they were hit by many fishermen on the same subject that would help  because it would draw attention to the issue.But a few just don't get their attention. IMHO



I have written both Chambliss and Isacson and heard nothing back as of yet. It's only been a couple of months. I also sent an email to Sen. Tolleson from Perry and have not heard back from him. Maybe time to follow up.


----------



## brailediver (Jun 11, 2009)

Letters to congress & Sec. of State Gary Locke will do a world of good. Just write one short letter & send a copy to each one. It doesn't take long.

Find your Congressmen
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
GA Legislators-
Residents of Georgia are represented in Congress by 2 Senators and 13 Representatives.
Member Name DC Phone DC FAX Electronic Correspondence

Senator Saxby Chambliss (R- GA) 202-224-3521 202-224-0103 http://chambliss.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?
FuseAction=ContactUs.ContactForm&
CFID=51026269&CFTOKEN=46757234

Senator Johnny Isakson (R- GA) 202-224-3643 202-228-0724 http://isakson.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Representative Jack Kingston (R - 01) 202-225-5831 202-226-2269 http://kingston.house.gov/ContactForm/zipauth.htm

Representative Sanford D. Bishop, Jr. (D - 02) 202-225-3631 202-225-2203 http://bishop.house.gov/display.cfm?content_id=229

Representative Lynn Westmoreland (R - 03) 202-225-5901 202-225-2515 http://www.house.gov/writerep/

Representative Hank Johnson (D - 04) 202-225-1605 202-226-0691 http://hankjohnson.house.gov/contact_hank_write.shtml

Representative John Lewis (D - 05) 202-225-3801 202-225-0351 http://www.house.gov/formjohnlewis/contact.html

Representative Tom Price (R - 06) 202-225-4501 202-225-4656 http://tomprice.house.gov/html/contact_form_email.cfm

Representative John Linder (R - 07) 202-225-4272 202-225-4696 http://linder.house.gov/index.cfm?Fu...hn.ContactForm

Representative Jim Marshall (D - 08) 202-225-6531 202-225-3013 http://www.house.gov/writerep/

Representative Nathan Deal (R - 09) 202-225-5211 202-225-8272 http://www.house.gov/deal/contact.shtml

Representative Paul C. Broun (R - 10) 202-225-4101 202-226-0776 http://broun.house.gov/Contact/zipauth.htm

Representative Phil Gingrey (R - 11) 202-225-2931 202-225-2944 http://www.house.gov/formgingrey/IMA/issue.htm

Representative John Barrow (D - 12) 202-225-2823 202-225-3377 https://forms.house.gov/barrow/webfo..._subscribe.htm

Representative David Scott (D - 13) 202-225-2939 202-225-4628 http://www.house.gov/writerep/

US Sec. of Commerce Gary Locke.
http://www.commerce.gov/Contact_Us/index.htm

Denny O'Hern also works very hard to defend our fishing rights-
http://www.thefra.org/



Thanks,
Gene


----------



## brown518 (Jun 11, 2009)

I think if we could get the forum members to commit and start with a massive letter campaign, we could build upon that.


----------



## brown518 (Jun 11, 2009)

Brailediver,

Thanks for this. I'll start on my mine today.


----------



## capt stan (Jun 11, 2009)

Braildiver has been putting a lot of info out for folks on several sites, I'm just not sure they are paying attention him. He's been doing a stand up job.


----------



## mauser64 (Jun 11, 2009)

I've e-mailed and called these guys at the state and federal level and the impression I got was that they were simpathetic to the concerns of sportsmen and these issues right now but with the exception of second ammendment concerns they had bigger fish to fry (pardon the pun ) in our country at this time.


----------



## PaulD (Jun 14, 2009)

WWWWWooooooooooooeeeee, Nelly! 
Time out, hold on, and for that matter back the train up here.

This got way, way, way off point and it had blown up into allowing the anti's to open up on here with their agenda again.
I speak only for myself and the rights of anglers to have the conservative minded self judgment to keep fish based on sound and solid scientific data. OK?
Now that being said, as I stated earlier, the CCA is offering money to have regulations changed. Correct me if I'm wrong but hinging a grant on a law being passed is extremely corrupt. That's little more than buying science and laws. Much like what they are trying to do by selling LAP's in the Atlantic to allow the highest bidder to continue to fish why the rest of us loose the right to do so. That was also the CCA's idea. OK? You can all go look that one up as it was even openly published by their reps. 
Mechanicaldawg, has a vested interest in the CCA as he sits on the board up in Athens. I looked it all up. Once again, no big secret. So, he comes on here and supports this after somebody left a bad taste in a lot of y'alls mouths about this issue.
Ga does not have a more liberal slot limit than La. Go look it up! That was a lie. Also look at what he posted about the limits of redfish. The actual slot on Red Drum in Ga is 14-23' with a creel limit of 5 fish per person per day. Also, Georgia has no stocking program for redfish. Why is the CCA taking money out of Georgia and giving it to other states for their stocking programs only to try to bribe us into changing our limits to their agenda before they give us OUR money BACK?! You don't thank that $30,000 will magically "change" some research numbers why the man in charge of all of has been directly contacted by them? Especially when he is a state official in a time when state funds are not at his ready to use and hence secures his job? 
I'll bet money right now that you can look for Spud to push a bill for signing that will do this: Drop the redfish limit to 2 fish per person, change trout from 15 to 5 while putting the size limit at 15-20" with one over 20" and close the flounder season completely.
Guys, the CCA supports the selling of our fishing rights. They support the auctioning of LAP's and they have promised $30,000 if the state will take actions to change current limits.
They are not supporting improved science or improved fisheries they are simply buying people out. Just like the PEW and other special interest groups.
If our redfish stocks need to be improved and tighter regulations need to be put in place then I support it 100% but until I see a stocking program in this state and after 4 years of that program being up see that the SCIENCE dictates tighter restrictions that I will not support any action to change recreational limits. It's time that people see that the fishing community will not have our rights shoved aside in the name of government officials being bought out. It's criminal! 
Fisheries management needs to be based of science and not emotion and soft money contributions to appointed officials.
-PAUL


----------



## Six million dollar ham (Jun 14, 2009)

NOTNKSNEMOR said:


> I wouldn't get too worked up over him....he probably got that attitude in thedesert as a vet and it makes him shiver so bad he'll have to DASH
> 
> Stay tuned...........


----------



## germag (Jun 14, 2009)

PaulD said:


> WWWWWooooooooooooeeeee, Nelly!
> Time out, hold on, and for that matter back the train up here.
> 
> This got way, way, way off point and it had blown up into allowing the anti's to open up on here with their agenda again.
> ...



That all makes perfect sense. So, what is it that the unititiated such as myself can do to help? What organizations to join? What meetings to attend? I've already written letters to Saxby, and Johnny Isakson, and Gary Locke and crew.


----------



## G Duck (Jun 14, 2009)

I have heard of this recently, and am concerned. I have heard the 30k number used several times. Is that a salary to be paid to a member? after D. Harris term is up? just trying to figure it out, like germag, want to know more. Where is the U.S. Fisheries in all of this? or is that who we are talking about?
Thanks.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 15, 2009)

PaulD said:


> WWWWWooooooooooooeeeee, Nelly!
> Time out, hold on, and for that matter back the train up here.
> 
> This got way, way, way off point and it had blown up into allowing the anti's to open up on here with their agenda again.
> ...



What a pantload.

Yes, I am a CCA member and proud of it. 

However, I am no policy maker and have no authority and do not pretend to speak on CCA's behalf. 

I support them because I know they have protected and aided in the conservation (not to be confused with "preservation") of America's coastal fisheries for decades. They did so in instances when, just as now, they were opposed by some who claimed the sky would fall if we left a fish for our grandchildren.

Our coastal resources are MUCH richer because of the efforts of CCA.

I have not "come on here and support this" reduction in creel limits.

What I did say, not that anyone other you needs for it to be repeated, is that I will trust respected men & women who have studied the resource, have lived on and in the water with the fishery and who have the good of the resource at heart over pompous, self righteous, blow hard malcontents who continue to subvert forum rules by creating multiple screen names in attempts to bully others into joining their misguided band or people repeating rumors with no evidence of "corruption". You should remember that people may make the same claims aimed at you.

As for the comparison between Georgia vs. La creel limits, I suppose it is objective. I believe that with a 14" lower end of the slot as opposed to La's 16" we have a more liberal slot. At the upper end, I guess with La allowing one 27" or larger fish that aspect is more liberal, though I freely admit that I am proud we are doing a better job of protecting brood fish.

All of that aside, I believe an overhaul of Georgia's fishing regulations will occur sooner rather than later and the changes that occur will protect the resource from over fishing while holding absolute preservationists at bay. 

Those changes may or may not include reductions or increases in creel limits.

I feel certain that Georgia's CRD Management cherishes the consumptive nature of our fishery and has no intentions of restricting access to that resource more than is required to preserve it for generations.

BTW, it's not the best picture but here is my catch from this Saturday.


----------



## PaulD (Jun 15, 2009)

Straight of the CCA Ga. Athens webpage: 

Live Auction Chair: Jeff Young 

I think you were meaning to say that members of the Coastal Resources Division are getting richer because of the CCA. Not Coastal resources as pertaining to natural resources.

Also I’m very curious to know why I have brought up several times that we need to place Tarpon and large pelagic sharks such as Tigers and Hammerheads on a no take status and the CCA has failed to support it every time. Instead going after tighter restrictions on redfish, snapper, tripletail, grouper, going after reef closures and supporting selling LAP’s which would stop domestic recreational harvest and sell the rights to the highest bidder, even to go so far as to put it on an international level. That is what the CCA supports.
Do you realize that the LAP’s that the CCA are supporting selling could be sold to a fishing boat out of China and that vessel could catch snapper and grouper and sell them back to us thus sending our domestic and local revenue back to China and the only thing they would have to do is keep a log of their catch! That came straight out of the mouth of a rep from the Coastal Resources Division of Ga and a SAMFC member. The CCA supports that completely. Jeff Young (MechanicalDawg) helps that organization raise funds to lobby such actions.
I’m all for the conservation of resources when based on sound science, as I stated earlier. However, I do not and will not support taking revenue and jobs away from Americans and giving them to the highest bidder. Further, I do not support decisions based on Short sighted science and emotion. I know as a fact that Tripletail has also come up on the chopping block in the last year and is on it again now. I read today and see where the CCA is “assisting” in research being done now. Research is good but, mark my words, they will do this tagging research for 3-6 months and then say they have sufficient research to close or reduce limits there as well. Sound science comes from years of research in which results are tested and reproduced with like results. Not a week of looking at a species and then seeing what special interest group will scratch your financial back if you generate the results they want in your research. That is a heinous violation of science, constitutional rights, civil liberties and the law!


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 15, 2009)

Paul,

I hope you are better at teaching history than you think you are at espionage.

I have never attempted to hide any of my affiliations on this forum. 

You behave as if I've been trying to hide my affiliation with CCA.

I helped form the Athens Chapter. I advertised that banquet here despite your constant attacks on that effort and despite your effort it was a successful banquet.

If you are "very curious to know why" people pay no attention to you perhaps some self-reflection is in order.


----------



## Six million dollar ham (Jun 15, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Paul,
> 
> If you are "very curious to know why" people pay no attention to you perhaps some self-reflection is in order.



I'm paying attention.  His angle on here seems way more straightforward than yours.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 15, 2009)

Six million dollar ham said:


> I'm paying attention.  His angle on here seems way more straightforward than yours.



Here's my "angle":

Do what I can to help conserve our natural resources at a consumptive level for this and future generations and to base those efforts on the best science available from dedicated, trusted sources. 

You may think as you wish but that is my angle from start to finish.


----------



## PaulD (Jun 15, 2009)

Jeff, lots of people are paying attention. Lots of people care and a lot of people don't want special interest groups infringing on their rights. 
I never said you denied your affiliation. I have never been involved in any espionage and I never tried to stop any banquet and never made any attacks on that banquet. All of those comments are very untrue.

I am simply putting it out there that the CCA has an agenda to stop the recreational harvest of fish and that they are using soft money contributions to influential members of state and federal government subsidiaries to get these things accomplished. It's a corrupt and twisted organization that likes to give the public appearance of doing one thing while behind closed doors it pushes for a different agenda and in doing so violates its mission statement. Our government and its officials need not be for sale neither need be our rights.
Why does a non-profit organization want to keep there books closed to the public? How can there, further more? Why would a “Conservation” group favor the selling of LAP’s on an international level? Why would they hold private research and give it to government officials without allowing independent groups to review it. Why would they take funds raised by members and have private outings with state and local officials in which they foot the bill for a few days of entertainment? Why would they offer money to influential figures to have laws passed that they want passed? How is any of that even legal, less not ethical?! Why would a “Conservation” group take contributions from big oil companies and other companies and persons known to have strong ties with the PEW trust? It just doesn’t make a sound and secure impression as to them being for recreational angler’s rights as they like to portray to the public. The only involvement that I have stated you have with them is you do help them raise money to do these things and you do support their actions. You have made no secret of that and should have no issue with me simply restating it if you feel and have the conviction that you and they, as an organization, are doing the right thing in supporting the above stated actions. There is nothing personal or presumptuous about anything I’m stating. Anyone that believes passionately about anything, as you do, is usually not a bad person though they may be misguided or under informed.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 15, 2009)

PaulD said:


> Jeff, lots of people are paying attention. Lots of people care and a lot of people don't want special interest groups infringing on their rights.
> I never said you denied your affiliation. I have never been involved in any espionage and I never tried to stop any banquet and never made any attacks on that banquet. All of those comments are very untrue. Then why would you continue to behave as if my affiliation with CCA is big news you had to dig up? Untrue? Really? You didn't make any negative posts on my thread concerning the banquet? THAT is "untrue"
> 
> I am simply putting it out there that the CCA has an agenda to stop the recreational harvest of fish and that they are using soft money contributions to influential members of state and federal government subsidiaries to get these things accomplished. It's a corrupt and twisted organization that likes to give the public appearance of doing one thing while behind closed doors it pushes for a different agenda and in doing so violates its mission statement. This certainly is a bold statement and it is one you've made several times now. When do you intend to offer a shred of evidence?



When is it going to be time for you to back up a shred of the pantload you are trying to sell with a minute amount of back up?


----------



## PaulD (Jun 15, 2009)

Sir, I don't see on here where you posted about the banquet, you must have deleted them and I made no physical or political attempt to stop it like what could have been construed through your loose wording there, so I really didn't do anything like you are accusing me.....

As far the rest I will certainly point people to members of and previous members of your organization that are disgruntled in the actions but if you expect me to start naming names publically that would be foolish on my part to burn the bridges that we have.

Now, allow this thread to get back on point and if you wish to carry on further with me you may PM me.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 15, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> When is it going to be time for you to back up a shred of the pantload you are trying to sell with a minute amount of back up?



Paul?

You've made very serious accusations.

Are you going to back them up?


----------



## K-DAWG XB 2003 (Jun 15, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Here's my "angle":
> 
> Do what I can to help conserve our natural resources at a consumptive level for this and future generations and to base those efforts on the best science available from dedicated, trusted sources.
> 
> You may think as you wish but that is my angle from start to finish.




I have lived in Kingsland all my life. Grew up fishing in the saltwater. I was mad when the changed the trout limits from 25 to 15 and the length from 12 to 13. I havent then and still dont see a reason for them to changed them now. This is bull. I aint seen any body anywhere around here collecting any kind of data, aint seen nothing in the papers asking local fisherman about their catch. I havent seen any creel surveys going on at the ramps. Sounds like a straight up behind close dooors screwing coming to me.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 15, 2009)

That's odd?

I don't live down there. Visit to fish 5 or 6 times per year and have been surveyed a couple of times and participated in data collections just this past Saturday.

In fact, there is a freezer at the fish cleaning station at 2 Way with signage asking fishermen to tag and bag discards of their catch for study by CRD.

Evidently it has been there for some time and is not "one of a kind".

Here's a picture of a fellow fisherman participating just this past Saturday afternoon:


----------



## G Duck (Jun 15, 2009)

To compare this to duck limits. I have been duck hunting since the early 80s, and I have seen a significant drop in the numbers of ducks that pass through here each fall/winter. One does not have to be a biologist to understand, and agree with the decrease in the bag limits over the years. 
I have yet to hear people say "dang, the trout just aint here like they used to be" Maybe they do in other parts, but not here. The same with redfish.
What Im saying is, I agree with decrease in creel/bag limits if needed to protect the rescource for future generations. But, I have yet to see anyone post a linc to a US fisheries or Ga wrd report on the data and conclusions. Can anyone produce studies to back up either side? Surelly they have to be out there somewhere?
One things for sure, with a decreased creel , the boat ramps will be less crowded.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 15, 2009)

G Duck, personally, I have yet to hear anyone back up any statement that creel limits are going to be reduced.

I've read the rumors. I have not seen any evidence or heard anything concerning the issue from DNR.

As I stated previously, I have been told that the regulations are being revamped but there was no specificity on whether or not that means that creel limits will change.

It seems that folks are trying to shoot the messenger without knowing what the message is or even if there is to be a message at all.


----------



## G Duck (Jun 15, 2009)

I have not seen any evidence either. That is what I would like to see, so I can make an informed decison. Before you two come to blows, I think someone better figure out what is rumor and truth. I think we should all be on the same side. I dont think I have made any personal remarks about any mesanger (Excluding Ruger hog). If I have, I apologize.
I would hope that there would be a chance for a public forum on the issue, rather than back room political decisions.

ps. Nice mess of trout!


----------



## K-DAWG XB 2003 (Jun 15, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> That's odd?
> 
> I don't live down there. Visit to fish 5 or 6 times per year and have been surveyed a couple of times and participated in data collections just this past Saturday.
> 
> ...



Show me a freezer in Camden County.  I have never fished out of 2 way. Theres plenty of great saltwater action right here. I have never even heard any locals talking about these Freezers. I havent heard any locals talking about being survey. I reckon them freezers are easy to find if you are in the loop.  What and how do the froze remains of a few fish tell?


----------



## PaulD (Jun 15, 2009)

Well as far as backing up my “accusations” the support of the CCA for selling LAP’s comes straight from articles published by none other than the CCA itself. With you being involved in fundraising efforts for them I would think that you would know that. I mean, they did publish their support THEMSELVES. So, to quote you,” That’s no big secret.”
As far as the reduction in creel limits that came straight out of the mouth of Spud Woodard and was said in front of many anglers. No big secret there either. One thing I’ll say about Spud and his bunch is they will tell you bold face what their plans are. As far as the soft money contributions from the CCA to Spud and the Coastal Resources division I’ll say this. You people have others in place to keep you abreast of any information or actions that other groups may have or may be doing. I have the same. It came from people (plural) that have or had very, very, very strong involvement with the organization. It may have been a person who is on a board for them. It may be a person who was sitting on a board for them, but I made those people a promise on the square that I would not divulge that information. Besides, why would I want to loose such a great source of information? I can tell you this too, they didn’t just tell me, others heard it as well.

As far as you having your catch checked a couple of times a year when you fish down here 5- 6 times a year. Sir, I do not believe that at all! If you were going to use that same ratio and apply it to a person like myself that would put me being checked around 20+ times a year and I can tell you that has not happened to me or anyone else I know. I stated at a public meeting a couple of weeks ago to Spud and his biologist that I have had a fish count done on my boat once in the last 10 years and around 3 times in the last 20 that I can recall. After I made that comment one of the biologist who supports the closures asked me if it was a Coastal Resources or law enforcement boat that checked me. I stated it was law enforcement and she promptly said,” We don’t count there fish counts anyway.” When she said this 3 others rolled their eyes because she put a bullet in her own argument. This raised my questions of why we are wasting state funds and rangers times on doing fish counts if the Coastal Resources Division isn’t even using the science they are collecting. It just shows they don’t want all the research out there just what agrees with their agenda. 

Why would you even say,” I have been told that the regulations are being revamped but there was no specificity on whether or not that means that creel limits will change.”
I’m not a brilliant analyst of words and actions but if they are revamping it doesn’t that mean the same thing as changing it? I mean, you really don’t think that they are going to spend the time and money that they are to leave things as is. I’ll make a big bet on that. 

G Duck, like I said man, I’m moderate. If sound science supports it and observations of those involved back it up then I’ll support it but all this is based off of emotion and the almighty dollar and that’s not going to cut it. I have no problem catching limits of reds and trout and rarely is it that I keep that limit but it’s my right as a conservationist and fisherman to make that call in my good judgment. That’s what having rights is all about, exercising your on personal judgment. I would like to see a no take or Tarpon if we’re going to do anything.

Are you all willing to place your trust in others that our fisheries will not be changed or would you rather have a voice and be involved with it?


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 15, 2009)

K-DAWG XB 2003 said:


> Show me a freezer in Camden County.  I have never fished out of 2 way. Theres plenty of great saltwater action right here. I have never even heard any locals talking about these Freezers. I havent heard any locals talking about being survey. I reckon them freezers are easy to find if you are in the loop.  What and how do the froze remains of a few fish tell?



I didn't know about the freezer at 2 Way (no "loop" involved) until I set my cooler down next to the thing.

Just making my own list-not sure exactly all the info to be gained from discards by a biologist but I'd say:

1. Number of species in catch
2. Quantity of each specie
3. Length of each fish
4. Ear bones (help determine the age of some specie)
5. Evidence of parasites or disease? (Just guessing)
6. T-Shirt size of the fisherman (yes it was a question & they even come in my size though everyone doesn't get one)
7. ???

Anyone else have any ideas on what info can be garnered from such collections?

This was my first trip from 2 Way and I've never been out of Camden that I can remember but I was surveyed at the dock at Ft. McCallister last Fall.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 15, 2009)

PaulD said:


> Well as far as backing up my “accusations” the support of the CCA for selling LAP’s comes straight from articles published by none other than the CCA itself. With you being involved in fundraising efforts for them I would think that you would know that. I mean, they did publish their support THEMSELVES. So, to quote you,” That’s no big secret.”
> As far as the reduction in creel limits that came straight out of the mouth of Spud Woodard and was said in front of many anglers. No big secret there either. One thing I’ll say about Spud and his bunch is they will tell you bold face what their plans are. As far as the soft money contributions from the CCA to Spud and the Coastal Resources division I’ll say this. You people have others in place to keep you abreast of any information or actions that other groups may have or may be doing. I have the same. It came from people (plural) that have or had very, very, very strong involvement with the organization. It may have been a person who is on a board for them. It may be a person who was sitting on a board for them, but I made those people a promise on the square that I would not divulge that information. Besides, why would I want to loose such a great source of information? I can tell you this too, they didn’t just tell me, others heard it as well.
> 
> As far as you having your catch checked a couple of times a year when you fish down here 5- 6 times a year. Sir, I do not believe that at all! If you were going to use that same ratio and apply it to a person like myself that would put me being checked around 20+ times a year and I can tell you that has not happened to me or anyone else I know. I stated at a public meeting a couple of weeks ago to Spud and his biologist that I have had a fish count done on my boat once in the last 10 years and around 3 times in the last 20 that I can recall. After I made that comment one of the biologist who supports the closures asked me if it was a Coastal Resources or law enforcement boat that checked me. I stated it was law enforcement and she promptly said,” We don’t count there fish counts anyway.” When she said this 3 others rolled their eyes because she put a bullet in her own argument. This raised my questions of why we are wasting state funds and rangers times on doing fish counts if the Coastal Resources Division isn’t even using the science they are collecting. It just shows they don’t want all the research out there just what agrees with their agenda.
> ...



Another pantload without any back up.


----------



## wmaybin (Jun 15, 2009)

Back to the original post, I have heard this "rumor" as well.  Several times to be exact.


----------



## markmg (Jun 15, 2009)

This is the best news I have heard in a long time. Maybe our shell of a fishery will start to resemble what they have just over the 'border' in SC. Also, trying to compare our state's redfish and trout fishing to Louisiana's is laughable. Anyone who has fished LA knows that it is the best in the nation - hands down.

Venture outside of our state's waters to anywhere but perhaps NC, and you will find that there is much room for improvement here in GA. This is one guy that would like to see that improvement.


----------



## K-DAWG XB 2003 (Jun 15, 2009)

We dont have half as much saltwater coast as LA either. I think the fishing around here is fantastic. Hook up with someone in the know and you can catch as many reds, trout as you can stand. I dont know where you have been fishing. Course there aint much saltwater in Macon.


----------



## Six million dollar ham (Jun 16, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> I didn't know about the freezer at 2 Way (no "loop" involved) until I set my cooler down next to the thing.
> 
> Just making my own list-not sure exactly all the info to be gained from discards by a biologist but I'd say:
> 
> ...



This is in no way meant to be any sort of a survey of numbers or fishing pressure.  It is done strictly on a voluntary basis.  I know of at least 2 such coolers in Savannah and I've never put any of the million fish I've cleaned in them.  Also, if a person wants to reach into those coolers and trash every carcass that's already in there, no problem!  It's not secured in any way.  How scientific is that?  

Shame on you for even suggesting that this exercise by the DNR is in any way a scientific survey that measures pressure and existing population.  Myself, I've been surveyed exactly once at the ramp in the last 6 years.  Suffice it to say, I've been a lottttttt of times without any survey.  Never even been pulled over on the water.


----------



## G Duck (Jun 16, 2009)

I have never been surveyed. But believe it or not, was surveyed by some uga grad students at the boat ramp for Ducks. It was a Mottled duck survey. That was many years back.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 16, 2009)

From CRD's website:

Carcass Recovery Project

Dead Fish DO Tell Tales

We've all heard the old saying "One man's trash is another man's treasure". Well, when it comes to collecting data on Georgias saltwater sportfish this is definitely true. Every weekend, scores of anglers take to the water in search of their favorite fish, some of which they keep for the table. While some fish are headed or kept whole for cooking, most anglers fillet them, then discard the remains, much to the delight of the local crab population. To the biologist, these discarded fish carcasses are a veritable gold mine of information. Recognizing this opportunity, staff with the Recreational Fisheries Program at the Coastal Resources Division developed a program to gather these fish carcasses.


The approach is simple, yet effective. Chest freezers are placed near the fish cleaning stations at selected locations along the Georgia coast. Each freezer is marked with an identifying sign and a list of target fish species. Inside the freezer is a supply of plastic bags, information cards, and pens. Cooperating anglers can place the filleted carcasses, with head and tail intact, in a bag, drop in a completed angler information card, and then place the bag in the freezer.

What Do We Do With Fish Carcasses?
The freezers are checked every week during peak fishing times and biweekly during the off months. Bags of frozen fish carcasses are returned to the Coastal Regional Headquarters where they are stored until processing. When storage freezers reach capacity, biologists and technicians join together and work up the carcasses. During examination, biologists record species, length, and sex, before removing the otoliths, commonly called ear bones. Later, the age of each donated fish is determined by examination of the otoliths with a computerized image analysis system.

Since the autumn of 1997, over 18,000 fish carcasses have been processed for biological information. Spotted seatrout and red drum (spottail bass) are donated in the greatest quantities, reflecting their popularity with Georgias anglers. These donated fish carcasses are one of the most important sources of information on harvested fish. The ongoing Georgia DNR creel survey also provides data on the type and size of fish caught by anglers, as well as the amount of fishing effort. 


The information provided by fish carcasses is used in a variety of analyses, all of which help us better understand the status of Georgias coastal fish populations. These data can be used in a descriptive manner to examine trends in the size and age structure of a population. For example, the average length of spotted seatrout harvested from our coastal waters has increased slightly over the past few years. This means that the 13-inch minimum size limit and 15-fish creel limit are having the desired positive effect on Georgias speckled trout fishery.


Often times the data from fish carcasses are used in very sophisticated analyses such as the recent stock assessment for Atlantic coast red drum. The length and age information collected from donated red drum carcasses was sent to stock assessment scientists with the National Marine Fisheries Service.  It is important to know that you, the angler, have been a partner in the conservation of Georgias red drum.

Guides and Anglers Pitch in To Help Protect Georgias Saltwater Fishery
Support for the program has been great and over 500 anglers have donated fish carcasses. Participants are given an incentive award for each three bags of fish carcasses. However, only carcasses taken from bags with information cards can be used for biological data, and only those anglers are eligible to receive an award.  So it is very important that anglers take the extra time to fill out the card and include it with their carcass donation. The cooperation of anglers and guides is important to the continued success of the program.


Anglers often ask, How long will you keep collecting fish carcasses? As long as we use stock assessments and similar methods to manage the saltwater fisheries, we will need timely data on the age and size of harvested fish. So this program will go on as long as there is funding and the support of the angling public.


We hope that anglers will continue to participate in this program, since it is the most cost-effective way to collect this type of critical information. Likewise, we hope that marina owners and their staff will continue their generous support of these efforts. For more information about the Carcass Recovery Project contact David J. "Jeff" Mericle at (912) 264-7218.
The End


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 16, 2009)

Creel Survey

Surveying Marine Recreational Finfish Anglers in Georgia

Since March of 2000, biologists with the Coastal Resources Division of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources (CRD GADNR) have been working in conjunction with the federal NOAA Fisheries (formerly the National Marine Fisheries Service, NMFS) to conduct a survey of recreational saltwater anglers in coastal Georgia.  This survey, entitled the Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey (MRFSS), produces estimates of recreational finfish catch (including fish released as well as those retained as harvest).  Additionally, the MRFSS estimates numbers of recreational saltwater anglers (participation) and numbers of fishing trips (effort).  These data are necessary for determining appropriate regulations (i.e., creel and length limit laws), provide catch data for fishery management plans, and track trends in angler participation and landings. 

What are the main components of the MRFSS?
The MRFSS combines data from two separate surveys to produce estimates of participation, effort and catch:

    * Households located in the coastal region are contacted by telephone (where coastal region represents those counties within 25 or 50 miles of the coastline, with the region determined by time of year).  If one or more of the residents are saltwater anglers, they are asked to participate in a telephone survey in which they are asked a series of questions designed to determine the number of saltwater angling trips taken by each angler in the household during a designated period of time.  From these telephone interviews, an estimate of the participation (number of anglers) and effort (number of trips) in saltwater recreational fishing is calculated.  This telephone survey is performed by a federally contracted survey company equipped with computerized telephone services.   
    * Saltwater anglers returning from a fishing trip may be asked to participate in an intercept survey.  The interview, which takes only a few minutes to complete, consists of two major sections:

        1) A background portion addresses gear type, number of anglers, hours spent fishing, general area fished (inshore vs. offshore), whether they were targeting a specific fish species, and the anglers county and state of residence.

        2) The latter portion of the interview focuses on finfish catch.  We ask questions pertaining both to the number and type of fish released as well as those fish that were kept.  We also ask to measure and weigh fish retained by the anglers.
        The intercept surveys are conducted by GADNR CRD personnel at fishing access points within the six coastal counties of Georgia.

Do I have to participate in these surveys? 
Participation in both surveys is voluntary, however we rely heavily on cooperation with the recreational angling community.  High levels of participation in the MRFSS will benefit recreational anglers by providing more precise and accurate catch and participation estimates necessary for sound fishery management principles and conservation at both the state and federal level.

Where and when do these intercept interviews take place?
Since private boat anglers harvest most of Georgia's regulated marine sportfish, we conduct approximately 50% of our annual 1,500 interviews on those fishing access sites utilized by the private boat angler, i.e., boat ramps and marinas, in order to intercept a larger proportion of anglers and their catch.  The remaining 50% of our interviews are split between anglers who are returning from a charter fishing trip and those who are fishing from the shore (i.e., fishing pier, dock, creek bank).  Our survey personnel conduct interviews on weekdays and weekends from March through December at access sites throughout coastal Georgia. The MRFSS is not conducted in Georgia during January and February when saltwater fishing activity is very limited.

How does the GADNR use these data?
Through data gathered from the MRFSS we are able to supply detailed catch, release and harvest summaries, fish length and creel (catch per angler) data, as well as angler demographic information.  These data are not only essential for monitoring recreational fishing pressure and assessing the impact of current regulations, but are crucial for determining changes from historical data as well.  Additionally, the fish length and creel data can be correlated with age/length and reproductive data necessary to conduct stock assessments and ensure sound management decisions for Georgia's sportfish populations. 

Click below to see a copy of the datasheet used during a Creel Survey

Creel Survey Datasheet (PDF)

What were the results from the survey?

Catch, effort and participation data from Georgia or other Atlantic, Gulf and Pacific states, are available on the MRFSS section of the NOAA Fisheries website www.st.nmfs.gov/st1/recreational/index.html . There you will find a more detailed explanation of the survey protocol as well as gain access to data summaries.

For additional information concerning the GADNRs participation, email the Marine Recreational Fisheries Program, Coastal Resources Division (Brunswick, GA) via kathy.knowlton@dnr.state.ga.us
The End


----------



## capt stan (Jun 16, 2009)

Funny thing on thses Surveys. I have been fishing the coast hard here for about 13 years now. More then 5 or 6 times a year I might add. I have been stopped by the DNR many manyy times for safety checks/ fish checks, Shoot most of them up here know my boat and me by name now.Always friendly and professional all they wanted to ensure was that we were leagle and safe..

I chartered for several years....I was never surveyed then. I did however volenteer  to give #'s of trips/ fish up on the "for hire survey program" I would recieve a form once every 6 weeks or so and was asked to fill out the form. It was information about how many trips I ran that week how many folks and info on the fish we caught.

Once every 6 weeks or so..that was it.For charter boat capt in ga. Not a average joe fishermen.

I haven't chartered in a few years now....have never been surveyed still  at the dock, on the water...nothing.  Untill this past hunting season I would bet I would be safe to say I spend more time on the water then most average fishermen...... so how good are these surveys at REALLY getting INFO???  it's just a check in the block IMHO and experiance on the water.

I have always been willing and wanting to vollenteer catch info.....there really is no source that wants the info on a daily basis to build a data base. I actually brought that idea up in the state Charter capt meetings I used to attend with the DNR. ( this may have changed in the last 2 years since I stopped attending meetings)

AS far as the 
phone call survey... IMHO thats a bunch of dog poo to put it nicely. I have been on the SAFMC, DNR, NOAA, CCA (when I belonged) and a few more I'm sure, mailing lists for years for info on all up coming meetings notices ect. They have my # and know I'm willing to share info....I have NEVER been called(except by the for hire folks)..I don't know of anyone that has been either. So really how good IS that so called scientific data???

Just because it's put out there don't mean its not an empty book cover

I would LOVE to see the dates..#of boats that are "surveyed" for any given month/ year.  What is the averages over the last few years. Same thing with the phone call..wheres those #'s???  Look at the numbers they give..do you REALLY believe them...VERY INFLATED!!!!!


----------



## K-DAWG XB 2003 (Jun 16, 2009)

Just like I said before sounds like a load of bull is about to be force fed to us on creel limits from bogus data. How can you determine anything about fish from a few different peoples fish remains? Theres no way to control what you are getting. Basically they are basing data on an unknown.


----------



## MudDucker (Jun 16, 2009)

There have been rumors on this for YEARS.  There have been ongoing studies by UGA and DNR for YEARS.  I haven't heard that there is a specific proposal for any creel limits at this time, but the next time I see our local member of the Board, I will ask him to find out for me.

I will remind him about how sure the DNR was with its shrimp net changes and how they finally had to back off of those changes.  There was no research there, only a reaction to the demands by locals that we run the commercial netters and recreational shrimp netters off of our local waters in order to "protect" our commercial shrimping concerns.

Good science can lead to good results.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 16, 2009)

capt stan said:


> I would LOVE to see the dates..#of boats that are "surveyed" for any given month/ year.  What is the averages over the last few years. Same thing with the phone call..wheres those #'s???  Look at the numbers they give..do you REALLY believe them...VERY INFLATED!!!!!



Stan,

I provided a link to the data you are asking to see. It is in the next to the last paragraph in my post above.

You can click on the link and address your query to fit into several categories from head boat to private to charter, inland, offshore, state waters etc. You may also check data for specific periods.

The surveys are random and must be to maintain statistical effectiveness. You are correct in stating that most of the guys at CRD know you and they pretty well know your effectiveness as a fisherman. They are also familiar with most other charter captains in the area. Armed with the knowledge that you, as a group, are the most effective recreational fishermen out there, if they knowingly targeted you for their survey the statistics would be skewed dramatically.

We have these same discussion at Woody's routinely concerning deer management surveys. It's the same discussion just a different target. Random telephone surveys are by far the most accurate, reliable method of gaining info from users.


----------



## capt stan (Jun 16, 2009)

Jeff I looked at those numbers and have been familiar with it for some time. Really LOOK at the numbers and tell me with confidience you actually believe them. They are VERY inflated. According to the numbers there are THOUSANDS of folks fishing....How were those Numbers gathered? I understand each person counts as a fishing trip. So 8 folks on a boat counts as 8 trips.

If they were actually surveyed don't you think we would all know at least a few folks who have participated or been surveyed, on the water/ back at the dock/ at a public ramp? I would think I would with the time I have spent out there.

There is some number crunching going on no doubt but WHAT  are the ACTUAL  NUMBERS????? Not the number given after the majic math formula is applied to them. Those are the #'s that I'm talking about.

Look at the time frame during the winter months.....Talk with some charterboat capts.. there are times when they are LUCKY to fish  5 or10 days a month due to the weather..... how do those #'s stay so high???? I also know that charters slow down in winter as this is a big deer hunting state... deer season means less guys fishing. 

Just like the data collected for snapper stocks..there is math involved. It depends on the formula used..not the real #'s.


----------



## pop-gun elder (Jun 16, 2009)

Having lived on the coast my whole life and growing up on the water fishing, I think the #'s are inflated.  Heck, I havnt been checked but about 4 or 5 times by the game wardon to see if i was legal.

In my whole life of fishing, I have been surveyed ONCE (1 time).  It was by some UGA student sitting in a chair at Lazaretto asking people what they caught.  I opend my cooler and he said "Now what species are those?" 

I go to north GA a few time a year to catch rainbow trout with some buddies of mine, that by no means makes me an expert on them nor does driving a Volvo and buying fly rods. (No offense to fly fishermen or those who drive Volvos )  Same thing goes for the guys from up there wearing Guy Harvey shirts and coasta del mars thinking they have their finger on the pulse of specks and reds.


----------



## Six million dollar ham (Jun 16, 2009)

capt stan said:


> There is some number crunching going on no doubt but WHAT  are the ACTUAL  NUMBERS????? Not the number given after the majic math formula is applied to them. Those are the #'s that I'm talking about.



Good question.  I figure it'll go something like this:

a)Lots of carcasses donated = too many fish are being caught....reduce creel

b)Few carcasses donated = too many fish have already been caught....reduce creel


----------



## capt stan (Jun 16, 2009)

According to the offical #'s given, I took the given time line of #2..March and April combined for 2008.

 There are 61 days during this time frame

According to the survey #'s 2150 trips were taken during this time frame on charter boats.

That adds up to 35.2 trips PER DAY......????

I find it VERY hard to believe that many Capt's are working here off GA on any given day and I know that there had to be a lot of bad weather days during that time period that folks couldn't fish.

Now for the same time period for Private boats/rentals

It says there were 94,988 trips during that same 61 day time period.

That comes up to 1557 trips PER DAY here in GA in the OFF season???? Doesen't anyone work any more????

Now I'm not a math wiz by any means, and maybe I didn't understand the data like a number cruncher would.....but those are the numbers they are putting up there.....who honestly believes that there isn't some "math formula " in that math......


----------



## bigswamp (Jun 16, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Stan,
> 
> I provided a link to the data you are asking to see. It is in the next to the last paragraph in my post above.
> 
> ...



The data can be skewed in the other direction if these fishermen are knowingly excluded from the "random" sample as well.

I have avoided this argument but something just smells a little "fishy".


----------



## G Duck (Jun 17, 2009)

Stan those numbers are crazy. Did someone post a link to that. I missed it.
thanks


----------



## capt stan (Jun 17, 2009)

G Duck said:


> Stan those numbers are crazy. Did someone post a link to that. I missed it.
> thanks




Yes it was posted up by Jeff, here it is again.

http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st1/recreational/index.html


This is nothing new it's been around for a little while, just read what is says though....

left side hit 
quearying the data that will take you into it. do a lot of reading in there you see what I'm saying abot a "math formula"

I just don't understand how they can come up with such thru the roof #'s when there aren't any "surveyers" out there on a daily basis. Thats a LOT of boat checks  surley someone would see it and with that many folks fishing on a daily basis I would think we here would have heard about seeing these being done over the years. As we can see it's been going on a while...?????

I guess my point with all this is if these #'s are so skewered like we see what is reported, the same thing is happening with the trout/ reds ect...some one who has the "power" is putting out guidence to change the conservation in the direction they are being "pulled into" . The ways and means are easy to manipluate if these kinds of numbers can go unchecked. AS I said earlier, a math "formula" is just that... a recipie to get the taste you want in the end just like cooking a wild hog stew..

This is the same kind of thing that is happening with the Red Snapper/ Grouper ect and it will continue to happen. Kings Spanish ans Cobia are next. This is the kind of Stuff Paul is talking about with the red snapper issue.

This is only MY opnion. I also believe that the folks doing this are good people  that in their hearts want whats right but they have been sucked into a vacum that they can't get out of by political and outside forces .

No I'm NOT talking about the SAFMC and crew..I have other thoughts that I can't put on here.....


----------



## G Duck (Jun 17, 2009)

capt stan said:


> Yes it was posted up by Jeff, here it is again.
> 
> http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st1/recreational/index.html
> 
> ...



Wow!
This is a little too much to sort thru. will have to look at it after my second cup of coffee


----------



## K-DAWG XB 2003 (Jun 17, 2009)

I know lots of people who spend alot of time on the water. I have never heard any of them talk about these issues or seeing anyone much less themselves being asked about there catch by anyone for data collection. I agree something stinks here.


----------



## grim (Jun 17, 2009)

The following is a press release that I received in an email from CCA:

_CCA Calls for Balanced Approach to Red Snapper Crisis
Unprecedented fisheries disaster in South Atlantic needs calculated response

   In late 2006, Congress passed a significantly strengthened Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Management and Conservation Act, the overriding piece of legislation that guides federal fisheries management. Among other progressive provisions, the new law required managers to end overfishing by 2010. Only a year later, a stock assessment for South Atlantic red snapper, the first modern stock assessment ever done on the species, was released and proclaimed red snapper undergoing severe overfishing and so grossly overfished that it was instantly a full-blown crisis discovered right under managers' noses.

Now those two events are colliding and recreational anglers from North Carolina to Florida are caught squarely in the middle.

“This is a perfect storm for fisheries management, and the system is clearly not designed to handle this type of unforeseen and unforeseeable situation,” said Richen Brame, Atlantic States Fisheries Director for Coastal Conservation Association (CCA). “If the science on red snapper is correct, then managers need to act. However, we believe that the measures that would be implemented for a stock that had been willfully mismanaged for 40 years should not be the same as those implemented for a stock such as this that has been ignored for 40 years and suddenly appears on the radar in a critically depressed condition.”

As a result, CCA is calling on the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council to take a calculated approach to red snapper to mitigate the impact on recreational angling to the greatest extent possible, including:

·         Further review of the existing science on red snapper to confirm the status of the stock;

·         Additional research to fill critical gaps in researchers’ knowledge of the species for management;

·         While complete closure of any fishery should be the means of a last resort for any species, if upon further review and research it appears necessary for red snapper, then the fisheries for all other bottom species should remain open;  

·         Additional federal funding for the development of better release practices to reduce red snapper release mortality;

·         When the stock is recovered, it should be managed as a purely recreational fishery;

·         Any proposal to close all bottom fishing will be opposed by CCA unless all other options have been thoroughly exhausted and such closures comply with specific criteria outlined in the Magnuson-Stevens Act, including timelines for reopening, periodic research and assessment requirements, and minimum size designations that are no larger than that needed to achieve the rebuilding objectives for red snapper.

“We need a scalpel, not a sledge hammer to manage this species. Massive bottom closures just do not fit the unique circumstances of this extraordinary case,” said Brame. “Anglers are willing to do their part and accept extensive regulations to keep marine resources healthy whenever necessary, but any proposals to close all bottom fishing should be the management tool of absolute last resort.”_


----------



## seaweaver (Jun 17, 2009)

Who am I going to trust, those who flail at the wind or those who have done the research and dedicated their lives to the resource?-Mechanical Dog/ Jeff Young


Well I do not trust Spud Woodward...the DNR data(lack of) Or Spud's Wife in her publications , I do not trust CCA
I do not trust Jeff Young/MacDog .

It all about Money. 
How are you going to enforce a yearly creel limit?
Tags....think they will be free?

I would like to know how much money CCA/CCAGA is dangling this time
I caught the guys in cahoots before as I was accidentally added to their email chain.
I do not trust them any farther than I can spit.


Rep. Bob Lane is who they fear.
Rep. Bob Lane of Statesboro is the chair of Parks /Game/Fish.
He is the one who said NO to red fish Game fish status.
I have talked w/ him and he  is a sensible guy.
I suggest calling or writing or emailing him if you have a moment.


http://www.legis.ga.gov/legis/2009_10/house/bios/laneBob/laneBobBio.htm


cw


----------



## grim (Jun 18, 2009)

Gentleman - if you do not agree with another post, attack the statement, not the poster.  Lets keep the name calling out of this

grim


----------



## germag (Jun 18, 2009)

pop-gun elder said:


> I go to north GA a few time a year to catch rainbow trout with some buddies of mine, that by no means makes me an expert on them nor does driving a Volvo and buying fly rods. (No offense to fly fishermen or those who drive Volvos )  Same thing goes for the guys from up there wearing Guy Harvey shirts and coasta del mars thinking they have their finger on the pulse of specks and reds.



See, now _this_ is valuable information. This is exactly what I was looking for when I started reading this thread. I had no idea that you judge the relative skill and knowledge of a fisherman by what he is wearing or driving. Now I know! Stupid me...I thought it would be something to do with how many fish he comes back to the dock with on average or something like that.

Thanks! I feel smarter already......

What about Columbia fish shirts and Gloomis hats?


----------



## pop-gun elder (Jun 18, 2009)

germag said:


> See, now _this_ is valuable information. This is exactly what I was looking for when I started reading this thread. I had no idea that you judge the relative skill and knowledge of a fisherman by what he is wearing or driving. Now I know! Stupid me...I thought it would be something to do with how many fish he comes back to the dock with on average or something like that.
> 
> Thanks! I feel smarter already......
> 
> What about Columbia fish shirts and Gloomis hats?



LOL...I wouldn't know...cant afford them 

I will let you borrow my crocs though


----------



## PaulD (Jun 18, 2009)

...Easy on knocking people who wear Crocs. I don't like them because for some reason you always seem to track dirt on the boat with them; it's like and endless supply. They are very comfortable though. I have a booger green pair that I love. If I could have found the hot pink ones in XXL I would be sporting those too.  I like the knock off Columbia shirts, they stay cool and prevent heat rash better than a tee but I bloody mine up a lot so paying $50 for a shirt that’s gonna be spattered after one trip is kinda pointless. Unless, you’re one of those people that likes to just look the part. 

On point to everything else. I fish Everglades National Park for Snook 5-10 days a year and while I keep informed about what goes on with the planning committee and the struggles going on down there, I in no way offer my opinion because who am I to try to hold a candle to guys who fish it everyday and have their finger on the pulse on the fishery. I just keep informed and let those who live it talk.


----------



## notnksnemor (Jun 18, 2009)

This thread is good hunting ground.....
Just found another banned member that couldn't resist.


----------



## K-DAWG XB 2003 (Jun 18, 2009)

germag said:


> See, now _this_ is valuable information. This is exactly what I was looking for when I started reading this thread. I had no idea that you judge the relative skill and knowledge of a fisherman by what he is wearing or driving. Now I know! Stupid me...I thought it would be something to do with how many fish he comes back to the dock with on average or something like that.
> 
> Thanks! I feel smarter already......
> 
> What about Columbia fish shirts and Gloomis hats?




I think all the post was sayng is. If your not there fishing all the time then, how can you expect to be sucsessful every trip. Its kind of like my trips to lakes to go bass fishing. I dont catch nearly half as many as a local fisherman. Because he knows the water better he is more sucsessful.


----------



## markmg (Jun 18, 2009)

It certainly is entertaining listening to the belligerent, mindless rantings from the banned members! The only problem is they always say the same things over and over - new material every once in a while would be good.


----------



## germag (Jun 19, 2009)

K-DAWG XB 2003 said:


> I think all the post was sayng is. If your not there fishing all the time then, how can you expect to be sucsessful every trip. Its kind of like my trips to lakes to go bass fishing. I dont catch nearly half as many as a local fisherman. Because he knows the water better he is more sucsessful.



Yep. I understand that. I was actually trying to make a point (and introduce a little "irony"), but I guess I failed.

Maybe the flaws in those statements relating the way people dress to their skill and knowledge level are exactly what's wrong with the "science" behind some of these proposals and legislation. It is a product of allowing emotion to enter into the equation. You have two different sets of data...the preferred dress style or automobile on the one hand, and the skill/knowledge level for a particular thing on the other. They are completely unrelated in reality. However, when you allow emotion to factor in, they become blurred together...now you have bad data. Now it's "Look at that guy wearing the Costa Del Mars and the Guy Harvey shirt...he must not know anything about fishing." 

It's the same thing as basing a determination of the health, size, and age of a population of fish on a deficient sampling method. Using the voluntary contribution freezers and looking into people's coolers only tells you about the fish those people contributed or had in their cooler. It isn't necessarily representative of the overall population of the fishery. There are other things to take into consideration:

1. Where were these fish caught? Did the fisherman fish where he knew he could catch numbers of fish? Maybe the smaller fish were congregated to one side of the reef and he could catch a lot of smaller, younger fish...meanwhile a healthy population of larger, older fish were relating to another part of the reef and weren't represented in the catch?

2. What size and kind of bait was being used? Big bait=big fish, but less action....maybe he was catching small fish because he was using small bait because small bait was producing more action?

Maybe the fish in the sampling are younger, smaller fish because the fishermen are targeting smaller, younger fish? And now....the people looking at the samples are saying "It's time to panic...all of our brood fish are gone because there aren't many older fish in this sample. Only 10% of the fish in this sample are over 10 years old, therefore that's the way the entire fishery is."

I'm not sure as much time and science has been put into this as emotion.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 19, 2009)

germag,

The info card filled out by the fishermen and placed in the bag with the discards asks where the fish was caught and prompts the angler to be as specific as possible.

Yes, the researchers are asking fishermen to be honest and are counting on that cooperation. Is it far-fetched to anticipate that cooperation from a group who should most love the resource?

As for people catching smaller fish because the angler was targeting smaller fish?- Did I miss some degree of sarcasm? Or are you really implying that fisherman load up the boat and head out to target smaller, younger fish?

I have no reason to believe that the folks doing the ongoing research on behalf of Georgia are intentionally skewing numbers, out of emotion or for any other cause. The people I know that are participating in the gathering of data are consumptive, recreational anglers themselves.

The research reduced to a statistical model can be difficult for those of us who are not statisticians to understand. We have seen the same situation on this forum relative to deer population surveys. People fear change and if they believe ongoing research may effect change they become emotional and lash out at that which they cannot get their arms around.

When emotions run high people hear, see and believe things that are simply not true. For example, someone may hear that CRD plans to use tags for redfish and translate that into "DNR is going to start making fishermen buy tags to catch redfish" when what is actually being discussed was a tag and release program such as the Peach State Reds Initiative. 

Sounds silly but believe me-it has happened.


----------



## germag (Jun 19, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> germag,
> 
> The info card filled out by the fishermen and placed in the bag with the discards asks where the fish was caught and prompts the angler to be as specific as possible.
> 
> ...



Let's try to keep the emotion out of this discussion too. We should all have one common goal....to find the middle ground that protects the fisheries without encroaching on sport fishing. I suspect that neither side of this unfortunate battle is entire right or entirely wrong...the answer lies somewhere in the middle. It's a matter of getting the emotion and egos out of it and making decisions based on solid facts and figures derived from solid science and data collection methods. The more time and energy that is spent on in-fighting between the sports fisherman, the less time and energy there is to take a united front to the decision-makers. It may or may not help in th elong run, but it's a cinch that a divided fishing community surely won't help.

To answer your questions:

No, it's not far-fetched to expect fishermen to care about their fisheries, but it is far-fetched to expect them to trust people that are trying to mandate changes in their creel limits, etc.

No, I was not being sarcastic. You might not target smaller, younger fish. but, the fact is, according to the logic being applied here, it might be better for the fishery if you did because the older fish are almost gone, right? I didn't say that people intentionally, knowingly target younger, smaller fish anyway....I said they might be targeting them, but inadvertently. They know that they are catching MORE fish....so that's a good spot and the right bait, right? Snapper seem to tend to congregate in schools of fish of pretty much the same size. You can have a huge school of smallish fish in one area and another school of another size fish on the other end of a large reef or other structure a short distance away. The fact is that the biologist weren't on board when the fish were caught. They have no real handle on the validity of the data they are using.

I never said that anyone was intentionally skewing numbers. I don't know that...it's possible, but I have no way of knowing that. I said that, from what I've been able to find out thus far,  I think the sampling methods they are using to produce their facts and figures may be flawed.

There may not be any better ways to measure the age and health of the fishery using data collected from sportsmen....I don't know. One thing I have found out so far is that their method of collecting locale data is definitely flawed....and seriously so. Counting snapper passing through a small radius sample zone that isn't even on the reef is a guaranteed way to skew the data. Intentional or not? Well, if it's not intentional, then they need people that understand the fish to conduct these samplings....snapper are reef fish that relate closely to the reef. Counting fish off the reef is in no way representative of the fish that are on the reef. Whether it's intentional or not, to me the entire project loses all validity....if that data is skewed, then all of it is suspect.


----------



## K-DAWG XB 2003 (Jun 19, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> germag,
> 
> The info card filled out by the fishermen and placed in the bag with the discards asks where the fish was caught and prompts the angler to be as specific as possible.
> 
> ...



The info card filled out by the fishermen and placed in the bag with the discards asks where the fish was caught and prompts the angler to be as specific as possible.

_See this is what I am talking about. You live in north georgia. I live in a coastal county and fish the coastal waters here all the time. I have never heard of this card to fill out, never seen a card to fill out. Most of the time I lauch my boat at a State Park. How can this data be any good if no one has ever heard of or knew there was reseach going on?_

Yes, the researchers are asking fishermen to be honest and are counting on that cooperation. Is it far-fetched to anticipate that cooperation from a group who should most love the resource?

_What researcher? Where are all these dang researchers at?_

I have no reason to believe that the folks doing the ongoing research on behalf of Georgia are intentionally skewing numbers, out of emotion or for any other cause. The people I know that are participating in the gathering of data are consumptive, recreational anglers themselves.

_How about letting us know who these people are? Again, how is it that someone from North Georgia has more knowledge of this on going reseach than a local person? Thsi is nuts. I am going to (possibly) be subjected to following creel limits set by an unkown group of researchers I have never seen nor met?_

The research reduced to a statistical model can be difficult for those of us who are not statisticians to understand. We have seen the same situation on this forum relative to deer population surveys. People fear change and if they believe ongoing research may effect change they become emotional and lash out at that which they cannot get their arms around.


_I fear crappy research! I fear data that is hard to understand on purpose. Composed to confuse or mislead_


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 19, 2009)

Since you live in South Georgia, away from the Capital building, why don't you leave the working of our state agencies and government to those of us who live up here every day?

There is no way that you could know what is going on since you live way down there.


----------



## K-DAWG XB 2003 (Jun 19, 2009)

Leaving the workings in the south to the capitol in ATL. is completely different than research on coastal areas. I have a representitive I get emails from to let me know what is going on in the capitol of Atlanta. Mr. Kingston and Mr. Isackson. I havent recieved a bit of info from any of you fellas about my coastal research via email, T.V. newspaper, etc....? I have to rely on a message board for info. Because, I havent seen any researchers on the coast at ant boat ramps or on the water. Havent seen a freezer or a card to fill out for data. But, You are telling me it is happening and I can rely on it. I believe what I can see. I dont see no research going on. If it is I sure dont believe it is credible.


----------



## K-DAWG XB 2003 (Jun 19, 2009)

And again who is doing the research? Are they unbiased people? Are they guides who are all for restrictions and catch and release? Is it college students who support peta and dont think eating your catch is a good thing? Who are these people?


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 19, 2009)

You are disconnected from your government. Mr. Isakson hasn't been working in the Atlanta Capital for quite sometime.

K-DAWG, you don't have to, and should not rely on any message board for info. I certainly do not. If you do, what you will "learn" is that CRD personnel are accepting $30,000 bribes and that fishermen will have to purchase redfish tags and that CCA regulates marine fisheries "Carte Blanche".

These are all things that have been "taught" by people on this message board and none of them seem to be true or correct.

You are better served to look for the information yourself. I have no special pipeline other than those that every other citizen enjoys. However, I do know how to search, read, interview and research for myself.

It does require a modicum of effort.

I fish as much as I can, wherever I can and spend time researching records, charts, tides, fishing reports, stock assessments-any information I can get my eyes on. I take it all with a grain of salt but have found most of the information that is served to be fairly good, accurate information.

Granted, it takes a little bit of judgment on my part to determine which info to believe but I have found that anytime people present wild accusations concerning others or things that just smell too rotten to be true and then offer only "I heard it from a source I can't reveal" as "evidence" (to use the term loosely) I simply ain't buying what they are selling. Salt in any quantity can't make somethings palatable.

I have provided you with photographic evidence that the carcass recovery freezers do exist and a phone number at the end of an article where you can call to get more info.

Did you look into that for yourself?

No you didn't. 

It is easier to just keep repeating that you can't see any research being done.


----------



## K-DAWG XB 2003 (Jun 19, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> I have provided you with photographic evidence that the carcass recovery freezers do exist and a phone number at the end of an article where you can call to get more info.
> 
> Did you look into that for yourself?
> 
> ...




Fair enough. Reckon I need to make some phone calls.


----------



## seaweaver (Jun 19, 2009)

_K-DAWG, you don't have to, and should not rely on any message board for info._-Jeff Young


_Commonsense is prevailing.

Redfish will have game fish status this year!

Why?

Seems that everyone, with the exception of an extremely small minority, understands that the redfish already is a game fish. _
-Jeff Young
_
because it is actually a game fish_-Jeff Young
_It's a done deal. _-Jeff Young


K-DAWG, you don't have to, and should not rely on any message board for info.........yep-CW


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 19, 2009)

By definition-

The Red Drum (Sciaenops ocellatus), also known as Channel Bass, Redfish, Spottail Bass or simply Reds, is a game fish that is found in the Atlantic Ocean from Massachusetts to Florida and in the Gulf of Mexico from Florida to Northern Mexico. It is the only species in the genus Sciaenops.

You are correct. Commonsense prevails.


----------



## seaweaver (Jun 20, 2009)

wow...wikipedia..... there a reliable source...

I just edited the wiki page to increase the slot size for ga per your recommendation...


geepers big talk...
I thought you would show us that legislation.......it was _a done deal_....


K-DAWG, you don't have to, and should not rely on any message board for info.-Jeff Young
or 
wikapedia-cw


----------



## PaulD (Jun 20, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Since you live in South Georgia, away from the Capital building, why don't you leave the working of our state agencies and government to those of us who live up here every day?



That is the most messed up comment I've ever heard. Telling a person to stay out of decisions and regulations that effect them and to let the government control everything.


I thought the skewed numbers you posted and the IM's full of bogus, made up, lies you were sending people were bad (yeap, I got e-mails, IM's and phone calls about them) but it all makes sense now. That's all just really messed up Jeff, really, really messed up.

Not to mention all the times you've tried to misquote  stuff I've said in above post. It's not about me or you but a fishery and rights that are in danger.
Let me go ahead and comment on the fish freezer situation as well.
Local anglers around here may know this but stuff left at marina's and boat ramps gets messed with and detroyed a lot! I can tell you through talking with state staff. marina owners and people who frequent marina's that those freezers get unpluged and also they have an issue with people taking out the fish that are in there and tossing them in the water. It's wrong and is tampering with state property, not to mention is probably hurting us in the long run, but it happens more frequent than you think and I don't support the behavior at all but with so many anglers angry about the way "you people up in Atlanta" are handling changing their local regulations, based off of what you thing and not solid science, when you have no knowledge of it except for coming down 4-6 times a year those things can be expected to happen. If the CRD would include input from fisherman like they are supposted to it would really help calm the fire.

We need less government involvment in everything now, after all the bale out's, stimulas packages, borrowing money from China, etc. I really don't think they need to working on our fisheries........I mean, they are not showing me why they are really using common sense, much less science, in their ability to make a rational decision.

BETTER SCIENCE, ANGLER INVOLVMENT, STOCKING PROGRAMS, NO SOFT MONEY CONTRIBUTIONS, NO PEW, NO CCA, NO EMOTION, NO IMPUT FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE TOURIST NOT FISHERMAN!
That's all I'm saying.




Just got this in too.

.........................The plea on behalf of the recreational fishing community is in response to recent proposal entered on the record at the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council by a Texas-based conservation group, suggesting that recreational fishing should be considered under "a catch shares program" whereby individual recreational fishing quotas are allotted through a bidding process. While directly referencing the proposal by the Houston-based Coastal Conservation Association (CCA), the RFA also points to lobbying groups like Environmental Defense Fund as pressing the Obama Administration for "legislation to require that catch shares be considered in all fishery management plans by 2012......................................

It's not about your views or my views it's about educating folks about what is or could be going on.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 20, 2009)

Paul, you're a ball in high weeds.


----------



## PaulD (Jun 20, 2009)

Is that some sort of threat? I know what you have been doing, as do many others. Everyone else already commented on the data you posted so I  haven't even said anything about that.

Please, let this topic stay on topic. This is a very important issue. Not just to fisherman but to our economy and rights.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 20, 2009)

PaulD said:


> That is the most messed up comment I've ever heard. Telling a person to stay out of decisions and regulations that effect them and to let the government control everything.
> 
> 
> I thought the skewed numbers you posted and the IM's full of bogus, made up, lies you were sending people were bad (yeap, I got e-mails, IM's and phone calls about them) but it all makes sense now. That's all just really messed up Jeff, really, really messed up.
> ...



Of course I have not sent anyone ay IM's or e-mails at all much less ones that contain any data, made up or otherwise.

To explain my previous quote for the simpleminded, you are lost as a ball in high weeds.

Every post you make reminds me of this guy.


----------



## PaulD (Jun 20, 2009)

Nice post edit. 

You have sent out emails telling people bogus snapper stats on this forum.

I'm fighting for rights and you're pushing for the sale of LAP's, passing of the inter-rim ruling, closing bottom fishing and more strict government regulations.   The CCA's support can be viewed in their publications and by talking to their state reps. Yet, you for some reason want to lanch personal assalts on myself and others who do not agree with your special interest groups agenda

Now you compare me to a dictator. 

Please stop the personal and character assasinations against myself as you are simply trying to get this thread deleted.

Thank you.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 20, 2009)

PaulD said:


> Nice post edit. post edit?
> 
> You have sent out emails telling people bogus snapper stats on this forum.1st of all, this is not a thread concerning snapper limits. Secondly, I have not sent out any e-mails containing any bogus stats.
> 
> ...


----------



## PaulD (Jun 20, 2009)

You're struggling Jeff. Please refrain from your personal attacks.
It's not a Pantload what the CCA is supporting. They publish it themselves. You should read and follow up on the organizations you're raising money for. 

Please let this get back on point rather than simply insulting others when you have no leg to stand on.


----------



## Six million dollar ham (Jun 20, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Since you live in South Georgia, away from the Capital building, why don't you leave the working of our state agencies and government to those of us who live up here every day?
> 
> There is no way that you could know what is going on since you live way down there.



That's how they roll in Pyongyang.


----------



## wmaybin (Jun 20, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> I have no reason to believe that the folks doing the ongoing research on behalf of Georgia are intentionally skewing numbers, out of emotion or for any other cause. The people I know that are participating in the gathering of data are consumptive, recreational anglers themselves.
> 
> Those in which data are collected from and those who process the data are totally different when you discuss data collected from anglers.
> 
> The research reduced to a statistical model can be difficult for those of us who are not statisticians to understand. We have seen the same situation on this forum relative to deer population surveys. People fear change and if they believe ongoing research may effect change they become emotional and lash out at that which they cannot get their arms around.



Obviously so being SAMFC memebers when questioned publicly admitted that they only understood 5% of the data the closures are being based on and also pleaded that we not ask them to clarify or explain any charts, tables or diagrams in their pressentation due to this lack of understanding.  I think we (the concerned anglers)"lash out" in a demand for accountability.  JMO


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 21, 2009)

Six million dollar ham said:


> That's how they roll in Pyongyang.



OK.

I'll explain for those who do not understand the irony and humor of satire and sarcasm:

K-DAWG and a few others had suggested that only people who actually live on the coast could possibly understand the state of the resource.

I was demonstrating the folly of the logic by using what is known as an analogy.

I didn't mean to fire over your head.

This has gotten far afield from the original topic. It seems that a couple of you would rather post misinformation concerning  my meager activities rather than actually discussing the subject matter.

Back to the subject, I do believe the regulations are changing. 

The creel limits are one page in the regulations. I have no idea if "The Board" will do anything relative to creel limit changes on reds and trout. I have not seen or heard any credible evidence concerning that issue one way or the other.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 21, 2009)

wmaybin said:


> Obviously so being SAMFC memebers when questioned publicly admitted that they only understood 5% of the data the closures are being based on and also pleaded that we not ask them to clarify or explain any charts, tables or diagrams in their pressentation due to this lack of understanding.  I think we (the concerned anglers)"lash out" in a demand for accountability.  JMO



wmaybin, I understand the confusion. Somehow a few previous posters had missed the subject of the thread.

We are discussing redfish and trout, not the probable closed season on snapper.


----------



## K-DAWG XB 2003 (Jun 21, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> OK.
> 
> I'll explain for those who do not understand the irony and humor of satire and sarcasm:
> 
> ...




No that is not what I am saying. What I am telling you is that if the local people who live on the coast know nothing about this Collection of scientific data, for example. How it is collected, where, why and who is doing the sampling. If the people living where its happening never see it and dont know anything about it. Then, how can it be wide spread and accurate data. I have no idea how many times you come to the coast and fish. I fish it often and know many many people who are out there all the time. I have never once talked to anyone who has been sampled or knows anything about one of those freezers.


----------



## reefdonkey12 (Jun 21, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Since you live in South Georgia, away from the Capital building, why don't you leave the working of our state agencies and government to those of us who live up here every day?
> 
> There is no way that you could know what is going on since you live way down there.


 
I'll be honest - it's hard to filter the actual information from the politics on this thread. All I want to know is what Jeff's (MecDawg's) role is. Is he in an _elected_ position?


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 21, 2009)

reefdonkey12 said:


> I'll be honest - it's hard to filter the actual information from the politics on this thread. All I want to know is what Jeff's (MecDawg's) role is. Is he in an _elected_ position?



No, not an elected official. Just a citizen who loves to hunt and fish and wants to be sure my children's children are able to enjoy the same great opportunities.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jun 21, 2009)

K-DAWG XB 2003 said:


> No that is not what I am saying. What I am telling you is that if the local people who live on the coast know nothing about this Collection of scientific data, for example. How it is collected, where, why and who is doing the sampling. If the people living where its happening never see it and dont know anything about it. Then, how can it be wide spread and accurate data. I have no idea how many times you come to the coast and fish. I fish it often and know many many people who are out there all the time. I have never once talked to anyone who has been sampled or knows anything about one of those freezers.



K-DAWG?

What was implied by the last sentence in post 86?


----------



## PaulD (Jun 21, 2009)

Reefdonkey, look at the CCA GA home page. Go to the Athens chapter. Look at Jeff Young’s name. He's responsible for fund raising efforts put forth by the chapter. It's on the internet, documented in the CCA documents as published by the CCA. He's trying to wiggle out of his biased affiliation now. Just look it up for yourself, it’s very easy to do, google Coastal Conservation Association  GA and just pick the Athens chapter then I believe it’s either under the officers or Banquet committee tabs.

If you think it’s more about politics than planned actions you can call or e-mail Spud or the CRD office and ask him or another person that is INVOLVED in this, not a secretary or intern. Like I said, I may not agree with Spud and I definitely get the vibe that he really doesn’t like me, which is understandable, but he’ll be honest with you about it.

Also the snapper topic plays right into this as well. It's about government control compared to sound, none biased science and the conservation of anglers rights. So, they do tie in together. Jeff and the CCA supports tighter restrictions on inshore species, the sale of LAP’s ( which would action off fishing rights to the highest bidder), the Inter-rim ruling which would close many square miles of the ocean, stopping the harvest of bottom dwelling fish and more big government control of the oceans. I still don’t understand why they are for all of this but I cannot get a response of support for a stocking program for redfish instead of just slapping tighter restrictions on them but this is the third time I’ve mentioned that and they do not want to touch that one, which really confuses me as to why they are calling themselves “Conservationist” when they are for tighter restrictions and not improving the population. Sounds a lot like the PEW Trust, Oceans Conservancy, Green Peace and PETA’s stance on things rather than the view of people that are calling themselves “Conservationist.” That’s just a very obvious observation though.

I am also for my son to be able to hunt and fish but I also want him to be able to keep a few of the fish he catchs and to hunt with a gun rather than just a video camera.


----------



## K-DAWG XB 2003 (Jun 21, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> K-DAWG?
> 
> What was implied by the last sentence in post 86?



For post 86 refer to post 111.

What about posts 92,103,116,118,119,121? What was my point in those posts? Way to go try'in to make me sound condicending.


----------



## seaweaver (Jun 21, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> No, not an elected official. Just a citizen who loves to hunt and fish and wants to be sure my children's children are able to enjoy the same great opportunities.




I would suggest way more than that.
Jeff Young's familiarity w/ the state workings and special interest groups (on ALL subjects....)that have more input on rules and regulations than citizens would have me believe He is a paid hack for the special interests.

Note the manor in which "flips out" and does a "LOOK OVER THERE...." and belittles those who do not share his POV,and behaves like he is the only one "who knows"...
He did very much the same in the Red Fish Scam when backed into a corner w/ his friends CCA , CRD, and GA RF.org....Or in the posts above where Paul notes...._You are struggling Jeff_...




If anyone thinks for one second there is not money or politics involved in the rules and regulations process of all species they are incredibly naive.

Special interest groups and their lobby often use the guise of supporting the environment and the citizens. They could not function otherwise in seeking their own objectives that fall outside those of citizens.

Lobbiest do not just work the halls of the state house.
_They work were ever they can to influence opinion to support their interests including the message boards in the state._




cw


----------



## reefdonkey12 (Jun 21, 2009)

My question about whether MecDawg was an elected official is simply because I felt personally offended by his comment to K-Dawg. If everyone at the CCA has the same opinion of the everyday fisherman, then no wonder we are even having this discussion. I would seriously like to have an opinion when it comes to who is on the CCA Board.

As for the fish collection sites, there are NONE in our county (Camden County). Seeing as though there are only 6 counties located on the coast of Georgia, and Camden being one of the largest, doesn't it seem like they might put one of those cost effective collection points in our county? I guess we are supposed to fillet our fish and then drive up to Glynn county to Two Way to drop off the specimen. Yeah, that's a good plan. 

I have lived in Camden County for 18 years and NOT ONCE have I received a call asking me to participate in a phone survey. In fact, NOT ONCE have I been surveyed after a day of fishing. 

Now I own a bait shop and get to talk to a lot of fellow fisherman. NEVER has anyone told me they were surveyed by anyone except GA DNR. But apparently DNR numbers don't count so guess that doesn't do any good. I spoke to a local DNR officer the other day in my shop and we were talking about the possible closure of Snapper. He said he didn't understand why anyone would want to close the Snapper season because he has seen more Snapper than ever lately. Makes me think that even the opinions of a DNR officer aren't taken into consideration.

So let me see if I have this right... it's more scientific to randomly survey people who live in landlocked areas of Georgia rather than to target actual fisherman who are out on the water everyday? OK... makes sense... please note the sarcasm.

Want to get some real data collected for science? How about talk to some bait shop owners. Between us, DNR and the guys out there fishing 3 times a week, you can get all the data you want. We can certainly tell you that the number of reds and trout is not declining in any way. And the Snapper bite ain't too shabby either!


----------



## reefdonkey12 (Jun 21, 2009)

How about instead of changing the creel limits, we enforce the rules that are already in place. You've got a guy out there who caught over 100 reds last year and had to pay a $193 fine! Let him try that in Florida where he would do FEDERAL time AND have his boat confiscated. But no, instead the brainiacs who are making these decisions want to further regulate the guys that are actually following the rules.


----------



## seaweaver (Jun 21, 2009)

RF12
enforcing the current laws is NEVER a viable option in the eyes of these people.
My main point of contention w/ any proposed rule/status changes is:
"Show me the evidence of the rules we have now failing."


cw


----------



## markmg (Jun 21, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg, or 'Jeff' as many like to say in some obvious effort to try and look like they are uncovering a secret alias - I quite enjoyed your mockery and sarcasm. It was obviously "firing over their heads" based by the reaction.

More than likely, this is discussion is probably not worth your time. As a curious reader of this thread you appear to be the only one simply spelling correctly - much less, making coherent and comprehensible points. Good work, it is much appreciated even if it does not appear so.

...and for the record, that picture was not of a dictator.


----------



## seaweaver (Jun 22, 2009)




----------



## wmaybin (Jun 22, 2009)




----------



## PaulD (Jun 22, 2009)

Wow, that was disturbingly histerical and well timed.


----------

