# red snapper



## Jamie Brett Jr. (Apr 10, 2009)

can any one belive that u cant keep any red snapper


----------



## Lostoutlaw (Apr 10, 2009)

Depends on where ya at....
And how brave ya feel....


----------



## caught (Apr 10, 2009)

I cant after all the monster reds I saw last Saturday out of Jacksonville.


----------



## Limitless (Apr 11, 2009)

Absolutely nuts!!  The Gulf doesn't open again until 1 June and you can keep 2!

I just got back from Carrabelle yesterday and fished Wednesday and Thursday.  Thursday we fished 40' to 80' and probably caught 50+ red snapper.  Couldn't get a bait to the Grouper.  We only ended up with 4 keeper Gags and no Strawberrys.


----------



## Jamie Brett Jr. (Apr 11, 2009)

well on the atlantic side u cant keep any but u can keep b liners


----------



## Hunter Haven (Apr 11, 2009)

The June 1st and 2 per person regulation is a bunch of pencil pushing dummies! There is absolutely no way that the red snapper is in low supply..... no way!!!

Crazy... and yet just adding another reason for the offshore fisherman to have to spend even more money to go out each day and not add to his catch!!!


----------



## PaulD (Apr 11, 2009)

Still open till they vote on closure dates on 6/1. You need to call your state and federal representatives and tell them how you feel about it. Only chance left!


----------



## Gitterdone (Apr 13, 2009)

Just returned from panama city,we were only able to go offshore twice but had a great trip with limit of grouper and released alot of snapper,3 witch were 15lbs and 1 at 12lbs plus several smaller.I do under stand reason for limits,but enough is enough.It cost to to go out for b-liners and triggers


----------



## DesertVet (Apr 15, 2009)

PaulD said:


> Still open till they vote on closure dates on 6/1. You need to call your state and federal representatives and tell them how you feel about it. Only chance left!



This is not up to state or federal pigs. This is up to SAFMC. I don't remember the exact date of the meeting, but it was held the first of March at Jekyll Island. There were a few fishermen there, but not enough to fill a Dodge Caravan. It is amazing how people can show up by the hundreds or thousands to watch a ball game, but cannot get off their edited for typing around the censor - grim to go to a meeting. They would rather get on a forum and whine like a bunch of babies. Either show up at the meetings or just quit whining.  The vote was  7 to 6. They are setting this up for the commercial fishing like the Gulf is. Who do you think runs NMFS? it sure isn't recreational fishermen.  Final approval has not been confirmed that I know of. Somebody had posted a list of who all voted and which way, but I can't find the thread. Maybe someone who knows who the board is and the way they voted, can post it again. 
    I think that we have more red snapper than ever, simply because hardly anyone has been able to afford to go fishing for the last year & a half. You can go to the Triple ledge and see Commercial Snapper boats out there everyday. These are the people who should be banned from fishing for snapper. They have the most impact on the population, and the least economic impact. They could simply take red snapper off the market for a year. Then the recs could still go catch a couple to eat and the fish would recover in one years time. However, the commercial fishery has deeper pockets that pay off the SAFMC & NMFS. The recreational fishermen can't get out from in front of a ball game to stand up for their rights to fish or anything else.
    Contact SAFMC immediately if you care to have your voice heard. These people use emotionally created data from their laptops to form their alleged scientific data. They have NO scientific data to support the population shortages they claim.  Where is CCA? Where is recreational Fishing Alliance? The fact that these organizations do not bother showing up, just reaffirms their priorities to me, and fishing is not one of them.
      Contact SAFMC now if you care. tell them to stop over fishing by commercial fishing and to take these fish off the markets for a year.


----------



## GONoob (Apr 16, 2009)

What do yall plan on targeting instead of red snapper?


----------



## PaulD (Apr 16, 2009)

DesertVet said:


> This is not up to state or federal pigs. This is up to SAFMC. I don't remember the exact date of the meeting, but it was held the first of March at Jekyll Island. There were a few fishermen there, but not enough to fill a Dodge Caravan. It is amazing how people can show up by the hundreds or thousands to watch a ball game, but cannot get off their arses to go to a meeting. They would rather get on a forum and whine like a bunch of babies. Either show up at the meetings or just quit whining.  The vote was  7 to 6. They are setting this up for the commercial fishing like the Gulf is. Who do you think runs NMFS? it sure isn't recreational fishermen.  Final approval has not been confirmed that I know of. Somebody had posted a list of who all voted and which way, but I can't find the thread. Maybe someone who knows who the board is and the way they voted, can post it again.
> I think that we have more red snapper than ever, simply because hardly anyone has been able to afford to go fishing for the last year & a half. You can go to the Triple ledge and see Commercial Snapper boats out there everyday. These are the people who should be banned from fishing for snapper. They have the most impact on the population, and the least economic impact. They could simply take red snapper off the market for a year. Then the recs could still go catch a couple to eat and the fish would recover in one years time. However, the commercial fishery has deeper pockets that pay off the SAFMC & NMFS. The recreational fishermen can't get out from in front of a ball game to stand up for their rights to fish or anything else.
> Contact SAFMC immediately if you care to have your voice heard. These people use emotionally created data from their laptops to form their alleged scientific data. They have NO scientific data to support the population shortages they claim.  Where is CCA? Where is recreational Fishing Alliance? The fact that these organizations do not bother showing up, just reaffirms their priorities to me, and fishing is not one of them.
> Contact SAFMC now if you care. tell them to stop over fishing by commercial fishing and to take these fish off the markets for a year.




No it's not up to them but they have the power to stop it from happening. The SAMFC has done what they wanted and said what they had to say. Your time of recourse with them is gone. The meeting was held on the First Thursday of March, yes Thursday, that way not as many people would show up as last time. One SAMFC member even stated to a speaker,"Say waht you like but we've already got our minds made up and you are not going to change it."
What should have happened was a mob of angry people on door steps. The issue there was that several of the council members openly stated that they feared public outrage and retaliation, so you know what happened after they said that. 
You need to go to the congressman and gov't officials now. Like I said time of dealing with the SAMFC is OVER but their "jurisdiction" can be over stepped by any "real" gov't body
STOP special interest groups as well. All of you that are members of the CCA need to take a long look at this! They can say what they want but where your money goes behind closed doors is different! The fact that they are having a meeting next month where one of the board members of the SAMFC will be speaking and that only members of the CCA can attend helps show their agenda. They will sell out your rights to offshore fishing in a New York minute! Also watch who is lobbying and supporting tighter restrictions on inshore limits and closure of seasons there (SPUD W). These special interest groups are getting into very influential peoples pockets and it's not good. I've been shocked to see how much the opinion of one person specifically ( Spud) has changed in the last couple of years and I'm well aware of why as it is painfully obvious when a man does a complete 180 in his opinion and out look. It's a sad day fellas because this is just the beginning. 

Next- Grouper closure, which has already been amended and attached to this snapper closure bill.

*Closure of spearfishing on Grays reef, thanks to some obviously doctored up photo's.
* Closure of the reef completely
* closure on Flounder
* 1 redfish per person limit, 5 trout per person limit between 15-20". 

These are coming and being supported by the people who make the calls. Act now of it's gone for you and your children cause it will not come back!!! 

We have no money ( to amount to anything) going into stocking research. We have no money going into research on Snapper, Grouper, or Flounder and the less we know about these species the less we can logically argue against false or misrepresented information provided by the people who support this.

Anyone that is offended by this can feel free to IM me or call me. I've already told a couple of people man to man how I feel about this stuff. If you're taking soft money contributions from special interest groups, either through cash, dinners, project funding, etc. You DO NOT need to be in a position to influence or vote on this crap. Your are biased and need to be removed from your position. This includes the council members who were shown pictures of Cubera Snapper and Yellow eye snapper and " believed" them to be red snapper! Give me a break folks!!!

Elected and appointed officials are there by the public and if they do not non biasedly support what their appointing body wants needs to fear removal from office or public retribution from the bodies they represent. That is how it was when this country was founded and how it should be today!!!


----------



## PaulD (Apr 16, 2009)

Member who voted FOR the ban

Duane Harris GA Retired Director Georgia Coastal Resources Division.

Benjamin Currin NC recreational fisherman/educator from Raleigh,N.C

George Geiger FL Charter Boat owner/operator

Susan Shipman GA Director of Coastal Fisheries for the Georgia

Robert Boyles SC South Carolina Marine Resources Division

David Cupka SC Retired S. C. Office of Fisheries Management

Roy Crabtree NMFS Regional Director


Council members voting NOT to ban red snapper harvest:

Mark Robson FL Div.Dir. Florida Fish & Wildlife Commission

Tom Swatzal SC fishing charter operator from Murrells Inlet

Tony Iarroci FL Key West commercial fisherman

Dr. Brian Cheuvron NC North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries 

Rita Merritt NC Commercial fishing business Wrightsville Beach

John Wallace GA Commercial shrimper and processor


----------



## PaulD (Apr 16, 2009)

Just so you know Duanne Harris and Susan Shipman, both who voted for the closure, as you can see from my above post, will be speaking at Shellmans Bluff on May 8th or 9th as guest of the CCA. You have to be a member to me let in teh meeting. i.e. financially support the ban. However it is free to protest it from outside!


----------



## JW2 (Apr 16, 2009)

Some of my greatest fishing memories as a youngun' was red snapper fishing. Is there a shortage of red snapper?!?!


----------



## PaulD (Apr 17, 2009)

No, I've been diving and fishing this coast for years and I can tell you that the population in the last 4 years has been on the rise. However they based this decision on infomation that was over 10 years old and questionably accurate, even worse was where the information was gathered accurately and they were able to repoduce the results it showed that they had no cause for closure. This is a load of it and the scarry part is everyone that is effected seems to be beaten down or just doesn't care.


----------



## DesertVet (Apr 17, 2009)

PaulD said:


> Just so you know Duanne Harris and Susan Shipman, both who voted for the closure, as you can see from my above post, will be speaking at Shellmans Bluff on May 8th or 9th as guest of the CCA. You have to be a member to me let in teh meeting. i.e. financially support the ban. However it is free to protest it from outside!



PAULD, are you going to the meeting? I am not joining CCA just to hear these two losers spill their propaganda.  I will however go protest like crazy, very loudly. Who among you will go and stand with me? We should make a mockery of CCA & these two bafoons.  Do we need a permit to protest at Shellmans? If we do, I will see about getting one on Monday.  AS Paul says, the time to act is now, and very short.  Come GON members, get behind something you can make a difference in.


----------



## PaulD (Apr 17, 2009)

I will be there and I believe that the CCA will do the right thing and allow us in. I plan to intelligently present a over view of their own research in which they provide no accurate data that was gathered by the same means and in many situations where the research results were reproduced on separate occasions the results did not support the closure. If not I'll just be outside 

-heads up


----------



## grim (Apr 20, 2009)

PaulD said:


> However they based this decision on infomation that was over 10 years old and questionably accurate, even worse was where the information was gathered accurately and they were able to repoduce the results it showed that they had no cause for closure.



I dont understand how theymake the regs tighter and tighter every year, on the same data, that like you said, is ten years old.  If the data, even if we assume it is accurate, dictates cutting the harvest by x amount in year 1, how does it mean that it needs to anything but x in year 2?  Talk about fuzzy math.


----------



## brown518 (Apr 20, 2009)

Does anyone know Sen. Isakson's and Chambliss's position on this issue? Sounds like it is time to send them a few notes to get their attention since this is a federally mandated issue.

Here is the link to the SAFMC and information about their stock assessment program:
http://www.safmc.net/Portals/6/Regulations/SEDAR_FactSheet012609.pdf


Also, here is a link explaining the Council appointment process:
http://www.safmc.net/AboutUs/AboutSAFMC/tabid/361/Default.aspx

It appears that Gov. Sonny submits the names to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce for appointment.

I may have to write Sonny a letter as well.


----------



## stratos201 (Apr 20, 2009)

We went on a 12 hour trip out of Destin this weekend and tried our best to NOT catch snapper. We did everything from counting down 15 seconds to 5-35 winds up from the bottom. I can't tell you how many snapper we caught, several (15-20) over 12 pounds. The captain was on our case for catching so many but it didn't make any difference what we did! We did catch a couple of grouper and amberjack but we worked for them!!! THERE IS NO SHORTAGE OF SNAPPER RIGHT NOW!!!!


----------



## PaulD (Apr 20, 2009)

If you look at the math they use in the SEDAR research you will see in the equation where UNK. is used in every conclusion model. Also you will notice that SEDAR has moved the snapper population stock from over fished to Unknown to " more accurately" show what they know. You will also notice that this was in the late 1990's ( 1999-1998). Gov. Perdue did approve the appointments of members however I don't think that he appointed them himself. The secretary of commerce ultimately decides if the closure goes into effect of not. I know that NOAA also has a very strong and silent hand in this matter as SAMFC is appoint into their position by NOAA. You need to write letters and make calls to your federal reps, the gov. and the U.S. secretary of Commerce, I believe this is still an open seat as of now which is very, very important as the more liberal person that gets put into this seat the more likely it will be that this closure will pass. You got to remember the politicians are going to approve and sign on what ever they can that puts money into their pockets or their friend’s pockets. It is sad but true. We need to make sure our appointed representatives know how we feel as it is their jobs to represent us. Make sure that you address them in a proper and respectful manor. Also make sure they know that the impact to this state along will be over $2 Million as is shown in the economical impact study. This by the way needs to have more work done on it as well. This will affect income in many areas including hotels, retail stores, restaurants, marinas, and other areas that cater to the tourism and vacation industry.


----------



## brown518 (Apr 20, 2009)

Any suggestions on using a "standard" form letter or should everyone write their own. Here are the contacts:

US Secretary of Commerce


Mail

U.S. Department of Commerce
1401 Constitution Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20230 

http://www.oig.doc.gov/oig/about_us/000575.html



Saxy Chambliss

http://chambliss.senate.gov/public/...Us.ContactForm&CFID=11316112&CFTOKEN=62199753

(You can cut and paste your letter online)

Johnny Isakson

http://isakson.senate.gov/contact.cfm

(You can cut and paste your letter online)


Sonny Perdue

http://gov.georgia.gov/00/gov/contact_us/0,2657,78006749_94820188,00.html

(You can cut and paste your letter online)


----------



## PaulD (Apr 20, 2009)

Go with what you got for now as there is no time to waste. I'll try to talk to people that know more about this than me and see if I can get a good letter form.


----------



## DesertVet (Apr 21, 2009)

Member who voted FOR the ban

Duane Harris GA Retired Director Georgia Coastal Resources Division.

Benjamin Currin NC recreational fisherman/educator from Raleigh,N.C

George Geiger FL Charter Boat owner/operator

Susan Shipman GA Director of Coastal Fisheries for the Georgia

Robert Boyles SC South Carolina Marine Resources Division

David Cupka SC Retired S. C. Office of Fisheries Management

Roy Crabtree NMFS Regional Director



George Geiger is a charter fisherman, and he voted for this. What is wrong with this picture people? Why would a man vote himself out of a job, unless he was getting something overwhelming in return. This is just more proof that this is nothing more than typical bureaucratic corruption.  George Geiger, I hope you never get another dime from those of us who would typically use a charter business like yours.  

Susan Shipman-- current state employee who answers to the citizens of GA, or is supposed to.  Susan how much money have you been Donated to vote this way? How much has the enviromental goofballs paid you to buy your votes.  If you were so smart, you would find that when you stop all the fishing, then we will not have a need for Coastal resources sDiv. We can just close the doors on CRD, saving the taxpayers of this state millions of dollars. 
     If we can't fish, then we don't need a CRD.  I will see what the new DNR Comissioner is made of, when I ask him to put a stop to the DNR employees taking soft money from enviromental clowns, while being on the state payroll.

  Do you people realize that in all reality, according to new amendments to the Magnusam(sp)laws, that once they close this fishery, they DO NOT have to do anything else with it for  10 years. So are you willing to sit on your butts, and give up snapper fishing for the next 10 years?
  Grouper is the next thing on their list. If we don't stop this snapper closure, then they will shutdown fishing altogether.  This is just plain wrong. Even if you do not saltwater fish, you should stand up for your rights and those of us who do.  Every proud American should fight against the tyranny of greed and these liberal donkeys who hate America.



NO SNAPPER FISHING FOR 10 YEARS. Think about it.


----------



## DesertVet (Apr 21, 2009)

Upon further investigation, I found out why Capt George Geiger would vote for a red snapper ban. He is nothing more than a inshore fisherman. he doesn't even qualify as someone who should be the chairman of the SAMFC. He has no stake in this game, except for the kickbacks he has received for his vote.  

To contact Capt Geiger and voice your displeasure in him, here is his contact info and a link to his webpage.

Capt. George Geiger
561/388-3183
Sebastian / Vero Beach


http://www.mbcboats.com/hewes/guides/geiger/geiger.html


----------



## PaulD (Apr 21, 2009)

Every body needs to read the Magnuson Stevens and Magnuson Furgason act. It had a great purpose but had a huge loop hole in it for passing no fishing ledgislation by stating that all decisions must be based "on the best data available" instead of establishing solid guide lines for it. Shame. At this point the best recourse is to contact the Sec. of Commerce.


----------



## DesertVet (Apr 21, 2009)

no red snapper for 10 years


----------



## DesertVet (Apr 21, 2009)

Here is the kind of carp the the NMFS & SAMFC should be stopping.I guess these guys pay the support of NMFS as well as the environuts.

What I have heard and just saw on the commercial kingfish quota report for February is scary. 
According to it, the gillnet fleet of kingfishermen (which is made up of only 21 boats with non-transferable permits) that operate off Florida Bay caught 695,751 pounds of kingfish in the first ten days of this year, breaking thier annual quota by 33% and causing it to be shut down. 
Im not opposed to regulated hook and line commercial kingfishing and have a hook and line permit myself but that is absolutely sick IMO. 
Their daily trip limits? 25,000 pounds-each! Not to mention the fact that such a massive dump of fish on the market runs the price to nearly nothing and produces poor quality fish. Its a waste. 
Why the NMFS allows this handful of individuals to keep doing this is beyond me. 

Just heard from a friend in Key West that those gillnetters caught all 695,000 pounds in TWO DAYS "fishing". Price they got for kingfish?-.70 to .80 cent a pound, about a third of what line caught fish sell for the rest of the year.


Here is where a legitimate need for a ban is needed, btu where is the conservation of kings?  All they do with king mackeral  is sell it to cat food factories. Why is it alright to slaughter all the kings, that aren't widely accepted as good to eat, while banning red snapper which are more plentiful than ever, and great to eat, and provides millions of dollars of revenue to thousands of people????


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Apr 21, 2009)

Page 1
1
Snapper Grouper Management in South Atlantic Federal Waters
Interim Rule Request for Red Snapper and Snapper Grouper Amendment 17
Frequently Asked Questions
April 2009
Q. Why are additional management measures necessary for red snapper?
 A new stock assessment was completed for red snapper through the Southeast Data,
Assessment and Review (SEDAR) stock assessment program in 2008. The assessment
(SEDAR 15) found that the South Atlantic red snapper stock was overfished and
currently undergoing overfishing. http://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/sedar/
.
 The 2008 assessment indicates that overfishing has been occurring since 1970, at about
8 times the sustainable level.
 The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) received notification from
NOAA Fisheries Service, in a letter dated July 8, 2008, that the South Atlantic red
snapper stock is overfished and undergoing overfishing.
 The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens
Act) requires the Council to prepare a plan amendment or proposed regulations to end
overfishing within one year of notification that a stock is undergoing overfishing.
 Upon notification, the Council began developing an amendment to the Snapper Grouper
Fishery Management Plan to address long-term management measures to end
overfishing and establish a rebuilding program for red snapper.
Interim Rule: Short-term Measures
Q. Is it true that the red snapper fishery could be closed in federal waters to recreational
and commercial fishermen beginning in July of 2009?
 Yes, the Council voted during its March 2009 meeting to request that NOAA Fisheries
Service draft and implement an interim rule (short-term measures) to help address
overfishing by closing the commercial and recreational red snapper fisheries for 180
days.
Page 2
2
 The Magnuson-Stevens Act states the Council may request the Secretary of Commerce
(Secretary) implement interim measures to reduce overfishing under section 305(c). An
interim rule can only be used to address species undergoing overfishing. In this case,
Amendment 17 would implement more long-term measures to end overfishing of red
snapper.
 The bulk of red snapper landings are from the recreational fishery, with recreational
landings exceeding commercial landings by 2-3 fold over the assessment period.
Between 2000 and 2006, the recreational sector accounted for about 72% of total red
snapper landings.
Q. How long would an interim rule be in effect?
 The interim rule would be effective for 180 days. Since the Council is developing
Amendment 17, the Council’s intent is to request an allowable extension of the interim
rule for an additional 186 days for a total of one year.
Q. Will the public be able to comment on an interim rule to close the red snapper fishery?
 Yes, the public will have the opportunity to comment on the interim rule and the
associated Environmental Assessment.
 The public will be informed about these comment periods through a Fishery Bulletin
issued by NOAA Fisheries Service and information on the Council’s and NOAA Fisheries
Service’s Web site, as well as in the Federal Register.
Q. Who approves the interim rule?
 The Secretary or his designee would approve the interim rule and associated
Environmental Assessment.
Q. Would the closure for red snapper be applied to state waters as well?
 If approved by the Secretary, the interim rule would only apply to federal waters off the
coasts of North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and the east coast of Florida (ranging
from 3 to 200 miles offshore of each state), unless each state also chooses to implement
compatible regulations for state waters. The Council would request these states adopt
compatible regulations. However, provisions specified in the interim rule would also
apply to a person on board a vessel for which a federal commercial or charter/headboat
permit for the South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery has been issued, regardless of
whether the fish are harvested or possessed in state or federal waters.
Page 3
3
Q. Why wasn’t an interim rule requested to close the red snapper fishery after the Council
initially received notification about overfishing in July 2008?
 The Council did consider requesting an interim rule for red snapper soon after receiving
the results of the stock assessment. However the Council wanted to review all options
before requesting a closure. In addition, an addendum to the red snapper stock
assessment was presented to the Council in December 2008. The Council decided to
wait until the revision was completed to consider interim management measures
necessary to end overfishing. The addendum did not change the stock status.
 The Council voted at their December 2008 meeting not to move forward with an interim
rule on red snapper due to concern that the interim rule would end before permanent
management measures could be implemented, resulting in a lack of continuity in
management for the red snapper fishery.
Q. Why does the fishery need to be closed? Can’t the bag limit simply be reduced from 2 fish
to 1 fish, or the size limit be increased from 20 inches for both the recreational and
commercial fisheries?
 The total mortality (landings and discards) of red snapper must be reduced by 87% to
end overfishing.
 The discard mortality rate, or the number of fish that die even when they are released,
is estimated at 40% for the recreational fishery and 90% for the commercial fishery (the
commercial numbers are higher because of the depths fished and differing handling
practices).
 Changing the bag and size limits would not achieve the necessary reductions because of
the discard mortality that would continue to occur.
 Even prohibiting all harvest of red snapper isn’t enough to end overfishing when the
discard mortality rates are considered. Because the red snapper stock is part of the
multi-species snapper-grouper fishery, discard mortality of red snapper would continue
to occur as fishermen pursue other co-occurring species in the fishery.
 Amendment 17 contains management alternatives for large time and area closures that
would prohibit fishing for all species in the snapper grouper management complex
(there are 73) in areas where red snapper are most prevalent to reduce encounters with
Page 4
4
red snapper and thereby limit discard losses. The Council is also considering alternatives
in Amendment 17 that would reduce deep water fishing effort and thereby reduce the
expected future discard mortality rate in the commercial fishery.
Q. Given the current economic conditions, can’t the Council wait another year or so to put
management measures in place?
 The requirement to end overfishing in the Magnuson-Stevens Act does not allow for a
delay. The Council received notification on July 8, 2008, that overfishing is occurring in
the red snapper fishery and the Council has one year to develop a plan to end
overfishing. The Magnuson-Stevens Act specifies that overfishing must be ended while
minimizing, to the greatest extent practicable, negative economic and social impacts.
Q. I’m seeing more red snapper than I have in the past 10 years. If the stock is in such bad
shape, why are we catching more fish?
 Many fishermen have testified during public hearings and scoping meetings that they
are catching more red snapper in recent years, especially for those fishing off the coast
of Georgia and northeast Florida. A spike in 2007 and 2008 recreational landings
documents that fishermen are seeing more fish now than in previous years.
 The 2008 stock assessment reflects an increase in abundance since 1995; in fact,
abundance estimated for the start of 2007 is nearly twice that estimated for 1995.
Strong year classes that occurred in 1998 and 1999 and moved through the fishery over
the last several years are also partially responsible for the perception that the stock has
improved recently.
 Despite these increases in overall abundance, the age structure of the population
remains truncated (there are not enough older fish). Red snapper live to 54 years of
age, but in 2007 less than one percent of the population was estimated as being age 10
or older.
 It is also apparent that the mortality in the directed fishery has recently fallen about
50%. However, discard mortality increased following implementation of the minimum
size limit in 1992.
Page 5
5
 The 2008 stock assessment incorporated research that indicated red snapper can live to
a maximum age of 54 years, far longer than the previous (1997) estimate of 25 years.
Yet the population assessment also shows that there are very few fish in the stock more
than 10 years old. Despite the protection afforded younger fish by the minimum size,
the mortality of red snapper, once they reach the legally harvestable size, remains
excessive.
 Although the stock is improving, overfishing is still occurring and must be addressed
within the requirements of the Reauthorized Magnuson-Stevens Act.
Q. We’re also seeing more of the larger fish than we have in the past few years. Aren’t these
larger fish a sign that the population is healthy?
 For red snapper, larger fish don’t always represent older fish. There is a great deal of
variance in the age of red snapper at larger sizes. For example, the average size of a 10
year old red snapper is around 32 inches, but 10 year old fish range in size from 27 to 40
inches.

Age samples from the fishery reveal that most of the larger fish in the catches in recent
years are younger than age 10.

Fish are being caught before they become old enough to reach their peak reproductive
levels. Although the 20 inch size limit allows some fish to spawn before they become
vulnerable to harvest, these younger, mostly first-time spawners are less productive
than the older and heavier fish. A 10-year old red snapper may have reached 90 – 95%
of its maximum length but only 80% of its potential maximum weight.

Increasing the abundance of older, mature fish is important to long-term sustainability.
Increasing the number of mature age classes in the population would allow it to take
greater advantage of favorable conditions to produce large number of recruits (fish that
are born within a given year) while also ensuring a buffer to sustain the population
during periods of less than optimal conditions for spawning.
Q. I’ve heard that the managers want to rebuild the stocks to levels seen in the 1960s. Isn’t
this an unreasonable goal?
 The rebuilding target is determined by the stock’s productivity and is not selected based
on any specific point in time. Determining the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY)
biomass level typically requires information on historical landings because the stock
must be observed over a range of conditions to get estimates of its overall potential and
productivity. The MSY is the largest long-term average catch that can be taken
Page 6
6
continuously (sustained) from a stock or stock complex under average environmental
conditions.
 The rebuilding target is simply stated and is the same for all federally managed stocks.
Specified by law in the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the target is to achieve a stock biomass
that is capable of supporting harvest equal to Maximum Sustainable Yield. For red
snapper, this target is 40% of the spawning stock biomass that would occur if the
population did not receive any fishing pressure.
 For most of our fisheries, we can only get such a range by looking at historical time
periods, and that includes landings. Landings data for red snapper date back to the
1940s for the commercial fishery and the 1960s for the recreational fishery.
Q. Where did the data used in the SEDAR stock assessment come from? How were the data
used in the assessment dating back to the 1950s and ‘60s collected?
 Data used for the assessment consist of records of commercial catches provided by
dealer and fishermen reports since the 1940s, headboat fishery catch records from the
Southeast Headboat Survey since 1972, and recreational catch records from the Marine
Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey (MRFSS) since 1981. Also included are U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service recreational fisheries surveys of the 1960s and 1970s. Data through
2006 were included in the assessment.
 Landings and effort information are provided by dealer and fishermen reports and
surveys. Information on catch lengths and ages is provided by sampling programs that
support the catch statistics programs. Information on biological characteristics, such as
age, growth, and reproduction, is provided by various research studies.
 All of the data used in the assessment are described in the SEDAR 15 red snapper stock
assessment report available on the SEDAR web site at:
http://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/sedar/. The SEDAR web site also provides extensive
supporting documentation that describes data collection programs and research
findings.
 Data sources for the 1960s and 1970s include surveys conducted by the U.S. Fish &
Wildlife Service and by the National Marine Fisheries Service. These sources are
referenced in the SEDAR 15 report and available with the red snapper assessment
documentation on the SEDAR website.
 The reliability and precision of these data sources, especially those related to catch,
effort, and size and age composition, generally increases over time. This trend is largely
Page 7
7
due to increased requirements for reporting by all participants implemented through
programs such as the commercial logbook system and state trip ticket programs.
 Scientists use assessment models that can test the impacts of using different years of
data and evaluate assumptions about data reliability and precision. As described in the
stock assessment report, they evaluate many different alternatives before deciding on
the final configuration.
Amendment 17: Long-term Management Measures
Q. What long-term measures are being considered in Amendment 17 to end overfishing and
rebuild red snapper stocks?
 Because red snapper will experience excessive bycatch mortality as fishermen pursue
other species in the snapper-grouper complex, Amendment 17 includes alternatives
that would prohibit the harvest of all snapper grouper species in certain areas.
 The alternatives for the closed areas focus on locations where concentrated landings of
red snapper are reported, primarily off the coasts of Georgia and the north/central east
coast of Florida.
 Amendment 17 also establishes Annual Catch Limits and Accountability Measures for
the 10 species under the South Atlantic Council’s jurisdiction currently listed as
undergoing overfishing, including red snapper. The other species addressed in
Amendment 17 are golden tilefish, snowy grouper, speckled hind, Warsaw grouper,
black grouper, black sea bass, gag, red grouper, and vermilion snapper.
Q. If these large areas are closed to snapper grouper fishing, how would data be collected?
How long would the closed areas have to be in place?
 Amendment 17 will include an alternative to develop a red snapper monitoring program
that may incorporate a research set-aside for an experimental headboat fishery with
observers to continue the Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) time series that is presently
available. A research set-aside is an amount (poundage) of fish reserved for research
purposes.
 Amendment 17 will include alternatives to increase the level of fishery-independent
sampling for red snapper, especially in those areas closed to fishing.
Page 8
8
 The assessment will be updated during the recovery period to monitor progress of the
rebuilding plan and provide support for changes in the management program as the
stock rebuilds.
 If the closure proves effective, the area closed to all snapper-grouper fishing may be
reduced as the stock rebuilds.
Q. Amendment 16 regulations are expected to be in place by June 2009. Will the impacts of
those regulations, including the 4-month spawning season closure be considered in the
development of Amendment 17?
 The impacts of regulations implemented in Amendment 16 will be included and
considered in the analysis of alternatives considered in Amendment 17.
 Amendment 16 addresses overfishing for gag and vermilion snapper. The amendment
includes a 4-month spawning season closure (January – April) for shallow-water grouper
species (including black and red grouper) for both the commercial and recreational
fisheries; reduces the aggregate grouper bag limit from 5 fish to 3 fish; reduces the
gag/black grouper bag limit to 1 gag or black grouper (combined); reduces the vermilion
snapper bag limit from 10 fish to 5 fish; creates a commercial gag quota; and
implements a recreational closed season for vermilion snapper (November – March).
The requirement for use of venting tools when appropriate was disapproved but
fishermen would be required to use dehooking tools, as needed.
Q. How did the red snapper fishery get to this situation? Why didn’t the Council take action
to end overfishing before now?
 The Council responded to stock assessments and recommendations from scientists
regarding the red snapper stock as information became available.
 In 1990, scientists recommended size limits for red snapper to provide reductions
necessary to end overfishing. In response, the Council developed Amendment 4 to the
Snapper Grouper Fishery Management Plan which went into effect in January 1992.
New regulations for red snapper established a 20” size limit and an aggregate bag limit
of 10 snapper (excluding vermilion snapper), with no more than 2 red snapper included
in the aggregate bag limit. These regulations were determined to be sufficient to end
overfishing based on the science available at the time.
 Note that at the time Amendment 4 was developed (1991), studies conducted by the
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the state of South Carolina estimated that
80 to 100% of the red snapper caught and released survived.
Page 9
9
 A red snapper stock assessment conducted in 1997 estimated that red snapper reached
a maximum age of 25 and noted few fish over the age of 12 in the landings. The
assessment concluded that the red snapper stock was in a “transitional” condition: “The
status of the stock is less than desirable, but does appear to be responding for the better
to something, possibly management, in the most recent years.” Based on this
conclusion, the Council did not implement any changes to red snapper management at
the time.
 The 2008 Southeast Data Assessment and Review (SEDAR 15) stock assessment for red
snapper, involving three separate workshops and an outside independent review,
concluded the stock is overfished and undergoing overfishing. The assessment
estimated that red snapper reach a maximum age of 54 years, not 25 years as previously
estimated. The Council’s Scientific and Statistical Committee approved the assessment
and its conclusions.
 On July 8, 2008, the Council received a letter from NMFS stating that red snapper are
overfished and undergoing overfishing, and that within one year the Council needed to
prepare a plan amendment or proposed regulations to end overfishing. The Council
began developing an amendment to end overfishing. If approved by the Secretary,
Amendment 17 will establish Annual Catch Limits and Accountability Measures for 10
species currently undergoing overfishing, including red snapper. The amendment will
also establish a new rebuilding plan for red snapper.
 On March 23, 2009, the Council submitted a request to NMFS for an interim rule to
close the red snapper fishery for a period of 180 days (with the intent to extend the
closure for an additional 186 days) to begin after the Council’s June 8-12, 2009, meeting
in Stuart, Florida. NMFS is currently developing an Environmental Assessment for the
180 day interim closure.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Apr 21, 2009)

Page 8
8
 The assessment will be updated during the recovery period to monitor progress of the
rebuilding plan and provide support for changes in the management program as the
stock rebuilds.
 If the closure proves effective, the area closed to all snapper-grouper fishing may be
reduced as the stock rebuilds.
Q. Amendment 16 regulations are expected to be in place by June 2009. Will the impacts of
those regulations, including the 4-month spawning season closure be considered in the
development of Amendment 17?
 The impacts of regulations implemented in Amendment 16 will be included and
considered in the analysis of alternatives considered in Amendment 17.
 Amendment 16 addresses overfishing for gag and vermilion snapper. The amendment
includes a 4-month spawning season closure (January – April) for shallow-water grouper
species (including black and red grouper) for both the commercial and recreational
fisheries; reduces the aggregate grouper bag limit from 5 fish to 3 fish; reduces the
gag/black grouper bag limit to 1 gag or black grouper (combined); reduces the vermilion
snapper bag limit from 10 fish to 5 fish; creates a commercial gag quota; and
implements a recreational closed season for vermilion snapper (November – March).
The requirement for use of venting tools when appropriate was disapproved but
fishermen would be required to use dehooking tools, as needed.
Q. How did the red snapper fishery get to this situation? Why didn’t the Council take action
to end overfishing before now?
 The Council responded to stock assessments and recommendations from scientists
regarding the red snapper stock as information became available.
 In 1990, scientists recommended size limits for red snapper to provide reductions
necessary to end overfishing. In response, the Council developed Amendment 4 to the
Snapper Grouper Fishery Management Plan which went into effect in January 1992.
New regulations for red snapper established a 20” size limit and an aggregate bag limit
of 10 snapper (excluding vermilion snapper), with no more than 2 red snapper included
in the aggregate bag limit. These regulations were determined to be sufficient to end
overfishing based on the science available at the time.
 Note that at the time Amendment 4 was developed (1991), studies conducted by the
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the state of South Carolina estimated that
80 to 100% of the red snapper caught and released survived.
Page 9
9
 A red snapper stock assessment conducted in 1997 estimated that red snapper reached
a maximum age of 25 and noted few fish over the age of 12 in the landings. The
assessment concluded that the red snapper stock was in a “transitional” condition: “The
status of the stock is less than desirable, but does appear to be responding for the better
to something, possibly management, in the most recent years.” Based on this
conclusion, the Council did not implement any changes to red snapper management at
the time.
 The 2008 Southeast Data Assessment and Review (SEDAR 15) stock assessment for red
snapper, involving three separate workshops and an outside independent review,
concluded the stock is overfished and undergoing overfishing. The assessment
estimated that red snapper reach a maximum age of 54 years, not 25 years as previously
estimated. The Council’s Scientific and Statistical Committee approved the assessment
and its conclusions.
 On July 8, 2008, the Council received a letter from NMFS stating that red snapper are
overfished and undergoing overfishing, and that within one year the Council needed to
prepare a plan amendment or proposed regulations to end overfishing. The Council
began developing an amendment to end overfishing. If approved by the Secretary,
Amendment 17 will establish Annual Catch Limits and Accountability Measures for 10
species currently undergoing overfishing, including red snapper. The amendment will
also establish a new rebuilding plan for red snapper.
 On March 23, 2009, the Council submitted a request to NMFS for an interim rule to
close the red snapper fishery for a period of 180 days (with the intent to extend the
closure for an additional 186 days) to begin after the Council’s June 8-12, 2009, meeting
in Stuart, Florida. NMFS is currently developing an Environmental Assessment for the
180 day interim closure.


----------



## wmaybin (Apr 21, 2009)

So you obviously support the closure, what I would like to know is where you got your info, are those meeting notes?  As an obviouse member of CCA who is suppose to be a recreational angler based conservation group, how can you support this?  Especially when there are many reasnable other alternatives other than complete colsure.  Especially when they try to slide the grouper in with it all, whats next?  Flounder?  Other than this data I would like to hear YOUR personal and honest reasons...


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Apr 21, 2009)

wmaybin said:


> So you obviously support the closure, what I would like to know is where you got your info, are those meeting notes?  As an obviouse member of CCA who is suppose to be a recreational angler based conservation group, how can you support this?  Especially when there are many reasnable other alternatives other than complete colsure.  Especially when they try to slide the grouper in with it all, whats next?  Flounder?  Other than this data I would like to hear YOUR personal and honest reasons...



I read the data from the several sources given as reason for the closure.

Understanding the results of those studies it is obvious that if we are to save snapper for future generations we can not continue as we have.

Modern technology coupled with a swell in the numbers of recreational fishermen equipped with boats, GPS and sonar add up to depleted stocks of breeding age fish.

Read the info I've posted above. If you can counter the data, do so.

If you can't counter the studies with more than "I don't have a problem catching snapper" then you owe it to the resource and the future to support the closure at least short term.

Not supporting the closure is not unlike supporting the Obama administration piling trillions of dollars of debt on our children and their children. It is generational irresponsibility.


----------



## PaulD (Apr 21, 2009)

SEDAR Stock Assessment Report 1 

February 2008 Revised 2009

_Abstract from Manooch et al:_ Changes in the age structure and population size of red snapper, _Lutjames campechanus_, from North Carolina through the Florida Keys were examined using records of landings and size frequencies of fish from commercial, recreational, and heatboat fisheries from 1986-1995. Population size in numbers at age was estimated for each year by applying seperabloe virtual population analysis ( SVPA) to the landings in numbers at age. AVPA was used to estimate annual, age specific fishing mortality (_F_) for four levels of natural mortality. Although the landings of red snapper for the three fisheries have declined , minimum fish size regualtions have also resulted in *an increase in the mean size of red snapper landed. age at entry and age at full recuitment were age 1 for 1986-1991, compared with age 2 and age 6, respectively, for 1992-1996*Levels of mortality from fishing ranges from .31 to .69 for the entire period. *Spawning potential ratio ( SPR) increased from .09 to .24 from 1986 to 1995* The SPR level could be improved with decrease in _F_, or an increase in age at entry to the fisheries. The altter could be enhanced now if fisherman, particularly recreational fisherman, comply with minimum size regulations.- pg 4

Management Review- Current stock Biomass status- UNKNOWN

Specific Management Criteria 
Value- UNK
          - UNK
          - UNK
          - UNK
          - UNK
          - UNK
          - UNK
-pg. 5

*red snapper is currently listed as unknown in terms of an overfished status. The overfished determination of this stock has been changed to unknown to better reflect the current knowledge of it's status. The previous pre-SFA determination of overfished for this stock was based on SPR, which is inadequate to determine the overfished status because it is not biomass-based determination that is SFA compliant cannot be made at this time*
pg-6

Quota calculation details

Current quota value- N/A
Next schedule quota value- N/A
Annual or average quota- N/A
If averaged, number of years to average- N/A
Other- N/A

References- Manooch, C.S., III, J.C. Potts, D.S. Vaughan, and M.L. Burton 1998

I can also point out that the graphs do not support the closure either. 

The base natural mortality in the fishery was .078. This was *assumed* to be constant over time

SAIP FORM

Stock Assesment improvement program 
Assessment Summary Form

Level of input data for
Abundance- 1 ( imprecise)

-pg 21

I have all 120 some odd pages, as well as economic impact studies for several states but I would much rather speak my FACTS from a bully pulpit rather than on the internet. 
I'm not here to cut and past pages of babble that only you, I and a select few others can understand. I'm not one to baffle with bull but much rather flatter with facts.

Also I noticed that you pulled the CCA letter down for a second time. I am interested why. It seems to be very private and closed doors where as a conservation organization should have no problem operating in the public.

I would like to thank you, whom ever you are,
Paul B. Durham


----------



## wmaybin (Apr 21, 2009)

HMMMMM


----------



## PaulD (Apr 21, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> I read the data from the several sources given as reason for the closure.
> 
> Understanding the results of those studies it is obvious that if we are to save snapper for future generations we can not continue as we have.
> 
> ...



- The SEDAR is supposed to be what the decision is based off of. The SEDAR does not support the closure.

-In the reports" is shows snapper populations dropping from the very beginning in the 1950's. Neither GPS nor modern Sonar existed back then. Especially at the level of being practical for recreational anglers.
-As far as MORE anglers fishing there has been a drop of 19% in recreational anglers (per state and federal studies)

- I've done so! Will do so again if you wish.

-See above statement. We as law upholding, true conservation minded, educated anglers will not be bullied by inadequate, biased, or misrepresented data. PERIOD!

Trying to compare this to stimulus packages is an open scare tactic aimed at changing the minds of conservative readers. If you truly wanted to compare this to that it would go something like this: You have harvested too many snapper, the oceans are depleted, and we (the government) are going to give you more snapper from the gulf fishery. You may catch these snapper without any recourse from anyone. We will lift the 2 fish limit completely and there shall be no size restriction. When they are all gone we will expect your children to produce 2 snapper for each one you caught. We will send said snapper back to the gulf and hope that yours spontaneously reproduce. 

That's not what we're saying!

I'm for finding a common ground. 

This closure will pull millions, MILLIONS away from the state and federal governments. Jobs will be lost, taxes will be lost, and everyone will suffer as taxes will have to be increased to make up for lost revenue. State employees will loss pay or their jobs as well as federal. Not to mention businesses closing.

Let's find a medium! I have no problem with making it where each boat has to carry a venting tool, use non stainless circle hooks and be required to have a ARC dehooker on board at all times to improve mortality rate. 
WE (ALL FISHERMAN) are the biggest conservationist of all. This is our resource and we do not want to see it go away. We don't want big gov't involved in it either as that is Socialism and removes our freedoms as Americans to enjoy our natural resources and provide a better life for our family. We need this fishery, there is not data to support shutting it down. We need the money and jobs it supports each year. They are vital to our economy and feed our families. They help keep individual taxes down by disbursing them out among more people.

Help support our freedoms and our people. Not a fish that is NOT at a critical stage nor is it going that way, I can tell you from being a fisherman and diver myself (recreational!).

This decision has to be based of off research that can be supported and reproduced. 
WE need to make a decision off of proper and timely research not emotion!


----------



## Swamprat (Apr 22, 2009)

We only post the regs for Georgia folks....us Florida people are privy to our own rules.

Kinda like Georgia folks wanting to keep Florida hunters out but with the tables reversed. 

Besides there is better eating fish than a red snapper out there in the waters but I guess the 30 foot open fisherman with twin 225's isn't really set up to gig flounder.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Apr 22, 2009)

I held no silly notion that some of you "I'm doing what I want regardless of the cost" type people would care about the science and I did not post this to debate your base desires.

I posted info so those with open minds could see the evidence.


----------



## DesertVet (Apr 22, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> I held no silly notion that some of you "I'm doing what I want regardless of the cost" type people would care about the science and I did not post this to debate your base desires.
> 
> I posted info so those with open minds could see the evidence.




UNKNOWN is NOT EVIDENCE of anything.  Typical leftwing liberal slant.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Apr 22, 2009)

Realizing that the cut and paste I made above is rather long, there is one section I want to highlight for those who may be interested:

Q. I’m seeing more red snapper than I have in the past 10 years. If the stock is in such bad
shape, why are we catching more fish?

A. Many fishermen have testified during public hearings and scoping meetings that they
are catching more red snapper in recent years, especially for those fishing off the coast
of Georgia and northeast Florida. A spike in 2007 and 2008 recreational landings
documents that fishermen are seeing more fish now than in previous years.

ï‚· The 2008 stock assessment reflects an increase in abundance since 1995; in fact,
abundance estimated for the start of 2007 is nearly twice that estimated for 1995.
Strong year classes that occurred in 1998 and 1999 and moved through the fishery over
the last several years are also partially responsible for the perception that the stock has
improved recently.

ï‚· Despite these increases in overall abundance, the age structure of the population
remains truncated (there are not enough older fish). Red snapper live to 54 years of
age, but in 2007 less than one percent of the population was estimated as being age 10
or older.

ï‚· It is also apparent that the mortality in the directed fishery has recently fallen about
50%. However, discard mortality increased following implementation of the minimum
size limit in 1992.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Apr 22, 2009)

DesertVet said:


> post deleted - grim



Looking past your ignorant personal attacks to the big bold letters, I'll point out that in Georgia there was no deer hunting for 100 years until responsible conservationist/sportsmen began to work to protect the resource.

If it takes 10 years to save the fishery is it worth it?

Or do you simply want to be concerned about your own immediate gratification?

(BTW, that was hypothetical in nature. I already know the tenor of your response.)


----------



## PaulD (Apr 22, 2009)

There were never "NO DEER" in Ga. That is propaganda and not true.

Also understand that Under the Magnuson Ferguson act the closure can be placed indefinitely! They don't even have to do any more research again for 10 years. Then if you read closely that research can be 10 years old as there is no date criteria in the act.

Alright get back on task and read what I wrote, like I read yours. For a person that is "open minded" I noticed that you only read the research you posted. 
I support measures to decrease mortality and support an Alternative that includes: Required Venting tools, Non-stainless circle hooks and ARC dehookers on each vessel.

AS far as age structure. If you will post that whole report you will see where proper aging knowledge and techniques are not available and the scientist in the study do not full understand the growth rate and age demographics of the species due to this.

MECHANICALDOG, please avoid personal attacks on my thread. This is nothing more than an attempt to have the tread removed. You have already shown that you are trying to achieve that by removing a CCA thread that I questioned and you removed and began attacking my thread. Please stop.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Apr 22, 2009)

PaulD said:


> MECHANICALDOG, please avoid personal attacks on my thread.



 You're kidding, right?


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Apr 22, 2009)

Paul,

You have continually posted incorrect assumptions concerning my experience, the limitations of my geographical endeavors, the depth of my research and reading as if I am your enemy, when if fact you have no concept, much less knowledge, on the subject. You partner in this, DV, has called ma a "liar" among many other assertions against myself and any other individual or organization who does not blindly support your cause.

And you want me to stop personal attacks when I have levied none?

You are simply amazing.


----------



## PaulD (Apr 22, 2009)

I have made no assumptions about you. I have read that all the reports you have posted in the first 10 pages, got tired last night, of your profile concern you fishing only in the pan handle of Florida. That is a fact, no assumption needed any member can look it up for himself. 
I have offered federally accepted information to you and you have turned down the request to read it. My knowledge on the subject is vast. I have simply pasted straight quotes from the SEDAR on here. No biased research NONE! Only Federally accepted! 
DV is not my partner; I don't know him from Adams house cat.
"I" have not called you a liar, though I have contradicted your statements, with once again, Facts from the SEDAR.

Again I ask of you, show me your research, open up the information you have to me and let me see where it is coming from. I have openly stated where mine is for all to find it and read themselves if they so wish. I have hidden nothing, information, technique or data collection or my name and contact information. I have it all out there for others to read and make their own decision off of. I have not seen you do the same. Obviously if you believe in the conviction of your beliefs you should have no problems opening up and telling us where your information is coming from and who is supporting it and publishing it. Mine, as I have stated is from the SEDAR, it is federally accepted and is a working subsidiary of the SAMFC. The economic impact studies are from each state. Not an independently funding group (i.e. special interest group)


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Apr 22, 2009)

PaulD said:


> I have made no assumptions about you. I have read that all ............................of your post concern you fishing only in the pan handle of Florida. That is a fact, no assumption needed any member can look it up for himself.



You obviously can't even do simple little research like this properly. Not that the geographic nature of my personal exploits is relative to the situation at hand, but you have failed the research test if your research on this board did not turn up a few trips to Georgia's coast. (Not that this board is the sum of the set.)

The snapper closure is an extremely complex issue and all the answers are not evident in a snapshot.

In fact, I don't see anyone claiming they have all the answers to the solution but only that there is a serious problem and something has to be done.

The members of SAMFC, CCA, Georgia's Coastal Resource Division, other state resource agencies, many charter captains, recreational and commercial fishermen are working towards a solution to protect the resource for future generations.

If a pipe bursts in your house and your flooring is being ruined, the drywall is absorbing water and the water is generally destroying your house, what is the first thing you do?

Do you try to bail it out?

Do you go try to fix the pipe?

I think most people would logically go turn the water off.

You seem to be suggesting that we just ignore it and eventually it will repair itself and the water will evaporate.

The closure shuts the water off.

Now we have to really get down to 'brass tacks' about what the future holds. It is going to require a cooperative effort on the part of the the fisheries community on whole to preserve the snapper fishery.

Of course, you do have the option of simply protesting or you can be a responsible part of seeking a solution to the problem.


----------



## PaulD (Apr 22, 2009)

PaulD said:


> I have made no assumptions about you. I have read that all the reports you have posted in the first 10 pages, got tired last night, of your profile concern you fishing only in the pan handle of Florida.



Allow me to quote exactly what I said, as I notice you left out a very important part in an effort to discredit me. 

This is what I'm talking about. Here for everyone to see you have clearly, in your last post, manipulated something I said by deleted an entire part of it and twisted it for your benefit!

I will ask again! A 4th time! Show me! I know my research and have opened it to you and you have once again tried to make it more difficult than what it is by side stepping my request for you to present reputable and tangible information as I have. 

You are side stepping the facts in an effort to elude the reality of the situation.

Now you are going further into this diluting of the facts by stating, "that it's not that simple." 
Do not insult the public’s intelligence sir. Provide hard evidence, reputably gathered and replicable in it's result, and show us! 
My information is there for all to see.

Again, a Fourth time, show me your reputable research as I have shown you and stop trying to distract from the point, sir.


----------



## DesertVet (Apr 22, 2009)

Paul you cannot show something you do not have. MD I did not call you a liar directly, but if the shoe fits wear it. I believe what I said was CCA was lying to the public at large and deceiving its naive members with the so-called evidence, that you or no one else can prove even exists. I have studied some of your other posts, and apparently you only support the closure of fish you don't care to catch in the first place, or are not able to catch.
   As Paul stated SHOW us. It is that simple. Just show us. I will bow down before you like your Messiah did the Saudi Prince, if you can show us some evidence of the propaganda you spew.  I along with any responsible angler, would not hesitate to help enforce a snapper closure if the species were in fact in trouble. That is simply not the case, & I can prove it. You care to join me on my boat, and I will show you.


----------



## DesertVet (Apr 22, 2009)

I forgot this,



RED SNAPPER CLOSURE FOR 10 YEARS


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Apr 22, 2009)

DesertVet said:


> I have studied some of your other posts, and apparently you only support the closure of fish you don't care to catch in the first place, or are not able to catch.



Again, you prove your inability at doing and understanding research. Here are a couple of pics from a couple of my threads:


----------



## seaweaver (Apr 22, 2009)

DesertVet said:


> UNKNOWN is NOT EVIDENCE of anything.  Typical leftwing liberal slant.






Why ...You boys have not experienced Jeff Young's Definition of evidence till NOW?

HAR!
Yall should have seen him twisting on Red fish!!!!
If you are anti CCA or Susan or Spuddy  you will reap the wrath of the Conservation Ranger!


cw


----------



## wmaybin (Apr 22, 2009)

MD, first of all nice pics, is that you in the hat? I originally figured you for the bearded guy on the pc cobia post. Anyway...

Look man, you got your view and we have ours. It is clear to me that the four of us are the only ones who care about the issue on this board or everyone else is to sheepish to step up for what they believe in so koodos to us! (your included in us by the way) I have to say I am dissapointed that in your post you keep attempting to portray us (your not included in this one) as not giving a crap about the fishery. Numerous times you have made comments such as If you can't counter the studies with more than "I don't have a problem catching snapper"We have not one time made any comment saying we were not concerned with the future of the fishery, yet that we believe the fishery is in better standing than the SAMF think and that we also beleive their reporting is innaccurate, misleading, and self contradicting.  We have said several times that we are interested in finding a common ground that benefits the fishery and everyone involved (unless those peoples real interest is closing fisheries for other reasons)  As I said in the other thread and paul has mentioned as well,  there are alternative measures which would allow for further research, accuurate research.  I am going to give one example that sticks out to me, the SEDAR report states several times that recreational anglers catch more fish than commercial anglers.  However there is a graph of the catch data and it plainly shows that commercial angling results in higher catches.  I know my stance on this issue and for the record, I have fished offshore 4 times in my life, I am an inshore guy.  (puke like a girl ) I am afraid that once they take this they will continue to take more and more.  I respect your opinion, however I do not agree with it in its entirety.  I do agree that we should attempt to suustain the fishery.  We have continually argued for our side with data and suggestions and you sir have progressed from posting data or Q&A sessions to simply attempting to make us look like a bunch of ignorant people who do not care about the resource and that PLAINLY is not the case.  If you care to respond fine, if not that is fine as well.  Regardless this will be my last post on this issue for as I see it we have clearly stated our points and backed them up.  There is nothing more for me to do here.  Good day.


----------



## PaulD (Apr 22, 2009)

So now you've gone from being on topic, to trying to discredit me after you couldn't provide research like I asked you too, to twisting my words around and editing them and reporting them to posting pictures of snapper you caught in the gulf of Florida, I know this because of the size of them and things in the back ground.

I see that you have nothing more to substantiate your argument and are now simply trying to derail the thread.

I'm not asking a 5th time. I see things clearly now.


----------



## DesertVet (Apr 22, 2009)

PaulD said:


> So now you've gone from being on topic, to trying to discredit me after you couldn't provide research like I asked you too, to twisting my words around and editing them and reporting them to posting pictures of snapper you caught in the gulf of Florida, I know this because of the size of them and things in the back ground.
> 
> I see that you have nothing more to substantiate your argument and are now simply trying to derail the thread.
> 
> I'm not asking a 5th time. I see things clearly now.



Hey Paul did you know that they were about to close snapper fishing for 10 years, and if they do, I am going to insist that they do so in the Gulf as well. as you can see, MD is typical liberal, Do as I say, not as I do. It would seem from looking at those pics, they raped the gulf in a few hours. If he  really was the conservationist he claims, he would have thrown all those fish back.  Again he proves our point, by not answering the simplest of questions.  His answers don't matter, as we all know the facts were not used to make this decision anyway. 
   I had a long phone call today with a state representative, who actually called me about another matter. I immediately moved the conversation to the need to terminate Susan Shipmans employment. I explained the position she held and how she has used it her benefit, and not the public's benefit. I told him about her vote to Ban red snapper fishing. He like us, likes to Offshore fish, and eat Red Snapper. He also explained how good a friend the new DNR commissioner is.  Hey Susan, you still have time for me to call off the dogs. Once I let them loose, I will stop at nothing to see your days numbered, and CRD. I will push the state to close down CRD, as it appears to be nothing more than an arm for environuts to use to sway fishing regulations.  Hey Hey Hey, Goodbye ! Susan.
   MD it is obsurd for you to claim recreational fishermen catch more snapper than commercials. Now we know who you really support. EDIT  There are commercial snapper boats out at the triple ledge daily, in spite of water conditions, slaughtering the fish. I have not been out there in a while. It is just plain stupid of you to even attempt to say recs catch more snapper, because once again, I bet you nor any of your fellow nazi's have checked a single recreational boat upon arrival to the docks.  Anybody  claiming otherwise, is a stupid liar. 

MD, once again show me a count or study of recreational catches that validates these numbers. That study should include names of anglers,dates, catches, etc.  Oh I am sorry, did you not understand the question? I bet your girlfriend Susan cannot produce a study either. what a bunch of losers the environuts are. 
   If you guys hate America so much, why don't you just leave. I promise you, we won't miss you.  Maybe they will let you go stay in Cuba or Venezuala, where you will be free to tell those govts what to do.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Apr 23, 2009)

PaulD said:


> So now you've gone from being on topic, to trying to discredit me after you couldn't provide research like I asked you too, to twisting my words around and editing them and reporting them to posting pictures of snapper you caught in the gulf of Florida, I know this because of the size of them and things in the back ground.
> 
> I see that you have nothing more to substantiate your argument and are now simply trying to derail the thread.
> 
> I'm not asking a 5th time. I see things clearly now.



Paul,

I have no reason to discredit you. 

You and your buddies have made this a personal issue. I responded to the personal. I should not have even acknowledged the attacks and simply stated that there is another side to the issue other than yours.

My experience fishing is not relative to the subject, nor is yours.

The information I posted, with the links embedded, offers a portal to all the study used in determining that there is truly a problem with Red Snapper stocks.

The fact is that the resource requires an effort to protect it and help it rebound.

Again, the solution is not clear but the first step is crystal.

Some are willing to help. 

Some are not.

Everyone is free to make their own decision.


----------



## PaulD (Apr 23, 2009)

You blatantly tried to discredit me by editing, for your benefit, what I originally said. This is another example of how one person twist the facts for their personal gain. This seems to be a large reoccurring theme in this whole snapper toboggle.

Experience is very relative, Do you follow blindly? People that are on the water often provide first hand accounts and are the first ones to notice something is wrong! I have years of experience with this fishery, first hand, for years. I know what I see and I know what others are seeing because I stay in contact with them and share information with them to allow us all the better understand our fishery. I do not follow blindly; I do not read opinions of research studies from biased sources when the actual research is there. I know you just wanted to read 4 pages from anther person rather than reading all 126 pages of the SEDAR but that's lazy and you are making decisions off of another persons OPINION!

You did not read the SEDAR. The information you posted was another person’s view of it. If you read it you would have seen that what you posted is WAY off. The mortality numbers in your post were over 80% higher than the actual numbers in the report. You provided another persons OPINIONS of the issue and not the facts as I did.
The solution is crystal clear: MORE RESEARCH needs to be done. 
You have made no effort to support alternative plans.

Edit:::::I'm not getting into federal control of state redfish stocks on this thread


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Apr 23, 2009)

PaulD said:


> You did not read the SEDAR. The information you posted was another person’s view of it.



One more time:

There are active links in my first posts that will lead you directly to the entire SEDAR site if you have the simple capability to move your mouse to it and click. 

It's not personal no matter how many words you use to attempt to bring it back to personalities.


----------



## Paymaster (Apr 23, 2009)

If it continues to get personal,this one goes away.


----------



## PaulD (Apr 23, 2009)

Mechanicaldawg said:


> One more time:
> 
> There are active links in my first posts that will lead you directly to the entire SEDAR site if you have the simple capability to move your mouse to it and click.
> 
> It's not personal no matter how many words you use to attempt to bring it back to personalities.



First, I have made no effort in bringing it to personalities. I have not taken a personal shot at you at all. 

There is an (1) active link inserted into your first post. However, it does not carry you to the SADER 15 it carries you to the SADER homepage. Also, the information it is inserted in does not support the SADER research. It is misrepresented information as I stated earlier. Sticking a link to a home page in  inaccurate information does not make that information accurate or reliable.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Apr 23, 2009)

PaulD said:


> First, I have made no effort in bringing it to personalities. I have not taken a personal shot at you at all.
> 
> There is an (1) active link inserted into your first post. However, it does not carry you to the SADER 15 it carries you to the SADER homepage. Also, the information it is inserted in does not support the SADER research. It is misrepresented information as I stated earlier. Sticking a link to a home page in  inaccurate information does not make that information accurate or reliable.



Most people here do not require spoon feeding.

As you could not locate the SEDAR 15 link on the SEDAR home page and take the one additional step required to get the material, I will post you another link that will take you directly to it:

http://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/sedar/Sedar_Workshops.jsp?WorkshopNum=15

You keep offering to furnish this material to others as if it were some secret holy grail. 

It is all out in the wide open world wide web for anyone that cares to see it. 

Not that anyone else seems to be paying attention, but if anyone truly does have any interest I urge you to read it for yourself rather than taking anyone on either side of the issue's cherry picked info.


----------



## PaulD (Apr 23, 2009)

Actually that's still not it. I offered to provide it because it is very difficult to get the exact document to open if your computer connection isn't all that great (i.e. slow to load or hangs up due to file size). I have it in PDF form so I can just e-mail it out. I'm just trying to be thoughtful and help people out that would like to read it. No Holy Grail, Just trying to make it easy.

With over 1,060 views I beg to differ on your comment that no one is paying attention to this as well. I have e-mailed out well over a dozen copies of the information. 
People do care about this and are educating themselves about it. 

I have never implied that anyone here needs spoon-feeding. I just try to provide strait information rather than making others have to look for it, due to all the biased information out there posted by others. This just makes the truth easier to find.

Like I stated earlier, don't insult peoples intelligence on here, or there interest in this topic.


----------



## PWalls (Apr 23, 2009)

Hey Jeff, those are some cool pics of those fish. I must say though that last pic would be a whole lot better without that ugly guy on the left in it.


----------



## DesertVet (Apr 23, 2009)

PWalls said:


> Hey Jeff, those are some cool pics of those fish. I must say though that last pic would be a whole lot better without that ugly guy on the left in it.



PW don't you find it strange that Jeff wants to ban Red snapper in the Atlantic, but he sure doesn't mind going to the Gulf and waxing them? What do you think? Is the Gulf full of Red snapper where there is about 5000% more fishing pressure than the Atlantic, which has run out of snapper that are 50 miles offshore and unreachable for most recreational boats?  There is no comparison to the fishing pressure between the two regions. Yet they are not clsoing the Gulf down, though they have it set up for commercial boats to fish year round and recreational fishermen can fish about 5 months out of the year. It seems this is the most conservative way to go, since all those recreational boats can catch so much more than a snapper boat with a 10,000 lb daily limit. Yeah that is right DAILY limit. I bet on a typical month, all the recs in the Gulf don't  catch that much. Yet there is no data to suggest any numbers, because nobody collects data from the recreational fishermen on either coast. Yet somehow these mysterious numbers that Mechanical Dog comes up with seem to come from the heavens above. Talk about something being fishy.


----------



## PaulD (Apr 24, 2009)

Gentleman, with over 1200 views on this thread it is obvious that people are interested in what is being said. Let us keep on task here. I know that there are efforts being made to get this thread removed, do not be tricked into responding off of emotion.
Like I said earlier, we all need to act of of information rather than emotion.

Thank you all for the interest and support.


----------



## PWalls (Apr 25, 2009)

DesertVet said:


> PW don't you find it strange that Jeff wants to ban Red snapper in the Atlantic, but he sure doesn't mind going to the Gulf and waxing them? What do you think? Is the Gulf full of Red snapper where there is about 5000% more fishing pressure than the Atlantic, which has run out of snapper that are 50 miles offshore and unreachable for most recreational boats?  There is no comparison to the fishing pressure between the two regions. Yet they are not clsoing the Gulf down, though they have it set up for commercial boats to fish year round and recreational fishermen can fish about 5 months out of the year. It seems this is the most conservative way to go, since all those recreational boats can catch so much more than a snapper boat with a 10,000 lb daily limit. Yeah that is right DAILY limit. I bet on a typical month, all the recs in the Gulf don't  catch that much. Yet there is no data to suggest any numbers, because nobody collects data from the recreational fishermen on either coast. Yet somehow these mysterious numbers that Mechanical Dog comes up with seem to come from the heavens above. Talk about something being fishy.



I do not know you. Nor do I have a dog in this fight at all.

However, I know for a FACT and there is no doubt that Jeff Young is a man of integrity. To insinuate otherwise shows your ignorance of the man. If he feels as passionately as he does about this subject, then I do not doubt that he has done the research and has the information that he needs to make the decision he has made.

In any case, I like to go out on a deep fish charter every once in a while. I like to catch a Red Snapper or a Grouper every once in a while. I will leave it to you gentlemen to hash it out amongst yourselves. Just please do so without personal attacks.

edited to add: BTW, the personal attack comment is not addressed to any one individual but is a request by me to moderate the "tone" of the posts. Based on past experience, the "tone" has reached the point where personal attacks are not too far off. I am trying to get you guys to head that off at the pass. Please continue the debate.


----------



## DesertVet (Apr 25, 2009)

PWalls said:


> I do not know you. Nor do I have a dog in this fight at all.
> 
> However, I know for a FACT and there is no doubt that Jeff Young is a man of integrity. To insinuate otherwise shows your ignorance of the man. If he feels as passionately as he does about this subject, then I do not doubt that he has done the research and has the information that he needs to make the decision he has made.
> 
> ...



As usual, and as I have seen from you in the past, you simply are sticking up for your buddy Jeff"Mr. Integrity" Young.  Now if you are as smart as you think you are, then you will see that Mr Integrity posted basically the same garbage in his previous Red Fish Scam threads.  

   There is no doubt he has posted some information, that he picks bit and pieces of, and twists to suit his position. If you take any study available from any agency, you will find they are simply put " Full of UNKNOWNS".  You liberals definetly make policy based on unknowns. Wait, forgive me, liberals such as Susan Shipman, make policy based on who is paying the most for her support. As you can tell, Mr Integrity, supports  Mrs Shipman 100%, and without regard for the fact her vote against Snapper Fishing is bought and paid for. 

  As I have previously mentioned, I am going to see to it that her vote to ban snapper fishing costs her that CRD Director job. I am also going to see to it, that we don't keep paying biologists to stand around in brunswick all day watching blue crabs and black sea bass deficate on each other.  I think we can stand to shut down CRD and save the taxpayers of this state thousands of dollars. I believe if you take the money that is wasted propping up CRD, we could have out State Parks remain intact without further fear of them being closed down or privitized.  

   Now I am sure that someone will go crying to Daddy that the Desert Vet, who has spilt his blood and guts for you liberals to have the freedom to whine as you do, has made a personal attack.  Well, I am not making a personal attack, just working with the previous stated garbage from such individuals. It is strange how a MODERATOR gets into a thread and throws his PERSONAL opinion around about an individual, when the only reason for said material is to incite the others with opposite views.  If a moderator interjects his personal views on a subject,((To insinuate otherwise shows your ignorance)) then he SHOULD be fair game. However, I know how having a pistol on your side makes you think you are a Big Man. Pwalls when you edit a members posts because you just don't like what he said, is plain wrong. You know what you did with another members posts, and you should have your moderator privileges revoked.  I am sure I will awake to some scolding for my post, but I am man enough to stand by what I say on this board or FTF, are you Pwalls or Mr Integrity?


----------



## PWalls (Apr 26, 2009)

DesertVet said:


> As usual, and as I have seen from you in the past, you simply are sticking up for your buddy Jeff"Mr. Integrity" Young.  Now if you are as smart as you think you are, then you will see that Mr Integrity posted basically the same garbage in his previous Red Fish Scam threads.
> 
> There is no doubt he has posted some information, that he picks bit and pieces of, and twists to suit his position. If you take any study available from any agency, you will find they are simply put " Full of UNKNOWNS".  You liberals definetly make policy based on unknowns. Wait, forgive me, liberals such as Susan Shipman, make policy based on who is paying the most for her support. As you can tell, Mr Integrity, supports  Mrs Shipman 100%, and without regard for the fact her vote against Snapper Fishing is bought and paid for.
> 
> ...



I now see the gist of your arguments. If anyone and I mean anyone disagrees with your statements then that means they are automatically a liberal. That is hilarious. That is rich.

Please continue to post. I am sure there are even better opinions out there and are forthcoming. And, for what it is worth coming from an obvious "liberal" like myself , thank you for your service.


----------



## seaweaver (Apr 26, 2009)

_However, I know for a FACT and there is no doubt that Jeff Young is a man of integrity._

Honesty is being able to tell the truth,
Integrity is being able to tell the truth even when it hurts you.

His admissions in his letter to the ed of GOA _which ran counter _to his postings here told me volumes about his integrity.

Snapper and ceding control to Good (pals) Government to appears to be another "passion" for an occasional saltwater dipper.

cw


----------



## HOBO (Apr 26, 2009)

*Typical "Know-it-all" Ignorance*



> I'll point out that in Georgia there was no deer hunting for 100 years until responsible conservationist/sportsmen began to work to protect the resource.



Georgia has always had deer and deer-hunting along the coastal and near coastal counties.....

Your statement above seems typical of your knowledge of the natural resources of Georgia....

Since you are so knowledgeable and well versed about all things,,,, plus being a big-time local GA CCA Chapter big wig,,,, how about "pointing out" just how much of the money taken in by the Georgia Chapters of the CCA actually stays in Georgia and now much goes to the National organization to pay for lobbyists to wine & dine the fat-cat politicians.....  How many lobbyists are currently on GA CCA's payroll???  How much money was actually taken in during 2008 by the CCA and how much of that money actually went toward anything useful to enhance or preserve our coastal resources???  Are you part of the GA CCA officers that are to "treat" our GA political representatives to a "weekend on the Coast for relaxing Golf and Fishing to build a better relationship"???

I don't have an ax to grind with the CCA.....  I believe the cause for which they were founded to be very noble and worthy.....  They have certainly done a lot of good and hopefully will continue to do so especially in Texas and Florida.....  Like many worthwhile organizations the CCA has really grown,,,,,, grown to the point where they have gotten all wrapped up in themselves and their perceived self worth!!!

Many of the local coastal rank & file membership of the Ga CCA are awakening to the facts that just maybe the CCA really isn't looking out for their best interests concerning coastal resources after all......  JUST THE OPPOSITE seems to be more accurate....  They are beginning to wonder just where all their money raised is actually going.....  They certainly aren't seeing any of "this wealth" being distributed in the coastal counties in the form of boat ramps, etc....  The stands taken by the Ga CCA regarding legislative issues such as the giving the Redfish gamefish status (which would have given the DNR exclusive control to regulate this fishery any way they saw fit with no science to support such action) plus the more recent stance supporting the Red Snapper closure even though this move was also based upon no current scientific data   is really beginning to wake up the silent majority.....  

Currently there is all kinds of political maneuvering and jockeying for political position under way within the DNR along with the CCA to lower the current limits on Georgia trout and redfish next year......  I keep hearing 2 redfish per person and 5 trout per day as the ballpark targeted goal.....  I am very concerned that any science generated will be "convenient science",,,, not real science,,,, and be used to slant and manipulate the numbers in directions the DNR wants.....

BTW,,,, Up until my resignation on 01-1-2009 I was a CCA Board member of the Golden Isles Chapter and a member of the CCA State Legislative Affairs Committee......  

----------<" ){{{{{*><


----------



## DesertVet (Apr 26, 2009)

Great Post HOBO. Right on point.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Apr 26, 2009)

WOW! Maybe the thread should be retitled. It hasn't been about red snapper for the past few days.

BTW, I caught a bunch of snapper this weekend along with some nice grouper! One of the snapper was almost mature! It was about 28 inches!


----------



## PaulD (Apr 26, 2009)

WOW, so you know the "Mature" size of a red snapper when 12 scientist with masters and Ph.D's can't determine it? To further that claim I have personally caught snapper that were smaller than that which contained mature row, however that was in the Atlantic, which is what we're talking about here and not the gulf where you were fishing.


Per excepted scientific research:::: RED SNAPPER START breeding at age 2 or 3, but the older the fish, the more fertile it is.




Actually it still is concerning red snapper, HOBO and Richie's comments posted above we're very on topic. Please stop trying to rally your troops to derail it and get it deleted like you have done it the past. If you would like to keep debating the federal research I have with me feel free.


----------



## Capt. Richie Lott (Apr 28, 2009)

Ken, good to hear from you... Dead on, brother.

Wow, this is getting interesting! It appears Paul and DV are fighting an uphill battle on this forum with only a fair amount of support. I think it is time for the fishing Guides (besides me) to step in, all will be from around St. Simons and Brunswick.... They will be signing up soon to chime in on this.

DesertVet, the part you keep hitting dead on is "NO SNAPPER FISHING FOR 10 YEARS". I don't know how many of you know exactly how the Feds work, but I can tell you, it's the same thing as when you owe the IRS. The Fees start mounting, with interest. The Feds are the Feds.... Meaning, if they pass this closure, we'll pay forever in the sense that we'll be whiting fishing (until they close that) on the beach until we're all 90 years old because Red Snapper fishing will still be closed..... Once they get this closed, it's over...

More and more of those graphs and charts (you know, the ones you make with Excel any way you want them) will show up offering the Feds more ammunition to keep it closed. The offer on the table now is 6 months with a 6 month extension plan. They'll get that, and then about another 8-9 years on top of it ONCE THEY CLOSE IT. ONCE IT IS CLOSED, THEY WILL GET ALL THE TIME THEY WANT, Which in my opinion is to stop commercial fishing for bottom fish in general, Bankrupt them and then the Feds buy their boats and businesses just like they have done with other fisheries I won't mention..

No matter how much we all go fishing, you're not going to match the numbers I saw in the report that commercial fisherman can keep. It is, for the most part, KEEP EVERY ONE YOU CATCH OR SHOOT. I can't imagine imagine the government wanting to lose out on the tax dollars this fishery makes, especially in a recession... 

We need logical answers and alternatives to stop this motion. Paul has many of these logical and smart ideas and has studied this issue with careful consideration. MD, you really should hear Paul out on what he has to say, putting all the garabage aside.... There is no one more determined to expose the TRUTH than Paul....

 I will add that there were a PILE of Chicken Snapper (Juvenile Red Snapper) caught and released from thrusday through Saturday this past week, on 4 different wrecks in 60-80 ft. of water. After further inspection from a diver on a quick bounce dive, there were hundreds of Reds swarming the wrecks. In fact, there were so many, the wall they had created was hard to see through in places.

Let's just say it looked alot like this... Notice the shortage:










Also, here is how low the catch numbers are.. My God. They're right!

http://video.yahoo.com/watch/4165239/11212885

Be sure to watch the whole thing.... It's worth it. This will enlighten everyone on the shortage.


----------



## DesertVet (Apr 28, 2009)

Nothing like some Gay Gansta Rap and a Contender full of Red snapper.  I tell you it just pains me to know that people like MD can't catch a red snapper in the Atlantic, have to run off to PCB, where anyone can catch one, and then want to close the Atlantic to the rest of us that CAN catch them.

Capt Richie, you da man.  


Red Snapper Banned for 10 years


----------



## PaulD (Apr 28, 2009)

Thanks for the kind words of support, Richie! As Capt. Richie has stated and reintegrated my previous statement, due to loop holes in the Magnuson acts once they close this fishery it will be very easy for them to keep it close and near impossible for us to get it reopened. 
I'm not for ignoring an issue but I don't support causing an issue where their is not one. There are many easy and painless alternatives for us to look at besides a closure with a state economic impact of over $3 million which will cost many jobs and also cause the state to loose tax revenue which they will have to make up some where else (our pockets). 
I spoke to a group of about 15 last night on this issue and I can tell you there are many people who are uninformed and who are asking some GREAT questions and giving great suggestions about how to properly conserve our resource. It's sad that I'm not a paid public official but I'm the one listening and education the public with federally excepted research data that is properly documented instead of opinions.


----------



## Capt. Richie Lott (Apr 28, 2009)

Hey, Where are those research papers...? I know they're around here somewhere.....


----------



## PaulD (Apr 28, 2009)

I have this link posted in the petition thread as well.

The correct link to the SEDAR so all can see it.

http://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/sedar/download/S15 SAR 1 Revised 3-09.pdf?id=DOCUMENT

I can tell you this too. I have seen spawning aggrigations of red snapper and it was not in the months of June-September. 

The state Department of Natural Resources estimates fishing has a $1.5 billion economic impact in Georgia. And those who make their living on the water are not taking the proposed ban lightly.

Income and jobs created by fisherman:
Florida numbers- $5,432,151,596  spent.  59,418 jobs supported.              $171, 883,333 in Fuel tax and sales tax. $239,723,442 paid in to federal taxs.


----------



## Capt. Richie Lott (Apr 28, 2009)

*More on the 2008-2009 Red Snapper Shortage*

Shortages...


----------



## seabear2 (Apr 28, 2009)

Very nice capt. Did the DesertVet teach you how to fish 

Maybe desert vet should post a few pics of his Red Snapper 

Did watson get to go on any of these trips?


----------



## Parker Phoenix (Apr 29, 2009)

PaulD said:


> Just so you know Duanne Harris and Susan Shipman, both who voted for the closure, as you can see from my above post, will be speaking at Shellmans Bluff on May 8th or 9th as guest of the CCA. You have to be a member to me let in teh meeting. i.e. financially support the ban. However it is free to protest it from outside!



So CCA is in bed with these snapper Nazi's. I thought something smelled of high heaven of this organization.


----------



## Parker Phoenix (Apr 29, 2009)

DesertVet said:


> Member who voted FOR the ban
> 
> Duane Harris GA Retired Director Georgia Coastal Resources Division.
> 
> ...



Geiger may be holding a commercial license as well. I know captains that do. That would explain him voting for the recreational closure.


----------



## PaulD (Apr 29, 2009)

parker phoenix said:


> so cca is in bed with these snapper nazi's. I thought something smelled of high heaven of this organization.



yes!!! Yes!!!!! Yes!!!!

This closure is both commercial and recreational.

Basically the CCA has money that they hold. A Lobiest walks up to a rep. and ask them if they would like money to fund a research project that the rep is very involved with, a pet if you wish. The the CCA lobiest tells the rep that if they do not vote for a closure or modification of a law that they will not give them the money. Research really doesn't play into it. Most of the money the CCA in Ga collects doesn't even stay in the state!!!!


----------



## Capt. Richie Lott (Apr 29, 2009)

Hey Bear- Yeah, Mr. Watson was there for most all of the Snapper season action. He helped catch our limit most days. If it weren't for him, we would have left early a few times...!


----------



## DesertVet (Apr 29, 2009)

seabear2 said:


> Very nice capt. Did the DesertVet teach you how to fish
> 
> Maybe desert vet should post a few pics of his Red Snapper
> 
> Did watson get to go on any of these trips?



I would but the snapper nazis at GON don't think it is funny. No sense of humor.


----------



## DesertVet (Apr 29, 2009)

Parker it is a total closure for commercial & recreational. However the first people to be allowed back in will be commercials. Just like in the gulf, the commercials will probably be allowed to fish the whole year, while recs only get to fish 5 months out of the year.  This Socialist attitude has to stop.  I support the commercial fishermen to the extent that we all get equal access, but not to the point hat they get a huge advantage or huge creel limits with very liberal bycatch restrictions.  The problem is the commercial fishermen spend their money buying politicians and Fish Council Members like Susan Shipman & Duane Harris, while recreational fishermen spend their money on FISHING.


Its coming 10 year Ban on Red Snapper


----------



## Capt. Richie Lott (Apr 30, 2009)

DV, You got that right... We invest our time, effort and money on FISHING.


----------



## stratos201 (Apr 30, 2009)

Ok, I've got a stupid question. As I posted earlier in this thread we went out of Destin a couple of weeks ago and had a VERY difficult time trying to get to the grouper and others for the fact that no matter what depth we tried the Red Snapper would get the bait. (It was to the point where the captain was getting very aggravated at us catching reds but we tried every depth he called out but to no avail.) When we brought them up, the first mate would take his gaff and hook them in the air bladder so they could swim back down. Are these fish REALLY that tough to be able to take a hook to the mid section and still live?????? When we catch spotted bass that deep it’s tough to keep them alive even after being VERY careful while inserting the needle to let the air out much less taking a hook and stabbing them. My point is, how many die due to this???


----------



## seabear2 (Apr 30, 2009)

Where did the desert vet go?


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Apr 30, 2009)

South Atlantic Red Snapper – A perfect storm
By Richen Brame
CCA South Atlantic Fisheries Director

In many ways, Atlantic red snapper are the proverbial “Perfect Storm” for fisheries management. It
is a species that declined before most of today’s fishermen were even fishing. That means very few
people fishing today have ever experienced how good the fishing for red snapper is supposed to be.
The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) did not conduct an adequate, modern stock assessment
until 2007, so the condition of the stock was completely unknown until then. Additionally, laws that
govern how federal fisheries are managed were modified significantly in 2006. Legislators, alarmed at
the increasing number of fish species in decline and the stagnant number of species in recovery, changed
the law to require managers to stop overfishing of all species almost immediately and implement
recovery plans that would bring most stocks back to a recovered state within 10 years.
Many anglers in the South Atlantic were stunned when the 2007 assessment showed that the
spawning stock of red snapper was less than five-percent of an unfished stock. Further analysis revealed
that current fishing effort today is equal to about 12 times the rate that red snapper can sustain. For the
average angler, who may have never even been aware there was a problem with red snapper, the first
indication of trouble was a rule that appeared out of the blue and closed the fishery.
The reaction has been about what could be expected – shock, confusion, disbelief and anger.
Immediate suspicion fell on the science, data and models used to compute what a healthy red snapper
population was supposed to look like. Unfortunately, the federal management failures that created the
current mess have been brewing for decades and we are all left in the eye of this now-perfect storm.
Like many fisheries today, the present can only be explained fully by looking at the past, and since
this is a fishery that scientists believe crashed in the 1960s, this disaster is about 40 years in the making.
This article is not intended to recount the entire history of red snapper in the South Atlantic. For a full
exploration of the factors that got us here today, go to the CCA South Carolina web site and click on the
Red Snapper Briefing Document that has been prepared for just that purpose.
The goal of this article is to explore the issue from where we are now and provide a vision for what
the future may bring. In order to do that, we have to accept for now the two forces that got us here – the
science and the law.

WHAT IS GOOD SCIENCE?

Science is a major part of the red snapper storm, as is often the case in any distressed fishery. The
more severe the regulation, the more scrutiny is placed on the science behind it. Fisheries science and
stock assessments will always be questioned and even doubted when times are tough. They are rarely
accepted in real time and only acclaimed long after a recovery is in place. This time is no different.
The Red Snapper Briefing Document provides greater detail on how NMFS scientists came to the
conclusions that warranted an interim rule closing the entire fishery. The end result, however, has many
anglers questioning whether the science is “good” or not. Perhaps a more pointed question would be, is
there any “better” science that points to a different conclusion? The answer, to this point, is no.
As conservationists, we have to navigate every fisheries storm with the best tools we have. If we fall
into the trap of using the science that suits us and ignoring that which restricts us, we would immediately
forfeit the claim to being conservationists. If we decide to pick and choose our science like entrees from
a buffet table and instead manage by anecdotal evidence and speculation, no fishery would ever make it
out of the storm.
Researchers, doctors and scientists of all kinds often find their effectiveness limited by the progress
of the science. Nonetheless, they have to address their challenges with the best science they have.
Fisheries management is no different.
Having said that, NMFS science has been wrong before and we owe it to ourselves to be skeptical
about what we are hearing now. Our knowledge of the oceans is always evolving and we should insist
that NMFS use the latest tools and best possible data to confirm again and again that this situation is
indeed as grave as it has been presented.
For the sake of argument, however, let’s assume that the most ****ing piece of science on red
snapper is off by 300 percent. That’s a massive miscalculation by anyone’s standards and yet in this case
it would mean the spawning stock of red snapper is still under 10 percent of what it should be. This is
truly a stock in trouble. Unless and until better knowledge is developed that refutes the present, peerreviewed
science, managers have to act.
The next logical question, then, is to what degree they must act, and for that we need to look at the
other force at work – the law.

MAGNUSON-STEVENS

The overall legal authority to manage red snapper in federal waters comes from the Magnuson-
Stevens Conservation and Management Act of 1976. The Act was significantly amended in 1986 to
require that fishery management councils and NMFS end overfishing and rebuild depleted stocks. Those
rules were not effective, so Congress amended the Act again in 2006, essentially adding language that
requires managers to end overfishing for all stocks by 2011 and rebuild overfished stocks within 10
years. More information on Magnuson-Stevens is available in the Red Snapper Briefing Document.
Those laws are driving the red snapper interim rule and are a critical part of this perfect storm.
Without a legitimate alternative to the science, many anglers are turning to the law in an effort to find a
way out of the current mess. Well-hidden in the current melee is the reality that those laws are a triumph
for conservation in that they put an end to disastrous federal management policies that allowed species
like red snapper to effectively disappear for 40 years before anyone noticed there might be a problem. In
that regard, the current law is a critical tool for conservationists that will prevent anything like the red
snapper situation from ever developing again. However, the problem is that in the meantime, anglers
will pay a steep price for horrendous management blunders of the past.
There is flexibility built into the Magnuson-Stevens Act that will allow managers to take into
account biological factors and other issues in developing options for a fishery management plan to guide
the recovery of red snapper. In this case, though, the available science developed by NMFS does not
leave many courses for federal managers to take to get out of the squalls, but exactly what comes next
remains to be seen.

WHAT’S THE FORECAST

What has been done so far – the interim rule – is essentially a temporary patch until the South
Atlantic Fishery Management Council is able to draw up some long-term options to achieve the overall
goal. The angling public will likely not see the proposed next steps (which will be known as
Amendment 17) until June at the very earliest, and it is hard to imagine it will forecast anything that will
be appealing to recreational anglers.
The management options that will ultimately be presented are being developed by the South Atlantic
Fishery Management Council and NMFS staff using the science and law described above. That science
and data, coupled with the law requiring managers to end overfishing and recover fish stocks, dictate
that one way or another, this storm will come to an end. It is almost certain that every option to be
presented will ask anglers to endure draconian regulations and end overfishing now, in the belief that the
stock will return to a historical range and age structure. In the future, anglers will be able to enjoy a
more robust fishery than they have ever seen.
There will be a number of options that managers could employ to achieve this, and certainly some
solutions will be more palatable than others. Will anglers be able to plan trips targeting red snapper any
time in the near future? Not likely. But it is also unlikely that managers will close all fishing from 3-200
miles offshore. The most likely scenarios will include combinations of time and area closures for places
known to be red snapper aggregation areas. Even when the course is initially set in the next few months,
nothing will be set in stone and it will be incumbent upon us to demand reviews and monitoring to
determine if the plan is working. No matter what else happens, as red snapper are rebuilt CCA will
advocate that the Council and NMFS reexamine the entire fishery to establish a fair and equitable
distribution between the commercial and recreational sectors. We believe fisheries should be managed
as a public resource for the greatest economic benefit to the nation.
Regardless of what the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council comes up with in Amendment
17, there will be discord and likely as many questions as solutions. But at this point it is impossible to
say exactly what will happen next with red snapper until those options are released.
What we do know is that the only way to get out of a storm is to push forward. Screaming at the
clouds changes nothing. As conservationists, we have to plot our course based on what we believe is the
best management for the species and the anglers who enjoy it. We find ourselves truly in the middle of a
tempest, but we will eventually end up on the right side of the storm


----------



## PaulD (Apr 30, 2009)

First of all, this is written by a CCA director not a biologist.  Secondly, we have already established the fact that the CCA is supporting the closure based off of agenda not research.  Next, I will address that the info and research was not updated post 2007 and this was addressed at a SAMFC meeting, so the comments in that artical are inaccurate.  Thusly, this is another biased article and not research.  Please refer to the SEDAR research and the research I have posted earlier which is parts of the SEDAR.  The actions taken on this need to be based off of research, not opinions of lobbyists and "conservation" groups. 

The issue over the fish being vented with a gaff is a shame! Those are the people that people should be focusing an effort on to stop there actions to the vast majority of conservation minded anglers that would never do that.
It also points out the need for angler education which I have stated is needed and would help the fishery drastically!


----------



## Parker Phoenix (May 1, 2009)

stratos201 said:


> Ok, I've got a stupid question. As I posted earlier in this thread we went out of Destin a couple of weeks ago and had a VERY difficult time trying to get to the grouper and others for the fact that no matter what depth we tried the Red Snapper would get the bait. (It was to the point where the captain was getting very aggravated at us catching reds but we tried every depth he called out but to no avail.) When we brought them up, the first mate would take his gaff and hook them in the air bladder so they could swim back down. Are these fish REALLY that tough to be able to take a hook to the mid section and still live?????? When we catch spotted bass that deep it’s tough to keep them alive even after being VERY careful while inserting the needle to let the air out much less taking a hook and stabbing them. My point is, how many die due to this???



That captain and mate should be called to the carpet. There is proper venting techniques and a gaff is not not involved any of them.


----------



## Colby (May 1, 2009)

Who's attending the Meeting @ Shellman Bluff May 8th?


----------



## PaulD (May 4, 2009)

<-------- In.


----------



## Corey (May 4, 2009)

Look at the bright side, it would not be hard to set up 
the boat for the Shell Island Red Snapper feeding 
trips.


----------



## PaulD (May 6, 2009)

ttt


----------



## seaweaver (May 7, 2009)

_
In many ways, Atlantic red snapper are the proverbial “Perfect Storm” for fisheries management. It
is a species that declined before most of today’s fishermen were even fishing. That means very few
people fishing today have ever experienced how good the fishing for red snapper is supposed to be.


The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) did not conduct an adequate, modern stock assessment
until 2007, so the condition of the stock was completely unknown until then._



sooooooo how do they know....._how good the fishing for red snapper is supposed to be?._

....they act like they are talking to Obama voters....and that's just the first paragraph.....

stupid.

cw


----------



## redneck_billcollector (May 7, 2009)

I have fished for snapper either commercially or recreationally since the mid-70s, I don't know how it was in the 60s, but I do since I have fished for them.  It is the best I have ever seen (I do fish the gulf mainly) and last year I probably saw more mature snapper than I have ever seen, up to 38 inches was not rare on the ledge out of PC.  If you want to protect the species, lower the size limit and keep the bag limit low.  Most folks improperly deflate the swim bladder (better to use a milk crate on 100ft of cord with the corners weighted) and lower the fish down that way, it will also keep flipper from getting too fat on all the released snapper. Face it, I don't care what the law says, most folks don't know how to handle a shortie to ensure a good release, even with all the tools out there.  You want to really do snapper some good, give them a status similar to red fish, no sales (I don't support that, but it would work).  

No one has said anything about the effects of the shrimp fishery on snapper either, it contributes to a huge mortality rate amongst young snapper.  As long as folks eat seafood, the stocks are going to be supressed, the human population has grown faster than nature can keep up.  It is sad, but it is the truth.  Sea food is a primary source of protien for a good many people out there and the only source for some.

There are no simple answers, but a complete closure isn't a good answer either.


----------



## PaulD (May 8, 2009)

Great idea, Like I have stated I completely support angler education on the matter of conservation and proper handling methods of bottom fish. I also agree with you on the no sale law for right now. I don't want to see anyone out of a job because of this, which is going to happen at a tune of about 100,000 jobs on the Atlantic cost but with recreational anglers supplying 10 times as many jobs as commercial it would soften the blow. 
Like I said I don't support it but it could be looked at as an alternative.


----------



## capt stan (May 8, 2009)

Richie, Paul(if it's the paul I think it is) how ya doing guys?!  It's been a long time.

Yea the CCA crap hit the roof for me a few years ago. I saw thru what the real issue is with them. I left it as fast as I could. been following this for a while and have been back dooring the support.

I have taken a back seat on this one as I got tired of non support for a lot of other issues I tried fighting here in GA over the years. That group safmc and the rest of them are 100% up to no good. Shes real good about smiling to your face and lieing thru her teeth!It's all about the money for them nothing more.

I wish the recs would finally come together and FIGHT this in the numbers  we have...but no one ever comes to gether in the numbers we need to be heard. I hope ya'll have better luck then I did with the issues I fought for.

I got your back boys!


----------



## Wild Turkey (May 8, 2009)

As long as Roy Crabtree has both his hands in the commercial fishermens pockets, recreational angler will get the short end of the stick.


----------



## PaulD (May 8, 2009)

Yeah Stan it's the Paul you're thinking off.  . I know what you mean about support as well but I'm just going to do what's right and if the corruption continues and people silently complain, I'll know that I did all I could and it will not weigh on my shoulders. I know what Shipman does, I know that the CCA and PEW are funding stuff and working together. I also know that the newly appointed head of NOAA is a former big wig and still involved with PEW. I give it about 2 more years and it'll be no more fishing. PERIOD. I've already seen SEDAR 16 and kings are next. They are working on Dolphin and Wahoo now. There is an amendment, I believe 16 that they are slidding in on this present closure that shuts down grouper as well. Beliners go down to 2. We all see where it's going.


----------



## PaulD (May 11, 2009)

From Friday Night-----Ga anglers definately took a shot from Mrs. Shipman and Mr. Harris for not organizing and defending themselves.!!

Notes from Fridays meeting.- Dwayne Harris, was honest, and  admitted to understanding 5% of the research he based his vote on. Very scary! He also admited to not have any experience with mortality rates of snapper when vented and released properly. In fact, he admited to throwing back a short snapper at G reef and watching it float off because he didn't have a venting tool in his boat but defended himself by stating venting doesn't work. I'll be more than happy to give more disturbing details if anyone want's to shoot me an e-mail.

Oh, all information on the graphs in the SEDAR with dates previous to the late 80's are assumptions and castbacks. NOT actual information!!!!! VERY SCARY.

Also this bill will close ALL bottom fishing,not just snapper. Next up on the SEDAR 16 will be kings.


----------



## REDFISH69 (May 11, 2009)

capt stan said:


> Richie, Paul(if it's the paul I think it is) how ya doing guys?!  It's been a long time.
> 
> Yea the CCA crap hit the roof for me a few years ago. I saw thru what the real issue is with them. I left it as fast as I could. been following this for a while and have been back dooring the support.
> 
> ...



I would think one of the most vocal/notorious charter captains would right in the middle of this, instead of backdooring support. You are either in or out. There is no fence to walk on. You are helping the SAMFC if you are not supporting the few guys fighting this.  I am not trying to pick a fight with you Stan, but if you support this, then take a few days out of your busy hunting schedule and help us out. You know a lot of people who value your opinion and stance on subjects. we need those people to fight this closure along with us.


----------



## capt stan (May 11, 2009)

REDFISH69 said:


> I would think one of the most vocal/notorious charter captains would right in the middle of this, instead of backdooring support. You are either in or out. There is no fence to walk on. You are helping the SAMFC if you are not supporting the few guys fighting this.  I am not trying to pick a fight with you Stan, but if you support this, then take a few days out of your busy hunting schedule and help us out. You know a lot of people who value your opinion and stance on subjects. we need those people to fight this closure along with us.





Yea well I'm not on a fence either, I just got tired of wasting my time for several years trying to get the issues out to the fishermen...trying to get them to listen to what was comming in the future to get involved....guess what..It's happening NOW!!! Where were you during all that time?

No support no numbers means no win! I got tired of being laughed at when I left those meetings. Lots of folks say they would be there and then guess what..EMPTY ROOMS. then  ya get on the net and they all make excuses. The only comments from fishermen were......the crickets in the background. PATHETIC! THATS why they get away with what they do.

I don't have any excuses, I got tired of fighting the fight alone. Oh I don't charter any more either gave it up a few years ago. Thats why I have such a "busy hunting schedue" because I  am more concerned with spending time with my kid then chasing the dollar fishing.

I have sent many e-mails to folks and signed all the petitions, My # is there. I'm glad to finally see a few(very few) fishermen getting involved. I hope it helps But from my experiance in this stuff over the last 5 years or so...it's done. I HOPE I AM WRONG!!!


All I can hope for is this is a BIG WAKE UP CALL FOR ALL THE FISHERMEN OUT THERE... they better get it together  QUICK or like Paul said..... kings /spanish cobes are all gonna be next! The writing IS ON THE WALL NOW!!!!


----------



## wmaybin (May 11, 2009)

I agree we need more support however in Stan's defense I can see where he is coming from.  After all the talk it was quite dissapointing when Paul, Desertvet, and I walked into the meeting with only a few other concerened anglers to face two council members and a room full of CCA heads who were too busy defending the council members any time we found a descrepency instead of fighting for angler rights.  I thng the CCA should be called the SAMFCAA (South Atlantic Marine Fisheries Council Advocacy Agency) It was pathetic!


----------



## PaulD (May 11, 2009)

I was there......and I'm there. Some times you have to make people angry to get them involved. I've listened to the voice of recreational anglers be mocked for years. If more of them could hear what the anti's say about them they would let their blood boil and stand up as well. It's degrading, I know, but we have to fight their emotion with their science. They know what they are doing and they are winning. I hope WE can beat this but it will take numbers and science. They have given us the science. It is on our shoulders to make the numbers happen. They are making a mockery of us. Will we stand on the principles of  our fourfathers or will we let all those who founded this country, their lives and works, be in vain? This is not conservation this, my piers, is constitution. Remember that.


----------



## capt stan (May 11, 2009)

wmaybin said:


> I agree we need more support however in Stan's defense I can see where he is coming from.  After all the talk it was quite dissapointing when Paul, Desertvet, and I walked into the meeting with only a few other concerened anglers to face two council members and a room full of CCA heads who were too busy defending the council members any time we found a descrepency instead of fighting for angler rights.  I thng the CCA should be called the SAMFCAA (South Atlantic Marine Fisheries Council Advocacy Agency) It was pathetic!



Exactly my man. I know the feeling, I did that for years. And it was VERY DISSAPOINTING. I had my fill of it. 

Fishermen and hunters all are pathetic when it comes time to stick together. Thats why the antis will win our lazyness. Sad but true!

I'm sorry for not doing it any more, but I had enough of no support.

Oh yea I forgot, the best part was the CCA asking me to doante a charter at their next event..LOLOLO  Go figure....


----------



## PaulD (May 11, 2009)

capt stan said:


> Exactly my man. I know the feeling, I did that for years. And it was VERY DISSAPOINTING. I had my fill of it.
> 
> Fishermen and hunters all are pathetic when it comes time to stick together. Thats why the antis will win our lazyness. Sad but true!
> 
> ...



Can't stop.....When you get to that point you have to step back and find another point of attack. Just like they do.


----------



## capt stan (May 11, 2009)

PaulD said:


> Can't stop.....When you get to that point you have to step back and find another point of attack. Just like they do.



 Yep but when going in on the objective if your support units aren't there to rearm resupply when you seize the objective.....you get knocked back off it on the counter attack.


Dude I'm all for stopping this crap, but untill fishermen get together they are gonna win. I lost many a battles only because of the same thing you are facing now. Believe me when I say I have been walking  in your  boots bro!


----------



## PaulD (May 11, 2009)

Very true. There are other options though, which I won't mention here. 

I know you have. If you want a ride to any local meeting let me know. I'll rent a conversion van if I need too.


----------



## Capt. Richie Lott (May 11, 2009)

Stan...

Good to see you in on this.... I have been watching this post to see who all we have actual support from. I can guarantee you we all appreciate it. I wish more of the guides would get on on this... How and if it will help, who knows, but if there has ever been a time we need all the support as a whole, this is it.....

Paul, talked to Dash this morning..... I had NO IDEA about the fishing license purchases in GA... Down a bit, huh? Interesting.....


----------



## PaulD (May 11, 2009)

Just over 19% per the Ga DNR.

Give me a call after 3:00 and I can tell you more.


----------



## Capt. T.J. (May 11, 2009)

I have been lurking this topic since the begining. I have had a few phone conversations with a few of you on this. Well I'm in! I'm tired of this crap! The tail doesn't wag the dog!


----------



## wmaybin (May 11, 2009)

Good to see you Brother!


----------



## Parker Phoenix (May 11, 2009)

Where does the Camo-Coalition stand on this issue? Could they be an ally?


----------



## wmaybin (May 11, 2009)

I don't know much of anything on them.


----------



## seabear2 (May 11, 2009)

Capt. Richie Lott said:


> Stan...
> 
> Good to see you in on this.... I have been watching this post to see who all we have actual support from. I can guarantee you we all appreciate it. I wish more of the guides would get on on this... How and if it will help, who knows, but if there has ever been a time we need all the support as a whole, this is it.....
> 
> Paul, talked to Dash this morning..... I had NO IDEA about the fishing license purchases in GA... Down a bit, huh? Interesting.....



Paul, I talked to dash today as well and he said congrats was in order for you

On a side note..........Did yall see that snapper he sent me a pic of? That could be the new state record


----------



## REDFISH69 (May 12, 2009)

capt stan said:


> Yep but when going in on the objective if your support units aren't there to rearm resupply when you seize the objective.....you get knocked back off it on the counter attack.
> 
> 
> Dude I'm all for stopping this crap, but untill fishermen get together they are gonna win. I lost many a battles only because of the same thing you are facing now. Believe me when I say I have been walking  in your  boots bro!



Stop making excuses and get in with both feet. You are a very notorious captain to many,many people, especially along the GA coast. I don't know if you mean you had no support back then. This is now. It would seem you got a few folks just right here. There are threads running on several other sites with these guys right here the main players, but others who don't use GON, are supporting elsewhere.
     There are several ideas that are extreme, but can't be mentioned here, for now. There needs to be a meeting of the few folks here to see where we can take this.  Paul D, you got any ideas for a meeting place down around the coast somewhere. Pick a night there are no races or ball games on, and they don't have all you can eat dog at the Chinese restaurants. We should get a few more that way.


----------



## Capt. Richie Lott (May 12, 2009)

Bear - Paul.... What Pic. Someone post it.

I think we need to get together and all meet with Paul and a few others and talk. I know a few people on here talked to Duane the other night and I would like him to attend a little get together as well, if I could get him to come.

 The DNR called me and a few others last week wanting Snapper Carcasses from several of us for aging the fish. As soon as the seas are nice again, I am going to catch a limit (if I can manage it during this snapper shortage) and call them to get the remains of the cleaned fish. I am not sure which direction they are heading with this aging, as there has been much talk in both directions about it.

Anyhow, we need some troops rallyed from somewhere and talk to the right few people before the secretary signs this thing. Full closure of our bottom fishing is approaching. I would urge everyone on here to talk with Paul. He knows more about this than NMFS.

Tripp, nice PM......


----------



## PaulD (May 12, 2009)

Thanks for the congrades, I couldn't be happier!
Yeah, I got that huge red snapper pic as well. 


We DO NOT need to get involved with the Camo Coalition. 
I've got something in the works right now and like Richie stated we really need to get together. I'm up for idea's on a meeting place. But it needs to happen SOON! Richie please be careful with the donation of carcass donation. I'll try to look into the aging information and see how accurate the process is. I know in Redfish it is VERY accurate, however, with all the growth of the red snapper not being as consistant I feel sure the plates in the bone would surely be effected. Possibly not but I want to make sure. If they cannot SHOW you, not tell you but show you, where it has been proven accurate by providing a control then I would wade carefully.


----------



## REDFISH69 (May 12, 2009)

Since Paul knows everything, I am thinking he could get us a deal on the buffet at B& J's in Darien and treat all of us. I bet there would be  a crowd then.  Set it up Paul, I love them crablegs they have. This is with you buying for all of us too. Thanks Pal.


----------



## PaulD (May 12, 2009)

I wish you could convince my wife that I know everything!!

I don't know about paying for us to eat. I'm sure the intimidation that the 2 of us alone would create when the staff tending a all you can eat buffet saw us would be epic. 

I think I could offer up a free beer for anyone that attended though. I mean we all know the 3 things that get fisherman to show up somewhere and legally you can supply food and beer for $$.


----------



## PaulD (May 12, 2009)

Here is the only research I have right now about the aging accuracy of red snapper. I had to go back and find the link for it.
It is very interesting and shows how even aging these fish when they get old is more difficult than other fish and smaller, younger snapper.

http://fishbull.noaa.gov/994/wil.pdf


----------



## PaulD (May 13, 2009)

Ttt


----------



## REDFISH69 (May 13, 2009)

Bump for a good cause.

Paul have they mentioned putting a moratorium on Charter/headboat permits for the Atlantic like they have in the Gulf?


----------



## Capt. Richie Lott (May 14, 2009)

Paul... I caught wind you are buying supper somewhere for everyone against the closure. I got the phone call yesterday afternoon. 

That is interesting about the aging of Red Snapper. Ashley Parmelee out of St. Simons caught one about 28 pounds this weekend. A good friend of ours at the DNR has taken the fish for aging... He says the fish is probably 30-40 years old, off the cuff.

Also, some big ones were caught out of HH and Charleston that were submitted for aging.

From what I was just told by XXXX, the DNR is aging to prove the old data not relative to todays Snapper catches.  I know most of the local DNR personally and have fished or been diving with them. The few that don't fish and dive may be rooting for the closure, from what I see, but let me add this;

Keep in mind, this is what I was told. I didn't take a personal poll, but the info came from a reliable source: 

Only a few are dead set on the closure. Many of the people there are mixed opinionated about the issue and want new data before making this decision on any level. I cannot say who this info came from as I promised not to. Let's just say there is a fairly large concerned group of folks there who like to fish and they are 100% against this and want to prove there is a variety of Snapper fish ages off the GA coast and plenty of them.


----------



## PaulD (May 14, 2009)

Great post Richie! I wouldn't want to put money on guessing the age of that fish, that's for sure! I think you're right to about the fence sitters, I just wish they wouldn't use this Magnasun act as a," we had to do it." kicking post to blame their decisions on. That's not what the act was put in place for and I have to wonder how many people are using it as a safty net to not anger others at their decision and how many truely don't know.
I think your source is probably correct.


----------



## brailediver (May 14, 2009)

Remember, the vote was nearly tied up! All we need to convince is 2 or 1 of them! Keep sending letters! Send as many as you can to Sec. of Commerce Locke.


----------



## PaulD (May 26, 2009)

Just wanted to get this back up to the top and invite everyone to attend a meeting about this on Friday night at Two-Way fish camp!


----------



## REDFISH69 (May 26, 2009)

PaulD said:


> Just wanted to get this back up to the top and invite everyone to attend a meeting about this on Friday night at Two-Way fish camp!



Where at down there PAUL? Is it going to be the restaurant(Catfish Charlies??) or somewhere else there.??


----------



## seabear2 (May 26, 2009)

REDFISH69 said:


> Where at down there PAUL? Is it going to be the restaurant(Catfish Charlies??) or somewhere else there.??



Mudcat Charlies


----------



## Capt. T.J. (May 26, 2009)

Can you post up some directions for some of that may be coming from out of town? Thanks!


----------



## Colby (May 27, 2009)

TJ, you coming?  If so, drinks on me!


----------



## REDFISH69 (May 27, 2009)

Colby said:


> TJ, you coming?  If so, drinks on me!



another No-Show, eehhh Colby???


----------



## Colby (May 27, 2009)

REDFISH69 said:


> another No-Show, eehhh Colby???



Which ego are you showing up with?  REDFISH69, DesertVet, Prochummer, Capt. Dash?


----------



## PaulD (May 27, 2009)

Edit:::: HOBO gave much better directions.


----------



## seabear2 (May 27, 2009)

Colby said:


> Which ego are you showing up with?  REDFISH69, DesertVet, Prochummer, Capt. Dash?




DiscoDuck, ReelBlue1, CommonCold, ShowMe1, GulfWarVet,Lex2006,Axetogrind,GAKINGFISH,TRIPLE S, RugerHog and oh yea one of the very first.....BLUETHUNDER

Would anyone like to add one to the list?


Whats next?


----------



## HOBO (May 27, 2009)

*PaulD*



> Hwy 17. On the left just over the Altamaha river bridge. If your coming from Savannah exit on ext 49 and go east. Take a left onto hwy 17. You'll see the sign for mudcat Charlies and Two Way fish camp.
> From the south take exit 42 and a right onto hwy 17.
> Reply With Quote



Please allow me to help you out a little with your directions.... You've got a couple of wrong turns.....

If you are coming from the north on I-95 exit left (east bound) onto exit 49 and  go until it dead-ends into US-17 (about one mile),,,, Turn right and proceed through Darien.....  You will pass over four bridges (Darien River, Butler River, Champney River and the Altamaha River).....  As soon as you pass over the fourth and tallest bridge (Glynn County line) immediately turn left at the base of the bridge and go about four hundred yards to Mudcat Charlies restaurant and Two-Way Fish Camp......

If you are coming from the south on I-95 veer off at exit #42 onto east bound highway 99.....  In about 3/4 mile highway 99 will dead-end into US 17......  Turn left and after about one mile you will see a large billboard sign on the right.....  You veer to the right immediately after the sign.....  Two Way Fish Camp and Mudcat Charlies is about 400 yards down this road.......

What time is this meeting????

------------<" ){{{{{*><


----------



## PaulD (May 27, 2009)

You're right Ken! Thank you, I was winging it. 

Meeting is at 7:00. I'm going to get there about 5:30-6:00. Be more than happy to talk to folks before hand or have a cold one (1) with y'all afterwards.


----------



## PaulD (Jun 10, 2009)

Guys with the meeting going on about this right now and all the moves being made by groups like the CCA, PETA, green peace, The Ocean Conservancy and PEW I really think it's time to put this back to the top. It's gotten the attention of many people and I know as a fact the above mentioned groups have been reading it and they don't like it.

Stan, this has a direct tie in with the inshore changes and closures that we are facing too. I'll give you 3 guesses as to who has aligned himself with the SAMFC on this snapper project even though he doesn't have a dog in the fight except to be placed on the SAMFC after Duanne Harris's 9 years are up. There are many people who have personal and financial gains to be had by this stuff. It's not based on science it's based on money being paid, fear of lawsuits from special interest, and personal gain.


----------



## RugerHog (Jun 10, 2009)

Spud woodard, who else. what a joke the whole bunch at CRD is. The state should shut down this bunch. They are milking the taxpayers out of millions of dollars, while they are causing our fishing rights to be reduced to nothing.


----------



## capt stan (Jun 10, 2009)

PaulD said:


> Guys with the meeting going on about this right now and all the moves being made by groups like the CCA, PETA, green peace, The Ocean Conservancy and PEW I really think it's time to put this back to the top. It's gotten the attention of many people and I know as a fact the above mentioned groups have been reading it and they don't like it.
> 
> Stan, this has a direct tie in with the inshore changes and closures that we are facing too. I'll give you 3 guesses as to who has aligned himself with the SAMFC on this snapper project even though he doesn't have a dog in the fight except to be placed on the SAMFC after Duanne Harris's 9 years are up. There are many people who have personal and financial gains to be had by this stuff. It's not based on science it's based on money being paid, fear of lawsuits from special interest, and personal gain.




I agree 100% its a sad state we are in from our"leaders" if you will


----------



## seaweaver (Jun 13, 2009)

Bump


----------



## PaulD (Jul 2, 2009)

I just wanted to get this back up to the top. Especially now that amendment 16 has passed and your possesion limits on B-lines and Gag grouper have been slashed. This is happening guys! It's happening now! Act now!!! There is no science that is reputable and current to support this but it's going through little by little now. That way they curb the public outrage.


http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=370115


----------



## Jamie Brett Jr. (Jul 4, 2009)

Ttt


----------

