re: Embattled Charlie Melancon says Gov. Edwards supports his red snapper strategy

quote:

---

With a lot of respect to all of you,please research the issue on snapper. Why didn't Jindal take over red snapper---bc he couldn't. There is a high cost associated with doing so. Look at the DWLF budget---outside of BP money which was misappropriated , it's ALL self generated dollars. They get very little front the general budget. If it costs only 5 million to run the program, where does the money come from? Another agency ? If so, thats the legislature. Another program , if so which one. Millions that could have been used for it were wasted on airplanes, speed boats, women's clothes , office decorations and God knows what else.

---

This has been hashed, rehashed, hashed again, and then hashed sideways. The idea that the state will be on the hook for millions of dollars of federal research has been debunked by just about everyone not named Melancon, as well as the same congressmen that wrote the wildly successful Dungeness crab state management plan in the northwest. That program has been going strong for two decades and it's so popular that a bill to make it permanent just passed with overwhelming support from both recreational and commercial. The amendment to Graves's bill has been spun to make it sound like an unfunded mandate, when in reality it was just bookkeeping. The federal researchers keep the money that was allocated for their research previously, and they keep on doing it, rather than the money being transferred to the states and they have to build a research program from scratch. Ironically, after Charlie making such a stink out of it, that amendment might be what makes Graves's bill a slam dunk. It makes the process almost seamless. That's why ole Charlie went and tampered with the minutes, the ones he changed were from the two meetings where he talked out of his arse about how the state would have to pay $10M a year, and then in the following meeting Graves completely ripped it all apart, while Charlie threw a fit in front of the whole commission.

I have kept up with this very very closely and for the hundredth time misappropriation has absolutely nothing to do with snapper. It's infuriating that people pushing your agenda feel like that's their best excuse. Money that was wasted during the BP cash grab should have no effect on setting the future budget for the agency. If money was misspent on toys, auction the damn things off and stop buying toys. Before you say it, no I don't mean using the proceeds to fund red snapper management, I mean start using the budget for what it's intended for after you've stopped the bleeding.

You even contradict yourself in your own post. If "millions" of dollars were misspent, then that means once that wasteful spending is cut out, there will be "millions" of dollars available in the next budget that can go towards snapper management.


Just to add further, you have been either straight up lied to or are extremely misinformed on the agency's budget. The department only "self generates" about $5M a year. The meat of the budget comes from the stat ded ($115M, this is what snapper would be coming from) and federal funding ($45M). The total budget for the agency is $171M. When you actually look at the facts and numbers this poormouthing over a few boats and a plane really falls apart quickly. The real issue here is the governor wants to get his hands on those stad ded funds, and he's using Charlie (and aparently you) as a tool to try and convince people the department is broke, so we need to cut all it's programs such as invasive aquatic vegetation management ($8M a year) and any others that simply aren't a priority for him. He's setting the table for another round of budget battles this summer, and he's planning to use LDWF as a piggy bank.

Sounds like you work there

Well they did!!! He polled the 10 people that Wes at the office after 4:00pm and coincidentally they all report to him directly. (They were all still at the office assisting him in writing the elementary school level email he turned around and sent to all employees the next day)

Gascon is the blame

quote:

---

Sounds like you work there

---

Sure don't, I'm just a guy who grew up snapper fishing who is tired of politics and money getting in the way of what used to be an awesome way to spend a day on the water.

As I said before, many of you have unfairly taken shots at Melancon. Just wait until the rest comes out about the "theft" at headquarters during the flood. There is a reason LDWF doesn't have the money to for the red snapper program. Let him clean up the mess and misappropriations, then he can spend money on programs that mean the most to sportsman. Unfortunately the last governor was sleeping at the wheel while he ran for president instead of paying attention to his agencies.

This thread has started to get juicy


Jerry Jerry

quote:

---

I suggest that you research the facts instead of parroting someone else's BS.

---

Oh that's rich. That's a good one.

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't the license fee increase supported by recreational fisherman in this state intended to provide funding for red snapper management? Since the feds will still do the stock assessments as they do now, I don't see the funding problem. The existing money stays where it is at and the new money gives the state biologists the ability to interpret the federal data and set appropriate management. If the state is going to now reverse course, I for one want my money back.

Additionally, the federal stocks do not include counts from rigs or artificial structures. As I read the assessment, the Artificial Reef ROV surveys are only used to assess the age and length of fish, but not the number. So essentially, only fish in open water count towards the stock count. How can that be accepted? If you don't count fish by artificial reefs (i.e. rigs), you are missing a big chunk of the count. Can someone provide insight on to that part of the assessment?