CCA is stocking redfish in Louisiana

Tx has been stocking saltwater fish for decades. Part of the BP money was going to a hatchery at Calcasieu Pt but I assume that money was swept by the legislature for Ruth’s Cris steaks.
Kinda swept $$$ out of the fund for pet projects to the point that Billy Breaux resigned from the WL&F board in discussed.

quote:

---

They opposed new creel limits for recreational fishermen because there was no action taken on pogie boats.

---

Im down with this. frick me giving up anything when the real problems get zero action.

I hate commercial fishing. There are plenty of fish suitable for farming to feed the people. You shouldn't be able to eat a fresh red snapper fillet in a restaurant when I cant legally keep my own.

The real problem hurting redfish is habitat degradation and LDWF has zero control over that

quote:

---

They opposed new creel limits for recreational fishermen because there was no action taken on pogie boats. If the LDWF is not going to be serious about the real problem kiling redfish, then why do we have to always be the ones giving it up?

---

quote:

---

I don't disagree that significant action needs to be taken against the commercial fishery, however, two wrongs do not make a right.

---

It is a stance on principle. We know that pogie boats murder fish at rates beyond what recreational fishermen could possibly do.

I know you and that you are a catch and release guy. I have probably kept 5 reds in the past 5 years. Again, the constant criticism on CCA here is exhausting. You have to look at the whole picture. CCA's membership would be raising hell if CCA agreed to reduce the creel limits.

I am sorry you are using stocking (a good thing) to attack CCA on this one. It's not really a sequential argument, but you and Bluemoons do what ya'll do. I still consider you guys friends--we can disagree about this issue.

This is why I vote no on all taxes. The Mf just play bait and switch!

Not to put words in his mouth, but i am pretty sure his/BlueMoon's criticism is just stating/using CCA's discrepancy that in one hand 1) stating CCA is working to stock to increase numbers of fish--which insinuates there is a reduced population while 2) also opposing/refusing to take a position to reduce overharvest of a reduced population.

I think it's a valid issue to discuss and something whether between CCA higherups or average CCA members.

Criticism is also never a bad thing. If anything, a group/business should want it as to keep the group/business in line with interest of members/consumers. Complaining of too much criticism just means there's issues from the membership that aren't being addressed and/or the members feel they have left behind.

As noted above, I 10/10 approve of CCAs effort to restock, and appreciate it. But CCA needs to figure out if its goal is conserve the marine resource at all times--even when there is a fuss from members (who obviously will want no change but in reality will not stop paying to be CCA members) or CCA only wants to conserve marine resource when it fits its "members" --bc there's a difference.

It's these situations/discrepancies that keep ordinary recreational fisherman (like me) from wanting to donate more time/money to CCA.

quote:

---

The real problem hurting redfish is habitat degradation and LDWF has zero control over that

---

This right here. Had a conversation with a retired Marine biologist last week on this very subject. 90% of the issue is habitat.

Damn no mention of bowfishing yet, the OB is getting soft

I wonder how much CCA is funding this restocking program.