- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If you need more proof that the LDWF is a mess
Posted on 9/20/16 at 9:03 am to The Last Coco
Posted on 9/20/16 at 9:03 am to The Last Coco
Plentiful speckled trout lead to high daily limits
quote:
But the conversation reminded me that a long-discredited chant is being heard again in some local fishing circles: We should drop the limit on specks and/or increase the minimum size limit, because we'll have more and bigger fish.
quote:
But the suggestion is also coming from sports fishers, who wonder if the quality of their trout fishing experience would improve if we had more conservative regulations.
To find an answer to that question, and to reconfirm we are not "fish hogs," I turned to the fisheries biologist at the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries.
I got a quick, one-word answer: No.
"We've run (computer) scenarios on lowering the creel limits and increasing the size limits, and from our assessments those actions did not noticeably increase the number of fish in the system or the number of big fish," said Joey Shepard, acting deputy assistant secretary of the LDFW, and a biologist who has spent much of his long career studying specks.
But there is also some real-world experience to back up those computers. In 2006, yielding to requests from some guides and sports fishers hoping for more large specks, the state reduced regulations on Calcasieu Lake. The daily limit was dropped to 15, and although the minimum size remained at 12 inches, anglers were restricted to only two fish of more than 25 inches. The result six years later? "From our assessment, it did not increase the number of big fish in the system," Shepard reported. "Of course, we didn't anticipate it would."
quote:
"Based on those numbers, our assessment is we would have to reduce the daily limit to five before anyone would notice a difference in the fish available," he said.
The daily limit of 25 is seldom reached by most anglers. Studies show that the average catch per trip is fewer than five fish. Obviously, if all of the almost 1 million anglers fishing caught 25 each trip, the limit would have to be lowered.
quote:
OK, so what about reducing the minimum size to increase the number of big fish? Shepard said the LDWF ran the numbers and got these results: Increasing the minimum from 12 inches to 15 inches would put 13 percent more fish back in the water; from 12 inches to 16 inches would reduce harvest by nine percent.
But because anglers would be hooking and releasing more fish, the improvement is dampened by an estimated 10 percent release mortality.
"Essentially, we would increase spawning potential by about four percent if we raised the minimum to 15 inches, and six percent if we raised it to 16 inches," he said. "Either way, the improvement would not be noticeable to fishermen."
Posted on 9/20/16 at 9:05 am to The Last Coco
you seem salty.....
pun intended
pun intended
Posted on 9/20/16 at 9:05 am to voros79
I think Charlie needs to go because the dept turn into a TV drama instead of a dept that protects wildlife and fisheries.
They need to have a head over LDWLF that lets the biologist make the regulations instead of politicians.
They need to have a head over LDWLF that lets the biologist make the regulations instead of politicians.
Posted on 9/20/16 at 9:07 am to The Last Coco
I still think that's all made up.
Posted on 9/20/16 at 9:14 am to AlxTgr
quote:
I still think that's all made up.
Lol. Ok I can't help you there. I will very rarely stump for something I haven't done the research on but I also can't stand when public opinion is based on anecdotal evidence and not science which indicates the contrary.
FWIW, I havent caught a speck in LA in probably 5 years so it's not like I'm benefiting from pushing to keep the limits where they are. It just blows my mind that the same people complaining about the snapper limits imposed by the feds which the LaWLF data clearly indicates are healthy enough to sustain more fishing pressure turn their nose up at LaWLF data which indicates the speck populations would not benefit in size or number by restricting with the current size and creel limits.
Posted on 9/20/16 at 9:21 am to The Last Coco
quote:I love it. otherwise, these places get pretty boring really fast.
anecdotal evidence
Posted on 9/20/16 at 9:21 am to The Last Coco
quote:
The Last Coco
This is how you back up your posts
Posted on 9/20/16 at 9:26 am to The Last Coco
quote:
It just blows my mind that the same people complaining about the snapper limits imposed by the feds which the LaWLF data clearly indicates are healthy enough to sustain more fishing pressure turn their nose up at LaWLF data which indicates the speck populations would not benefit in size or number by restricting with the current size and creel limits.
Careful, it's almost as if you are expecting residents of a state with one of the worst education systems in the country to be smart.
Posted on 9/20/16 at 9:30 am to BiggerBear
Yeah, cuz they "ran the numbers".
Posted on 9/20/16 at 10:15 am to voros79
We get 4 trout per day. 15-20" slot. We can keep one fish over 20" in that 4 fish limit. I could not imagine being able to keep even 15 p/d. My freezer would be overflowing.
Although how much meat does a 12" speck really have? Do you just gut and chop the head off to cook like a Rainbow or Brown?
We have it pretty good with Snook fishing but the trout fishery y'all have is amazing.
Although how much meat does a 12" speck really have? Do you just gut and chop the head off to cook like a Rainbow or Brown?
We have it pretty good with Snook fishing but the trout fishery y'all have is amazing.
Posted on 9/20/16 at 10:24 am to voros79
Keep it how it is IMO. For those wanting 15 and 14", you know that nobody is making you keep fish right? If you think 25 is too many, don't keep 25. It's that easy. I've been on trips where 45 of 50 fish are under 14". People spend too much money saltwater fishing to sit here and tell them they can fish all day and only keep a couple dozen filets.
Posted on 9/20/16 at 10:34 am to PapaPogey
quote:I just wonder if there is anything that can be done to change that. Nothing more really.
I've been on trips where 45 of 50 fish are under 14".
Posted on 9/20/16 at 10:38 am to AlxTgr
That doesn't happen VERY often, but it does certain times of year at certain locations.
Posted on 9/20/16 at 10:39 am to PapaPogey
I only see it east. Never west.
Posted on 9/20/16 at 10:44 am to voros79
Let actual biologist make this call like MS is doing. Anecdotal fisherman reports are not real science. I've seen folks say this trout were down this year. I caught more this year than I ever have in my life. Just because I caught more and you caught less means nothing. Other factors like the flooding and fresh water in the spring could have pushed fish away from your area and to mine or vice versa. That has nothing to do with trout population and more to do with environmental factors.
Just me personally, last year was the worst of my life and this year was the best for trout (Biloxi marsh). I have no idea the science behind that. I'll let State biologist handle that.
Just me personally, last year was the worst of my life and this year was the best for trout (Biloxi marsh). I have no idea the science behind that. I'll let State biologist handle that.
Posted on 9/20/16 at 11:03 am to voros79
quote:
LDWF is a mess
And I have a belly button.
Posted on 9/20/16 at 12:32 pm to 34venture
I think the 25 speck limit is too low. I would like to see it raised to 50.
Posted on 9/20/16 at 12:35 pm to The Last Coco
quote:
The Last Coco
killed it!
Posted on 9/20/16 at 12:46 pm to stoms
"Let actual biologist make this call like MS is doing. Anecdotal fisherman reports are not real science."
I think like you do. We pay folks to do the science; let's let them set the rules.
I personally like the 12", 25 limit.
I can remember when there were absolutely NO LIMITS. That was fun but everyone that cared about the sport didn't have a problem when limits were set, BY THE BIOLOGISTS!
Lets keep this the norm.
I think like you do. We pay folks to do the science; let's let them set the rules.
I personally like the 12", 25 limit.
I can remember when there were absolutely NO LIMITS. That was fun but everyone that cared about the sport didn't have a problem when limits were set, BY THE BIOLOGISTS!
Lets keep this the norm.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News