re: No Change to Speckled Trout regulations

I suspect that we will eventually see a 15 fish creel limit and I’m ok with that, but like some others I don’t trust the collection and compilation of the data. I’ve had the data collectors/surveyors approach me and I always give them information, but here’s where it’s flawed. They are at the boat launches where people put their boats in who don’t have camps or live around where they fish. I’m in Terrebonne Parish on the bayou and we seldom go without a good catch. Of course I go when winds are low, tides are moving and water is decently clear, but the fish are in good shape, at least in the Terrebonne/Lafourche basin. Especially after Ida when hardly no one fished for ~6 months after the storm.

I agree that the pogey boats are a problem, at least in Terrebonne/Timbalier and La Leg needs to address that at soonest.

quote:

---

I’ve had the data collectors/surveyors approach me and I always give them information,

---

I’ve fished most of my 42yrs and can tell you I’ve never once seen anyone at a launch asking for information. Why not ask recreational anglers to fill out a short survey online? Make it mandatory for charter captains.

I can agree habitat loss is an issue and something should be done, but without good data they are just doing something for the sake of doing it.

quote:

---

I’ve fished most of my 42yrs and can tell you I’ve never once seen anyone at a launch asking for information. Why not ask recreational anglers to fill out a short survey online? Make it mandatory for charter captains.

---

There were surveys posted on every outdoor website

quote:

---

The bloggers and self aggrandizers on Facebook crack me up with their virtue signaling on the topic. If you believe strongly about catch and release, knock yourself out, just realize not everyone has the same motivation.

---

I think the frustration, if any, comes from making these decisions based off of emotion. It was turned down because guides and marinas were afraid of what this would do to their industry. Not based on science. I’d have more respect and honestly understand if they would just say that. They don’t have to make up talking points like “it’s gonna hurt the females” or “all those released fish will die” to overturn it. Just be honest.

Having said that, I totally agree that we shouldn’t be making any major changes to our regs without some actual research being done in our fishery. I wish we could contract the people who manage texas’ and Mississippi’s fishery to do an actual assessment and we can go from there.

quote:

---

Did you see the video of John Kennedy talking about the plans to fill in the MRGO?

---

yeah, but it's way to late - the damage has long since been done. WHen it was built it should have been dug land locked and heavily rocked the whole way and locks for traditional boat use bayous. the real sad thing is it never came close to it's full use projection something like 12%

Nothing will change until it is too late. My grandpa caught 100 a day so 25 will not hurt anything. How many people do you know that keep more than one limit a day illegally? I have met a lot. Who needs 50 fish in one day? Ma freezer and kids...

Louisiana's coast is disappearing. Planned diversions to increase sediment loading are fought because of the fishing industry in an area that was land and freshwater historically. F it, lets catch every fish we can until the coast is a wasteland.

I had a discussion over email with a well respected biologist in a neighboring state. This is what he had to say about the “over fishing females” baloney:

“For the 2nd point. Yes, that doesn’t totally makes sense to be either. If you set the min size higher (e.g., 15”), the population of females would have plenty of opportunity to reproduce and contribute to breeding populations in a sustainable way. At that size they will have spawned likely multiple times and there a lot of them compared to larger females. It’s really just a management choice of what is desired. Neither really impacts total fish biomass, it’s just do you want a lot of smaller ones or more biomass in the large size classes.

For example, fish in general tend to stack up right below the lower size limit. So, a question managers have to address is what you want the population to look like? For example, our recent freeze resulted in a 3 fish 17” bag limit. In the past it was 15” 5 fish, and all the fish were stacking up at 14”. Now, they are all stacking at 16”. That’s a pretty nice trout. So, now we have high catch rates of relatively large trout. Anglers are really liking that scenario. Plus, when you look at fillets and other species available (redfish, black drum, flounder)… that’s a lot of fish for those seeking that aspect.”

quote:

---

I wonder who they are listening to?

---

CCA and the guides. This was a hill CCA was willing to die on. They could dangle this as a carrot and to avoid other, more critical issues. All of the questioning done by the committee was obviously biased. I get that you ask pressing questions but it was obviously all the same filtered garbage that guides on forums have been mentioning without any supporting evidence. Romero literally said he “feels like the survival rate is incorrect”. They made the decisions based off of politics and not what is best for the fishery. Sen Allain kept diverting to unrelated things. Sen. Connick questioned the online polls.
The common theme was that no one could mention one supported counter argument to the proposed regulations.

Just come out and say it could potentially affect guide’s pocket books in the short term. That’s what this decision was based off of

quote:

---

Louisiana needs to change it's slogan from "Sportsman's Paradise" to "Short Sighted Greedland"

---

This! Which ironically is why they refuse to change anything. They want to be called Sportsmans Paradise.

quote:

---

All the pro-regulation side has is emotional arguments as well.

---

This isn’t remotely true. Did you not watch the video? The only argument the opposition has is that the science isn’t perfect. Does it have weaknesses? Absolutely! But LDWF actually did a good job of accumulate a decent amount of research across multiple different states to address most, if not all, the concerns. Of course it’s not perfect but it’s the best we got.

At this point I’d take the “best we got” vs overused, inaccurate, reductionistic arguments based on nothing but “ole guide t-boy’s” personal experience over his career. And it just so conveniently fits with his inability to run a business without catching 11.75 trout.