There IS scientific data:help: You guys posted it, it shows the whole ecology/biology of tripletail (when they breed, how much they breed, age at sexual maturity, etc.) and that data will be examined, discussed, and a best management strategy will be proposed on the information that is provided. THIS is how regulations are proposed. Its not that big a deal.
The commission hasn't even voted on this yet, just a letter of INTENT. Write them, email them, whatever. Its not time to get up in arms yet.

Oh no, I may only be able keep 5 tripletail, what am I going to do? LDWF and CCA are trying to kill our fisheries:rotfl:

Some people are so dense. Please stop posting about their sexual maturity, we get it, we don't care. Stock Assessments, come back when you have relevant info please, 'cause all you've got right now, is when 3tails hump, and a pic of a dude who caught a 100 of em so lets freak out about it.

Obviously you didn't read, or can't read my post.
And as always.....bring Texas up in the conversation. I bet money it would come up !

The burden to provide sound scientific support should always be on those suggesting increased regulation.

A Constitutional Republic is based on the idea that the liberty of individuals should only be restricted in cases of demonstrated necessity. The position that tighter limits are always good conservation is not only bad science, it is contrary to the ideas of liberty that the framers of our Constitution sought to preserve.

Copying other states is rarely sound science based wildlife management. Asserting the sexual maturity of a fish as the basis for a minimum length limit is not scientific management. For example, it has been shown and is well known that the sexual maturity of redfish is actually a good cause to restrict harvest of sexually mature fish.

Restrictions on liberty (tighter limits) that carry criminal penalties should be supported with good science, including stock assessments, condition indices, and understanding the role of the species in the overall food web.

The debacle with red snapper is actually endangering other species because the Draconian restrictions on red snapper are allowing them to become overpopulated in some areas to the detriment of their food sources and to the harm of other species that red snapper compete with for food and habitat.

Overly restrictive harvest limits is not good conservation. Good conservation allows sustainable harvests to prevent overpopulation for the benefit of the overall habitat and food web.

My point exactly

More than Kool-Aid
 

With all due respect, duck buttter you must be drinking more than kool-aid. Please do not confused "or" with the word "and".

CCA mission, as per its website is "conserve, promote and enhance the present and future availability of these coastal resources for the benefit and enjoyment of the general public.

So, I guess CCA does not think that when the general public cannot fish in a public waterway it is promoting or enhancing coastal resources (Fish are coastal resources).

As to the comments about rigs-to-reefs, I am assuming either you do not know, or you refuse to accept the facts that David Vitter sponsored a bill to stop the destruction of rigs off Louisiana's coast. He begged CCA of Louisiana to appear for the committee hearing, yet CCA failed to show and the bill was deferred (polite way of saying the bill is dead). He

I am well aware that CCA likes to neglect to tell its members of its self serving agenda, but please gets your facts straight before you get in this argument.

I do have one question though, why is CCA of Louisiana the only 501(C) entity in the entire country that refuses to publish it's finanicial statement on a yearly basis.

Finally, please understand that everything I posted is public record, not what I think, hope to believe or dream in a drunken stuper.

Thank you

No offense meant Camp Canard but this discussion on the TT limit is a Louisiana regulatory issue. Texas and the Louisiana are vastly different estuaries. I think that's the purpose of mentioning Texas. Should Louisiana sportsman have a say in your states regulations?

I've never caught a TT. I've seen them and think there cool but have no desire to target them. My issue with CCA is more about the access issue and thier hesitancy to weigh in on current issues pertaining to access and other membership concerns. Red snapper, rigs to reef funds etc. Gill nets are in the past. What have you done for me lately?

I'm a member of DU and Delta Waterfowl. They both work towards conservation of Ducks. I personally think Delta Waterfowl coming on the sceen has snapped DU back into its stated mission. CCA needs something similar to compete for the anglers conservation dollars to get them in line with membership wishes and their own mission statement.

Excellent post. Two thumbs up.

I think WD hacked Duck Butters account

"As to the comments about rigs-to-reefs, I am assuming either you do not know, or you refuse to accept the facts that David Vitter sponsored a bill to stop the destruction of rigs off Louisiana's coast. He begged CCA of Louisiana to appear for the committee hearing, yet CCA failed to show and the bill was deferred (polite way of saying the bill is dead)."

That's pretty poor on CCA's part.

"I do I do have one question though, why is CCA of Louisiana the only 501(C) entity in the entire country that refuses to publish it's finanicial statement on a yearly basis.have one question though, why is CCA of Louisiana the only 501(C) entity in the entire country that refuses to publish it's finanicial statement on a yearly basis."

What's the deal with that?

No one on here is against limits if there is a reason for it. And as far as going to complain at meetings, do you think no one did that before the limit was reduced? Yeah right. A lot of good that did. Everyone on here who thinks that a limit on triple tail isn't a big deal is ridiculous. It's just like the liberal goverment taking over and telling us what we can and can't do. Same concept

I know. It's giving me a headache. We know they reproduce several times a year. Laying up to 9 millions of eggs. They only show up for about 3 months out of the year. Show us where they are being over fished. God, how hard is that to understand!! The scientific data they have means nothing more than what you can find on wiki

Hey "They said its the smart thing to do"

What more do we need!!! Im sold on that :help:

Exactly x10000. But the CCA koolaide flows strong in some.

Can I have a hug??? BINGO we have the winner!!!!

what is this? the WWE? Cause Will Drost said so!!!

Do you people really think it is one man that can set limits to what HE thinks is considered to be right?

get out of here with that sh it..

Imagine the things that could be done if everyone on this site that is vehemently against any changes would actually go to the meeting and let their message be known:D

Exactly the reason Barry O is still in office, everyone was mad but they just didn't voice their opinion in the right spot (at the polls):help:

Its comical yet sad that people think that

I've been to the meetings. It's a waste of time.

I Hunt and Fish in La., and own a Camp there as well. Purchase $480 in Licenses ea. year. I think I should have a say in La. regulations !
Comment about " Mad Texan".....Really ! This is specifically why I NEVER get involved in these type of debates, and rarely post. I have been a member of DU since 1976, and do not agree with everything they have done. My feelings are mutual with respect to CCA.
I often wonder where WE ( La. and TX.) Sportsman would be today without the efforts of DU, Delta,CCA, etc. I doubt you would be able to strap a Canvasback, or even see one now days ! They didn't just come back to huntable numbers because the Hens decided to lay more eggs.

He was the hook n bull for 15trout limit!!! along with HR&G

The purpose of public meetings seems to be to claim after the fact that public meetings were held. The only scientific support for regulations changes you get at public meetings are a few oversimplified platitudes that might seem to make sense at the time, but usually only amount to unsupported claims that the regulatory proposal is a data driven necessity.

But the data and scientific reasons motivating any change really should be published in written and electronic form to be more carefully considered and assessed by independent parties. Otherwise, the public can't tell the difference between sound scientific validation and basing decisions on unvalidated opinions of a few purported "experts."

The triple tail regulations, the red snapper regulations, and the speckled trout regulations all seem to be based on unvalidated opinions of purported experts.

Conservation groups should be demanding better science before restricting access to resources that appear to be sufficiently abundant to allow greater or at least historical levels of access.

:fireworks::amen:

Fair enough, but your say is as a customer or consumer of the resources. Your say should be analogous to a customer at Burger King if they discontinue or restrict access to a product. Your say is nothing more than a recommendation or an expression of your personal preferences.

This is much different than the authoritative say deserved by LA residents and registered LA voters. Citizens of Louisiana should have an authoritative say equivalent to Burger King stockholders.

;), I will go along with them everytime. If there is an issue, its with the LDWF Commission. They listen to their panel of experts who present to them the data and their decision SHOULD be based upon that data (whether it is or not is a different subject). Again, they are the experts in their field and they are presenting to the lawmakers, just like in every form of government

You absolutely DO have as say in that case Camp Canard. I was pointing out the differences in the estuaries and the fact that each state should regulate their resources with sound scientific data pertaining to the location. Not in a me too manner.

When and where is the next meeting. Lets all go. And ask "so if we don't put a limit on tripletail, do you honestly think they will be gone one day? And if you think that, simply tell me why and show me data." I'm a logical guy, prove to me why we need a limit and i'm all for it

Duh

The scientific method is based on skepticism and the demand that assertions be supported with published data and a methodology that allows both replication and review by others.

This is in contrast to believing in viewpoints based on the authority, education, or employment status of those espousing the view.

Responsible PhD Wildlife Professionals should know they need to back up proposed management actions with sound scientific data. Pushing major policy changes without sound scientific support diminishes their credibility. They would be on much more sound footing if they proposed to study the status of the stock with sound scientific methods and suggested delay of consideration of major policy changes until there was more data available.

Its september 5th.. dont know the location though

Preaching to the choir on most that MG:)

Apples to Bowling balls. Migratory bird populations are extensively researched every year and regulations are managed accordingly. When you come up with a better argument than "Why do y'all need more than 5?" then let us know, TEXAN!!! :D

EXACTLY!!!

Migratory bird populations are estimates as well, just as the tripletail studies and there have been extensive studies done as per this:

David Cresson, executive director of the Coastal Conservation Association-Louisiana, told the commission his organization supports the implementation of regulations on tripletail.
"There is limited information in general on tripletail, but it's extensive in other parts of the country," he said. "We've been visiting with scientists, and the information is undeniable: Eighteen inches is where they become sexually mature."

There is no such thing as a Louisiana tripletail, they are a migratory species, they do not know state lines. What is seen in Alabama and Mississippi tripletail populations would be the same here, unlike red snapper which do not migrate and is why I think our state's red snapper fishery should be managed by us

I don't recall saying "why you need more than 5".
10-4 on the Ducks research and regulations. Would you have a problem with LDWF doing the same with 3 tailers, and manage accordingly ? Does LDWF research Trout, Redfish, etc. ?
My point has not changed. Nobody wants to be told how many you can keep. Lets just catch as many as we can NOW, and the heck with the future of the Fish. Who cares if my kids/grandkids ever know of there existence ?

Yep, I'm tryin to fish 'em to extinction, I wish these Out-of-Towners would mind their own business and let us exterminate these things. C'mon man, you're gettin a little radical now.

Sooooooo.......You're sayin they have no idea, they just S.W.A.G. it. Kind of what we're gettin at.......

So in Africa today..

.La CCA guy took a visit to see how they controlled the Lion populations... When CCA ask how do you know where to set the limit on Lions, the African guy just looked and said we look extensive in other parts of the country.
CCA guy said we do the same thing with our fishing regulations, so what is your triple tail limit here? Confused African said what is a triple tail? CCA Guy: it’s that fish with 3 tails that floats under debris.
He says Ohhhh mate you speak of the fish we with 3tails .... We base our limits on extensive in other parts of the country.
The CCA guy comes back to Baton Rouge and gives a great detail of what he learned in Africa over his trip! When commissioner ask about the 3 tail limit and what we should do. He answered extensive in other parts of the country!
It’s the smart thing to do!

No, I am saying that the info is there already, its been done all around us. Its not going to be different because they are a migratory species that do not know what state they are in:) They are not a different subspecies

:headknocker:

Careful for what you wish for ! Those out of towners help fuel your economy, and there not all from Texas.

Texas has the dumbest trout law of all...15inch min on trout...lmao

Keep all females and leave males in the water!! WINNING...

Maybe Texas could have a better trout program if they dropped that 15inch min down to a 12inch where you keep a better ratio male to female

I was being sarcastic. It was a joke.

MathGeek, you need to be present at some of these meetings. Even though logic isn't always the best solution(in most political-type cases these days), your ability to speak and present facts, along with the extensive studies you have done would likely go a lot further than "It's my right to keep what I want!"

THIS!!!!!!!!!


not only should it be MG, It needs to be everyone who gives a rat's posterior.

Like i said in the other thread, Policiticians listed to two things 1) Money 2) public opinion. Unless we have a Williams Gates Jr in our midst who is willing to finance our cause..... Then i suggest people start creating some public opinion.

Squeeky Wheels really do tend to get grease.

Roger !

agreed...bruh.

I'm not much of a public speaker, but given time and google scholar, I can frame a decent scientific viewpoint.

I've corresponded with Jason Adriance in the past, and I could probably put together a decent case that there simply is not much scientific data showing the need to impose such a drastically lower limit on tripletail.

However, I think the bigger danger to LDWF is setting the precedent of managing by public opinion without sound scientific data. If Draconian regulations can be imposed without valid scientific support, then why will the legislature ever bother to spend the extra $$$ for good science to get the data?

W said it well. A decade from now, we'll all be wondering what happened when there are plenty of fish and we're wondering why the limit is 3 specks and one redfish.

If we want fisheries that suck as bad as Texas and Florida, then we should copy their regulations!

MG is on Fiya!!!!!!!!!!

Man I help fight that battle... It was a hard fight but great win!!! We had a good group of guides and supporters! CCA and I'm not going to mention a name which he is gone now but that was the biggest crock of crap I've ever heard what they spread and made up!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk