what y'all make of this?

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

There certainly is a good chance it could work out this way. I'm optimistic that fairly good fisheries can be preserved over the next 100 years as the marshes turn into open lakes and bays by:


3. Managing salinity in the lakes and bays by controlling salinity flowing in from the Gulf and freshwater flows from rivers and freshwater swamps.
.

They have these things called a wier or something like that, that does this very thing. Crazy ain't it

[duckman1911]

Originally Posted by HenryBoy

I tell you what........

I pursue trophy fish in both fresh and saltwater - so maybe I can bring some street cred to this conversation. Now I don't have a degree in fish management, but I can say the trophy fish just aren't what they use to be.........both Salt and Fresh.........in Lousiana and Texas. I blame Obama, the umbrella rig, myself, the new trout limits and these new fish finders.

And for this guy....... I fish trophies numero uno and I fish for food numero dos. So you (Mr. Office fisherman) can eat a topwater with your new limit proposal.

Been windy lately.......but here are few trophies for 2014.

6 posts in and he's showing off a 26" redfish for street cred. Gota give him props on the fly rod though. Foot off the throttle until you have some street cred here or the boys are gona have fun with you. Trust me I know.
Welcome aboard bro. Seat belt on at all times. Its a hell of a ride. J

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

They have these things called a wier or something like that, that does this very thing. Crazy ain't it

A single level has proven less effective than hoped. I envision more of a staged salinity control system where salinity is gradually reduced from the highest areas (ship channel) to moderate levels (lake) to lower levels (marsh). There is too much flow between the lake and the Gulf for a single level structure (weir) to be effective because it ends up closed to many days each year.

Also, there is a management plan, but it has not really been followed. Opening and closing control structures should be based on the salinity and water levels on each side and the target levels on each side. You know, some measurement science to determine how much salt is flowing.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Also, there is a management plan, but it has not really been followed. Opening and closing control structures should be based on the salinity and water levels on each side and the target levels on each side. You know, some measurement science to determine how much salt is flowing.

Second time in this thread that something that I've said for months gets repeated. Yet, everytime I say these things, it starts a big azz argument as to why I'm wrong.

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by Smalls

Second time in this thread that something that I've said for months gets repeated. Yet, everytime I say these things, it starts a big azz argument as to why I'm wrong.

It's almost comical isn't it?

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

It's almost comical isn't it?

No, not at all. I'm the one that did this kind of work, worked in the Marsh for years, continue to work in wetlands, and have conducted research on those wetlands. Yet, I am told repeatedly that I don't know what I'm talking about.

But its ok when other people repeat it.

Makes perfect sense. Yeah, I see no humor in that.

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by Smalls

No, not at all. I'm the one that did this kind of work, worked in the Marsh for years, continue to work in wetlands, and have conducted research on those wetlands. Yet, I am told repeatedly that I don't know what I'm talking about.

But its ok when other people repeat it.

Makes perfect sense. Yeah, I see no humor in that.

I know right

U say it and certain folks blow it off, those exact same folks say it down the road and it's taken for the gospel

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

I know right

U say it and certain folks blow it off, those exact same folks say it down the road and it's taken for the gospel

Maybe you'd be more credible with this crowd if you talked more about liberty, small gov't, and RKBA and didn't think your sacred cows were "reasonable" exceptions. Handing out good fishing info doesn't hurt either. Maybe some selfies with some big fish, along with the whens, wheres and hows you caught them.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Maybe you'd be more credible with this crowd if you talked more about liberty, small gov't, and RKBA and didn't think your sacred cows were "reasonable" exceptions. Handing out good fishing info doesn't hurt either. Maybe some selfies with some big fish, along with the whens, wheres and hows you caught them.

Did you really just say selfie? Lol!

So catching big fish is what makes you credible now? Funny, and I'm just spitballing here, but I thought if one, I don't know, say for example, worked in a particular environment for years, you know, that might give their opinion some weight on that particular subject.

Guess I need to get busy catching big fish then, or else I'll never be respected.

[PaulMyers]

Originally Posted by Smalls

Did you really just say selfie? Lol!

So catching big fish is what makes you credible now? Funny, and I'm just spitballing here, but I thought if one, I don't know, say for example, worked in a particular environment for years, you know, that might give their opinion some weight on that particular subject.

Guess I need to get busy catching big fish then, or else I'll never be respected.

Nah man, you just sided with the duck weed.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by PaulMyers

Nah man, you just sided with the duck weed.

Oh geez, that again?!?

I didn't side with anything. I stated fact, based on research and experience. It was others (ahem) that spun my argument as such. The weirs were not constructed for that purpose, but the land behind there has been used for that purpose. Lets not even get into the fact that the National Wildlife Refuge system was created with the specific purpose of preserving waterfowl habitat. Yes, half of that land behind the weirs is not NWR, but is there any proof that those landowners control the weirs? No. Just the word of some.

Proof. Where is it?

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Smalls

Did you really just say selfie? Lol!

So catching big fish is what makes you credible now? Funny, and I'm just spitballing here, but I thought if one, I don't know, say for example, worked in a particular environment for years, you know, that might give their opinion some weight on that particular subject.

Guess I need to get busy catching big fish then, or else I'll never be respected.

You gotta know your crowd. Sheepskins on the wall count in the office and on the resume, but no so much in the bar or at the cleaning station.

Think of SC as a cross between a bar and the cleaning station. You gotta speak the language. You gotta agree everywhere you can and pick your spots to gently educate your peers. And you gotta argue from facts not from authority.

The guides who post know that a lot of credibility on fishing forums comes from box shots and shots from happy customers. They could post average numbers of trout and redfish caught each trip, but they know its pictures, not statistics that make them credible. I'm not saying that's how it should work, but that's how it does work. Would some educational certification in guiding trump box shots and happy customers? Should it?

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

You gotta know your crowd. Sheepskins on the wall count in the office and on the resume, but no so much in the bar or at the cleaning station.

Think of SC as a cross between a bar and the cleaning station. You gotta speak the language. You gotta agree everywhere you can and pick your spots to gently educate your peers. And you gotta argue from facts not from authority.

The guides who post know that a lot of credibility on fishing forums comes from box shots and shots from happy customers. They could post average numbers of trout and redfish caught each trip, but they know its pictures, not statistics that make them credible. I'm not saying that's how it should work, but that's how it does work. Would some educational certification in guiding trump box shots and happy customers? Should it?

Preaching to the choir dude! When have I ever argued from authority over facts?

What happens if you have an "educational certification" and the "box shots"?

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Smalls

Oh geez, that again?!?

I didn't side with anything. I stated fact, based on research and experience. It was others (ahem) that spun my argument as such. The weirs were not constructed for that purpose, but the land behind there has been used for that purpose. Lets not even get into the fact that the National Wildlife Refuge system was created with the specific purpose of preserving waterfowl habitat. Yes, half of that land behind the weirs is not NWR, but is there any proof that those landowners control the weirs? No. Just the word of some.

Proof. Where is it?

Why not offer info we can use?

Who (exactly) is responsible for weir operation?

How can they be contacted with citizen input?

What salinity levels and water levels inside and outside does the existing plan use to determine opening and closure?

Where can the written plan be found?

Where is the nearest station measuring inside and outside salinity?

Are these numbers recorded regularly?

Where can they be obtained?

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Why not offer info we can use?

Who (exactly) is responsible for weir operation?

How can they be contacted with citizen input?

What salinity levels and water levels inside and outside does the existing plan use to determine opening and closure?

Where can the written plan be found?

Where is the nearest station measuring inside and outside salinity?

Are these numbers recorded regularly?

Where can they be obtained?

At one point, I could have offered that information pretty accurately. I'm out of the loop now.

I can answer some of those though.

The weirs are bid out now, at least they were at one point. USFWS quit operation after many years of dealing with disgruntled public. I do not know who is in control now. Call LDWF, NRCS, or USFWS. I'm sure one of them knows. Or the Cameron-Creole Advisory committee.

I have a few different documents outlining the plan, or variations of it. Maybe I can upload them one day.

Salinity levels are based on isohaline lines. There is a 5 ppt and 12 ppt line. When the salinity reaches 5 ppt at the 5 ppt line, closure is triggered. Water depth, as far as I know, does not dictate closure.

Look up USGS Water Resources and CRMS. Those systems both have monitoring stations in the lake and Marsh. I do not remember exact sstations anymore, but I was very familiar with those systems during my research.

Its not as simple as just knowing the salinity though. Its about vegetation salinity tolerances as well. There are reports out there on the Cameron-Creole, monitoring reports, that outline the history if the area. Several thousand acres of fresh Marsh were lost because of excess salinity.

MG, you are more than welcome to come to my house sometime and look at these things. I have more information than I care to even try and upload and post. Old vegetation maps, reports, etc.

The weirs are not there to manage duck food, although the Marsh does provide duck food, habitat, fish habitat, fur bearer and alligator habitat, etc. The primary purpose was to maintain a viable ecosystem, which was dieing at a rapid rate.

Again, these things are in various reports I've read over the years.

Most of this I have stated before. I've always used facts to back up my argument.

[Speckmeister]

MathGeek,
I am very interested in this data, but I am concerned.
You need to be frank with the public here that you cannot make inferences from descriptive data (your histograms), unless you have performed some statistical tests.
There are so many variables (competing hypotheses) that can account for this data besides unseeded oyster reefs.
If you have conducted some tests - then show the public. I will be happy to be mistaken if I see these data in a professional publication that's refereed.
If you can't, then you are making the same mistake you accuse CCA and the LWF Commission in accepting data from another professional that wasn't published.
Please, I do think that at least your descriptive statistics are important, but exciting the public who have no experience in design, methodology and statistics to judge your descriptive data makes me wonder here.
It also injures the public we rely on to continue funding research of our natural resources. If you do not want to send me citations here - fine! Send it by e-mail.
I will be happy to look at your descriptive data to see if we can make meaningful inferences from it.

But again, I applaud your posting these histograms - you are doing something about what I feel is not only affecting Big Lake, but all of coastal Louisiana.

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Speckmeister

MathGeek,
I am very interested in this data, but I am concerned.
You need to be frank with the public here that you cannot make inferences from descriptive data (your histograms), unless you have performed some statistical tests.
There are so many variables (competing hypotheses) that can account for this data besides unseeded oyster reefs.
If you have conducted some tests - then show the public. I will be happy to be mistaken if I see these data in a professional publication that's refereed.
If you can't, then you are making the same mistake you accuse CCA and the LWF Commission in accepting data from another professional that wasn't published.
Please, I do think that at least your descriptive statistics are important, but exciting the public who have no experience in design, methodology and statistics to judge your descriptive data makes me wonder here.
It also injures the public we rely on to continue funding research of our natural resources. If you do not want to send me citations here - fine! Send it by e-mail.
I will be happy to look at your descriptive data to see if we can make meaningful inferences from it.

But again, I applaud your posting these histograms - you are doing something about what I feel is not only affecting Big Lake, but all of coastal Louisiana.

Yes, we are aware of the competing hypotheses. They are discussed in detail in the draft paper. The draft paper has been circulated privately to a number of experts and the feedback has been generally positive. Each year, we've drafted a paper and privately invited reviews from a number of experts.

We are aware that it is an overstatement to definitively conclude causality (fish decline due to oyster reef destruction), but we have made a strong case that the decline in fish condition is correlated with the decline in oysters. We have also considered whether any of the prominent competing hypotheses explain our data as well as the oyster reef hypothesis. Right now, it seems that they do not.

My colleagues and I recently discussed whether to publish our first three years of data or collect another year and then revisit the issue. We've decided to collect another year. The case will be much more convincing if the condition factors of fish rebound with the oyster populations. The more years of data we have, the more likely statistical methods are to reveal more confidence in the likely importance of various causal factors.

In general, our work is covered by various non-disclosure agreements, and I obtained the needed approvals for general release of the graphs you've seen. PM me and I'll see what might be possible, but I don't think some of the parties would approve sending the draft paper to a journalist. Some journals explicitly prohibit releasing drafts to the press prior to publication.

[mallardhead]

I grew up in creole hunting as a kid thru my teens my marshes in east creole and chenier perdue used to be full of life, fish,crabs, and ducks since the king bayou weirs and oak grove weirs.have been pretty much shut down for years now to keep any kind of salinity out of my marsh it has gone to sheet. Cane everywhere and what was once duck ponds have pretty much closed up to grass land. I think these weirs need to be opened back up also. They are killing what was once prime duck hunting land with these damn weirs. Just my 2 cents

Sent from my LGL45C using Tapatalk 2

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Smalls

At one point, I could have offered that information pretty accurately. I'm out of the loop now.

I can answer some of those though.

The weirs are bid out now, at least they were at one point. USFWS quit operation after many years of dealing with disgruntled public. I do not know who is in control now. Call LDWF, NRCS, or USFWS. I'm sure one of them knows. Or the Cameron-Creole Advisory committee.

I have a few different documents outlining the plan, or variations of it. Maybe I can upload them one day.

Salinity levels are based on isohaline lines. There is a 5 ppt and 12 ppt line. When the salinity reaches 5 ppt at the 5 ppt line, closure is triggered. Water depth, as far as I know, does not dictate closure.

Look up USGS Water Resources and CRMS. Those systems both have monitoring stations in the lake and Marsh. I do not remember exact sstations anymore, but I was very familiar with those systems during my research.

Its not as simple as just knowing the salinity though. Its about vegetation salinity tolerances as well. There are reports out there on the Cameron-Creole, monitoring reports, that outline the history if the area. Several thousand acres of fresh Marsh were lost because of excess salinity.

MG, you are more than welcome to come to my house sometime and look at these things. I have more information than I care to even try and upload and post. Old vegetation maps, reports, etc.

The weirs are not there to manage duck food, although the Marsh does provide duck food, habitat, fish habitat, fur bearer and alligator habitat, etc. The primary purpose was to maintain a viable ecosystem, which was dieing at a rapid rate.

Again, these things are in various reports I've read over the years.

Most of this I have stated before. I've always used facts to back up my argument.

Thanks for such a detailed answer, truly appreciated.

5 ppt is a pretty low salinity for closing the weirs, no wonder they stay closed most of the time. I'm sure that threshold is justified based on the needs of the vegetation behind them, but wow! It would be nice if greater consideration could be given to the needs of the ecosystem as a whole, not just the vegetation behind the weirs. I think we need to work to bring the salinity in the lake down. If 35 ppt is common in the lake, then the oysters are in danger too.

I took the liberty of posting a big fish for you. It would make a great profile pic.

[Speckmeister]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Yes, we are aware of the competing hypotheses. They are discussed in detail in the draft paper. The draft paper has been circulated privately to a number of experts and the feedback has been generally positive. Each year, we've drafted a paper and privately invited reviews from a number of experts.

We are aware that it is an overstatement to definitively conclude causality (fish decline due to oyster reef destruction), but we have made a strong case that the decline in fish condition is correlated with the decline in oysters. We have also considered whether any of the prominent competing hypotheses explain our data as well as the oyster reef hypothesis. Right now, it seems that they do not.

My colleagues and I recently discussed whether to publish our first three years of data or collect another year and then revisit the issue. We've decided to collect another year. The case will be much more convincing if the condition factors of fish rebound with the oyster populations. The more years of data we have, the more likely statistical methods are to reveal more confidence in the likely importance of various causal factors.

In general, our work is covered by various non-disclosure agreements, and I obtained the needed approvals for general release of the graphs you've seen. PM me and I'll see what might be possible, but I don't think some of the parties would approve sending the draft paper to a journalist. Some journals explicitly prohibit releasing drafts to the press prior to publication.

Hi MathGeek,

I did send you a Salty Cajum PM as you requested.
Did take me a while again to figure out how to do that again.
Thanks!