LDWF meeting to talk about Big Lake Oysters

[MathGeek]

I was a bit disappointed with the turnout from SWLA. The oyster folks has several reps, but the LC CCA pres was the only SWLA angler who made the drive. I know the location and time is often not convenient, but even a fraction of the turnout we had for the "State of the Lake" meeting could have an impact over time.

They have these meetings every month or so and there is always a public comment time at the end. Even if there are no Calcasieu related items on the agenda, having a few people from SWLA at each meeting and reminding the Commission that we want to see more scientific management and we want to see greater consideration given to oysters as essential habit and not just a commercial resource to be exploited would have an effect over time.

[Bluechip]

Kudos to the CCA past President Raymond Little for representing the Big Lake area.

[PaulMyers]

Originally Posted by Bluechip

Kudos to the CCA past President Raymond Little for representing the Big Lake area.

x2

["W"]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

I was a bit disappointed with the turnout from SWLA. The oyster folks has several reps, but the LC CCA pres was the only SWLA angler who made the drive. I know the location and time is often not convenient, but even a fraction of the turnout we had for the "State of the Lake" meeting could have an impact over time.

They have these meetings every month or so and there is always a public comment time at the end. Even if there are no Calcasieu related items on the agenda, having a few people from SWLA at each meeting and reminding the Commission that we want to see more scientific management and we want to see greater consideration given to oysters as essential habit and not just a commercial resource to be exploited would have an effect over time.

Yea sucks that day they do it I'm at work. , because I wanted to attend this one !

But i have sent numuous emails to Patrick with "Zero" feedback

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by "W"

Yea sucks that day they do it I'm at work. , because I wanted to attend this one !

But i have sent numuous emails to Patrick with "Zero" feedback

I think the best approach will be gentle and consistent pressure on the Commission itself and its members, rather than the biologists. The biologists are in a bind because everyone is asking them for data and personal attention to their pet theories, which they cannot really be expected to provide. A group like CCA can probably cultivate a working relationship with LDWF, but the biologists just cannot practically give much attention to many individual anglers and guides, and they are under a gag order not to share data unless it has gone through an approval process.

The LWF Commission meets almost every month. I'd like to see the recreational anglers and guides who feel strongly about this make it to Commission meetings 1, 2, or 3 times over the next 12 months and speak for 2-3 minutes during the public comment session. A consistent gentle message about the importance of oyster reefs as essential habitat and how healthy oyster reefs sustain the estuary by the benthic food webs they support and how they improve water quality by filtering will leave an impression over time that should eventually have an impact when the annual policy vote comes up.

There are always a lot of important LDWF people in the room too at these meetings. If they see that the Commission is beginning to realize the importance of oyster reefs as a habitat issue and the recreational anglers care deeply about this habitat issue, over time, their recommendations may begin to shift, or it least if the data leaves them on the fence about a policy recommendation, they may begin to lean toward habitat conservation rather than the maximum exploitation allowed by their assessments.

Bottom line: SWLA anglers and guides who care about oyster reefs should try and make 1, 2, or 3 LWF Commission meetings in the next 12 months.

CCA members should also keep up the pressure on CCA to not be satisfied with efforts so far and to seek ways to make real change. On the scientific front, we'll continue to pursue the ideas mentioned earlier in the thread, and also consider if we might find the data to test other hypotheses like the possibility that oyster stocks are inversely correlated with harmful bacteria (fecal coliform and vibrio), which would suggest that the water quality benefits of healthy reef systems extends to these two dangerous pathogens.

The dredging issue needs to be taken up with the Legislature. If CCA really means to effect change, then we should see them stepping up here. But whatever their efforts are, it would help if recreational anglers and guides also make some efforts on this front, writing will help, but stopping by your rep's office for a personal visit can be more effective.