you were complaing about 15 fish limit

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by Speckmeister

Will Drost may be doing exactly what many of you wanted. It could be the only way to get the sore to make a head so to speak.
We need SPR data, which we haven't had since 2011, and that specific speckled trout biomass indicator was through 2010.
We don't even know if the trout biomass is high or low.
I want to give him the benefit of the doubt first, because the only way we may be able to obtain that data is to get it this way. Please read the Nola.com article again. He explains his thrust on this issue. Here's the link to the Nola.com story: http://www.nola.com/outdoors/index.s....html#comments

This is certainly one way to look at it and also the way I read it. Not even our own commissioners have seen the fisheries data since the BP oil spill. This info is so secretive and maybe now we can actually see some data. He is calling them out on that in my opinion. Lets see some data

The 14" redfish comment from the lady is just complete nonsense however. No way can I read that comment and see anything that makes one lick of sense.

[noodle creek]

It's unbelievable that mentioning limit changes is even a conversation when WLF has seen zero data in the last several years. To further mention that it is a social issue rather than a biological one is even more of a joke.

Once again, this effort should be aimed at fixing our actual estuary, not trying to fix it by simply reducing limits. We have to start at the estuary itself, reducing limits will not fix the oyster, erosion, or wier problems.

[kb7722]

Except the trout limits!

[T-TOP]

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

This is certainly one way to look at it and also the way I read it. Not even our own commissioners have seen the fisheries data since the BP oil spill. This info is so secretive and maybe now we can actually see some data. He is calling them out on that in my opinion. Lets see some data

The 14" redfish comment from the lady is just complete nonsense however. No way can I read that comment and see anything that makes one lick of sense.

This is correct. I contacted Will this morning. The LAS article is not accurate. He has no agenda to lower trout limits, he never said that. He is just trying to get the data that has been kept from us(that we need). The other things mentioned about fishing pressure and influx in guides from other areas are issues that have been voiced to him by the public. I think there is an thread on this forum talking about over fishing BL.

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by T-TOP

This is correct. I contacted Will this morning. The LAS article is not accurate. He has no agenda to lower trout limits, he never said that. He is just trying to get the data that has been kept from us(that we need). The other things mentioned about fishing pressure and influx in guides from other areas are issues that have been voiced to him by the public. I think there is an thread on this forum talking about over fishing BL.

Yep People can spin a story so quick. He is even quoted in there saying why:

Interpreted biological data has barely trickled from the department since 2010 because of the state's ongoing litigation with BP after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. State lawyers have clamped down on the flow of information for fear of weakening the state's case.

But Drost said he wants to know, among other things, where SPR stands today.

"I know that they'll give me the picture that I ask for as a commissioner," he said. "I want to know everything there is to know.

"I feel like it's our responsibility to properly manage the most important species in our state. I think we're currently managing it properly, but it's an ongoing job. It never ends."


I feel like this is a good thing. He wants to know, we want to know, lets see some data.

[MOJO]

Originally Posted by "W"

Poes are going for sure talked to Nick and one of the guys on west side is going


Thur is my only day off of guiding this week and I have some things set up that day

But I might still go

Y'all let me know when you headed down. This is in my backyard and I'll be there to support and voice my opinion. Anyone who knows me knows I fish Lake P. And Big Lake pretty evenly throughout the year.

[duckman1911]

Originally Posted by TarponTom

Hearing internal debate on Specks at LaWLF being discussed from 25 per day to between 10-15 for trout with possible restrictions on max size kept. Redfish from 5 to 3 per day with none over 33 inches also floated internally. Look for restrictions on other species as well flounder, white trout, tripletail, even croaker in the near future. Supposedly forage base (cocahoes, menhaden, etc) significantly declined in numbers in Eastern Louisiana from the oil spill along with the near loss of the 2010 spawn for many species.

Sadly I'm hearing the various internal state fisheries research projects funded by BP to study the impact on our fisheries (out of public purview due to BP litigation) is not good news for anglers across Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. I've heard the spawning ratio "SPR" in some parts of the state have fallen to levels in the low single digits versus the optimal number of 18 SPR.

A 33 inch max limit on reds would pretty much kill summertime surf fishing for a lot of folks.

[keakar]

Drost said most anglers in Southwest Louisiana fully support the special regulations in that area for speckled trout. Anglers in the rest of the state may harvest up to 25 speckled trout each per day, with a minimum length limit of 12 inches. In Southwest Louisiana, however, the daily limit is 15 fish with an angler allowed to harvest no more than two measuring more than 25 inches.
If anything, anglers in that part of the state are alarmed about how increased pressure is impacting the fishery there, Drost said.

sounds like drost has that same imaginary friend that harry reid and nancy pelosi have when they talk about lots of people support doing the stupid things they want to do to us.

maybe you guys in BL are just secretly supporting putting yourselves out of business and making fishing too restrictive for recreationals?

ya know political hacks would never lie so check with your neighbors, some of em must be liberals

[TarponTom]

Originally Posted by duckman1911

A 33 inch max limit on reds would pretty much kill summertime surf fishing for a lot of folks.

If they decide to implement that max limit on reds it will have an impact on nighttime surf fishing for anyone other than those who want to practice catch and release.

Just internal debate by some right now I understand. One thing that was pointed out to me was that this isn't a BL/Texas issue with pressure but also concerns have been mounting with respect to the Chandeleur Island chain. Mississippi which has a 15 per person trout limit and now the growing Mississippi and even Alabama headboat industry has been multiplying and inundating the Chandeleur Island Chain with pressure. The impact of BP spill's use of corexit in 2010, in conjunction with the significant land loss in the eastern part of Louisiana, harsh winter of 2013/14, and higher freshwater discharges from the Miss River pushing into areas with higher salinity levels (above the acceptable levels needed for trout eggs to hatch) are troubling some inside the WLF.

Now whether they keep it at 25 or lower it to 15 or even 10 I don't know but the government needs to make this information public so that we can see if we have a problem and to the extent its as bad as rumored it is just how bad it is. Otherwise the WLF will be doing a disservice to everyone because it will create a bigger issue the politicization of this issue which is not in anyone's best interest. If the SPR is actually down to 3 or 5 in areas then something needs to be done immediately to prevent a collapse of the fishery but if its in the 15-18 then there is no reason to change the limits IMO.

I know the oyster fisherman in Eastern La in the Hopedale/La Marsh/Barataria areas are replanting all of their oyster leases right now because the spat is completely dead from BP and they are praying the major money they are sinking into replanting will actually show results in 3-4 years.

[Ratdog]

Originally Posted by duckman1911

A 33 inch max limit on reds would pretty much kill summertime surf fishing for a lot of folks.

*** I will starve. Unreasonable!

[mr crab]

Originally Posted by kb7722

Except the trout limits!

I'd laugh if i wasn't crying....sad but true