What does CCA mean to you?

[eman]

Originally Posted by cmdrost

eman.....

I think that fight is between law makers and land owners. I'm surprised to hear other state chapters of CCA got in that fight and won, and if that is the case, you need to bring it up to CCA LA. One thing about CCA, they are followers, meaning if one state or chapter is successful, then others will follow suit. You ought to bring it up to someone.

.


The last year i was a member of CCA ,I did bring it up at meetings 3 different times and 2 times the subject was changed w/o me getting an answer and the third time i was just ignored.
CCA ,WILL NOT answer any questions about why they won't get involved here in Louisiana.
I got the info that other states had joined the fight and won straight from the Other chapters info pages in the tide magazine.
CCA is all about the $$$ , They are not going to fight the major landowners in the marsh. When these same landowners contribute big $$$ to CCA and allow the big shots to fish the gated/posted areas any time they want.

[Big Kahunaz]

Originally Posted by cmdrost

I'm not Will. LDWF also didn't say it wasn't needed. They stated SPR levels were on the decline and have been for a while now. They also said SPR levels had declined below the sustainable average with they themselves set.

SPR? please elaborate

[Hebert]

I'm against any organization that advocates or trys to dictate what I can keep and what size I can keep...we already have this its called the LDWF...after living outside of Louisiana for 20 yrs and having to deal with states that have destroyed a sportsman's right to bring home a mess of fish to eat...it sickens me to even think of possibility of it happening in La. also.....this is how it starts...

[cmdrost]

[SIZE=3]Mortality and spawning potential ratio (SPR):[/SIZE]
Earlier we said the goal of fishery management was to determine how many (numbers) or how much (pounds) fish can be safely harvested from a stock. In simpler terms we want to know how many fish in a stock can die and still allow the stock to maintain itself. Fishery biologists refer to the rate at which fish die as mortality or the mortality rate. If 1000 fish are alive at the beginning of the year and 200 fish die leaving 800 at the end of a year, then the annual mortality rate is 20 percent (200 divided by 1000) and the survival rate is 80 percent (800 divided by 1000). Each year some fish die whether they are harvested or not. The rate at which fish die from natural causes is called natural mortality and the rate at which fish die from fishing is called fishing mortality.
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]While it is easy to understand these rates as annual percentages, fishery biologists must convert them to something called instantaneous rates to use them in mathematical formulas. As a result, in a fishery management plan you might see statements such as, "The instantaneous fishing mortality rate is 0.67 (F = 0.67" or that, "The instantaneous natural mortality rate is 0.1 (M = 0.1)." Sometimes the word instantaneous is omitted, but F and M are conventional symbols for instantaneous annual rates. Natural mortality (M) and fishing mortality (F) can be added together to get total mortality (Z). Unless regularly dealt with, these numbers do not mean much relative to our more intuitive understanding of annual percentages. Table 1 gives some examples of annual percentages and the corresponding instantaneous rates (F, M or Z). [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]Determining mortality from age structure:
The age structure diagrams (Figures 2 and 3) are a picture of the stock at the time the information was gathered. It is often assumed that if conditions remain the same, then as the younger fish grow older they will decline through time at about the same rate as the older year classes appear to have declined. For example, in Figure 2, there are 6.5 million two-year-olds and 2.5 million six-year-olds. It would seem likely that the current crop of two-year-olds will also be reduced to 2.5 million by the time they are six years old. In this case the annual mortality can be estimated by subtracting 2.5 million from 6.5 million to get 4.0 million and then dividing by 6.5 million to get 0.62 or 62 percent mortality. However, this mortality took place over five years, so the average annual rate is 0.62 divided by 5 which equals 0.12 or 12 percent. This corresponds to a total instantaneous mortality (Z) of 0.13. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]Remember that in a fish population, the total mortality includes the fishing mortality and natural mortality. The above example for estimating total mortality from the age structure does not reveal how much of the total mortality is due to fishing mortality and how much is due to natural mortality. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]Several methods are used to determine each mortality rate. For example, fishing mortality can be estimated from a tagging study. After a lot of fish from a stock are tagged, the percentage of tagged fish that are caught and reported is an estimate of the fishing mortality. Natural mortality is then calculated by subtracting fishing mortality from total mortality. Sometimes there is no available estimate of fishing mortality for a stock. However, fishery biologists may have a good idea of what the natural mortality might be from studying other similar stocks. In this case, natural mortalities (or a range of possible natural mortalities) can be subtracted from total mortality to get fishing mortality (or a range of possible fishing mortalities). [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]Spawning potential ratio:[/SIZE]
Most recent fishery management plans attempt to define a rate of fishing mortality which, when added to the natural mortality, will lead to the rebuilding of a stock or the maintenance of a stock at some agreed upon level. The level being used in many management plans is based on the spawning potential ratio (SPR). The spawning potential ratio incorporates the principle that enough fish have to survive to spawn and replenish the stock at a sustainable level.
[SIZE=3]Spawning potential ratio is the number of eggs that could be produced by an average recruit over its lifetime when the stock is fished divided by the number of eggs that could be produced by an average recruit over its lifetime when the stock is unfished. In other words, SPR compares the spawning ability of a stock in the fished condition to the stock's spawning ability in the unfished condition. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]As an example, imagine that 10 fish survive the first couple of years of life and are now large enough to get caught (recruited) in the fishery. Four are caught before they spawn (no eggs produced), three others are caught after they spawn once (some eggs produced), and the last three live to spawn three times (many eggs produced) before dying of old age. During their lifetime, the 10 fish produced 1 million eggs and the average recruit produced 100,000 eggs (1 million divided by 10). [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]In the unfished population, 10 fish survive as before. Three die from natural causes after spawning (some eggs produced) and the other seven spawn three times (very many eggs produced) before dying of old age. During their lifetime, these 10 fish produced 5 million eggs and the average recruit produced 500,000 eggs (5 million divided by 10). [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]The spawning potential ratio is then the 100,000 eggs produced by the average fished recruit divided by the 500,000 eggs produced by the average unfished recruit and is equal to 0.20 or 20 percent. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]SPR can also be calculated using the biomass (weight) of the entire adult stock, the biomass of mature females in the stock, or the biomass of the eggs they produce. These measures are called spawing stock biomass (SSB) and when they are put on a per-recruit basis they are called spawning stock biomass per recruit (SSBR). [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]In the above example, the weight of fish that contributes to spawning could be substituted for eggs produced to get the SSBR for the fish stock. SSBR (fished) divided by SSBR (unfished) gives the SPR. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]The concept of spawning stock biomass is illustrated in Figure 5. The graph shows the weight (biomass) of a stock at each age in the unfished condition compared to the weight of the stock when SPR = 20%. The adult fish in this stock spawn at age four so only the weight of fish four years and older sontribute to the spawning stock biomass. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]In a perfect world, fishery biologists would know what the appropriate SPR should be for every harvested stock based on the biology of that stock. Generally, not enough is known about managed stocks to be so precise. However, studies show that some stocks (depending on the species of fish) can maintain themselves if the spawning stock biomass per recruit can be kept at 20 to 35% (or more) of what it was in the unfished stock. Lower values of SPR may lead to severe stock declines. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]Summary of mortality and SPR:[/SIZE]
Fish die from either natural mortality or fishing mortality. Fishing and natural mortality added together equal total mortality. Total mortality can be estimated from age structure graphs. If either fishing or natural mortality can be estimated, then the remaining unknown mortality can be determined by subtraction from total mortality. Once fishing mortality and natural mortality are known, they can be used to examine the effects of fishing on the stock.
[SIZE=3]One way of looking at the effect of fishing mortality is to compare the spawning biomass of the fished stock to what it would be without fishing. The ratio of the fished spawning biomass to the unfished spawning biomass is called the spawning potential ratio (SPR). If the SPR is below the level considered necessary to sustain the stock, then fishing mortality needs to be reduced. [/SIZE]

[cmdrost]

This is from Jerald Horst in 2003:

"What is the future of recreational speckled trout fishing?
The future of the fishery depends on two factors: good habitat and good management. If our coastal areas remain unpolluted and coastal erosion is controlled, management will be the key. Very few more speckled trout can be produced from other sources. If the entire commercial speckled trout harvest were divided up equally among Louisiana’s over 400 thousand recreational anglers, each sport fisherman would get less than one fish per person per year. Research has also shown that very few speckled trout appear in shrimp trawl bycatch. This means that gains and losses will be the result of management within the recreational fishery. Management priorities, as set by recreational leadership, will determine whether the fishery is managed for liberal limits and smaller fish or restrictive creel limits and larger fish."

["W"]

I just hate to see the word Liberal involed in Fishing!!! In my outlook you can stack 3000 boats on Big Lake and only a small % will catch fish!!!! Liberal just dont need to be part of Fishing!! IMO

[LaAngler]

say what?

Originally Posted by "W"

I just hate to see the word Liberal involed in Fishing!!! In my outlook you can stack 3000 boats on Big Lake and only a small % will catch fish!!!! Liberal just dont need to be part of Fishing!! IMO

[cmdrost]

he's contradicting himself ....haha

[sulphurboy]

i was very disappointed that CCA didn't get more involved in the posting of waterways/restricting access to waterways.

[jsmoke222000]

What does CCA mean to you?

CCA gives me an excuse to fish as much as possible from memorial day to labor day in hopes of catching a tagged redfish.

[Ray]

CCA means another $100 spent on fishing this year.

[Country]

Originally Posted by eman

.


The last year i was a member of CCA ,I did bring it up at meetings 3 different times and 2 times the subject was changed w/o me getting an answer and the third time i was just ignored.
CCA ,WILL NOT answer any questions about why they won't get involved here in Louisiana.
I got the info that other states had joined the fight and won straight from the Other chapters info pages in the tide magazine.
CCA is all about the $$$ , They are not going to fight the major landowners in the marsh. When these same landowners contribute big $$$ to CCA and allow the big shots to fish the gated/posted areas any time they want.

Eman, You are dead on spot. The CCA is taking more money fro the big oil and landowners in the marsh than they are collecting from recreational fishermen. They will not even discuss this at any meeting. The big land owners are gating off the canals and politicians get to fish and duck behind the gates. What really bothers me most is that these very same canals are a primary reason we have lost so much of the marsh.

I feel the landowners have a right to keep someone of of their land. But the water and the fish in that canal belong to the people. I also feel that because of the erosion issue, they should relinquish any so called right to the canal or have to fill it back in at their expense therfore, helping to hold ground in the marsh.

Because of their lack of stance, I have lost respect for the CCA. The have prostituted themselves to big money and I dont really see any benefit they have provided to saving our fishing and coast line in Louisiana.

SAM, ARE YOU LISTENING!!!!!


Country

[cordgrass]

nothing. i just get in the star incase i catch a tagged red or big trout thats it. They are to political.