04-19-2011, 12:10 PM
Specifically, how is the data collected? Is it collected by fishing reports from anglers? (we caught such and such of such and such), are the scientists going out on a dive boat, and observing the populations? Recording and logging data? Tagging fish? etc.......
Using angler data is skewed and not scientific or accurate in any way. You never know what you'll get. There are some anglers that believe if they tell you what they are catching, they are affraid you'll think they are catching too many fish and the population will go down. Then, there are people that think if they tell you they suck and didn't catch anything, that there isn't anything to catch.
The truth is, only about 10% of the anglers along our coast catch 90% of the fish. The ones that don't catch anything, are the ones that don't have a clue as to how to catch them. That logic, which is fact, simply makes commercial and recreational angler data skewed and unusable. I can't tell you how many times i've parked my boat in the middle of another dozen, and consistently caught fish, while the other boats checked me out through thier binocs in discussed, wondering what I was doing different. It's tactics. But, i'm assuming that your council's advisors are angler too, and understand this concept. I for the life of me wouldn't be able to understand how a council could hire people to make a decision on fishing limits, if they themselves are not anglers. Those should not be political positions, and again, i'm going to assume they are not.
So, if you're not using angler derived data, what type of scientific data are you using? I'm asking questions that all of us anglers want to know, and I do appreciate your efforts to answer these questions. We are only trying to preserve the fishery for our children later on down the road. A fishery, by which, becomes less viable if there is nothing we can keep. Why spend 300 dollars in fuel to go offshore, if you come back empty handed? Though the council's reasoning seems to be legit, we want to know that the decisions are being made responsibly, and not with a "best guess" type of situation by a bunch of politicians that don't have a clue. The impact of drastic changes to the economy from boat retailers to tackle retailers, is dramatic as well. Every time a new reg is put in place, or a season closed, it creates more and more of a economic drag. So, the entire industry is effected. This is the other reason we need to know how things are happening and why.
[signature]
Using angler data is skewed and not scientific or accurate in any way. You never know what you'll get. There are some anglers that believe if they tell you what they are catching, they are affraid you'll think they are catching too many fish and the population will go down. Then, there are people that think if they tell you they suck and didn't catch anything, that there isn't anything to catch.
The truth is, only about 10% of the anglers along our coast catch 90% of the fish. The ones that don't catch anything, are the ones that don't have a clue as to how to catch them. That logic, which is fact, simply makes commercial and recreational angler data skewed and unusable. I can't tell you how many times i've parked my boat in the middle of another dozen, and consistently caught fish, while the other boats checked me out through thier binocs in discussed, wondering what I was doing different. It's tactics. But, i'm assuming that your council's advisors are angler too, and understand this concept. I for the life of me wouldn't be able to understand how a council could hire people to make a decision on fishing limits, if they themselves are not anglers. Those should not be political positions, and again, i'm going to assume they are not.
So, if you're not using angler derived data, what type of scientific data are you using? I'm asking questions that all of us anglers want to know, and I do appreciate your efforts to answer these questions. We are only trying to preserve the fishery for our children later on down the road. A fishery, by which, becomes less viable if there is nothing we can keep. Why spend 300 dollars in fuel to go offshore, if you come back empty handed? Though the council's reasoning seems to be legit, we want to know that the decisions are being made responsibly, and not with a "best guess" type of situation by a bunch of politicians that don't have a clue. The impact of drastic changes to the economy from boat retailers to tackle retailers, is dramatic as well. Every time a new reg is put in place, or a season closed, it creates more and more of a economic drag. So, the entire industry is effected. This is the other reason we need to know how things are happening and why.
[signature]