# Roy Crabtree Reef



## Tom Hilton (Oct 4, 2007)

Howdy,

Since tomorrow is the last day of the shortest snapper season in history (*which happened under Roy Crabtree's watch*), we figured it would be appropriate to officially announce the creation/deployment of the *Roy Crabtree Reef*! Enclosed are photos of the design which depicts a stylized tree covered with crabs, designed in Roy's honor. 

Since many have felt that Dr. Crabtree has been a *LARGE* part of the problem relative to the red snapper debacle for the last few years, *we are happy to announce that Dr. Crabtree is now part of the SOLUTION! *

This project, which was a collaboration between Reef-Man and the young men/women of Brazosport High School, underscores the point that simply cutting seasons and limits is not the answer to successful fishery management efforts. 

Proactive creation of suitable habitat has already been proven to be the answer to enhancing/restoring fish populations. 

This reef, positioned inside of Texas State waters will be *PRODUCING* snapper in Roy Crabtree's name for the rest of our lives. 

*Congratulations Roy! *

Perhaps a more suitable name would be the *Roy Crabtree 2010 54 Day Season Memorial Reef *to forever memorialize Roy's expertise in fisheries management (or lack thereof).

http://www.reef-man.com/index_vancouver.php 

ROY CRABTREE REEF 28 47.619 / 95 20.749 

All the best, 
Tom Hilton 
President, REEF-MAN, LLC


----------



## JoeZ (Sep 30, 2007)

That's awesome Tom! 
Great work and good job getting the kids involved? 

Whre was the reef deployed? Not numbers but which county did y'all permit it through?

Keep up the good work.


----------



## Tom Hilton (Oct 4, 2007)

Thanks JoeZ

We deployed the reef 10 miles south of the Freeport Texas jetties (6 miles off of the beach), in Texas State Waters, and out of reach of Roy and Co.'s jurisdiction.

This reef can be fished 365 days a year by Texas anglers, regardless of what draconian measures that Roy and Co. inflict on the rest of the Gulf.

Thanks to Texas Parks and Wildlife Dept for actually providing bone fida fisheries management expertise by focusing on providing not only badly-needed hard subtrate for fisheries habitat, but by maintaining open access to the fishery instead of relying on continually reducing our seasons/limits as Roy and Co. have done.

The great people of Alabama and Florida panhandle created an incredible, sustainable fishery through their artificial reef programs which ended up accounting for +_ 50% of ALL RECREATIONALLY-CAUGHT RED SNAPPER IN THE ENTIRE GULF OF MEXICO. Wow.

Did Roy and Co. acknowledge their efforts to assist them in rebuilding the fish stocks? 

No. 

Roy and Co. in fact crippled the successful reefing programs there by removing access to the reefs owned by those Alabama and Florida fishermen for 10+ months of the year while simultaneously reducing the bag limit to 2 fish per person. 

Why invest in more reefing when you can only go out and catch 2 fish 54 days of the year? The fish lost out big time.

Congratulations Roy! Not.

All the best,
Tom


----------



## Pinksnappertrapper (Dec 7, 2007)

Tell Roy Crabtree I said he is a ASSHOLE, and karma is going to get him. HOw old is he now?


----------



## swhiting (Oct 4, 2007)

That is hilarious!

You may be on to something..... The State got into the advertising and marketing business years ago with all the different types of license plates. Florida has gone nuts with the number we have.

Maybe fisherman should follow suit. I'd be ticked off and would financially support enhancing a UF reef if the UF reef did not produce more than the reF$U reef. I bet neither one of us would have to worry about the other fishing their reef.......


----------



## swhiting (Oct 4, 2007)

If this is thread derailing let me know... but other than the obvious organizational names (military, colleges or funds), what are some reef names that could be sponsored like the one above that is mocking a federal official????

How about an INSHORE REEF called Turpin's Tarpon!

(cheesy I know... that's the best I could come up with at the time)


----------



## lbhuntley (Oct 6, 2007)

Tom, how did you determine that Dr Crabtree and Marine Fisheries are wrong about the GOM red snapper management plan? Seems to me that the snapper are recovering. In fact, the ACL increased from 5 million lbs in 09 to 6.9 in 2010, with a target of 14 million. How many snapper were you catching in 2000? 

Quick story. A 6 hr fisheries management class, conducted by Dr Will Patterson, UWF Marine Science Dept (he focuses on red snapper recovery) was offered in Pensacola, April 2010. He required 10 for the class to make. One signed up. The class date was changed to May and 6 signed up, but he offered the class. Two retired gentlemen visiting from the north, a local realtor, two from the Corps of Engineers, and me. The class was advertised in UWF literature, News Journal, two local radio stations, and several times times on this forum. 

Are fishermen simply afraid of knowledge? If Roy is wrong, information will certainly strengthen your argument. If he is right, with increased public support we may experience even better, sustainable fishing. How can you argue your case without understanding at least the basics of fisheries management? 

Joe, I personally invited you and a number of vocal Pensacola fishermen to attend. You missed a great opportunity to learn some information that may support some of your arguments. At a minimum, you could have confronted an expert who is a member of the Gulf Council's scientific and statistical committee. Please tell me what you are afraid of. 

I urge forum members outside of Pensacola to contact university marine science depts in your area and request a class. Tom, Joe... if you're as interested in fishing as you indicate, please don't be scared of some knowledge.


----------



## SHunter (Jun 19, 2009)

LBHuntley I am sorry that I missed the class. But, I do have a concern when I see red snapper iced down and being shipped to Canada and I can't go out and catch snapper after July. I don't find fault in commercial fishers but I do think that the distributors of seafood are a powerful lobby behind restrictions on recreational fishing. If you hear about another class, please post on the forum and I will make an effort to come.


----------



## SHunter (Jun 19, 2009)

Tom, that is a work of art. Glad to see you working with kids.


----------



## Tom Hilton (Oct 4, 2007)

*Snapper Mismanagement*

LBHuntley,
The proof is *ALREADY* in the pudding Sir. 

As I pointed out, we have just experienced the *shortest snapper season in history which was a direct result of Crabtree's incompetence*, *and certainly reflects on his lack of management skills*. If the fishery WAS indeed managed properly, there would be no need for such draconian measures.

*In fact, if Crabtree and Co. were hired to manage your finances, they would have been fired or have been put in jail long ago.*

The Science and Statistical Committee (SSC) that you mentioned makes decisions based on biased modeling and sheer politics, not "science". The process should be open to all regarding how the SSC makes their determinations, but alas, it is not. Why?

Dr. Steven Szedlmayer has studied the artificial reefs offshore of Alabama for over 10 years now. His conclusion? The people of Alabama have created their own vibrant and *SUSTAINABLE FISHERY*. Incredible, especially considering that the small area has been accounting for about *40% of ALL RECREATIONALLY-CAUGHT SNAPPER IN THE ENTIRE GULF*. Since about 80% of recreational effort occurs in the eastern Gulf, these artificial reefs off of Alabama and Fl. panhandle have filled a critical need. Has Crabtree and Co. acknowledged this? No.

Dr. Shipp and Dr. Bortone have also published papers illustrating the history of snapper demographics in the Gulf over the last 100 years or so. They pointed out that the introduction of the thousands of oil platforms in the western Gulf has created the largest de facto artificial reef in the world. The result of this is that most of the Gulf's snapper are now found in the western Gulf. Dr. Shipp also pointed out that the enviro's view (and therefore the NMFS's view) that snapper are recruitment-limited is not accurate - they are more accurately described as habitat-limited.

If Crabtree and Co. were *TRULY* interested in rebuilding/enhancing fishery stocks, they would acknowledge the value in providing habitat through artificial reefs, especially when considering that many oil platforms are being removed each year. 

Unfortunately, politics have trumped science in this case.

Tom Hilton
President, REEF-MAN, LLC


----------



## swhiting (Oct 4, 2007)

Standing by.....


----------



## snapperfan (Aug 30, 2009)

Thanks Tom and everyone else involved, not only for the work you do but for a good laugh to top it with.

:thumbup:


----------



## Tom Hilton (Oct 4, 2007)

*Crabtree Reef*

Here's a sounder image of the Crabtree reef right after deployment.
Standing tall.
Tom


----------



## lbhuntley (Oct 6, 2007)

Tom, you probably know that many marine scientists focusing on the GOM believe artificial reefs attract red snapper, therefore making them easier to catch. Bottom line: artificial reefs may support overfishing. There are almost 4,000 oil and gas platforms in the gulf, as well as natural bottom. Until Gulf Council/Dr Crabtree's rebulding plans were implemented, there were very few snapper in spite of this habitat that existed before the massive artificial reef building programs. 

Don't you recognize that the rebuilding program is effective! How do you explain the ACL's increasing almost 40%? 

Last time I checked, Dr Shipp was representing the recreational interest on the council. Probably not a totally unbiased source of information. In fact, Dr Shipp co-authored a paper on artificial reefs off of NW AL and FL and concluded they may attract, not produce, and may have a negative impact on snapper recovery.

You will be able to catch legal snapper off of the Crabtree reef in a very short time. Do you believe the reef produced them?

Because of the current management plan, larger females are surviving and the ACL's can be increased with sustainability.

Magnuson requires that NMFS utilize "best" science. Fishermen are fortunate that politics in the management process is limited.


----------



## hogdogs (Apr 19, 2010)

> You will be able to catch legal snapper off of the Crabtree reef in a very short time. Do you believe the reef produced them?


Do you realize that fish in a 10 gallon tank will stop or drastically retard growth but when put into a larger tank, they speed back up the growth and grow too large for the 10 gallon tank in short order?

The way these Artificial Reefs/FAD's "PRODUCE" ARS's, is similar... Many of the fish will be smaller specimens that venture off, due to feeding pressure from larger specimens. The little buggers find an fad that has few fish besides bait fish, who show up almost immediately. They now can grow to be the large units we all love to catch and eat... 

I say, "REDUCE THE COMMERCIAL (long ass) season length and quota before worrying about us recreational fishermen." Heck, most is being bought by folks who have no idea how to catch one...

"GIVE A MAN A FISH AND HE WILL PAY $20 BUCKS PER PLATE, TEACH A MAN TO FISH AND HE WILL SIT IN A HIGH DOLLAR BOAT AND DRINK BEER ALL DAY"... But he will also know how to fish for healthy food for a lifetime...:thumbup::whistling::thumbsup:
Brent


----------



## Tom Hilton (Oct 4, 2007)

*bovine excrement*



lbhuntley said:


> Tom, you probably know that many marine scientists focusing on the GOM believe artificial reefs attract red snapper, therefore making them easier to catch. Bottom line: artificial reefs may support overfishing. There are almost 4,000 oil and gas platforms in the gulf, as well as natural bottom. Until Gulf Council/Dr Crabtree's rebulding plans were implemented, there were very few snapper in spite of this habitat that existed before the massive artificial reef building programs.
> 
> Don't you recognize that the rebuilding program is effective! How do you explain the ACL's increasing almost 40%?
> 
> ...


LB,
"Until Gulf Council/Dr Crabtree's rebulding plans were implemented, there were very few snapper in spite of this habitat that existed before the massive artificial reef building programs."

*THAT IS FUNNY SIR!* 

Totally bogus, but funny just the same. We have most of the snapper over here in the western Gulf BECAUSE of the existence of the oil platforms. It has been documented that there were little to no viable snapper populations over here prior to the introduction of the oil platforms. We have had no problem catching as many snapper as we want over here off of Texas for as long as I can remember.

On the eastern side, the reefs off of the Florida panhandle/Alabama area have filled an important void in producing enough fish for fishermen to catch on a SUSTAINABLE basis. that has been shown to be true for several years now.

Yes, there is an initial attraction feature, but the fish, once they find suitable habitat have high fidelity to staying on that structure. They do not migrate like pelagics do, but are moved around by storms. Most if not all of the scientists supporting the "attraction" idea are funded by environmental.orgs. - this includes scientists in the NMFS itself. The attraction/production issues is really not even debatable anymore as artificial reefs have *PROVEN* to produce sustainable fish populations for decades now. 

Using the NMFS' own data, the Alabama reefs have accounted for about 40% of ALL recreationally-caught snapper in the ENTIRE GULF OF MEXICO. *If the reefs are not PRODUCING these fish, then where are they being attracted from?* To state that 40% of ALL recreationally-caught snapper migrate to that area each year to be attracted and caught has no basis in reality. 

Dr. Shipp is the pre-eminent expert on Gulf fisheries, regardless of his recreational seat on the Council. *Please post up the paper where he concluded that reefs have negative consequences due to attraction.*

The "proof" that the fish are rebuilding due to increased ACL's is preposterous. The Gulf Council and Dr. Crabtree have no idea how many fish are swimming out there and furthermore, they have no idea of how many fishermen are targetting snapper. THEY cut the seasons/ACLs based on bogus, flawed, and MANIPULATED data, and if THEY want to increase the ACLs, it is still based on the SAME faulty data. Whether or not the stocks are rebuilding really has NOTHING to do with it. 

To claim that politics are not driving their decisions is also ridiculous - why then is the process not open and transparent on how the SSC arrives at their concusions? "Science" should withstand the light of day, yet the make their decisions behind closed doors.

For example, this same SSC wants us to believe that we were able to catch the same poundage of snapper in 2 months/2 fish limits/no capt or crew retainage as we did when we had 6 months/4 fish limts/and capt and crew could retain their catches. 

*IT'S A MIRACLE!*

*No, IT'S JUST PURE BULL EXCREMENT (BS).*

Tom Hilton
President, REEF-MAN, LLC


----------



## lbhuntley (Oct 6, 2007)

Tom, thanks to NMFS management plan, the over-fishing of red snapper has stopped but the stock is still considered overfished. The bag limits and length of season are necessary to help the snapper rebuild at a reasonable rate. The goal is for red snapper not to be overfished and to not allow overfishing. What limits would you advocate? 

Dr Shipp's reef research: http://fishbull.noaa.gov/994/pat.pdf


----------



## Matt Mcleod (Oct 3, 2007)

huntley.....for the 400th time this is a recreational fishing forum. We are not interested in hearing your commercial fishing propaganda bullshit! 

Why don't all you guys who want to see the commercial/charter fishermen have the ONLY rights to our fishery create your own forum and quit trying to feed your cool aid to everyone here.


----------



## captwesrozier (Sep 28, 2007)

i am with Capt Matt. lb can spew his opinion cause he can harvest 500lbs of snapper a year anytime he wants!


----------



## lbhuntley (Oct 6, 2007)

Matt and Wes, I'm interested in recreational, charter and commercial fishing, as you should be, because management and ultimately the increase/decrease in ACL's impacts all of us. When management for all sectors is effective, the catch limits increase (5 million lbs in 09; 6.9 in 2010; with a target of 14). This translates to more fish for everyone. If emotion and politics prevail (instead of science), we will not see a sustainable fishery. Yes, Matt and Wes, what you advocate directly affects me, and what I support affects you. Let's rationally discuss the issues.


----------



## feelin' wright (Oct 7, 2007)

Artificial Reefs do increase the fish populations. In previous times 40,50 60s all commercial fisherman went to the bay of campeche to fish for red snapper. Now we are able to have commerical fisherman fish far closer to port resulting in the same catch weights. Can you explain this? Im sure you will say that the goverment is the only one that contribituted to this. Hows that kool aid 

You say that artifical reefs do not increase the red snapper population that is total bullshit. Habitat is critical in maintaing a healthy fish population. Look at the jewfish in south florida. One of the main issue down south is the development of mangroves which destroys the habitat of the juvenile fish. Artificail reefs provide the same protective enviroment that the mangroves do in south florida. They allow the snapper to feed and to avoid other predatory fish. Since the fish are in a protected enviroment and have an abundance of prey the fish have a better shot to mature into the spawning population of red snapper. Less habitat= less fish it is that simple.


----------



## lbhuntley (Oct 6, 2007)

Feelin' wright, I wish additional artificial reefs were the answer. But, I believe we are seeing a recovery of red snapper because of a dramatic decrease in bycatch (shrimping has declined by 75-80%) and a management plan that sets realistic annual catch limits based on best available science. 

These solutions have been around for many years but they are finally in place.


----------



## Tom Hilton (Oct 4, 2007)

*enviro propaganda*

LBHuntley,
Who do you work for - Environmental Defense or the NMFS? There's really not much difference between the 2, but was just wondering.

Since the recreational TAC was tied directly to the shrimper bycatch issue, the NMFS mandate an 84% reduction reduction in bycatch across the board. Thus, the recreational season went from 6 months, 4 fish limits to the current 54 day, 2 fish limits. The bycatch has been reduced by factors such as hurricanes, bad economy, and low imported shrimp prices - not anything done by the NMFS.

Additionally, the data used to mandate the reduction in bycatch severely underestimated natural mortality of said bycatch. In fact, propaganda from enviro.orgs and the CCA stated that shrimpers were responsible for killing 80% of every year class of snapper due to bycatch. Fact of the matter is that the 0-1 snapper have an extremely high nartural mortality rate (about 90%), so whether or not the snapper are killed in shrimp nets is a moot point - they are going to be eaten most likely anyways.

To claim that the snapper "recovery" is due to reduced shriomping effort is false. To claim that artificial reefs do not enhance snapper populations is equally false. To claim that the NMFS is regulating snapper with viable data is about as bogus as it gets.

Again, as I asked before - post up the link to the paper where Dr. Shipp concluded that reefs merely attracted snapper. 

Tom Hilton


----------



## lbhuntley (Oct 6, 2007)

Tom, #17 of this thread. Read the last two paragraphs just before the acknowledgments.


----------



## Tom Hilton (Oct 4, 2007)

*Shipp-Bortone*

LBHuntley,
Who do you work for - Environmental Defense or the NMFS? You never answered.

The paper you referenced is almost 10 years old and headed by James Cowan of LSU, not Shipp.

Here is the latest paper by Shipp (2009) - it's too long to post up but here's the title and conclusion, which states; * "...it will be necessary to maintain, or even increase the amount of artificial habitat in the northern Gulf of Mexico to keep pace with fishing pressure. Programs such as the “rigs to reefs” efforts off Louisiana and Texas would have to be continued, as would the reef construction off Alabama."
*


A Perspective on the Importance of Artificial Habitat on the Management of Red Snapper in the Gulf of Mexico​​Robert L. Shipp​​Department of Marine Sciences​University of South Alabama​Mobile, AL 36688, USA​and​Stephen A. Bortone, Ph.D.​​Minnesota Sea Grant College Program​​2305 East Fifth Street​​Duluth, Minnesota 55812 USA​​*Conclusions*​ 
 The massive additions of artificial reef habitat preferred by red snapper during the last fifty years in the northcentral and northwestern Gulf of Mexico has corresponded with major shifts in harvest locations and areas of red snapper concentrations. This suggests that habitat was a factor that limited population abundance during the first one hundred years of the fishery. Current model projections of MSY at levels higher than have ever been achieved also suggest that increases in habitat have increased harvest potential. However, because current models are premised on a stock of red snapper that is recruitment limited, these stocks are considered “overfished and overfishing is occurring”. Consideration of increased habitat would lead to a different conclusion (i.e., the stocks have an unrealized harvest potential).
 In addition, if the habitat limitation hypothesis is correct, it will be necessary to maintain, or even increase the amount of artificial habitat in the northern Gulf of Mexico to keep pace with fishing pressure. Programs such as the “rigs to reefs” efforts off Louisiana and Texas would have to be continued, as would the reef construction off Alabama.


----------



## Polebender (Oct 2, 2007)

Seems funny to me that the guy holding a commercial license doesn't see anything wrong with the way things are....can't blame him I guess, if the laws were stacked in my favor i wouldn't complain either...If I could bring back a boat load of fish that were caught over public ARTIFICIAL REEFS when ever I felt like it, I would argue that things are getting better too....Thanks Tom for presenting an educated, logical argument that things are messed up and standing up for the recreational guys.


----------



## aroundthehorn (Aug 29, 2010)

Bump.


----------

