# LA defies NOAA



## MrFish (Aug 21, 2009)

Just saw on Sportfishing magazine that LA is going to break from NOAA's red snapper guidelines.


----------



## PompNewbie (Oct 1, 2007)

Rock on.. now if only FL would reach down and grab the cojones

http://www.sportfishingmag.com/spec...siana-defy-noaa-fisheries-red-snapper-fishing


----------



## Matt Mcleod (Oct 3, 2007)

I like it!:thumbsup:


----------



## chicon monster (Mar 7, 2012)

Florida needs to jump on their bandwagon.


----------



## scupper (Mar 22, 2009)

7 months as opposed to 40 days...I would say this is more than defying...sounds like they're saying "stick it"

http://www.sportfishingmag.com/species/conservation/louisiana-defy-noaa-fisheries-red-snapper-fishing


----------



## MathGeek (Mar 31, 2012)

PompNewbie said:


> Rock on.. now if only FL would reach down and grab the cojones
> 
> http://www.sportfishingmag.com/spec...siana-defy-noaa-fisheries-red-snapper-fishing


Gotta have 'em to grab 'em.

God bless Louisiana!

and God bless Texas!


----------



## MrFish (Aug 21, 2009)

It would be nice if Alabama would at least look at extending state waters past 3 miles.


----------



## SmokenJoe (Mar 18, 2011)

MrFish said:


> It would be nice if Alabama would at least look at extending state waters past 3 miles.


+1 3 miles is nothing.


----------



## marcuswon (Apr 5, 2010)

MrFish said:


> It would be nice if Alabama would at least look at extending state waters past 3 miles.


thats something i have all ways wonder about.why is it 3 for some and es and 9 for others?


----------



## Trophyhusband (Nov 30, 2011)

scupper said:


> 7 months as opposed to 40 days...I would say this is more than defying...sounds like they're saying "stick it"
> 
> http://www.sportfishingmag.com/species/conservation/louisiana-defy-noaa-fisheries-red-snapper-fishing


The change of state waters from 9 statute miles to 9 nautical miles puts the exclamation point on the "F You!":thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## 192 (Oct 1, 2007)

PompNewbie said:


> Rock on.. now if only FL would reach down and grab the cojones
> 
> http://www.sportfishingmag.com/spec...siana-defy-noaa-fisheries-red-snapper-fishing


It will never happen. Florida is far to concerned with what big government thinks.


----------



## minkmaster (Apr 5, 2008)

I wonder how the NOAA is going to take this? I mean will they take TAC away from Florida since its not managed by region?


----------



## RMS (Dec 9, 2008)

minkmaster said:


> I wonder how the NOAA is going to take this? I mean will they take TAC away from Florida since its not managed by region?


Who the he11 cares! They have already taken away 325 of 365 days. IMO the remaining 40 days are more of an insult than no season at all.

By cowering to NOAA, the state of Florida disgraces itself even lower than NOAA.

Louisiana has done the right thing.

When the going gets tough, the tough get going. Florida is sitting in the corner sucking its thumb.


----------



## dockmaster (Sep 27, 2007)

States need to get some balls. Whether is fishing regulations or things that the states voters passed...ie medical mj, gun laws, immigration laws, etc. 
IMO, it all need to come to a head BEFORE the election. Washington hasn't done a whole lot to better any situations that I can think of. A few government jobs isnt worth the stated giving up there rights. Believe me, they (feds) dont have enough balls to move the fed jobs out of a swing state like FL.

Rock on
Billd


----------



## Chris Phillips (Oct 1, 2007)

Weekend only 3 fish per person in LA! Florida needs to make a move...


----------



## Matt Mcleod (Oct 3, 2007)

grouper22 said:


> It will never happen. Florida is far to concerned with what big government thinks.


I wouldn't be so sure. The way I see it Lousiana's state season will probably decrease the federal tac down close to nothing. This means NO snapper season in 2013. 

I believe in that situation the state of Florida will open state waters.

This could be the turning point!


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

Matt Mcleod said:


> I wouldn't be so sure. The way I see it Lousiana's state season will probably decrease the federal tac down close to nothing. This means NO snapper season in 2013.
> 
> I believe in that situation the state of Florida will open state waters.
> 
> This could be the turning point!


Spot on.

Looks like it maybe now or never for Florida to make a move. Alabama could move to extend its state waters out to 9 miles and join in as well. I used to have the head of fwc's email address (nick Wiley) good time to dig it back out and start peppering fwc , the governor's office and state legislators about Florida opening up state waters. After all it is an election year...


----------



## minkmaster (Apr 5, 2008)

So basically what I am hearing is you are no longer going to keep a red snapper over 9 miles offshore in 2013. I wonder how that would work??? I know this is in theory of alot of chips falling into place.


----------



## MrFish (Aug 21, 2009)

minkmaster said:


> So basically what I am hearing is you are no longer going to keep a red snapper over 9 miles offshore in 2013. I wonder how that would work??? I know this is in theory of alot of chips falling into place.


We don't know what NOAA is going to do yet, but most likely they will say that the TAC has been reached, due to TX and LA. As far as 9 miles, it all depends on what state you fish out of and if they are going to still follow NOAA's guidelines. FL has 9 miles of state waters, but they might stick with NOAA and shut down ARS fishing also. AL has only 3 miles of state waters and who knows if they will extend it or even have a state snapper season. I think MS has 3 miles also, but again have no clue what they might do. And LA and TX have already made their moves.


----------



## MathGeek (Mar 31, 2012)

Louisiana's decision is based on a sound understanding of the proper limits of federal government in state matters, on a sound understanding of the scientific evidence contradicting the unit stock hypothesis, and on a sound desire to satisfy the interests of its citizens.

The unit stock hypothesis is bogus on several counts. First, although some fish may travel a few hundreds of miles, the majority of red snapper spend their adult lives within a few miles of the same location, and the population of a given area has maturity rates and body condition specific to that location and significantly different from other locations in the northern GoM. 

Second, the carrying capacity of any given area of the GoM depends strongly on the features of that area with some locations in the GoM able to sustain much larger populations than others. More harvest should usually be allowed in areas at or above their carrying capacity so that overabundant red snapper do not have localized negative impacts on a given ecosystem. Managing a large region based on the unit stock hypothesis ignores this fact. Since neither the red snapper stock nor their food sources are uniformly distributed, wise management should consider the relative local populations of red snapper and how to balance the stocks with their food sources.

Third, the fact that red snapper might occasionally cross a political boundary does not make a unified federal management plan any more wise than the fact that deer or elk might occasionally cross a state line shows that federal management is necessary for those species.


----------



## DreamWeaver21 (Oct 3, 2007)

Good for them! If it were up to me each state would get 100 miles, could manage as they see fit, and NOAA could spend their time making ridiculous rules and seasons for obscure deep water species past 100 miles.


----------



## DreamWeaver21 (Oct 3, 2007)

Apparently they don't understand the meaning of "unprecedented" though. Texas does it every year, other gulf states did it in years past, and while I think it is the right thing to do, it is hardly "unprecedented".


----------



## deersniper270 (Apr 29, 2009)

So if Alabama state waters is only 3miles could I come from Florida without an Alabama license and fish toward alabama as long as I stay past 3 miles out?


----------



## DreamWeaver21 (Oct 3, 2007)

Also, here is LA facebook page where they have the annoucement http://www.facebook.com/ldwffb#!/ldwffb

Lets show our support by getting as many Likes and Shares as we can. It is an easy way to suuport the action that doesn't require going to a meeting!


----------



## aroundthehorn (Aug 29, 2010)

deersniper270 said:


> So if Alabama state waters is only 3miles could I come from Florida without an Alabama license and fish toward alabama as long as I stay past 3 miles out?


That would put you in federal waters, wouldn't it?

I wonder if NOAA will do something retaliatory, like close down or limit other species normally found in deeper waters....


----------



## Kenton (Nov 16, 2007)

Hell ya!


----------



## RMS (Dec 9, 2008)

aroundthehorn said:


> I wonder if NOAA will do something retaliatory, like close down or limit other species normally found in deeper waters....


 
That would validate what many of us aleady know; NOAA's actions are more poilitically based than on science. Their science is fabricated to justify their political agenda.

We have a political problem, not a science problem.

The solution will be political, not scientific.

The people will eventually prevail, one way or another.

In the meantime we continue to be abused.


----------



## whome (Oct 2, 2007)

Matt Mcleod said:


> I wouldn't be so sure. The way I see it Lousiana's state season will probably decrease the federal tac down close to nothing. This means NO snapper season in 2013.
> 
> I believe in that situation the state of Florida will open state waters.
> 
> This could be the turning point!


I agree...


----------



## MathGeek (Mar 31, 2012)

RMS said:


> That would validate what many of us aleady know; NOAA's actions are more poilitically based than on science. Their science is fabricated to justify their political agenda.
> 
> We have a political problem, not a science problem.
> 
> ...


You are right, this is a political problem, akin to global warming, but if the people remain ignorant of the science, then the politicians will run roughshod over their wishes. 

I really like the 9-10 mile extension of state waters with each state deciding on the best management for its state's waters. The GoM Red Snapper stocks could never be depleted with this approach, because > 99% of the GoM remains a refuge for Red Snapper under Federal control, yet when the excess Snapper spill into state waters looking for more food and habitat, the recreational anglers will be there to catch them.


----------



## aroundthehorn (Aug 29, 2010)

MathGeek said:


> You are right, this is a political problem, akin to global warming, but if the people remain ignorant of the science, then the politicians will run roughshod over their wishes.
> 
> I really like the 9-10 mile extension of state waters with each state deciding on the best management for its state's waters. The GoM Red Snapper stocks could never be depleted with this approach, because > 99% of the GoM remains a refuge for Red Snapper under Federal control, yet when the excess Snapper spill into state waters looking for more food and habitat, the recreational anglers will be there to catch them.


Well, snapper are in the Bay already....


----------



## MathGeek (Mar 31, 2012)

aroundthehorn said:


> Well, snapper are in the Bay already....


Exactly, the mere presence of an abundance of Red Snapper inside the 10 mile limit, especially in estuaries, means that they are not really in short supply, because they are having to venture outside of their normal range to find food and habitat.


----------



## Trophyhusband (Nov 30, 2011)

Has anyone see this yet?

http://myfwc.com/fishing/saltwater/regulations/snappers/gulf-red-snapper/

"The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission set the 2012 recreational red snapper season in state waters of the Gulf of Mexico to June 1 through July 10, a 40-day season. This decision was made at the May 2 Commission meeting in Crystal River.
This season is the same as the proposed federal season. *The Commission also voted to keep the June 1 through July 10 season, regardless of whether the 2012 federal season is further shortened*." 

It's a step in the right direction, albeit a small one.


----------



## JD7.62 (Feb 13, 2008)

Trophyhusband said:


> Has anyone see this yet?
> 
> http://myfwc.com/fishing/saltwater/regulations/snappers/gulf-red-snapper/
> 
> ...


I mentioned that in one of the thousand threads that popped up about this years ARS season but no one seemed to notice.

IF, the feds shut the season before the forty days FL will allow anglers to fish until the original forty day season is over.

While not what we want, like you said, its a small step in the right direction.


----------



## Lyin Too (Aug 31, 2009)

They'll change they're minds if the feds close season early.


----------



## PoolBoy074 (May 2, 2012)

congrats to LA!!!!! way to tell big brother "screw you"!!!! I do fear noaa will clamp down even stronger on our state... but oh well... U gotta make some waves to get a positive outcome!!!! Congrats LA guys!!!! lead the way!!!!!


----------



## fishnhuntguy (Feb 8, 2012)

*Bad Science*

I listened to the LA commissioner on a radio interview. The reason they did this is fo force NOAA to re-check their science. They are using junk science to predict the fishery. They also do not like being bullied by the feds all the time. Whcih is what has been happening. LA state limits only go 3 miles. There are very few snapper with the exception of Venice, LA where snapper can be caught. This amounts to a political ploy which they hope will result in a better managed fishery for all states.:yes:


----------



## psalzman (Mar 26, 2008)

When I lived in New Orleans as a kid we used to catch Red Snapper on the Mississipi river near Algiers point. Far, far, north of Venice.


----------



## DanG (May 8, 2012)

Hi all. This is my first post here, but I've been lurking for a few days.

It was my good fortune to be sidelined by stomach problems for a few days last week, and it afforded me the opportunity to watch the entire FWC meeting on The Florida Channel. I was very impressed with the wealth of data the Comissioners were presented with. Indications were that they would surely loosen things up significantly. The presentations indicated that some major changes are in order, and the discussion seemed to be leading in that direction, then they suddenly caved and did what they did. Frankly, I was floored that they would go with a simple season and bag limit when the data so strongly dictated another course. It seemed to me that they should have based the limits on size, rather than the number of fish. According to the biologists, the numbers of fish are just fine, and even so great as to have a negative impact on other species. The problem is that there is an imbalance in the number of small fish vs large ones. The larger fish lay many, many times more eggs than the smaller ones, yet they eat less. According to them, snapper live for up to 50+ years, but do most of their growing in the first 20. A 24" female will lay 212 times more eggs than a 12" female. It seemed from the discussion that they would surely go with a slot limit something like five fish with just one keeper over 24". One comissioner even pointed out that an 18" snapper tastes just as good as a 24" one. They seemed headed in that direction, then suddenly somebody moved that they go with what we have and they voted it in. 

Another point that got ignored was the triggerfish. Everybody from the biologists to the commercial fishermen agreed that triggers are in trouble. It was pointed out that many small snapper are found to have a belly full of triggerfish eggs. Well, duhhh! We should be thinning the smaller snapper out and letting the big ones breed, in order to have a sustainable fishery, just like you would in your bream pond. How in heck are we going to regulate a catch based on poundage when we enforce it based on numbers? They are just guessing at the poundage, based on tiny samples.

I have watched a number of these meetings and had a good feeling about the comissioners until now. They seem like great folks, very likeable people, but I gotta say I'm disappointed in them right now.

Wow, that was pretty wordy for a first post, but I had something to say and I said it. I'm looking forward to the fun!!


----------



## psalzman (Mar 26, 2008)

DanG said:


> Hi all. This is my first post here, but I've been lurking for a few days.
> 
> Another point that got ignored was the triggerfish. Everybody from the biologists to the commercial fishermen agreed that triggers are in trouble. It was pointed out that many small snapper are found to have a belly full of triggerfish eggs. Well, duhhh! We should be thinning the smaller snapper out and letting the big ones breed, in order to have a sustainable fishery, just like you would in your bream pond. How in heck are we going to regulate a catch based on poundage when we enforce it based on numbers? They are just guessing at the poundage, based on tiny samples.


Yes, that's exactly the problem. We need to be eliminating some of the smaller ones to allow the bigger ones to grow.


----------



## 192 (Oct 1, 2007)

Matt Mcleod said:


> I wouldn't be so sure. The way I see it Lousiana's state season will probably decrease the federal tac down close to nothing. This means NO snapper season in 2013.
> 
> I believe in that situation the state of Florida will open state waters.
> 
> This could be the turning point!


 
Hmmm, I hadnt considered that point. Right on Matt, lets hope Florida gets smart.

Mike


----------



## Matt Mcleod (Oct 3, 2007)

I think this a HUGE step in the right direction!

This process will not be easy. There will probably be VERY little if any federal snapper season next year, and the next, and maybe the next. 

This house of cards must fall so we can create a reasonable snapper management plan for the future.

Very Exciting!


----------



## DreamWeaver21 (Oct 3, 2007)

Matt Mcleod said:


> I think this a HUGE step in the right direction!
> 
> This process will not be easy. There will probably be VERY little if any federal snapper season next year, and the next, and maybe the next.
> 
> ...


I agree. I predict we will see the fed make rule changes to try and assert power but it will amount to the fed throwing a temper tantrum.


----------



## Matt Mcleod (Oct 3, 2007)

DreamWeaver21 said:


> I agree. I predict we will see the fed make rule changes to try and assert power but it will amount to the fed throwing a temper tantrum.


I agree dreamweaver. 

One issue is going to be federal funding. The feds currently help fund some of our natural resource programs as far as I understand. When a state decides to not comply with NMFS they threaten to cut this funding to encourage compliance!

In my opinion the state of Florida must begin to operate without much of this funding to insure our independence. This will not be easy! Fishing license costs must go up, we may need to buy a "snapper stamp", ect......... Also some programs might need to be downsized or cut. We MUST cut the cord from the feds!

It can be done because Louisiana is not going to get much natural resource funding now I promise!!!!


----------



## Bullshark (Mar 19, 2009)

It's never going to happen in this state. Not with the population in south Florida and the federal money that goes to the Keys. Just like California we are just going to lose more and more of our rights.


----------



## Trophyhusband (Nov 30, 2011)

Matt Mcleod said:


> I agree dreamweaver.
> 
> One issue is going to be federal funding. The feds currently help fund some of our natural resource programs as far as I understand. When a state decides to not comply with NMFS they threaten to cut this funding to encourage compliance!


I guarantee that won't happen before November. Florida is a perpetual swing state and there has been a big focus on states' rights recently. The public has had a bit of an education about federal government intrusion recently and while something like this may not effect a huge number of votes, this is a state where every vote counts. I think the state has a bit of an edge here. Currently the general public has no idea about this issue, but a retaliatory cut of federal funding would get the attention of the general public. 

As far as your suggestion of the state learning to operate without federal funding, I couldn't agree more. I am of the opinion that no state should rely on federal funding for anything. Tax dollars should be going mostly to the state and not the federal government anyway. If a state decides to provide everyone healthcare and give everyone welfare, fine, but it isn't the federal government's responsibility to take care of us.


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

Has anyone queried FWC officials, or for that matter our Governor, or State legislators to feel them out on the State of FL's position or their personal position on going non-compliant with Federal red snapper regs in view of the recent State of LA decision?


----------



## Burnt Drag (Jun 3, 2008)

I'm not sure if any of you realise this, 90+% of Louisiana won't benifit from this at all. There is a huge "dead zone" that extends from Texas to Fourchon. The only place I've ever caught red snapper in LA waters is near the mouth of the Mississippi. The only thing this is going to do is embolden those who fish where the snappers are in Federal waters to break the law. Sure... once they get to the State waters, they're safe, but you have to go 20-25 miles out before you'll catch any snapper in those areas I mentioned between Sabine pass and Fourchon. Anyone who's ever worked over there on the boats will verify this.


----------



## Trophyhusband (Nov 30, 2011)

I had a conversation with Matt Gaetz's assistant the other day. She didn't sound familiar with any of it but she had me send her an email that she would forward to him and that he would call me personally. I haven't heard back yet.


----------



## Trophyhusband (Nov 30, 2011)

Burnt Drag said:


> I'm not sure if any of you realise this, 90+% of Louisiana won't benifit from this at all. There is a huge "dead zone" that extends from Texas to Fourchon. The only place I've ever caught red snapper in LA waters is near the mouth of the Mississippi. The only thing this is going to do is embolden those who fish where the snappers are in Federal waters to break the law. Sure... once they get to the State waters, they're safe, but you have to go 20-25 miles out before you'll catch any snapper in those areas I mentioned between Sabine pass and Fourchon. Anyone who's ever worked over there on the boats will verify this.


I don't think that matters. This is about politics and control over the states more than it's about a fish.


----------



## Matt Mcleod (Oct 3, 2007)

*"LDWF Secretary Robert Barham was given the authority to modify the portions of this rule pertaining to red snapper recreational daily harvest limits and seasons if the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Survey institutes sub-regional management for the species or if it is otherwise deemed necessary."*

I found this part interesting........


----------



## MathGeek (Mar 31, 2012)

Burnt Drag said:


> I'm not sure if any of you realise this, 90+% of Louisiana won't benifit from this at all. There is a huge "dead zone" that extends from Texas to Fourchon. The only place I've ever caught red snapper in LA waters is near the mouth of the Mississippi. The only thing this is going to do is embolden those who fish where the snappers are in Federal waters to break the law. Sure... once they get to the State waters, they're safe, but you have to go 20-25 miles out before you'll catch any snapper in those areas I mentioned between Sabine pass and Fourchon. Anyone who's ever worked over there on the boats will verify this.


The "dead zone" is largely a myth. The habit of these waters is more suitable to other species (redfish, drum, trout, etc.) because the water is more turbid and shallower than the waters preferred by snapper. But these waters teem with life and abundant fish.


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

Matt Mcleod said:


> *"LDWF Secretary Robert Barham was given the authority to modify the portions of this rule pertaining to red snapper recreational daily harvest limits and seasons if the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Survey institutes sub-regional management for the species or if it is otherwise deemed necessary."*
> 
> I found this part interesting........


Matt,
That is interesting language. From the looks of it the ldwf secretary acted on the "if otherwise deemed necessary" part of the above regulatory clause due to the federal season going to 40 days this year. The Feds have discussed sector management so it looks like the above language also prepared
Ldwf to act if they feel "shorted" on any such scheme. 

We may see Nfs back off on shortening any more than 40 days as part of a political strategy in future years as I believe part of their strategy is to push the recreational fisherman as far as they can. Nfs may decide they have reached that point with la's non compliance move.

A little known fact and what is also interesting is that Florida FWC has also gone non-compliant for grouper in the big bend area of Florida counties for grouper this year. See this web link:
http://myfwc.com/fishing/saltwater/regulations/groupers/gulf-grouper/ 

The four counties listed in the web link will get a special state grouper season and then get the federal normal season as well.

Sure would be nice to have a special red snapper season in Florida state season around these parts! After all the precedent has been set by fwc's action on grouper.

I wonder what type of political support and action it would
Take to convince fwc to go non-compliant in escambia, Santa rosa ,
Okaloosa. Walton and bay counties for red snapper?

A convincing needs statement could be based on the current socio-economic hardship in escambia county for sure in terms of the increase in economic benefits and local business stimulus that would be connected to an inreased recreational fishing season for Red snapper.


----------



## Chet88 (Feb 20, 2008)

Wish we could get an Oct.-Nov. weekend season like after the oil spill.


----------



## Burnt Drag (Jun 3, 2008)

MathGeek said:


> The "dead zone" is largely a myth. The habit of these waters is more suitable to other species (redfish, drum, trout, etc.) because the water is more turbid and shallower than the waters preferred by snapper. But these waters teem with life and abundant fish.


I'll go with that, there just are not any red snapper in the state waters of Louisiana save for the area around the mouth of the river. And yes... plenty of shrimp, croakers, redfish, and white trout in this "dead zone". I suspect the reason there are no snappers is the salinity of the water. I don't think it has anything to do with depth, snappers are caught regularly from the piers at the Navy base.


----------



## smann316 (Aug 2, 2010)

Who do you contact in Alabama to let your voice be heard? I will make a phone call or write a letter, but I have no idea who to send it to.


----------



## bamachem (Oct 2, 2007)

smann316 said:


> Who do you contact in Alabama to let your voice be heard? I will make a phone call or write a letter, but I have no idea who to send it to.


Start here. http://www.outdooralabama.com/fishing/saltwater/


----------

