468x80 Banner

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A good read

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A good read

    I’ve tried to refrain from getting involved in all of this “We don’t have any fish” and “We have millions of them” debate that seems to have consumed my Facebook feed but I feel compelled to chime in at this point. There seems to be quite a few internet experts out there these days spreading misinformation. I’m sure some of the things I have to say will fall on deaf ears but my conscience will not allow me to remain silent.
    I wouldn’t expect the average weekend angler to understand the ecology of our bay (Galveston Bay Complex) or every minute variable (and there are many) that makes it tick. I have to say that I’m a bit surprised, however, by some of the comments I’ve read from a few of the “guides.” As professional fishing guides I would think they would feel the need to become more educated about the bay system in which they fish. Most only seem to comment about the trout population in a vacuum without considering habitat and other factors.
    Here are a few not-so-fun facts –
    In 2006 there were 975,157 licenses (Combo & Saltwater) purchased in Texas. (TPWD)
    In 2015 (most recent data I have) there were 1,685,695 (Combo & Saltwater) purchased. (TPWD)
    So, in 10 years we’ve experienced an increase in saltwater angler participation of more than 710,000. I would expect it’s closer to 900,000 by now but the bottom line is it has increased by almost 75 percent.
    In 2006 there were 929 Texas Saltwater Guide licenses purchased. (TPWD) In 2015 the number was 1,166. (TPWD) I’m guessing the number is over 1,200 now. The number of guides each year used to remain somewhat constant because there was an annual turnover. That doesn’t seem to occur in recent years so the number continues to grow. I think some of this has to do with the fact that the millennial generation which is the largest generation since the baby boomers are coming of age and a very large percentage of them love to fish. Modern technology, social media and various forms of networking have also made it easier to find and catch fish.
    The Galveston Bay Complex is approximately 600 square miles. Its primary habitat consists of live oyster reefs. There are other types of habitat such as various species of bottom grasses, clam beds, etc. but they make up a small percentage compared to oysters. Prior to September 13, 2008 Galveston Bay had roughly 24,000 acres of live oyster reefs. The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department used side-scan sonar mapping to determine the loss of oyster reefs post-Ike. The results showed that more than 12,000 acres of live oyster reefs were covered in mud and silt. For those who are not aware, oysters must have substrate to grow. In other words, they will not grow on top of mud. I only mention this because I hear folks continuously tell me how resilient our bay is and how it will recover. Galveston Bay is indeed resilient. She has experienced ebbs and flows throughout history in the form of floods, freezes, droughts, etc. and she always seemed to recover. The one thing she never experienced during those events was a loss of 50 percent of primary habitat. While the Texas Parks and Wildlife (and to a lesser extent various individuals and organizations) conduct oyster reef restoration projects (primarily using 2 to 4 inch river rock) it will take many years to replace what was lost. On average there has been less than 100 acres per year planted since Ike. At this rate it would take 120 years to replenish assuming there were no natural disasters.
    In addition to increased fishing pressure and loss of habitat we’ve experience approximately 7 years of trout stack-ups. 2010 through 2014 found us in drought conditions which sent large populations of trout and forage species searching for lower salinities near river mouths and other similar areas. Facebook and internet fishing forums were loaded with pics of fishermen posing with big trout and over-the-shoulder stringers caught while wading and drifting the far reaches of Trinity and East Bays as well as Upper Galveston Bay. While all of this was taking place there were certain high salinity-thriving parasites such as Dermo (Perkinsus marinus) further damaging remaining oyster reefs that Ike didn’t destroy.
    Then we had the heavy spring rains in 2015 and 2016 that everyone continuously talks about. Trout sought areas with higher salinities to survive. The ones that didn’t leave through the passes concentrated in just a few areas and became easy pickings for just about anyone who owned a boat (including me). Many average fishermen became guides during this time because catching was so easy.
    Now here we are in 2017 with almost twice as many fishermen, half of the habitat and coming off of 7 years of stack-ups in which record numbers of trout were harvested. 98 percent of the fishermen I speak with are telling me that fishing is not nearly as good as they’re use to experiencing. The other 2 percent are saying publicly via Facebook that there are trout everywhere. The funny thing is that several of the ones saying that have told me privately that they have really struggled this year. Hell, I’ve personally witnessed many of them at the cleaning table with only a handful of trout up until the past month or so. I think now that we’re seeing more calm days that they’ve been able to capitalize on some of the tide-runner trout that have moved back into our bay system in certain locales. It’s funny how a few easy limits of trout can cause short-term memory loss. The problem is (and they’ll never admit it) the trout they’re catching on are only concentrated in a few areas. I have to be honest. The trout I’m catching on lures are only in 3 or 4 areas. I basically make my rotations every day and work my tail off to catch (not necessarily keep) however many we catch.
    I’m not saying that there are not trout throughout our bay system. I am saying that there are fewer areas with catchable numbers than in years past. It’s obvious when I make my rounds around the bay and see clusters of fiberglass in the same 4 or 5 areas every day. If you could go anywhere and catch trout in adequate numbers then why are the same guys fishing the same areas every day? Those of us who fish this bay 200 plus days per year over a twelve month period while utilizing the entire bay system know that there are many areas where we should be catching fish but we’re not. In my opinion, those who are only fishing a few areas for 4 or 5 months out of the year really can’t offer an accurate assessment of the state of our fishery.
    I am really concerned about the sustainability of our fishery because of not only the facts that I’ve stated but my own observations on a daily basis. No one is saying that we don’t have any fish, but it would be nice to have the overall quality and numbers of trout that we used to have. But I’m just not sure we ever will without some major changes. Anyone who thinks overall fishing is good right now has most likely never witnessed “good.” Either that or they choose to ignore the writing on the wall.
    One last thing - Up until the last 8 or 9 years I never have experienced so much animosity among guys who are in the same industry. It’s really sad to see certain “guides” insulting well-respected fishing guides. Fishing these days sometimes reminds me more of a reality series. We as professional fishing guides need to understand that everything we do is observed by our younger generations. We need to let them know that keeping a limit of trout just to get a meat haul pick isn’t necessarily the mark of a successful guide. I include myself when I say that because there was a time when I did the same thing. We have to mature as fishermen at some point and we have to learn to work together. Best of luck to everyone!

    The above was written by Capt. Steve Hillman.

  • #2
    Nice read.Hillman is right about the amount of people fishing and just the boat traffic makes it harder to find fish.

    Comment


    • #3
      Very good read.
      Mirrolure Pro Staff

      Comment


      • #4
        Very interesting indeed

        Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

        Comment


        • #5
          Well said.


          Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
          "Curmudgeon only pawn in game of life."


          Comment


          • #6
            Thanks for the insightful comments .
            GEORGE A. BRANARD, COLOR SERGEANT, CO. L, 1 ST TEXAS INFANTRY, HOOD'S TEXAS BRIGADE, C.S.A. : S.C.V.

            Comment


            • #7
              Telling it like it is.....

              Comment


              • #8
                Very interesting read. thanks for sharing.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Good stuff, thanks for sharing.
                  "Courage is being scared to death... and saddling up anyway."
                  -John Wayne

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    My take on this is with better technology will have today, social media and the increasing numbers of fisherman, fishing will never be better than it is now. We need to take more conservation efforts than what we are doing now. I believe eliminating using croakers as bait will help and with almost half the fisherman are on the upper coast, change the limits to five as the rest of the state. I don't understand why CCA and TP&W haven't made these changes. I may have ruffled a few feathers, but this is what I believe in. Hopefully some of you will bring this up at your next CCA meeting or write to TP&W.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      TPWD had a 'scoping' meeting in League City on this very subject a couple years ago. Items for discussion were:

                      - reducing upper bays limits of specs to 5 from 10
                      - reducing limits of flounder
                      - designating flounder as a game fish only (commercial flounder men were there in force)

                      They had several wildlife biologists present, went over the survey counts in the upper bays and surveys showed increasing number of specs over the past several years average 5-8% per year. Flounder surveys weren't as good mainly because of mild winters and females needed lower bay water temps to put on weight for spawn or they will change sex to male as survival mechanism.

                      Red surveys were strong as well, but many old salts pointed out when TPWD reduced the red limits years ago they 'promised' to reinstate limit them once populations stabilized and never have. TPWD taketh away limit but never giveth.

                      Many proposed reducing slot on specs and allowing the bigger females to thrive. That was not a topic for presentation to Austin.

                      Wildlife biologists stated that 30 millions specs and reds are introduced to the bay systems each year from the hatcheries program at a 50% survival rate. These programs have been going since the 70s I believe, flounder program introduces a few hundred thousand but has only been going since late 90s if I recall.

                      They also went over the increased number of fishing licenses, and that is a statistic of note; however, a license purchase does not equate on a one-to-one basis to an avid fisherman pulling limits 3-4x a week, more than likely weekend warriors getting out a few times a year. Just look at the population increase in counties surrounding us verses the increase in number of licenses sold. The population is growing at a faster higher rate.

                      These scoping meetings were held all along the upper coast and consensus opinion of TPWD was passed to Austin to keep upper bay limits as is. I am sure similar meetings will be held again, and that is the time to voice concerns.

                      If you haven't had the opportunity to attend one of their meetings I suggest you do so, the wildlife biologists alone are worth it and a wealth of information on the health and sustainability of our fisheries.
                      Water is the most essential element for life...because without water you can't go fishing!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        What a great bit of info. Thanks. The guy I went with to WB, where I caught those seven Trout and one Flounder, goes every weekend and limits out on trout just about every weekend. While we were there, there must have been at least 20 boats up and down the channel, coming back, or going out, to fish. That's just that weekend. It was supposed to rain and thunderstorms were in the area, so I imagine it's probably double that in good weather. If even half the crew on those boats limit every weekend, that's about 200 trout a week from that one location. That's over 10,000 trout a year. Five are plenty per person, per trip, especially if they're caught every weekend. My point is, catching 20 trout a trip, every weekend is fun, but nobody can eat that many fish in a month. Even if you're giving them away, it's too many fish being taken from one place, and you can only give away so many to the same folks before they're tired of the fish. We used live mullet, and I don't think there's a problem using them, except for the price gouging going on. I mean, a $buck a mullet is robbery. As far as Flounder are concerned, I don't know about them. I don't get that many when I go, and wouldn't want the limit, even in spawning season. I don't like them that much. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
                        Keith Bodine 1st Cav 1966-1967
                        RVN A/229th AHB/Door Gunner
                        sigpic


                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I will assure you the biggest contingency and loudest voices against lowering the limits at the TPWD scoping meeting were the guides. They claimed, and rightfully so, it would impact their livelihood as clients wouldn't pay their rate for a 5 spec limit but simply drive a hour and a half East to Sabine or Calcasieu and get 5x that amount. If you really think about it though, those that have the biggest impact on the fishery are those who fish it practically daily, the guides, more so than the recreational fisherman who's working 5 days a week.

                          As OP pointed out the increase in guide licenses, perhaps that number should be capped (although TPWD wants that revenue), or go to a bid/lottery system with some grandfathering provisions? The slot for guide boats could by tinkered with as well, and bag limit for clients only would reduce trip haul by 10 a day per guide. That's 3 million fish @ 1200 guides fishing 250 days a year. Just food for thought.
                          Water is the most essential element for life...because without water you can't go fishing!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            " bag limit for clients only " Yep. That might make some guides help the clients catch fish, instead of filling the box with their own catches and heading home.

                            Of course, the guides can catch a lot more fish than the occasional angler. But, some guides, in doing so, take the teaching, learning and fun away from the client. Guides fishing ....is the main reason I bought my first boat some 25 years ago. I may not catch too many, but I have all of the fun of trying.


                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by specstreet View Post
                              I will assure you the biggest contingency and loudest voices against lowering the limits at the TPWD scoping meeting were the guides. They claimed, and rightfully so, it would impact their livelihood as clients wouldn't pay their rate for a 5 spec limit but simply drive a hour and a half East to Sabine or Calcasieu and get 5x that amount. If you really think about it though, those that have the biggest impact on the fishery are those who fish it practically daily, the guides, more so than the recreational fisherman who's working 5 days a week.

                              As OP pointed out the increase in guide licenses, perhaps that number should be capped (although TPWD wants that revenue), or go to a bid/lottery system with some grandfathering provisions? The slot for guide boats could by tinkered with as well, and bag limit for clients only would reduce trip haul by 10 a day per guide. That's 3 million fish @ 1200 guides fishing 250 days a year. Just food for thought.
                              I'm not really concerned with the business end of fishing. I have been in several Bass clubs, and even took folks out and put them on fish, for money for gas only, but it was too much like work, and I was getting burned out, so I quit both and began enjoying fishing again.
                              I'm more concerned with the fish populations, and remembering when I could go to several places and limit out in a couple of hours, like Half Moon Reef. It's not that way anymore. I can catch a few, in a few hours, but with heat we're having, I won't go. TPWL know what they're doing.

                              The deer herds were becoming Doe with a buck every now and then. They changed the bag limit, encouraged game management, and it took a few years, but it paid off. Only problem, the lease prices shot straight up and I go once every two years, when I can, on public property. I don't want the fish population to shrink again where fishing was almost non existent in places I used to go to.



                              Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
                              Keith Bodine 1st Cav 1966-1967
                              RVN A/229th AHB/Door Gunner
                              sigpic


                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X