Comment...
 

For all you experts on global warming and fishing...please make your comment where it will count...those of us on BWE already know you're an expert on all affairs, political and worldly!

We now have an opportunity to comment on the proposed recreational bluefin tuna regulations for 2015-2016.
Many of us are familiar with the Pacific Fishery Management Council process that decided on a compromise
approach to reducing recreational bluefin tuna catches in the Eastern Pacific. What many of us may not know is that
this compromise has not yet been officially made into law. First, a comment period is required. This will likely give the folks that would like to see all recreational bluefin fishing stopped completely a final chance to have their way.
It would be greatly appreciated if you all could go online to the following website; http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa....shing_wcr.html

and then click on http://www.regulations.gov/#!documen...2015-0029-0001 to read background and the text of the rule.

Then click on...

http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketD...NMFS-2015-0029
This will bring up the comment page that you can make your thoughts known on this subject.

This is really important and will make a big difference in whether we will be able to fish bluefin tuna off California this year!

http://www.bigwatersedge.com/bwegall...ker_CMYK-2.jpg

Haha. This is awesome Silbaugh. Grown men bickering like teenage girls on social media…..

Thanks Nick! Figured that it's more fun to intervene with some humor rather than my opinion. ;)

Good thing you didn't add your opinion this time....cause' last time you offered it you called some boaters "assholes"...now they really want to run us all over now....! :eek:! Hopefully Chuck Norris shows up to save the day...

Attachment 15335Attachment 15336

Don't count on it Tony! Here's the sign I made for him in '05. Somebody posted my platoon online too. I'm on the truck holding my sign, so my head is cut off.

Anyway, we're still fighting ISIS.

SO, you better be Packin the next time you're Yackin!

Asshole boaters!

Alright, one more time! Maybe/surely I was naïve in expecting a conversation/debate on the NOAA proposal. I have no FB or twitter, or any other of those social media accounts, so I was unaware of that fact that you cannot debate on the old interweb. I assumed that a few people could participate in a debate on issues that the public might have varying opinions on.
My coworker, who I carpool with over an hour a day; have very different opinions than I. I have a rather conservative background, he a rather liberal background, but our conversations/debates are very fruitful. His points of views are generally ones I would never even think or very much consider. But his information is valuable, because it helps me understand the thought process and understanding the process, sometimes gives us a better picture of the outcome. Because a person has a different opinion on the volume of fish caught, does that make him any less of a person? Not in my book.
If he thinks the climate is warming up "1000" times faster than any time in the past. Well everyone is entitled to their opinion. I won't think less of you.

Won't I don't understand, and this is 100% honest, is why people would attempt to shut this conversation down by smearing an author, or comparing statements/facts being well supported or not to hyperbole.
I had always wondered why politician did not argue "facts"....now I know why. The general public wants entertainment not education.

NOT FOX NEWS......BUT CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY.

If you are interested in how catch rates are calculated, how different catch rates are modeled, historic biomass estimates. Check out the below link. If anybody else bothers to read this. Please chime in on your conclusion to the article.

http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/s...ry_4_04-17.pdf

Seems to me the purse seiners are getting most of the "action"

Nobody forced you to read this thread. Seems like you clicked it on your own, Greg. Or are you just looking to insult everybody involved and contribute nothing to the conversation?

The only joke around here is the utter lack of a productive dialogue. Thank you lipripper for speaking your mind and taking the time to support your opinions!

Funny thing about this thread is that the OP never mentioned anything about global heating.

I did my own research and found some charts that may help


http://rs2img.memecdn.com/Proof-of-g...ng_o_96195.jpg

^^^^ HAHAHA

Recreational fishing doesn't put a dent in the tuna population compared to the Seiners. You know, those guys who drag nets and are pulling up 10's of thousands of tuna at a time. Limit the recreational fisherman? Why? We're small timers on the big scale. On a good year all of San Diego's sport boats combined will pull in 10k BFT. Seiners do it every day....

Can't agree more bro. I've realized that some people you can have an intellectual debate based on facts, but most people just have their opinion and won't listen to facts either way. Most people voted for Obama because they're racist, and most will vote for Hillary because their feminist..........I mean sexist.

Debating with facts, to either liberals and even sometimes conservatives is almost pointless. People are motivated by emotions, and the media, politicians, lobbyists and many people in those type fields are great at playing to people's emotions.

In my opinion, global warming is BS, and I'm basing this opinion on facts stated by scientists across the globe that appeared on documentaries such as "The great global swindle". I believe politicians like AL Gore put out documentaries such as "Inconvenient Truth" to achieve political gain, through environmental type taxes. They've been pushing for this carbon tax for some time now.

As for the tuna limit, I'll be happy to get two fish, so I'm not too concerned on not getting 10. We still can get 10 yt and 10 yft right? I'm good with that!

I know a lot of people get mad about the commercial guys, and they're probably struggling to make a dollar. Who do I blame? The Federal Reserve! What, why would I blame a bank for our fishing regulations, that's absurd right? Well, think about it this way........
If they didn't devalue our dollar by 98% since the inception of the Fed, than commercial guys wouldn't be struggling, wouldn't over fish or push for nets, and wouldn't damage our fisheries.

You can't just look at the surface and say sardines crashed from 790,000 tons on 1936 to 100 tons in 1970. Those numbers might be misleading if half the commercial fishermen left the industry due to decreasing profit margins. Who knows? I'm sure there's many reasons, but the enviros will sure as shit try to ban all fishing just using little stats like that. Just like the hedonistic methods of the Bureau of Labor of Statistics, the CPI, measured inflation and others. They misrepresent numbers to achieve political goals.

I'd gladly debate with you sometime bro. I'm socially liberal, fiscally conservative, and love to fish! See you on the water! ;);)

If anything should be banned or severely limited around here...its tuna Pens! Talk about destroying the ocean...if they never had to fill and feed those things, we would all be a lot better off especially the ocean.

Look at how many of these stupid things they're are...
 

http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u...pspbnnuumz.jpg

Imagine how many tons of tuna it takes to fill all of those pens and how many tons of feed it takes to feed them....

http://echeng.com/journal/images/mis...fintunapen.jpg

The seiners will typically net the fish offshore and drag them in the net right up against the coast of ensenada which is where I am guessing your screenshot is from.

Good point... That way we can do absolutely nothing and still complain.

So limit the guys who do it for fun a couple times a year and catch .05% of the population? Makes sense :rolleyes:

http://media4.onsugar.com/files/2014...g.xxxlarge.jpg



Yep those tuna pens are the ones off of punta Banda...

Honestly, my opinion is that most of our BFT catch is going here...


Attachment 15337

Carifornia row anyone???

So do nothing? What are you proposing? Or are you part of the "not in my lifetime" camp? No one is stopping you from catching as much bluefin as you want, you just have to release them after you get two. Is that really such a huge sacrifice for you? If you kept more than two decent sized BF, I'd bet $100 it would just sit in your freezer for six months and be catfood grade by the time you got around to eating it anyway!

Look I'm not trying to make enemies or piss people off. I just don't get why a bunch redneck kayak fishermen (myself included here) think they know more than scientists who have devoted their entire lives to understanding marine ecology and climate. The folks at fisheries aren't eco-nazis... Many of them are avid anglers themselves. Just recently I had dinner with a former director of fisheries. This person was so excited and stoked to see pictures and hear stories of fish that I had caught. They love the ocean and want to make it accessible to all of us, especially our future generations. Who do you think will be able to limit the evil commercial fisherman anyway? A bunch of disgruntled kayakers?

Lol that's great right there

I do agree with you that a couple kayak fisherman will not sway any commercial fisherman from doing what they do. And I'm definitely not one who thinks I'm living in my lifetime so screw younger generations. After all, I will have kids, grandkids, and so forth and would want them all to have every experience that I had and maybe better. I also agree that catching that much bluefin tuna for one person may eventually lead to some waste. I've come back from 3 day charters looking at my phone and waiting for that service to come in so I can make calls and dump some fresh fish with family and friends. Actually, I enjoy giving this fish away more than I do eating it myself. And I love seafood. The point that I was trying to make is that even while limiting recreational fisherman, the commercial guys will still be doing their jobs. Not saying that anyone can do one thing about the fishing that takes place in international waters, but I just don't feel that I personally take a whole lot out of BFT fishery.

Jim, I've been called names before, but never like this.

But hey, the rest is spot on buddy!

Comment sent, thanks for the link.

http://i.imgur.com/8k6QnwDl.jpg

No One In Particular
 

My post was not meant for any one expert in particular on fishing or global warming...

Just commented....
 

I gave'm hell!

No worries Jim, I was just having fun with it, while trying to bring a little attention back to your links.

I did click on the link for "reduced BFT limits" it is true. That does not mean that I want to wade through a bunch of personal opinion spouted as fact about other far reaching topics. Comparing those that don't believe the way you do to "Rednecks" is not productive to any of those topics. Nor, in my opinion, is comparing someone pointing out that an organization (NOAA) "fudging" numbers is comparable to saying that they (NOAA) would lie about a life threatening situation ("Category 5 Hurricane"). Contrary to your accusation that I am trying to "insult everybody involved", most of the other posts and several of your ideas are constructive.

There are probably a lot of people in the fishery management business to do just that "manage the fishery". But if you don't believe that there are others there, in this day and age, that want to protect all wildlife from all take activities, I believe you might have blinders on (but I will concede that this is just opinion).

I don't mind a good debate on an issue, but I have never seen it happen on the Internet. A good debate requires much more back and forth than is usually capable on a forum before the "Mob Mentality" takes over.

I would love to see some hard numbers on the proportion of BFT caught by recreational anglers between the border and Santa Barbara to the take in the entire Pacific. Those numbers, I would hope, would be "facts". Giving an opinion on what those numbers might mean without having the real numbers is just that Opinion. Unfortunately, today opinion trumps fact too often because of the way it is marketed.

For the record, I would be considered pretty liberal when it comes to catch limits. Other than a few times when the WSB limit was 1, I don't remember having caught and kept a limit of any fish except stocked Trout. If the numbers showed that there was any reasonable chance that reducing the limit from 10 to 2 BFT in this tiny zone would help, I would be all for it.

I'm not real sure how much this regulation will effect most anglers. Last time I caught a blue fin was on an 8 day trip two years ago.

Personally, for one trip, two blue fins are plenty for me.

I do think that if we are to be regulated that restrictively that the commercial interests should be also.






Hey! Who has the popcorn!?!?

this thread is like Herpes...........it just keeps coming back

Probably right, this regulation isn't going to effect most anglers because how often does an angler catch 2 bluefin a trip let alone 10 in US waters...? The truth is not often. To me it seems....(I could totally be wrong about this, but I don't think so)...but they're trying to fix something that isn't a problem to begin with. Why?

In my opinion, the bluefin out there are going to get caught no matter what we do. If we regulate the sportfishery and reduce the limit to two, the fish we don't keep or catch will eventually be caught by the commercials. I'm all for protecting the fishery but let's do it in a way that will have some real impact. Here's a suggestion....how about the commercials be limited to a hook and line fishery like the guys on the east coast like we see on wicked tuna. Lets do away with all the seiners, how about that? Now that would make a huge impact.


Pass the popcorn please!

Seems reasonable to me
 

Extra butter on mine please;)

Opinion approved! Sounds like a logical reaction to a diminishing BFT biomass. Same standards for all involved with a "harvest". The purse seiners seem to have the largest impact on both the Atlantic and Pacific BFT fisheries. According to NOAA and a few other sources, smaller BFT seem to be the majority of the west coast catches. Maybe a size limit could improve the fishery, but I would want to review a study that could scientifically support such measures.

Scientists can't catch fish... but they love to hear about other people catching though :drool5:

And that Greg Andrew guy sure can be a total jerk. He always seems to get in the way and make obnoxious comments ;)

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/p_dS2h_fAcs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I was at a seminar given by NOAA scientists last week..... this year and last year are quite warm.

But they said it's likely inter-annual variation, and not climate change.

That said, the NOAA scientists say the ocean off the US west coast is as warm as they have ever seen it for this time of year.

That said we only have data that goes back 50-60 years.... which is a SMALL time period.

So who knows.

That said, the links you put up about NOAA falsifying or changing their data are quite comical. Thanks for sharing that Liprippa. It made my day :)

Like ^^^^

FYI Tony, I literally plagiarized this word for word as part of my comment :D

Meteorologist
 

It's refreshing to hear inter-annual variation, I couldn't agree any more.
But does not the second statement contradict the first one?
If you could, please let me know why that link is comical. My co-worker who has an advanced degree in physics and is a Director of the Meteorologist Department and believes in man made climate change has no issues with those comparison graphs. He strongly believes that NOAA has not done a complete job on explaining the changes/documentation in the published temp data sets. But sides with there conclusions. Any input?

If that video is of you tagging YT....any data being generated from the study? If so, anything online or published?

These guys will get to the bottom of it. http://www.tempdatareview.org/

Lol, this says it all. ....Attachment 15352