FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Industry Meeting on Bycatch Reduction

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
chriselk View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar

Joined: 22 November 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3547
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote chriselk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Industry Meeting on Bycatch Reduction
    Posted: 23 December 2016 at 3:11pm
If you look at the shrimp trawl chart from when I was on the MFC, I seem to remember that the Diamond study in the CF has so few trawls to be credible or statistically valid and it may have been the one done during daylight hours.

Ray probably knows this with his steel trap cranium

"...studies are often relegated to times of low shrimp catch rates, and as such, the bycatch data are not representative of times when shrimp catch rates are higher. For example the F:S ratio for gear studies conducted in 1994 (McKenna et al. 1996) was 5.5:1, while characterization studies conducted in 1995 by Diamond-Tissue (1999) found the F:S ratio to be 1.6:1."




Edited by chriselk - 23 December 2016 at 3:11pm
The above comments are my personal opinion and do not represent those of any organizations or agencies I may be a member of.
Back to Top
Rick View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 16 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6325
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 December 2016 at 11:19am
BINGO!!!!


Page 79 of the FMP

"...studies are often relegated to times of low shrimp catch rates, and as such, the bycatch data are not representative of times when shrimp catch rates are higher. For example the F:S ratio for gear studies conducted in 1994 (McKenna et al. 1996) was 5.5:1, while characterization studies conducted in 1995 by Diamond-Tissue (1999) found the F:S ratio to be 1.6:1."


So is the 2015 study truely representative of "typical" bycatch rates.  What is the real reduction based on an average year of slightly over six million pounds of landings? 

As Kevin Brown said at the November MFC meeting- 
"last year (2015) was one of the cleanest years ever" 

I'm hearing 2016 is going to be another high landing year.


YEARPOUNDS (WHOLE WEIGHT) VALUE ($)


20095,407,708 $8,527,714
2010 5,955,335 $10,691,399
2011 5,140,360 $10,885,795
2012 6,141,489 $13,333,193
2013 4,859,840 $12,947,059
2014 4,691,073 $12,405,269
2015 9,097,684 $16,835,349

 












Edited by Rick - 23 December 2016 at 11:23am
fiogf49gjkf0d
NC Fisheries Management- Motto: Too Little, Too Late, Too Bad   Slogan: Shrimp On! Mission Statement: Enable Commercial Fishing At Any and All Cost, Regardless of Impact to the Resource.
Back to Top
23Mako View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 01 February 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 665
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 23Mako Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2016 at 10:18pm
And once again a meeting where working folk cannot attend! What a crock of $hit!!!!!
Back to Top
Glacierbaze View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 09 January 2005
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 3892
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Glacierbaze Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2016 at 9:21pm
15 minutes for public questions and discussion, an hour and a half for lunch in the middle of a 2 hour meeting, then come back for only 30 minutes?  Who makes up the agenda? 
"You can never elevate your own character by stepping on someone else's."

"Never argue with a man who loves the sound of his own voice."
Back to Top
BrackishWater View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 18 December 2014
Location: Pamlico River
Status: Offline
Points: 519
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BrackishWater Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2016 at 4:28pm
They have almost as much time scheduled for lunch as they do for the entire meeting! What a sham.
A rising tide lifts all boats...
Back to Top
Rick View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 16 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6325
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2016 at 4:07pm
Originally posted by BrackishWater BrackishWater wrote:

11:00 - 11:15 on the schedule lists "Opportunity for public to ask questions"....


I overlooked that change.  How about that!

Trying to build credibility 2/3 of the way into the process?  lol  

I guess we can thank Commissioner Willis for this opportunity.  They can now say that the public was "fully involved".


Edited by Rick - 13 December 2016 at 4:15pm
fiogf49gjkf0d
NC Fisheries Management- Motto: Too Little, Too Late, Too Bad   Slogan: Shrimp On! Mission Statement: Enable Commercial Fishing At Any and All Cost, Regardless of Impact to the Resource.
Back to Top
BrackishWater View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 18 December 2014
Location: Pamlico River
Status: Offline
Points: 519
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BrackishWater Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2016 at 4:01pm
11:00 - 11:15 on the schedule lists "Opportunity for public to ask questions"....
A rising tide lifts all boats...
Back to Top
Rick View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 16 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6325
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2016 at 3:56pm
"This is Beaufort, North Carolina, home of the Beaufort Inlet Seafood Company.  Since 2011 this massive facility hauling in nearly 4 million pounds of shrimp each and every year.  Meet Brent Fulcher, he's a third generation shrimper.  His big dream, that his kids and their kids can keep this shrimping legacy alive."

http://video.foxnews.com/v/5116226862001/the-deciders-shrimp-fishermen-split-on-trump-vs-clinton/?playlist_id=5100383878001#sp=show-clips

"Four million pounds, each and every year" !!! 

One man controlling 61% of the average annual total shrimp haul in NC.

One man responsible for 61% of the bycatch in NC.

One man responsible for depletion of our estuarine resources like spot, croaker and gray trout.


The same man that is almost solely funding the current NCDMF bycatch reduction device studies and conducting those studies on his boat.

The same man sitting at the head of the table and kicking off the meeting above.

Follow the money boys, follow the money.  Vote accordingly.  Let your voice be heard.


Edited by Rick - 13 December 2016 at 4:05pm
fiogf49gjkf0d
NC Fisheries Management- Motto: Too Little, Too Late, Too Bad   Slogan: Shrimp On! Mission Statement: Enable Commercial Fishing At Any and All Cost, Regardless of Impact to the Resource.
Back to Top
Ray Brown View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar
NCW FOUNDER

Joined: 14 July 2003
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 14883
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ray Brown Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2016 at 3:39pm
No public comment???????????????

They took and spent public funds to do this. I knew the public was not allowed to monitor the on water tests, but now we find out that even though the public furnished money to do this that the public could not comment or ask questions during the process.

What kind of transparency of process is this, and why should anything done to date be deemed accurate at all?   This is a simple trust but verify process without stating that the process was rigged.

But.....not being able to trust and verify should set the results to date aside and new rules on trawling be applied while the studies are redone with the public clearly allowed to view the process and have input. For forty years we've allowed trawling with the belief that it does not harm and we have seen fish stocks decline. Why not do three more years on this reduction attempt with shrimping activity curbed using the assumption that it does harm and at the end of the three years we'll not only have results from the gear tests, but also some indication as to whether reduced or eliminated trawling activity in estuarine waters would bring fish stocks back. By doing it in reverse of how we've done it in the past we could answer two questions in the same time frame without having to do two independent tests.



Edited by Ray Brown - 13 December 2016 at 3:42pm
I am a native of NC. The "bycatch captial of the east coast of the US". Our legislature lets us kill more fish for no reason than any other Atlantic Coast state. I hope they are proud.
Back to Top
Rick View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 16 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6325
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2016 at 3:15pm
Originally posted by BrackishWater BrackishWater wrote:

Do you know if Commissioner Wicker plans to attend the Industry Workgroup presentation to continue to press Kevin Brown on his concerns with the study?

If not, then could another qualified member of the public attend the presentation to have those questions entered into public record?


Contrary to the implications made by division staff at the November MFC meeting  in response to Alison Willis' question about "public involvement" in the trials and workshop presentations...

The public is only allowed to attend and listen.  The public has never been allowed to participate.

There has been NO public comment period before or during the workshop presentations.




Edited by Rick - 13 December 2016 at 4:11pm
fiogf49gjkf0d
NC Fisheries Management- Motto: Too Little, Too Late, Too Bad   Slogan: Shrimp On! Mission Statement: Enable Commercial Fishing At Any and All Cost, Regardless of Impact to the Resource.
Back to Top
BrackishWater View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 18 December 2014
Location: Pamlico River
Status: Offline
Points: 519
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BrackishWater Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2016 at 3:05pm
Do you know if Commissioner Wicker plans to attend the Industry Workgroup presentation to continue to press Kevin Brown on his concerns with the study?

If not, then could another qualified member of the public attend the presentation to have those questions entered into public record?
A rising tide lifts all boats...
Back to Top
Rick View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 16 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6325
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2016 at 2:30pm
Deny, Defend, Deflect, Delay...Delay...Delay...

We need a hell of a strong showing at the petition public comment meeting supporting the resource.

There is no doubt what Sammy and the Division are trying to do.

  • Get the 2016 bycatch reduction trials on record
  • Hold a meeting for public comment on the petition before it has even been deemed complete or made available to the broad public.
  • Let the ACs hear from division staff/commercials on how well the trials are going
  • Let the ACs hear from division staff/commercials that they should be allowed to "do their job"
  • Let the ACs hear from division staff/commercials that the petition should be denied
  • Let the pro-commercial ACs recommend denying the petition to the MFC 
  • Let the current commission and division kill it before Gov. Cooper can effect change

 

"Do we protect every single nursery area? No! We don't! If we protected every single nursery area, I would, (pause) I would argue, I think, that from three miles to the Inland Water Boundary Line is a nursery area for something." Dr. Louis Daniel, Director-NCDMF, August 29th, 2013







Edited by Rick - 13 December 2016 at 3:25pm
fiogf49gjkf0d
NC Fisheries Management- Motto: Too Little, Too Late, Too Bad   Slogan: Shrimp On! Mission Statement: Enable Commercial Fishing At Any and All Cost, Regardless of Impact to the Resource.
Back to Top
TomM View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 11 July 2006
Location: Roanoke Rapids
Status: Offline
Points: 2543
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TomM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2016 at 2:09pm
2017 field trials
Back to Top
Rick View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 16 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6325
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2016 at 1:41pm
The meeting to discuss the 2016 results and plan for the 2017 trials will be held on Monday, January 9th, 10:30am at the New Bern Convention Center-

Here is the agenda-

http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=fdc281dc-11a2-49c1-ad2d-6e45ddfbd52e&groupId=38337




Edited by Rick - 13 December 2016 at 2:08pm
fiogf49gjkf0d
NC Fisheries Management- Motto: Too Little, Too Late, Too Bad   Slogan: Shrimp On! Mission Statement: Enable Commercial Fishing At Any and All Cost, Regardless of Impact to the Resource.
Back to Top
TomM View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 11 July 2006
Location: Roanoke Rapids
Status: Offline
Points: 2543
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TomM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 November 2016 at 10:03pm
When Berger and Moore get on board. It will change. Until then nada.
Back to Top
BaitWaster View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar
NCW PATRON

Joined: 15 July 2003
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 13165
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BaitWaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 November 2016 at 9:17pm
Agree and the operative words are " is necessary." 

My post was to suggest that Cooper or whoever the Governor is can initiate this without the blessing of the Legislature is spurious other than appointments on the MFC.

One of my pet peeves is folks running for head of the executive branch making all these promises when much/most of the power is held by the legislative branch. The NC Legislature holds the cards.


 
I'm not here for a long time, but I'm here for a good time.

The days that I keep my gratitude higher than my expectations
Well, I have really good days - Ray Wylie
Back to Top
chriselk View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar

Joined: 22 November 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3547
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote chriselk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 November 2016 at 6:22pm
BW,
A paradigm shift in the way legislators think about natural resources is necessary.  Instead of short term economic gain, long term conservation must prevail.  The latter has the feature of better economics for all and a stronger, more resilient marine resource, able to survive ups and downs that humans have no control over.

No more river herring type failures.
The above comments are my personal opinion and do not represent those of any organizations or agencies I may be a member of.
Back to Top
BaitWaster View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar
NCW PATRON

Joined: 15 July 2003
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 13165
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BaitWaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 November 2016 at 2:35pm
What can Cooper do?  Or what could (can)McCrory do other than appoint MFC commissioners that might advance this petition or more rigorous restriction to grow the stocks?

I don't think the Legislature has changed and they have ultimate change or deny authority.
I'm not here for a long time, but I'm here for a good time.

The days that I keep my gratitude higher than my expectations
Well, I have really good days - Ray Wylie
Back to Top
penfish2 View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 25 August 2012
Location: Snow Camp NC
Status: Offline
Points: 216
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote penfish2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 November 2016 at 10:25am
I may be mistaken, but it seems the strategy (as has occurred in the past for, oh, 40 or 50 years) is delay, delay, delay....in the meantime,  has anyone considered the crazy off-the-rails trawl gear tests were done deliberately, knowing (a) they were not, as Ray pointed out, what was ordered by the MFC, (b) the subterfuge made the test results ultimately worthy of joining the scrap heap of past studies, (c) plotters included K. Brown -- and banned uncommitted "observers" along with other impartial public observers -- so as  to muddy the waters since Brown's 2010 report was so clear in its findings, (d) K. Brown has been "turned" and joined comms (obviously job security counts for a lot), (e) the ultimate result was planned to be and actually is more delay, delay, delay .... and more $$ can be wasted on a future study(ies) and the merry-go-round continues but no one can touch the brass ring.....while, in the meantime, marine species suffer more "incidental" and "discarded" bycatch -- what a novel idea, two terms to describe dead fish -- and bycatch (dead baby fish) totals continue to mount and certain species still plummet toward eradication by net while the chance to catch with hook and line a <15-inch s. flounder grows tinier each day.
Will Gov. (to be?) Cooper put an end to compromised tests, dodges, smoke&mirrors, etc., especially giving room for spouting of pseudoscientific survey results? ... since he's been touted to have promoted real solutions during a pre-election statement and, at the top of his list of things to do upon moving into the residence at 200 Blount St., will be to solve this problem?
Stayed tuned for the next...and the next....and the next episodes.
Many go fishing all their lives without knowing it is not fish they are after.
* Henry David Thoreau
Back to Top
Ray Brown View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar
NCW FOUNDER

Joined: 14 July 2003
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 14883
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ray Brown Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 November 2016 at 10:53am
They also...and this is important....did not study what the MFC authorized and charged them to do.

They were to measure real world by catch in NC by alternating existing gear on one side of the boat versus test gear on the other.  They were not charged to run tests using gear certification protocol, but rather shrimp like they normally would but rotate gear from side to side to see the difference, if any, in bycatch.  I heard them ask for that kind of study, existing members of the MFC have agreed that is what they wanted and thought that is what they were to get back.  So who changed the rules of the study and why?

Why is that important?

Listen to what has been said at the meetings or at the MFC meeting last week....

"We didn't count any bycatch but finfish, and only then after marketable sized fish were removed from the deck."  (That means that sharks, rays, crabs, etc were not counted when the MFC wanted to know current and possible total bycatch.)

"We didn't sample tail bags that had things like crab pots in it because it may have skewed the results."  that was said at the MFC meeting last week.  In a real world example every tow would be dumped on the deck if there was any shrimp in it and I'm sure crab pot capture is routine in Pamlico Sound so the test immediately is invalid because they are "cherry picking" the tows to be counted.  What else has been stated in meetings that could have prompted them to not count a tow?  I know the answer, but now is not the time to list it.

Plus....they took public funds to do the study and did not allow disinterested parties to observe the operations even when asked making sure the public got objectivity.

The first Brown study simply studied what was in the tail bag and was pure data just as Rick said.

This last one has too many exceptions to the process decided on by individuals who have something economically to gain or lose.

In fairness to Mr. Brown he was put in, or chose to be in, a no win situation and finds himself in place to be criticized by both sides depending on the results.  Had "observers" been there to see all tows and counts then the sides could say what they want, but the observers would have seen and recorded the count thus taking the pressure off Mr. Brown.

But that is water under the bridge and now peer review and further scrutiny by the MFC and other scientists lay ahead.   Now that the SELC is in it you can bet that scientist that don't know any players here, but have knowledge of shrimping and shrimp trawls will be made available to comment.

But I stand on one simple thing first and foremost.....the study done versus the study that was asked to be done; are not the same!  And that alone should have raised questions from day one, but since only people involved in trawling could be involved behind the scenes there was nothing anyone could do but watch it go forward!

The industry told the AC that they would pay for the study if the MFC approved it.  A large portion of the money came from the "Conservation Fund" which are public funds.  Since the public funds were used, but no public observers were allowed then the industry should repay the public or else ask that the findings be set aside as non validated.   Enough is enough!

If the process had been open, and done with observers on board, and the results like we have been described resulted, then people like me would have been quieted and mooted once and for all.  Anyone thinking that simply putting out results without independent verification on an issue this sensitive is living in Disney's Fantasyland.  It is not going to happen, the heat will continue to build for answers or else a boiling point will be raised by a growing number of people and trawling of any kind in NC will look like that in Virginia, SC, or Georgia.  More and more people are asking for just that and if shrimpers in those states can survive economically by working exclusively in the ocean then simply saying you can't do that in NC will obviously not fly.  The absolute data to the contrary is on the horizon south of us and what do you know....many of those vessels have a NC town emblazoned on their stern.  If it wasn't profitable to be there they would not be there.

Why did the state of NC allow this type of study on an issue so contentious?  Do you think the state would have allowed Duke power to study their coal ash ponds and relocation process of refuse with only their staff and stockholders having input into the plan and no one from Raleigh would have objected?

The process itself has made any outcome tainted Bernie....can we agree that the integrity of the process is so malodorous that as bycatch it brings down Kevin's reputation too, regardless of his culpability or lack thereof?   Unfortunately, the process has made him the topic in some ways and possibly to both sides depending on what he says.   Science, not scientist, should be the debate, but that debate only exists if the process is available for all eyes to see.  This study was not one of proprietary methods to profit a few as would be studies of a drug formulation or a formula for a new type of asphalt, I mean this was about a public trust resource and how to protect it....right?



Edited by Ray Brown - 22 November 2016 at 11:10am
I am a native of NC. The "bycatch captial of the east coast of the US". Our legislature lets us kill more fish for no reason than any other Atlantic Coast state. I hope they are proud.
Back to Top
BrackishWater View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 18 December 2014
Location: Pamlico River
Status: Offline
Points: 519
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BrackishWater Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 November 2016 at 10:07am
I get your point BW but that is not what the industry has in mind. I assure you from the tone of the meeting that the commercial industry plans to use this study to delay any action on bycatch reduction in the shrimp trawl industry. The Chairman practically said as much when he questioned why the Commission would even consider the NCWF Petition for Rulemaking when the trawl gear study results were not even in yet.

They want to use this Proof of Concept as a reason to further delay any substantive action by the Commission to reduce bycatch, and we will be expected to accept another year of the destruction of hundreds of thousands of pounds of juvenile fish. It is deja vue all over again. Anytime the Commission gets anywhere close to protecting the future of the resource they are hit with another Concept for delay.
A rising tide lifts all boats...
Back to Top
Rick View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 16 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6325
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 November 2016 at 9:40am
Originally posted by BaitWaster BaitWaster wrote:

Rick you continue to deflect/ignore my issue with you continuing to hold up the characterization study done by biologist Kevin Brown as definitive when it is limited and for a single year.    

And yet there have been derogatory comments about the conduct of this industry/public proof-of-concept study (my definition) by the same biologist which clearly has many of the same limitations, which have been pointed out.


Ok Bernie, not deflecting, ignoring yes.  It's a busy week at work with Thanksgiving, trying to get five done in three, but I'll play before you throw a temper tantrum.

On Brown's single year characterization study of the Pamlico Sound in 2009-2010-
  • It's the most recent best available science
  • It reaffirms past studies
Why do I trust this study?  Because there was no ulterior industry motive to skew the results.  This study was 100% grant money with one simple goal, characterization.

I have always found some of Brown's comments in the study interesting.

The results of this study offer insights for fishery managers developing fishery management plans and may assist in bycatch mortality estimates. Recommendations include expansion of the observer coverage in commercial shrimp trawl fisheries to encompass all seasons, establishing a long-term observer program throughout North Carolina commercial fisheries and requiring mandatory observer coverage in North Carolina commercial fisheries.

Technological advances in the shrimp industry have increased the catching efficiency of larger boats. In the 1940s and early 1950s, a 45-60 foot vessel pulled a single trawl with a head rope length of 60-65 feet. Due to improvements in engine design, the same sized vessel, using four-barreled rigs, can now pull four nets with a combined head rope length of 120-160 feet. Four-barreled rigs allow fishermen to pull two nets from each outrigger. In Pamlico Sound the commercial shrimp trawl fishery is conducted primarily on a multiple day trip basis and is conducted around the clock. The Pamlico Sound fishery accounted for 68% of the total harvest of shrimp in North Carolina in 2009 (NCDMF 2009).

Currently, the shrimp trawl fishery is allowed to operate in the estuarine and oceanic water of North Carolina, which is controversial because of its bycatch and discards, especially of commercial and recreationally valuable species such as flounder spp. (Parlichthys lethostigma, P. dentatus, and P. albigutta), gray trout (weakfish) (Cynoscion regalis), spot (Leiostomus xanthurus), and Atlantic croaker (Micropogonias undulatus).

I particularly find the comment below interesting given the fact that the current gear study to reduce "bycatch" only measured those species deemed "important" to the study group while I believe the charge from the MFC was to reduce bycatch.

Bycatch is defined as “the portion of a catch taken incidentally to the targeted catch because of non-selectivity of the fishing gear to either species or size differences” (ASMFC 1994). Bycatch can be divided into two components: incidental catch and discarded catch. Incidental catch refers to retained or marketable catch of non-targeted species, while discarded catch is that portion of the catch returned to the sea as a result of regulatory, economic, or personal preference.

Based on Brown's understanding of bycatch variability in 2010, he should understand that the current reduction work is all preliminary.

The amount of bycatch can vary greatly from fisherman to fisherman, trip to trip and tow to tow. Factors that may affect bycatch include water temperature, water clarity, fishing location, tow time, and gear configuration (NCDMF 2006). Fishery managers continually face the issue of bycatch and discards in commercial and recreational fisheries. Discards impact fishery yields and fishery managers’ ability to accurately assess fishery stocks (Fennessy 1994; Hall 1999).

Brown's recommendations in his 2010 study were as follows-

RECOMMENDATIONS
  • Expand the scientific observer coverage in commercial shrimp trawl fisheries to encompass all seasons and areas.
  • Establish a long-term scientific observer program throughout North Carolina commercial fisheries.
  • Require mandatory observer coverage in North Carolina commercial fisheries.
  • Generate better lines of communication between fishery managers and the commercial fishing industry. This will increase understanding and allow the increased incorporation of commercial knowledge into fishery management.
  • Work with the commercial fishing industry and fishery managers to develop gear or trawling methods to reduce bycatch.

I'm glad to see he's working on the last point, there is certainly need.

Let's talk about the first three points.

I know for a fact (or at least fact conveyed to me by senior staff at NCDMF) that Brown caught a heck of a lot of grief from both the industry and pro-commercial staff at DMF for those recommendations.  After that Brown back-peddled and worked to re-endear himself to the commercial trawling group.  I also know that Brown was a member of a Facebook page (Hate Tim Hergenrader) that had the intent of intimidating Tim, and those who supported Tim and change.  Not only was Brown a member, but he posted inappropriate remarks to the page personally attacking Tim.  Given Brown's position, not only was that inappropriate, but it was unprofessional and quite frankly should have gotten him fired from NCDMF.  Brown's actions at the time were in support of comments made by a few of the more vocal commercial agitators over on the NCMFY2 facebook page now.  Given those facts, it is reasonable to question Brown's potential bias.  His demeanor at last week's MFC meeting certainly magnifies that need.   

Again- comparing the characterization study to the gear reduction study is apple and oranges.  The first is a simple characterization- Is it a spot, croaker, weakfish, etc and how many.  The second is a hypothesis driven study by an industry with a huge financial interest in a positive result.  The first was done at a time when the commercials controlled the MFC and Raleigh.  They had their own handpicked "science seat" in their pocket along with the Governor, House and Senate.  Studies then where exactly that, studies to obtain grant monies to keep staff running with little chance of application if it was negative to the industry.  The second is being done at a time with a resource friendlier commission and people in Raleigh listening.  The industry obviously needs the results it wants...more accurately wants the results it needs.  




Edited by Rick - 22 November 2016 at 4:52pm
fiogf49gjkf0d
NC Fisheries Management- Motto: Too Little, Too Late, Too Bad   Slogan: Shrimp On! Mission Statement: Enable Commercial Fishing At Any and All Cost, Regardless of Impact to the Resource.
Back to Top
Rick View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 16 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6325
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 November 2016 at 9:39am
Double post- see below


Edited by Rick - 22 November 2016 at 1:55pm
fiogf49gjkf0d
NC Fisheries Management- Motto: Too Little, Too Late, Too Bad   Slogan: Shrimp On! Mission Statement: Enable Commercial Fishing At Any and All Cost, Regardless of Impact to the Resource.
Back to Top
Redfisher View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 09 May 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 481
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Redfisher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 November 2016 at 8:57am
Originally posted by BaitWaster BaitWaster wrote:

Originally posted by BaitWaster BaitWaster wrote:

Thinking the goal was to identify an improved BRD to reduce dead discard of commercially/rec important species.  But then I may be in the minority here. Smile

Proof of concept (POC) is a realization of a certain method or idea in order to demonstrate its feasibility, or a demonstration in principle with the aim of verifying that some concept or theory has practical potential. ... A proof of concept is usually small and may or may not be complete.

In my world, this is what this study was.  If if failed, then it failed.  If it proved promising, then additional studies and a certification process for general application.


Why don't we just study it to death.  
Back to Top
BaitWaster View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar
NCW PATRON

Joined: 15 July 2003
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 13165
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BaitWaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 November 2016 at 1:20am
I was not involved any Phase I (POC/safety) and very few Phase II (larger sample size / dosing / safety profile) trials.

I'm not arguing that this trial is anything other than a loosely-controlled examination of potential bycatch reduction gear proposed by some in the industry. Isn't bycatch reduction a good thing? I think it was a positive that some in the industry realized that bycatch has been and is an issue and were working to reduce it.

Turtle excluders went though several iterations with major input from industry and I believe the TEDs are largely responsible for the ever increasing number of nesting females.

And if any have personal issues with Kevin Brown (I don't), then why keep citing the 2009 Brown study which was a single-year, multi-gear, small-sample characterization?
I'm not here for a long time, but I'm here for a good time.

The days that I keep my gratitude higher than my expectations
Well, I have really good days - Ray Wylie
Back to Top
Glacierbaze View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 09 January 2005
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 3892
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Glacierbaze Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 November 2016 at 11:21pm
So, BW, if your lab at Duke was going to conduct a study to test a Proof of Concept, wouldn't that goal be clearly stated in the proposal, and in the design of the experiment? Was POC ever mentioned in the design of this experiment, and would anyone on board, other than Kevin Brown, even have a clue what it meant?  You can label it a POC after the fact, but I am guessing that the commercial component was hoping for results that the DMF/MFC would swallow hook, line and sinker.
The POC established here was Proof that the study group has absolutely no Concept of the scientific method, and having Kevin Brown involved in every waking minute of the study does nothing to change that, if he does not control and protect the integrity of that method.
If nothing comes of this study, and it should not, how much time will be wasted while the status quo is preserved, until the MFC has the guts to scrap it and move on.


Edited by Glacierbaze - 21 November 2016 at 11:24pm
"You can never elevate your own character by stepping on someone else's."

"Never argue with a man who loves the sound of his own voice."
Back to Top
Ray Brown View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar
NCW FOUNDER

Joined: 14 July 2003
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 14883
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ray Brown Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 November 2016 at 10:06pm
This same biologist was on Facebook 'liking' a website to send Tim Hergenrader back to Nebraska because Tim dared challenge shrimpers in NC.    Thank God and Bill Gates for screen shots.

I am a native of NC. The "bycatch captial of the east coast of the US". Our legislature lets us kill more fish for no reason than any other Atlantic Coast state. I hope they are proud.
Back to Top
BaitWaster View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar
NCW PATRON

Joined: 15 July 2003
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 13165
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BaitWaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 November 2016 at 7:32pm
I was fishing out of MHC so didn't listen. 

Agree this shouldn't be taken as gospel as it is simply a POC.  Based on what you say, this commissioner should pump the brakes.  Wink

Additionally, my issue is and has been with the unnecessary bashing of this study on NCW and the chief biologist which had some of the same limitations (single year, limited sample size) as the characterization study which seems to be held up as a definitive gold standard and extrapolationable (prolly not a word) for all years and all gear. 
I'm not here for a long time, but I'm here for a good time.

The days that I keep my gratitude higher than my expectations
Well, I have really good days - Ray Wylie
Back to Top
chriselk View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar

Joined: 22 November 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3547
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote chriselk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 November 2016 at 7:17pm
BW,
You should have been at the MFC meeting.  What was presented as preliminary data was swallowed as the Gospel by one incessantly naive Commissioner.  Lots of head scratching whenever that Commissioner speaks.  Everyone else in the room knew the data would not stand the light of review.
The above comments are my personal opinion and do not represent those of any organizations or agencies I may be a member of.
Back to Top
BaitWaster View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar
NCW PATRON

Joined: 15 July 2003
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 13165
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BaitWaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 November 2016 at 7:12pm
Originally posted by BaitWaster BaitWaster wrote:

Thinking the goal was to identify an improved BRD to reduce dead discard of commercially/rec important species.  But then I may be in the minority here. Smile

Proof of concept (POC) is a realization of a certain method or idea in order to demonstrate its feasibility, or a demonstration in principle with the aim of verifying that some concept or theory has practical potential. ... A proof of concept is usually small and may or may not be complete.

In my world, this is what this study was.  If if failed, then it failed.  If it proved promising, then additional studies and a certification process for general application.


Edited by BaitWaster - 21 November 2016 at 7:14pm
I'm not here for a long time, but I'm here for a good time.

The days that I keep my gratitude higher than my expectations
Well, I have really good days - Ray Wylie
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.11
Copyright ©2001-2012 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.172 seconds.