# The future of our bays?



## capt2016 (Mar 4, 2016)

Fished with a buddy a couple days ago one of tha topics of course was, fishing just ain't like it used to be. Now I've fished and hunted east bay for probably a little over 25 years, spent alot of hours in marshes observing everything possible, and have seen so many huge changes. 
Of course changes include the abundance of trout specifically specks under lights, now most of tha lights hold nothing but very small Sandy's, when 15 to 20 years ago heck u could walk across specks at tha shrimp boats.
Flounder run.... simple fact it's not like it was not even 5 to 10 years ago, now dont get me wrong u can still get into them but reality is numbers are simply way down.
Believe it or not even what some people consider trash fish, or creatures you may not notice just aren't there. Croaker for instance are they still around of course, but I can remember ppl catching huge ones and big numbers in October. Back to other animals crabs, snails, grass shrimp, mud minnows, ect.. have all declined by alot.
All in all our bays are dying and it's a fact, u might have good fishing days here and there but all good things come to an end unfortunately , what do yall think? Agree/ disagree, not trying to start a feud


----------



## pocjetty (Sep 12, 2014)

.


----------



## ROBOWADER (May 22, 2004)

Fished and hunted East Bay since you were 6????????



capt2016 said:


> Fished with a buddy a couple days ago one of tha topics of course was, fishing just ain't like it used to be. Now I've fished and hunted east bay for probably a little over 25 years, spent alot of hours in marshes observing everything possible, and have seen so many huge changes.
> Of course changes include the abundance of trout specifically specks under lights, now most of tha lights hold nothing but very small Sandy's, when 15 to 20 years ago heck u could walk across specks at tha shrimp boats.
> Flounder run.... simple fact it's not like it was not even 5 to 10 years ago, now dont get me wrong u can still get into them but reality is numbers are simply way down.
> Believe it or not even what some people consider trash fish, or creatures you may not notice just aren't there. Croaker for instance are they still around of course, but I can remember ppl catching huge ones and big numbers in October. Back to other animals crabs, snails, grass shrimp, mud minnows, ect.. have all declined by alot.
> All in all our bays are dying and it's a fact, u might have good fishing days here and there but all good things come to an end unfortunately , what do yall think? Agree/ disagree, not trying to start a feud


----------



## Puddle_Jumper (Jun 30, 2014)

pocjetty said:


> .


hahahaa


----------



## Trouthappy (Jun 12, 2008)

A 31-year old fretting about the good old days? 

Anyway the big croaker runs ended by the mid-1970s when the shrimpboat fleet was out of control, 
wasting an estimated billion croakers annually in the Gulf of Mexico.


----------



## mchildress (Jul 11, 2009)

Was pretty sickening seeing their bycatch lines of dead fish.


----------



## Trouthunter (Dec 18, 1998)

> Was pretty sickening seeing their bycatch lines of dead fish.


Yup but kings, lings and dolphin sure enjoyed it.

TH


----------



## Stumpgrinder1 (Jul 18, 2016)

These are the good old days... make peace with it


----------



## karstopo (Jun 29, 2009)

Bays dying from what? I havenâ€™t seen any sign of it.


----------



## RUFcaptain (Aug 12, 2011)

Thereâ€™s a lot more fishing pressure than ever before.


----------



## Bocephus (May 30, 2008)

Hang on....where the heck is my popcorn ?


----------



## ivomec (Jul 26, 2007)

pocjetty said:


> .


I agree!

I keep hearing how fishing isnâ€™t what it used to be. Yes there are more fisherman out there. Which also means there are more fisherman who just canâ€™t catch fish. I fish the same areas that I was taken to wade when I was 12 years old and still catch plenty of trout and redfish and good quality fish. Using both artificial and live bait. My 2cents.


----------



## karstopo (Jun 29, 2009)

https://www.chron.com/sports/outdoo...led-trout-population-not-slowing-10605462.php

The numbers, at least for Speckled trout, are improving year after year.


----------



## Bullitt4439 (Sep 18, 2014)

Say what? 

Been fishing Xmas/ Bastrop/ Cold Pass area since I was 8 or so. Running a boat there for 15 years now. 

Just about the only thing that has changed is the number of boats on the water, and the now plague of kayaks that has descended on "my" BOAT launch LOL. 

It's no mystery as to the increase in numbers of people, going outdoors is now the "in" thing. Almost every football player DB that used to make fun of me in high school for fishing and hunting every weekend instead of going drinking now has a $30k+ boat and a 1500$ a gun duck lease.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

According to hard data from TPWDâ€™s catch rate by bay not much has changed at all over the last 30 years.

However it is a proven fact that whining on the internet has increased 100% since 1980


----------



## bigfishtx (Jul 17, 2007)

Its Catchy said:


> According to hard data from TPWDâ€™s catch rate by bay not much has changed at all over the last 30 years.
> 
> However it is a proven fact that whining on the internet has increased 100% since 1980


If there has been no decline, why do we have lower bag limits?


----------



## Hunter.S.Tomson (Aug 15, 2018)

pocjetty said:


> .


hahaaaa yessss


----------



## RedFlounderBass (May 10, 2015)

Somebody bought Troutsupport and caught â€˜em all...:smile:


----------



## ltppowell (Dec 21, 2015)

bigfishtx said:


> Its Catchy said:
> 
> 
> > According to hard data from TPWD's catch rate by bay not much has changed at all over the last 30 years.
> ...


Well, in the case of our offshore fisheries, it's because the Federal Government believes Texas fish (Gulf) are more important somewhere else. Did you know that the Gulf of Mexico is the only identified spawning ground of the Atlantic bluefin tuna?

As far as Texas inshore sources are concerned...a few people have decided that it is going to be managed for quality, not quantity.

The important thing to remember is that this water will be here long after we're gone...and swimming with stuff.
,


----------



## TexasWineGuy (Jun 19, 2017)

RUFcaptain said:


> Thereâ€™s a lot more fishing pressure than ever before.


You're referring to commercial fishing, right?

I ask this because, in my opinion, the amount of fish that sporting anglers take is a gnat fart compared to what the commercial boats haul in with those huge nets.

TWG


----------



## karstopo (Jun 29, 2009)

Thereâ€™s no legal commercial fishing for wild Speckled trout or redfish in Texas waters. Thatâ€™s probably the prime reason the numbers of those fish caught in TP&W gill net surveys keep trending upwards. 

If people are catching less, thatâ€™s more on the fisherman than the fish. The fish counts conducted by the researchers are saying overall the fish numbers are good and have remained that way for some time. Flounder might not be doing as good. Thatâ€™s been more about bad spawning conditions.


----------



## Trouthappy (Jun 12, 2008)

Flounder spawn offshore after their November run from the bays. That's why gigging was made illegal in November; most are full of eggs and were unable to spawn. Cut back on the flounder gig boat operations going on almost year 'round, and we'd have a lot more flounder.

Shrimpboats have been cut way back since the 1980's. There are no other nets out there, except a few illegal gill nets that are confiscated and heavily fined.


----------



## Agwader (Feb 6, 2011)

OP, I'd recommend moving to another Bay. Things aren't as good as they were 35+ years ago (before you were born) but they have improved IMO over the past few years.


----------



## bigfishtx (Jul 17, 2007)

The fishing in the Aransas bay system was better this year than it has been in a long time. 
IMO the reason is two fold. First, Harvey did a good cleanup/flush of the bays.
Second is, there was almost NO pressure on the fish last fall. 

Yea, there are still a lot of fish in the bay, but, there are not as many as there were 20 years ago.


----------



## yellowmouth2 (Aug 16, 2005)

How many fish were caught off the deep reefs in East Bay over the last few summers? A LOT due to the fresh water in the upper bays. There's no secret spots anymore with all the communication and information out there available. Me, I'm usually the "should've been here yesterday" guy.


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

bigfishtx said:


> Yea, there are still a lot of fish in the bay, but, there are not as many as there were 20 years ago.


Is this your opinion or do you have some facts to back up that statement?

The science actually indicates there are more trout now than there was 20 years ago. So unless you have some sort of population survey or scientific measure I'd say your statement is highly inaccurate.


----------



## salty_waders (Feb 13, 2006)

I have no doubt that the numbers and size of the redfish and trout in the Lower Laguna has significantly declined within the last 12 years, especially within the last 5-7 yrs. I discuss this with my fishing buddies regularly and they completely agree. The places we'd consistently catch fish are now highways of boats. Google earth from 2008 shows minimal prop scars. Now it looks like a toddler scribbling with a crayon. In 2005 TPWD stocked 782,677 red drum into the LLM. In 2017 they stocked 2,091,759.


----------



## irbjd (Aug 11, 2005)

fishinguy said:


> The science actually indicates there are more trout now than there was 20 years ago. So unless you have some sort of population survey or scientific measure I'd say your statement is highly inaccurate.


Gill net and seine numbers were actually down for most of the coast on the last report I saw.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Letâ€™s look at the facts. Over the last 40 years commercial fishing pressure has been eliminated for redfish and trout. The shrimp fleet has been reduced by 90%. The few remaining shrimpers have to pull bycatch reduction devices.

Sampling data from TPWD surveys indicate a stable if not increasing trout population and a redfish population thatâ€™s thriving.

The only place their are fishery issues is on Internet forums


----------



## Skifffer (Aug 11, 2016)

IMO the specs and red fish numbers have held up very well due to the stocking efforts, very thankful for that. I knew a guy that used to work at the hatchery a few years ago and he admitted they just hadn't got the flounder all the way figured out then. However the numbers of most other species are in decline. I think making croaker and flounder gamefish would bring on drastic improvements. Obviously it would help those two populations directly and the trout population indirectly. Come spend a Saturday on the Laguna Madre in the Summer and tell me it's sustainable.


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

irbjd said:


> Gill net and seine numbers were actually down for most of the coast on the last report I saw.


Please post the report.


----------



## Anderson Guide Service (Oct 21, 2016)

fishinguy said:


> Is this your opinion or do you have some facts to back up that statement?
> 
> The science actually indicates there are more trout now than there was 20 years ago. So unless you have some sort of population survey or scientific measure I'd say your statement is highly inaccurate.


I don't know about the scientific numbers, but fishing is not nearly as good in my neck of the woods as it was in the 90's. There may be more fish now but they do not school like they used to. After Harvey San Antonio Bay was straight stupid like in the 90's. Then it started going down hill as the boats returned.

All I know is that the numbers of boats is having a direct impact on the size of the groups of fish and possibly their patterns. Getting run over all day changes things. Think about the redfish rodeos that used to happen in the flats that no longer happen. Back then there were less redfish but they were easier to find. Now days you rarely see a school of redfish over 25-30.


----------



## Zeitgeist (Nov 10, 2011)

*Hillman has the answer!*

I always enjoy reading Steve Hillman's article from Texas Saltwater Fishing Magazine. He is good with words and puts it into a perspective that is backed up with facts. His family legacy and their knowledge of the oyster reefs and industry as a whole, does not hurt. I always try and go on a guided trip with him at least once every year. Of course he is full time and artificial only. On social media, he tells it like it is! In my opinion, a very honest assessment of what is really happening.

For those that think nothing has changed over the past 5 years, at least in the Galveston Bay complex, I politely disagree. For me personally, it has definitely changed, but I am not the greatest barometer to follow, LOL! Even the live bait guys that post daily on Social media as a way to get business, their size and numbers are pretty much half of what I witnessed last year. The typical three man trip, you would see a limit. This year it is very common to see a spread with 15-16 trout. Now there is always a one-off great report, but as I whole, I have definitely noticed a difference.

Link below is Hillman's latest article, but you have to be a subscriber to read:

http://www.texassaltwaterfishingmag...ve-hillman/looking-back-at-the-summer-of-2018


----------



## pocjetty (Sep 12, 2014)

fishinguy said:


> Is this your opinion or do you have some facts to back up that statement?
> 
> The science actually indicates there are more trout now than there was 20 years ago. So unless you have some sort of population survey or scientific measure I'd say your statement is highly inaccurate.


Whoah. I'm a big believer in a scientific approach, but a lot of "studies" are biased and of questionable validity - and empirical evidence has its place.

Forget about the cause for a minute. There was a time when it was very common for people to fill whole ice chests with trout. Catching 100+ fish in a trip was fairly common. You would have a VERY hard time doing that today. Ever. When something goes from commonplace to almost impossible, that represents a fundamental change.

During the fall croaker runs, people would line both sides of certain channels and passes and literally catch big burlap sacks full of croaker. Every single person, even if they didn't know a thing about fishing, could do it. That could not be done today. I know people say that there has been a rebound of croaker, and that may be a true statement. But the difference between now and then is like two different worlds.

If you want to see hard evidence of how it used to be, pick up a copy of Hart Stillwell's "The Glory Of The Silver King". He's got some great stories, but also pictures. You don't have to have a taxpayer-funded "study" to know for 100% certain that things aren't like they once were. That doesn't mean that the bays are nearly dead, or that there are hardly any keepers out there anymore.

Floundering in November has been part of my life for as long as I can remember. But I can see the wisdom in shutting it down, since there are just so many more people here than there once were. And as much as I love to fish, I've said before that I would support making our entire bay systems C&R for a year or even two, if they would do a really honest, thorough scientific study of the impact. But that's not going to happen. I would like to see a moratorium on shrimping in the big passes during migrations, for the exact same reason as the floundering, but that's not going to happen either.

The current limits appear to be working. And regardless of what some people say, there are plenty of keepers in our bays. I prove it on a weekly basis, as do many others. More than anything, I wish that fishing was like it was 100 years ago. But I'm not sure what I would do with it, since I already harvest all I could justify. If I were able to catch 100 trout in a day now, I still wouldn't do it. I would like to lay my hands on the occasional limit of golden croaker, and I wish there were some way to re-establish them in those numbers. But everything is interrelated, and there might be unintended consequences of even that.

Pine away for the good old days. That's okay. But go catch some fish, too. I know they're out there, because I just caught a bunch a couple of hours ago, and I released more than I brought home.


----------



## shane.bonnot (Aug 16, 2018)

Zeitgeist said:


> I always enjoy reading Steve Hillman's article from Texas Saltwater Fishing Magazine. He is good with words and puts it into a perspective that is backed up with facts....
> 
> Link below is Hillman's latest article, but you have to be a subscriber to read:
> 
> http://www.texassaltwaterfishingmag...ve-hillman/looking-back-at-the-summer-of-2018


Good article! And here is the podcast that he did about a year ago.


__
https://soundcloud.com/user-978708922%2Fepisode-19-the-status-of-galveston-trout-with-captain-steve-hillman

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

pocjetty said:


> And regardless of what some people say, there are plenty of keepers in our bays. I prove it on a weekly basis, as do many others.


That's the main point there are alot of people that go out there and can't catch fish so their assumption becomes that there are no fish.

I never fished this glory days croaker run and have never in my life seen a fish put into a burlap sack. My kids catch a ton of croaker at the jetties on fresh peeled shrimp.


----------



## TrueblueTexican (Aug 29, 2005)

*A few of us*

Who post here really did see the good old, bad old days -

I've seen MILES of saltwater trotlines with reds hanging off every orange mylar strip baited hook --I've seen twenty bay shrimpers making a mud pie out of Copano bay,

I've seen when we had water come down the Colorado and other streams which kept back bays a nursery area for shrimp and crabs - now thats down to a trickle and our finfish nursery areas suffer from too **** many users of a critical resource

I've had days when I saw only four other boats in Espiritu Santo - I've seen the days when there was no limit on specks - and Cedar Bayou was 300' wide, ten feet deep

I *see* the days with tricked up shallow flat boats blading up the nearshore grass areas and hurting nursery areas, burning a shoreline and disrupting fish spawns.

I've seen the days when fishermen respected each others drifts, plenty of fishing spots to go around

I* see* the days of too many pricks on the water with an entitlement attitude, with boats they can't operate

I've seen a fishing license cost $2.15 and only 850,000 Texans had one. There was no saltwater limit.

I've seen haul seines on the beach catch thousands of pounds of specks in one haul.

I've seen the bays before the the ship channel at POC was built and Aransas was widened dredged to 50'

Those days are gone/and those days are here - if you grew up on the coast in the early sixties you know some of what I am talking about, one thing for sure is there are just too many boats/users sucking up resources in Texas now - I headed to better pastures a little east of Sabine Pass -- Texas Bays are "home" - catching fish is inverse of population.


----------



## ReedA1691 (Jan 29, 2018)

pocjetty said:


> ...I would like to lay my hands on the occasional limit of golden croaker, and I wish there were some way to re-establish them in those numbers. But everything is interrelated, and there might be unintended consequences of even that.


I feel the same way. One thing I know from experience about croaker, before the mid-90s, I had no concept of an industry that keeps small croaker caught in shrimp nets and sells them to bait camps. Stop the sale of croaker as bait and in a few years, you will see large croaker again. As an example of how I know this, go to Lake Calcasieu. All of their shrimp are harvested in butterfly nets. Very little by-catch is involved. You cannot find croaker for sale there, but you can catch 21" croaker...I've seen it and caught several in the 19" range myself.


----------



## salty_waders (Feb 13, 2006)

Anderson Guide Service said:


> All I know is that the numbers of boats is having a direct impact on the size of the groups of fish and possibly their patterns. Getting run over all day changes things. Think about the redfish rodeos that used to happen in the flats that no longer happen. Back then there were less redfish but they were easier to find. Now days you rarely see a school of redfish over 25-30.


You are correct, no doubt about it...


----------



## bigfishtx (Jul 17, 2007)

fishinguy said:


> Is this your opinion or do you have some facts to back up that statement?
> 
> The science actually indicates there are more trout now than there was 20 years ago. So unless you have some sort of population survey or scientific measure I'd say your statement is highly inaccurate.


This is my opinion based on science of fishing. We moved our bay fishing operation to Aransas pass from POC in 2002. Every year, the fishing was a little worse than it was the year before. 
Two summers back, guides were not even trying to catch fish in our area, they were all going to Laguna Madre. I remember having a lot of the bay almost to myself for weeks, and one day I came in with a limit of reds and the guides were all over me wanting to know where I found them.
I do not trust the TPW surveys. I just don't think they are that accurate in the big picture. They take a very small sample here and there then make their report. The best way to know how good the fishing is to go to the fish cleaning table at 2 or 3 on friday or sat, and see what the guides are bringing in. When they have a pile of 16" black drum and a couple of 17" trout, you know things are slow.


----------



## yellowmouth2 (Aug 16, 2005)

I know back in the late 70's through the 80's when the surf got "right" it wasn't about "if" you caught fish, it was how many. It definitely is not like that anymore.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

bigfishtx said:


> This is my opinion based on science of fishing. We moved our bay fishing operation to Aransas pass from POC in 2002. Every year, the fishing was a little worse than it was the year before.
> Two summers back, guides were not even trying to catch fish in our area, they were all going to Laguna Madre. I remember having a lot of the bay almost to myself for weeks, and one day I came in with a limit of reds and the guides were all over me wanting to know where I found them.
> I do not trust the TPW surveys. I just don't think they are that accurate in the big picture. They take a very small sample here and there then make their report. The best way to know how good the fishing is to go to the fish cleaning table at 2 or 3 on friday or sat, and see what the guides are bringing in. When they have a pile of 16" black drum and a couple of 17" trout, you know things are slow.


Thatâ€™s ok because I donâ€™t trust memories. You tend to â€œRememberâ€ the good days forget the bad days. And on the topic of what you call their â€œsmallâ€ sample size? Their sample size is weeks of gill net surveys in every major bay on the coast with 600â€™ gill nets in the spring and fall, trawl samples and thousands of boat ramp catch surveys.

So to say your opinion based on â€œthe science of fishingâ€ is valid and their 30 years of statistically based research consisting of thousands of man hours is not is ridiculous.

But Iâ€™m guessing from your comments that you were unaware of TPWDs survey methods


----------



## bigfishtx (Jul 17, 2007)

Its Catchy said:


> Thatâ€™s ok because I donâ€™t trust memories. You tend to â€œRememberâ€ the good days forget the bad days. And on the topic of what you call their â€œsmallâ€ sample size? Their sample size is weeks of gill net surveys in every major bay on the coast with 600â€™ gill nets in the spring and fall, trawl samples and thousands of boat ramp catch surveys.
> 
> So to say your opinion based on â€œthe science of fishingâ€ is valid and their 30 years of statistically based research consisting of thousands of man hours is not is ridiculous.
> 
> But Iâ€™m guessing from your comments that you were unaware of TPWDs survey methods


So according to you, the fish are more abundant, it is just not evident because I can't fish as good as I used to. Now that is some good science. I have been fishing since I was a small child, which means close to 60 years. I don't think I just stopped knowing how to catch fish. 
But whatever, you are going to believe what you want to believe and I am going to do the same. So we can just agree to disagree.


----------



## TrueblueTexican (Aug 29, 2005)

*Rebounding fish stocks*

Rest solely on reproduction of not only game fish but forage - the "good old days" on any back tidal flat would be absolutely covered in fiddler crabs, the sloughs were full of menhaden, shrimp would jump if you slapped a paddle on the water, get back in the back sloughs now and tell me what you see - its a direct correlation between misuse of the marsh, developing and building on the flats, upstream water use and water quality --

TPWD had to establish limits and begin supplemental stocking because recruitment is severely depressed over what it once was - if it continues unabated like it has for the last twenty years a "silent" bay will become a fact - the "average" fisherman will go fishless, those on the water every day will still find some to catch - there is only so much damage you can do to a nursery-

Further east of Sabine and you still have extensive freshwater flow to the gulf and thousands of miles of marsh so far undeveloped - catching is 1000 % better and what Texas used to produce --


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

bigfishtx said:


> So according to you, the fish are more abundant, it is just not evident because I can't fish as good as I used to. Now that is some good science. I have been fishing since I was a small child, which means close to 60 years. I don't think I just stopped knowing how to catch fish.
> But whatever, you are going to believe what you want to believe and I am going to do the same. So we can just agree to disagree.


Itâ€™s not according to me. Itâ€™s according to 30+ years of TPWD data. And I would not say fish are â€œmore abundantâ€. I would say for most species fish populations are within their 30 year norms and fishing pressure and limits are at sustainable levels. And given TPWDs history of conservative fisheries management were in good hands. If you donâ€™t agree with the science we can agree to disagree.


----------



## c hook (Jul 6, 2016)

*37 years of fishing*



Its Catchy said:


> Itâ€™s not according to me. Itâ€™s according to 30+ years of TPWD data. And I would not say fish are â€œmore abundantâ€. I would say for most species fish populations are within their 30 year norms and fishing pressure and limits are at sustainable levels. And given TPWDs history of conservative fisheries management were in good hands. If you donâ€™t agree with the science we can agree to disagree.


i have nothing against TP&W(they have a purpose), but I'd say big money or ignorance is hindering there ability to make a reasonable decision. the fishing is nothing like it was. i'm running a 1975 mako i bought in 1989. with no trolling motor gps and only a compass I's fill the cooler over and over again. listen to mickey and plagg in the mornings(if you can bear it), they sum it up. i'm starting to sound like them, talking about how 8 and 9 pounders were tail walking around the boat as we were filling the no limit cooler with them. i often catch myself reminiscing about the glory days, and have to stop myself from boasting. lmao :dance:


----------



## ReedA1691 (Jan 29, 2018)

Besides responsibly adhering to bag limits or being careful not to create prop scars, what do most of us do to improve the health of our bays? Do we give back anywhere near as much as we take? Could it be that a massive increase in pressure and relatively few efforts to restore the bays, might be catching up with us!!!!!! Duhh...


As to the "Health" of our bays, we all need to look at that as a separate issue from numbers and limits. Yes, of course the health of a bay system will affect marine populations, but low numbers doesn't have as much to do with pollutants as one would think. Habitat loss has a great impact, as do other non-pollution-related environmental issues. Marsh grass & oyster reef restoration, good fresh water influx, removal of derelict/abandoned crab traps, the potential closing of Rollover Pass; these are all critical components and could drastically improve the overall water quality of our bays, and thus improve prospects for marine life to flourish. We should all consider volunteering to improve these aspects of our bays. If you know of no other way to get involved, go to the Galveston Bay Foundation website and find out how you can help. 


Besides being the right thing to do, I can tell you from experience that it is awesome to plant grass beds and go back in 2-3 years to find all types of bait and reds and flounder all up in it, all where there was barren sandy flats before and little to no bait before. Try to get involved in limiting commercial harvest of natural oyster beds. I never even knew this was done, but apparently it is. I love those slimy things as much as anyone, but we have plenty of viable commercial oyster leases to harvest.


----------



## karstopo (Jun 29, 2009)

The OP is 31 years old. He talks about the last 15-20 years. Maybe things were better in the middle to late middle of the last century, but he wasnâ€™t even alive then. 

TP&W data and my own experience and those that I fish with indicate no drop off in fish numbers, quality or quantity, in the time frame, 15-20 years, of the original post. There have plenty of days in that time period including this year where weâ€™ve caught double digits of quality trout and/or redfish. There have also been days were we havenâ€™t caught a thing. And all the in betweens. 

I do think people can lose their fishing edge and forget how to fish. They rely too much on hitting proven spots and not enough on their fish finding skills or presentation. If the survey data says the fish are there in steady numbers and other people are doing just as good as they have always done, then maybe itâ€™s your approach and execution that needs adjusting and not the data.


----------



## Trouthappy (Jun 12, 2008)

Look what they did to Sabine Lake in 1968, Brown and Root chopped off huge chunks of the lake on the Texas side, almost the entire shoreline in fact, and built the north and south levies. All to fill in with dredge to keep the ships running and the refineries going. I was there, we camped and had both levies to ourselves most weekends until 1970 when the big bridge was completed from Port Arthur to Pleasure Island. A hundred years ago, Sabine Lake was said to be 20 feet deep with a white sand bottom and tarpon. Lots of flushing from the Sabine and Neches Rivers. Whoops, both rivers were dammed in the mid-1960s. I remember fishing reports of boats coming in with 250 trout in 1967, but it didn't last.


----------



## ltppowell (Dec 21, 2015)

Trouthappy said:


> Look what they did to Sabine Lake in 1968, Brown and Root chopped off huge chunks of the lake on the Texas side, almost the entire shoreline in fact, and built the north and south levies. All to fill in with dredge to keep the ships running and the refineries going. I was there, we camped and had both levies to ourselves most weekends until 1970 when the big bridge was completed from Port Arthur to Pleasure Island. A hundred years ago, Sabine Lake was said to be 20 feet deep with a white sand bottom and tarpon. Lots of flushing from the Sabine and Neches Rivers. Whoops, both rivers were dammed in the mid-1960s. I remember fishing reports of boats coming in with 250 trout in 1967, but it didn't last.


And the October drawdown on Rayburn and Toledo is just a month away. I'm not that good at math, but you don't have to be to see what dropping 300,000 acres of freshwater lakes several feet does to the 90,000 acre saltwater bay downstream. It makes me sick .


----------



## cervena reba (Jan 11, 2006)

*The "good ole days"*

30+ years ago, most fisherman used live bait, not lures. 
No size or possession limits; kept them all.
I haven't fished with live bait in over 20 years and still occasionally get into the fish and stop at my limit. In days gone by, I would have tried to catch them all!
Offshore, many fishermen pull up behind shrimp boats to catch fish feeding on the bycatch from the nets. No shrimp nets in the bays now, no bycatch. You can't tell me the reds and trout weren't fatting themselves up on that bycatch that is not there anymore. Easy meals for those fish.
Many more boats on the water; many running shorelines and moving fish. Old guys like me moved very little back in the day.
My day is made when I leave the dock with a little beer in the cooler, the boat running good and the sun just starting to show. Give me a little shoreline to wade and I am good.
50 years ago, we would wait to chase the big fat girls til about 11:00 on Saturday nite; now we are doing it at 0600!


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

I've got two instances from this year that illustrates the fish are there but not everyone is catching them.

1st one I am on the way in from offshore and I get a hot tip on the way in that the trout have been turned on in a certain spot. I guess a few others had the same hot tip because just as I am pulling up I get passed by 3 boats headed to the same spot. Anyhow we all get on the same spot and start fishing. I am throwing croaker because I had a couple dozen that I took offshore the other 3 boats are throwing shrimp with corks. The guy immediately to my south is catching trout one after another. The other 3 boats were catching a couple and I got skunked. Those trout wanted nothing to do with the croaker but were nailing the guy's shrimp next to me on every cast. He bagged up two upper coast limits in about 20 minutes. IF the guy next to me had not been catching fish like crazy I would have no idea that the spot was really holding fish. My tactics were wrong for the situation. 

2nd trip also from this year. I was pulling up on some structure that had been holding a good school of trout. I take my time easing in, usually they will school up pretty good in this spot. I slowly drift in and get setup. First bait in the water bam fish on put that one in the cooler rebait and boom fish on. Then some guy comes flying through the school of fish shuts down his boat and starts casting toward my boat. Needless to say I didn't catch any more fish there. Had this guy run through there before I got there I probably would have caught no fish and he was surely not going to catch any fish.

We always have to make adjustments to stay on fish they are never in the same place all the time. This year has been even more difficult but really I think that all the bait in the water and the non-typical tides are more to blame than the population of trout.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Copy and paste this prediction. This year, next year, five or ten years down the line there will be a blue norther. Unlike any other in decades. The temp will drop well below freezing for days on end.

Fish will die and float. Millions of them. There will be pictures posted on this website of trout after trout. World class fish many of them in the 8-10 pound range. Fish that are supposedly rare will be seen everywhere. Limits will be reduced to 2 or less in a "prudent" reaction.

In 1983 we were all told the Redfish population was decimated by commercial gill netters. There were not supposed to be hardly any left in the bay systems and if we did not outlaw the nets they would be extinct. In late December that year the arctic blast hit and I personally saw millions and millions of dead redfish and trout in Galveston Bay. The scene was worse down the coast. Later that year they outlawed most gill nets as a prudent reaction.

I saw the same thing in 1989. Not once but twice. In February and December. The same scene millions of dead fishâ€¦

We heard about the shrimpers and how their by catch was decimating the bays. We reduced the fleet by 90%.

This is history not opinion. So you will excuse me if I am skeptical when it comes to dire predictions and how great things were so good "back in the day" and how we are overfishing. There are no more net fishermen, hardly any more shrimpers so the finger of blame is on guides and croaker soakers. I have heard it all before.

I remember trying to catch a fish in 1984 and 1990 after those freezes. All the old-timers here can attest to that fact they were scarce. But things bounced back within two years and have remained pretty consistent ever since.

Some good years, some bad ones but TPWD indicates the median is constant or slightly increasing.


----------



## teeroy (Oct 1, 2009)

RUFcaptain said:


> Thereâ€™s a lot more fishing pressure than ever before.


All you need is a flat bill hat, wrap on your boat, a 15 year note on your Majek/200 SHO, couple spinning rods, some treble hooks and a pass your class and you too can get paid to drown croaker!!


----------



## salty_waders (Feb 13, 2006)

fishinguy said:


> Then some guy comes flying through the school of fish shuts down his boat and starts casting toward my boat. Needless to say I didn't catch any more fish there. Had this guy run through there before I got there I probably would have caught no fish and he was surely not going to catch any fish.
> 
> We always have to make adjustments to stay on fish they are never in the same place all the time.


Your thoughts are valid but you are also strengthening the point that many of us are making, which is that the drastic increase of boats and fisherman has significantly impacted the attributes of our fisheries, fishing techniques, and yes fish behavior. I think those of us that have been fishing the coast for 15+ years are just frustrated that we cant go fishing anymore without someone else negatively impacting our days on the water, just like the situation you described above. We all want the flats to ourselves again, but that aint happening.


----------



## pocjetty (Sep 12, 2014)

bigfishtx said:


> So according to you, the fish are more abundant, it is just not evident because I can't fish as good as I used to. Now that is some good science. I have been fishing since I was a small child, which means close to 60 years. I don't think I just stopped knowing how to catch fish.
> But whatever, you are going to believe what you want to believe and I am going to do the same. So we can just agree to disagree.


I don't have all the answers. I may not have any of the answers. But do you think it's possible that with 10X the number of boats buzzing around the bays, the big schools tend to get scattered? Might the fish feed more at night, compared to decades ago? The survey nets stay in one place and trap everything that swims past for 24 hours or more. They don't tell us much of anything about the timing.

Don't get me wrong. I think that the surveys don't necessarily mean what they get interpreted to mean. You can't deny the numbers - either the fish are in the nets or they aren't. But the assumption that more fish in the nets means more fish in the bays is tenuous at best. Collecting data is easy. Understanding what it tells you is an art.

Animals change their behaviors in response to interaction with humans. It's called habituation. The nets that catch a lot of fish today may have caught fewer fish decades ago - even if there were more fish back then. The biologists try to make statistically valid surveys, but I've seen enough of their methodologies, and I've seen them change over the years. They can't be used to compare year on year results for that many years back. They attempt to do "adjustments", but the comparisons aren't valid. They're just not.

It's Catchy is 100% right about one thing - our memories are not trustworthy. The casinos in Las Vegas make a fortune off of that. People remember the wins much more vividly than they do the losses. But we can detect gross differences. When I used to flounder and see hundreds and hundreds of crabs every night, but then for years I might see two or three in a night? I know that something is fundamentally different. Maybe they were never as plentiful as I remember. Maybe my eyes aren't as good as they once were. But the difference is so extreme that I can be certain that the numbers are less than they were. It turned out that after a year with a lot of rain, the numbers of crabs exploded - and then I observed that things were much more like they used to be.

The biggest problem is that the biologists, commercial fishermen, and recreational fishermen all tend to ignore each other. It's Catchy grew up in a commercial fishing household. I'm sure he has his biases as a result, but he also has a world of good observations. A wise person listens to all the sources. But all of us recreational fishermen have a lot of good experience too. The two of you are beating each other up, instead of considering that you don't have a full view of the situation.


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

salty_waders said:


> Your thoughts are valid but you are also strengthening the point that many of us are making, which is that the drastic increase of boats and fisherman has significantly impacted the attributes of our fisheries, fishing techniques, and yes fish behavior. I think those of us that have been fishing the coast for 15+ years are just frustrated that we cant go fishing anymore without someone else negatively impacting our days on the water, just like the situation you described above. We all want the flats to ourselves again, but that aint happening.


Exactly and changing bag limits isn't going to have any effect. Making the limit 5 isn't really going to change much except making it "easier" to catch a limit. The people not catching fish are still not going to catch fish. The people that stay on the fish will change the tactics and figure out how to catch the fish.


----------



## irbjd (Aug 11, 2005)

pocjetty said:


> It's Catchy is 100% right about one thing - our memories are not trustworthy.


Memories are not trustworthy, but written records are. I've spoken to multiple people that have fished up and down the coast for 20+ years and religiously keep log books. This is a mix of guides and people that are fortunate to be able to fish 3+ days a week. Their books all show the same thing - reduced catch over the past handful of years.


----------



## Porky (Nov 1, 2006)

It's all a accumulation of many variables. Even if everyone(rec.,guide,commercial) quit fishing it would take years for it to recover to the levels us geezers have seen in the old days. We are all guilty ! Remember what happened to the Buffalo, Passenger Pigeon, Carolina Parakeet, Turkey. 2 of those are gone forever !


----------



## karstopo (Jun 29, 2009)

The STAR tournament weights on trout havenâ€™t really changed since 2000. Thatâ€™s the time frame of the OP. Thereâ€™s been no drop off or discernible up or down pattern. This is the first year 11 pounds has been cracked. Last year, there were two divisions over 10 pounds on the winning fish. You would think if the fish were suffering, there would be a downward trend. Some past years, few 8 plus pound fish made it to the scales and there were several runner up spots left unclaimed. 2018 looks about average. 

Rudy Grigar from the book "Plugger, Wade Fishing the Gulf Coast", he was said to have caught a total of 3 trout over ten pounds In many years of heavy fishing during the heyday of Texas coastal fishing. Bud Rowland has caught that many 10 pound fish, one at 15#6oz. in a span of about a year, and all after the year 2000, plus many more than three total in his life all in this century. 

People are still finding big fish. People are catching lots of quality fish. The numbers donâ€™t lie. The fish are out there.


----------



## Totally Tuna (Apr 13, 2006)

pocjetty said:


> .


We seriously need a "Like Button".


----------



## Zeitgeist (Nov 10, 2011)

karstopo said:


> People are still finding big fish. People are catching lots of quality fish. The numbers donâ€™t lie. The fish are out there.


They are better fisherman who don't rely on spots, but focus on conditions and are better at identifying where the fish are. :fish:


----------



## bigfishtx (Jul 17, 2007)

pocjetty said:


> I don't have all the answers. I may not have any of the answers. But do you think it's possible that with 10X the number of boats buzzing around the bays, the big schools tend to get scattered? Might the fish feed more at night, compared to decades ago? The survey nets stay in one place and trap everything that swims past for 24 hours or more. They don't tell us much of anything about the timing.
> 
> Don't get me wrong. I think that the surveys don't necessarily mean what they get interpreted to mean. You can't deny the numbers - either the fish are in the nets or they aren't. But the assumption that more fish in the nets means more fish in the bays is tenuous at best. Collecting data is easy. Understanding what it tells you is an art.
> 
> ...


Good points. I am just glad â€œIts Catchyâ€ isnâ€™t running gill nets decimating our bays.


----------



## Totally Tuna (Apr 13, 2006)

More or less fish? I don't know. But I do know back in the 70's catching was easier. 

My memories only go back to about '74 or so with fishing the bays. But from my first year to the fall of '83 were definitely the good ole days to me. Limits were 10 reds and 20 trout and 14" for reds and 12" for trout. We caught our limit of trout most days and often several of us would get all of our reds too. If you've ever eaten a 14-16" red you know why I refer to them as the good ole days. From Dec. 83' to summer of 86' I didn't catch a single red. The freeze in '89 hit the reds really hard again, but the restocking hatcheries were already in full operation and that rebound seemed much quicker. 

In my opinion it's only gotten better from 84' till now. Back in the time period before the 83' freeze our favorite area to fish became very popular, and when there were boats there as thick as they are today everywhere we wouldn't start catching fish until a few hours after all those boats would pull out. Fish were still there, but they just couldn't stand all that traffic through their living room. Usually on a crowded weekend with 30-40 boats on a crowded 2 mile stretch of shoreline we would start killing them about 1:00 in the afternoon between July 4 and Labor day. After Labor day there were very few boats and the fish would be hungry when we arrived. I think the same thing is happening today. 

The surf is the same situation. You can hardly fit anymore people in the surf when the weather is right and from what I've seen very few are catching. If someone was within 200-300 yards of you back then, they were crowding you. Now you are lucky to get 100 feet to yourself in the surf when it's right. 

More or less fish? I don't know, but I do know the bays are too crowded to have great fishing and there is nothing that can be done about that. C&R, 5 fish limits, or out-lawing finfish for bait is not going to change the situation. If you enjoy fishing our bays, get used to the crowds and catching fewer fish, or go on Tuesday or Wednesday and see if a less crowded bay system pays off for you better.


----------



## ltppowell (Dec 21, 2015)

The beauty of growing old is that you have more experience to draw from. Not much changes as rapidly and frequently as salt water fishing. 

It's August in Texas. Get used to it, get over it or leave. It'll be awesome before you know it.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

bigfishtx said:


> Good points. I am just glad â€œIts Catchyâ€ isnâ€™t running gill nets decimating our bays.


I have often wondered if things really have changed? My father used to run thousands of feet of gill net in the 1960's and 1970's. I pulled fish out of gill nets until my fingers bled. He also ran a wholesale and retail seafood market in Kemah for years. We unloaded, iced, gut and gilled untold thousands of pounds of fish every year. At one time he had hundreds of shrimp boats that would sell to him because he "paid cash daily". Winters were tough but he purchased, shucked and sold thousands of sacks of oysters from November through April.

Nowadays it's viewed in a different light. Just possessing a gill net is likely to get you jail time. Back then it was an honest days work, supplying the local restaurants like Jimmy Walker's, The Flying Dutchman and The Clear Creek Inn with fresh seafood that "swam in the bay last night."

I am still curious what would I catch with 1600' of drag seine pulled from the small boat cut on the North Jetty in Bolivar to the beach on the pocket? What would I catch with several thousand feet of gill net on the Seabrook Flats during a blue norther? Would it compare?

I don't think so. I think the trend has been downward. But for a multitude of factors not because of people fishing with a rod and reel catching a 5 fish limit.

My .02 cents from a very different point of view.


----------



## pocjetty (Sep 12, 2014)

Its Catchy said:


> I have often wondered if things really have changed? My father used to run thousands of feet of gill net in the 1960's and 1970's. I pulled fish out of gill nets until my fingers bled. He also ran a wholesale and retail seafood market in Kemah for years. We unloaded, iced, gut and gilled untold thousands of pounds of fish every year. At one time he had hundreds of shrimp boats that would sell to him because he "paid cash daily". Winters were tough but he purchased, shucked and sold thousands of sacks of oysters from November through April.
> 
> Nowadays it's viewed in a different light. Just possessing a gill net is likely to get you jail time. Back then it was an honest days work, supplying the local restaurants like Jimmy Walker's, The Flying Dutchman and The Clear Creek Inn with fresh seafood that "swam in the bay last night."
> 
> ...


For some reason a lot of people don't seem to remember the purse seining of redfish in the Gulf back in the 80's, to satisfy the stupid blackened redfish craze. Find them bunched up in the gulf, circle the whole school with a net, and catch them all. The government agencies let it go on WAY too long, and the population crashed. They finally put a stop to it, and they rebounded. But when you take away a big chunk of an ecosystem, there are all kinds of peripheral consequences.

That plus two massive freezes had more to do with harming the gamefish populations in the bays than anything else I can think of. Throw in a long period of drought deprived the estuaries of fresh water that is needed for effective spawning and rearing of many species of crustaceans and bait fish. Less food means fewer predators can be supported.

Here's the thing that most people simply can't get their heads around: there is nothing that says the period we know as the "good old days" was really normal. We may have been privileged to have experienced an exceptionally bountiful time. I don't think that's likely, but if you aren't going to consider all possibilities, you've already got your mind made up. If you keep your eyes open, the unexpected turns out to be true often enough that you have to be willing to look.

Redfish being purse seined:


----------



## gater (May 25, 2004)

*Facts*



Its Catchy said:


> Copy and paste this prediction. This year, next year, five or ten years down the line there will be a blue norther. Unlike any other in decades. The temp will drop well below freezing for days on end.
> 
> Fish will die and float. Millions of them. There will be pictures posted on this website of trout after trout. World class fish many of them in the 8-10 pound range. Fish that are supposedly rare will be seen everywhere. Limits will be reduced to 2 or less in a "prudent" reaction.
> 
> ...


We werenâ€™t told in 1983 if we didnâ€™t outlaw nets redfish would become extinct. In 1983 Redfish were on the rebound and the numbers were way up because HB1000 was passed and gill nets were outlawed in 1981.....


----------



## keywest244 (May 18, 2017)

You have to look at the entire ecosystem as some have mentioned. Yes, there is increased fishing pressure, equipment is improved but then again some of these folks still can't catch fish on a consistent basis.
Need to stop the illegal discharge of raw sewage into the bays for starters. Yes it happens and a lot more than people realize. That kills off the beginning of the food chain and it just goes down hill from there. But the problem is too many politicians in small towns won't put a stop to the dumping.

you can check out this site to see how the water is before going wading:
https://cgis.glo.texas.gov/Beachwatch/#loc=100

I've always said a good flood is nothing more than mother nature flushing the toilet. Problem now days, the toilet is filling up faster than ever before.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

gater said:


> We werenâ€™t told in 1983 if we didnâ€™t outlaw nets redfish would become extinct. In 1983 Redfish were on the rebound and the numbers were way up because HB1000 was passed and gill nets were outlawed in 1981.....


Gill nets were not banned in Texas until 1989. Redfish and trout were made gamefish in 1981
https://texas.public.law/statutes/tex._parks_and_wild._code_section_66.006


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

Zeitgeist said:


> They are better fisherman who don't rely on spots, but focus on conditions and are better at identifying where the fish are. :fish:


I still fish in spots just depends on the conditions to see what spot I go to :cheers:


----------



## jeffm66 (Sep 14, 2010)

It seems like we have more gafftop than ever, why is that ? Not very many keeping them, not very natural predators, freshwater resistant ? I have seen more alligator gar this year than ever also.


----------



## pickn'fish (Jun 1, 2004)

Generalizations, imo, are not accurate assessments of the 3 Tx., coastal region's trout fisheries, much less a comprehensive representation of ongoing environmental impacts and issues. Assuming the OP was speaking of East Galveston Bay, consider the recent history starting with 2011, a drought of historical record, followed by several more years of aridity. Then, beginning in 2015, we suffered 3; 500-1000 year flood events, culminating in 2017's, 25,000 year flood! This created stack ups, much like decade's past at the North jetty. For example. I remember one year (late 80's or early 90's flood) when you could walk from boat to boat at the N. Jetty and everybody was catching fish!.. Those Trinity Bay and Upper Galveston Bay resident fish were flushed down and Hammered on in East and Lower Galveston Bays for at least, 2-3 years in a row. It's not rocket science, as Capts. Plaagg and Eastman covered on the Outdoor Show... Those guys are on the water every week esp., guides like Plaagg and Hillman, and they see what's going on. 
If you consider the number of boat/anglers weekly on the water, most of whom, are using natural baits, a big difference in frequently, turbid water, one can see how it all adds up...
Despite water quality improvements from the 70s, overall, habitat has declined as numbers of fishing licenses, development and the burgeoning population of Houston has exploded. Add to that, our superior rods, reels, technology, boats, etc., and detrimental pollution/environmental impacts and diminished returns are not altogether, unexpected, imo, even as limits are restricted. And, things will continue to change with extreme weather events, so constant vigilance is the price as they say. Leave some for seed!..
This year's trout surveys in Sabine Lake were down, significantly due to local runoff but Galveston luckily, was not affected. If we can just make it through September now without some pluvial event, I'll be happy!..
I continue to support a trout limit reduction, as guides, Mickey, James and others, endorse on the Upper Coast.
In addition, I advocate gamefish status for both Flounder and Croaker... 
->2cts...

https://www.chron.com/sports/outdoors/article/Early-sampling-data-positive-for-Texas-13012293.php


----------



## pickn'fish (Jun 1, 2004)

I would like to see TPWD reveal more statistics on otoliths/age and body weight percentages as they relate to the overall, biomass in each bay system. Experienced anglers are not just interested in numbers. Imo, just like Bass fishing, there is a learning curve and quality has high regard among fishermen.


----------



## irbjd (Aug 11, 2005)

pickn'fish said:


> I would like to see TPWD reveal more statistics on otoliths/age and body weight percentages as they relate to the overall, biomass in each bay system. Experienced anglers are not just interested in numbers. Imo, just like Bass fishing, there is a learning curve and quality has high regard among fishermen.


Amongst a certain sect of the fishing population that is true. But a lot of folks just want to meat haul and post stringer pics on the InterGoogles.


----------



## c hook (Jul 6, 2016)

*yes and no*

People are still finding big fish. People are catching lots of quality fish. The numbers donâ€™t lie. The fish are out there.

People are still catching fish but not the numbers and size as before. I'm living proof, I've been fishing Galveston for quite some time, about 25 years plus. I've seen the good and the bad. There are still plenty of fish out there, but it's a little tougher then a couple years back. That being said we still catch a good day here and there. These were caught this year on tails, little jons.


----------



## Trouthunter (Dec 18, 1998)

Actually Catchy gill nets were banned in Texas in 1981. In 1989 another law was enacted that banned all commercial nets within 9 miles of the shoreline.


TH


----------



## TrueblueTexican (Aug 29, 2005)

*Targeted populations*



karstopo said:


> The STAR tournament weights on trout havenâ€™t really changed since 2000. Thatâ€™s the time frame of the OP. Thereâ€™s been no drop off or discernible up or down pattern. This is the first year 11 pounds has been cracked. Last year, there were two divisions over 10 pounds on the winning fish. You would think if the fish were suffering, there would be a downward trend. Some past years, few 8 plus pound fish made it to the scales and there were several runner up spots left unclaimed. 2018 looks about average.
> 
> Rudy Grigar from the book "Plugger, Wade Fishing the Gulf Coast", he was said to have caught a total of 3 trout over ten pounds In many years of heavy fishing during the heyday of Texas coastal fishing. Bud Rowland has caught that many 10 pound fish, one at 15#6oz. in a span of about a year, and all after the year 2000, plus many more than three total in his life all in this century.
> 
> People are still finding big fish. People are catching lots of quality fish. The numbers donâ€™t lie. The fish are out there.


This is EXACTLY what you would find in a declining population - there will be bigger fish due to a lack of competition for food - If you have a million pounds of 14" specks, they are competing for the available food - the target is in a slot, which will grow larger fish -

SO the Star tournament is no indicator of a healthy fishery

I fish in LA now - billions of average trout and very few real quality fish, liberal limits and size restrictions , more redfish than you can shake a stick at, ONLY because of a tremendous estuary from Sabine to Venice, and a huge new class of fish every spring and summer - the effort to catch a box full is just as intense there, as it still is in Texas - the ONLY difference is the extensive marsh and nursery areas - Better fishing in Texas bays will be when this is recognized as the single most important factor to fish stocks --


----------



## pickn'fish (Jun 1, 2004)

irbjd said:


> Amongst a certain sect of the fishing population that is true. But a lot of folks just want to meat haul and post stringer pics on the InterGoogles.





irbjd said:


> Amongst a certain sect of the fishing population that is true. But a lot of folks just want to meat haul and post stringer pics on the InterGoogles.


 The vast majority, no doubt. It was the same with Black Bass, historically. As I see it, that evolved and changed over time with 'experience' - the learning curve I alluded to. There might be more than just topwaters we can learn from bass fishermen...
And, yes, there are some good fish to be had. I caught a 24", then, a 26", followed by a 25", on May 15th pluggin the surf. But, you ask Capts., James Plaag, Mickey Eastman, Steve Hillman, Cliff Webb, Charlie Paradoski and Jimmy West and I think you will get a general consensus... the quantities of those big fish have declined dramatically, over the last 30 or 40 years. "All of the above" reasons why...


----------



## gater (May 25, 2004)

*Nets*



Trouthunter said:


> Actually Catchy gill nets were banned in Texas in 1981. In 1989 another law was enacted that banned all commercial nets within 9 miles of the shoreline.
> 
> TH


Thanks TH, you are correct. That 1989 law also banned possession of a gill net.


----------



## karstopo (Jun 29, 2009)

There were trout in 344 out of 380 net sets," Fisher said. "That's just about unheard of."

Over a 10-week period beginning in mid-April, TPWD coastal fisheries crews set a total of 45 gill net sets in each Texas bay system. The location crews set the 600-foot nets is determined by a computer that selects random spots on the bay's shoreline. The nets, stretched perpendicular to the shoreline at the GPS location picked by the computer, are set at dusk and retrieved the next morning.

The random selection of net locations gives statistical validity to the long-term, standardized survey conducted since 1978.

Those numbers are even more impressive when considering the conditions in most Texas bays this spring. Most bays on the upper and middle coast were awash in freshwater from record rains and resulting flooding, conditions that can push marine fish, such as speckled trout, out of large areas of bay systems as salinity levels plummet.

The gill net surveys indicate all Texas bays hold very good speckled trout populations, and those populations have been on a long-term increase.

The populations are trending up," Hopper said. "You can see the upticks."

https://www.chron.com/sports/outdoo...led-trout-population-not-slowing-10605462.php

Read the article. Maybe it might change some minds.


----------



## irbjd (Aug 11, 2005)

karstopo said:


> There were trout in 344 out of 380 net sets," Fisher said. "That's just about unheard of."
> 
> Over a 10-week period beginning in mid-April, TPWD coastal fisheries crews set a total of 45 gill net sets in each Texas bay system. The location crews set the 600-foot nets is determined by a computer that selects random spots on the bay's shoreline. The nets, stretched perpendicular to the shoreline at the GPS location picked by the computer, are set at dusk and retrieved the next morning.
> 
> ...


That article is nearly two years old. There are also factors to be considered in the "trending up" statement that don't appear to be discussed.


----------



## Zeitgeist (Nov 10, 2011)

irbjd said:


> That article is nearly two years old. There are also factors to be considered in the "trending up" statement that don't appear to be discussed.


Shush! The Houston Chronicle is the go to periodical if you want your pulse on what is happening with the fishery on the Texas Coast!


----------



## karstopo (Jun 29, 2009)

â€œIn Galveston Bay, this springâ€™s gillnet sets recorded the highest number of speckled trout taken since 1983, when the sampling program was standardized. That tally indicates the bayâ€™s trout fishery is doing quite well, Sutton said.â€

â€œOverall, gill net sampling data indicates the bayâ€™s speckled trout population has been relatively stable for most of the past decade, Sutton said.â€

â€œTo make the sampling statistically valid â€" to get a true representation of the fishery â€" a bayâ€™s shoreline is divided into grids, and the location of net sets is determined through random selection by computer.â€

â€œThis year, the bayâ€™s redfish and black drum populations look very much like those of recent years. And thatâ€™s very good, as those populations have been strong for the past decade.â€

â€œTexas has used this standardized process for more than 30 years, the longest running such coastal fisheries sampling program in the nation. The data collected gives fisheries managers crucial, empirical insights into long-term trends of fisheries populations.â€

â€œWe saw some just incredible numbers of redfish in East Matagorda Bay,â€ Hartman said. The number of redfish encountered in nets set in East Matagorda Bay during April set a 35-year record, she said, more than double any previous Aprilâ€™s numbers.â€œ

The number of redfish there was just off the charts,â€ she said.
The bayâ€™s speckled trout population looks strong, too.
â€œTrout numbers might end up being a little lower, but not by much,â€ Hartman said. â€œThereâ€™s no shortage of trout in the bay.â€

https://www.chron.com/sports/outdoors/article/Early-sampling-data-positive-for-Texas-13012293.php

Hereâ€™s this yearâ€™s article. You may not like the Houston Chronicle, but Shannon Thomkins, the author is mostly just quoting the researchers from TP&W.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Karstopo,

How dare you try to interject data and fact into the discussion. Long term trends upward, sampling size, computers... Those are just fancy words used by TPWD to justify their jobs.

I remember with my own two eyes that there were so many fish 30 years ago they would jump in the boat!


----------



## pickn'fish (Jun 1, 2004)

pickn'fish said:


> The vast majority, no doubt. It was the same with Black Bass, historically. As I see it, that evolved and changed over time with 'experience' - the learning curve I alluded to. There might be more than just topwaters we can learn from bass fishermen...
> And, yes, there are some good fish to be had. I caught a 24", then, a 26", followed by a 25", on May 15th pluggin the surf. But, you ask Capts., James Plaag, Mickey Eastman, Steve Hillman, Cliff Webb, Charlie Paradoski and Jimmy West and I think you will get a general consensus... the quantities of those big fish have declined dramatically, over the last 30 or 40 years. "All of the above" reasons why...


I'm not referring to 4 -6 lb trout, like those l caught in May. I'm talking about fish over 7 lbs.
I couldn't edit my initial post, either. You cannot lump individual bays together, much less all three coastal regions. Matagorda didn't get 52"+ of rainfall a year ago. Galveston Bay got Whacked, flushed out...


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

Itâ€™s very simple, ship channels drain the fresh water too quickly and that causes the natural passes to close, all rivers have been dammed up in one way or another. The supply of fresh water is nothing like it once was and that means less of everything to support the fishery. In the Corpus Christi area and south basically is fed by a desert climate. Without a constant flow of water, it will never be what it was before we dammed up all the rivers for fresh water. It could be fixed over night if we opened all the dams and replaced the fresh water with desalination. Until then, we will not change much. Boating pressure has changed the schooling patterns forever. The only place you see large schools of reds like the old days is out in the gulf. This is why I love making trips to Louisiana, it brings me back to my youth.


----------



## irbjd (Aug 11, 2005)

*Galveston Gill Net Data*

Here's the latest Galveston Bay gill net data. Perhaps you can point out the increase Tompkins wrote about. Sorry for injecting data into the conversation.


----------



## TrueblueTexican (Aug 29, 2005)

*Yup*



railbird said:


> Itâ€™s very simple, ship channels drain the fresh water too quickly and that causes the natural passes to close, all rivers have been dammed up in one way or another. The supply of fresh water is nothing like it once was and that means less of everything to support the fishery. In the Corpus Christi area and south basically is fed by a desert climate. Without a constant flow of water, it will never be what it was before we dammed up all the rivers for fresh water. It could be fixed over night if we opened all the dams and replaced the fresh water with desalination. Until then, we will not change much. Boating pressure has changed the schooling patterns forever. The only place you see large schools of reds like the old days is out in the gulf. This is why I love making trips to Louisiana, it brings me back to my youth.


Why I quit Texas for the most part - I like catching - not fishing - and there is definitely NO WAY any of the major coastal bays can be compared - Lower Laguna has always been a desert climate, and the vast majority of its make up fish come from the upper coastal marshes and Perry Bass. The principal reason LLM has kicked out the largest specks every year is somewhat lower fishing pressure and lower numbers of new recruits, allowing whats there to grow bigger. You will never be able to manage the fishery on a one size fits all basis -- 
Austin/San Antonio/Corpus Metro is basically sucking up available freshwater supply - river average flows are basically gray water returns - and there are no established minimum flows from upstream reservoirs.

This affects water quality in the marshes, where young of the year crustaceans and finfish need brackish water to get started.

IF TPWD really wanted to get serious , they would monitor salinity levels and flow, and do yearly recruitment sampling in the upper estuaries, in the same spot each year. That would be a waste of resources, TPWD knows full well what the real story is --


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

My interpretation of the data is this. Spring gill net samples indicate much better numbers than the historical norm. Fall numbers are a little down.

If you took every data point on that graph and averaged them you would get numbers slightly above the 35 year average.

Indicating to me the stocks are healthy and harvest sustainable.


----------



## Trouthunter (Dec 18, 1998)

You have to forgive us old salts who remember schools of redfish that covered acres of water and of endless stringers of big trout that we used to see. I remember walking and flounder gigging and not being able to lift the stringer into the boat by myself because there were so many.

The fishery today is nothing like it was in the early 60's to early 70's and rightfully so as much has happened to the ecosystem since then and instead of seeing three or four boats a day now you see hundreds. 

Some day you young guys will be our age and you'll be talking about the good old days too because at the rate of how things are going, what the fishery is today will just be a memory for you just as 40 or 50 years ago is for us.

TH


----------



## irbjd (Aug 11, 2005)

Its Catchy said:


> My interpretation of the data is this. Spring gill net samples indicate much better numbers than the historical norm. Fall numbers are a little down.
> 
> If you took every data point on that graph and averaged them you would get numbers slightly above the 35 year average.
> 
> Indicating to me the stocks are healthy and harvest sustainable.


But what's not on the graph is how aggressive TPWD's restocking program has gotten over the past couple of years. I think the numbers would be trending down otherwise.


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

irbjd said:


> Here's the latest Galveston Bay gill net data. Perhaps you can point out the increase Tompkins wrote about. Sorry for injecting data into the conversation.


Trend line is on the upward slope. This graph illustrates that the population is not only sustainable but on an upward trend.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

irbjd said:


> But what's not on the graph is how aggressive TPWD's restocking program has gotten over the past couple of years. I think the numbers would be trending down otherwise.


We could speculate all day long as to why stocks have increased but they have. And stocking will continue and get better in the future.

The bottom line is data indicates the trout populations are healthy and at sustainable levels and Redfish populations are through the roof and limits probably need to be raised to cull the heard.


----------



## irbjd (Aug 11, 2005)

Its Catchy said:


> We could speculate all day long as to why stocks have increased but they have. And stocking will continue and get better in the future.
> 
> The bottom line is data indicates the trout populations are healthy and at sustainable levels and Redfish populations are through the roof and limits probably need to be raised to cull the heard.


TPWD put 16,885,846 spotted seatrout fingerlings in Galveston Bay from 2010-2017. Don't think there is any need to speculate on why the surveys are the way they are.


----------



## Gilbert (May 25, 2004)

Its Catchy said:


> We could speculate all day long as to why stocks have increased but they have. And stocking will continue and get better in the future.
> 
> The bottom line is data indicates the trout populations are healthy and at sustainable levels and *Redfish populations are through the roof and limits probably need to be raised to cull the heard.*


That needs to happen for real. they are eating up all the small trout faster than the croaker can eat trout eggs. :cheers:


----------



## irbjd (Aug 11, 2005)

Gilbert said:


> That needs to happen for real.


TPWD has taken the issue of raising redfish limits to public hearings on multiple occasions and it is always rejected.


----------



## pocjetty (Sep 12, 2014)

TrueblueTexican said:


> This is EXACTLY what you would find in a declining population - there will be bigger fish due to a lack of competition for food - If you have a million pounds of 14" specks, they are competing for the available food - the target is in a slot, which will grow larger fish -


Actually, TBT, it's not that simple. It's never that simple. Some years back there was a lot of concern over the decline of the swordfish population. One of the signs that they looked to that showed the decline was that the average size of fish being taken was MUCH smaller. Granders that were common enough at one time had become and extreme rarity. I don't remember the exact numbers, but the average swordfish being harvested was less than half what it had been a decade before. There's no one-size-fits-all answer .

In the graph posted below, the spring net samples have an obvious upward trend. You don't need to run a regression to see that there is a definite upward trend there. The biggest question would be why/how the same trend doesn't apply to the fall surveys. Why would there be a steadily increasing number of fish in the spring, but not in the fall? You just can't conclude very much from looking at gill net surveys in a vacuum. For instance, do the fall graphs have a correlation to temperature or rainfall patterns for the same years?

For the record, the fall graph suggests a cyclical trend, on about a 10 year cycle. That's the problem with looking at graphs like this without context. Could be coincidence, but it would be an interesting study. But what neither line shows is a prolonged downward trend in the trout population in Galveston Bay.


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

Gilbert said:


> That needs to happen for real. they are eating up all the small trout faster than the croaker can eat trout eggs. :cheers:


x2chins


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

irbjd said:


> TPWD put 16,885,846 spotted seatrout fingerlings in Galveston Bay from 2010-2017. Don't think there is any need to speculate on why the surveys are the way they are.


I will just say this and end it. 35 years of data indicates trout populations are healthy and above the long term average. Long term cycles, tighter limits, restocking, droughts, floods hurricanes all have had an effect.

When data indicates otherwise we can revisit this. Until then I see no reason to re-hash this everytime some whiner wants to blame someone else for his lack of success catching fish.

Like most things in life the harder you work at it the better you get. And when you go fishing there is no trophy for...

Participation!


----------



## karstopo (Jun 29, 2009)

Its Catchy said:


> I will just say this and end it. 35 years of data indicates trout populations are healthy and above the long term average. Long term cycles, tighter limits, restocking, droughts, floods hurricanes all have had an effect.
> 
> When data indicates otherwise we can revisit this. Until then I see no reason to re-hash this everytime some whiner wants to blame someone else for his lack of success catching fish.
> 
> ...


Amen. Could not agree more.


----------



## irbjd (Aug 11, 2005)

Its Catchy said:


> Until then I see no reason to re-hash this everytime some whiner wants to blame someone else for his lack of success catching fish.
> 
> Like most things in life the harder you work at it the better you get. And when you go fishing there is no trophy for...
> 
> Participation!


Can you point to one post where I've whined about not catching fish?

I was only pointing out the information conveyed in Tompkins' article was not correct. Nobody seems to think I'm wrong about that.


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

irbjd said:


> I was only pointing out the information conveyed in Tompkins' article was not correct. Nobody seems to think I'm wrong about that.


What part of his article was inaccurate?


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

irbjd said:


> Can you point to one post where I've whined about not catching fish?
> 
> I was only pointing out the information conveyed in Tompkins' article was not correct. Nobody seems to think I'm wrong about that.


Sorry I was not referring to you as one of the whiners and I donâ€™t want to lower the level of respect in this discussion.

As for Tompkinsâ€™ article I could not disagree more. The article dated June 22 this year seemed right in the mark. He quoted a TPWD biologist who stated the fact that the spring gill net surveys indicated healthy, stable trout populations.

What is incorrect about that? He quoted the biologist who simply stTed what the data indicated.


----------



## irbjd (Aug 11, 2005)

Its Catchy said:


> Sorry I was not referring to you as one of the whiners and I donâ€™t want to lower the level of respect in this discussion.
> 
> As for Tompkinsâ€™ article I could not disagree more. The article dated June 22 this year seemed right in the mark. He quoted a TPWD biologist who stated the fact that the spring gill net surveys indicated healthy, stable trout populations.
> 
> What is incorrect about that? He quoted the biologist who simply stTed what the data indicated.


This is the part I was referring to: "In Galveston Bay, this springâ€™s gillnet sets recorded the highest number of speckled trout taken since 1983, when the sampling program was standardized."


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

irbjd said:


> This is the part I was referring to: "In Galveston Bay, this springâ€™s gillnet sets recorded the highest number of speckled trout taken since 1983, when the sampling program was standardized."


Why is that wrong? You do realize the data you posted only goes to 2017 and the 2018 numbers are not updated yet?


----------



## Totally Tuna (Apr 13, 2006)

We were catching fish as fast as we could get our baits in the water, then nothing. Did the bite turn off? No, the guide took his foot off the anchor and we drifted back about 30 feet and he stepped back on the rope. Next 4-5 casts bite was back on. Bite totally stopped again, repeat dropping back 30 feet and back to catching. This goes on for an hour. Hull slap, disturbance of fighting hefty trout or something else was causing the hungry trout to move just out of our casting range. 

Now consider the sheer number of boats out there and their propensity to run and gun up and down the shoreline looking for fish. The data seems to indicate healthy numbers of fish. Catching says otherwise. I'm going with the data and I'm going to fish when traffic is lower in the bays.


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

irbjd said:


> This is the part I was referring to: "In Galveston Bay, this springâ€™s gillnet sets recorded the highest number of speckled trout taken since 1983, when the sampling program was standardized."


Chronicle editing is a bigger problem than the trout population.

Two paragraphs later

â€œThe highest catch rate (post 1983) weâ€™ve seen was in 2007,â€ he said. â€œItâ€™s declined a bit since then but remained pretty steady for the past decade.â€


----------



## TrueblueTexican (Aug 29, 2005)

*All anecdotal to the surveys*



pocjetty said:


> Actually, TBT, it's not that simple. It's never that simple. Some years back there was a lot of concern over the decline of the swordfish population. One of the signs that they looked to that showed the decline was that the average size of fish being taken was MUCH smaller. Granders that were common enough at one time had become and extreme rarity. I don't remember the exact numbers, but the average swordfish being harvested was less than half what it had been a decade before. There's no one-size-fits-all answer .
> 
> In the graph posted below, the spring net samples have an obvious upward trend. You don't need to run a regression to see that there is a definite upward trend there. The biggest question would be why/how the same trend doesn't apply to the fall surveys. Why would there be a steadily increasing number of fish in the spring, but not in the fall? You just can't conclude very much from looking at gill net surveys in a vacuum. For instance, do the fall graphs have a correlation to temperature or rainfall patterns for the same years?
> 
> For the record, the fall graph suggests a cyclical trend, on about a 10 year cycle. That's the problem with looking at graphs like this without context. Could be coincidence, but it would be an interesting study. But what neither line shows is a prolonged downward trend in the trout population in Galveston Bay.


Having grown up Matagorda Bay, and fished it from six yrs old to only occasionally now - seen the destruction of the Marsh in Carancahua, sea wall at every developing point, Marsh disappearing rapidly in SA Bay, homes being built and sand piled into those marshes - it does not take a rocket scientist to observe that habitat loss due to development is what the difference is today - In 1962 I could stand on the dock with a true temper rod and an old spincaster a hook with a piece of shrimp and a split shot and catch 20 different species of fish in a day as a kid, specs, big croaker, lookdowns, oyster fish, pinfish, reds, piggy perch, drum, ladyfish, jacks (several kinds), gafftops, hardheads, eel, ribbon fish, pipefish, were common and abundant - you can measure the health of a coastal system by the variety of fish that exist - I had hopes my grandkids would be able to enjoy that, but in the last several years while they have been little -fishing those same spots off a bulkhead our average catch was hardheads, using the same methods I did as a kid -- haven't seen some of the once abundant species in years -- I would argue that most of this "lack" of multi- species is directly tied to over development of coastal marshes - Not to knock TPWD and their studies, which are somewhat flawed and non- repeatable, (but they sure make folks feel good) but you wouldn't need all this red stocking, were coastal marshes not disappearing - it should be a supply side economy of scale the more forage you have, and the more recruitment you get each year makes for more fish to catch - even with the vacuum cleaner effect on the bays. I saw gill and strike netting when I was a kid -- thousands of pounds of trout and reds harvested in a single scoop and it went on DAILY for years -- somewhere there are some old pics of me wading thru those piles -- Easy catching has been in decline for thirty years, I can still go out on any given day in Matagorda and catch a limit of trout, and in years past we could fill a boat bottom catching trout - well those days are gone -- and its not because of over harvest - its because we have ignored what we have done to the coastal marshes - I looked a little east and liked what I saw (big old nasty swamps and marshes full of fish) - they are that way because there are few that choose to build seawalls, and marsh habitat destruction -- my grand kids get to catch all those fish that a healthy marsh produces again, I can net jumbo shrimp on the bayou with a castnet, paradise again - paradise lost in Texas barring some good coastal marsh restoration -- Recruitment rebounds when there are rainy weather patterns in spring and summer, they cycle when it gets dry again - thats the one thing that TPWD tracking does - it shows the cyclic nature which is mainly due to weather -- wet seasons are good for crab, and juvenile fish - RESTORING marshes, and a moratorium on building in any of them will at least maintain whats left - not gonna happen though - All of this purely anecdotal as any good TPWD trained biologist would say - most of em I meet are wet behind the ears - so discount my 56 years of experience --


----------



## [email protected] (May 24, 2004)

Trueblue: Much of what you have said in your post above was included in the editor's column I wrote for the August issue of TSFMag...

*Our Greatest Responsibility*

Most of my friends are coastal anglers. When we get together we discuss where weâ€™ve been fishing, recent catching success, and fishing trips we will be making soon. We actively support CCA Texas and other conservation groups. We donâ€™t think of ourselves as especially senior but our outdoor careers began in the 1960s and 70s. Weâ€™ve been around long enough to have seen many changes in our fisheries. 

During an Independence Day gathering we engaged in discussion of the state of Texasâ€™ inshore fisheries. Of course Galvestonâ€™s seatrout fishery became a topic. Where are the fish, fishing pressure, angler attitudes, pending regulation changesâ€¦and so forth.

A point many seem to overlook is that Mother Nature is in charge and nobody tells her what to do or when to do it. All man can do is react, for the most part. However, we should also strive to be pro-active in fisheries management. 

This brings me to population growth in Texas. Thanks largely to a mostly-thriving energy economy since the 1970s, our population has grown like the proverbial bad weed.

The 1970 census declared the population of Texas to be 11.2 million. By 2010 it had grown to 25.3 million. Projections indicate that we will top 30 million in 2020 and could reach 40 million by 2030.


While the population continues to grow, the geographic area of Texas will remain the same. As development along the coast continues to boom, it would be fair to say the coast will actually shrink â€" at least in its capacity to support healthy estuarine habitat.

So, what about fishing participation? Today, with population pushing toward 30 million; TPWD says they sold 1.2 million saltwater fishing licenses in 2017 but have no data as to how many actually went fishing. US Fish and Wildlife Service reports 800,000 anglers plied Texas saltwater during 2011. Data through 2016 is expected soon. 

Do we have to wait for the report or is the handwriting on the wall clear enough?

As the population of Texas rises, I believe the number of saltwater anglers will rise with it. Whether we have 800,000 or 1.2 million anglers today is hardly as important as the fact that we will soon have more. Where will they fish, and will the habitat support additional harvest?

About all we say with certainty is that Mother Nature will remain fickle, our population is growing, coastal fishing will remain popular as long as there are fish to catch, and TPWD will be charged with regulating it. 

As anglers, we can sit back and continue to chew the good-old-day fat and wait for Mother Nature to smile again, or we can revise our expectations and pro-actively encourage more conservative regulations from TPWD. 

Me and my group will be enjoying occasional fish suppers while practicing way more catch and release. We will urge TPWD to listen to angler concerns about the Galveston fishery and continue to support CCAâ€™s habitat restoration and creation projects.

Our greatest responsibility in this to conserve what we still have for future generations to enjoy. 

Take a kid fishing!


----------



## pocjetty (Sep 12, 2014)

TrueblueTexican said:


> Having grown up Matagorda Bay, and fished it from six yrs old to only occasionally now - seen the destruction of the Marsh in Carancahua, sea wall at every developing point, Marsh disappearing rapidly in SA Bay, homes being built and sand piled into those marshes - it does not take a rocket scientist to observe that habitat loss due to development is what the difference is today - In 1962 I could stand on the dock with a true temper rod and an old spincaster a hook with a piece of shrimp and a split shot and catch 20 different species of fish in a day as a kid, specs, big croaker, lookdowns, oyster fish, pinfish, reds, piggy perch, drum, ladyfish, jacks (several kinds), gafftops, hardheads, eel, ribbon fish, pipefish, were common and abundant - you can measure the health of a coastal system by the variety of fish that exist - I had hopes my grandkids would be able to enjoy that, but in the last several years while they have been little -fishing those same spots off a bulkhead our average catch was hardheads, using the same methods I did as a kid -- haven't seen some of the once abundant species in years -- I would argue that most of this "lack" of multi- species is directly tied to over development of coastal marshes - Not to knock TPWD and their studies, which are somewhat flawed and non- repeatable, (but they sure make folks feel good) but you wouldn't need all this red stocking, were coastal marshes not disappearing - it should be a supply side economy of scale the more forage you have, and the more recruitment you get each year makes for more fish to catch - even with the vacuum cleaner effect on the bays. I saw gill and strike netting when I was a kid -- thousands of pounds of trout and reds harvested in a single scoop and it went on DAILY for years -- somewhere there are some old pics of me wading thru those piles -- Easy catching has been in decline for thirty years, I can still go out on any given day in Matagorda and catch a limit of trout, and in years past we could fill a boat bottom catching trout - well those days are gone -- and its not because of over harvest - its because we have ignored what we have done to the coastal marshes - I looked a little east and liked what I saw (big old nasty swamps and marshes full of fish) - they are that way because there are few that choose to build seawalls, and marsh habitat destruction -- my grand kids get to catch all those fish that a healthy marsh produces again, I can net jumbo shrimp on the bayou with a castnet, paradise again - paradise lost in Texas barring some good coastal marsh restoration -- Recruitment rebounds when there are rainy weather patterns in spring and summer, they cycle when it gets dry again - thats the one thing that TPWD tracking does - it shows the cyclic nature which is mainly due to weather -- wet seasons are good for crab, and juvenile fish - RESTORING marshes, and a moratorium on building in any of them will at least maintain whats left - not gonna happen though - All of this purely anecdotal as any good TPWD trained biologist would say - most of em I meet are wet behind the ears - *so discount my 56 years of experience* --


I never discounted anything you said, other than the comment about bigger fish being sign that there is less competition for food. And that's not something you observed, it's something you concluded. The flip side of that conclusion would be that a lack of bigger fish would be a sign that there are more fish, but smaller because of competition for food. So I gave you one specific example where that isn't true. With all the things you and I agree on, I disagree with you on one conclusion and you're going to get that way? That's disappointing.

I agree with everything you said above. But your conclusion about bigger fish being caught being caused by less competition for food is a miss, in my opinion.


----------



## Al Landers (Oct 15, 2017)

We are all about conservation. The limits are a good thing, although they get broken from time to time. I think the clean water act of 1970 did more for our fisheries than we give it credit for, keeping industrial waste out of the water benefits everyone and everything. Except of course the bottom line of industry, but I believe they have adapted and continue to be profitable, also a good thing. We lose lots of shoreline to erosion from the wave action of boats and ships and many of our species rely on marshes and their respective "shoreline" regions for spawning. These margins between land and sea are critical to thriving populations of fish. The Galveston Bay foundation is doing some really great stuff along with centerpoint to re-plant some marsh and restore shorelines with erosion control infrastructure. If you're feeling down about the condition of our fisheries this particular organization is a great way to get involved in the protection and restoration thereof. The data point to improving conditions in our waterways, there is still work to be done, but as a collective it appears that we are moving in the right direction.

Galveston bay foundation website - Landers volunteers with them - I recommend checking it out, they do ALOT of great work.

https://galvbay.org/how-we-protect-the-bay/on-the-ground/marsh-mania/#


----------



## TrueblueTexican (Aug 29, 2005)

*Great work you guys are doing Al*

Now come bust up some concrete for me:biggrin:

What you guys are doing , I wish there was an AG division in TPWD to spend that study money where it counts - restoring and planting marsh and eel grass -


----------



## Trouthappy (Jun 12, 2008)

I suppose refineries on the water are the elephant in the room here, that no one talks about. In other states, you won't see that. I was talking to Billy at Clark's marina in POC, he was getting old and breathing oxygen out on the dock. (Two summers ago, not sure where he is today). Nobody around, just us two. He told me lots of stories about the old days. Says Port Lavaca Bay has never been the same, after they built Formosa Plastics. No shrimp up there, these days. I suppose the big Alcoa Plant hasn't helped, either. Nor the ship channel to deliver bauxite to Alcoa. There's been talk of widening that channel, so that ships can pass each other. Meanwhile historic Pass Cavallo has become anemic from lack of water flow. To counter-balance this screwing up of nature, hatcheries now dump millions of trout and redfish fingerlings into the bays. And it was hatchery supporter bay conservationists who went along with Formosa Plastics building on Lavaca Bay. I was there.


----------



## bigfishtx (Jul 17, 2007)

Trouthappy said:


> I suppose refineries on the water are the elephant in the room here, that no one talks about. In other states, you won't see that. I was talking to Billy at Clark's marina in POC, he was getting old and breathing oxygen out on the dock. (Two summers ago, not sure where he is today). Nobody around, just us two. He told me lots of stories about the old days. Says Port Lavaca Bay has never been the same, after they built Formosa Plastics. No shrimp up there, these days. I suppose the big Alcoa Plant hasn't helped, either. Nor the ship channel to deliver bauxite to Alcoa. There's been talk of widening that channel, so that ships can pass each other. Meanwhile historic Pass Cavallo has become anemic from lack of water flow. To counter-balance this screwing up of nature, hatcheries now dump millions of trout and redfish fingerlings into the bays. And it was hatchery supporter bay conservationists who went along with Formosa Plastics building on Lavaca Bay. I was there.


Trout, isn't upper Matagorda buy closed to trawling since the Mercury problems are there?


----------



## Trouthappy (Jun 12, 2008)

bigfishtx said:


> Trout, isn't upper Matagorda buy closed to trawling since the Mercury problems are there?


I've never seen a shrimpboat from the Lavaca bridge in Hwy 35. Maybe shrimp recruitment in the upper bay is down, but that was
just one old fisherman talking. Born and raised in POC, if I heard right. Maybe TP&W would know, if they ever check the upper bay.
There are still people fishing around the 35 bridge, though the mercury warning signs were there 20 years ago.


----------



## TrueblueTexican (Aug 29, 2005)

*Yep*

From Mission lake, up past greens and almost all the way to 
Victoria was a nursery ground, the barge canal and turning basin are a dead sea - used to be able to net a lot of shrimp up there in a castnet off any drain on low tide -

Mud flats were just full of crabs, blues and fiddlers, heck it sounded like a snappin party - run a jon up there now and throw a net and tell me what you see --

Thats a big estuary basically lost -damming up Coleto creek didn't help much either.


----------



## pocjetty (Sep 12, 2014)

https://2coolfishing.com/ttmbforum/showthread.php?p=23524765#post23524765

I guess I have to walk back something I said. It's still possible to catch a hundred trout. It may not be as common, but it's possible. And I have to wonder - if people were able to legally keep 14 inch "eatin' size" trout, would those catches be more commonplace than I'm giving credit for?


----------



## Anderson Guide Service (Oct 21, 2016)

bigfishtx said:


> Trout, isn't upper Matagorda buy closed to trawling since the Mercury problems are there?


Lavaca Bay is becasue they are trying to keep the Mercury in the ground. At least that is what I have been told. I know for a long time you weren't supposed to eat fish out of Lavaca Bay.


----------



## UpperTxFishing (Aug 8, 2018)

My suggestion is for everyone that has an opinion to make it to the TPWD and any fishery meeting when they occur.That Is no matter If you are for or against lowering the limits on fish.My personal opinion on the matter is that Galveston bay has no shortage of Speckled trout.However I do feel the general size has been reduced and due to the fact the boat pressure is so extensive these fish have spread out into less populated areas.Every popular reef is not gonna hold the same amount of big fish and definately not be as willing to bite in all the prop wash.We are still catching 5-7 lb fish when we target them.There is still lots of them out there I can assure you.However most ppl these days aren't targeting the bigger fish.Look at your tournaments in the summer and winter, those big fish are still being brought in.Hell , it takes 18-19 lbs to win a 3 fish tourney with 1 over 25 inches in the winter.They are still swimming but not as abundant in your community areas so I have no doubt that you will see less of them caught.How many times have you seen the hunter who has the huge buck on his game cam but the animal just never shows its presence in the day time.I have no doubt these bigger older fish adapt just like those deer do.They are gonna be in places that your average boater is not gonna fish.Not to mention that with the rising cost of fishing (gas,bait,boat payments) most people don't throw anything back.They spend 150 to go and those fish are gonna pay the price.Well within the right of the consumer and license holder as well.Then we have the internet forums and Facebook.If u can post a 27" today you are getting 75 likes .Fishing for likes on those cleaning table photos is not going anywhere anytime soon.The old timers did it as well though.Dont let the legends tell you any different.I hear Jim Wallace didn't throw back anything over 25.And he was one of the all time greats.I take ppl fishing so I'm guilty of allowing ppl to keep larger fish as well.Customers and future customers like to see pictures however I cant stress enough to clients that keeping enough to eat and letting the bigger one go for the next guy is way more important than that Facebook fame.I would love to see the limit go to 5 and see what happens after a a few years.I also am a believer that as long as it is legal and the TPWD say we are ok than I'm ok with that as well.When they saw the lower coast struggling they changed it.I feel if they think we have the same problem here they will change it as well.Maybe what we need is what Steve Hillman says.17-22 slot on the trout.But again I'm no biologist..As far as the redfish go, raise it..We have plenty of those in all size..All of our bays are extremely healthy foraging wise.Large hatches of shrimp and shad in every crack and crevice of the bay.We are extremely blessed to have a huge population of juvenile trout as well.We just need em to be able to grow..I think this fall will be exceptional.Good day fellas and remember you cant catch em if your sitting on the couch.


----------



## dk2429 (Mar 27, 2015)

Not the bays, but I can speak for this about different ponds around the area...

When I was 8-10 years old, my friend and I would hop on our bikes and go ride around and bass fish different ponds in the area. This wasn't too long ago (I'm 18 now.)

Now, when I get off work and want to catch a few bass, I go back to these ponds we used to go to that we would absolutely tear them up at. Only difference is, don't even get a bite. Not a single bite.. Used to be every other cast.

The big difference is though, there's actually people fishing these ponds now. We used to roll up in there on the bikes and be the only ones. I can't point finger at anyone, but those YouTube guys "the googan squad" I think are what got this going. I'm not at all saying it's bad, because I support younger folks and guys my age to spend their time on the water fishing, and that's what those YouTubers are doing.. BUT, ever since those guys came out, fishing even for me in just these little ponds has been complete junk.

The only pond I've recently fished that was **** good was a pond in Santa Fe on HWY 6. I fished that pond for 6-7 months at least twice a week it was so good. Took a little 8' Bass Raider with a trolling motor, dropped it in, and easy 15-20 bass in under an hour. But sure enough, after me fishing that pond for 7 months straight, the po-po decides to come rolling up and run me out of there. Told me it was private property....... I didn't argue at all, but there were literally no signs, and there's literally a parking lot in front of the pond.... 7 months later and he finally tells me I can't fish there....... Either way, **** good pond. Had bass, crappie, cats, tilapia, all kinds of stuff. Cop told me if he catches me again I'm headed to the jailhouse... That place was so good, I've been tempted to risk a few days behind bars to go fish that place one more time.. lol

But, I guess the reason it was so good was because no one fished it!!!!


----------



## Bohemian Texan (Jun 25, 2018)

"TPWD reports trout numbers are up". I guess if they reported negative numbers people would be less likely to buy a fishing license, a new boat, fishing gear, etc. The government never lies. Ask Hillary.


----------



## Bohemian Texan (Jun 25, 2018)

Here's a quote from Steve Hillman's article he wrote last year on the Galveston Bay fishery. These statistics are scary. But again....Fish numbers are UP! Go on out there and let em jump in the boat for you!

"Here are a few not-so-fun facts â€“
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 weâ€™ve experienced an increase in saltwater angler participation of more than 710,000. I would expect itâ€™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) Iâ€™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 doesnâ€™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."


----------



## [email protected] (May 24, 2004)

Bohemian Texan: Where did you find that article by Hillman?


----------



## Shalor96 (Jul 26, 2016)

I was thinking about Increased fishing pressure recently. Not only are there a lot more boats, but they are much more effective and Mobile. I have been fishing the Laguna Madre/Baffin Since 1998, which I realize is only 20 years. Back then I had a old redfish line majek with a 90 hp motor... and there were quite a few people with similar boats to me. Going to Yarbrough or the landcut Was a big undertaking that I mainly did on good weather days. Now I have a 23 foot haynie with a big mercury on the back and getting there is relatively easy. Most of the people I see fishing are in similar boats. The amount of pressure that makes it 25 miles quickly has drastically gone up. I thought the five trout limit would make a huge difference down there, but the pressure went so much further up...There are a ton of 13 to 15 inch trout, but keepers are strangely difficult to find after the crowds have worked on them for most of the spring and summer. At this point, Iâ€™m not sure what itâ€™s going to take to get the fishing back close to what it was like in the 90s. I donâ€™t think that pressure is going away without a huge economic downturn or natural disaster, neither of which Iâ€™m going to wish for. But there are still days when you can catch some really good fish, and I really enjoy it. So I will continue to go.


----------



## Zeitgeist (Nov 10, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> Bohemian Texan: Where did you find that article by Hillman?


It is a mystery, but very similar to this article 

https://www.texassaltwaterfishingmagazine.com/fishing/features/steve-hillman/limits-food-thought


----------



## irbjd (Aug 11, 2005)

Shalor96 said:


> At this point, Iâ€™m not sure what itâ€™s going to take to get the fishing back close to what it was like in the 90s.


Making croaker a gamefish would be a good start.


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

irbjd said:


> Making croaker a gamefish would be a good start.


yeah because less fish would be killed when bait fisherman switch to shrimp and catch 25 to 30 undersized trout on treble hooks to their catch their limit of keeper size fish.


----------



## JoeintheBackyard (Sep 21, 2017)

[email protected] said:


> Bohemian Texan: Where did you find that article by Hillman?


Pretty sure that was from a Facebook post Steve made that resulted in a couple hundred comments if I remember correctly.


----------



## c hook (Jul 6, 2016)

*heha*

we can sit behind our firewalls and hurl "it's better" "it's worst", it's your fishing skills yata yata yata. Where did that come from Seinfeld,lol. But reality is reality. TP&W can sit behind there firewall and do the same. But it does not change reality. Reality is, it's not what it used to be. If it makes you feel good to beat your chest and say I still catch fish and biguns too, we will say and your the best too. I wish I could be like you lol. Fish numbers do not lie from the absolute best guys on the bay, and they are down down. So probably best to not show your amateurish by boasting it's the same, nothing has changed and TP&W is 100% correct.


----------



## Trouthappy (Jun 12, 2008)

One thing for sure, there isn't much of a catch and release ethic on the coast, compared to overall number of fishermen. And two guys can legally keep 50 trout a day across the water from Sabine Pass? Appalling. With the number of boats and people increasing, there's no way the upper Texas coast can sustain a bag limit of 10 trout daily. Eventually the trout population will be overwhelmed. It might take 10 more years, but it will happen. We already need more hatcheries to churn out trout fingerlings.


----------



## irbjd (Aug 11, 2005)

Trouthappy said:


> One thing for sure, there isn't much of a catch and release ethic on the coast, compared to overall number of fishermen.


I think this is a combination of several things including a lot of people fishing that did not have exposure to the outdoors, the internet (2cool, FaceGoogles, Instagram, etc.), with a sprinkling of people that are just meat haulers regardless of what they are doing. It's all a big Venn diagram. A lot of people don't understand the difference between what they can keep and what they should keep. I guess bottom line is it's an education issue.


----------



## pocjetty (Sep 12, 2014)

c hook said:


> we can sit behind our firewalls and hurl "it's better" "it's worst", it's your fishing skills yata yata yata. Where did that come from Seinfeld,lol. But reality is reality. TP&W can sit behind there firewall and do the same. But it does not change reality. Reality is, it's not what it used to be. *If it makes you feel good to beat your chest and say I still catch fish and biguns too, we will say and your the best too. I wish I could be like you lol.* Fish numbers do not lie from the absolute best guys on the bay, and they are down down. So probably best to not show your amateurish by boasting it's the same, nothing has changed and TP&W is 100% correct.


So many of these threads go to hell in a hand basket, specifically because of comments like that. I make fishing reports here specifically to try and help people, and if possible help them catch more fish. I answer PM's all the time - and I mean all the time - and many times I've told people exactly the spot where I caught fish, down to sending them a Google Map picture with a red "X" on it. If you want to call that chest-beating and boasting, it's a reflection of who you are inside.

I've consistently said that things are not like they used to be - in this thread and every other thread like it. But if you look real close, the OP said "_All in all our bays are dying and it's a fact, u might have good fishing days here and there but all good things come to an end unfortunately"_. I don't know any way to counter a claim like that, except to show evidence to the contrary.

My whole point yesterday is that I realized that we don't fish like we used to. Ordinarily, I would _never_ sit around long enough to catch that many 13-15" trout. And I don't know many people who would. My other point was that on those 100-fish days we used to have, a LOT of the fish were the "eatin' sized" fish that I was catching yesterday. People tend to forget things like that.

Just so we're clear - my favorite fishing ever is the wade I took this morning. Yesterday, my favorite trip was the wade I took that morning. I love it when I catch a bunch of fish, and I love it when I get skunked.


----------



## Bohemian Texan (Jun 25, 2018)

JoeintheBackyard said:


> Pretty sure that was from a Facebook post Steve made that resulted in a couple hundred comments if I remember correctly.


This is correct. I copied it and saved it to a word document because I found it so insightful


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

c hook said:


> we can sit behind our firewalls and hurl "it's better" "it's worst", it's your fishing skills yata yata yata. Where did that come from Seinfeld,lol. But reality is reality. TP&W can sit behind there firewall and do the same. But it does not change reality. Reality is, it's not what it used to be. *If it makes you feel good to beat your chest and say I still catch fish and biguns too, we will say and your the best too. I wish I could be like you lol.* Fish numbers do not lie from the absolute best guys on the bay, and they are down down. So probably best to not show your amateurish by boasting it's the same, nothing has changed and TP&W is 100% correct.


Are you saying that a legal catch quantifies boasting, bragging and excess?

If anyone ever wonders what happend to the reports that used to be posted on here this attitude pretty much sums it up.


----------



## Zeitgeist (Nov 10, 2011)

JoeintheBackyard said:


> Pretty sure that was from a Facebook post Steve made that resulted in a couple hundred comments if I remember correctly.





Bohemian Texan said:


> This is correct. I copied it and saved it to a word document because I found it so insightful


724 likes, 600 comments & 166 shares! It was colossal!




__ https://www.facebook.com/hilmdawg/posts/10210361145251831


----------



## pocjetty (Sep 12, 2014)

Trouthappy said:


> One thing for sure, there isn't much of a catch and release ethic on the coast, compared to overall number of fishermen. And two guys can legally keep 50 trout a day across the water from Sabine Pass? Appalling. With the number of boats and people increasing, there's no way the upper Texas coast can sustain a bag limit of 10 trout daily. Eventually the trout population will be overwhelmed. It might take 10 more years, but it will happen. We already need more hatcheries to churn out trout fingerlings.


You've made the comment about the hatcheries a couple of times recently, and it's a big point. I do wonder sometimes what would happen if there weren't funding for the hatcheries for a year or two. The hatcheries enhance the health of the bays, but the funding comes because recreational fishing brings in so much revenue to the coast. I've said many times that I would support the entire coast being made C&R only for a year or two, to observe the effects. I've never had a single person say they liked that idea. And you'll never see it come up for serious discussion, because it's about the revenue more than the actual health of the bays.

You want to improve the number, as well as the average size, of trout in our bays? Get a bill passed outlawing the commercial sale of croaker for bait. Everyone here knows it's true. But it won't happen. After Harvey, they put out numbers of how many dozen croaker the bait stands sell per week in the summer, and how much tourist revenue that represents.

I'm very concerned about the health and volume of our oyster reefs, and how that effects the overall health of the bay. One thing that never gets talked about is the fact that oyster shell is made up of calcium, and the effect of removing gazillions of tons of calcium carbonate from our bays. Personally, I think that oyster buyers should be required to barge all the empty shells back out into the bays. But you won't see that happen, because it would increase the cost of oysters.


----------



## pocjetty (Sep 12, 2014)

There are enough fish out there right now. Not "like it used to be", but enough. The biggest problem is that we're living on the edge, which means that a single event could have catastrophic effects. If you're concerned about the fishery, and don't know what "critical depensation" means, take some time to read. 

The question isn't whether you can go out and catch enough fish to be satisfied. You can. The problem is how vulnerable we are to certain populations crashing, because there is no buffer against a bad year or two. I think we're in trouble with our oysters already.


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

pocjetty said:


> There are enough fish out there right now. Not "like it used to be", but enough. The biggest problem is that we're living on the edge, which means that a single event could have catastrophic effects. If you're concerned about the fishery, and don't know what "critical depensation" means, take some time to read.
> 
> The question isn't whether you can go out and catch enough fish to be satisfied. You can. The problem is how vulnerable we are to certain populations crashing, because there is no buffer against a bad year or two. I think we're in trouble with our oysters already.


"Use to be" there was no limits at all.

IMO the data shows the populations has proven to be sustainable, if that changes according to the "data" then revised limits should be in order.

If you want to see what happens when fish are regulated on BS just look at the snapper situation. How are you going to feel when there is a limit of 2 trout and the season is 30 days, even when the data shows the population to be healthy?

There is always the personal choice to stop keeping fish after your own justifiable number has been retained. No one is making you keep any fish at all. I don't always keep a limit of trout but if I have some people coming or plan a fish fry I might want to keep a full limit. I don't see why the limit needs to be set based on wild guesses and whatever seems to "feel good". Determined by what you see at the cleaning table. Why do people seem to be so hung up on the limit being set at 5, what determines that to be an appropriate limit as opposed to 3,8 or 10?

We are always on the edge of a disaster, a big time freeze, storm, flood, hazard waste, oil spill or other event could kill a size able amount of the population at any time. Bag limits won't change that, just means there might be a few more dead fish.


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

pocjetty said:


> I think we're in trouble with our oysters already.


I agree with you on this. There are major oyster problems in East Galveston bay in regards to oyster reefs and it has been getting worse the past few years. I think it is flood water related. They should be implementing measures to protect the oyster reefs.


----------



## Bohemian Texan (Jun 25, 2018)

pocjetty said:


> *You want to improve the number, as well as the average size, of trout in our bays? Get a bill passed outlawing the commercial sale of croaker for bait. Everyone here knows it's true. But it won't happen. After Harvey, they put out numbers of how many dozen croaker the bait stands sell per week in the summer, and how much tourist revenue that represents.*


I heard TX City Dave (the Boyd's One Stop guy) say on the outdoor show the other day that they actually import their croaker from somewhere down south (can't remember if it was Palacios or Port Lavaca area). I couldn't believe it. Guess there aren't enough left in Galveston. Where's TPWD's numbers on THAT?


----------



## irbjd (Aug 11, 2005)

pocjetty said:


> The hatcheries enhance the health of the bays, but the funding comes because recreational fishing brings in so much revenue to the coast.


The number of fish that are "restocked" is pretty amazing. From 2010-2017 TPWD restocked 69,054,410 speckled trout fingerlings and 137,953,126 redfish fingerlings on the Texas coast. Data is available at this link: http://tpwd.texas.gov/fishboat/fish/management/stocking/fishstock_state.phtml. That is a lot of fish. I truly wonder what fishing would be like without this program. I know the flounder building at Sea Center Texas is under construction, so the flounder breeding program should be up and running in the next year.

I don't know what their survival rate is, but I read a paper where the DNA of fish caught in gill nets was tested and they were able to determine around 11% of redfish (I think) were from the restocking program.

Overall, I wish people were more respectful of the resource across the board so it doesn't come to a point where fishing is catch and release only (as if that could ever be monitored). This goes for industry, development, anglers, and commercial guys.


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

Bohemian Texan said:


> I heard TX City Dave (the Boyd's One Stop guy) say on the outdoor show the other day that they actually import their croaker from somewhere down south (can't remember if it was Palacios or Port Lavaca area). I couldn't believe it. Guess there aren't enough left in Galveston. Where's TPWD's numbers on THAT?


Last I heard t was Palacios. Now I am not sure if you have considered this or if you are only fixated that there might be no fish in galveston but generally business will go to the lowest cost supplier. Given most of the bait catchers in Galveston sell out of their own store and Boyds has no boats of their own, it might be feasible that the wholesale price of croaker could be lower and availability greater in areas other than the Galveston area.


----------



## irbjd (Aug 11, 2005)

pocjetty said:


> Personally, I think that oyster buyers should be required to barge all the empty shells back out into the bays. But you won't see that happen, because it would increase the cost of oysters.


HB 51, adopted during the 2017 legislative session, requires them to distribute no less than 30% of their shell back into the bay systems.

https://legiscan.com/TX/text/HB51/id/1624364


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

irbjd said:


> Overall, I wish people were more respectful of the resource across the board


In your opinion is it respectful to stay within the current regulations and guidelines established by TPWD or is that not enough?


----------



## TrueblueTexican (Aug 29, 2005)

*Not staggering numbers of hatchery fish*

IF you consider that a small spawning trout ( 2 year old class )produces up to 100,000 eggs and an 8 year old trout can produce a million eggs, with spawns going on for four months - that 69 million figure only represents 690 - 2# trout spawning -- average fry survival stands at about 25% to a legal harvest size - I will restate this again, we should be concentrating efforts on the SUPPLY side - stocking fish is just a panacea and band-aid --


----------



## karstopo (Jun 29, 2009)

http://agrilifecdn.tamu.edu/gold/files/2012/05/Karlssonetal2008.pdf

The percentage of hatchery-released red drum in our study ranged from 1.13% in Aransas Bay to 9.35% in Galveston Bay. Similar percentages have been docu- mented for the red drum stock enhancement program in Florida.

http://www.evanwcarson.com/wp-conte...son-et-al-2014-Hatchery-Released-Red-Drum.pdf


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Bohemian Texan said:


> Here's a quote from Steve Hillman's article he wrote last year on the Galveston Bay fishery. These statistics are scary. But again....Fish numbers are UP! Go on out there and let em jump in the boat for you!
> 
> "Here are a few not-so-fun facts â€"
> In 2006 there were 975,157 licenses (Combo & Saltwater) purchased in Texas. (TPWD)
> ...


The problem with this math is that limits have also been cut in half for most of the coast. So the increase in pressure has been met with multiple reductions in the limits over the years. Then there is the fact that over the last 40 years commercial fishing pressure has been completely eliminated. There has been a 90% reduction in the shrimp fleet and all it's by catch. The Oyster fishery has been placed on a license moratorium and a buyback program has been started to reduce pressure.

So once again I refer back to TPWD data. Gill net samplings just don't lie. As the biologists pointed out in Shannon Tompkins article. Trout populations are very healthy and in the Galveston Bay complex are at record levels. At least in the last survey taken this spring. If the trend is clearly upward? There is no problem.

I see no reason to doubt 35 years of hard data...


----------



## Bohemian Texan (Jun 25, 2018)

Its Catchy said:


> The problem with this math is that limits have also been cut in half for most of the coast. So the increase in pressure has been met with multiple reductions in the limits over the years. Then there is the fact that over the last 40 years commercial fishing pressure has been completely eliminated.  There has been a 90% reduction in the shrimp fleet and all it's by catch. The Oyster fishery has been placed on a license moratorium and a buyback program has been started to reduce pressure.
> 
> So once again I refer back to TPWD data. Gill net samplings just don't lie. As the biologists pointed out in Shannon Tompkins article. Trout populations are very healthy and in the Galveston Bay complex are at record levels. At least in the last survey taken this spring. If the trend is clearly upward? There is no problem.
> 
> I see no reason to doubt 35 years of hard data...


You must not fish the Galveston complex. If you did (and have been fishing it for 20 years), you would not believe that fish numbers in recent years are "normal" or "healthy", whatever healthy means. And neither do the guides that have fished it for years. Gill net "samplings" are exactly what they are. A "sample". I think if you were to compile catch data from some of our seasoned guides' log books over the past 10 years you would see very different results. Even the croaker soakers fishing the ship channel are struggling this year.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

I grew up in Kemah and have fished the Galveston Bay complex my entire life. Long enough to remember the fish freezes in 83â€™ and 89â€™. And if you think the fishing is bad this year think back to 84â€™ and 90â€™.

Exactly one year ago The Galveston Bay complex and many others were inundated with fresh water from Harvey. A 1000 year flood event. Fishing is and always will be cyclical. Good years and bad years. Trout are not freshwater catfish so considering all that happened last year I do not think this is abnormal.

The long term 35 year trend is stable


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

Bohemian Texan said:


> You must not fish the Galveston complex. If you did (and have been fishing it for 20 years), you would not believe that fish numbers in recent years are "normal" or "healthy", whatever healthy means.


In recent years this has been my experience.

2012 - 2016 were some of the best years for trout in my life. Early limits, big fish, healthy oyster reefs.

2017 was good, I had a slower July than usual and really got on the fish in August.

2018 - Has been slower than usual we did ok in June probably averaging about 5 trout per person per trip. I haven't really fished trout in July or August because we finally got a red snapper season and some nice offshore weather. I'll probably get out there on the holiday weekend and catch a few.

I do run through the bay quite a bit and this year the amount of bait in the water is off the chart. I would assume that you have seen the same. It is going to be much harder to catch fish if they have easy access to bait everywhere. That coupled with all the fresh water runoff has to have an effect on the fish.

I'd really hate to think we should set the limit based on any 1 or 2 year period.


----------



## Bohemian Texan (Jun 25, 2018)

Its Catchy said:


> I grew up in Kemah and have fished the Galveston Bay complex my entire life. Long enough to remember the fish freezes in 83â€™ and 89â€™. And if you think the fishing is bad this year think back to 84â€™ and 90â€™.
> 
> *Exactly one year ago The Galveston Bay complex and many others were inundated with fresh water from Harvey. A 1000 year flood event. Fishing is and always will be cyclical. Good years and bad years. Trout are not freshwater catfish so considering all that happened last year I do not think this is abnormal.*
> 
> The long term 35 year trend is stable


So we are in agreement that numbers are down because of the recent floods in years past with fish stacking up in east bay where everyone could catch a limit on Hannah's reef and the Harvey flood last year did nothing to help. So this is why I don't believe the TPWD survey. Hopefully it will recover but with all the pressure, I think it's take some time.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

I have no reason to doubt TPWD data. Fishing is why itâ€™s always been. Cyclical


----------



## Marker 54 Lures (Dec 28, 2015)

capt2016 said:


> Fished with a buddy a couple days ago one of tha topics of course was, fishing just ain't like it used to be. Now I've fished and hunted east bay for probably a little over 25 years, spent alot of hours in marshes observing everything possible, and have seen so many huge changes.
> Of course changes include the abundance of trout specifically specks under lights, now most of tha lights hold nothing but very small Sandy's, when 15 to 20 years ago heck u could walk across specks at tha shrimp boats.
> Flounder run.... simple fact it's not like it was not even 5 to 10 years ago, now dont get me wrong u can still get into them but reality is numbers are simply way down.
> Believe it or not even what some people consider trash fish, or creatures you may not notice just aren't there. Croaker for instance are they still around of course, but I can remember ppl catching huge ones and big numbers in October. Back to other animals crabs, snails, grass shrimp, mud minnows, ect.. have all declined by alot.
> All in all our bays are dying and it's a fact, u might have good fishing days here and there but all good things come to an end unfortunately , what do yall think? Agree/ disagree, not trying to start a feud


The side you take to this argument entirely depends upon if you are any good at fishing now a days.. so from my perspective

you are 100% wrong. But not make this about who knows more .. instead lets talk about the fish AND

Lets test your theory : A) do fish leave the area when Dolphins show up

If you answered yes to A then you have two consider that fish also leave the Area when Humans show up... So places that Dolphins and Humans frequent .. are largely devoid of trout and reds. SO perhaps its not the fishing that has slowed , but your failure to adjust your patterns due to HUMAN traffic.

Try areas that are less likely to attract Humans.. because those areas are MORE LIKELY to attract fish.

like it or not .. Fish learn.. if they didnt .. none of them would leave when the Dolphins show up


----------



## Ish (Oct 30, 2008)

coastal bay fisheries on the middle and lower coast have been on the decline since ~1979 when dolph briscoe ordered the passes closed to "protect" the bays from ixtoc.

while well-intended, it was short-sighted. 

now with most of the natural passes closed shrimp and crabs can't migrate to the gulf beaches where they go to spawn like they once could. the ones that do make it out dump their larvae, then that larvae have a hard time getting to the back estuaries where they can thrive. there's simply not the same intra- and inter-bay circulation that there once was. the bays have become largely closed systems.

closed systems with compromised intra- and inter-bay circulation can't quickly flush out sweetwater floods.


jettied ship channels also contributed to the problem by changing hydrostatic pressure in the bays that used to keep the natural passes open.

gill-netting in the 70s didn't help, and several hard freezes in the 80s wiped out much of what could be found in the bays. and with closed natural passes there's no way it could recover to what it once was.





on top of all that, tpwd and cca have compounded the problem with their stupid stocker program and all foolish initiatives they've launched and squandered money on over the years.

each year they dump millions of predators into a largely closed bay system. those predators have to eat, and without adequate flushing of the bays bringing in fresh larvae and food the bays have become largely closed systems.


you do the math...dump millions of predators into a ~closed system and then don't add enough food to keep up with their appetites and what do you think is going to happen?



thank the state, tpwd, and cca for the mismanagement that's led to the **** inland mid- and south-coast fisheries texas is stuck with today.


----------



## Ish (Oct 30, 2008)

Its Catchy said:


> I have no reason to doubt TPWD data. Fishing is why itâ€™s always been. Cyclical


a great reason to doubt their data is where their funding comes from.


----------



## gater (May 25, 2004)

*Trout*



Bohemian Texan said:


> So we are in agreement that numbers are down because of the recent floods in years past with fish stacking up in east bay where everyone could catch a limit on Hannah's reef and the Harvey flood last year did nothing to help. So this is why I don't believe the TPWD survey. Hopefully it will recover but with all the pressure, I think it's take some time.[/QUOTE
> 
> Maybe or where they are setting their nets. In talking to some people, if you canâ€™t catch a fish off of one of the reefs in East Bay fishing is the worst itâ€™s been in years. Itâ€™s like the only place people know where to go is East Bay. The Galveston Bay complex is 618 miles, there are trout in other places than East Bay


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Ish said:


> a great reason to doubt their data is where their funding comes from.


Could you be a little more specific?


----------



## gater (May 25, 2004)

*Fish*



Ish said:


> coastal bay fisheries on the middle and lower coast have been on the decline since ~1979 when dolph briscoe ordered the passes closed to "protect" the bays from ixtoc.
> 
> while well-intended, it was short-sighted.
> 
> ...


You are kidding.......


----------



## Ish (Oct 30, 2008)

gater said:


> Bohemian Texan said:
> 
> 
> > So we are in agreement that numbers are down because of the recent floods in years past with fish stacking up in east bay where everyone could catch a limit on Hannah's reef and the Harvey flood last year did nothing to help. So this is why I don't believe the TPWD survey. Hopefully it will recover but with all the pressure, I think it's take some time.[/QUOTE
> ...


----------



## Ish (Oct 30, 2008)

Its Catchy said:


> Could you be a little more specific?


yes. do some digging and figure out where their funding comes from.

don't take my word for it.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Ish said:


> yes. do some digging and figure out where their funding comes from.
> 
> don't take my word for it.


I most certainly would not take your word for it. But I would rather here it in your wordsâ€¦

So I ask again where does their funding come from?


----------



## gater (May 25, 2004)

*Funding*



Ish said:


> gater said:
> 
> 
> > it's exactly about where they're setting the nets. they set the nets where they know they're gonna get the results they want.
> ...


----------



## Ish (Oct 30, 2008)

bigfishtx said:


> If there has been no decline, why do we have lower bag limits?












only a fool trusts gov't agencies.


----------



## DUTY FIRST (Jun 23, 2012)

bigfishtx said:


> If there has been no decline, why do we have lower bag limits?


Because it's what CCA wants.
"If you want fish to eat, you can buy 'em at HEB!"


----------



## Redfish Rick (Aug 27, 2004)

*Spot on, bravo!!*

THE QUOTE BELOW IS EXACTLY WHAT HAS HAPPENED, I COULDN'T HAVE SAID IT ANY BETTER MYSELF. Ish is 100% correct about all of this, and I have seen its effects first hand. Closed bay systems are dead bay systems, just look at the once prolific shrimp and crab populations in the Aransas Bay and other mid and lower coast bay systems. Now there are hardly any crabs or shrimp, they cannot effectively complete their life-cycle without many open passes and free water flow.

TPWD and CCA are a big part of the problem, and the fish stocking programs are doing more harm than good in an already stressed ecosystem, and a huge waste of money. Introducing more hatchery predators like redfish and trout will decimate the shrimp and crab population further. If these organizations were focused more on opening and maintaining fish passes and fresh water inflows, the bay would be a much better place today, but that's not where the money is. Mother nature can be amazingly productive if conditions are right, but if passes are closed and not maintained the ecosystem will suffer greatly. Introducing more predator fish is foolish, when the ecosystem cant support it...

If more of the passes were open, mother nature would find its own balance, including improved trout and redfish numbers based on the more abundant available forage species.

Capt. Rick Hammond



Ish said:


> coastal bay fisheries on the middle and lower coast have been on the decline since ~1979 when dolph briscoe ordered the passes closed to "protect" the bays from ixtoc.
> 
> while well-intended, it was short-sighted.
> 
> ...


----------



## Redfish Rick (Aug 27, 2004)

*.*

Just look at Cedar Bayou/Vinson Slough: While it was open for 3 years, shrimp, crabs, flounder, reds, and trout flourished in Mesquite Bay, Ayres, and Carlos Bay. Now 1 year after Harvey closed the pass, those same bay systems are dead ground. I was in Mesquite Bay gigging tonight, and I never saw a single crab or shrimp in the water for miles of shoreline. Only a couple flounder and very few redfish there. When the pass was open pre-Harvey, this same area was a vibrant ecosystem, and I would see 1000's of crabs each night and almost always gig an easy limit of flounder. Now its a dead sea.... Closed bay system...


----------



## pocjetty (Sep 12, 2014)

Redfish Rick said:


> Just look at Cedar Bayou/Vinson Slough: While it was open for 3 years, shrimp, crabs, flounder, reds, and trout flourished in Mesquite Bay, Ayres, and Carlos Bay. Now 1 year after Harvey closed the pass, those same bay systems are dead ground. I was in Mesquite Bay gigging tonight, and I never saw a single crab or shrimp in the water for miles of shoreline. Only a couple flounder and very few redfish there. When the pass was open pre-Harvey, this same area was a vibrant ecosystem, and I would see 1000's of crabs each night and almost always gig an easy limit of flounder. Now its a dead sea.... Closed bay system...


What most people don't understand, Rick, is that floundering at night gives us a visual confirmation that reveals much more than what can be learned in the daytime just by soaking some bait. Everything moves up on the flats at night, and we actually see what is and isn't there. And we cover miles of shoreline in a night - much more than could be covered wading. Floundering gives a much larger sample size, as well as a lot more detailed information.

The people that never saw shrimp hopping everywhere in front of the flounder lights can't appreciate the fact that we now see few or no shrimp hopping in front of the boat most nights.

One thing that people seem to resist, and I don't know why, is the fact that croaker became MUCH less abundant than they were, due to a combination of factors. That shifted the feeding habits of fish toward other food sources. Seems like a pretty simple concept, that shouldn't stir a lot of debate - but it does.

That shift, in turn, put more stress on other baitfish and shrimp. And you're right - the stocking program puts more predators into the system than it can likely support. And that puts more stress on the shrimp, in particular.

The bays are not dead - there are still lots of fish to be caught. My big concern is the lack of croaker, crabs, and shrimp relative to what we used to see. I believe that leaves the bays vulnerable to events. A disease outbreak from a shrimp farm that escapes containment. A freeze, a drought, etc. There is no margin for error for things like that now. It's just a matter of time until something like that hits.

And, yes, water from the Gulf is cleansing and sustaining. The re-opening of Cedar Bayou was a vital addition to that area, and its implementation got mishandled, largely due to egos and turf wars.


----------



## pocjetty (Sep 12, 2014)

irbjd said:


> The number of fish that are "restocked" is pretty amazing. From 2010-2017 TPWD restocked 69,054,410 speckled trout fingerlings and 137,953,126 redfish fingerlings on the Texas coast. Data is available at this link: http://tpwd.texas.gov/fishboat/fish/management/stocking/fishstock_state.phtml. That is a lot of fish. I truly wonder what fishing would be like without this program. I know the flounder building at Sea Center Texas is under construction, so the flounder breeding program should be up and running in the next year.
> 
> I don't know what their survival rate is, but I read a paper where the DNA of fish caught in gill nets was tested and they were able to determine around 11% of redfish (I think) were from the restocking program.
> 
> Overall, I wish people were more respectful of the resource across the board so it doesn't come to a point where fishing is catch and release only (as if that could ever be monitored). This goes for industry, development, anglers, and commercial guys.


And I mis-spoke when I said that re-stocking improves the health of the bays. What I should have said is that it increases the number of trout and redfish in the bays. As mentioned above, that may well not be healthier.


----------

