# Future of Matagorda Bay Trout- Meeting



## Redilingus (Jul 13, 2007)

Is this that meeting to discuss banning Croaker as a bait?

http://www.matagordabay.com/tournaments2007/trout-meeting.pdf


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

I was thinking the same thing!!! ol'e mister 'only i can do it not you'.


----------



## ExplorerTv (Apr 18, 2006)

What decline in fish? Seems like these bays are better than they ever have been. I know that it is alot easier to target big fish than it was 5-7years ago. Where are these decline in numbers coming from?
FYI... I dont throw bait...


----------



## twitch-twitch-reel (May 21, 2006)

I think, opening a channel to the gulf and mabe cutting back the # of trout you keep would help but, I don't see the big deal. I catch a lot of fish there. either way a cut to the gulf could only help things.


----------



## EndTuition (May 24, 2004)

If this gets any traction at all, it could have some serious backlash for the poor guides that foolishly jump on this bandwagon. I know there is well meaning behind it, but it's being pursued in a completely self destructive manor. I'm just waiting to see if all 'Guides' don't end up with a black eye over this. I would hope the guides could find a different way to be better stewards of the resource. To imply only fish caught with Croaker are actually dead when you pile em up on the cleaning table is just wrong. And if that doesn't work what's next, live shrimp? Then what, fish caught with any form of bait? It is true that what is good for the common fisherman is good for the guides, but the opposite is not true. Let's see if they decide to self destruct or not. 



This is just my opinion of course. I'm not telling anyone how they ought to think, just how I think. 

I know how the system works and just ranting on the web is not helping the problem one bit, but it does make me feel better.



Probably not the last time you will hear from me on this subject, sorry.


----------



## ExplorerTv (Apr 18, 2006)

*Cut to the Gulf*

I dont really know if opening a cut to the gulf would be good for east bay... There is something about closed bay systems and big trout... I think that is one of the reasons for it being a very productive bay for trout 4-8lbs... Who knows if a cut would help or not. I like the bay just like it is...

Menefee


----------



## Freshwaterman (May 21, 2004)

> I think, opening a channel to the gulf and mabe cutting back the # of trout you keep would help but, I don't see the big deal. I catch a lot of fish there. either way a cut to the gulf could only help things.


It would? How? Why is it needed?

One of the probable reasons(IMO) why it produces larger than average sized trout is probably due to the fact that it's a relatively "closed" system. No sharks immediately comes to mind as a possible contributing factor. Kinda like ULM and LLM.

The people, that I know, regularly catch just as many fish there as they always have. Size isn't a problem, either.


----------



## ExplorerTv (Apr 18, 2006)

Big trout are the predators in that bay... And they are hurting the corkie population... lol...


----------



## LBS (Sep 2, 2004)

These guys are gonna kill their own careers and reputations.....


----------



## Stuart (May 21, 2004)

I just hope whatever TPWD decides in the coming months or years that it is across the board, up and down the whole coast. Personally I wouldn't mind lower limits, and if that is what is decided, make it for the whole Texas coast. Don't make the limit 5 in this bay system, 10 in this system, 5 in the next and so on. That would be a pita.

BTW, from reading the pdf, I don't see where it is a "ban the croaker" meeting.


----------



## twitch-twitch-reel (May 21, 2006)

all that I have read, you guys are right, the higher the salt the biger the trout. and you know, an opening may even hurt the grass. I'm not sure on that one. It just seems that it is hard for good clean freash water to get into the bay. but like you said, opening it to the sure would likely make for smaller trout and big sharks.

I really don't see anyting wrong with it as it is. as for the croker thing, who is saying crokers are bad? what is the differance between a croker and a mullet or a shrimp? they all catch trout. mabe croker a little better but big woop! if the trout dies, eat it!

Is there some study I have missed that says the trout population in east bay is in decline? perhaps we should makes some cuts into west bay that are closer something LOL! I am just dying to dig a cut. LOL!



SpeckledTrout said:


> It would? How? Why is it needed?
> 
> One of the probable reasons(IMO) why it produces larger than average sized trout is probably due to the fact that it's a relatively "closed" system. No sharks immediately comes to mind as a possible contributing factor. Kinda like ULM and LLM.
> The people that I know regularly catch just as many fish there as they always have. Size isn't a problem, either.


----------



## Stuart (May 21, 2004)

twitch-twitch-reel said:


> all that I have read, you guys are right, the higher the salt the biger the trout. and you know, an opening may even hurt the grass. I'm not sure on that one. It just seems that it is hard for good clean freash water to get into the bay. but like you said, opening it to the sure would likely make for smaller trout and big sharks.
> 
> I really don't see anyting wrong with it as it is. as for the croker thing, who is saying crokers are bad? what is the differance between a croker and a mullet or a shrimp? they all catch trout. mabe croker a little better but big woop! if the trout dies, eat it!
> 
> Is there some study I have missed that says the trout population in east bay is in decline? perhaps we should makes some cuts into west bay that are closer something LOL! I am just dying to dig a cut. LOL!


Of course what some people have been pushing for years to do is reopen parker's cut into West Matagorda.


----------



## twitch-twitch-reel (May 21, 2006)

I have never even been to west bay other than in port o conner.



Stuart said:


> Of course what some people have been pushing for years to do is reopen parker's cut into West Matagorda.


----------



## ExplorerTv (Apr 18, 2006)

*Hard Freeze Would Hurt*

I think that both bays are in real good shape population wise... What would hurt these bays more than anything would be a real hard freeze for about a week. I don't even like thinking about that. I have heard horror stories about what the mid 80's freeze did to fishing in the Matagorda Bay complex.


----------



## Porky (Nov 1, 2006)

It's a guide VS guide thing and they are trying to sucker us(rec. fishers) into it! Maybe they ought to limit the number of guides.


----------



## Freshwaterman (May 21, 2004)

Did ya'll realize, that before the delta built up along the Colorado, there was only one Matagorda Bay? Stuff changes constantly. The fact that E. Matagorda is now isolated is probably a good thing. 

From what I've heard, it was a very clear bay with lots of grass and shell reefs. The bottom was hard, until the dead oystershell, beneath the live shell was removed to cover county roads. Big floating rigs literally sucked the shell from below the bottom for upwards of 30 to 50 feet in some places. This resulted in silty bottoms and muddier overall conditions. They did the same thing in San Antonio Bay. That's why you don't wanna step off the reefs when wading that Bay. No bottom.

And, it apparently gets enough freshwater because it supports a healthy population of oysters. On the other hand, ULM and Baffin, are so salty that oysters can't even live there. Because of this, I highly doubt that salinity has anything to do with the larger sized trout.


----------



## Freshwaterman (May 21, 2004)

> It's a guide VS guide thing and they are trying to sucker us(rec. fishers) into it! Maybe they ought to limit the number of guides.


Probably, more than you think. Competition creates it's own problems. Jealousy has always played a role in behavior like this. All guides aren't created equal. Some of them consistently put there clients on more fish than others. All of this contributes to resentment among each other.

Heck, I can remember when there was only one guide working the area, Raymond Cox. A guy nam d Terry Gilmer eventually started helping him out and well, the rest is history.


----------



## SARGENTTX (Aug 8, 2007)

*brown cedar cut*

back in the 60's & 70's when brown cedar cut was still open were some of the best fishing i can remember !


----------



## Freshwaterman (May 21, 2004)

For numbers or size?


----------



## Dani California (Jul 20, 2006)

If anyone is old enough to remember the fishing in E matty when Brown Cedar Cut was there and before they rerouted the Colorado you would know good and well what a cut would do to that bay.

Biggie


----------



## Doubleover (Jul 7, 2005)

Do any of you plan on attending this meeting? I wish I could go just to see each sides point but it is a little too far for me. Too bad someone cant set up a recorder and tape it for all of us who cant make it.


----------



## ExplorerTv (Apr 18, 2006)

I bet when brown ceder was open it was great for #'s... But I like it better as a big trout bay close to my house....


----------



## POCKID (Jul 26, 2004)

*Solution*

A good start would be banning guides, croaker and shrimping.


----------



## Doubleover (Jul 7, 2005)

If they Changed the limit to 5 I may have a better chance at limiting out. LOL


----------



## Redilingus (Jul 13, 2007)

POCKID said:


> A good start would be banning guides


YES! Now we're getting somewhere!


----------



## BALZTOWAL (Aug 29, 2006)

Maybe Guides Should Be Banned From Using Croakers Since Most Of Them Are On A Meat Haul Anyways And The Average Fisherperson Has Trouble Keeping The Dang Things Alive And We All Know They Only Work Alive.


----------



## cat. (Nov 27, 2006)

i thought this was about the croaker deal.


----------



## jabx1962 (Nov 9, 2004)

Since Bill Balboa will be there to present DATA. Apparrently, the meeting has some "Official" status. Will there be any Wildlife Commisioner's there too?

Who will be recording the meeting Minutes?

Is this an official Texas Parks and Wildlife meeting with an Agenda? Or is Bill Balboa a guest of the Private Enterprises?


----------



## BALZTOWAL (Aug 29, 2006)

Back In The 1960-70s Any Coastal Water Was Great Fishing Wherever A Person Went, Nowadays With The Pollution And Numbers Of People Fishing It Makes Since To Allow The Fish From The Gulf To Come In Just Like Packery Is Doing.


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

The Italian Stalian?


----------



## EndTuition (May 24, 2004)

This meeting is all about banning croaker and nothing else. It's not the first one either. It's a private agenda fuled by a single guide with enough stroke to keep it alive. Be afraid, very very afraid. I say ban guides if they can't behave.


----------



## BeachCityBoy (May 27, 2007)

What's next ?....ban live shrimp ?, ban Corkys ?


----------



## spotsndots (May 20, 2005)

you know they have an agenda that probably doesn't sit well with the average joe fisherman when they plan it for a Tuesday night and they know most folks from Houston aren't going to make the drive.


----------



## specktackler1 (Nov 15, 2006)

If fishing is so bad in East Matagorda Bay, why do the guides keep posting "full limits" in the chronocle and on the Outdoor Show? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see if the limit is cut to 5 specks, that a lot of guides will be out of work. Bottom line is that a few guides in E. Mat want croakers banned. End of discussion.

Speck-tackler1


----------



## plugger21 (Dec 5, 2004)

*Matagorda's future*

I am a lure fisherman , but I don't believe banning any particular bait is a good solution. What these people should really be worried about is the number of people and developments that will be bordering that bay in the next 10 years. The total number of people fishing that bay will have a much greater impact than a few guides fishing with croaker. Seems to me that keeping fewer fish is a better idea.


----------



## KappaDave (Aug 29, 2005)

spotsndots said:


> you know they have an agenda that probably doesn't sit well with the average joe fisherman when they plan it for a Tuesday night and they know most folks from Houston aren't going to make the drive.


BINGO!!! WE HAVE A WINNER!!!! I'll say it once more....SAD!


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

Ban banning!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!oh!! i'm on the way


----------



## Hughoo222 (Aug 24, 2005)

reminds me of another trout story and another "guide". .


EndTuition said:


> This meeting is all about banning croaker and nothing else. It's not the first one either. It's a private agenda fuled by a single guide with enough stroke to keep it alive. Be afraid, very very afraid. I say ban guides if they can't behave.


----------



## Whooper (Nov 3, 2006)

Don't get me started! 

Here is my take, though. TP&W runs the fishery on science. Leave them alone to do their jobs. Take your "opinion" and shove it where the sun don't shine if you THINK you're smarter than the biologists ALL THE REST OF US TRUST to run our fishery.

Thank you.

This message brought to you by the foundation to shut up guys with private agendas to impose on people too busy having a life to get involved in stupid bull pooky.


----------



## Nicademas (Jan 31, 2006)

I want to live in your world Whooper, where science dictates policy.
Prudence demands more than mere passivity in most cases.

I agree that banning croaker is not the solution.


----------



## Freshwaterman (May 21, 2004)

If you guys are so worried about guides, then reduce the limits on their clients to five, if that makes "everybody feel better". Heck, just eliminate their keeping anything over 22" inches, while you're at it. And, I'm just ranting, nothing personal to anyone in particular. 

Guides get a lot of negative publicity from some individuals. Not all of it, IMO, is warranted.

Personally, though, I don't think that they're hurting anything. By the way, not all of them catch as nearly as many fish as "you think" they do. My father retired after being a Marine Biologist for 33 years. He surveyed a lot of guides in both E. Mata and Espirto Santos Bays, during that time period, and a lot of them struggle much of the time. It definitely isn't always a "meat haul" as some of you guys like to put it.


----------



## Leemo (Nov 16, 2006)

Leemo will be there........


----------



## redneck694x41 (Aug 10, 2007)

i like it the way it is


----------



## Andy_Holland_25 (Aug 8, 2007)

I second that notion!


----------



## tealnexttime1 (Aug 23, 2004)

aint no way TPW is going to cut a channel out in east bay. if they do, it would be a huge slap in the face to the mansfield folks and the san bernard needs dredging more than anyone does and they cant get the funding for that. east bay is fine, i personally dont fish there cause of the crowds, but last time i was there there were plenty of fish w/ those people. i see the "driver" on this site slamming fish there


----------



## 100% Texan (Jan 30, 2005)

Iam at a loss of words reading some of these post I won't mention names but the guide haters or easy to spot.Let me run my little neck out there ok I dont fish croakers but if you have them your welcome.Some of the very same guides crying or the same ones hauling limits out of east bay daily.All guides or not the same I can think of a bunch of really good one's that are 2cooler's and would not deserve to be lumped in with the other's myself included.I would rather want to be known as a good steward of the bay I do way more than my part to keep that little bay clean and show other's respect.If I have ever burned the shoreline while you were fishing or cut your drift off or did anything like that I would apologize I donot act like that.I just recently invited a 2cooler to fish with me and he witnessed for himself the rudeness and disrespect that boaters or fisherman have for each other.Also if your a guide hater is it because of a bad past trip or what Ill apologize to you for what someone else did ok.Lets all quit trying to give us more limits and enjoy what we have now. The last meeting they had they were told east matagorda was in the best shape it has ever been in the past 30 years of collecting data.If you had been at the cleaning tables in june and july and seen the daily haul of fish over 25 inch's that were being cleaned from croaker fisherman you would probably say WoW something might need to done or this bay wont survive.That is were all the crying came from east matty is a little bay with alot of traffic.Ok Iam going fishing it's corkie biting season work them slow and hold on Later Ken


----------



## JOKER (May 16, 2007)

*Meeting*

I have to agree with Noo Noo. I am from Matagorda County and though I am 28 I have fished East Matty for a very long time. East Matty is better than I have seen it in a long time. In my own opinion Matagorda, Palacios, Bay City, and other small towns in our county are getting bigger and bigger every year. Matagorda is blowing up and becoming something comparable to Rockport or Port A. It is getting advertisments from people such as you and I reading reports on this website along with many many others. In my sole opinion and not to upset anyone, I like Matagorda just the way it is and would not like to see it grow. It's kinda like a little hole in the wall. While everyone is making that long haul down to Rivera, most of us know it's a much shorter drive here and still catch quality fish. I have fished with both live bait and artificial. I would much rather fish with artifical, but if my Mom or Dad whom do not fish very much and I know using live shrimp will be easier I will not have a regret none. I practice catch and release and only keep enough for me and my wife. I live close enough that if we want fish soon, I'll just go catch few. Most of the people whom come from a long distance I would not blame for keeping everything they catch because they don't get the chance to fish very often. As for the guides, that is their job to feed the mouths of their familes. Anyone who wants to just ban guides needs to think about their kids and families who rely on that chartered trip and tip money. It's easy to say to have guides banned or what have you, but people need to look a little closer at who it affects. When it comes to guides fishing is all they know and is their job. I will be at the meeting and will let you guys know what went on.


----------



## EndTuition (May 24, 2004)

noo-noo said:


> Lets all quit trying to give us more limits and enjoy what we have now./QUOTE]
> 
> Thanks for presenting a different view for us to ponder, but this all started with a Guide trying to do just that to the common fisherman.
> 
> ...


----------



## tcountz (Apr 3, 2006)

I know that I am probably sticking out my neck to let one of you cut my throat but here goes. East Matagorda Bay is in very good shape not only in quality of fish but also in quanity. TPWD isn't going to bann croaker fishing because they don't have the data to qualify such a more. Catching fish on croaker is not the problem. The problem is keeping and killing big fish just to be able to throw them on the table and say look what I've done. If we would all take more pictures and release more fish everyone would benifit. I try to have a camera with me in the water and a set of Boga Grips so that I can capture a trophy fish on film for ever. A picture lasts a life time while filets last a meal or two. There are only a couple of guides that are pushing this croaker thing and one of them is beginning to see that he has stirred an ant bed for nothing. The other has nothing to lose because he doesn't do many trips anyway. I've always believed that if it aint broke don't try to fix it. As far as a cut from East Bay into the lower river, a study was done by TPWD several years ago and their findings were that East Bay is one of the healthiest bays on the coast and that they didn't think that a cut would enhance it and it might just hurt the bay. The Corp of Engineers is pushing that cut for two reasons. First they believe that the cut could help keep the Jetty flushed out. I don't buy that. Second, it would relieve some of the water pressure at the bridge and locks. In a little over a year the swing bridge will be gone. As for Parker's Cut, there was a study done by Dr. George Ward prior to closing the cut. His findings were that Parker's was the best recruitment area for new marine life for West Matagorda Bay even over the Pt O jetties and Pass Cavalle. What happened was that the Corp didn't allow anyone to see the findings until after the cut was closed and the U S Fish and Wildlife didn't want it opened. If you are against the Corp doing another stupid thing then contact them in mass and let them know that you don't want a cut into the southwest corner of East Bay. As far as the croaker issue goes it should go away after this meeting. Now for those of you who don't like guides. Don't hire one.


----------



## EndTuition (May 24, 2004)

Tommy, that's probably the best narrative yet on this subject, except I'd say to those who don't like guides, they *should* hire one, it might just change their mind.

Thanks !


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

I wouldnt say it's the guides fault.I don't used them cause most of them have a bad atitude and they act like they are the only ones intitled to the bays.


----------



## Dani California (Jul 20, 2006)

tcountz said:


> There are only a couple of guides that are pushing this croaker thing and one of them is beginning to see that he has stirred an ant bed for nothing. The other has nothing to lose because he doesn't do many trips anyway. As far as the croaker issue goes it should go away after this meeting. Now for those of you who don't like guides. Don't hire one.


What are the two guides names? Who are they? I woouldn't hire em and i'm knot a guide hater but i dont play the pull in its my spot deal either. Just like E matty aint their bay either.

Biggie:biggrin:


----------



## Capt. Dustin Lee (Jan 16, 2006)

A few bad apples make all of us guides look bad with stirring the pot with the public or their on the water manners. I am all about releasing bigger trout to go and spawn and make more trophy trout but eveyone has their choice to keep it or not and I try to talk those into taking a pic and releasing it. Alot of people think that I, or any of us guides, that we catch limits after limits every day. This is not true. Most of the people I have on charters have never fished or casted a rod in their lives. This makes it harder for my chartered group to catch fish, period. Now the next day I may have a group that can cast and catch fish and they will catch more fish than the other group. What I dont want to happen is other things being banned or limited to someone else's thoughts. I can tell you that I feel the same, if someone is catching limits everyday and then turns around and trys to ban something because others are catching limits, then it's a no brainer that the public is going to get mad. All I am saying is , please dont bash the other guides that are out there who are just like you and think the same way you do. If you are going to bash them, then bash those that are standing beside whoever is wanting the ban. I am not for or against this ban since this bay system has been the best it has in years.

Capt. Dustin Lee
Fish'N Addiction Guide Service
[email protected]
www.TexasBigFish.com

Team Brown Lures
Team Mosca Boats
Team AMP Lures
Team Midcoastproducts.com


----------



## Redilingus (Jul 13, 2007)

Dani California said:


> What are the two guides names? Who are they? I woouldn't hire em and i'm knot a guide hater but i dont play the pull in its my spot deal either. Just like E matty aint their bay either.
> 
> Biggie:biggrin:


One is Bill Pustejovsky (http://www.goldtipguideservice.com/goldtip/default.asp), don't know other one.


----------



## Freshwaterman (May 21, 2004)

> TPWD isn't going to bann croaker fishing because they don't have the data to qualify such a move.


Well, it wouldn't be the first time it happened. Look at the one trout over 25" regulation. Unfortunately, politics does play a role. There wasn't anything scientific to back that one up. It was a special interest group that pushed for it and they got what they wanted.


----------



## Gilbert (May 25, 2004)

Redilingus said:


> One is Bill Pustejovsky (http://www.goldtipguideservice.com/goldtip/default.asp), don't know other one.


he seems to be catching fish. He doesn't make sence with why he wants to ban croaker fishing and catching a limit of the same size fish with different bait. What does it matter how you catch them? 

waded the reefs in East Matagorda Bay with
Capt. Bill and boxed 30 trout 16-26" while
throwing 10W40 and Pumpkinseed Bass Assassins
along with BNSH Mirrolure She Dogs.
9/24/07

waded East
Matagorda Bay with Capt. Bill. They threw
10W40 4" Sea Shads and boxed 20 trout,
16-25", and 3 flounder, 16-20".
9/18/07

*Port Mansfield, Texas, a southern gulf coastal fishing village, 
has suffered a depletion of speckled trout in the 18-24" range 
which constitutes our breeding fish. 
The cause of this depletion basically stems from fishermen 
using live croaker as bait. As a result, on September 1, 2007
new regulations will initiate a 5 fish limit for those choosing
to fish the Port Mansfield waters.*


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

Redilingus said:


> One is Bill Pustejovsky (http://www.goldtipguideservice.com/goldtip/default.asp), don't know other one.


thats true he is one of them.


----------



## Freshwaterman (May 21, 2004)

He wants to limit who else is capable of catching those same fish. Take away croakers and a lot of people would see a serious reduction in their fishing success. Both for limits and size. 

And, I ain't saying they should ban croakers. That's just what I believe he is thinking.


----------



## Fishin-Inc (May 27, 2004)

*NO fish in EM*

There are no big fish in EM. Period

No way that will pass. It's doesn't have any supportive info.


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

Fishin-Inc said:


> There are no big fish in EM. Period
> 
> No way that will pass. It's doesn't have any supportive info.


Hello! is this Bill P. himself?


----------



## jabx1962 (Nov 9, 2004)

Redilingus said:


> One is Bill Pustejovsky (http://www.goldtipguideservice.com/goldtip/default.asp), don't know other one.


If you want to get someones attention.....hit them in the Wallet..

Boycott this Guide, and any business that promotes him.

Get rid of the Gutpile pics.


----------



## Gilbert (May 25, 2004)

SpeckledTrout said:


> He wants to limit who else is capable of catching those same fish. Take away croakers and a lot of people would see a serious reduction in their fishing success. Both for limits and size.
> 
> And, I ain't saying they should ban croakers. That's just what I believe he is thinking.


I will be there to ask him. Maybe I should print out his reports and pictures from his website to show and ask if these are the same size fish he is trying to save from croaker fishing.


----------



## twitch-twitch-reel (May 21, 2006)

so, are we talking banning the selling of crokers at bait camps or are we talking, you can't fish with crokers at all.

I guess the next thing you are going to tell me is I can't fish with shrimp..........

SOME PEOPLE HAVE TO MUCH TIME ON THEIR HANDS.

Well, I guess my job is done. my goal was to impact the trout population by catching all the big ones and eating them........ that didn't take long!

ROFLMAO!


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

jabx1962 said:


> If you want to get someones attention.....hit them in the Wallet..
> 
> Boycott this Guide, and any business that promotes him.
> 
> Get rid of the Gutpile pics.


I'm with you Jab! I guess it's only right for him to use them.


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

Oh wait a minute, we're getting off the subject here!!


----------



## Dani California (Jul 20, 2006)

jabx1962 said:


> If you want to get someones attention.....hit them in the Wallet..
> 
> Boycott this Guide, and any business that promotes him.
> 
> Get rid of the Gutpile pics.


When Capt. Bill was a wee lad he was fishing the marsh with his dad. Down in e' matty. They were all tucked in behind the cut to this big marsh and no one could see them. My partner came in, in an air boat. He couldn't se em. They were to the right and my partner hung a left. When he did the air boat swung around and blew Capt. Bill's daddy's hat off way into the marsh. Capt. Bills Daddy was best friends with the game warden down there and reported my partner for coming too close. What a bunch of sissys if you ask me and they've been that way for decades!

Biggie


----------



## LBS (Sep 2, 2004)

It's good to see some guides posting up here. I commend those that are out there working to set examples and teach other people to enjoy and respect the coast the way it should be. 

There are two sides to this whole thing, the side that was throwing the catches of big trout on the tables, and the side that did the screaming about it. I think they both, and probably many others, have all learned some valuable lessons from the months of arguing about it, including their responsibilities, as guides, to be conservationists. So why can't they all just let it go and be stewards of the bays instead of whimpering a tune that isn't going to do anything but cause more tension and rude acts on the bay? 

I think the meeting is going to be a waste of time and an extremely one sided arguement. Being a guide for 20 years doesn't make anyone a biologist or give them the right to say that the use of any particular bait fish is going to be the demise of the game fish population. I've been fishing Matagorda very regularly for nearly 20 years myself and aside from the crowds and the inconsiderate boaters, I think the fishing is as good as it ever was, maybe better. I still have a great time everytime I go out.


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

Man there's nothing anyone can do about whining,you can vote or post or whatever! and it's not going to make no matter.And the sad thing is it's only going to get worse.


----------



## EndTuition (May 24, 2004)

OK, guys, are we are starting to self destruct? Lets keep our sense of fair play about us. If we get personal, we just loose credibility. If we stay focused, but voice our concerns in a way that helps, we all (all fishermen regardless of guide status) win. I don't like what the good Capn P is trying to do, but I don't want to be associated with the bashing of all guides over his actions if he is acting alone here. We have right here on this same post examples of well respected professional guides who feel just like we do. Let's be careful to use the right size brush when painting here. 



Again, just my opinion, and yes I know everyone has one and some of them stink.



Think I'll step away for a day or two and see if this whole thing vaporizes into nothing. 



So, what kind of Flounder season are we going to have ?


----------



## aquafowlr (May 21, 2004)

I know the harbor quit selling croakers. That'a all right, Rawling's still does. And I always buy my bait there anyways. The service just seems better.


----------



## KappaDave (Aug 29, 2005)

aquafowlr said:


> I know the harbor quit selling croakers. That'a all right, Rawling's still does. And I always buy my bait there anyways. The service just seems better.


WhaaaT??? Why would you say something like that? Get your facts straight! Russell still sells croaks when they are able to get them. Had the flags flying high Saturday morning just as they have this past summer whenever available. Russell's is one helluva harbor.... Purty much a one stop shop! As far as service goes, I don't know what the he!! your talking about... Both Russell's and Rawling's have GREAT service!


----------



## JOKER (May 16, 2007)

*The harbor*

Please do not ridicule the Hicks family, Russel and Brandy are doing a bang up job running that place.


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

I really like Russell's nice ,clean plenty of room been going there for years but, you better get a second mortgage on the house for a bag of chips! everything is soo high!.But i'll keep going. The resturante next door is really good too!


----------



## whos your daddy (Jun 2, 2004)

Russells still sells croaker. I was there when they came off the boat last week and watched them fill a tank full of croakers so get your stories straight before you open your mouth here. Russell and Brandy are good friends of mine as well as others here on this board.


----------



## aquafowlr (May 21, 2004)

Man I feel like I kicked over an ant bed. OK I'll take the hit for the croaker. I was lied to then. I took a good friends word for it. By bad. Am glad ya'll have had better dealings with Russel's than I have. I have my own opions about service. And I really don't care if you think it sticks.


----------



## Redilingus (Jul 13, 2007)

Hasn't happened yet, its on Oct 23rd.


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

aquafowlr said:


> Man I feel like I kicked over an ant bed. OK I'll take the hit for the croaker. I was lied to then. I took a good friends word for it. By bad. Am glad ya'll have had better dealings with Russel's than I have. I have my own opions about service. And I really don't care if you think it sticks.


sticks? or stinks?...LOL now thats MY bad...just kiddin!


----------



## Dani California (Jul 20, 2006)

Awl I can tell you is I have some buds that chunk meat down there and they tell me the bait at the Harbor aint worth a hoot! 

Biggie


----------



## Team Ranger Bob (Jul 13, 2004)

*This is pretty funny.*



SpeckledTrout said:


> Well, it wouldn't be the first time it happened. Look at the one trout over 25" regulation. Unfortunately, politics does play a role. There wasn't anything scientific to back that one up. It was a special interest group that pushed for it and they got what they wanted.


Speckled trout you are oh so close with that statement.
Special interest plays a huge role in what happens and these decisions are not made on science alone.

Now I know the politics and most of the players and wonder why the ones I know were not there at the Matagorda meeting when we had battles over the 25" limit.

You know really there is nothing funny about it at all because this same little petty drama is replayed over and over in in every one of our bays.

The sad part is that when there are meetings held on matters that really influence our fishing that they are almost always empty affairs with very few people who will show up and make their voice heard.

Ranger Bob

By the way Tommy and Jessie went to the Matagorda meeting with a few others, and Tommy spoke up, but all the other big names were no shows!
Tommy did I forget anybody else?


----------



## KappaDave (Aug 29, 2005)

Team Ranger Bob said:


> *The sad part is that when there are meetings held on matters that really influence our fishing that they are almost always empty affairs with very few people who will show up and make their voice heard.*
> 
> Ranger Bob


Well then have the dayum meeting on a Saturday afternoon when the "majority" of the people can and would make it! To he!! with this Tuesday night ****! Why on a Tuesday night anyhow?


----------



## Team Ranger Bob (Jul 13, 2004)

*Who knows why?*



KappaDave said:


> Well then have the dayum meeting on a Saturday afternoon when the "majority" of the people can and would make it! To he!! with this Tuesday night ****! Why on a Tuesday night anyhow?


The majority could but would not is the meaning of my comment!
Happens to often. Most really do not give a dayum when it comes to doing something about it.

But you are right better scheduling would help.

Ranger Bob


----------



## Capt. Hollis Forrester (Jun 17, 2006)

EndTuition said:


> OK, guys, are we are starting to self destruct? Lets keep our sense of fair play about us. If we get personal, we just loose credibility. If we stay focused, but voice our concerns in a way that helps, we all (all fishermen regardless of guide status) win. I don't like what the good Capn P is trying to do, but I don't want to be associated with the bashing of all guides over his actions if he is acting alone here. We have right here on this same post examples of well respected professional guides who feel just like we do. Let's be careful to use the right size brush when painting here.
> 
> Again, just my opinion, and yes I know everyone has one and some of them stink.
> 
> ...


 Exactly.. we fish artificial or we do not fish at all!! Thats my story and I'm stickin to it. I will not soak a croaker but I have nothing against it, its just my way. I just cant see myself not casting every 30 seconds, lol, its just me. I guide because I like teaching and showing not too throw limits on the table, Thats the easy part! If you see me with limits, I promise you it aint with croaker or live shrimp. Just cant do it! I hope some of you out there will back me up on the helping part cause thats what it's all about.


----------



## KappaDave (Aug 29, 2005)

I know the guys that can't make it will be well represented. Even though numbers speak volume... I think that some forget that many people "outside" Matagorda care just as much!


----------



## Capt Scott Reeh (Jan 21, 2006)

Ok....been watching this thread awhile and I'll stick my neck out also and give my opinion.I don't agree w/ banning a bait because it can lead to more banning of other baits.Just like the gun control crowd tries to do...ban this and this and this...you get the idea.What we need to do coast wide is remember that w/ the growing number of fishermen,development etc. lets take a hard look at preserving our resources now so our kids and grandkids will still be able to enjoy the outdoors when they are our age.As for some of the people bashing guides,whether it serious or not,we don't " limit out " on every outting.Some of us are fulltime and some of us are part time w/ the goal of becoming full time one day,we take people fishing because we love to teach,laugh,have fellowship,see smiles and ENJOY THE OUTDOORS!Lets try to preserve our resources now before it's too late for future generations.
I use arties 90% of the time....but I want to be able to use whatever bait I choose for the occasion....whether it be for my own kids or clients!

I couldn't make it to the first meeting at the Harbor,but I'll be in Bay City for this one as it could affect everyone sooner or later.

Next time you go fishing.....stop..look around and thank The Good Lord for what he has given us to enjoy on His earth.The sights and smells of the good ole outdoors are PRICELESS!


----------



## KappaDave (Aug 29, 2005)

Capt Scott Reeh said:


> Next time you go fishing.....stop..look around and thank The Good Lord for what he has given us to enjoy on His earth.The sights and smells of the good ole outdoors are PRICELESS!


AMEN BROTHER!!!


----------



## Run-N-Gun (Jul 5, 2007)

As I recall, the meeting was by invitation only in Matagorda on that Tuesday. I was told that if I showed up that I would be asked to leave.... I was told this by more than just one person and by people that were actually invited to the meeting. I'm glad this one is open to the public and announced ahead of time. I will not be able to make it because I have a prior commitment to a DU event in College Station, but I will know plenty of people that will be going. I don't think much will come of this meeting as far as banning croaker, but whatever does come of it as far as new regulations go, I'll trust the guys that made it because that's there job and because I/we all have to.


----------



## J Ipock (Nov 5, 2006)

FISHGUTS said:


> The Italian Stalian?


LOL!


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

KappaDave said:


> Well then have the dayum meeting on a Saturday afternoon when the "majority" of the people can and would make it! To he!! with this Tuesday night ****! Why on a Tuesday night anyhow?


they bank on no one showing up.


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

Capt Scott Reeh said:


> Ok....been watching this thread awhile and I'll stick my neck out also and give my opinion.I don't agree w/ banning a bait because it can lead to more banning of other baits.Just like the gun control crowd tries to do...ban this and this and this...you get the idea.What we need to do coast wide is remember that w/ the growing number of fishermen,development etc. lets take a hard look at preserving our resources now so our kids and grandkids will still be able to enjoy the outdoors when they are our age.As for some of the people bashing guides,whether it serious or not,we don't " limit out " on every outting.Some of us are fulltime and some of us are part time w/ the goal of becoming full time one day,we take people fishing because we love to teach,laugh,have fellowship,see smiles and ENJOY THE OUTDOORS!Lets try to preserve our resources now before it's too late for future generations.
> I use arties 90% of the time....but I want to be able to use whatever bait I choose for the occasion....whether it be for my own kids or clients!
> 
> I couldn't make it to the first meeting at the Harbor,but I'll be in Bay City for this one as it could affect everyone sooner or later.
> ...


You know,i'm not saying this to you,just speaking my mind here.You say it's about teaching, the love and fellowship,ok maybe your like that and if so my hats off to you but,imho most of them are about the MONEY making a paycheck nothing wrong with that but again imo i think the guides do way more damage than the weekend rec fisherman.why not put a limit on guide boats? say five a customer(trout) leave the reds the same.oh well i'm also with getting rid of the croaker fishing too.All these guides say'let's preserve the resourse' but, none of them wants to lower the trout limit? it's like everybody want to go to heaven but no one want dead. my 2 pennies,not bashing anybody.


----------



## LBS (Sep 2, 2004)

> All these guides say'let's preserve the resourse' but, none of them want to lower the trout limit? it's like everybody want to go to heaven but no one want dead.


I know you said you aren't bashing, but I just want to point out that there ARE some true conservationists out there. Kevin Cochran offers discounts for catch and release only trips. I haven't heard of anyone else doing this (not saying there aren't any others) and I think it's a dam fine idea. Several guides that visit here strongly encourage the release of fish over 25", as well as some of the seasoned rec guys here. I personally don't eat much fish so I usually let most everything go....I hardly ever have to clean fish and it feels good to let em go.


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

You are right! it feels great to let them big ones swim away.I do eat fish i don't eat redfish i usally let them go but,i do like fried trout!


----------



## Capt Scott Reeh (Jan 21, 2006)

FISHGUTS,
I'm all for " just keep five"!I didn't take your post in a demeaning manor so it's all good!We all have our opinions and lets just respect them.Lets just stay focused on saveing our resources, however it may be,and what changes come if they do come, aren't going to make everyone happy.


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

Capt Scott Reeh said:


> FISHGUTS,
> I'm all for " just keep five"!I didn't take your post in a demeaning manor so it's all good!We all have our opinions and lets just respect them.Lets just stay focused on saveing our resources, however it may be,and what changes come if they do come, aren't going to make everyone happy.


no problem


----------



## Leemo (Nov 16, 2006)

Well guys its like this, when Mother Nature decides to freeze that bay and knock the trout population on its butt, you won't have to worry about who caught what and with what, you'll either grin and bear it, or go on down the road, momma trout can live to be 10 yrs.old most averaging about 8, can lay as many as 1 million eggs at a time, under the right circumstances have multiple spawnings, reach sexual maturity as early as 11 months(on average 19 months), as far as not being able to make a meeting at a designated time is bs, if you want or beleive in something bad enough you'll find a way to accomplish it, my view on all of this, trout population is in good shape, until TP&W tells me different, I will not let someone else dictate when and how I can fish and by what method, do I use croakers, you bet, do I use artificials, you bet, do I keep fish, yes sir! do I listen to others opinions, only when they make sense!


----------



## Run-N-Gun (Jul 5, 2007)

Back when I first started catching a lot of trout, I was bad about keeping everything. That was before they changed the 25in law, and that was mainly because for many years I fished and didn't catch anything. That stage in my life has ran its course and this past summer, myself, clients, fellow guides working with me caught 46 trout over 25inches and we released 35 of them. The ones that were kept were for tourn., personal best for mounting, or we didn't think they would make it. We urge everyone on our trips to release anything over 25inches that they don't want for the wall, and I take plenty of pictures for them to prove it. 



A good thing that I see about a 5 trout limits that it should shorten our day. On the same note, everyone is going to expect to limit out for sure now, if they already didn't. Another good thing is that it will be easier for people to say that they limited out, not saying that's what it's all about, but you catch my drift. 



A bad thing is that if they do change the law, I believe that business will slow for just a little while before picking back up. We may lose some customers because they don't want to pay and just be able to keep five.



There are more pros and cons, that that's just a few.



Truly, we are all getting our panties in a twist on something that might not happen anytime soon. In East Matagorda Bay, the biologist are reporting bigger, healthier, and more fish than ever before (since they started surveys). So until their survey's result something different, I don't believe that they will be changing much based on that bay system. Hopefully we don't have any freezes anytime soon like the 2 in the 80's, because that would hurt the fish population way more than any fishermen are at this point. 







But no matter what, you can go on any fishing discussion board and a topic similar to this one will be up. Whether it is dealing with fishing with/without croaker, only throw artificial, keep only five, they are everywhere and they will always be there because those are different people's beliefs. It would be like trying to convert an aggie into a longhorn (or vise versa), democrat to a republican, etc. Not saying that it never happens, but you follow me. No one is legally wrong in what they believe or what they do. 







These are just my 2 or 4 cents worth on the entire deal. No bashing, just thoughts. Everyone's entitled to fish or catch however they want to me as long as they do it legally.


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

Go Longhorns!!


----------



## jabx1962 (Nov 9, 2004)

Run-N-Gun said:


> A good thing that I see about a 5 trout limits that it should shorten our day.


With this being said, your Fee should be cut in half as well?...

Or better yet, No Limit, No Pay?....

If you don't like Fishing a full day,then why are you in the Guide business?

Is it really about "Limiting Out"...


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

I hear crickets....


----------



## jabx1962 (Nov 9, 2004)

FISHGUTS said:


> I hear crickets....


The Sound is Deafening........


----------



## Dani California (Jul 20, 2006)

They shouldn't ban croakers they should make em a game fish. We have depleted the supply. Anyone see that 8 lb. Croaker caught out on the east coast? Think that thing could fight? Wouldn't we like to see the old croaker runs of the past like at Rollover??? I dont think anyone would die if they made croaker a game fish there are plenty of different kinds of bait that can be used. Croaker is seasonal anyway. They dont use em year round in most places so making them a game fish wouldnt hurt anyone. If anything it could take some pressure off our Specs. Change is a hard thing for many folks to swallow...just like the 25 inch rule it's making a big difference. You make Croaker a game fish and a lot more than just one thing is going to happen. Pressure on other species will be less, we will have an awesone fighting fish in place being craoker, our youth will get to enjoy the golden croaker run like many of the old salts here enjoyed back in the day, and live baiters will have plenty other bait to use.
The problem here is I do knot agree with the way Capt. Bill is going about this thing. It's not banning a bait...it's protecting a species. If your hearing crickets now...you gotta problem.

Biggie:biggrin:


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

I thought he was just mad cause other people were catching fish too.Don't get me wrong, i'm with you on the croaker game fish deal.


----------



## JShupe (Oct 17, 2004)

*Ummmmmm Ummmmm*

Anyone who doesn't like fried GOLDEN CROAKER is crazy....

Your right Dani.... make it a game fish, put a size limit on it and wa-la you have a new fish to fight.... you ever seen a 30in croaker??

Decrease the limit to 3 trout and 2 croaker and a redfish but redfish can ony be kept on Monday, Weds and Friday....

PROBLEM SOLVED!

and yea.. and only 1 trout over 22 becuase anything over 22 isn't really worth eating.

J-


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

And you can only use leader material on days that have a z in them!! but not in leap year.


----------



## Brine Jake (Aug 12, 2005)

jabx1962 said:


> With this being said, your Fee should be cut in half as well?...
> 
> Or better yet, No Limit, No Pay?....
> 
> ...


Heheh; well, they could leave the limit at 10 for noncommercial interests, 
and drop it to 5 for guided trips.

(Yeah, I know, all that would do is increase the black market for guided trips.)

I don't recall who it was ( a young fellow, maybe Pat Murray), but here is my kind of guide (Advertisement quote):

"I don't promise you limits; I guarantee you a good hard day of fishing."

Another thought: How often does the game warden monitor our bay house 
night catches under the lights? Heheh.


----------



## Run-N-Gun (Jul 5, 2007)

I was not saying that I don't like fishing a full day, I love being on the water. It just makes sense that if you cut the limit in half, that your day will probably be shorter. But if guys limit out and wanna keep catching and releasing, then my boats staying!!


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

I think croaker should be made a game fish they are very good table fare.A redfish without a dot...right?


----------



## A Draper (Aug 14, 2007)

I was under the impression that the 25" deal was supposed to protect those big trout. If I can only keep one a day, does it matter what I catch it with? Lets see (9) 16" trout plus (1) 26" trout caught on croaker is < or = or > (9) 16" trout plus (1) 26" trout caught on a corky. Seems like a good question for the SAT. In my experience, if you cant fish a bull minnow/shrimp tail/sand eel then you can't effectively freeline a croaker. I guess I just don't understand the need for the discussion in the first place. I think the thought process that recreational fishermen will catch less and smaller fish if not allowed to use croaker is fundementally flawed. There will just be a learning curve.

This whole thing is a grassroots campaign, correct? But, where are the roots. Invitation only meetings? Meetings scheduled to exclude? Doesn't seem well thought out.


----------



## Leemo (Nov 16, 2006)

The meeting is open to all.


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

A Draper said:


> I was under the impression that the 25" deal was supposed to protect those big trout. If I can only keep one a day, does it matter what I catch it with? Lets see (9) 16" trout plus (1) 26" trout caught on croaker is < or = or > (9) 16" trout plus (1) 26" trout caught on a corky. Seems like a good question for the SAT. In my experience, if you cant fish a bull minnow/shrimp tail/sand eel then you can't effectively freeline a croaker. I guess I just don't understand the need for the discussion in the first place. I think the thought process that recreational fishermen will catch less and smaller fish if not allowed to use croaker is fundementally flawed. There will just be a learning curve.
> 
> This whole thing is a grassroots campaign, correct? But, where are the roots. Invitation only meetings? Meetings scheduled to exclude? Doesn't seem well thought out.


Is this Andy Draper?


----------



## Capt. Hollis Forrester (Jun 17, 2006)

You want to think of destruction on the trout, well the light fishing is doing it's fair share. Everyone I've seen fishing under lights either live on the water and keep what they want or kill more fish than they keep!!!!


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

Make croaker a gamefish... next up, lets save our piggy fishery.


----------



## rat race (Aug 10, 2006)

My .02-
If you want to stop this whole thing then take your fish home to clean them don't flop them on the table for the photo. Take the fish home then acording to "their" scientific study no one will be catching fish right?

As for my opinion, fish how you want, keep what you want (within set limits), and have a good time. Enjoy the outdoors, be a good steward, and enjoy the rewards.

As for Mr. Bill P-
You elitist...Do not try and tell me how to fish, or what to fish with. It is still a free country despite all your efforts. I will fish how I wish as long as it is of legal means. I will keep what I wish within the limits. Mr. Bill P, you will never get any of my money!! And that can be scientifically proven!

RR


----------



## Fishin-Inc (May 27, 2004)

*some things*

Some things just make you say Hhmmmmmmmmmmm


----------



## TrueblueTexican (Aug 29, 2005)

*Nuts*

I been fishin saltwater since I was four years old in 1959 -- I have guided in fresh water for the last 25 years, all this Passion about C&R, limits ,one fisherman tellin another he shouldn't fish at night, shouldn't keep his legal limit, shouldn't use live bait , should only use arty's is BS plain and simple -- as long as we fish in a legal, ethical manner all of this is just noise and fury -- I pay for my license, boat and gas just like the next person does and until that person who may disagree with my style of catchin or keepin is makin the laws , I will continue to do what our PROFESSIONAL fish and game managers allow.

Five trout isn't a big deal IF there is a BIOLOGICAL reason to drop the limit and not a SOCIAL outcry from some elite bunch.

It is a fish eat fish world -- ballyhoo should be a game fish as well since big trout love to eat them


----------



## Brine Jake (Aug 12, 2005)

TrueblueTexican said:


> until that person who may disagree with my style of catchin or keepin is makin the laws , I will continue to do what our PROFESSIONAL fish and game managers allow.


I think maybe when people exercise their right of free expression about what is or is not legal or ought or ought not to be legal they are reminding us that in a representative democracy, give or take a go-between, the people _are_ in fact the ones "makin the laws". Making and changing laws has often involved some hollerin about what somebody else is or isn't doing. Since no law ever really accomplishes completely its desired end, much less utopia, the hollerin will always be with us--along with the hollerin back.

Guide on, brothah--

Gone fishing.


----------



## Freshwaterman (May 21, 2004)

> momma trout can live to be 10 yrs.old most averaging about 8, can lay as many as 1 million eggs at a time, *under the right circumstances have multiple spawnings*, reach sexual maturity as early as 11 months(on average 19 months), as far as not being able to make a meeting at a designated time is bs





> Five trout isn't a big deal IF there is a *BIOLOGICAL* reason to drop the limit and not a *SOCIAL* outcry from *some elite bunch*.


They spawn, on average, every 3 to 5 days throughout the warmer months of the year. That's a lot of babies. Granted, a lot will never reach maturity, but many will. People who are worried about keeping their limit of fish need to realize this simple, biological fact.

This is why they rebound so fast after a natural disaster, like a freeze. For every fish you keep, you're making room for another to fill it's place. It's how nature works.


----------



## BeachCityBoy (May 27, 2007)

Nobody could say it any better than you just did....greenie for ya !



TrueblueTexican said:


> I been fishin saltwater since I was four years old in 1959 -- I have guided in fresh water for the last 25 years, all this Passion about C&R, limits ,one fisherman tellin another he shouldn't fish at night, shouldn't keep his legal limit, shouldn't use live bait , should only use arty's is BS plain and simple -- as long as we fish in a legal, ethical manner all of this is just noise and fury -- I pay for my license, boat and gas just like the next person does and until that person who may disagree with my style of catchin or keepin is makin the laws , I will continue to do what our PROFESSIONAL fish and game managers allow.
> 
> Five trout isn't a big deal IF there is a BIOLOGICAL reason to drop the limit and not a SOCIAL outcry from some elite bunch.
> 
> It is a fish eat fish world -- ballyhoo should be a game fish as well since big trout love to eat them


----------



## AgaveFlats (Oct 5, 2005)

*Meeting tonight?*

or has this "baited" situation run its course? Work demands have derailed
some of us attending this event.


----------



## Capt. Rob Baylor (Aug 12, 2005)

Well I just got back to the house from the meeting. I will be interested in seeing what will come from tonights town hall. Alot of great things were brought up and I think at the end everyone has one common goal. To protect the resource and insure a future for the bay system. I just hope that everyone can agree on a cause of action that will insure such a grand future. I am sure that there will be more to follow regarding this matter. Good night to all!


----------



## Capt Scott Reeh (Jan 21, 2006)

It was nice chatting w/ you at the meeting Rob!I believe last nights meeting will bring change to East Matagorda Bay that our future generations will benefit from.As stated, a proactive rather than reactive approach to protect this little bay of its resorce is the way to go.


----------



## spotsndots (May 20, 2005)

Hey Scott or Rob...could either one of you please give those of us that couldn't make it down there last night a quick run down of what was actually discussed in this meeting? I have heard so many different things I am just curious. Thanks in advance.


Jim


----------



## Redilingus (Jul 13, 2007)

spotsndots said:


> Hey Scott or Rob...could either one of you please give those of us that couldn't make it down there last night a quick run down of what was actually discussed in this meeting? I have heard so many different things I am just curious. Thanks in advance.
> 
> Jim


Ditto


----------



## wil.k (Aug 22, 2005)

Anybody know what went down at the *Future of Matagorda Bay Trout- Meeting *last night ????????????/


----------



## Capt. Rob Baylor (Aug 12, 2005)

Okay, Please forgive the late response as I was on the water. Here is my take on the meeting. It started off as an attempt to show that the use of croaker in East Matagorda Bay is having a detrimental effect on the larger sea trout population. However the TP&W did not have the fall gill net data as they are not finished with the collection of data so the meeting then turned into a short bashing session with the guides blaming the recreational fisherman for the use of croaker as the perceived cause of a future down turn in large specs and the recreational fisherman blaming the guides for constantly keeping limits of specs. After that debate relaxed I think some real progress started to happen as everyone realized that we all have the same goal, that is to insure that we can maintain the fishery with current limits and insure a future healthy fishery. Maybe everyone connected on some level and good things will come from future meetings. I think the most important thing is to remember not to fish or retain fish outside the legal limits. I fish for myself as much as possible and most of the time I only keep what I plan to eat that week. I know for most of you that is not possible as you only have the ability to fish a few times a year and therefore you prefer to catch limits of trouts and reds. I think that no one has a problem with that as long as they can go on the assumption that the fish will not just go to waste in the freezer. Everyone is a steward of our natural resources and I would love more than anything to see people step up and work together to protect it. Just take the time to tell someone whom has kept undersized trout or reds or have more than they should that it is not cool anymore to retain more in size and limit than the law allows. If everyone fished within the law I think things would stay as they are but if not you can bet there will be a decline in population and the TP&W will do what needs to be done to protect the fishery and we as avid outdoor sportspersons may not like how or what they do. We can control our future (well that is if mother nature doesn't throw us a curve like she did in the 80's and 90's with the freeze). Good luck to everyone. Keep a tight line but most of all introduce a kid to the great outdoors.


----------



## GSMAN (May 22, 2004)

Thanks for the summary Captain Baylor!


----------



## Capt. Rob Baylor (Aug 12, 2005)

I want to clarify a couple of things. It is unfair for the to lump people into two categories. So it would be better said that a few guides and a few recreational fisherman. My point was that we all share the same bay systems and we had better start working together or we might not like what the future holds. Is it just me or does it always seem that the few ruin it for the many.


----------



## Brine Jake (Aug 12, 2005)

> "After that debate relaxed I think some real progress started to happen as everyone realized that we all have the same goal, that is to insure that we can maintain the fishery with current limits and insure a future healthy fishery. Maybe everyone connected on some level and good things will come from future meetings. " Capt Rob
> 
> Thanks for the report. From what I can tell of it, nothing substantive
> happened, plusl the above, and then you included your opinion that you see that as reasonably good news. Sounds OK to me, too.
> ...


----------



## Leemo (Nov 16, 2006)

What you guys don't understand about net surveys is that they are biased, computer generated "spots" to make there sets, hogwash, I can take you places in that bay where you won't catch a hardhead, Balboa will tell you, how the heck can you get correct data from a net or any other means for that matter if their not set correctly, that would be like TX DOT surveying how many people use hwy. 59 from 2:00 am- 3o am, come on, get for real, hire a commercial fisherman to set em', oh excuse me- that would be inappropriate, talk about screw up historical data!!!!! the day is coming when the whiners will win, simple reason, who ever greases the spoke gets to turn the wheel.. enough said.. LK


----------



## Brine Jake (Aug 12, 2005)

Leemo said:


> What you guys don't understand about net surveys is that they are biased, computer generated "spots" to make there sets, hogwash,... LK


Interesting; I can see how consistency is important year to year, and that that is hard to get becuase conditions change. I don't know how they determine where to set their nets.
Tell us how you know they are wrong.


----------



## Capt. Rob Baylor (Aug 12, 2005)

Mr. Brine Jake, Your assumption is correct. As I recall the TP&W's official position was as a delivery client for data only. They only attended the meeting on the request of a couple of local concerned guides that believed the use of croaker as bait during the summer had a major impact on the larger sea trout population. As the meeting went on I do recall a statement to the extent that the TP&W see no data to support the reduction of size or count limits in the East Matagorda Bay complex.


----------



## jabx1962 (Nov 9, 2004)

There should not have been any Official Texas Parks and Wildlife Representative supplying State Funded Data to a Private Interest group in an UnOfficial Public forum. 


Hopefully, the Matagorda Midget, and Posse will get off the Gutpile, and Shut Up about the Croakers.


----------



## spotsndots (May 20, 2005)

I talked to a person in attendance and what I got out of it was that the parks and wildlife guys wouldn't make and decisions until all the info was taken back to their bosses and everything was analyzed but it sounded like pretty much of the majority of people in attendance were against banning any particular bait. They realize that there are people on both ends of the extreme spectrum and the goal is to try to meet somewhere in the middle with their decisions.

Everybody was concerned about protecting the resources for the future which is understandably good. One of the brainstorming ideas brought up which I really liked was that of: changing the limits on trout and redfish. Decrease trout to 5 and increase reds to 4 or 5. We talked about abunch of different ideas but that was the one that got my attention.


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

Thanks for the report Rob!


----------



## bjones2571 (May 2, 2007)

Redilingus said:


> One is Bill Pustejovsky (http://www.goldtipguideservice.com/goldtip/default.asp), don't know other one.


Shocking that he is promoting the ban considering all the pictures he has of stringers full of large sows. What a hypocrite!!!

Brendan


----------



## Brine Jake (Aug 12, 2005)

jabx1962 said:


> There should not have been any Official Texas Parks and Wildlife Representative supplying State Funded Data to a Private Interest group in an UnOfficial Public forum.


I dunno why you say that; once at a GCCA meeting up in Houston, the guest was a TPW rep who presented the entire net survey results with a copy for each attendee. Maybe it has to do with the definition of 'official'.


----------



## jabx1962 (Nov 9, 2004)

Brine Jake said:


> I dunno why you say that; once at a GCCA meeting up in Houston, the guest was a TPW rep who presented the entire net survey results with a copy for each attendee. Maybe it has to do with the definition of 'official'.


It has everything to do with "Official"...


----------



## Sow Trout (Jun 28, 2004)

Parks and Wildlife officials should provide data paid for by taxpayers to any gathering that has an interest. This meeting was open to everyone who was interested. There was nothing private about it.


jabx1962 said:


> There should not have been any Official Texas Parks and Wildlife Representative supplying State Funded Data to a Private Interest group in an UnOfficial Public forum.
> 
> Hopefully, the Matagorda Midget, and Posse will get off the Gutpile, and Shut Up about the Croakers.


----------



## LBS (Sep 2, 2004)

> Decrease trout to 5 and increase reds to 4 or 5.


What sense does that make? I would say ok to decrease trout limits if TPWD justified that there really is a problem. But why increase limits on reds to compensate? Leave the redfish alone.


----------



## Leemo (Nov 16, 2006)

Brine Jake- consistency is the key, you are 100% correct, BUT you cannot get consistency from computer generated creel or "set" surveys, things change, computers do not allow for this, only if and when the programer enters the data for change, if you go to your mailbox every evening at 7:00 pm. to get your mail and one day your mail box is moved across town and the only time you can check your mail now is at 3:00 pm., has anything changed? my point-I've seen Balboa and his crews in the past take samples for the upcoming oyster season on reefs that have been dead for yrs., pull a mud- dredge when they should have used a skimmer, etc... I don't mean to bash Bill and his crew they are friends of mine only doing what they're told to do, but to make a conclusion that something is wrong based only on "sets" @ a specific time frame is wrong, I guess the next time I need a physical I'll go see a vet., are'nt they both doctors?


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

Was little BP there? and if so did he have anything to say about all those big trout the he keeps? day in and day out? .....or is it ok for him to do it cause you know, he owns that bay and all! man this is gonna go no where.Why don't TPW just put a five trout limit all up and down the coast? IMO i don't think it would hurt.but like i said imo.


----------



## Doubleover (Jul 7, 2005)

I keep hearing about gill net surveys but no one that I have seen has mentioned anything about the surveys TP&W take from fisherman, The last couple of times fishing Matagorda I have had to take a survey at the marina. These surverys would seem to be more accurate being that they are taken weekly.


----------



## Mont (Nov 17, 1998)

The way gill net surveys work is fairly simple and hasn't changed since they began doing them (called benchmarking). 

Each bay is divided into a grid. Each square of the grid is assigned a number. A random number or numbers is generated and the nets are set in that grid overnight. In the morning, they pull the nets and count the catch. The nets are set out perpendicular to the shore. The methodology isn't changed so the year to year results can be compared. 

Creel surveys (where they count your fish at the dock) are done a little differently, but the methodology is consistent from year to year.


----------



## Leemo (Nov 16, 2006)

Mont-random #'s do not take into account feeding patterns, weather conditions, moon phases, I know these are randomly selected and compared, but you can't compare a Honda Goldwing to a mini bike is the point I was trying to get across, not start an argument with anybody, just simply stating the facts, computer generated.


----------



## redfishflyfisherdds (Mar 16, 2005)

Just FYI, You don't "have" to take the TP&W survey. It is voluntary.


----------



## Freshwaterman (May 21, 2004)

> The last couple of times fishing Matagorda I have had to take a survey at the marina. These surverys would seem to be more accurate being that they are taken weekly.


*What????* *Gillnets are way better at showing what is actually out in the bay.* *They don't have to know how to fish!*

A lot of "people" don't catch fish because they don't know what they are doing. Some people think that buying an expensive boat and the "best" gear instantly turns them into a fisherman who should be able to put lots of fish in the boat. Heck, some of them even think it turns them into a guide.


----------



## Brine Jake (Aug 12, 2005)

Leemo said:


> ...you cannot get consistency from computer generated creel or "set" surveys, things change, computers do not allow for this, only if and when the programer enters the data for change,...but to make a conclusion that something is wrong based only on "sets" @ a specific time frame is wrong,...


Thanks much for the reply; you seem to know a lot about this. Some of your comments reflect what I meant when I wrote that changes in conditions affect the consistency of the surveys. It's not unlike going fishing next week doing what you did last week and expecting similar results without allowing for changes in tide, temp, etc. I get that part.
You seem to believe that the biologists/guys in charge are not providing relevant programming changes, based on your observations of working the "wrong" areas. Surely they know at least as much as we know about the need for this. Maybe they have a time span requirement before eliminating
an area, for example. Ohh--I see--shoulda read to the end first. The random generations are what concerns you most.
(I'm not giving you a hard time--I appreciate your perspective and want to know more about how these things are done. I share your concern for accurate measurement.)

So what do you think they should do instead?


----------



## Mont (Nov 17, 1998)

Lemmo, the only thing computer generated is the number of the particular grid to be surveyed. That's it. The rest is up to the gill nets. The whole concept is based upon doing the same thing for years and years and comparing the results. It's not a computer model, like NMFS uses for their "studies". The numbers could easily be written on a piece of paper and drawn from a hat. Same concept.


----------



## Brine Jake (Aug 12, 2005)

Mont said:


> ... The whole concept is based upon doing the same thing for years and years and comparing the results. ...


and using established stat's rules and procedures to avoid overresponding to 
a single result, "smoothing" the graphs over time, etc.


----------



## Leemo (Nov 16, 2006)

Doing the same thing for yrs. and yrs. and comparing the results is comparing Ford model T's to todays vehicles, East Mat. Bay has been changed, it is not and will continue to be not as it was just 19 yrs. ago, everything changed when the Diversion channel was dug and parkers cut closed, yeah, yeah, I know the channel and Parkers is in West bay, let me finish, before these 2 things happened, the current in the canal east of the locks predominately flowed from the west to the east at a slow continuos pace dumping out the southern end at sergt., after the channel was dug and parkers closed the water flow split, shrimp no longer "dumped" like they use to in sergt. on a moon change, a few still do, but most on Mat. end now, the current in the ditch runs now @ almost 2.4 kts. most of the time, all the currents in the bay have changed, reefs that were dead are alive, and the ones that were alive are dead, I could go on and on, my message is that I see nothing wrong with "sets" if they take in all the relevant data of TODAY, I feel that I cannot get my message across that this Bay has changed, why not correspond the surveys to comply with the changes, simple reason, who's gonna do it, who's gonna understand what's happened, unless you have seen what has happened and the changes that have occured, how can you make any assumption at all, for the record, Bill came to work at the Palacios office after these changes, but then again, if you choose not to decide you still have made a choice!


----------



## Freshwaterman (May 21, 2004)

> I feel that I cannot get *my message across that this Bay has changed, why not correspond the surveys to comply with the changes*, simple reason, who's gonna do it, who's gonna understand what's happened, unless you have seen what has happened and the changes that have occured, how can you make any assumption at all, for the record, Bill came to work at the Palacios office after these changes, but then again, if you choose not to decide you still have made a choice!


If a particular bay system produced a certain amount, of a certain species, at a particular size range X years ago, and *STILL* produces *at least* the same amounts/sizes, then *WHAT THE HECK DOES THE TIDE HAVE TO DO WITH IT????? *
*The answer is, it doesn't. Limits aren't set according to tidal flows. They are set according to the amounts and availability of a particular species. *


----------



## Leemo (Nov 16, 2006)

Speckledtrout- thanks for the input, I once again apologize, I thought the tidal boogeyman set the limits, boy was I wrong, my fault I'll say no more on this matter, never been to eastbay, as a matter of fact I don't even know what a trout is, thanks for enlightening me as to what a dumb arse I am.


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

Man i thought it was all about little bill not wanting anyone to catch big trout too by using croaker for bait?


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

FISHGUTS said:


> Man i thought it was all about little bill not wanting anyone to catch big trout too by using croaker for bait?


Guess he is trying to get the tides changed too so he don't get in over his waders :wink:


----------



## FISHGUTS (Jun 5, 2007)

Haute Pursuit said:


> Guess he is trying to get the tides changed too so he don't get in over his waders :wink:


yup!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11


----------



## capn (Aug 11, 2005)

Leemo said:


> Doing the same thing for yrs. and yrs. and comparing the results is comparing Ford model T's to todays vehicles, East Mat. Bay has been changed, it is not and will continue to be not as it was just 19 yrs. ago,


You're really not a stats guy, are you. 

The only thing that would make comparisons mean anything is having an unchanged procedure for selecting spots for sets. The idea in the sets is not to only put nets on productive areas - that would lead to overestimation of the population. It's also to not only put nets on unproductive areas, which would lead to underestimation. You have to put nets on both to get an accurate reading, and you have to do it consistently year after year after year to be able to compare results between years.

The fact that the bay has changed has NO EFFECT. It only means that different areas will be productive and unproductive. A random selection of the locations to put the nets means that nets were/are put in areas that are both productive and non-productive both then and now.

This is purely methodology to create unbiased results, and has to do with math, not fishing ability or knowledge. If you start hand picking the areas to set nets, you introduce bias which will necessarily skew the numbers. The computer is used to reduce bias.


----------



## Freshwaterman (May 21, 2004)

> thanks for enlightening me as to what a dumb arse I am.


*No problem. You're welcome! *

*By the way, I'm just messing with you! *

*capn, well said.* I couldn't have said it any better. However, some people will never understand the methodology.


----------



## Mont (Nov 17, 1998)

> Doing the same thing for yrs. and yrs. and comparing the results is comparing Ford model T's to todays vehicles,


step away from fisheries for a moment and take a look at the quote.

A Model T got a certain mileage, what it was, I don't know.
A modern f-150 gets a certain mileage, again, I don't know how much.

But, MPG is a constant measuring stick for the 2 vehicles, regardless of when they were made.

The fishery stock in the bays is measured in a constant manner. It doesn't matter if the bay changes, it's the stock in the bay they are interested in. Just like MPG, the fish stock size is a measurement. Change the test and the measurements become non comparable.


----------



## Leemo (Nov 16, 2006)

Not to change the subject, but if I run for govnr., will ya' vote for me?


----------



## capn (Aug 11, 2005)

We already have enough politicians in office that don't understand high school math!


----------

