# Lower the trout limit?



## YoungGun1 (Jan 8, 2009)

I, personally, would love to see the trout limit lowered to 5 a day. Thoughts?


----------



## DUKFVR (Aug 19, 2004)

Me too.


----------



## JLKing (Jul 17, 2008)

That, and keep the 1 over 25"' rule.


----------



## 3rdbarnottoodeep (May 1, 2009)

Why? Are they endangered? Takes a lot of effort to get on the water for 5 trout.


----------



## YoungGun1 (Jan 8, 2009)

JLKing said:


> That, and keep the 1 over 25"' rule.


x2 again! I think we are on the same page JLKing!


----------



## callsignsleepy (Apr 3, 2007)

why? there's a *****in' amount of specs out there...


----------



## Empty Pockets CC (Feb 18, 2009)

We already can only keep 5 in some areas that I fish. I don't mind that limit at all. Plenty of fish for everyone and it is helping the trout in those areas. I think one over 25" is also a good rule in my opinion...Why eat something that big anyways!?!? It's the smaller ones that taste good!


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

No one is making YOU keep more than 5 trout. Trout populations are very healthy right now. Some guys don't get to go fish every week... They should be able to keep what TPWD determines will keep a healthy population.


----------



## Ckill (Mar 9, 2007)

Yep, could not agree more.



Haute Pursuit said:


> No one is making YOU keep more than 5 trout. Trout populations are very healthy right now. Some guys don't get to go fish every week... They should be able to keep what TPWD determines will keep a healthy population.


----------



## YoungGun1 (Jan 8, 2009)

Haute Pursuit said:


> *No one is making YOU keep more than 5 trout*. Trout populations are very healthy right now. Some guys don't get to go fish every week... They should be able to keep what TPWD determines will keep a healthy population.


So then why don't we raise the limit to 20 specs a person (very sarcastic tone)? I mean...no one is MAKING YOU keep that many! That is an absurd argument! The reason we should lower it to 5 is because of those out there that have zero discretion in their blood and need the law to limit them. Is a 5 bag limit really that tight? That is 10 fillets!

I'm young (24 yrs old) and would love to see the trout population be plentiful for my children!

I'll be waiting for the remarks about my age and inexperience...yadah yadah yadah...at least make the comments creative...


----------



## Super Dave (May 26, 2004)

3rdbarnottoodeep said:


> Why? Are they endangered? Takes a lot of effort to get on the water for 5 trout.





dlsalva said:


> why? there's a *****in' amount of specs out there...





Haute Pursuit said:


> No one is making YOU keep more than 5 trout. Trout populations are very healthy right now. Some guys don't get to go fish every week... They should be able to keep what TPWD determines will keep a healthy population.


you guys need to keep up with the facts. there is almost a complete absence of spawning trout in the class of 18-26 inches coastwide due to the pressure and targeting of those size trout by live bait anglers and the guides. In a recent seine survey in Rockport the entire catch in multiple sets was 4 trout. If people keep up the meat hauls they'lll soon be looking at a possible fishery closure during spawning cycles.

Even Calcasieu has lowered their limits because the trout hauls are much lower because of the pressure. Guides there have also discovered croakers and therein lies the problem.


----------



## TRW (Nov 30, 2006)

*Why*

If you are so concerned about the Trout population Then I think you should just keep none. TPW seem to have more qualified people to figure out what the limit should Be. When they take it away it is hard to get it back.

TRW


----------



## YoungGun1 (Jan 8, 2009)

TRW said:


> If you are so concerned about the Trout population Then I think you should just keep none. TPW seem to have more qualified people to figure out what the limit should Be. When they take it away it is hard to get it back.
> 
> TRW


I am a catch and release fisherman. I don't have a problem with those that keep trout but when you see 4 people come in with 40 trout (80 fillets) it makes you ask yourself...is that really necessary?

Just my opinion.


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

YoungGun1 said:


> So then why don't we raise the limit to 20 specs a person (very sarcastic tone)? I mean...no one is MAKING YOU keep that many! That is an absurd argument! The reason we should lower it to 5 is because of those out there that have zero discretion in their blood and need the law to limit them. Is a 5 bag limit really that tight? That is 10 fillets!
> 
> I'm young (24 yrs old) and would love to see the trout population be plentiful for my children!
> 
> I'll be waiting for the remarks about my age and inexperience...yadah yadah yadah...at least make the comments creative...


The law already limits the catch. They already lowered the limits down south to 5 fish. Do you think you are better qualified than a TPWD fisheries biologist?

The rest of your post makes no sense.


----------



## trout-thumper (Apr 24, 2008)

all i have to say is look at what the 5 trout limit has done to the LLM... made a great fishery.. SUPERB.. and i agree with Younggun.. I am a 23 yr old fisherman that may not have the experience as some.. but wanna be fishing for many yrs to come..


----------



## frenzyfinder (Jul 8, 2008)

Haute Pursuit said:


> No one is making YOU keep more than 5 trout. Trout populations are very healthy right now. Some guys don't get to go fish every week... They should be able to keep what TPWD determines will keep a healthy population.


X2


----------



## YoungGun1 (Jan 8, 2009)

Haute Pursuit said:


> The law already limits the catch. *They already lowered the limits down south to 5 fish.* Do you think you are better qualified than a TPWD fisheries biologist?
> 
> The rest of your post makes no sense.


Any why do you think they did that?

Am I as qualified as a TPWD fisheries biologist? No.

I do, however, fish in Rockport and in my short life I have seen the trout numbers deplete. One year we caught 20+ fish over 25" and last year we caught 6 over 25". I don't need to be a fisheries biologist to make the connection.


----------



## TRW (Nov 30, 2006)

*Yes*

If each person takes their 20 fillets home and they eat fish a couple times a week 20 fillets do not last long for a family of four and they invented this thing called a freezer which can keep fish for a while if you store them correct. I also have faith in TPW to make the Decision over some one who just Feels that 10 trout a person is to Much. Not everyone catches a limit (even on Guided Trips) Every time they go Fishing. Whats next just keep 0

TRW


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

YoungGun1 said:


> Any why do you think they did that?
> 
> Am I as qualified as a TPWD fisheries biologist? No.


I think they did that to prove my point that they should be trusted in setting limits.


----------



## cfred (Jun 13, 2004)

YoungGun1 said:


> I'll be waiting for the remarks about my age and inexperience...yadah yadah yadah...at least make the comments creative...


Paranoid much?


----------



## cfred (Jun 13, 2004)

BTW, no I don't think they should lower the limits up here. I only say that because they haven't done it. If they do, I probably won't like it, but I will also realize that they are the experts that do this for a living, and as their passion, so they might know more than me. My personal experience is that I am catching more and bigger trout than I ever have, but I also think that has a lot to do with my skills getting better. I also know that it's pretty rare that we catch a boat limit when we go, so we like most aren't putting too much of a hurting on the population. Just some thoughts. Now relax and try and have a civilized conversation, if that's possible on this topic.


----------



## Empty Pockets CC (Feb 18, 2009)

I usually don't even keep five...I usually keep none! Every once in awhile I'll keep some for a fish fry or dinner. YoungGun has the rest of my comments in his post. The amount of fish that were being killed a year down south of Port Mansfield was sick. They lowered the limit because they thought it was sick too. Some of those "boats" were keeping 50-60 trout A DAY and they were fishing a lot during the week. 
In my opinion, it goes farther than Texas Parks and Game...It goes to what I personally believe...Maybe me throwing some of them back will make up for the other guys...I'm no tree hugger or even close to it but I'll do what I want to do and the "limit out ya cool" guys do what you want to do...


----------



## Andy_Holland_25 (Aug 8, 2007)

Haute Pursuit said:


> No one is making YOU keep more than 5 trout. Trout populations are very healthy right now. Some guys don't get to go fish every week... They should be able to keep what TPWD determines will keep a healthy population.


X3
You See the thing is after a few years of five ya'll will want two and so on. I say we let our wonderfull TP&W Bio. staff figure out the facts. They have done a great job thus far and they are the ones doing the studies.


----------



## Fish-a-mon (May 21, 2004)

Too the post on last year we caught 20+ over 25" on this year only 6. that means you have not been as lucky.

LLM has always been a great fishery, it will be better becuae of the lower limits until that big freeze happens again. Then we will have fish being eaten by crabs and pigs again.

Biologist set the limits. We can only set our own limits. If you want to keep 5 then do so. I think the 1 over 25" should be nothing over 25".


----------



## TexSpec (Jun 28, 2006)

So the basis of your argument is that you caught less fish over 25" over the last few years. Yep, that definitely means that the fish population is depleted. We better do something. The sky is falling. If you don't think it's right to keep 10 then don't. If you see me at the ramp with 4 limits try not to look. Your idea has merit and you are showing that you are conservationally aware, but there is just no reason at this time to make those types of changes.


----------



## YoungGun1 (Jan 8, 2009)

Super Dave said:


> you guys need to keep up with the facts. there is almost a complete absence of spawning trout in the class of 18-26 inches coastwide due to the pressure and targeting of those size trout by live bait anglers and the guides. In a recent seine survey in Rockport the entire catch in multiple sets was 4 trout. If people keep up the meat hauls they'lll soon be looking at a possible fishery closure during spawning cycles.
> 
> Even Calcasieu has lowered their limits because the trout hauls are much lower because of the pressure. Guides there have also discovered croakers and therein lies the problem.


Did any of you even read Super Dave's post?

I agree SD!


----------



## btreybig (Jul 3, 2008)

how bout instead of lowering the limit, raise the legal size limit to 18".


----------



## Solid Action (May 21, 2004)

They need to at least cut the guide boats to a 5 trout limit per person. It is the guides that haul 40 trout out each day that are putting a dent in the population, not the recreational fisherman.


----------



## Empty Pockets CC (Feb 18, 2009)

Solid Action said:


> They need to at least cut the guide boats to a 5 trout limit per person. It is the guides that haul 40 trout out each day that are putting a dent in the population, not the recreational fisherman.


Glad somebody said this...Does anyone know how many guides there are South of Port Mansfield? Not including Port Mansfield...It will make you sick to your stomach...I've seen them come in with limit after limit after limit for days on end during the summer...
I'm glad we can only keep 5 down there...It has made our fishery awesome and limits some of the destruction that was going on for awhile...


----------



## rut-ro (Oct 12, 2008)

not trying to start anything but why do people say they dont mind lowering the daily bag limit? Is that because they havent messed with it yet? Last year when they started messing with the flounder regs. everyone got their panties in a bunch. I trust TP&W and I trust that they have been researching everything and have way more insight than most of us. Lets just let them do their job!!!!


----------



## Shallow Sport68 (Oct 14, 2008)

Solid Action said:


> They need to at least cut the guide boats to a 5 trout limit per person. It is the guides that haul 40 trout out each day that are putting a dent in the population, not the recreational fisherman.


I agree 100%!!!!!!!


----------



## A Draper (Aug 14, 2007)

Is it the heat? There is a lot less bickering in February. I know a lot fisherman, myself included, that never catch a trout limit. If they lower the limit to say 2, I would feel much better about posting my fishing reports.


----------



## jeffsfishin (Jan 27, 2008)

Solid Action said:


> They need to at least cut the guide boats to a 5 trout limit per person. It is the guides that haul 40 trout out each day that are putting a dent in the population, not the recreational fisherman.


Correct , and the State also needs to start a limited entry on guide license's in the State. The same as they have done with commercial fisherman and shrimpers.


----------



## El Cazador (Mar 4, 2005)

The Jr. Game Wardens at it once again. If y'all want to limits yourselves to five...go ahead. 

The limits are fine the way they are!


----------



## Super Dave (May 26, 2004)

when ya'll see what's coming down the pike by TPWL either this year or next maybe you will get the picture. Your freezer won't help you much cause the possession limit will also be drastically reduced. And those guides that conduct meat hauls on the eagle point spoil banks every year twice a day during the summer with croakers will get the message also. The missing class of fish was introduced to the public a couple years ago in meetings across the coast. As a result of those meetings the guide limit was zeroed and the 1 over 25 was introduced. More is coming. It is my understanding talks are underway by TPWL with informed and concerned anglers coastwide looking for suggestions to correct the declining populations. The seine surveys tell the story and the die has been cast. Soon, you may be fishing without hooks.


----------



## btreybig (Jul 3, 2008)

jeffsfishin said:


> Correct , and the State also needs to start a limited entry on guide license's in the State. The same as they have done with commercial fisherman and shrimpers.


x2, there are way to many guides out there. Seems like everyone wants to be a guide these days. Not doggin' on you guides but just seems like everyday someone else wants to get into the business.


----------



## uncle dave (Jul 27, 2008)

solid action, what you stated in your post makes a lot of sense.


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

TPWD could also institute a per day guide boat limit per the # of anglers to eliminate the guys who are booking 2 trips a day.


----------



## cfred (Jun 13, 2004)

Why limit the number of guides Obama? What happened to free enterprise and such? If they can't catch fish and get along with people then they won't last. But I don't think we should be able to decide whether they want to try to open a business. What if I got on here telling you what I thought you should or should not be able to do for a living?


----------



## Muddskipper (Dec 29, 2004)

The trout all have PCB's anyway......


----------



## Reel Sweet (Jun 29, 2008)

Agree! and croaker soakers catch toooo many fish!


----------



## 3rdbarnottoodeep (May 1, 2009)

All you 5 limit guys keep your 5 trout. I`ll keep my 10 till TPW tells me otherwise.


----------



## surfspeck (Jun 7, 2006)

How about trout tags.... LOL!!


----------



## CaptDoug (May 24, 2004)

Haute Pursuit said:


> They should be able to keep what TPWD determines will keep a healthy population.


Agreed 100% I believe we have the best biologist in the country with TPWD. If they think it should be lowered, I'm all for it. Now if it were NMFS making the call I would be looking at the motive for the change in the rules!  As with the Snapper issue, TPWD didn't see a need to reduce the limits of the (over populated :smile Red Snapper as did the Feds. I'll trust our state guys to do the right thing!


----------



## BUBAFISH (Jun 10, 2008)

I THINK YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO LOWER THE SIZE TO 12" SO YOU WOULD NOT HURT SO MANY SMALL FISH AND IT WOULD EASE UP ON THE LARGER FISH.


----------



## ANYBDYHERE (Mar 16, 2007)

Super Dave said:


> you guys need to keep up with the facts. there is almost a complete absence of spawning trout in the class of 18-26 inches coastwide due to the pressure and targeting of those size trout by live bait anglers and the guides. In a recent seine survey in Rockport the entire catch in multiple sets was 4 trout. If people keep up the meat hauls they'lll soon be looking at a possible fishery closure during spawning cycles.
> 
> Even Calcasieu has lowered their limits because the trout hauls are much lower because of the pressure. Guides there have also discovered croakers and therein lies the problem.





trout-thumper said:


> all i have to say is look at what the 5 trout limit has done to the LLM... made a great fishery.. SUPERB.. and i agree with Younggun.. I am a 23 yr old fisherman that may not have the experience as some.. but wanna be fishing for many yrs to come..





YoungGun1 said:


> Any why do you think they did that?
> 
> Am I as qualified as a TPWD fisheries biologist? No.
> 
> I do, however, fish in Rockport and in my short life I have seen the trout numbers deplete. One year we caught 20+ fish over 25" and last year we caught 6 over 25". I don't need to be a fisheries biologist to make the connection.


I somewhat agree with Super D..I do think that Guides should be given a lower bag limit...we all know when guides know where the bite is, they can deplete that area very quickly in a couple days till the fish move on..We should not place blame on "Live Bait" users tho.....As many of you know,when you are in an area where trout are and feeding the bite is on....Your chances of catching your limit are increased with live bait, but you can do as well with arties. I fish both live and arty..

Thumper.... You may see an increase in fish in the 15 to 18" range but its way to early to tell how well the lower bag limit has affected that area...Trout dont grow that fast...

Younggun...I fish Rockport on a regular basis....I still catch quality fish...We happen to be at the right spot at the right time in Feb. and caught 40 to 50 plus fish (all on arties) all over 21" and 10 plus to 25"..

Im not knocking any of you here...In my opinion they should actually raise the min. length to say 16" or 17" and propose a 5 trout limit....I do 2 or 3 meat hauls a year and that takes care of family and friends...Friends and I keep only trout over 16". If there is change to be made....I think anything from the Land Cut to POC should be the area of focus. Tight lines to all!


----------



## TRW (Nov 30, 2006)

Super Dave,
Please post up a link for the this survey . I think last year or mabey two years ago TPW said the Trout population was doing good for the upper coast. I would like to see them. If the lower or middle coast is having problems then I trust TPW to do what ever they see fit for all areas of the coast. Just because one area is having trouble does not mean all of the texas coast is.

TRW


----------



## ANYBDYHERE (Mar 16, 2007)

Haute Pursuit said:


> No one is making YOU keep more than 5 trout. Trout populations are very healthy right now. Some guys don't get to go fish every week... They should be able to keep what TPWD determines will keep a healthy population.


 HP....The limit established has been in place for many years....Takes way too long for them to gather enough info to make changes....Alot of us see the decline in some areas we fish regularly..How much longer is it going to take to make changes needed now??? :question:


----------



## jeffsfishin (Jan 27, 2008)

cfred said:


> Why limit the number of guides Obama? What happened to free enterprise and such? If they can't catch fish and get along with people then they won't last. But I don't think we should be able to decide whether they want to try to open a business. What if I got on here telling you what I thought you should or should not be able to do for a living?


Then do you agree with TP&W limiting the number of shrimpers in the bay or the commercial red snapper fisherman in the gulf, or the finfish license holders that can gig 60 flounder a night. Sometimes free enterprise will jump up and bite you. Really I do not see any differnce.


----------



## cfred (Jun 13, 2004)

jeffsfishin said:


> Then do you agree with TP&W limiting the number of shrimpers in the bay or the commercial red snapper fisherman in the gulf, or the finfish license holders that can gig 60 flounder a night. Sometimes free enterprise will jump up and bite you. Really I do not see any differnce.


I see your point, but it feels different for some reason. Will have to put some more thought into that.


----------



## Trout-deluxe (Apr 6, 2009)

Alright now, make room for the retard...

I imagine people have been catching fish all year, but a 10 year
noob here hasnt caught a single fish this year, and it is June. 

So while the guides are hauling 20-40 fish some people can only
catch a sunburn.


----------



## spotsndots (May 20, 2005)

I'll bet on the year round average joe going fishing on an AVERAGE of 1-2 days per month. I'd also bet that most guides fish at least 15 days out of each month. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that a guide is going to put a much bigger dent in the population than the average fisherman. If the guides were limited to 5 fish per day they would still have clients calling them to go fish! And that's not guide bashing...it's actually complimenting their abilities to locate the fish.

What I do find hypocritical is guides the promote the ban of certain bait, or "just keep 5" on websites, magazine articles etc. yet let their customers continually bring in limits or near full limits because that's what the law allows. Either you support "just keep 5" or you don't! Just tell your customers when they book that 5 is the limit.


----------



## metal man (Mar 30, 2006)

5 Fish , no more croaker, 2 years.


----------



## fishhunter81 (Apr 15, 2008)

go ahead lower the limits and what will happen is nothing, people will still be keeping more fish than they should because we dont have enough gamewardens to keep up with our fast growing sport. to me keep the limit where it is at, if you only want to keep five thats great, but I will keep what im allowed by law. If this was brought up due to the amount of guides putting clients on their limits, maybe TPWD needs to step in and limit the amount of guides that are allowed in each bay system, but these guys have to eat too. so, when it comes down to it keep it where it is at and the more conservation minded fisherman catch and release or just keep what you feel you need. Just my opinion. Now lets go catch some fish.


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

We keep just 5 each and nada over 25" unless its a tournament fish. Anyone that fishes around Rockport would be less than honest in my opinion if they think the trout population is as good as it was 5 or 10 years ago. Theres simply too much pressure. If you boys on the upper coast believe differently then maybe there should be a cut off line around Port O or Freeport. After talking to quite a few people in the know I believe TP&W will be addressing this shortly. IMO I think the surveys would point to lowering the trout limit to 5 with one over 25" and increasing the redfish limit by 1 and black drum by 1 or 2 per day. Like I said thats my opinion and I will try and do some research to back it up and I'll post my findings.

Mike


----------



## TRW (Nov 30, 2006)

I sure would like a # to all of these fishing Guides that are so good they catch a four or five person limit every time they go out and twice a day at that. I have fished and personally know quite a few Guides. and have fished with several Guides most people on here highy recomend. They are all great guides and we had a blast fishing with them. But we never came close to catching our limit. So please give me a # to all of these guides. 
Thanks,
TRW


----------



## Brian Castille (May 27, 2004)

I wonder how many old posts can be found on 2cool that focus on just keeping 5, no more croakers, releasing all fish over a certain length, shoreline burning, etc, etc? It seems like it's the same thing over and over and over and over again, lol.


----------



## Mike East (Jul 31, 2006)

The really goofy part of this discussion is in one breath the implication is that we are running out of fish, and in the next breath that we need to stop keeping 10 fish each because all this fish catching that is happening is creating a shortage of fish. If there are too many limits being caught and we are running out of fish then why are we saying we are over catching, that is very contradictory. If the fish populations were declining we would not be catching fish, at least not like we are. I for one am absoutely KILLING the fish on a consistant basis and I am a total amateur. So much that I have almost completely stopped keeping them because I have enough in my freezer to feed my family about 4-5 good fish fries. There are ridiculous numbers of trout out there right now, at least in the waters that I fish. I see people catching trout everywhere I go almost everytime I go out.

Now, if you have areas where people that are good average fisherman are going out and they never catch fish even after good scouting and preparatory efforts and the biologists are starting to see declining numbers then yeah, we need to start cutting back. 

The biologists are constantly keeping an eye on the population, you can bet your bottom dollar that those guys are way more worried about population decline than we are,, and the guides are probably nort far behind them in 2nd place. If those two entities start to get nervous then I will get nervous. I am sure that no self respecting professional guide is going to fish himself out of a job. At least I would not think so.

Flounder on the other hand are another story. I know the guides are catching them but I am struggling to consistantly catch fish. I may have a day where I stumble onto a spot where they are holding and catch 6-8 in a tide movement. Then I wont catch a single fish for a week or two or three, that worries me.


----------



## ExplorerTv (Apr 18, 2006)

*LLM always has been loaded with fish*

For everyone saying that the LLM is better than it was must not have fished down there long. LLM is a great fishery and always has been. Everyone is saying it is better fishery now that the limits have been lowered and that is not true. Anyone who fishes down there alot knows that the trout fishing has always been stupid good. I thought the spring 2 years ago was alot better than this Spring. I am not saying lowering the limit to 5 is a bad thing, I am just saying that in a short amount of time it could not make as big of a difference as everyone says. Most of the fisheries on the Tx coast are in better shape than ever right now. I have caught more +5lb trout in the surf in the last 3 weeks than any other time I can think of. 

The simple fact is that your typical weekend warrior does not go out and catch full limits and does not fish any other time but summer. Not many folks are skilled enough to go and plug out a limit on a regular basis. 5% of the fishermen catch 95% of the fish. The TPW surveys show an average of 1 trout per day per fisherman since the early 70's. #'s don't lie my friends. Not everyone that fishes is killing the fish every single time they go out. 

I love fishing the TX Coast as much as anyone and I say only keep what you are going to eat and let bigger trout swim unless they are going on the wall.


----------



## Empty Pockets CC (Feb 18, 2009)

TRW said:


> I sure would like a # to all of these fishing Guides that are so good they catch a four or five person limit every time they go out and twice a day at that. I have fished and personally know quite a few Guides. and have fished with several Guides most people on here highy recomend. They are all great guides and we had a blast fishing with them. But we never came close to catching our limit. So please give me a # to all of these guides.
> Thanks,
> TRW


You ever fish South of the land cut...Limiting out happens often down there...


----------



## ATE_UP_FISHERMAN (Jun 25, 2004)

I would like to see "keep five" above Aransas Pass and "keep three" below. 

If you don't like that here's the queer dolphin for you..LOL

:an6:


----------



## ExplorerTv (Apr 18, 2006)

Im Headed South said:


> We keep just 5 each and nada over 25" unless its a tournament fish. Anyone that fishes around Rockport would be less than honest in my opinion if they think the trout population is as good as it was 5 or 10 years ago. Theres simply too much pressure. If you boys on the upper coast believe differently then maybe there should be a cut off line around Port O or Freeport. After talking to quite a few people in the know I believe TP&W will be addressing this shortly. IMO I think the surveys would point to lowering the trout limit to 5 with one over 25" and increasing the redfish limit by 1 and black drum by 1 or 2 per day. Like I said thats my opinion and I will try and do some research to back it up and I'll post my findings.
> 
> Mike


Right the pressure on Rockport is crazy. That does not mean that the fish are not there, they are just harder to locate due to the pressure.


----------



## ExplorerTv (Apr 18, 2006)

*Right*



Empty Pockets CC said:


> You ever fish South of the land cut...Limiting out happens often down there...


Yeah by the people that know what they are doing.


----------



## LaAngler (Mar 11, 2008)

*?*



Super Dave said:


> Even Calcasieu has lowered their limits because the trout hauls are much lower because of the pressure. Guides there have also discovered croakers and therein lies the problem.


this is debatable to say the least

which bait shop on big lake sells live croaker again?


----------



## Leemo (Nov 16, 2006)

YoungGun1 said:


> I, personally, would love to see the trout limit lowered to 5 a day. Thoughts?


Which bay do you fish in Fort Worth, salinity levels must be pretty high up there, leave the "fish" studies to the people who know what they are doing, I can give you a 10 question quiz about Texas Bay systems that you would fail, so your opinion on this matter does not count, simple reason ;you are too young and wet behind the ears!


----------



## Stumpgrinder (Feb 18, 2006)

YoungGun1 said:


> So then why don't we raise the limit to 20 specs a person (very sarcastic tone)? I mean...no one is MAKING YOU keep that many! That is an absurd argument! The reason we should lower it to 5 is because of those out there that have zero discretion in their blood and need the law to limit them. Is a 5 bag limit really that tight? That is 10 fillets!
> 
> I'm young (24 yrs old) and would love to see the trout population be plentiful for my children!
> 
> I'll be waiting for the remarks about my age and inexperience...yadah yadah yadah...at least make the comments creative...


OK. Your posts make me think you should investigate decaffinated coffee or get off the Monster drinks. Creative enough for you ?


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

Mike East said:


> The really goofy part of this discussion is in one breath the implication is that we are running out of fish, and in the next breath that we need to stop keeping 10 fish each because all this fish catching that is happening is creating a shortage of fish. If there are too many limits being caught and we are running out of fish then why are we saying we are over catching, that is very contradictory. If the fish populations were declining we would not be catching fish, at least not like we are. I for one am absoutely KILLING the fish on a consistant basis and I am a total amateur. So much that I have almost completely stopped keeping them because I have enough in my freezer to feed my family about 4-5 good fish fries. There are ridiculous numbers of trout out there right now, at least in the waters that I fish. I see people catching trout everywhere I go almost everytime I go out.
> 
> Now, if you have areas where people that are good average fisherman are going out and they never catch fish even after good scouting and preparatory efforts and the biologists are starting to see declining numbers then yeah, we need to start cutting back.
> 
> ...


Good post and pretty much right on the money.


----------



## tropicalsun (May 21, 2004)

I seldom keep fish. A change in regulations won't affect my personal fishing at all. However, I would strongly support any changes that raise the enforcement of current laws. Before we mess with those fishermen who obey the laws, and will obey any changes, let's get all these folks keeping coolers full of illegal fish of the water. 

Tropicalsun


----------



## Gilbert (May 25, 2004)

there are no more trout in the bays. everyone stop going fishing. you won't catch anything. :cop:


----------



## jdot7749 (Dec 1, 2008)

I think if you only want to keep 5 then that's what you should do. If you want everyone to be limited to five then you should become a marine biologist, join TPW, perform countless hours of research, and then lobby the legislature to adopt new regulations.


----------



## Cactus (Jan 16, 2006)

dont have time to read through all the posts, so i dont know if this has been covered. PM is as good as its ever been and i do believe its b/c of the lowered limits. Rockport is now the worst trout bay on the coast, and needs limits lowered. W/in two yrs itll be back.


----------



## Gilbert (May 25, 2004)

I don't fish rockport but could the lack of fish be due to all the tournaments held out of rockport? just ax-n.


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

ANYBDYHERE said:


> HP....The limit established has been in place for many years....Takes way too long for them to gather enough info to make changes....Alot of us see the decline in some areas we fish regularly..How much longer is it going to take to make changes needed now??? :question:


I don't know where you fish but it is debatable whether any new changes are needed. I have been fishing from Matagorda to Trinity since the late 60's and the only time I remember trout being in short supply was the big freeze of the early 80's. Even then, we were still mopping up in the Colorado at Gorda. I just don't see the need for further restrictions. My gut feeling is most of those who are in favor of more restrictions are the same ones who would like to turn speckled trout into a trophy fishery only. Elitism at its finest.


----------



## Texas Jeweler (Nov 6, 2007)

ExplorerTv said:


> For everyone saying that the LLM is better than it was must not have fished down there long. LLM is a great fishery and always has been. Everyone is saying it is better fishery now that the limits have been lowered and that is not true. Anyone who fishes down there alot knows that the trout fishing has always been stupid good. I thought the spring 2 years ago was alot better than this Spring. I am not saying lowering the limit to 5 is a bad thing, I am just saying that in a short amount of time it could not make as big of a difference as everyone says. Most of the fisheries on the Tx coast are in better shape than ever right now. I have caught more +5lb trout in the surf in the last 3 weeks than any other time I can think of.
> 
> The simple fact is that your typical weekend warrior does not go out and catch full limits and does not fish any other time but summer. Not many folks are skilled enough to go and plug out a limit on a regular basis. 5% of the fishermen catch 95% of the fish. The TPW surveys show an average of 1 trout per day per fisherman since the early 70's. #'s don't lie my friends. Not everyone that fishes is killing the fish every single time they go out.
> 
> I love fishing the TX Coast as much as anyone and I say only keep what you are going to eat and let bigger trout swim unless they are going on the wall.


_______________________________________________________________

Well stated. Those of you wishing to keep 5, please do so. Those of you that can catch more than five, please do so and let your better sense make the call.

I have not returned to LLM since the numbers were cut. No need to drive all that way, hit five and be done. No, the people insisting that only five be kept there did so for thier own reasons, has not got a thing to do "with the resource". "Oh, we got limits". Sounds good to the client looking to book a trip, it becomes the fishery for guide services and such. To heck with the rest of us that get two decent weekend off a year to make a trip.

Ya wanna go to 5 a day, how about this? You get so many a day and once you hit a number, that's it for the year. Go play golf or do something for mankind. This is a thread that can get me going...


----------



## TRW (Nov 30, 2006)

*nope*



Empty Pockets CC said:


> You ever fish South of the land cut...Limiting out happens often down there...


No I have not but have fished the upper part a few times,
Have you ever fished galveston, two completly diffrent bay systems, and do not want our limits changed up here because of somthing that is going on down on the lower coast. from what I hear it is the lack of fishing pressure in the LLM that is making the diffrence. I would still like the # to all of the Guides that limit out every time they go fishing. As said before I trust TPW knows what they are doing and if they see fit to lower the limit on Trout then I do not have a problem with it. But just because someone who is not a Marine Biologist thinks the whole Tx coast should keep 5 is not good enough for me.

TRW


----------



## BEER4BAIT (Jun 24, 2005)

Lets just have a trout season lets say from June 1 till the end of Aug, just can keep 2 per day. And then start allowing comercial fishing of trout year round with Individual limmits per commercial fisherman. They say that is how they will save snapper.












Sorry for the troll LOL


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

BEER4BAIT said:


> Lets just have a trout season lets say from June 1 till the end of Aug, just can keep 2 per day. And then start allowing comercial fishing of trout year round with Individual limmits per commercial fisherman. They say that is how they will save snapper.
> 
> Sorry for the troll LOL


Your braids are too tight Alex...LOL


----------



## BEER4BAIT (Jun 24, 2005)

Just think that makes since to some idiots


----------



## tboltmike (Jun 21, 2006)

YoungGun1 said:


> I am a catch and release fisherman. I don't have a problem with those that keep trout but when you see 4 people come in with 40 trout (80 fillets) it makes you ask yourself...is that really necessary?
> 
> Just my opinion.


What is the difference, catching 40 one or twice a summer, or someone that goes out several times a week or twice day and catches 5?

What you are implying is a season limit. Why should infrequent (or unlucky) fishermen be penalized on their few trips, when some make multiple trips a day?


----------



## boatmanjohn (Mar 18, 2009)

Go see the last page or two on croaker bashing. We're discussing this very issue. Sorry. Don't mean to hi-jack the thread, but we seem to be covering it in depth, so-to-speak.

But since I'm here, I'll relay what Levelwind said in the other post. All it will take is one hard freeze to wipe out the population so why not catch them while you can? You can't stockpile them.

Just so it's out there and the tree huggers don't fire-bomb my boat...I keep very few every year. Just what I will eat.

P.S. I believe the populations are dwindling as a result of the closed passes along the coast. It is causing a decline in all sea life and even whooper populations since they eat the crabs. JMO.


----------



## surfspeck (Jun 7, 2006)

I wouldnt mind seeing a 5 fish limit. I also wouldnt mind seeing the 1 fish over 25" rule changed a little bit, and mandate that fisherman tag fish over 27" and allow only 1 or 2 per year similar to redfish. It would not be that difficult.


----------



## Empty Pockets CC (Feb 18, 2009)

tboltmike said:


> What is the difference, catching 40 one or twice a summer, or someone that goes out several times a week or twice day and catches 5?
> 
> What you are implying is a season limit. Why should infrequent (or unlucky) fishermen be penalized on their few trips, when some make multiple trips a day?


Because the hundreds of guides that takes people out almost every day in the summer are nailing 20-60 a day (depending on how many people it takes to sink his boat)...They will ruin it for the "infrequent (or unlucky) fisherman"...

Numbers killed are numbers killed...


----------



## boatmanjohn (Mar 18, 2009)

Empty Pockets CC said:


> Because the hundreds of guides that takes people out almost every day in the summer are nailing 20-60 a day (depending on how many people it takes to sink his boat)...They will ruin it for the "infrequent (or unlucky) fisherman"...
> 
> Numbers killed are numbers killed...


Nah. Guides don't like to trout fish. They prefer to go after reds. It only takes multiples of 3 reds to go home. If they go after trout they might have to fish a full day to get 3 limits!


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

Did a little digging and so far what I have found bears out what's been said here. 05 and 07 are the newest TP&W data I have found and both of those showed a decline in trout numbers in Aransas. That's both in numbers and size. Both of those also showed all time high trout numbers in the all the bays north of Port O.I also found it took 8 straight years of declining numbers of adult trout before TP&W did anything with the LLM. I hope they don't wait 8 years to do something in Rockport.In reading some of their reports it seems they have a very hard time admitting there might be a problem in some areas but really want the good numbers to be seen. Kind of like the chamber of commerce writing the fishing report.

Mike


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

Just goes to show that the old coast-wide regulations are really obsolete. Each bay system should me monitored and regulated seperately. There is no doubt in my mind that the bay systems on the rise, numbers wise, get more fishing pressure than the ones to the south. Anglers are not the biggest problem evidently.


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

I know most people won't say it but about the best thing that could happen for the area is a good flushing by mother nature.Just a little east of cedar bayou would do the trick.I'm convinced more than ever that's the only way water will get be exchanged though there.

Mike


----------



## Big John (Aug 25, 2004)

Here is a perfect reason to lower the limit to 5.
http://www.run-n-gunadventures.com/report/viewtopic.php?p=102#102http://2coolfishing.com/ttmbforum/showthread.php?t=213518


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

I've not read every post.Here is my opinion for state wide limits on trout. 

Lower the state wide limit to 5 per day, and 1 per day over 25. Also a slot limit of 14-28 would be fine. Allow 1 trout per year over 28" by tag only (which adds to that daily limit), if you return the tag properly documented, to the state, you will be given a 2nd tag for that year. 

Sounds alot like the redfish limit/tag program doesn't it. The only problem is it might result in more people targeting my redfish. 

JMHO 
chuck


----------



## goosekillr (Jul 11, 2007)

I love how everyone sees guides as taking 30-60 fish per day. I know guides limit a lot but not every day. You also have to come to grips with the fact that they are taking average fisherman just like the rest of us fishing. They just elect to spend their money on a guide and catch fish enstead of a boat, bait, tackle, ext. and then complain about not catching fish because their are to many guides.


----------



## Gilbert (May 25, 2004)

Big John said:


> Here is a perfect reason to lower the limit to 5.
> http://www.run-n-gunadventures.com/report/viewtopic.php?p=102#102


that's more of a reason to book with them. them dudes are on some fish!!!! :bounce:


----------



## Uncle Doug (May 26, 2009)

I for one have never thought that if I caught five trout, that that was plenty, good day, lets' go in.I fish weekly and have probably limited only five or six times this year,and believe ten is a reasonable number to keep. I know fillets don't catch a freezer burn at my house. As far as guides go, they would probably like a five fish limit, would only half to work haf as long. But even guides do not limit every time they go out. I think I will continue to take ten when I can, for those who think that is excessive, stop at 2 or 5 and go hug a tree.


----------



## Bocephus (May 30, 2008)

How many people limit out every time they go fishing ???.......LOL


----------



## Out of the rough (May 28, 2009)

On any given night, I can go to at least 10 piers in the area and catch dinks all night long with a few keepers mixed in. Will these dinks not grow into spawning size fish in the future?? just wondering??


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Okahere it goes- There is an consumption advisory for Galveston bay and surrounding areas. 8oz per month. Roughly 1 filet off of one decent size trout. Kids and females of child bearing age should not eat any. All the money that goes into fishing, are you really that hard up for fish that you need a meat haul of fish flesh thats loaded with PCB's and dioxon? I would suggest that a 5 fish limit makes great sense. Hell I can buy fish at HEB for a lot cheaper than it cost to catch them, but a great fishery in my back yard? Thats priceless. Certainly worth giving up a few toxins for


----------



## YoungGun1 (Jan 8, 2009)

Leemo said:


> Which bay do you fish in Fort Worth, salinity levels must be pretty high up there, leave the "fish" studies to the people who know what they are doing, I can give you a 10 question quiz about Texas Bay systems that you would fail, so your opinion on this matter does not count, simple reason ;you are too young and wet behind the ears!


You're an idiot! Just because I am not an old salty like yourself doesn't mean jack. Any being young...haha...big insult there. I guess its a bonus because my kids won't have to worry about running into you on the water. I can here it now..."Daddy, what's a *****?"


----------



## YoungGun1 (Jan 8, 2009)

BEER4BAIT said:


> Just think that makes *since* to some idiots


Huuked on fonix wurked fur me!


----------



## Reel Bender (Sep 30, 2004)

Isn't this were biggie comes in and starts talking bout meathauls and cutting people off and.........................................................................

opps wrong thread!

Carry On!


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

*"IT'S NOT ILLEGAL"*

For those of you who think the government is going to monitor this situation and protect the trout population, I would ask what color is the sky in the world you live in. Just because it is not illegal to do something, (slaughter 30 inch trout or keep 10 24 inch trout), doesn't make it ethical.

Here is something to think about:

Most everyone knows it is not illegal to play poker in Texas. The controlling factor is the house cannot have an advantage over the rest of the participants in the game by the way the game is designed. Lets say you go into an old folks home full of old poker players with alzhiemers, and setup a game. You would have a game every night, because they couldn't remember you skinned them every night this week, all they remember is they were studs at that game in their prime. You should have an obvious advantage over your opponents in the game. You should, over time, beat every single person out of their lifes savings in a few months/years. Its not illegal, but it is highly unethical.

Just because its legal doesn't make it right/ethical. Don't hide behind Its not illegal, so I shouldn't comment on it. Thats a copout.

JMHO
chuck


----------



## boatmanjohn (Mar 18, 2009)

Here we go again! Glad I'm off work!


----------



## corykj (Oct 30, 2008)

there have been very few times when we have kept a limit of trout.... and more than one occassion where it was possible. i know i'm not going to sway anyone's vote, so i'm not going to try. i will, however, state that we (three of us usually) will normally keep five at most.... i guess it's just a personal choice, but i am like some other 'tree huggers' out there. i want my kids (when i have them) to have the same luxuries as i have had, fishing being one of them. not only that, but i would like my future kids to catch a few big trout as well, which, in my opinion will not happen if we keep things the way they are. call me a tree hugger, i don't care... in my mind, i am a conservationist for the future. besides, i can't even get a big fish to my hands anymore, i lose them a few feet in front of me, so i guess my vote doesn't count.


----------



## bayskout (Oct 25, 2006)

"just keep five"

I love the new five fish limit in the lower laguna. 5 trout is plenty for a family fish fry. Add in a couple of redfish, maybe a flounder or two, some black drum, a sheephead, mangrove snapper, etc. and you will be freezing fillets or giving some away. Plus the sooner you run out of fish, the more you get to go fishing


----------



## FXSTB (Apr 23, 2008)

5 is plenty. If you feel you need more then take friends and family.


----------



## sweenyite (Feb 22, 2009)

You mean we're only supposed to keep ten???
:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:


----------



## Mike East (Jul 31, 2006)

I just threw my curve off. I just got in and did not catch one fish. My brother caught 3 and that was it... I am feeling much better about myself and the fish population now.:bounce:


----------



## Porky (Nov 1, 2006)

Sounds like the golfers & lawyers are at it again!
Oh don't forget the lure companies!


----------



## jeffsfishin (Jan 27, 2008)

poppadawg said:


> Okahere it goes- There is an consumption advisory for Galveston bay and surrounding areas. 8oz per month. Roughly 1 filet off of one decent size trout. Kids and females of child bearing age should not eat any. All the money that goes into fishing, are you really that hard up for fish that you need a meat haul of fish flesh thats loaded with PCB's and dioxon? I would suggest that a 5 fish limit makes great sense. Hell I can buy fish at HEB for a lot cheaper than it cost to catch them, but a great fishery in my back yard? Thats priceless. Certainly worth giving up a few toxins for


You are exactly right about the toxins, I for one have been putting a whiping on the spanish mac's this year, better table fare in my opinion. I still will go out to the jettys and catch a few trout on live bait just because I love the feel of that hard thump when they hit a large bait, I just don't keep any of the trout not interested in eating them at all after reading the warning signs posted at boat ramps, But soon as I see those mac's give their self away, It's meat haul time without the dioxins.
Plus this year they have been some very good size mackeral at the end of the jettys. 15 per person and they are easy to catch. So I really don't care if they drop the trout limit to one a day.


----------



## Finfisher (Jul 20, 2008)

We are more educated about how to catch these fish.
It's our own damm fault!
Technology (sp) is killing the fish, not guides, nor rec. fishermen.
Heck, Gulp out fished 2:1 compared to live shrimp on a trip last year.

I need more tech.... LOL


----------



## Kenner21 (Aug 25, 2005)

Haute Pursuit said:


> No one is making YOU keep more than 5 trout. Trout populations are very healthy right now. Some guys don't get to go fish every week... They should be able to keep what TPWD determines will keep a healthy population.


 Couldn't have said it any better myself


----------



## Ledge (Feb 4, 2005)

Lets all meet in the Middle and Just keep 7.5


----------



## jdot7749 (Dec 1, 2008)

I think instead of limiting the # of fish each person can catch, TPW should monitor every access to the bay and surf and when a certain # of fishermen have been checked in the rest will take a # and be scheduled at a later date. That way everyone who can catch a limit can continue to do so and the rest can have something else to whine about. I'll be waiting on that kid to correct my spelling and punctuation. Things he's better at than fisheries biology.


----------



## catfishcrouch (Jun 5, 2008)

jdot7749 said:


> I think instead of limiting the # of fish each person can catch, TPW should monitor every access to the bay and surf and when a certain # of fishermen have been checked in the rest will take a # and be scheduled at a later date. That way everyone who can catch a limit can continue to do so and the rest can have something else to whine about. I'll be waiting on that kid to correct my spelling and punctuation. Things he's better at than fisheries biology.


You can't be serious.


----------



## the wood man (Sep 14, 2006)

I think that it is just a matter of time before 5 is adopted coastal wide. I am all for it. maybe it will slow down all of the guides and croaker soakers.


----------



## BALZTOWAL (Aug 29, 2006)

SHOULDN'T YA'LL BE MORE WORRIED ABOUT THE POLLUTION IN YOUR AREA.


----------



## sweenyite (Feb 22, 2009)

If I keep ten, we eat ten. Nuff said.


----------



## ikeephardheads (Feb 23, 2008)

I don't care im keeping ten!!! muahahahahaha:bounce:


----------



## twwp (Jul 12, 2007)

jdot7749 said:


> I think instead of limiting the # of fish each person can catch, TPW should monitor every access to the bay and surf and when a certain # of fishermen have been checked in the rest will take a # and be scheduled at a later date. That way everyone who can catch a limit can continue to do so and the rest can have something else to whine about. I'll be waiting on that kid to correct my spelling and punctuation. Things he's better at than fisheries biology.


yeah, We could make it even better and play tag team fishing. When you get tired of fishing tag your partner thats standing on shore and then he can jump in till he gets tired and tags you back in. Of course i would probably never tag anyone in. I'd leave them standing on shore. LOL

On a serious note, the limit is ten and you shouldn't knock someone if they are following the law. I personally only keep what I know my family will eat. Which in my case is ten. But I do release anything over 24".


----------



## Kenner21 (Aug 25, 2005)

jdot7749 said:


> I think instead of limiting the # of fish each person can catch, TPW should monitor every access to the bay and surf and when a certain # of fishermen have been checked in the rest will take a # and be scheduled at a later date. That way everyone who can catch a limit can continue to do so and the rest can have something else to whine about. I'll be waiting on that kid to correct my spelling and punctuation. Things he's better at than fisheries biology.


Put the pipe down, yes thats all we need is more regulations. How about we can only fish every 3rd full moon of the lunar calendar unless it's a Tuesday in which case we all fish on the following Saturday but for only 27 minutes. Oh by the way the gillnet survay last year showed the speck population in East Bay to be some of the best on record.


----------



## Rusty S (Apr 6, 2006)

YoungGun1 said:


> You're an idiot! Just because I am not an old salty like yourself doesn't mean jack. Any being young...haha...big insult there. I guess its a bonus because my kids won't have to worry about running into you on the water. I can here it now..."Daddy, what's a *****?"


Young man, and I am using that term generously, do you think the guides you were defending yesterday have your same beliefs--I haven't seen them yet on this dialogue. You need not call people idiots because they do not believe what you say, I live on the coast not Fort Worth, I keep at best 3-4 fish when I go out because I can. Quit your job or school and move down here and catch all you want, but quit telling people what you think from Fort Worth in the allmighty conservation mode, change your degree and become a biologists for TP&W if you feel so strongly about it. You are becoming a little troll in the eyes of most I feel, change your ways or be done with you, I am ready for your witty response. BTW, I am easy to find, just give me a PM on your next road trip. rs


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

All you guy's saying I'm going to keep 10 because I can does that mean if you have 4 or 5 on the boat you keep 40 or 50? Go meet Jay Watkins at Goose Island ramp around 6:30am and ask him about the trout fishery around Rockport. Jay keeps a detailed log dating back 20+ years and he can tell you how the spawning size trout has been in a nose dive for 4+ years. He spends 200+ days a year on the water and I value his opinion more than TP&W that as far as I can tell do a gill net survey once every two years. I have not found the results of the 09 survey yet but since 05 and 07 were both below average and 07 was below 05 I think I know what 09 is going to say. If 09 comes out below 07 that means we've had a decline for at least 4 or 5 straight years, sounds like the LLM a couple of years ago. By the way take a look at the surveys of flounder during those same years. Most bays it showed the numbers to be holding steady and to be even improving in some places then all of a sudden the flounder were way down to the point that they felt the need to take action. How does that compute? After doing some reading and research I don't put quite as much stock into what the mighty TP&W biologist are telling me as I once did.

Mike


----------



## Redfishr (Jul 26, 2004)

5 trout.....5 reds......5 flounder
same slots


----------



## lagunarods (Jan 19, 2009)

There are many valid arguments made on this topic. Being a fishing guide out of Port mansfield I have seen, first hand, the benefits of the reduced limit. However, there are other factors that have helped us. The dredging of the east cut, hurricane Dolly, more conservation minded anglers and so on. I know many on this board want to blame the guides for the reduced #'s of fish. We are on the water most days. We do fish with clientel consisting of recreational anglers who may or may not have boats. We also teach anglers how to catch fish and show them more about the bay system that they fish. We (guides) are a necessary "evil". Most guides, in my opinion, are big advocates of the bay systems in which they fish. We are not biologists but we know what they know through our time spent on the water. We can see when the numbers are not out there to be caught. I feel like the state has a good idea of what they are doing when they impose new regs on all of us. 5 fish is plenty in a day of fishing. I would rather be able to catch 20 and keep only 5 than be able to keep 10 and only catch 5. We all want to catch more fish. Killing less to catch more sounds good to me. I would hope most would agree.


----------



## wedington (Dec 19, 2007)

trout-thumper said:


> all i have to say is look at what the 5 trout limit has done to the LLM... made a great fishery.. SUPERB.. and i agree with Younggun.. I am a 23 yr old fisherman that may not have the experience as some.. but wanna be fishing for many yrs to come..


I agree. It has made fishing the LLM AMAZING! I fished there in February and completely slayed them. I think I caught something like 50 - 75 trout all over 20" in a day. I didn't even keep any, it was just fun catching that many fish.

When I fish Galve-traz, I'm lucky to even catch 5. I don't bother keeping them because of all the **** in them. I think they should do that on the upper coast because there is 10x the fishing pressure.


----------



## WillieP (Jul 2, 2004)

lagunarods said:


> There are many valid arguments made on this topic. Being a fishing guide out of Port mansfield I have seen, first hand, the benefits of the reduced limit. However, there are other factors that have helped us. The dredging of the east cut, hurricane Dolly, more conservation minded anglers and so on. I know many on this board want to blame the guides for the reduced #'s of fish. We are on the water most days. We do fish with clientel consisting of recreational anglers who may or may not have boats. We also teach anglers how to catch fish and show them more about the bay system that they fish. We (guides) are a necessary "evil". Most guides, in my opinion, are big advocates of the bay systems in which they fish. We are not biologists but we know what they know through our time spent on the water. We can see when the numbers are not out there to be caught. I feel like the state has a good idea of what they are doing when they impose new regs on all of us. 5 fish is plenty in a day of fishing. I would rather be able to catch 20 and keep only 5 than be able to keep 10 and only catch 5. We all want to catch more fish. Killing less to catch more sounds good to me. I would hope most would agree.


Well said, I couldn't agree more. :cheers:

But, every person has the right to keep what they want as long as they stay within the state regs and until the rule's (Laws) change that the way it's going to be. Nuff said.


----------



## Porky (Nov 1, 2006)

One variable that has not been mentioned is the drought, and until it ends and stays that way for a couple of years to reset the esturaries, trout populations along with other species will continue to be stressed. If you notice the drought is strongest in the middle coast(rockport) and the weakest in the upper coast(sabine lake).
So everybody do a rain dance(not a storm dance)!


----------



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

I see both sides of the fight, but a bad Texas freeze would do more damage to the trout population than you and I could ever do in a lifetime, and it will happen again I promise. Enjoy it while you have it, because the keep 5 will happen as soon as this happens all down the coast. I do not think these fish survey stations do any good, because I know of many who tell them they have no catch when they do to avoid the hassel, is it wrong to do so, yes, but thats there business. TPWD still uses gill net surveys, and to me thats not good either, but they have not came up with any better way. I've seen my fair share of gill net surveys loaded with 28"-30" trout "dead"by the 100's, now thats a waste, but I guess theres not a better way????Bash Croakers, Guides, Bycatch, but mother nature has her way of making all of what I have mentioned look like nothing.


----------



## ikeephardheads (Feb 23, 2008)

Thats why i keep hardheads, forget the trout! LOL!


----------



## coachlaw (Oct 26, 2005)

Let me see here. Young Gun comes on here, starts a controversial topic, and calls people idiots because they either disagree with his pontificating, or because they give him a good natured and well deserved jab. I think I have that straight. Young Gun I don't have a problem with you bro. Your age doesn't bother me at all. Your location could use some work though.  It might help if you realize that it's ok for people to disagree with you and rib you a little. It shouldn't trigger a tantrum. We're all entitled to our opinions. Here's mine.

My only problem with limits is that despite improving fish populations in the future, limits are never expanded. They only go in one direction. If you are an elitist, good on you. If you are a catch and release only, right on. If you are a just keep 5 guy, keep up the good work. If you catch your legal limit and eat them, great job. If you are a scum sucking potlicking poacher who doesn't have a license and keeps illegal fish and illegal amounts, I hope you rot in jail. If you think it's ok to target people who follow the laws and tell them what to do or make them feel guilty for having a good day, then take a hike. Do what you want and leave other people alone.

Personally I rarely keep trout in Texas because I prefer to eat reds. If the trout limit is lowered, it won't affect me much. My meat hauls come from Louisiana where my dad and I keep 50 trout a day for as long as I'm there and that lasts me a year. No PCBs to worry about either. The ecosystem there handles it well, especially since there so much less pressure. I think that regionalizing limits along our vast coast is the best option. 

Enforcement is a huge issue. Let's remember that laws only affect those of us who follow them.


----------



## sabine lake hustler (Dec 17, 2007)

Politics and BS. Look at the flounder limit being drop. that's so stupid. i only fish flounder 1 month out of the year. NOV. now they impose a 2 fish limit. i fish all month november. usually 5 or 6 a trip, but if you average the 150 days i fish a year. it comes out to maybe 1 or 2 flounder per trip. I;ve never seen anyone gig on sabine. I think the law should be impose for certain areas that get fished or gig heavy. same goes for the trout. As much as chester moore brag about fishing sabine, i've never in my life seen him on the water once. fishing is not cheap. every blue moon you take a few friends out and the fish decide to bite, not you can't keep but a few. next year i will not own a texas LICENSE. being that i fish SABINE i will pan out the 90 and keep my LA license.


----------



## Joe Guilbeau (Jun 27, 2004)

This here is a typical case of "Straining out the gnats, and letting the Elephants through".

Fishing pressure is what decimates the populations in addition to freezes and access to spawning grounds.

Open up Cedar Bayou, Yarborough Pass that will improve water quality.

Limit the skinny water boats from tearing up the seagrass, which does not grow back, just look at prop scarring all over the bays.

Back in the 60's and 70's we caught 200-300 in a night under the lights, there were plenty, and all of the passes were open. There were skinny water boats available then as well... flatbottoms.

Fishing pressure and ego's are the things that are killin the fish population. Show me a tournament for the smallest trout, smallest redfish etc...

Everyone's first reaction is that Guilbeau's out of his mind.

Ban the skinny water boats and go back to wade fishing and let's just see how the trout populations start to thrive.

Don't even get me started on menhaden populations and Omega Protein in Houston.

Point is that there are many interwoven reasons that the trout fishery is not what it once was, a simple poll on a narrow aspect illustrates the well intentioned but inexperienced basis of the premise.

I would just as soon go to the first (insert limit here) that you catch and you are done. Forget slot sizes, that way there is no culling. We all do it, catch a undersize trout and we throw it back.

For those of you who catch and release, as long as you use barbless hooks, I have zero problem with that. Using circle hooks is a fine idea. No. 5 longshanks with cut mullet will about guarantee a redfish with the hook past its crushers.

So, the point being it that it is the whole spectrum that needs to be addressed, not just a micromanagement approach to one of many aspects. This is where the TPWD Biologist and policy makers come in, they have the broad experience and hands on knowledge needed. Politics and CYA prevent them from doing the right thing from time to time, but overall they do a fine job.


----------



## T. Rep (May 24, 2009)

Yes! Just keep 5!


----------



## jabx1962 (Nov 9, 2004)

sabine lake hustler said:


> Next year I will not own a texas LICENSE. being that I fish SABINE I will pan out the 90 and keep my LA license.


The only drawback to fishing Sabine with a La. license only is that you also are required to launch in La. The same goes for keeping your La. limit.


----------



## redman35 (Jul 1, 2008)

Listen go to La. and fish. The limit there is 25 per day and 12" min. There fishing is just fine without any issues. Its not the limit. In Galveston areas its all the dang chemicals being released into our waters. So everyone can blame guides or croaker. But they are not the issue.


----------



## saltshaker1 (Feb 15, 2008)

Since you guys are so hung up on 30" trout....why not just change the minimum size to 30". :smile:


----------



## transportcmr (Sep 23, 2005)

*I'M FOR 5!!!*

Lower the limit to 5, keeping anymore is greed and gloating.


----------



## corkyboy10 (Aug 11, 2005)

*5 Trout Limit*

Lets see when gas gets $3.50 to $4.00 a gallon again. $50.00 dollars for boat gas, $50.00 for truck gas to pull boat to bay, 5 trout limit. That is $20.00 a fish. You guys might as well put up high fences in the bay and ruin fishing like they have done deer hunting. We have a whole generation of kids that don't get to go hunting because people cant afford to go because of the trophy hunter mentality. That is what is comming with this trophy trout mentality. You trophy trout guys want to catch and release that is fine but don't start telling me I can't keep my 10 fish to eat.


----------



## TRW (Nov 30, 2006)

I feel like if all of the just keep 5 people would not keep any Trout then that should just about make up for the greedy people who follow the law and keep what TPW set the limit at. So from now on all of the people on here who just want to keep five should just keep 0. 
Thanks I knew you would understand.
TRW


----------



## Capt Ryan Rachunek (Feb 16, 2006)

Another one of the "just keep five" people.....


----------



## 3rdbarnottoodeep (May 1, 2009)

I personally would like to see them raise the limit to 15. My family doesn`t get full on a 10 fish limit.


----------



## Wading Mark (Apr 21, 2005)

Habitat is key. That's why the LA fisherman can't hurt their fish populations on rod and reel. Opening up the middle and lower coast passes will do wonders.


----------



## kcliff (Dec 18, 2004)

corkyboy dont let your wife see that price breakdown- you wont ever be able to fish again- fishing is about having a good time and so is the fish fry. the law is a good thing to follow, but all the keep 5 thing is about is making the fishing better- if they raise it to 15 great just make sure they clean their plate :biggrin: i had a fish fry from 2 days of fishing releasing 5 keepers: 4 trout one oversize red(had the tag) 2 reds where given to a friend to blacken- 3 trout to another friend who made ceviche- i kept 9 trout and 3 reds (3 people fishing- yea i know im not bragging) i fed 10 people with left overs on a 5 trout limit of 16 hours of fishing in places i dont know squat about- anyone who is any good can do better than that- i dont know why people get so ******- its not like we are raising your taxes


----------



## corkyboy10 (Aug 11, 2005)

*5 Trout Limit*

kcliff I forgot to add in the boat note also. Now were up to $75.00 a fish. I could take my wife to Pappadeaux 3 times a month. She would be real mad if she knew that. That is why you can't put a price on having a good time. Im just sick of people trying to tell other people how they should think or what they should do or how things should be. If you wan't to keep 5 or if you don't want to keep any that is your choice and I will respect you for it.


----------



## Diamond Jen (Jan 3, 2008)

IMO, just keep 5....


----------



## corykj (Oct 30, 2008)

TRW said:


> I feel like if all of the just keep 5 people would not keep any Trout then that should just about make up for the greedy people who follow the law and keep what TPW set the limit at. So from now on all of the people on here who just want to keep five should just keep 0.
> Thanks I knew you would understand.
> TRW


i feel like you are dumb. keeping five is a choice in most areas, yes. but five is plenty for a family... unless you have 9 kids and 3 wives, in which i can't see how you can afford spending money to go fishing anyway. really, who needs more than five a day? five is enough for two bags of fish, which equals two meals for 2-4 people. then add some 'mashed taters and okra and it is way more than enough. i will keep my five (if that) and sleep sound at night, while you or who ever keeps 10 and will be punished by god himself. oh, almost forgot... lets bring back the gay dolphin :an6:


----------



## TRW (Nov 30, 2006)

corykj said:


> i feel like you are dumb. keeping five is a choice in most areas, yes. but five is plenty for a family... unless you have 9 kids and 3 wives, in which i can't see how you can afford spending money to go fishing anyway. really, who needs more than five a day? five is enough for two bags of fish, which equals two meals for 2-4 people. then add some 'mashed taters and okra and it is way more than enough. i will keep my five (if that) and sleep sound at night, while you or who ever keeps 10 and will be punished by god himself. oh, almost forgot... lets bring back the gay dolphin :an6:


As I do you. Who the hell made you God. If I get punished for keeping my 10 trout then so be it. But for one to pass judgement is pretty foolish. I just like to now where my fish came from, and that it has not been on Ice in a fish case for a week. I use to work at a seafood place when I was younger and all fresh means is it has not been frozen. I is not about the money buying fish from a store is way cheaper. I am just sick of people who think they are better then others because they keep 5. So you can keep 5 of your gay dolphins. And I will go feed my 9 kids and 3 wives with my 10 Trout. Have a good day O Mighty One.

TRW


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

corykj said:


> i feel like you are dumb. keeping five is a choice in most areas, yes. but five is plenty for a family... unless you have 9 kids and 3 wives, in which i can't see how you can afford spending money to go fishing anyway. really, who needs more than five a day? five is enough for two bags of fish, which equals two meals for 2-4 people. then add some 'mashed taters and okra and it is way more than enough. i will keep my five (if that) and sleep sound at night, while you or who ever keeps 10 and will be punished by god himself. oh, almost forgot... lets bring back the gay dolphin :an6:


Stupidest post on a way-long thread...


----------



## corykj (Oct 30, 2008)

TRW said:


> As I do you. Who the hell made you God. If I get punished for keeping my 10 trout then so be it. But for one to pass judgement is pretty foolish. I just like to now where my fish came from, and that it has not been on Ice in a fish case for a week. I use to work at a seafood place when I was younger and all fresh means is it has not been frozen. I is not about the money buying fish from a store is way cheaper. I am just sick of people who think they are better then others because they keep 5. So you can keep 5 of your gay dolphins. And I will go feed my 9 kids and 3 wives with my 10 Trout. Have a good day O Mighty One.
> 
> TRW


so i will take the 'god' thing as a compliment... you're too kind, but that really isn't necessary. i picture god as having morals... he had one son, right? i bet he'd only keep five or fewer... as for the icing of the fish and whatnot... there is a simple solution to this my friend. FISH MORE! i know it'e easier said than done, but still... the whole argument about keeping the limit @ 10 works 'two fold'... so i ask, 'why the hell should we keep the limit at 10?' answer: to let all of the weekend warriors who only get out a dozen times a year box numerous limits w/ their croaker and gulp? quit *****ing... you think it's unfair to lower the limit b/c you have 37 people in your immediate family who need some pescado to eat and i think it's unfair to keep the limit b/c, well... i'm hard headed and i think five is enough. agree to disagree... and thanks for the five gay dolphin's... it's like christmas in june!


----------



## fishsmart (Dec 5, 2004)

Limit - 5 trout with 1 over 25 inches.

Charles


----------



## cajunasian (Mar 7, 2007)

I finally got to the end of this thread....Glad I'm at work....I mean at home....You guys crack me up.....I'll just keep fishing for croakers until someone sets a limit on them too. As for me catching a trout or a limit of trout. After reading this, I won't post up here. Oh, I did catch a dozen croakers sunday morning, if anyone wanted a report on them.


----------



## mozingo1952 (Sep 29, 2004)

what a waste of time, 15 pages and still going. 
Make your comments to TPWD , they make the rules , you are
not going to convice anyone here to change thier minds ,

Mo


----------



## corykj (Oct 30, 2008)

cajunasian said:


> I finally got to the end of this thread....Glad I'm at work....I mean at home....You guys crack me up.....I'll just keep fishing for croakers until someone sets a limit on them too. As for me catching a trout or a limit of trout. After reading this, I won't post up here. Oh, I did catch a dozen croakers sunday morning, if anyone wanted a report on them.


i caught one on friday on a pink corky... that's as far as the report goes. :biggrin:


----------



## moganman (Mar 30, 2006)

I believe that it's up to the angler's discretion. I believe 10 fish is a good amount to keep. Nothing wrong with that limit. People dont realize that conservation isnt just releasing most of what you catch or not killing things, but it's also about harvesting. Females normally start spawning aroung two years old if not earlier and some live almost ten years old. The bigger they are the more eggs they produce, so the reg that only allows you to keep 1 over 25 is great. Most of the fish we catch have already spawned. Most of us on this forum arent guides and when we get a chance to get away from work and go fishing we like to do it big. We're not talking about 10 redfish. We're talking about trout. One could argue that the redfish limit isnt high enough. Besides, they are so much easier to raise and they have a higher survival rate when hooked and released and they tend to lay more eggs. All Im saying is that the people who make the rules know what they're doing. If you only wanna keep 5 just keep them and dont make people feel bad about keeping what the law allows. And God shouldnt be in this topic because when he told the fishermen to cast the net on the other side of the boat they had so many that they couldn't lift it. Wonder if they had limits then?


----------



## rattletrap (Sep 9, 2005)

YoungGun1 said:


> I, personally, would love to see the trout limit lowered to 5 a day. Thoughts?


Hang in there and don`t give up, you will eventually find the fish again !!:ac550: :ac550:


----------



## Gluconda (Aug 25, 2005)

Gosh, you make it sound like it's so easy to limit out with 10 trout! I fish probably 3 times a month and very few times have I ever limited out. Twice all of last year, and that's all on one good weekend! Most of my trips end up with a couple of trout, a few smacks and maybe a sheepie or two. That's a good trip for me! So try not to worry so much! Get out and enjoy the weather and try to have some fun fishing!


----------



## Texasfishdude (Jul 22, 2008)

I'm all for raising the limit to 25 like Louisiana for the 2 times a year that I catch my limit. After that my freezer is full anyway and I'll catch and release.


----------



## greg77 (May 22, 2006)

YoungGun1 said:


> I, personally, would love to see the trout limit lowered to 5 a day. Thoughts?


Personally, what I would love is having so many trout out there that there was no need for a limit at all.


----------



## galvestontrophyhunter (Jun 25, 2008)

Everyone that agreed with the 5 trout limit. Next time you go out and get into them thick, only keep 5 fish. I'm eatn 10 everytime. They don't call me Big Chad for nothin.


----------



## bowedup00 (Jun 26, 2006)

10% of the people catch 90% of the fish. I don't fish every weekend and I hardly ever limit out on trout and I am not starving for fish. I also want my grandkids to have fish to catch.


----------



## Fish-a-mon (May 21, 2004)

Hey 5 only guys. Last week I kept a weeks worth (30) over three days of fishing. You should have been there, but since you were not I caught and released your weeks worth as well. One limit each day kept. Until the state say they are in trouble and lowers the limit, I will keep mine. None of you work for the state so your opinion is just that. 

I'm going to keep 20 hardheads the next time out. No problem with that? 

Better yet I'm going to kill the croakers catching the trout. See we can list every fish and limit the whole bunch. Why not C&R every fish if you all are worried about 10 trout.


Let me ask you all this, are you catching more fish today then you did 15 yrs ago? For me yes. more Flounder more Trout and definately more Reds. don't get me start on Snapper.


----------



## ATE_UP_FISHERMAN (Jun 25, 2004)

I almost forgot.. We need to ban flowtrolls while wading.. 
I hate them things and the little red guys yall stick in them.

:an6:


----------



## pelochas (Jun 15, 2005)

Leave the limits to tpwd
If you want to conserve ,then teach it but dont preach it especially ont his board LOL
Blaming the guides, thats there legal right not there problem again them guides can teach conservation and not preach it here to their clients
Lowering the limits to five may put a bunch of guides out of business go look at the deep sea charters and what the two fish limit on red snapper has done
Imo i would try to catch a full limit everytime cause i dont go often maybe two to four times per month in spring summer fall and half of those times i dont get near a limit and most times i get skunked due to weather. Haha
Anyways. Fishing will never be like the olde times and the current fishing will never like it is in the future so fish often and take the kids because no matter, license fees will increase and everything else , beaches and other areas will close due to development, pollution will increase and poisons will be increase in the waters
I have yet to see anything come down in price, any more beach grow or more access to waters , and any less signs of pollution so by the time next generation kids comes to fish, it will be a little harder to catch those five fish


----------



## MENOSQUEEZYHARDHEADZ (Oct 28, 2005)

*LOL, L2FISH*

Eventually there will be lower bag limits and more non fishing zones, enjoy while you can


----------



## drgarrett (Jul 21, 2006)

I think we need a slot size 14" to 20" and for 30" up everything else let go.


----------

