# Commercial Oyster Boats in East Matagorda



## KeithR (Jan 30, 2006)

I fished East Matagorda over the weekend and witnessed dozens of Oyster boats in the bay. These guys were ganged up on top of all the beds on the West end of the bay. At the end of the day I saw boats packed to the top with sacks of oysters. I doubt there will be much left once they are done. I heard state congressman Bonnen has a target on them after what these jackasses did to Christmas Bay. The beds were totally destroyed. I am not sure those guys give a flip about the resource.


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

They don't care about anything but the money, folks need to call their representatives in support of House Bill 51. Check out the last several pages on this thread if haven't read it yet.

http://www.2coolfishing.com/ttmbforum/showthread.php?t=2212625

More reading here,
http://www.baycitysentinel.com/arti...med-harming-east-bay-oyster-beds-mike-reddell


----------



## Bayscout22 (Aug 9, 2007)

We have been invaded. By who, I don't know. 

We have a place under the bridge and the same half dozen or so boats have unloaded oysters in our cove for years. Never mind that they are all illegals. This year there is the usual gang unloading in our cove, one group unloading under the bridge on the south side of the ICW, and one group by the little bridge on cemetery road. 

This is a straight up gang rape.


----------



## cdouglas (Apr 4, 2013)

How was the fishing in East Matagorda this weekend?


----------



## Harbormaster (May 26, 2000)

KeithR said:


> I fished East Matagorda over the weekend and witnessed dozens of Oyster boats in the bay. These guys were ganged up on top of all the beds on the West end of the bay. At the end of the day I saw boats packed to the top with sacks of oysters. I doubt there will be much left once they are done. I heard state congressman Bonnen has a target on them after what these jackasses did to Christmas Bay. The beds were totally destroyed. I am not sure those guys give a flip about the resource.


West of Raymonds?


----------



## KeithR (Jan 30, 2006)

Harbormaster said:


> West of Raymonds?


From Raymonds West. One group was just South of the gulf cut.


----------



## KeithR (Jan 30, 2006)

cdouglas said:


> How was the fishing in East Matagorda this weekend?


It was a grind Friday. We put 6 in the box and I CPR a 28" fatty. Saturday was a blowout in East so we headed to west and only boxed a couple. Due south wind made for tough conditions.


----------



## Trouthappy (Jun 12, 2008)

KeithR said:


> I doubt there will be much left once they are done. I heard state congressman Bonnen has a target on them after what these jackasses did to Christmas Bay. The beds were totally destroyed. I am not sure those guys give a flip about the resource.


I heard the old Galveston oyster companies still carry a lot of pull in Austin. Oystering should be shut down for 10 years, and let the bays recover. Order something else on the restaurant menu. How hard is that?


----------



## Stuart (May 21, 2004)

I'm confused on this HB 51. I watched the video where Dennis Bonnen was giving them heck. Every one of the commercial oysters guys that came up to testify were in support of HB 51 ???? How can that be? I need the cliff notes for this bill. lol


----------



## pipeliner24 (Apr 10, 2013)

Trouthappy said:


> I heard the old Galveston oyster companies still carry a lot of pull in Austin. Oystering should be shut down for 10 years, and let the bays recover. Order something else on the restaurant menu. How hard is that?


Probably pretty hard if you're in the oyster business,I'm not a fan of the big oyster companies but shutting down someone's living gives me the creeps.Alot of treehuggers want to shut down coal mining and any other fossil fuel business without thinking of the people that make their living in it.


----------



## Trouthappy (Jun 12, 2008)

Majek11 said:


> Probably pretty hard if you're in the oyster business,I'm not a fan of the big oyster companies but shutting down someone's living gives me the creeps.


It happened to the beach seiners first, then the gillnetters and trotliners. They presumably found other jobs. And coastal fishing bounced back. Destructive shrimp trawling with wasted bycatch has been cut back, too. If a harvest method is overall too destructive, it should be phased out. What percentage of oyster fishermen are in good standing with the law?


----------



## pipeliner24 (Apr 10, 2013)

Trouthappy said:


> It happened to the beach seiners first, then the gillnetters and trotliners. They presumably found other jobs. And coastal fishing bounced back. Destructive shrimp trawling with wasted bycatch has been cut back, too. If a harvest method is overall too destructive, it should be phased out. What percentage of oyster fishermen are in good standing with the law?


Next guides


----------



## troutsupport (May 22, 2006)

With all due respect guys, I personally side scanned Christmas bay last year for oysters and there wasn't really anything left for them to 'destroy'. All the years of high salinity is what killed all the oysters in Chrismas as well as 85% of all of Galveston Bay reef. All they did was **** a few oysters off the crests of the reefs and it was probly pretty hard pickins. Where they took oyster from isn't really much use to the trout that's for sure. Also all the raking that oyster boats do helps keep the substrate from being silted over. In east bay and in trinity the oyster companies have actually spent a lot of there fuel raking old buried beds to try to bring substrate back up to the top so new reef can form. There's not a lot of oyster left out there; id hate to be trying to make a living doing that after 11 years of drought. That's what has removed all the beds from the bays.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## The Last Mango (Jan 31, 2010)

KeithR said:


> I fished East Matagorda over the weekend and witnessed dozens of Oyster boats in the bay. These guys were ganged up on top of all the beds on the West end of the bay. At the end of the day I saw boats packed to the top with sacks of oysters. I doubt there will be much left once they are done. I heard state congressman Bonnen has a target on them after what these jackasses did to Christmas Bay. The beds were totally destroyed. I am not sure those guys give a flip about the resource.


How do you know the beds are destroyed?


----------



## The Last Mango (Jan 31, 2010)

Trouthappy said:


> I heard the old Galveston oyster companies still carry a lot of pull in Austin. Oystering should be shut down for 10 years, and let the bays recover. Order something else on the restaurant menu. How hard is that?


I see you and Joe Biden are still in love


----------



## edwardg361 (Jun 6, 2011)

X2 troutsupport


----------



## Bayscout22 (Aug 9, 2007)

troutsupport said:


> With all due respect guys, I personally side scanned Christmas bay last year for oysters and there wasn't really anything left for them to 'destroy'. All the years of high salinity is what killed all the oysters in Chrismas as well as 85% of all of Galveston Bay reef. All they did was **** a few oysters off the crests of the reefs and it was probly pretty hard pickins. Where they took oyster from isn't really much use to the trout that's for sure. Also all the raking that oyster boats do helps keep the substrate from being silted over. In east bay and in trinity the oyster companies have actually spent a lot of there fuel raking old buried beds to try to bring substrate back up to the top so new reef can form. There's not a lot of oyster left out there; id hate to be trying to make a living doing that after 11 years of drought. That's what has removed all the beds from the bays.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I'm not really on top of what happened in Christmas Bay or what remains of the reefs there. I have only heard stories.

I can personally attest to what has and is happening in Matagorda. Maybe living "amongst the oyster boats" under the bridge gives me a unique perspective.

I can absolutely tell you that two things are true.

1) When we bought our place twelve years ago, there were a few oyster boats that were all run by locals. Over time, and up until this year, the number of boats increased to around 10, at any given time, all run by folks that are not from here. These boys only rarely went East, but they absolutely bum rushed West Matagorda Bay. I would venture a guess that virtually every oyster was offloaded at one place (directly across from my condo) during this period.

2) This year the game has changed (see my earlier post). It's difficult to guess how many boats there are but there are enough that they now have three locations where they offload. I'd guess we are between 2 and 3 dozen boats.

It's also difficult for me to buy that drought got Christmas Bay, when I know it was a mob that got West Matagorda. I'd believe that all three bay systems have had roughly the same rainfall over the past ten years.


----------



## pickn'fish (Jun 1, 2004)

The last two years in Galveston have seen multiple 500 and 1000 year flood events...
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/12/06/houston-flooding-boomtown-flood-town-plain-text/


----------



## The Last Mango (Jan 31, 2010)

Bayscout22 said:


> I'm not really on top of what happened in Christmas Bay or what remains of the reefs there. I have only heard stories.
> 
> I can personally attest to what has and is happening in Matagorda. Maybe living "amongst the oyster boats" under the bridge gives me a unique perspective.
> 
> ...


An expert


----------



## karstopo (Jun 29, 2009)

Dennis Bonnen
March 29 at 4:04pm Â· 
Most Texans are unaware of a crisis affecting one of our precious natural resources that will take generations to recover. Oysters are the foundation of our entire aquatic ecosystem, positively impacting other marine species and keeping our bays healthy. Leaders in Texas conservation, including the Coastal Conservation Association and The Galveston Bay Foundation, have expressed grave concern for the future of oysters in Texas and the negative impact of overharvesting on our entire ecosystem. On Tuesday in the House Culture, Recreation, and Tourism Committee, I spoke out very directly and forcefully against the lies, bullying and underhanded tactics being used by several unscrupulous oyster operations in Texas who have no regard for our state laws and regulations. These operators overharvest our bays, destroy our reefs, deplete our oyster supply, and cost taxpayers millions of dollars while repeatedly denying their abuse of our coastal waters. Most recently, a company caused a massive marine pile-up in Brazoria County while challenging our local elected leaders when asked to rectify the situation. In yesterday's hearing, this same company admitted that over the past four years they have hired former investigative reporter Wayne Dolcefino, who personally called to threaten and intimidate me this morning. It is time for Texas to restore integrity and honesty in this industry while, most importantly, strengthening the protection of our ecosystem."

From State Rep. Dennis Bonnen's Facebook page


----------



## karstopo (Jun 29, 2009)

http://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31....8ba3a52ecd77c50cdfe0d619eb96&oe=5951E01C&dl=1

From the Christmas Bay Foundation Facebook page


----------



## karstopo (Jun 29, 2009)

https://scontent-dft4-1.xx.fbcdn.ne...f8eee4d9d82ca914a05299e0a79b&oe=594D9D5A&dl=1

One more from the Christmas Bay foundation page.


----------



## pipeliner24 (Apr 10, 2013)

Just so everyone understands I'm not for these boats over harvesting and trashing out the bay,but I'm not for a 10 year ban on the way some locals make their living and feed their family.Ive never seen the government stick their beak in and cut anything off then give it back,and if they did give it back who would do it then?All the small time locals would have been out of business after the first year,them here comes the out of town foreign boats.


----------



## capt. david (Dec 29, 2004)

A oyster grows to full harvest size in 3 years. Tobin is right on his statement. Reefs need to be worked to remain healthy. Just ate some freshly harvested oysters, Christmas Bay oysters and excellent!


----------



## Gorda Fisher (Aug 19, 2005)

Bayscout22 said:


> 2) This year the game has changed (see my earlier post). It's difficult to guess how many boats there are but there are enough that they now have three locations where they offload. I'd guess we are between 2 and 3 dozen boats.
> 
> Try +-60 last Tuesday in east
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Salty Dog (Jan 29, 2005)

I'd like to see all that harvested shell go back in the bay it came out of. It would make a great base to start new reefs.


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

Oysters take 18 months to reach market size (3").


----------



## BretE (Jan 24, 2008)

Salty Dog said:


> I'd like to see all that harvested shell go back in the bay it came out of. It would make a great base to start new reefs.


I was watching an episode of Lone Star Law last night on the DVR and thought the Game Warden checking an oyster boat said the shell had to go back where it came from.....


----------



## Salty Dog (Jan 29, 2005)

BretE said:


> I was watching an episode of Lone Star Law last night on the DVR and thought the Game Warden checking an oyster boat said the shell had to go back where it came from.....


Not the shell containing oysters. It is taken to a shucker, shucked, piled up and sold to fill in potholes and driveways.

They are referring to the cull.


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

The ones that get thrown into refrigerated trucks and are sent all over the US all end up in landfills.


----------



## Stuart (May 21, 2004)

capt. david said:


> .....Reefs need to be worked to remain healthy.........


I read where the Karankawa Indians had a heck of a oyster dredge fleet.


----------



## Bayscout22 (Aug 9, 2007)

Salty Dog said:


> Not the shell containing oysters. It is taken to a shucker, shucked, piled up and sold to fill in potholes and driveways.
> 
> They are referring to the cull.


And the funniest part... You can't buy shell from any from the processor (s) if you tried (and I recently have tried). The County buys all they can deliver.

I guess it helps to defray the cost of building 60' piers.


----------



## troutsupport (May 22, 2006)

> The last two years in Galveston have seen multiple 500 and 1000 year flood events...
> http://www.texastribune.org/2016/12/06/houston-flooding-boomtown-flood-town-plain-text/


Hope this helps provide information, really only intend to provide some information from the perspective of being the one person that has side scanned the entire Galveston Bay Complex and what really happened out there under the water.

Floods ... Yes, that's going to help the oyster population tremendously. First of all, all that fresh water finally pushed out or killed the the high salinity predators that were decimating the reefs... But, temporarily it also killed a lot of Trinity bay and upper Galveston bay oyster due to staying fresh too long. All those oysters that were killed will be substrate for the 'spat' (oyster larvae) to land on right now. Right now we finally have the right conditions if it will just last like that for a couple of years.

Also, with regard to the Karankawa Indian comment.... no, they didn't need to turn their oyster beds... they didn't have the problem with sediment runoff that we have today. There were no agricultural crops, it was all grasslands that protected the soils. Today we primarily have unprotected soils in almost all rural areas for miles and miles and those unprotected soils are available to translocation from rain and erosion. Find a map of Mattagorda at the mouth of the Colorado from 100 years ago and there was no road to the beach... that road to the beach was built on sediment that formed from after the industrial / agricultural age. Over about 40 years that system changed dramatically. Im not saying we go back to that... because we can't. We have to look at how to maximize everything for all parties involved and it's not a one variable equation. Its multi variate with lots of problems to think thru. I'm not saying that harvest doesn't need to be managed either. But currently I can tell you that oyster boat activity on reefs that are harvested is helpful to sustaining a healthy fishery for us. If not, it would all be buried in sediment. Also, I think its only fair that everyone knows that it's not the oyster industry that has decimated our reefs, it was 8 years of draught and high salinity predators to oysters. I can tell you from personal observation that is what wiped it out. While it takes 3 years for an oyster to become big enough to harvest.. it only takes 3 months for new reef to form on hard substrate that was turned up... and trout and reds don't care what size oyster is on it... as long as it's live it's better fishing.

I also am not for or against the oyster industry.. I remember Saturday Night Live long ago when RosanaRosanaDanna said "eating raw oysters are like chewing on a flemball".. Classic. LOL


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

http://tpwd.texas.gov/publications/pwdpubs/media/pwd_br_v3400_006_oysters.pdf

"GROWTH
Growth of oysters in Texas waters is relatively fast and occurs throughout the year. Under ideal conditions, spat may reach 1 inch in three months, 2 inches in seven months, and 3 inches in 15 months. But growth can be variable, and oysters of identical age may differ remarkably in size. Probably most Texas oysters reach the legal market size of three inches in 18 to 20 months."


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

KeithR said:


> I fished East Matagorda over the weekend and witnessed dozens of Oyster boats in the bay. These guys were ganged up on top of all the beds on the West end of the bay. At the end of the day I saw boats packed to the top with sacks of oysters. I doubt there will be much left once they are done. I heard state congressman Bonnen has a target on them after what these jackasses did to Christmas Bay. The beds were totally destroyed. I am not sure those guys give a flip about the resource.


A couple of things. First off, Christmas Bay beds were not "totally destroyed". I have commercially oystered in Christmas Bay off and on for 30 years and there are still plenty of oysters there. The bay is too shallow to dredge so every oyster that was harvested was done so by hand. The same technology deployed buy the first humans to visit our shores tens of thousands of years ago. Our hands.

All of the shell base is still there as "cooners" do very little long term damage to the foundation of the reef and there are still plenty of oysters to harvest in Christmas Bay. If anything they may have knocked down and spread some of the shell from the tops to the deeper areas of the long reefs that criss cross the bay which is a good thing.

The problem arises with TPWD closing down about 25 of the 32 designated "approved" areas due to "over harvest". This forced the price up to record levels and created a "refugee" trail from every closed bay system into fewer and fewer bays that remained open.

In late Februrary for the first time in 30 years I saw another oyster boat in Christmas Bay other than mine. Then there were 4, then 8 all the way up to about 40 plus people "cooning" from their trucks based on the south shoreline.

Then when the Spring tides came the water became too deep to "****" but still not deep enough for the dredge boats. So they left. I am now back to being the only boat on the bay.

Most of them ended up in East Matagorda where with the spring tides they can get their dredges to work.

So there are a lot of issues TPWD is working on but the biggest is an oyster license buyback which is included in HB-51. Which if it passes will voluntarily reduce the number of working licenses on the water.

The last few years have been kind of a perfect storm for the Oyster fishery in Texas. Years of drought, followed by a few floods, red tide, dermo and extremely poor management have taken its toll.

Hopefully they will establish a buyback system and get to work voluntarily reducing the number of boats to a more sustainable number.


----------



## Zeitgeist (Nov 10, 2011)

Its Catchy said:


> A couple of things. First off, Christmas Bay beds were not "totally destroyed". I have commercially oystered in Christmas Bay off and on for 30 years and there are still plenty of oysters there. The bay is too shallow to dredge so every oyster that was harvested was done so by hand. The same technology deployed buy the first humans to visit our shores tens of thousands of years ago. Our hands.
> 
> All of the shell base is still there as "cooners" do very little long term damage to the foundation of the reef and there are still plenty of oysters to harvest in Christmas Bay. If anything they may have knocked down and spread some of the shell from the tops to the deeper areas of the long reefs that criss cross the bay which is a good thing.
> 
> ...


Catchy would know as I purchased oysters from him a couple of weeks back. They were excellent and I personally returned them to the bay.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

A couple of things to think about as well.

There are 10's of thousands of square miles of bays and reefs that are in closed waters and have gone untouched for years. Kind of a regulatory "sanctuary" off limits to harvest. Sabine Lake has one of the biggest untouched oyster reefs left in world.

Drive a piling in the water and come back in 18 months. You can't keep an oyster off of it. They are extremely prolific capable of spawning on a level it is hard for mammals to understand. We just have to make sure the culch (base) is there for them to grow on.

What we don't need to do is anything "regulatory" that will increase the price, make the resource more valuable and thus harder to buy back and retire licenses. And for god sakes closing one bay and forcing a horde of barbarians into fewer and fewer open bays is not a practical management tool. Your resting one while raping another.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Trouthappy said:


> It happened to the beach seiners first, then the gillnetters and trotliners. They presumably found other jobs. And coastal fishing bounced back. Destructive shrimp trawling with wasted bycatch has been cut back, too. If a harvest method is overall too destructive, it should be phased out. What percentage of oyster fishermen are in good standing with the law?


Im all for "outlawing" babbling ultra-liberal part time "writers", Photographers and magazine columnists. They presumably will find other jobs as well.

But in reality they will just end up on the welfare rolls mooching off the rest of us that actually work for a living.


----------



## karstopo (Jun 29, 2009)

Its Catchy said:


> A couple of things. First off, Christmas Bay beds were not "totally destroyed". I have commercially oystered in Christmas Bay off and on for 30 years and there are still plenty of oysters there. The bay is too shallow to dredge so every oyster that was harvested was done so by hand. The same technology deployed buy the first humans to visit our shores tens of thousands of years ago. Our hands.
> 
> All of the shell base is still there as "cooners" do very little long term damage to the foundation of the reef and there are still plenty of oysters to harvest in Christmas Bay. If anything they may have knocked down and spread some of the shell from the tops to the deeper areas of the long reefs that criss cross the bay which is a good thing.
> 
> ...


It is really great to hear your perspective as a long term commercial oyster man that knows Christmas Bay. Good to hear the reefs will be fine. You would have to think that whatever went on in Christmas Bay was completely legal being it was so visible and lasted for a few weeks. I'm surprised the landowner let the oyster guys (or whoever did) tear up their land running ATVs across it like they did in the photos. Personally, I'm all for anyone making a living within the laws and if the laws managing the resource need changing that can be done too.

My only interest in that bay is as a recreational fisherman and occasional gatherer of oysters. I haven't been out there since January. I usually go there in March, but all the reports from my friends about all the boats in there sent me fishing elsewhere.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Everybody who has ever had the pleasure of eating a Christmas Bay oyster please take the time to contact your state Rep and Lance Robinson with TPWD. Let them know you do not want this treasure to be closed to the harvest of oysters. There are no other oysters like it in the State and maybe in the nation. The problem I have with the big buyers like Halili, Misho and others is they have private oyster leases. Every square inch of public reef closed just makes their "private" leases more valuable.

So heck yes they want it closed. If it is closed nobody will ever eat another oyster from this bay and a true treasure will be lost.

It won't just be closed to commercial harvest it will be closed to everyone.

This from the Galveston Daily News:
Oyster companies urge state to close a bay amid uproar over conditions
Galveston Daily News:
http://www.galvnews.com/news/article_e36213af-271c-5e3c-bfce-7e2ac50c4fcd.ht
ml
April 11, 2017

A group of major Texas oyster companies and a coastal advocacy group are
urging the state to close a small bay in Brazoria County amid uproar there
over oyster harvesting.

The Texas Outdoor Coastal Council, a nonprofit focused on coastal issues, is
gathering signatures for a petition asking the Texas Parks and Wildlife
Director of Coastal Fisheries to immediately halt oyster harvesting in
Christmas Bay, according to a letter obtained by The Daily News.

Several of the Gulf's largest oyster companies have signed onto the
petition. Those include Prestige Oysters, Hillman Shrimp and Seafood Co.,
Casterline Seafood Co. and Misho's Oyster Co., according to a list provided
by the group.

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department considers bacteria conditions and the
maturity and quantity of oysters in an area when determining whether to keep
it open, said Lance Robinson, Coastal Fisheries regional director at Texas
Parks and Wildlife.

Christmas Bay, near Surfside, was closed to oyster harvesting between 2000
and 2014 because of high levels of bacteria, according to the state health
department. The health department reopened the bay to oystering beginning in
the 2015 season, a spokesman said.

Oyster industry leaders are calling for a renewed ban on oyster harvesting
of Christmas Bay because of its sensitive ecosystem, Prestige Oysters
co-owner Lisa Halili said. The area is one of few places in the state with
near-pristine water quality and should not be open to commercial fishing,
Halili said.

"We're more than happy to give up this one little sliver of the area if it's
a sensitive ecosystem," Halili said, adding industry players have been in
talks with environmental groups about the bay ecosystem.

Halili insisted the industry's support is not related to an ongoing
controversy in Brazoria County over concerns about damage to grasslands
around Christmas Bay, which environmental groups say was caused by some
oyster harvesters, she said.

During this public season, which started Nov. 1 and runs through May 1, more
oyster harvesters have been working in Christmas Bay, which has created some
tensions with recreational anglers there, Robinson said. The increased
traffic is likely because other public reefs along the Gulf coast are closed
this season, Robinson said.

More than a 100 harvesters have licenses to take oysters on public reefs,
Robinson said. Many of the major oyster companies own private leases in the
bay but do sometimes purchase oysters from smaller operations.

Prestige Oysters does not harvest in Christmas Bay and hadn't purchased any
oysters out of Christmas Bay in about five weeks, Halili said.

Because the water in Christmas Bay is very shallow and the areas to
cultivate oysters are near-shore, many oystermen working in the area have
been walking or driving all-terrain vehicles through the grasslands to get
oysters, said Scott Jones of the Galveston Bay Foundation. Harvesting in the
area also was stirring up sediments and disturbing rookery islands, Jones
said.

Galveston Bay Foundation intends to ask the state to close Christmas Bay to
oyster harvesting, Jones said.

The increased traffic of oyster harvesters also upset recreational anglers
who use public boat ramps at Christmas Bay because commercial boaters were
tying their boats to the ramps for long periods of time.

The Brazoria County Commissioners Court on March 28 voted to put up signs
prohibiting commercial harvesters from using the boat ramps. Because the
county owns the boat ramps, the signs can only apply to those areas,
Robinson said. The state otherwise regulates oyster harvesting.

Of late, fewer oystermen have been fishing in Christmas Bay, which Robinson
said is likely because they have found better places to harvest farther
south.

"We're seeing fewer boats out there but I'd hate to speculate as to why,"
Robinson said.
________________________________________


----------



## The Last Mango (Jan 31, 2010)

Its Catchy said:


> Im all for "outlawing" babbling ultra-liberal part time "writers", Photographers and magazine columnists. They presumably will find other jobs as well.
> 
> But in reality they will just end up on the welfare rolls mooching off the rest of us that actually work for a living.


This


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

Man this is making me really want some oysters right now, especially Christmas Bay oysters. Where can I get some?


----------



## karstopo (Jun 29, 2009)

Leo said:


> Man this is making me really want some oysters right now, especially Christmas Bay oysters. Where can I get some?


Wait until the next lower water levels and go get you some. You have until the end of the month. Closed after that, at least to recreational harvesting.


----------



## pocjetty (Sep 12, 2014)

troutsupport said:


> With all due respect guys, I personally side scanned Christmas bay last year for oysters and there wasn't really anything left for them to 'destroy'. All the years of high salinity is what killed all the oysters in Chrismas as well as 85% of all of Galveston Bay reef. All they did was **** a few oysters off the crests of the reefs and it was probly pretty hard pickins. Where they took oyster from isn't really much use to the trout that's for sure. Also all the raking that oyster boats do helps keep the substrate from being silted over. In east bay and in trinity the oyster companies have actually spent a lot of there fuel raking old buried beds to try to bring substrate back up to the top so new reef can form. There's not a lot of oyster left out there; id hate to be trying to make a living doing that after 11 years of drought. That's what has removed all the beds from the bays.


And with just as much respect, when a resource is under as much stress as you acknowledge this one is, from 11 years of drought, it might not be the best time to allow anyone to strip out any of the ones that are left.

What's funny is that we hear these stories about how the oyster companies are raking the bottom to expose substrate, so that oysters can grow. And at the same time, one of the guys who ALWAYS defends the oyster industry says that if you drive a stake in the bay floor and come back in a year, it will be covered with oysters. So shouldn't the oyster companies be driving stakes everywhere, instead of burning their own fuel raking the bottom?

You guys need to get together - you can't have it both ways. They can't be fragile, and ultra-prolific at the same time. These are some of the same arguments people gave before Chesapeake Bay collapsed.

Tell you what - any of you who aren't so sure what's happening here. Do a google search on "triploid oysters". That's what is sustaining the Chesapeake Bay oyster industry these days. They're coming soon, to a bay near you, if they aren't already here. And they have tetraploid oysters being "tested", that will come right behind. But, hey, if that's what it takes to keep the oyster buyers in business?


----------



## pocjetty (Sep 12, 2014)

Its Catchy said:


> A couple of things to think about as well.
> 
> There are 10's of thousands of square miles of bays and reefs that are in closed waters and have gone untouched for years. Kind of a regulatory "sanctuary" off limits to harvest. Sabine Lake has one of the biggest untouched oyster reefs left in world.
> 
> Drive a piling in the water and come back in 18 months. You can't keep an oyster off of it. They are extremely prolific capable of spawning on a level it is hard for mammals to understand. We just have to make sure the culch (base) is there for them to grow on.


10,000 square miles is 100 miles X 100 miles. (You can look it up.) So if a bay is 10 miles across, from shore to barrier island, *it would have to be 1000 miles long* to come up with 10K square miles. I don't know how many of those sized spaces are closed to oystering. I truly don't. But I'm guessing that there can't be too many areas 10 miles wide and 1000 miles long that are closed to oystering. And that's what it would take for there to be "tens of thousands of square miles closed to oystering".

For the record, Sabine lake is 14 miles long and 7 miles wide. That's a total of 84 square miles, and you say that is one of the biggest untouched oyster reefs left in the world. It would take about ten Sabine Lakes to make a single 10K sq. mile sanctuary.

What I do know is this: these days, TPWD typically closes bays because of a "low abundance of oysters", not to make a "sanctuary". Don't believe me - believe them. http://tpwd.texas.gov/newsmedia/releases/?req=20161031a These are bays where the oysters are in short supply, not where they have been protected by some mythical sanctuary.

What's really funny is that you have been a big "man-made global warming" proponent, but you still b**ch about other people being "liberal", whenever they suggest anything that makes life harder on oystermen. You fire back with whatever you like, I'm not going to come back here to argue with you. But other people will notice that the things you say never add up. You're on the side of oystermen, no matter what.

BTW - according to you, all we need to do to protect the oyster population is to drive pilings everywhere. They will all be full of oysters within 18 months. It's a shame all the biologists don't just come to you for advice.


----------



## lurker (Feb 26, 2015)

pocjetty said:


> you can't have it both ways. They can't be fragile, and ultra-prolific at the same time. These are some of the same arguments people gave before Chesapeake Bay collapsed.


Don't forget that dragging chains over reefs is helpful, but there are also sanctuary reefs that are off limits from oystering.


----------



## Salty Dog (Jan 29, 2005)

Well, the good thing is that there are big areas in each bay that are off limits to oyster harvest. That is a good thing because as long as those areas are full of oysters you have the basis for replenishing the harvested areas. Take a look at the oyster harvest map and look at what zones are always closed. In our area it is some pretty key areas that are full of oysters, like the whole area around Chinquapin.

I think what is ticking people off isn't the harvest of oysters, it is that these companies roll in with big bunches of boats and systematically strip all of the reefs that they are allowed to oyster. This isn't our local guys going out and scratching out a living. These are folks who are not from here coming in with a fleet of boats and just dragging the bottom clean. And THAT is what rubs folks the wrong way. They don't have any stake in the fishery or in the area. They just take, and take, and take and then leave.

The thing is, there just aren't hardly any of the local guys down here oystering anymore. We hardly have any crabbers left and not too many shrimpers either. I'm not saying that is good or bad, it just is what it is. I'd imagine it's dang hard to make a living at it when these guys come in and pick the bay clean.


----------



## Capt.ChrisO (Jun 22, 2016)

Its Catchy said:


> Im all for "outlawing" babbling ultra-liberal part time "writers", Photographers and magazine columnists. They presumably will find other jobs as well.
> 
> But in reality they will just end up on the welfare rolls mooching off the rest of us that actually work for a living.


I'm all for "outlawing" babbling ulta-conservatives who are only concerned about their $$$ at the time. If the harvesting process destroys, I presume you will find another job as well... so you don't end up on the welfare rolls mooching off the rest of us actually working for a living.

I am educating myself on this because East Matagorda matters to me. I, as well as you and everyone should, appreciate a liberal approach toward conserving the resources that bring us together on this sight. Take and no give leaves us with nothing.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

pocjetty said:


> 10,000 square miles is 100 miles X 100 miles. (You can look it up.) So if a bay is 10 miles across, from shore to barrier island, *it would have to be 1000 miles long* to come up with 10K square miles. I don't know how many of those sized spaces are closed to oystering. I truly don't. But I'm guessing that there can't be too many areas 10 miles wide and 1000 miles long that are closed to oystering. And that's what it would take for there to be "tens of thousands of square miles closed to oystering".
> 
> For the record, Sabine lake is 14 miles long and 7 miles wide. That's a total of 84 square miles, and you say that is one of the biggest untouched oyster reefs left in the world. It would take about ten Sabine Lakes to make a single 10K sq. mile sanctuary.
> 
> ...


First off you are a completely stark raving mad lunatic if you think I am a "man-made global warming proponent". Secondly there are currently only a handful of areas on the entire Texas Coast open to the harvest of shellfish. Yes that's 10's of thousands of square miles from the Sabine River to the Rio Grande that are closed.

Thirdly I don't b**ch about other people being liberal unless well they are. Read his posts and get back to me on that... I think they speak for themselves.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Capt.ChrisO said:


> I'm all for "outlawing" babbling ulta-conservatives who are only concerned about their $$$ at the time. If the harvesting process destroys, I presume you will find another job as well... so you don't end up on the welfare rolls mooching off the rest of us actually working for a living.
> 
> I am educating myself on this because East Matagorda matters to me. I, as well as you and everyone should, appreciate a liberal approach toward conserving the resources that bring us together on this sight. Take and no give leaves us with nothing.


I don't think I fall under the category of "ultra conservative". Maybe rightward leaning. But I certainly think the economic impact of oyster fishing should be taken into consideration. It's a multimillion dollar industry that provides thousands of jobs from the harvesters to the restaurants that serve them.

Not too much different from the guide fishermen that harvest thousands of pounds of Redfish and Trout from our bay systems every year to line their pockets. It's pretty easy to point your finger at other user groups without taking a good look in the mirror.


----------



## RedXCross (Aug 7, 2005)

I'd much prefer to eat a Galveston or further South Oyster than Sabine Lake



Its Catchy said:


> A couple of things to think about as well.
> 
> There are 10's of thousands of square miles of bays and reefs that are in closed waters and have gone untouched for years. Kind of a regulatory "sanctuary" off limits to harvest. Sabine Lake has one of the biggest untouched oyster reefs left in world.
> 
> ...


----------



## Capt.ChrisO (Jun 22, 2016)

Its Catchy said:


> I don't think I fall under the category of "ultra conservative". Maybe rightward leaning. But I certainly think the economic impact of oyster fishing should be taken into consideration. It's a multimillion dollar industry that provides thousands of jobs from the harvesters to the restaurants that serve them.
> 
> Not too much different from the guide fishermen that harvest thousands of pounds of Redfish and Trout from our bay systems every year to line their pockets. It's pretty easy to point your finger at other user groups without taking a good look in the mirror.


Harvesting oysters (within regulations) is not the concern, it's the process involved. I am not for shutting down oyster harvests but I am against the damaged. Catching fish is a different process.

It seems the harvest process needs improvement: maybe stick 1,000s of pvc pipe into the bay bottom in a designated area, tall enough for everyone to see, away from the reefs. If you're correct the oysters will grow and to harvest pull the poles out of the water....something different that's not as harmful.

This is not a personal attack on you. It's great you're here to discuss. It helps all see both sides.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Capt.ChrisO said:


> Harvesting oysters (within regulations) is not the concern, it's the process involved. I am not for shutting down oyster harvests but I am against the damaged. Catching fish is a different process.
> 
> It seems the harvest process needs improvement: maybe stick 1,000s of pvc pipe into the bay bottom in a designated area, tall enough for everyone to see, away from the reefs. If you're correct the oysters will grow and to harvest pull the poles out of the water....something different that's not as harmful.
> 
> This is not a personal attack on you. It's great you're here to discuss. It helps all see both sides.


Chris, There are studies out that that seem to indicate oystering may actually have beneficial impacts to the reef and help fight sedimentation. TPWD with a federal grant actually paid oyster boats to pull bag less dredges to help expose reef in East Galveston Bay that had been covered by sediment during Ike. But like anything else it has limits.

I think the future is certainly in aquaculture. But Texas is decades and decades behind in that area. Most oyster farms grow them in chains of long floating baskets, Texas simply does it by placing cultch on the bottom. But there have been no new leases issued by the state since the 1960's and all of them are in Galveston Bay and controlled by a few large buyers.

I personally think funding the limited entry program is the key. Decrease pressure over time, place cultch for oysters to grow on and let mother nature do the rest.


----------



## Stuart (May 21, 2004)

Aren't a fair amount of the areas that are "closed" due to pollution? Some of those closures get lifted from time to time and some don't I would assume.

Also, although a license buy back program might help TPWD with the overall numbers of boats they have to keep up, I don't see where it does anything to reduce pressure on the resource. If x pounds of oysters are going to be harvested, it doesn't matter if 200 boats are doing it or 100 boats.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Stuart said:


> Aren't a fair amount of the areas that are "closed" due to pollution? Some of those closures get lifted from time to time and some don't I would assume.
> 
> Also, although a license buy back program might help TPWD with the overall numbers of boats they have to keep up, I don't see where it does anything to reduce pressure on the resource. If x pounds of oysters are going to be harvested, it doesn't matter if 200 boats are doing it or 100 boats.


There are approved areas, restricted areas and prohibited areas. The approved areas can be open and closed due to runoff from rains, red tides etc. This year I would estimate 90+ % of the total area containing oysters has been closed for one reason or another.

The limit is currently 40 sacks per boat per day. TPWD claims there are about 100 boats currently actively working. So that is a maximum of 4000 sacks a day can be taken. If you retire a license that number goes down to 3960, 3920, 3880 etc... So reduction of the fleet is probably the best way to achieve long term sustainability. It has worked great for the shrimp, crab and fin fish industries.

No need to re-invent the wheel. A couple of things that we need to think about as we move forward. Don't quote me on the exact number but there are approximately 400 total licenses out there and TPWD estimates that about 100 or 25% of them are currently working. Rough figures.

The boat price is currently 40.00 to 50.00 per sack. Any regulation passed that increases the cost to harvest oysters will undoubtably be passed on down to the consumer and cause the price to go up. Law of supply and demand.

Oystering commercially is extremely hard work, its not for the meek. Thats why only 100 out of 400 total licenses are actually working. If the price increases from 40.00 to 80.00 oystering becomes much more profitable even at say 10 sacks a day. What you will have is more money being made and more licenses actually being worked.

So instead of 100 licenses working we may jump up to 200 or 300. That raises the "potential" total number of oyster sacks taken from our bays daily from 4,000 to 8,000 or heaven forbid even 12,000. The exact opposite effect of what we should be trying to do.

Thats why I am fervently opposing any additional regulations that will artificially drive up the price. Lower the limits and oysters go up, more boats go to work and the pressure on the resource increases. In addition the cost to buy back the license shoots up making it harder to retire them.

There has already been a fundamental change in the way we oyster. Lower limits mean the big slower boats with a limited range have become obsolete. They have been replaced by much smaller, very fast skiffs with a huge range.

At 20.00 - 30.00 a sack cooning oysters was just not very feasible for all but the very young and very hardy. At 40.00 - 50.00 a guy "cooning" ten sacks can make pretty decent money. Thats why for the first time that I know of in our history Christmas Bay had more than a couple of oyster fishermen working it. The law of unintended consequences keeps biting the industry and it's "managers".


----------



## Stuart (May 21, 2004)

Its Catchy said:


> The limit is currently 40 sacks per boat per day. TPWD claims there are about 100 boats currently actively working. So that is a maximum of 4000 sacks a day can be taken. If you retire a license that number goes down to 3960, 3920, 3880 etc... So reduction of the fleet is probably the best way to achieve long term sustainability. It has worked great for the shrimp, crab and fin fish industries.


I guess that is where you and I are assuming different things. Where does it say anywhere that the limit won't remain at 4000 sacks per day? I'm asking because I don't know.

I'm assuming the current limit is based on what TPWD thinks the fishery can take. The limit should never be based on how many boats there are.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Stuart said:


> I guess that is where you and I are assuming different things. Where does it say anywhere that the limit won't remain at 4000 sacks per day? I'm asking because I don't know.
> 
> I'm assuming the current limit is based on what TPWD thinks the fishery can take. The limit should never be based on how many boats there are.


No, the limit is not 4000 sacks. It technically is the total number of oyster boats multiplied by 40 sacks per day. So in theory it's probably closer to 16,000 sacks per day. But in reality only 1/4 of the total number are "active" and this year most probably struggle to get 25 sacks per day.


----------



## troutsupport (May 22, 2006)

pocjetty said:


> And with just as much respect, when a resource is under as much stress as you acknowledge this one is, from 11 years of drought, it might not be the best time to allow anyone to strip out any of the ones that are left.


I get you're upset and taking a stand but it's a manageble natural resource. 
The spawn from the remaining non harvestable oyster is MORE than PLENTY to recolonize all the substrate. While the legal harvest is substantial, they are not taking every last one.



pocjetty said:


> What's funny is that we hear these stories about how the oyster companies are raking the bottom to expose substrate, so that oysters can grow. And at the same time, one of the guys who ALWAYS defends the oyster industry says that if you drive a stake in the bay floor and come back in a year, it will be covered with oysters. So shouldn't the oyster companies be driving stakes everywhere, instead of burning their own fuel raking the bottom?.


Yes, any hard substate.. even dense clay can collect 'spat'. Let's add 10000 hull wreckers to the bay with 10000 poles of what will essentially be limestone to a lower unit. They'd also be entirely unfishable.. "hey I hooked another trout but it got off due to those crazy oyster laden poles"... (the poles) would be so thick we'd have to go in with flippin sticks. "New from TroutSupport, how to flip ChickenBoys for giant Oyster Pole Trout.. 'well first you use stainless cable leader to tie to your 1oz sinker on your New Ultra Heavy Action Sarge, or 'Pitchin Croaker in the Poles with Guest Stars SharkChum and Zeitguest". Of course I'm being facetious but let's think through this.. that's why the state laid down acres and acres of rock substrate on the bottom so newbies to the bays won't endanger themselves. They'd probably have to make the 'Poles' Off Limits to boaters after the first lawsuit and crash anyway... then we'd all be ******.



pocjetty said:


> They can't be fragile, and ultra-prolific at the same time.


Actually they are.. with sufficient substrate and current available and the absence of high salinity predators they are quite prolific and manageable.

Again, I'm not saying they don't need to be managed and policed as well.


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

There were 557 commercial licenses issued this year, between 350 to 400 were active at some point this season.


----------



## Stuart (May 21, 2004)

Its Catchy said:


> No, the limit is not 4000 sacks. It technically is the total number of oyster boats multiplied by 40 sacks per day. So in theory it's probably closer to 16,000 sacks per day. But in reality only 1/4 of the total number are "active" and this year most probably struggle to get 25 sacks per day.


Same thing I think. Okay, so if the limit is 40 sacks a day and the fleet is cut in half through buy-backs, TPWD will raise the limit to 80 sacks per day (if even possible, but where there is a will, there is a way).


----------



## Bayscout22 (Aug 9, 2007)

troutsupport said:


> I get you're upset and taking a stand but it's a manageble natural resource.
> The spawn from the remaining non harvestable oyster is MORE than PLENTY to recolonize all the substrate. While the legal harvest is substantial, they are not taking every last one.


The conversation started around East Matagorda. I now understand (better) why there is such a proliferation of new boats here and I even learned a little more about harvesting.

My question is this... *How do we know that this increased pressure isn't doing irreversible harm?* I think by any estimate, we are seeing at least a five fold increase in boats this year focused exclusively on East Matagorda. It would seem to me this is an unprecedented increase in pressure, but maybe it's not.

This is actually an informative conversation. I'm just not sure what to believe.


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

Bayscout22 said:


> The conversation started around East Matagorda. I now understand (better) why there is such a proliferation of new boats here and I even learned a little more about harvesting.
> 
> My question is this... *How do we know that this increased pressure isn't doing irreversible harm?* I think by any estimate, we are seeing at least a five fold increase in boats this year focused exclusively on East Matagorda. It would seem to me this is an unprecedented increase in pressure, but maybe it's not.
> 
> This is actually an informative conversation. I'm just not sure what to believe.


TPWD between recommendation from industry (what their seeing in their dredges) or from Game Warden Reports (what their seeing in enforcement checks) will go out and pull dredges of their own which are just like the ones commercials use, they have specific protocol they follow and if a certain percentage of what their seeing is undersized oysters they then can close the area off to insure those undersized oyster are left alone and allowed to mature for next years season. This is the procedure that's been used all year and the reason so many of the areas are closed due to overfishing.


----------



## troutsupport (May 22, 2006)

Bayscout22 said:


> The conversation started around East Matagorda. I now understand (better) why there is such a proliferation of new boats here and I even learned a little more about harvesting.
> 
> My question is this... *How do we know that this increased pressure isn't doing irreversible harm?* I think by any estimate, we are seeing at least a five fold increase in boats this year focused exclusively on East Matagorda. It would seem to me this is an unprecedented increase in pressure, but maybe it's not.
> 
> This is actually an informative conversation. I'm just not sure what to believe.


How do we know its not doing more harm than good? I wish I could have saved some of the side scan images from the historic raking. First of all, they don't rake in one pinpoint spot. What I mean by that is, due to wind and current the boats drift even as they go in circles. So while they are going in circles they are only raking their dredge which is what about 3' wide x a couple feet long... and its following an arc shape path spiraling down wind. It's a rather inefficient harvest method if you ask me. Anyway, what I've seen is that even heavily worked beds only have about 5% of the area raked. It's literally impossible for them to even rake the whole bed void. Impossible. Plus, they do have to throw back un-harvestable material anything that is not legal and empty shells go back in as well as stated above. They take the legal live oyster shell and all. What they put back is both substrate and also anything that is less than three inches is going to spawn all spring, summer, and fall. All that spawn just needs something hard to land on from dense clay, oyster, oyster or clam shell, or pipe, rocks, wooden poles old anchors and or debris from anything like a wreck. Reef will form as one oyster grows and another attaches to it... the reefs tend to grow up current and down current the best and fastest since the spat float with the current until they land on something they can attach to. I've scanned entire 1/4 mile long reefs that started off attaching to one clump of shell that was the edge of a raked area. They just need something to start with, and enough current or wave action to keep the sediment from burying them (at least long enough so that the next oyster can connect and keep growing upwards).

The Western 1/3 of East Mattagorda is almost entirely oyster beds. That's a sizable area ~ about 15 square miles. There's a lot of good oyster beds there almost covering the entire bottom, if not solid bed then for sure in clumps of mud and shell mix. Moving toward the east from Boggy, is where East Matty's beds were also damaged by the high salinity oyster predators (Oyster drills etc) ... especially everything from about Boggy East was seriously damaged. There used to be a lot of oyster around half moon but now it's little tiny shell fragments. Those shell fragments are not oyster substrate and are referred to as 'Hash' by oyster experts.

I think those boats are probably in Matty because everywhere else the beds are dead or closed. Let's put ourselves in their shoes. I'd go anywhere as long as it was legal to feed my wife and kids wouldn't you. So yes, with the current state of the rest of the oyster beds dead or closed, then we'll probably continue to see them move to areas in groups, and perhaps more concentrated groups. Should this concern be brought up to TPWD. I think it's worth voicing our opinion as fisherman, but in general they've always operated in groups anyway whether organized or unorganized.

To some extent we have to trust the TPWD and their biologist and the regulatory process.. yes, yes, we've all seen that fail as well. What I CAN say is that with their current harvest method they are not going to entirely wipe anything out. It's just too inefficient a harvest process.It ends up turning up the bottom and bringing good substrate back to the surface and making the bottom rougher which in turn is also good for fishing / structure.

So, how do we know.. we don't entirely. Let's voice our opinions to the regulatory agency and be a part of the process but let's do it with good science and good management full knowing of how the harvest and all parties work including things that we can't control like salinity shifts and changing weather patterns etc. etc.


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

Your example of how they pull their dredges is spot on but what you fail to point out is once that boat is done that bed doesn't get marked and left alone, the next day another boat will hit it and later that day a 3rd boat will hit, the next day another boat or two and on and on till they either figure out their burning more fuel than it's worth or the area is shut down by TPWD. There were 50+ plus boats in St Charles every day in between the public ramp and the mouth into Aransas for over 2 weeks, there is no way that every square inch of shell of that area didn't have a dredge pulled over it more than once, Coastal Fisheries finally got out there to sample and the abundance of undersized was through the roof and way past the cut off limit and 3 days later (which is required by law so it can be published) it was closed. Everyone of those boats know how many undersized oysters and other "stuff" (dead shell, rock, etc) they can put in a sack and get away with it, buyers are buying sacks and given the current market they are just glad to get them and write off all the other "stuff" their buying as the cost of doing bushiness right now. I can't attest to about up north but myself and several old timers in the Aransas Bay area will tell you that without a doubt the fleet has ground reefs that have been around for ever down to nothing in the last 10 years.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Im Headed South said:


> Your example of how they pull their dredges is spot on but what you fail to point out is once that boat is done that bed doesn't get marked and left alone, the next day another boat will hit it and later that day a 3rd boat will hit, the next day another boat or two and on and on till they either figure out their burning more fuel than it's worth or the area is shut down by TPWD. There were 50+ plus boats in St Charles every day in between the public ramp and the mouth into Aransas for over 2 weeks, there is no way that every square inch of shell of that area didn't have a dredge pulled over it more than once, Coastal Fisheries finally got out there to sample and the abundance of undersized was through the roof and way past the cut off limit and 3 days later (which is required by law so it can be published) it was closed. Everyone of those boats know how many undersized oysters and other "stuff" (dead shell, rock, etc) they can put in a sack and get away with it, buyers are buying sacks and given the current market they are just glad to get them and write off all the other "stuff" their buying as the cost of doing bushiness right now. I can't attest to about up north but myself and several old timers in the Aransas Bay area will tell you that without a doubt the fleet has ground reefs that have been around for ever down to nothing in the last 10 years.


Not exactly accurate. Every buyer I know is extremely stringent on what they buy. You throw too much shell or small oysters and you get run off. Period the end.

There are two markets for oysters. The half shell and the "meat" market or shucked. Both depend on yields. Too much shell/small oysters and the yield drops. That cuts way into profits.

So the industry is pretty self policing in that category and always has been. It boils down to profits. I have been run off of reef by my buyers simply because the oysters were water bags and did not yield. In any good business transaction both sides walk away happy and I can assure you if a boat throws "trash" he will be looking for another buyer.

I'm not going to tell you that certain reefs have not been overfished because they have. It's what happens when you put more and more boats into less and less area. I will also say that there are reefs in every bay system that have been worked and worked year after year for over 100 years and still produce and will continue to do so for generations to come if we get this management program right.

So we need to avoid knee-jerk reactions like closing Christmas Bay or any other bay. We need to buy back licenses and spread out the remaining boats into as many bay systems as possible. What is happening now is TPWD is forcing more and more boats into less and less area and it becomes overfished.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Stuart said:


> I guess that is where you and I are assuming different things. Where does it say anywhere that the limit won't remain at 4000 sacks per day? I'm asking because I don't know.
> 
> I'm assuming the current limit is based on what TPWD thinks the fishery can take. The limit should never be based on how many boats there are.


Stuart,

In my life they have never increased an oyster limit. It has always been down.


----------



## troutsupport (May 22, 2006)

Im Headed South said:


> Your example of how they pull their dredges is spot on but what you fail to point out is once that boat is done that bed doesn't get marked and left alone, the next day another boat will hit it and later that day a 3rd boat will hit, the next day another boat or two and on and on till they either figure out their burning more fuel than it's worth or the area is shut down by TPWD. There were 50+ plus boats in St Charles every day in between the public ramp and the mouth into Aransas for over 2 weeks, there is no way that every square inch of shell of that area didn't have a dredge pulled over it more than once,


Actually, what I've looked at was from side scanned areas of high intensity harvest, not hypothesizing about how much is or isn't. It's a difference between what we think must be happening and what actually is happening. They don't use draglines like the coal industry and they can't see the bottom, their raking is completely random to some extent. It's a very inefficient process. Even if every oyster boat was using a Lowrance HDS marking its own tracks of where its been, they arn't able to perfectly churn up and remove all oyster from a reef. For example, if a person was to walk around a room with thier eyes closed and try to walk over that whole room without opening thier eyes all the while being blown by the wind and current or someone pushing them along in this case. Sure, multiple attempts by others will cover more ground. Even if you think you're walking a pattern to cover the whole room, a persons footsteps wouldn't cover 25% of the room, maybe a 1/3 at best. I can tell you from what I've seen side scanning, they don't even come close to covering that amount at all. Of course they don't mark it or leave it alone. Even with multiple boats running that area in succession, there is still a lot of undersized oyster and substrate left and complete areas of reef not even turned up. I am here passing on to you good men, what I've actually seen with my own two eyes and my side scan. Like I said, I'm not for or against oyster harvest.. just passing on what I've seen out there. Was there a high percentage of less than harvestable size... Im sure there was. But the fish don't care if an oyster is 1" or 5". Yes, an older oyster such as a three year old has a bigger spawn just like a 28 inch trout, but oyster do mature enough to spawn during their first year. Just because they shut it down doesn't mean it was devoid of all oyster.. it means there were low numbers of harvestable oyster.

What I have found is that we see boats scouring an area and then we go back near that area on it and find there really isn't any oyster there.. we say they dredged it all. Many of those areas didn't have any oyster to begin with due to predation.. they are trying to rake areas to find oyster and in a lot of areas there really isn't any to be found. But we're blaming them for there not being any.. when really it's been, like someone else said a perfect storm between salinity, disease, predation.. that's what has decimated the reefs.

I normally am not one to get involved in these discussions in 2cool, because everyone has their opinion I am here trying to relay what I've personally seen side scanning these highly worked areas and it's not the oyster boat's killing reef. There's plenty oyster left after they work a live reef. It's all the reefs that were killed to predation (due to oyster drills and salinity increases which allow them into our bays) and disease that have wiped out 85% of the oyster.. and the TPWD concurs with those numbers. I've talked to Lance Robinson about what I've seen out there and we agree.


----------



## The Last Mango (Jan 31, 2010)

If the Good Lord would have dropped ample rainfall in the last 15 years, excluding the last 2, this discussion would not be here and a sack of oysters would be $15


----------



## pickn'fish (Jun 1, 2004)

troutsupport said:


> ... It's all the reefs that were killed to predation (due to oyster drills and salinity increases which allow them into our bays) and disease that have wiped out 85% of the oyster.. and the TPWD concurs with those numbers. I've talked to Lance Robinson about what I've seen out there and we agree.


Agreed. So, in light of 
increasingly, smaller viable remaining reef open to harvest and an increase of ocean acidification for the foreseeable future, maybe stricter limits or practices are warranted. Science and sustainability, my foremost concern...


----------



## troutsupport (May 22, 2006)

pickn'fish said:


> Agreed. So, in light of
> increasingly, smaller viable remaining reef open to harvest and an increase of ocean acidification for the foreseeable future, maybe stricter limits or practices are warranted. Science and sustainability, my foremost concern...


Maybe.... and maybe not. If the current 3 inch harvestable size remains leaving a lot of undersize oyster out there for the fish... then it might be ok.

I think there are 2 issues here that we're talking about. 
1. 'Over harvesting of the legal SIZE oysters... and
2. 'Is there enough oyster reef habitat for the fish'

With respect to over harvesting of legal oysters I'll defer to others. It won't be ok for the oystermen that can't fill sacks, but the fish will be ok with it. A reef can be completely devoid of 3 inch oysters and be fantastic for trout, reds, and flounder and the fin fish they forage on. It might be choc full of 2 and 2.5 inch oyster. As long as the reef is healthy and growing with good water flow and sufficient forage (plankton - a water quality type issue) then it's not problematic as far as fishing is concerned. I also don't think that harvesting all the 3 inch oysters will lead to depleting the resource of oysters.

As for acidification, I think the question is will it increase the time it takes for an oyster to reach a hartvestable size (as there may be less nutrients and less Calcium in the water). Possibly. Then again the long term average pH has only shifted from 8.2 to 8.1 If it does effect it, this could effect both groups. The oyster boats may rake more often to find the fewer legal size oysters.. Will that increased raking be good or bad? That might be worthy of commenting on to Lance R and see what he says. But the past has shown us that providing more surface area above the sediment has been a good thing for the oyster allowing it more area for spat to land on and colonize. Will it reach a point where it's too much activity? Also, another factor with acidification is how it will affect the oyster food source, plankton. The current research from MIT indicates that plankton species may shift with some decreasing and other increasing. We simply won't know until it happens and we measure it. The calcification of bay water (the reduction of calcium in solution) is probably a bigger factor to growth and size of the oyster. Will probably take longer for an oyster to become legal size.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

I got to admit. For the most part I am impressed with the quality of the conversation. Speaking from experience I know that for whatever reason Christmas Bay oysters bounce back extremely fast. I was there one year in November and there were millions of 3" oysters. Went back in March and there were nice fat 4" oysters everywhere. Personally I think it is the fact that the tide movements are so strong and the reef so shallow they are more resistant to the oyster conchs and drills. On a normal low the reef is exposed and the slower moving conchs and drills can't get in and out fast enough to get them.

The same can be said for West Galveston Bay "Bear Claw" oysters. They grow extremely fast. 

Three or four times in my life I have seen Christmas Bay and East Matagorda Bay literally void of living oysters only to bounce back with a "Super Spat". In 1983 and 1988 due to the freezes. They killed every living oyster in those bays. And once or twice more due to red tides in the 90's. In all cases the oysters bounced back within two years.


----------



## troutsupport (May 22, 2006)

A lots of great questions and concerns for sure, good to see the involvement and interest from all sides.


----------



## gotmuddy (Dec 19, 2013)

How does TPWD decide which bays are off limits? I normally fish the san bernard over to cow trap when I come down and there are oysters everywhere.


----------



## pickn'fish (Jun 1, 2004)

Consensus estimate is it the pH will reach 7.8 by Century's end
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB124051938218949231


----------



## troutsupport (May 22, 2006)

gotmuddy said:


> How does TPWD decide which bays are off limits? I normally fish the san bernard over to cow trap when I come down and there are oysters everywhere.


Shhhhh, don't tell anyone ;-) I don't think you'll have any problem in that area. not enough water to get a boat into and the mud is so deep it's a problem.


----------



## Trophytrout_47 (Jul 22, 2016)

*....*

Talked to Capt. Gary Grable today and he said they destroyed Kain cove the other day. Over 25 boats in Sargent the other day in the canal. WOW!


----------



## The Last Mango (Jan 31, 2010)

Trophytrout_47 said:


> Talked to Capt. Gary Grable today and he said they destroyed Kain cove the other day. Over 25 boats in Sargent the other day in the canal. WOW!


How ? And what did they destroy?


----------



## karstopo (Jun 29, 2009)

gotmuddy said:


> How does TPWD decide which bays are off limits? I normally fish the san bernard over to cow trap when I come down and there are oysters everywhere.


https://www.dshs.texas.gov/seafood/shellfish-harvest-maps.aspx

Nothing between Christmas Bay and East Matagorda has been open to harvesting oysters since I can remember. If you see anyone oystering in Cow Trap, Jones Creek. McNeil, the San Bernard, Cedar Lakes, any place over there they would be in violation of the law. It's a violation to get them for your own use as well as for commercial oyster harvesting.


----------



## Fishsurfer (Dec 14, 2014)

The illegal harvest of oysters is a deadly proposition. If these oysters are being harvested from quarantined reefs or with little regard for the law then the serving of these oysters can and will harm the public when consumed. Lawbreakers like this care little for whom they hurt. It would be wise not to consume oysters in restaurants due to this concern because you could wind up in the hospital fighting for your life or worse.


----------



## gotmuddy (Dec 19, 2013)

troutsupport said:


> Shhhhh, don't tell anyone ;-) I don't think you'll have any problem in that area. not enough water to get a boat into and the mud is so deep it's a problem.


lol my lips are sealed.


----------



## Marker 54 Lures (Dec 28, 2015)

Total economic output for ALL commercial fishing in Texas $2.2billion & jobs 27k 
Source -> http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/economics/publications/feus/fisheries_economics_2011

Total economic output for ALL recreational fishing in Texas $1.4billion & jobs 13k 
Source ->
http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/Assets/...er Expenditures in the United States 2011.pdf

The question is what is a better use of the resource in terms of long run economics. I think with the ever increasing fuel costs and the downward pressure on prices by farmed sources .. perhaps the industryregulations for seafood harvest need to be realigned...

I just don't see how with a increasing population + a increase in operations costs ..that commercial wild harvest can be seen as a viable business model( or environmentally sustainable) that needs defending


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Marker 54 Lures said:


> Total economic output for ALL commercial fishing in Texas $2.2billion & jobs 27k
> Source -> http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/economics/publications/feus/fisheries_economics_2011
> 
> Total economic output for ALL recreational fishing in Texas $1.4billion & jobs 13k
> ...


We have a yearly seafood trade deficit of about 9.3 Billion dollars. I have never understood the Recreational/Commercial us or them mentality. We should do our best as a nation to promote both a sustainable commercial and recreational harvest.

When it comes to oysters the recreational harvest amounts to almost nothing. So lets maximize the economic benefit of the commercial harvest. Especially since 90+ percent of our total coastal area is permanently closed to harvest of oysters.

To put it into perspective what would the trout fishery be in our state if 90% of the total area that contains trout were permanently closed? I'm going to guess it would be hard to catch a legal trout in the few square miles of bay still open?


----------



## Notenoughtime (Mar 7, 2011)

Group petitions Texas Parks and Wildlife to permanently close Christmas Bay to oyster industry

GALVESTON - Bruce Bodson looked disapprovingly at a wide, rutted trail carved through the marsh at the edge of one of the most pristine bays on the upper Texas Gulf Coast.

Four-wheeled ATVs ferrying 110-pound bags of oysters had crushed the glasswort and cordgrass into the mud along a long arc around the lip of Drum Bay, which forms the western end of Christmas Bay. The damage left a scar that could take years to heal and cause the shoreline to erode, said Bodson, executive director of Galveston Bay Keepers, as he took in the scene last Thursday.

Oyster boats churned through the shallow waters of Brazoria County's unspoiled Christmas Bay this season for the first time in at least 16 years, leading to accusations of environmental damage and calls for closing it and neighboring Drum Bay. The drive to find oysters in this designated natural preserve is a result of high oyster prices and oyster scarcity, said Lance Robinson, Texas Parks and Wildlife deputy director.

If oystermen return next season, the damage would be worse, Bodson said. "It won't sustain this year after year," he said.

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/new...istmas-Bay-oyster-closure-sought-11077192.php


----------



## Zeitgeist (Nov 10, 2011)

Notenoughtime said:


> http://www.houstonchronicle.com/new...istmas-Bay-oyster-closure-sought-11077192.php


Have to be a subscriber to open this.


----------



## tigerbait1970 (Jun 12, 2014)

Full article:


GALVESTON - Bruce Bodson looked disapprovingly at a wide, rutted trail carved through the marsh at the edge of one of the most pristine bays on the upper Texas Gulf Coast.

Four-wheeled ATVs ferrying 110-pound bags of oysters had crushed the glasswort and cordgrass into the mud along a long arc around the lip of Drum Bay, which forms the western end of Christmas Bay. The damage left a scar that could take years to heal and cause the shoreline to erode, said Bodson, executive director of Galveston Bay Keepers, as he took in the scene last Thursday.

Oyster boats churned through the shallow waters of Brazoria County's unspoiled Christmas Bay this season for the first time in at least 16 years, leading to accusations of environmental damage and calls for closing it and neighboring Drum Bay. The drive to find oysters in this designated natural preserve is a result of high oyster prices and oyster scarcity, said Lance Robinson, Texas Parks and Wildlife deputy director.

If oystermen return next season, the damage would be worse, Bodson said. "It won't sustain this year after year," he said.

Christmas Bay is a 9-square-mile haven for wildlife and the last bay on the Upper Texas Gulf Coast with significant seagrass beds, which provide a home for shrimp, crab and many varieties of fish. With the exception of a portion of West Galveston Bay, seagrass has largely disappeared on the upper coast.

"At least in the Galveston Bay system, this is one of the last unaltered, undisturbed areas," Bodson said.

But the recent oyster harvesting is putting this serene landscape at risk. Oyster boats endangered seagrass in Christmas Bay, said Scott Jones, Galveston Bay Foundation advocacy director. Jones said ATVs have splashed through fragile wetlands and harvesters used rookery islands as staging areas for heavy oyster sacks, driving away birds that nest on the islands and potentially crushing eggs,

To keep Christmas Bay pristine, the Outdoor Coastal Council last week petitioned the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission to permanently close the bay to oyster harvesting. Signatures on the petition included some of the most important oyster companies in Galveston Bay, which halted oyster harvesting after they understood the potential environmental damage.

"It is a pristine area and a small bay," said Clifford Hillman, CEO of Hillman Shrimp and Oyster Co. and one of the petition signers. "If there is damage to that bay, it should be closed to all and not just some."


The petition is signed by officials from six oyster companies and five environmental groups. "I'm really pleased with the broad scope of individuals who are in support of it," said Brad Bonney, Outdoor Coastal Council regional director.

The commission can vote to close the bay for environmental reasons, but Parks and Wildlife staff also can close bays to oystering if there are too many oysters below the legal 3-inch size. A crew began sampling Christmas Bay oysters last week, and the results should be available this week, said Christine Jensen, fisheries biologist.

Only nine of 34 oyster areas on the Texas coast remain open, and those nine are some of the smallest, Robinson said.

As the available oyster areas shrink, high prices lure oyster boats onto the water. The oyster prices in 2016 shot to $5.50 a pound, the highest on record, according to Parks and Wildlife figures. Oystermen say prices are similar this year.

The oyster beds were closed either for health reasons or to let the oyster reefs recover after more than eight years of natural disasters. Hurricane Ike in 2008 severely damaged the oyster reefs in Galveston Bay, which until that year supplied as much 90 percent of Texas' annual oyster harvest.

The oyster season, Nov. 1 to April 30, is nearly over, and last week a man and woman, who declined to give their names, were the only commercial oyster harvesters in Drum Bay. Christmas and Drum bays are so shallow that oysters, normally harvested with a dredge, must be plucked from the bottom by hand. The pair waded knee deep, bending over to collect oysters from the bottom, "I average about 9-12 bags a day," the woman said.

Many of the oyster crews were unaware of the environmental sensitivity of the area. Johnny Halili, owner of Prestige Oysters, said some of his oyster boats initially worked Christmas Bay but pulled out as soon as they learned of the environmental concerns. One of the Prestige boat captains, Gezim Halili, said he and his crew mistook marsh grass for seagrass, not realizing that seagrass was below the surface. He said that several other oyster companies pulled out along with Prestige, but at least four oyster companies continued to harvest oysters despite environmental concerns.

Christmas Bay was declared a coastal preserve in 1991, but the declaration carried no special enforcement provisions, said Robinson, the Texas Parks and Wildlife deputy director. Bodson said the bay was closed to shrimping, but not to oystering, probably because it wasn't being harvested for oysters commercially at the time.

It's unclear if any commercial oystering was done between 1991 and 2000, the year the Texas Department of State Health Services closed Christmas and Drum bays, which the department considers a single area, because of a high bacteria count. The department reopened the bay two years ago, but oyster companies were unaware of it being open until about February of this year.

With most of the oyster reefs closed for health reasons or to allow small oysters to mature, oyster companies this year sought advice from Texas Parks and Wildlife, said Lisa Halili, who owns Prestige Oysters with her husband, Johnny Halili. Parks and Wildlife pointed out that Christmas Bay was open, and the rush began.

Oyster boats from all over Texas swooped into Christmas and Drum bays, where they found huge oysters measuring as large as 6 inches.

Some boats began stacking heavy sacks of oysters on rookery islands in the bay, driving birds away from their nests and potentially crushing bird eggs. Bay residents and sport fishermen complained to Brazoria County officials about boat landings clogged by oyster company boat trailers. They also complained about a mound of trash piled by commercial oystermen.

Brazoria County officials could not be reached for comment, but Gezim Halili said that Commissioner Donald "Dude" Payne, county Parks Director Brian Frazier, a county engineer and a representative of the District Attorney's Office showed up at the boat ramp on Amigo Road early this month and announced that the ramp would be closed to commercial oyster boats.

About the same time Lisa Halili began receiving calls warning her that it was illegal to damage seagrass. She began calling environmentalists and learned about their concerns. Prestige Oysters promptly pulled its boats from the bay, and several other companies followed suit.

Hurricane Ike was not the only disaster to impact the future of oyster reefs in Galveston Bay.

The storm was followed by the BP oil spill in 2010, which led to intense harvesting of Texas oyster reefs because it was the only state unaffected by the spill. In 2011 a five-year drought began that increased bay salinity, creating a breeding ground for oyster disease and predators. That same year blooms of poisonous algae, known as red tide, closed many oyster reefs. In 2015 and 2016 heavy flooding pumped enormous amounts of fresh water into Galveston and surrounding bays, killing untold numbers of oysters.

By 2016 only 26 percent of a much-reduced Texas oyster harvest came from Galveston Bay. The total oyster catch in pounds fell from 6.13 million pounds in 2013 to 2.5 million pounds in 2016.

Robinson, the Parks and Wildlife official, said that the Texas oyster fleet is too large for the number of oysters that can be safely harvested without depleting the oyster reefs. Bills under consideration by the Legislature, House Bill 51 and Senate Bill 1566, would allow the state to buy back oyster licenses from fishermen to reduce pressure on oyster reefs. The legislation also would require a GPS on all oyster boats so that they can be tracked by Parks and Wildlife officials. The GPS would help the agency understand where oysters were being overharvested and show when a boat entered an area that was off limits.

Prestige owner Johnny Halili, who signed the petition to close Christmas Bay, said Parks and Wildlife's efforts to revive the oyster population are working and that many oyster reefs closed by the state will likely reopen next year to a bountiful harvest, taking pressure off Christmas Bay.


----------



## Notenoughtime (Mar 7, 2011)

Zeitgeist said:


> Have to be a subscriber to open this.


Sorry, I'm not a subscriber either. If there is ever a story you want to read behind the paywall just copy and paste the headline into the google search bar and the story will come up. Click on the link and it will take you to the full article.

I don't know if the geniuses at the Chronicle know this but it works every time.


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

http://www.2coolfishing.com/ttmbforum/showpost.php?p=20460945&postcount=71
http://www.2coolfishing.com/ttmbforum/showpost.php?p=20461377&postcount=75

Guess they got all they could while destroying both shoreline and seagrass beds and now they're favor of shutting it down so that the little local guy can't go out and and try and **** some oysters in a effort to eek out a living, see the name on the truck and who was buying all they could get their hands on? This same thing goes on in every bay along the coast, earlier this year it was St Charles, last year it was Copano, the big fleet moves in and grinds the reefs down till TPWD shuts it down and they move on to the next one and the local guys get put out of business while the fleet moves on to the next bay, once they run out of public reefs to rake over they end up in Galveston on their private leases and all that left behind them is a trail of overfished bays. What a screwed up system, folks need to call their representatives and get HB51 passed to get some of these permits retired and put measures in place to help game wardens enforce the laws on the books.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Im Headed South said:


> http://www.2coolfishing.com/ttmbforum/showpost.php?p=20460945&postcount=71
> http://www.2coolfishing.com/ttmbforum/showpost.php?p=20461377&postcount=75
> 
> Guess they got all they could while destroying both shoreline and seagrass beds and now they're favor of shutting it down so that the little local guy can't go out and and try and **** some oysters in a effort to eek out a living, see the name on the truck and who was buying all they could get their hands on? This same thing goes on in every bay along the coast, earlier this year it was St Charles, last year it was Copano, the big fleet moves in and grinds the reefs down till TPWD shuts it down and they move on to the next one and the local guys get put out of business while the fleet moves on to the next bay, once they run out of public reefs to rake over they end up in Galveston on their private leases and all that left behind them is a trail of overfished bays. What a screwed up system, folks need to call their representatives and get HB51 passed to get some of these permits retired and put measures in place to help game wardens enforce the laws on the books.


Of course the oyster houses that have private leases want Christmas bay shut down. What do you think does to the value of their leases? Hillman's, Prestige, Misho's all have their own leases.

Closing more bays is not the answer. It's going to force more and more into less and less. It's just plain ignorant.

In addition we already have laws against destroying wetlands, underwater grasses, blocking boat ramps etc. We don't need more laws, we need enforceable ones. And the GPS is just as ignorant. If you are going to "outlaw" do you think the GPS is going to be enabled?

It's just going to cost the boats more money, the "cost" will be passed down to the consumer and the price of oysters is going to go up.

Instead of 100 boats working next year they all will be working because the price of oysters will be 80 dollars a sack. For God sakes these guys keep making the same mistake over and over....


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

And the truth about why Halili, Misho and other "buyers" are supporting the GPS requirement? They all have private leases. Leases stocked with ripe succulent oysters that many just can't resist sneaking onto.

They wan't a government subsidized "private security" force. 

Newsflash. As a commercial oyster fisherman I don't want to pay for Prestige's security. I have and ADT system in my house to protect me and mine and I don't expect Halili to pay for it.


----------



## gotmuddy (Dec 19, 2013)

Its Catchy said:


> In addition we already have laws against destroying wetlands, underwater grasses, blocking boat ramps etc. We don't need more laws, we need enforceable ones.


It appears the current laws cant be enforced. If it takes closing an area to oyster harvest to protect the small amount of wetland texas has its worth it. Not just for the fishing(the places I fish are thankfully already protected) but for birds and other aquatic animals.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

gotmuddy said:


> It appears the current laws cant be enforced. If it takes closing an area to oyster harvest to protect the small amount of wetland texas has its worth it. Not just for the fishing(the places I fish are thankfully already protected) but for birds and other aquatic animals.


I am not a LEO. But how hard can it be to give a guy in a four wheeler a ripping up the saltgrass a citation? If they would have simply enforced the laws already on the books the situation in Christmas Bay would never have happened.


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

It's my understanding those guys were ticketed and the operation was shut down once reported and contact was made, by then the damage was done though. They were probably illegals and will never show up to court and already have a id with a different name on it.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Im Headed South said:


> It's my understanding those guys were ticketed and the operation was shut down once reported and contact was made, by then the damage was done though. They were probably illegals and will never show up to court and already have a id with a different name on it.


Thats probably and accurate assessment. As far as shutting down Christmas Bay. It's going to be shut down for everyone. Nobody will ever eat another oyster out of the bay because of this petition. That includes recreational fishermen.

If the greenies shut it down to oystering. Whats next? Hunting? Fishing?

In addition with it's closing more pressure is going to be put on other bays. Thats just not a "management plan" as much as it is a knee-jerk reaction.


----------



## gotmuddy (Dec 19, 2013)

Its Catchy said:


> In addition with it's closing more pressure is going to be put on other bays. Thats just not a "management plan" as much as it is a knee-jerk reaction.


thats accurate, it is a knee jerk reaction which is very common and not always bad. Your theory is they should open MORE bays up? I really like the buyback idea personally as opposed to closing them.

I will likely never even fish christmas bay, the areas I fish are already loaded with oysters.


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

Good luck gotmuddy,


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

gotmuddy said:


> thats accurate, it is a knee jerk reaction which is very common and not always bad. Your theory is they should open MORE bays up? I really like the buyback idea personally as opposed to closing them.
> 
> I will likely never even fish christmas bay, the areas I fish are already loaded with oysters.


Yep. Imagine if you closed all but a couple bays down to the harvest of trout? The bays that were still open would get wiped out. Which is exactly what is happening to the oysters in the bays still open.

Thats not a management plan.


----------



## gotmuddy (Dec 19, 2013)

Its Catchy said:


> Yep. Imagine if you closed all but a couple bays down to the harvest of trout? The bays that were still open would get wiped out. Which is exactly what is happening to the oysters in the bays still open.
> 
> Thats not a management plan.


whats your plan again?


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Fund a license buyback and retire as many licenses as possible. Do this with a sack tax. Use proceeds to voluntarily retire licenses.

Put an emphasis on enforcing existing laws.

Do nothing that will artificially increase the price and put more pressure on the resource.

K.I.S.S. Keep it simple...


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

So a sack tax wouldn't get passed on to consumers? How much would said tax be?


----------



## Stalkin Spots (Jan 12, 2014)

Its Catchy said:


> Do nothing that will artificially increase the price and put more pressure on the resource.


Wouldn't the continued raping of the resource by commercial oystermen lead to such a price increase?


----------



## Stalkin Spots (Jan 12, 2014)

From what I can see, you are the exception to the rule It's Catchy. You seem to do it the right way, but you are a small operator. As is evidenced by the photos posted earlier, most of your commercial brethren aren't so concerned about the impact they make as long as they get what they are after. I call BS on Ms. Halili's excuse that they didn't realize the difference between marsh grass and sea grass. They flat didn't care until it was discovered.


----------



## The Last Mango (Jan 31, 2010)

Stalkin Spots said:


> From what I can see, you are the exception to the rule It's Catchy. You seem to do it the right way, but you are a small operator. As is evidenced by the photos posted earlier, most of your commercial brethren aren't so concerned about the impact they make as long as they get what they are after. I call BS on Ms. Halili's excuse that they didn't realize the difference between marsh grass and sea grass. They flat didn't care until it was discovered.


If I told you the real reason the Texas oyster industry is in a "mess" I would be banned and this thread deleted


----------



## Kenner 23 (Sep 14, 2009)

Stalkin Spots said:


> From what I can see, you are the exception to the rule It's Catchy. You seem to do it the right way, but you are a small operator. As is evidenced by the photos posted earlier, most of your commercial brethren aren't so concerned about the impact they make as long as they get what they are after. I call BS on Ms. Halili's excuse that they didn't realize the difference between marsh grass and sea grass. They flat didn't care until it was discovered.


Hammer meet Nail:work:
Most of these operators are first cousins to the Buzzard, start at the *** and end at the nose. When there's nothing left but bones, ***** and moan for someone in goobment to Hep them out. A better idea would be to run every license and ****can any with more than two violations. Willing to bet that alone would half the fleet, maybe more. Zero tolerance for the ones left, F up and your done for evah. Caught after that or no license seize the boat and fine them $1,000 per sack along with 180 days breaking rocks.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Im Headed South said:


> So a sack tax wouldn't get passed on to consumers? How much would said tax be?


.50 cents a sack would be a good start. That would raise thousands of dollars every week. And yes all "fees" are ultimately passed down to the consumer.

Just like all the other buyback programs license holders would submit bids. Every year dozens would be voluntarily retired. It's worked wonders for the shrimp, crab and fin-fish fisheries.


----------



## txshockwave (Mar 6, 2007)

KemoSabe said:


> Hammer meet Nail:work:
> Most of these operators are first cousins to the Buzzard, start at the *** and end at the nose. When there's nothing left but bones, ***** and moan for someone in goobment to Hep them out. A better idea would be to run every license and ****can any with more than two violations. Willing to bet that alone would half the fleet, maybe more. Zero tolerance for the ones left, F up and your done for evah. Caught after that or no license seize the boat and fine them $1,000 per sack along with 180 days breaking rocks.


Sounds like a good plan to me.


----------



## Kenner 23 (Sep 14, 2009)

Its Catchy said:


> .50 cents a sack would be a good start. That would raise thousands of dollars every week. And yes all "fees" are ultimately passed down to the consumer.
> 
> Just like all the other buyback programs license holders would submit bids. Every year dozens would be voluntarily retired. It's worked wonders for the shrimp, crab and fin-fish fisheries.


So the consumer also has to be extorted in order for the fishermen to do the right thing:headknock
Bunch of F'ing BUZZARDs


----------



## The Last Mango (Jan 31, 2010)

KemoSabe said:


> So the consumer also has to be extorted in order for the fishermen to do the right thing:headknock
> Bunch of F'ing BUZZARDs


You don't like something, or don't want to pay the price, don't buy it


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

Its Catchy said:


> .50 cents a sack would be a good start. That would raise thousands of dollars every week. And yes all "fees" are ultimately passed down to the consumer.
> 
> Just like all the other buyback programs license holders would submit bids. Every year dozens would be voluntarily retired. It's worked wonders for the shrimp, crab and fin-fish fisheries.


Newsflash, Prices are going to going up no matter what. Even with your plan, retired licenses mean less boats on the water and oysters at the dock, couple lower supply with higher demand and prices are going up just like they have with shrimp and fin-fish. Hopefully the supply lowering results in a rebound in the fishery if mother nature cooperates, no guarantee of that but we can do better than the current system and HB51 is our only pending legislation taking a step in the right direction.


----------



## irbjd (Aug 11, 2005)

Its Catchy said:


> Put an emphasis on enforcing existing laws.


You keep talking about the enforcement of existing laws. And while I generally agree with this concept, the problem is there are not enough game wardens to monitor what every oyster boat is doing. Furthermore, it shouldn't require constant monitoring to operate within the law. And it's abundantly clear they have no intent of policing themselves or operating within the confines of the existing laws. Since the oyster boats don't want to do it, it's going to be legislated. They have nobody to blame but themselves.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Im Headed South said:


> Newsflash, Prices are going to going up no matter what. Even with your plan, retired licenses mean less boats on the water and oysters at the dock, couple lower supply with higher demand and prices are going up just like they have with shrimp and fin-fish. Hopefully the supply lowering results in a rebound in the fishery if mother nature cooperates, no guarantee of that but we can do better than the current system and HB51 is our only pending legislation taking a step in the right direction.


Boat prices for Shrimp and Crab have been stagnant for years while over that same period oyster prices have almost tripled. In addition non effective regulation that artificially drives up prices is the last thing you want. It will cause the price of both oysters and licenses to go up and when you are trying to "retire" licenses you don't want them being worth more.

Keep in mind I have a commercial oyster license. In the short run, I am going to make more money if they pass this nonsense as written. Which is why the big boys like it. Just had my best year oystering in decades harvesting much fewer oysters.

However, unlike some of the other guys I am looking at the long term stability of the fishery. Driving the price up will:

A.) Put more pressure on the resource. 
B.) Cost the State much more to retire licenses.
C.) Incentivize inactive boats to hit the water.

None of which are good things.

I think we agree on HB-51 as it pertains to the buyback. It's a good thing. Keep that, trash everything else in the bill that will not be effective and just drive the price up.


----------



## texasgwp (Oct 26, 2006)

HB 51 will be heard on the house floor this morning if anyone wants to watch.

Here is the Link.


----------



## Kenner 23 (Sep 14, 2009)

H.B. 156 in the Louisiana Legislature will exclude the use of scrappers/dredges to harvest oysters on Calcasieu Lake.


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

Amendments added today put some serious teeth in the bill, will be interesting to see who in the industry continues to support the bill. Bet I know one that will be mad


----------



## The Last Mango (Jan 31, 2010)

Im Headed South said:


> Amendments added today put some serious teeth in the bill, will be interesting to see who in the industry continues to support the bill. Bet I know one that will be mad


Post it


----------



## dolch (Aug 19, 2005)

maybe we need a few ICE boats running around. seems like quite a bit of the problem could be quickly rectified with a little "redistricting"


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Im Headed South said:


> Amendments added today put some serious teeth in the bill, will be interesting to see who in the industry continues to support the bill. Bet I know one that will be mad


Pretty typical of our politicians. Start with a good bill like a license buy back program and "amend" it so that it becomes an un-enforceable and ineffective piece of bureaucratic non-sense.


----------



## The Last Mango (Jan 31, 2010)

Its Catchy said:


> Pretty typical of our politicians. Start with a good bill like a license buy back program and "amend" it so that it becomes an un-enforceable and ineffective piece of bureaucratic non-sense.


Amendments?


----------



## Bayscout22 (Aug 9, 2007)

dolch said:


> maybe we need a few ICE boats running around. seems like quite a bit of the problem could be quickly rectified with a little "redistricting"


In Matagorda, I'm pretty certain it would be close to 100%.


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

Passed the house as amended, on to the Senate where the amendments will be debated with a little more vigor I'm sure.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Hate to say I told you so but HB 51 has now been amended about 100 times and has lost all support of the industry in its current form.

If you like to eat fresh Texas Oysters please write your local representative and tell them HB 51 in it's current form is a disaster.

As usual the bureaucrats in Austin like their brethren in Washington have attached so much "BS" to an otherwise good bill it has become a quagmire of un-inforceable nonsense.

http://legiscan.com/TX/text/HB51/2017


----------



## The Last Mango (Jan 31, 2010)

Its Catchy said:


> Hate to say I told you so but HB 51 has now been amended about 100 times and has lost all support of the industry in its current form.
> 
> If you like to eat fresh Texas Oysters please write your local representative and tell them HB 51 in it's current form is a disaster.
> 
> ...


Unbelievable ..........
It's going to be hard to crawl on a boat if this passes as amended !


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

More false bs by our resident commercial fisherman, point out the 100 changes. Our representatives are tired of the **** the "industry leaders" are pulling and included amendments to punish the ones that can't come to grips with the fact that they'll have to operate within the law or be harshly punished. The buyers got their panties in wad because they are now going to have some skin in the game, if they are caught with sacks of undersized oysters they can't just throw their hands up and blame the fisherman. I don't think it's too much to ask any of them that are making a living of OUR public resource to do all they can to protect it, hopefully our representatives agree. That answer the pm you sent me Catchy? Not sure where you get your info but I'm not buddy's with any buyers are commercials, I'm a recreational angler concerned about the resource and the current folks profiting off of the fishery seem to have forgotten who those oysters actually belong to and if stiffer penalties are needed to remind them then I'm all for it. If others agree with my train of thought you can click the link below to let your senator know you support HB51, the bill will be reviewed this Monday in committee so time is of the essence.

http://www.votervoice.net/mobile/CCATX/Campaigns/52046/Respond


----------



## The Last Mango (Jan 31, 2010)

Im Headed South said:


> More false bs by our resident commercial fisherman, point out the 100 changes. Our representatives are tired of the **** the "industry leaders" are pulling and included amendments to punish the ones that can't come to grips with the fact that they'll have to operate within the law or be harshly punished. The buyers got their panties in wad because they are now going to have some skin in the game, if they are caught with sacks of undersized oysters they can't just throw their hands up and blame the fisherman. I don't think it's too much to ask any of them that are making a living of OUR public resource to do all they can to protect it, hopefully our representatives agree. That answer the pm you sent me Catchy? Not sure where you get your info but I'm not buddy's with any buyers are commercials, I'm a recreational angler concerned about the resource and the current folks profiting off of the fishery seem to have forgotten who those oysters actually belong to and if stiffer penalties are needed to remind them then I'm all for it. If others agree with my train of thought you can click the link below to let your senator know you support HB51, the bill will be reviewed this Monday in committee so time is of the essence.
> 
> http://www.votervoice.net/mobile/CCATX/Campaigns/52046/Respond


Another rec. with no idea what's going on .


----------



## TX1836 (May 5, 2014)

Funny..... Shoes on the other foot. Where was the support from CCA , and others, for keeping Rollover open?


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Im Headed South said:


> More false bs by our resident commercial fisherman, point out the 100 changes. Our representatives are tired of the **** the "industry leaders" are pulling and included amendments to punish the ones that can't come to grips with the fact that they'll have to operate within the law or be harshly punished. The buyers got their panties in wad because they are now going to have some skin in the game, if they are caught with sacks of undersized oysters they can't just throw their hands up and blame the fisherman. I don't think it's too much to ask any of them that are making a living of OUR public resource to do all they can to protect it, hopefully our representatives agree. That answer the pm you sent me Catchy? Not sure where you get your info but I'm not buddy's with any buyers are commercials, I'm a recreational angler concerned about the resource and the current folks profiting off of the fishery seem to have forgotten who those oysters actually belong to and if stiffer penalties are needed to remind them then I'm all for it. If others agree with my train of thought you can click the link below to let your senator know you support HB51, the bill will be reviewed this Monday in committee so time is of the essence.
> 
> http://www.votervoice.net/mobile/CCATX/Campaigns/52046/Respond


Complete and utter nonsense. A good bill has been "infected" with pork and nonsense. If you like to eat fresh Texas oysters call your local representative and tell them that if they vote for this trash you won't vote for them.

Period the end...


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

I have done all that I can do...

If you like fresh local oysters feel free to write your state representative. I did.


Glenn Koks
502 Fairdale St.
Friendswood, TX 77546


5/14/17


The Honorable Greg Bonnen
Post Office Box 2910
Austin, TX 78768


Dear Representative Bonnen:


My name is Glenn Koks and I reside at 502 Fairdale St. in Friendswood, Texas. 


I am writing you concerning HB-51 and it's possible effects on the local economy. On the surface establishing a fund to help retire commercial oyster licenses is a good thing. But the bill has become amended so many times it has become a twisted and over-reaching "Big Government" intrusion into private sector that will cost local jobs and burden the economy. 

I appreciate your help and ask that you please send me a response letting me know if you are not going to support this bill in it's current form.


Thank you for your time and considering my request.


Sincerely,

Glenn Koks


----------



## The Last Mango (Jan 31, 2010)

Its Catchy said:


> I have done all that I can do...
> 
> If you like fresh local oysters feel free to write your state representative. I did.
> 
> ...


I'm leaving for Austin right now!


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

Its Catchy said:


> Complete and utter nonsense. A good bill has been "infected" with pork and nonsense. If you like to eat fresh Texas oysters call your local representative and tell them that if they vote for this trash you won't vote for them.
> 
> Period the end...


Point out the pork and nonsense for the folks up to speed, fyi the House passed the bill as amended and it's now in the Senate. Here's the post from Rep Bonnen who was one of the sponsors of the bill, pretty common sense stuff in closing up loop holes that folks have been using for years, "Don't blame us, go give the guys on the boat a ticket", never mind a bunch of them are illegals who will never pay their fines.

"I appreciate the positive feedback and support regarding my efforts to clean up the oyster industry and target bad actors who are destroying our bay system. This morning was a tremendous victory when I passed a significant and far reaching amendment to HB 51 in the Texas House. This legislation will impose strong penalties upon all levels of the oyster business from every person on the boat all the way up to the dealers and wholesalers. Too many loopholes were allowing those who abuse our oyster reefs to hide and pass the buck. In addition to enhanced penalties and license suspensions, the bill requires those who commercially benefit from this industry to do their part in restoration and recovery by returning a percentage of oyster shells to the reef system. It also requires those who purchase illegal undersized oysters to transport them back to the water under the supervision of TPWD. HB 51 makes great strides in breathing new life and integrity into the oyster industry, while ensuring a healthy ecosystem into the future. HB 51 now moves to the Texas Senate for consideration."


----------



## [email protected] (May 24, 2004)

So, maybe I'm missing something but, is it necessary that a piece of legislation have the backing of the industry it was written to regulate in order to be effective?


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

[email protected] said:


> So, maybe I'm missing something but, is it necessary that a piece of legislation have the backing of the industry it was written to regulate in order to be effective?


Any industry should want effective regulation that insures long term stability. Whether you are a farmer, fisherman or stock broker...

I'm not sure I want a bunch of politicians and bureaucrats who think "they know" better than professionals who work in the industry forcing needless regulation down our throats. Hence the industry support.

In this case HB-51 started with broad support. Funding a buyback program is a good thing. But then the amendments started pouring in and many who once supported it have withdrawn that support.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Im Headed South said:


> Point out the pork and nonsense for the folks up to speed, fyi the House passed the bill as amended and it's now in the Senate. Here's the post from Rep Bonnen who was one of the sponsors of the bill, pretty common sense stuff in closing up loop holes that folks have been using for years, "Don't blame us, go give the guys on the boat a ticket", never mind a bunch of them are illegals who will never pay their fines.
> 
> "I appreciate the positive feedback and support regarding my efforts to clean up the oyster industry and target bad actors who are destroying our bay system. This morning was a tremendous victory when I passed a significant and far reaching amendment to HB 51 in the Texas House. This legislation will impose strong penalties upon all levels of the oyster business from every person on the boat all the way up to the dealers and wholesalers. Too many loopholes were allowing those who abuse our oyster reefs to hide and pass the buck. In addition to enhanced penalties and license suspensions, the bill requires those who commercially benefit from this industry to do their part in restoration and recovery by returning a percentage of oyster shells to the reef system. It also requires those who purchase illegal undersized oysters to transport them back to the water under the supervision of TPWD. HB 51 makes great strides in breathing new life and integrity into the oyster industry, while ensuring a healthy ecosystem into the future. HB 51 now moves to the Texas Senate for consideration."


Possession of undersized oysters is already a crime. So is being in this country illegally. Every sack is required to have a tag with all the boat's information, Capt etc. so how is there a "loophole"? No amount of regulation is ever going to work if there is no enforcement.

For any regulation in any industry to be effective it has to:

1.) Be needed
2.) Be enforceable
3.) Be effective

HB-51 with help from our duly elected officials has morphed from a good idea to a quagmire of un-wanted, un-enforceable and un-effective trash.

Keep in mind the same bureaucrats brought us our current snapper management plan. Which is no longer needed or effective. But we are none the less "stuck with".


----------



## [email protected] (May 24, 2004)

Catchy, I agree with some of your points but not all.

Indeed, we've had size restriction in the oyster regs for a long time. And yes, the regs are hard to enforce. Boats must be boarded, sacks emptied, oysters graded, etc. Too few wardens, and so on.

Seems simple enough: Boat crews will cease sacking undersized oysters with implementation of stiffer penalties...AND NOWHERE TO SELL THEM!

If HB-51 has lost the support of the industry (boat owners and buyers/processors) might it be because they are unwilling to assume responsibility for what they're selling and buying? 

Enforcement is only possible when all players are held accountable.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

[email protected] said:


> Catchy, I agree with some of your points but not all.
> 
> Indeed, we've had size restriction in the oyster regs for a long time. And yes, the regs are hard to enforce. Boats must be boarded, sacks emptied, oysters graded, etc. Too few wardens, and so on.
> 
> ...


HB-51 is losing support from the industry for multiple reasons. GPS monitoring sounds good but in reality will drive up the price and not be effective. Who is going to pay for that? In the end run the consumer. Higher prices will lead to more fishing pressure not less.

Limited entry programs have worked wonders reducing the fleet via volunteer retirement of licenses in the Shrimp, finfish, and crab industries. I see no need for all this other nonsense that will drive up the cost and put more pressure on the resource at a time when we are trying to buy back licenses.

Keep It Simple and at all costs avoid needless and ineffective regulation that artificially drives the price up.


----------



## Sgrem (Oct 5, 2005)

Sounds like it drives up the cost of operating legally....which would encourage more voluntary license buy backs lessening the pressure. Legit efficient operations would be minimally affected and then more profitable.....

Sounds like a legit operation would be strongly in favor. If the rules in place are just expanded upon but redundant then again the legit operation is unaffected and again should be in favor of greater punishment for those going around the rules. I can't see where this is bad.


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

Bill just passed committee after a couple hours of debate (4-2), one of the yeas were with the understanding to work with industry and TPWD before a full senate vote to try and come up with a better solution for the punishment and enforcement at the dealer/buyer level. Funny how the 2 no's were from guys that zero interaction in the debate that went on for over 2 hours, think their minds were made up already?


----------



## Erich1717 (Jul 19, 2012)

Im Headed South said:


> Bill just passed committee after a couple hours of debate (4-2), one of the yeas were with the understanding to work with industry before a full senate vote to try and come up with a better solution for the punishment and enforcement at the dealer/buyer level.


People seem to be more worried about eating the oysters than helping the resource that does so much for the bays. I am not worried about the price of oysters going up I am worried about them taking all the oyster beds, killing off sea life and polluting the bays. Crazy concept huh?


----------



## Erich1717 (Jul 19, 2012)

Its Catchy said:


> Possession of undersized oysters is already a crime. So is being in this country illegally. Every sack is required to have a tag with all the boat's information, Capt etc. so how is there a "loophole"? No amount of regulation is ever going to work if there is no enforcement.
> 
> For any regulation in any industry to be effective it has to:
> 
> ...


Why are the buyers not responsible for having under sized oysters? Once they are off loaded there is no way to enforce the law.


----------



## [email protected] (May 24, 2004)

Erich1717 - Your two posts above are right on the money!


----------



## Erich1717 (Jul 19, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> Erich1717 - Your two posts above are right on the money!


Thanks! People look at the price they will pay instead of looking at the real problem of destroying the fishery not just from oysters but from all the sea life that depends on them. Its Catchy seems to have an underlying agenda here and I would be curious to know it is.


----------



## [email protected] (May 24, 2004)

Catchy - Sounds like you are predicting buy back won't work because the amendments to HB51 will drive prices even higher. I do not believe that's necessarily true, for two reasons. 

One - Consumers may balk at another price increase and demand could shrink. 
Two - The industry is already going broke. Why would higher prices without commensurate increase in profits encourage producers already engaged to remain or new ones to join?

Basic economics!


----------



## The Last Mango (Jan 31, 2010)

Im Headed South said:


> Bill just passed committee after a couple hours of debate (4-2), one of the yeas were with the understanding to work with industry and TPWD before a full senate vote to try and come up with a better solution for the punishment and enforcement at the dealer/buyer level. Funny how the 2 no's were from guys that zero interaction in the debate that went on for over 2 hours, think their minds were made up already?


The 4 yeas minds were made up before hand


----------



## Lone-Star (Dec 19, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> Two - The industry is already going broke. Why would higher prices without commensurate increase in profits encourage producers already engaged to remain or new ones to join?
> 
> Basic economics!


Because theres a lot of commercial licenses on the sidelines and when dockside prices go up that will bring a lot of part timers out of the woodwork and you end up with a seemingly counter intuitive increase in pressure on the resource.

I dont have a stake in oystering but I do in finfish and that's what happens with fish. The price goes up and all of a sudden there's guys fishing everywhere you never see the rest of the year.

Im not commenting on the validity of this particular bill, just pointing out that we should care about potential impacts on price because it could have unintended consequences.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Erich1717 said:


> Why are the buyers not responsible for having under sized oysters? Once they are off loaded there is no way to enforce the law.


They are currently responsible for being in possession of undersized oysters. It's redundancy and if they do not enforce the law now I doubt they will in the future. I have no underlying agenda other than I want a stable and sustainable fishery for generations to come.

I have said this before but for those did not read earlier posts I have a commercial oyster boat. I harvest oysters with tongs not a dredge. The same technology that has been used for 400 years or so. Dozens of fellow 2coolers have eaten my oysters. If I only cared about money I would be for HB-51 100%.

It's going to drive up the price and put more money in my pocket. We need to avoid this scenario at all costs. Because there are 100's of licenses not being used that will be put on small skiffs that are very fast and can move from any bay on this coast in one days time or less. This is going to make the situation worse not better. We saw this in Christmas Bay this past year. A bay that was too shallow to dredge and too remote became economically feasible to harvest.

The best thing the Senate can do is strip this bill back to just funding a buyback program. Retire as many licenses as possible and reduce the fleet to a more sustainable level.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Lone-Star said:


> Because theres a lot of commercial licenses on the sidelines and when dockside prices go up that will bring a lot of part timers out of the woodwork and you end up with a seemingly counter intuitive increase in pressure on the resource.
> 
> I dont have a stake in oystering but I do in finfish and that's what happens with fish. The price goes up and all of a sudden there's guys fishing everywhere you never see the rest of the year.
> 
> Im not commenting on the validity of this particular bill, just pointing out that we should care about potential impacts on price because it could have unintended consequences.


Bingo we have a winner! There are hundreds of licenses out there that are not being used. Drive the price up from 45.00 a sack to 60.00 or higher and you highly incentivize the owners to put that license back to work increasing the pressure on the resource and driving up the cost to buy back licenses.

The very thing we do not want.


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

The senators pointed out the issue in the hearing, there is no deterrent currently. They get a class c ticket time after time after time, the small fine if the local jp even decided to fine them is just a cost of doing business.


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

Its Catchy said:


> Bingo we have a winner! There are hundreds of licenses out there that are not being used. Drive the price up from 45.00 a sack to 60.00 or higher and you highly incentivize the owners to put that license back to work increasing the pressure on the resource and driving up the cost to buy back licenses.
> 
> The very thing we do not want.


What you fail to see is if all the available areas are closed it doesn't matter how many licenses want to fish, 70% were closed by the end of the season this year several of which sampled so high in undersized oysters that there is zero chance they'll be open next year.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Im Headed South said:


> What you fail to see is if all the available areas are closed it doesn't matter how many licenses want to fish, 70% were closed by the end of the season this year several of which sampled so high in undersized oysters that there is zero chance they'll be open next year.


TPWD already has regulatory authority to close any bay that samples high in undersized oysters. Putting more and more boats into less and less area creating a swarm of boats is exactly what we have seen the last two or three years.

HB-51 is just going to make it worse.


----------



## pocjetty (Sep 12, 2014)

Im Headed South said:


> That answer the pm you sent me? Not sure where you get your info but I'm not buddy's with any buyers are commercials, I'm a recreational angler concerned about the resource and the current folks profiting off of the fishery


You expressed an opinion, and got private mail with baseless accusations? Weird, uncalled-for accusations, with absolutely no evidence that justified them? Sounds a little extreme, but I've heard of things like that happening.

The one thing that is certain: if the oyster population is damaged too badly, the entire fishery will suffer drastic consequences. I've seen too many documents that show that the fisheries agencies (state and federal) manage certain resources for maximum revenues. It's the wrong paradigm. The overall health of the bay/estuary system must be the one driving factor, and THEN we figure out what we can do within that constraint.

First of all, a buyer of illegal oysters is no different that a restaurant that buys illegal trout and redfish on the black market. They are not an innocent bystander, any more than the fisherman. The penalty should be harsh, and for a repeat offense it should be permanent. We currently place much greater requirements and accountability on people who sell beer. The ONLY reason wholesale buyers of seafood have not faced similar requirements is that they make a lot of money that pays for very powerful lobbyists.

If there are too many fishermen out there, that condition needs to be fixed. If there are too many licenses out there, that needs to be fixed also. Any proposed solution is going to be unpleasant for someone. The alternative is a lot more unpleasant for everyone. If we are really concerned about protecting the resource AND making sure that people can make a living fishing:

1. Close Texas bays to commercial fishing by anyone who is not a Texas resident.
2. If there really are too many licenses sitting on the sidelines, have a forced sell-back of all the ones that haven't been being used - at a reasonable price. Buying a fishing license is not a retirement plan.
3. Have a forced buy-back from anyone who receives W-2's that show he/she has full-time employment outside of commercial fishing.

Those things, together, should be enough to protect the resource AND make it so that a guy can make a living fishing. Of course you would extend some grace period to allow people to get back into the business, if that's what they want to do with their license. Currently there are people who believe that their license is part of their retirement program. They hold onto them because they believe that they will appreciate more than other investments. And in the interim, they get to harvest more than they need in their spare time.

Propose that package of changes, then sit back and see who screams the loudest. Or sends harassing messages.


----------



## The Last Mango (Jan 31, 2010)

pocjetty said:


> You expressed an opinion, and got private mail with baseless accusations? Weird, uncalled-for accusations, with absolutely no evidence that justified them? Sounds a little extreme, but I've heard of things like that happening.
> 
> The one thing that is certain: if the oyster population is damaged too badly, the entire fishery will suffer drastic consequences. I've seen too many documents that show that the fisheries agencies (state and federal) manage certain resources for maximum revenues. It's the wrong paradigm. The overall health of the bay/estuary system must be the one driving factor, and THEN we figure out what we can do within that constraint.
> 
> ...


Complete Liberal caaa caaa


----------



## Erich1717 (Jul 19, 2012)

Its Catchy said:


> They are currently responsible for being in possession of undersized oysters. It's redundancy and if they do not enforce the law now I doubt they will in the future. I have no underlying agenda other than I want a stable and sustainable fishery for generations to come.
> 
> I have said this before but for those did not read earlier posts I have a commercial oyster boat. I harvest oysters with tongs not a dredge. The same technology that has been used for 400 years or so. Dozens of fellow 2coolers have eaten my oysters. If I only cared about money I would be for HB-51 100%.
> 
> ...


No they are not. The boat is responsible not the buyer.


----------



## Its Catchy (Apr 10, 2014)

Erich1717 said:


> No they are not. The boat is responsible not the buyer.


Possession of undersized fish, oysters or crabs is illegal. Period the end. Being a dealer does not get you a "free pass" on buying anything illegal.

If a dealer is in possession of undersized oysters he is responsible. Which is why the buyer I sell to is extremely strict on what they buy.


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

HB51 passed the Senate yesterday after a amendment was added that took a little of the teeth from the punishment of violators (had to for industry and the politicians they lobby to go along with it would be my guess), hopefully the industry cleans up it's act after getting chastised multiple times throughout the bills process. The bill is a step in the right direction, now to get the buy back program funded.


----------



## The Last Mango (Jan 31, 2010)

Im Headed South said:


> HB51 passed the Senate yesterday after a amendment was added that took a little of the teeth from the punishment of violators (had to for industry and the politicians they lobby to go along with it would be my guess), hopefully the industry cleans up it's act after getting chastised multiple times throughout the bills process. The bill is a step in the right direction, now to get the buy back program funded.


I testified at the hearing last Monday , nobody got chastized , get your facts straight, better yet , go fly your liberal flag 
Yes, the Oystet Industry needs some fixing, but not from dim witts who know nothing


----------



## Im Headed South (Jun 28, 2006)

Representative Dennis Bonnen today,

"Despite many attempts by the oyster industry to weaken and defeat my efforts, House Bill 51 is officially headed to the Governor's desk! This bill aims to save the foundation of our marine ecosystem by overhauling the oyster business at every level. This legislative endeavor was initiated by constituents who were appalled by the devastation to our area oyster reefs due to overharvesting motivated solely by greed. I worked closely with the Coastal Conservation Association, other conservation groups, and oyster dealers to bring accountability to the entire industry. HB 51 achieves this goal through enhanced penalties and shell recovery and restoration measures that will help regenerate our oyster supply and protect the future of this natural resource."

Also fyi, another bill has passed that will combine all the buy back accounts into one account so there will be a good starting balance to start buying back some of the latent licenses out there.


----------



## [email protected] (May 24, 2004)

IHS - That is very good news. Thanks for your diligence in keeping us abreast of the issues. Whether or not all the industry players are happy, it'll be good for them in the long run. Some might end up needing to seek a new career but the sad state of the overfished resource was taking a good many of them that direction anyway. Some of the oystermen I know said they were barely able to keep a 20 sack average in some of the areas they worked this past season. Can't be making much of a living at that rate. Hope the Gov signs it off.


----------



## karstopo (Jun 29, 2009)

If it's a public resource, it should not be reserved for commercial interests. The public should get first crack at public resources. We, the public, in public state water get equal access to game fish like speckled trout and redfish. The state, rightly, banned commercial harvesting of wild redfish and trout years ago because it wasn't sustainable. The resource is managed for sustainability for future generations. B*t?h all you want about limits and where they should be set, but TP&W does a pretty good job with balancing it all. 

So why should oysters be any different? Found in public water, owned by the people of Texas. Naturally occurring. So let's let a select few profit by harvesting what belongs to the people of the State when it's becoming clear it's not working? Harvestable oysters are way down, no recovery in sight. It's fine when there is plenty to go around, but that's not what is happening. Individuals get first crack, then the commercial guys. 

The same should be true with red snapper in federal water. Owned by the people of the USA. Why should a tiny, tiny fraction of people get the majority rights to our fish? To supply restaurants and markets? It's is BS. Those are our fish. Get you a boat, hire you a boat, hitch a ride, but they need to be managed for everyone and not a select few permit or license holders.


----------

