# Proposed State Water Reefs



## CoastalOutfitters (Aug 20, 2004)

I ask this out of curiosity, no opinion yet.

If we were to add a bunch of new state water reefs as proposed in earlier discussions, how is this going to help snapper fishing?

are snapper going to suddenly gather over shallow water reefs?
They aren't there in great abundance already sround the shallow rigs and known wrecks.

Are there going to be commercial no-fish zones around them ? enforcement?

Are the shrimpboats to be buffered from that area as well? enforcement?


----------



## Arlon (Feb 8, 2005)

I think any structure that gives small snapper protection from the shrimp nets is a good thing. If in shallower water, the survivability of the returned undersize fish should be greater too. More reef material spread out a little to keep from concentrating fish too much (single wreck is too concentrating and can be fished out by a single shrimp boat in one night) and still presenting a snag threat to the shrimp nets would be good. I can't think of a single negative for the idea as long as it doesn't cost money that might go to supporting the hatcheries or something. Great way to get rid of a lot of construction debris that would be a win win deal for all of us in my opinion...

As to enforcement, they don't have the resources to enforce much of anything now so they just need to keep from concentrating the reefs and fish. Make it harder for the poachers to find enough fish in one place to support their business.. Arlon


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

*Guys Look at The Alabama Plan 45% of Rec Snapper Landed in GOM*

Test have been conducted scattering shell on the floor of the GOM. Within days 
0 to 2 year old snapper were found on the newly formed structure. The nearshore reefs will attract numerous species. These reefs will forever enhance fishing in Texas.

Enforcement- We are asking for a line item to be placed in the budgets for law enforcement to make sure they have funds. The General fund is not the place for enforcement funds in any budget. Enforcement has been very pleased with this plan to solidify their place at the "ATM Machine". This is a
huge move to protect our fisheries.

As far as taking funds away from hatcheries that is not our plan. Statements from TP&WD biologist explained the benefits of wild natural spawning and the 
hatcheries. One naturally spawning herd of Redfish could out produce the hatcheries production for ten years in the words of one senior TPWD Biologist in Rockport. The wild fish know what they are doing. Hatcheries help but are not the solution they were once thought to be according to insiders. Busting open all Coastal Passes would have been much more beneficial use of funds directed towards the hatcheries since the wild fish do a better job. Clean fresh Gulf Saltwater exchange has a list of benefits as long as a childs christmas list including reduction of vibiro virus. We need 
to think seriously about best bang for the buck.


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*Texas Great Barrier Reef*

Howdy,
Coastal Outfitters - first, you need to look at what TPWD has accomplished with the state reefing program...they have almost 60 reef sites along the Texas coast, and over 50 of them are out of the reach of the average fisherman, being 80 miles offshore or down south where there is just a handful of fishermen to access them. I have to ask; Exactly who is benefitting the most from the majority of the TPWD reefs? In my opinion, Commercial Fishermen are really the only ones benefitting.

Our vision is to deploy about 4,000 REEFS PER YEAR in this 1 mile wide corridor situated just inside the 9 mile line along the entire Texas coast. I have caught 18 pound snapper well within the 9 mile line just south of Freeport - they will come inshore if there is something there for them to come to. The existing spattering of rigs/wrecks inside of state waters aren't enough to prevent overcapitalization due to fishing pressure. The idea is to "shock and awe" both fishermen and fish, providing so much structure that there is no possibility of overcapitalization. Who is going to benefit from the majority of these reefs? Recreational fishermen, their kids, and coastal communities.

With the looming threat of TAC reduction by the Gulf Council, Texas desperately needs to do something in an area where they/we have control...STATE WATERS. If the Gulf Council decides to reduce TAC to 7 million pounds or even to 5 million pounds (which is under consideration), the Texas Great Barrier Reef project will provide insurance against economic collapse of coastal communities and businesses which rely on offshore fishing for a large portion of their income.

The reduction of TAC in addition to higher gas prices is going to have a major detrimental impact on the amount of recreational boats going snapper fishing. Providing this incredible reefing corridor will promote increased participation in the sport, even for guys with a 17' center console...you will be able to fish year-round, the investment in time and money is minimal as fishermen will be able to hit 40 to 50 spots 10 to 12 miles from port, coastal economies will benefit greatly from increased bait, tackle, gas sales, etc. in addition to renting more hotel rooms, more charters, etc., other species will be attracted to the TGBR such as King Mackerel, Ling, Tarpon, Sailfish...imagine the trolling possibilities this corridor will provide!

The snapper will benefit by the increased habitat in several ways; 1) Higher survivability rates from predators as they will have a place to take refuge. 2) Since the location of several reefs will not be made public, shrimpers will want to avoid the TGBR or risk losing their nets - this will result in several hundred square miles of bottom area that is not being scraped by shrimp trawls...small crabs, shrimp, small fish of all types (bycatch) will be allowed to live and multiply. The shrimping industry is not opposing the creation of the TGBR. 3) The reefs themselves will be the starting point for the food chain - barnacle and coral larvae float with the currents until they find a suitable place to attach, which the reefs will provide. This will benefit juvenile snapper by providing a food source that is not currently there.

There is an item on the table to prohibit commercial fishing on the TGBR - I can't go into detail on that right now.

All in all, the Texas Great Barrier Reef will reverse the negative impacts of regulations forced upon us by the Gulf Council and the U.S. Department of Commercial Fishing (NMFS). This reefing corridor will energize interest in fishing offshore like nothing has before, and I believe will be worth BILLIONS OF $ to the coastal communities right here in Texas. And, by focusing on the replenishment of the resource in a major way, I believe this will also lead the way to helping the snapper population Gulf-wide and will lead to higher TACs in the future...not the steadily decreasing TACs that we now see.

All the best,
Tom Hilton


----------



## Ono Loco (Aug 4, 2005)

Tom,

what types of reef materials are we talking about? Sounds like a great idea to me - i envy all those SoFla guys who catch quality fish within sight of land..


----------



## CoastalOutfitters (Aug 20, 2004)

As i said above , i don't have an opinion on this reef project yet, just weighing the facts.

If we all collectively agree that it is a good idea for the rec fishermen, then we should all agree to petition (electronically?) the NMFS gulf council/NOAA/TNRCC/GLO/Congress/Army Corps to go for it with a mass mailing of some kind with our names and numbers, after all we are an informed "organization"
right?


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*Reefs*

Howdy,
OnoLoco - here's a couple of shots of reef models.

The pyramid design is comprised of 88 concrete blocks with six concrete floors. The dimensions are 10' x 10' x 9' high. There are some tetrahedrons in use over off of Alabama, and they claim that these reefs produce up to 500 lbs of Red Snapper per year. The concept here is to provide a bunch of efficiency apartments for juvenile snappers and other fish, geared to providing shelter/escape from predators. Also, the square footage of the horizontal area is increased from a 100 sq. ft. footprint to 320 sq. ft. making a much more efficient use of space, and I think will produce more snapper per year than 500 lbs. They have done a great job over in Alabama - I think we can do as good (or better) over here.

The kelp design is based on casting floating rope into a 10' x 10' concrete slab. These will provide structure in areas where we have clearance problems due to depth constraints. The floating rope will eventually become encrusted and sink in a few years' time, but IMHO will continue to provide important structure to nurture reef fish populations. Besides, they are cheap to produce, and we'll just put more out there when needed.

One thing to remember is that over here in the western Gulf is where the majority of shrimping occurs, thus is where the majority of bycatch is produced. The type of bottom favored by shrimp is also the same that is favored by small snapper and other small fish. Providing structures such as depicted below with not only provide cover from predators, but their existence will prevent shrimpers from dragging in that area...it's a double-positive. Reducing bycatch allowing that bycatch to live, and providing structure to increase the survivability of that bycatch living in that area.

All the best,
Tom Hilton

P.S. Coast Outfitters - what "informed' organization are you speaking about? The only organization that is making the push for this that I know of is the RFA. While the CCA is sitting there whining about bycatch - the RFA is exploring hands-on solutions directly addressing bycatch survivability. Join the RFA here in Texas, and let's show the national organization we are a force to be reckoned with. The national RFA is informed and organized in a way with lobbyists and attorneys that can effectively fight the war over our rights to fish.
T.


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

A couple thoughts, who is going to pay for this program??? Will there be any corporate sponsors? Can a mitigation program be set up with oil companies that are not in government compliance as far as enviromental issues are concerned? How about a seafood tax at restraunts that sell seafood with the tax solely for the use of Habitat Restoration and Mitigation? 

My next thought is that if something is not done to the commercial industry then the reef program will really hurt the fishery in the long run. Let me explain....If we build 2000 reefs a year in state waters and each reef yields 300lbs of fish that is 600,000 lbs of fish taken in state waters that may have not been taken without the reefs. That is ok as long as we keep the snapper population at a sustainable level. To do this we need to reduce the catch somewhere and that would be reflected in the shrimper bycatch and commercial harvest. IF we don't reduce the level of damage they do to the population then we would just increase the snapper harvest with the reef program thus potentially crippling the Red Snapper Fishery. This is just something to think about, I know there are other factors that will help the fishery such as increased cover for juvenile snapper which would increase their survival rate, by how much nobody knows. If the survival rate increase is greater than the recreational catch then we will be in good shape. This is all based on the TAC remaining the same. IF they reduce the TAC then we may or may not hurt the fishery with this program. The bottom line still is that COMMERCIAL FISHING IS LIKE CRACK.... IT KILLS

We need to support a reduction in bycatch and in the commercial harvest while implementing the TGBR program. I believe this is the only way to support our coastal communities and ensure a healthy red snapper fishery well into the next century.


----------



## CoastalOutfitters (Aug 20, 2004)

Gee whiz Tom , i'm talking about the 2coolguys to bind together and push for this as an informed "organization" see the quotes on that, that means i was being smug.

I think it is a great idea, but everyone has to carry the torch to push it thru.

By the way Tom and Jim, are we gonna let the charter/head boats fish these reefs in our brave new world and if not who is gonna police them ?


----------



## CoastalOutfitters (Aug 20, 2004)

My next thought is that if something is not done to the commercial industry then the reef program will really hurt the fishery in the long run. Let me explain....If we build 2000 reefs a year in state waters and each reef yields 300lbs of fish that is 600,000 lbs of fish taken in state waters that may have not been taken without the reefs. That is ok as long as we keep the snapper population at a sustainable level. To do this we need to reduce the catch somewhere and that would be reflected in the shrimper bycatch and commercial harvest. IF we don't reduce the level of damage they do to the population then we would just increase the snapper harvest with the reef program thus potentially crippling the Red Snapper Fishery.


sorry, you lost me on this one, can you re-phrase.......................


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Coastal outfitters, it's easy. With more close in reefs there will be more presuure as Tom says. Think about it on the less than 2 foot days all the bay boats out on the middle bank fishing for kings will now fish for snapper. That will automatically increase the recreational catch. I am for the reefs, more and better habitat always helps the fishery but it will also increase the catch. It just amazes me how 200 or so commercial boats can have a higher quota than 50,000 recreational fishermen.


----------



## Calmday (Jul 7, 2005)

Bugaboo said:


> A couple thoughts, who is going to pay for this program??? Will there be any corporate sponsors? Can a mitigation program be set up with oil companies that are not in government compliance as far as enviromental issues are concerned? How about a seafood tax at restraunts that sell seafood with the tax solely for the use of Habitat Restoration and Mitigation?
> 
> My next thought is that if something is not done to the commercial industry then the reef program will really hurt the fishery in the long run. Let me explain....If we build 2000 reefs a year in state waters and each reef yields 300lbs of fish that is 600,000 lbs of fish taken in state waters that may have not been taken without the reefs. That is ok as long as we keep the snapper population at a sustainable level. To do this we need to reduce the catch somewhere and that would be reflected in the shrimper bycatch and commercial harvest. IF we don't reduce the level of damage they do to the population then we would just increase the snapper harvest with the reef program thus potentially crippling the Red Snapper Fishery. This is just something to think about, I know there are other factors that will help the fishery such as increased cover for juvenile snapper which would increase their survival rate, by how much nobody knows. If the survival rate increase is greater than the recreational catch then we will be in good shape. This is all based on the TAC remaining the same. IF they reduce the TAC then we may or may not hurt the fishery with this program. The bottom line still is that COMMERCIAL FISHING IS LIKE CRACK.... IT KILLS
> 
> We need to support a reduction in bycatch and in the commercial harvest while implementing the TGBR program. I believe this is the only way to support our coastal communities and ensure a healthy red snapper fishery well into the next century.


Cmon man be positive. More structure equals more fish. Quotas are already reached every year so how could this increase total catch? As for funding Tom H came up with a plan for corporate funding that I thought was great. I will post the link to the thread when I find it.


----------



## fishtruck (Aug 9, 2004)

As I have said I am good for at least two or three, Al we can carry them on your boat on our way to bigfish ;-)The weather is gettin better every day hehehehe
Rob C

Tom you build them and I will buy them!


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Calmday, just looking at it objectively. What you are saying is that structure produces fish. Well bad news for you I have never seen a rig leg or other structure produce any fish, it just provides a haven. If quotas are reached then why are we worried about the fishery, sounds to me like there are plenty of fish there. They say recreational quotas are reached but I have yet to see anyone measure, weigh or count my fish so how do they really know if they have been reached?

I think the reef program is a great idea but only if as a whole we do not overfish our brood stock. We have to use the basic formula...

2006 brood stock-recreational catch-commercial catch-shrimper bycatch=2007 brood stock. As long as 2007 brood stock is greater than 2006 then we are on the road to recovery. 

Building the reefs will just treat one of the symptoms-low recreational catch. We need to cure the whole disease which is an overfished fishery mainly by commercials. With the implementation of the TGBR program we should then support a closure of the GOM Red Snapper Fishery. We could catch our fish in state waters while the deep water fishery recovers. We should support other measures as no shrimping zones in the areas that have high snapper populations so we can reduce bycatch. When the GOM is open to commercials again we should support no commercial fishing zones such as artificial reefs. We can't just treat the sympton we need to cure the disease.


----------



## Ono Loco (Aug 4, 2005)

I like the snap condo model.. you want something that will really foul nets to keep the trawlers out. I wonder how these would fair in a hurricane situation?


----------



## Mike Jennings (Oct 11, 2005)

CoastalOutfitters said:


> By the way Tom and Jim, are we gonna let the charter/head boats fish these reefs in our brave new world and if not who is gonna police them ?


oh never mind


----------



## Calmday (Jul 7, 2005)

Me too :headknock


----------



## Calmday (Jul 7, 2005)

fishtruck said:


> As I have said I am good for at least two or three, Al we can carry them on your boat on our way to bigfish ;-)The weather is gettin better every day hehehehe
> Rob C
> 
> Tom you build them and I will buy them!


LOL. I plan on going there sometime during the week after opening day. Way to many boats that first weekend for that kind of covert operation. 

If this state reef thing gets up and going I will do whatever I can to help.


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*snapper*

Howdy,
Bugaboo - to quote you; "What you are saying is that structure produces fish. Well bad news for you I have never seen a rig leg or other structure produce any fish, it just provides a haven."

What are you basing this statement upon?

I'm going to cut and paste an earlier post of mine from another thread;

As far as your contention that it will just spread the existing fish out over more spots - I have to respectfully disagree. I had a conversation with Wayne Swingle while in Mobile and he explained the history of what happened over there (Wayne is the brother of Hugh Swingle, whom one of the Reefing Permit Areas is named for). Basically, they took 1,260 square miles of barren sandy bottom, devoid of many snapper at all (or shrimp), and converted it (via reefs) into an area where it is responsible for producing 40-45% of all recreationally-caught snapper in the ENTIRE GULF. One heck of a success story.

Let's start at the beginning of the food chain. Before, in that barren, sandy area, larvae (fish, barnacles, coral, etc.) would just float with the current endlessly, as there was nothing to stop them. Let's say there is a piece of structure placed in this barren area, creating a break in the current...a barnacle larvae attaches to it. (Have you ever seen any floating barnacles or coral looking for a place to attach? No, it is done at this larval stage.) So, more and more barnacles attach to this structure, creating positive/negative spaces, and thus more surface area, breaking the current and allowing other larvae to take refuge. This is the beginning building blocks of the food chain, and builds right on up. My contention is that these are not merely "fish attraction devices" but actually provide the first foothold for life to begin - life takes over from there. One example of this happening is the presence of fish species at the rigs just off of the Mississippi Delta which were previously only found at the Flower Garden Banks. The larvae floated with the currents from the Flower Gardens over there until they were able to take refuge and take up habitation. The rigs (vertical artificial reefs) allowed this to happen.

Now Bugaboo, I believe there is overwhelming evidence that structure DOES produce fish. How can 40 miles of barren sandy bottom now account for 40-45% of all of the rec snapper in the Gulf? Did all of these snapper migrate to this 40 mile stretch from thousands of miles away? I don't believe they did, as most reef fish take up residence and don't migrate like pelagics.

Why are there fish off of the muddy Mississippi delta now that were previously only known to be out at the Flower Gardens? Those little fish swam all that way? No. The life in the Gulf is spread at the larval stage.

Overfishing by the commercial sector is a large part of the problem, I agree. But's that's a different battle. I am trying to accomplish something thru avenues where we may have some influence, and let me tell ya, it's not at the NMFS or the Gulf Council. That problem (commercial overfishing) too will be dealt with (and solved) at the local level through more effective enforcement.

All the best,
Tom Hilton


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Tom,
Nobody can convince me that one area produces more fish than another because there is no accurate data. I would be willing to bet I can survey 100 fisherman and not one recreational fisherman would be able to say that 50 percent of their fish were counted in a survey and for that matter any fish were counted in the past year. This is not to say that the Alabama reefing program was not a success, it is as far as recreational catch goes and the survival rate of young snapper goes.. 

As far as structure producing fish goes I have to ask this question. After 2 years the fish that were caught were they fish that just appeared from the structure or were they fish that were already part of the GOM red snapper stock? I agree Red Snapper are not migratory but there are many reasons that causes them to move around.

One explanation is currents from strong storms such as hurricanes. This was evident last year in our own waters after hurricanes Rita and Katrina. After the storms there were excellent catches of quality fish as close as 5 miles from the Freeport jetty. Wouldn't you say that they showed up there because of the strong storm currents or would you say that the close in structure produced them.

Another reason fished showed there was just part of the Red Snapper's natural habit. Young juvenile Red Snapper favor sandy or muddy bottoms while mature Snapper prefer limestone or irregular rock formations. So in the scheme of things young snapper maybe in an area with a sandy or muddy bottom and as they mature they will seek out structure. In the Alabama case the reef program created the habitat that mature snapper prefer close by the habit that the young snapper prefer. This made it an easy and safe transition from one habitat to the other without having to travel miles from sandy or muddy bottom to a structure.

So as we look at the reefing program it won't produce fish but it will increase the survival rate of the young snapper by creating a better more compact life cycle habitat. I say this since the whole habitat in that area will support young fish with the sandy bottom as well as mature fish with the structure. The fish won't have to travel across the gulf to find structure thus reducing the chance of them becoming bycatch or some other predators dinner. 

As far as the reefs becoming the foothold for life I will not argue that. Fish will always follow their prey and as new life developes small fish will show then bigger and bigger fish will come. 

So it still boils down to one thing, we have to make sure our catch rate does not exceed our survival rate. The reef program is one way to increase the survival rate the other ways are to cut the bycatch out and the commercial fishing. 

Good luck with the program


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

*Bugaboo News Flash about Sow Snapper*

Large Sow Snapper like the mud Flats. The longliners caught most of their large fish on The Mud Flats. A very small lump will hold huge sows. I am amazed at the thought process that all the large fish are around the rocks. When the Commercial longliners were moved to the fifty Fathom curve the fish less than two years old spiked off the chart. The longliners were working the MUD FLATS inside the 50 fathom curve. A large sow will eat anything she can get in her mouth including smaller snapper.

The "Hilton Hotel's" forming "The Texas Great Barrier Reef" will give 0 to 2 year old fish a place to hide from predators. This survival rate increase will help the stocks overall. The reason for the increase in the stock assesment in part was due to Texas RFA pushing for a longline study to show sows are on the mud flats as a part of the stock assesments. Guess what we were correct about large numbers of very large sows on the mud flats. This new data is just now hitting the system. NMFS is finding out we are in much better shape than previously thought. NMFS is dragging their feet as far as getting this current data looked at.

The problem is the needless slaughter of large breeding sows by the Illegal Commercial Black Market take. We are trying to save our Coastal Fishing Communities and the support industries in placing reefs in State Waters First.
We do not want to lose the restraunts,motels ,tackle shops and marine industries all along the coast due to a 6 month fishery. We are very close to
a crisis with gas prices and a closed season of six months.

We will move to Federal Waters once we have the State Water Reefs in place. This will be a very long process for generations to come.

Go to rfatexas.org and look at the minton/shipp report. It clearly explains the benefits of habitat. I believe it is listed under news. The main point is Red Snapper are limited by habitat not by numbers spawned.These two men sit on the GOMFC. They also have some unkind thoughts about NMFS and their model's.

Jim Smarr
Texas RFA
361-463-1558


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Jim,
I have some unkind words for the NMFS also. I said they favor not necessarily are stuck there for life. There are forces of nature that push these fish into a different habitat each year or certain times of the year, for their spawn or possibly to prey on the hatch of some crustacean over that flat.

Guess what we were correct about large numbers of very large sows on the mud flats. This new data is just now hitting the system. NMFS is finding out we are in much better shape than previously thought.

So what you are also saying is that we have more snapper than we thought and we are in better shape correct? If this is so where is the problem if we are in better shape? I just don't think the data we have is 1. Accurate and 2. I don't believe anybody has really studied the life cycle of a red snapper. Snapper can live to up to 50 years old, do you know if when that sow is 49 yrs old if her eggs are fertile?


----------



## wet dreams (May 21, 2004)

The loss of habitat is the #1 reason for the lack of various fish and wildlife. I dont care if your speaking of snappers, ducks or the horned owl. WW


----------



## James Howell (May 21, 2004)

I generally stay out of these arguments and keep my opinions to myself, but Bugaboo, I just can't seem to grasp what your point is. Not trying to be disrespectful, but what are you arguing for/against? No reefs in state waters? or no commercial fishing proposed reefs in state waters? or only rec. fishing of proposed reefs, but no charter/headboat fishing of the proposed reefs? Please clarify.


----------



## CoastalOutfitters (Aug 20, 2004)

James , i agree with you, and here are still my questions.

if they are a good idea lets as a group push for it, we have a collective voice.

are they going to move all over during a storm surge?

exactly who is going to get to fish them and how is this monitored?

are these to be no shrimp zones?

in theory the stocks would increase and the Tac would follow, but they have to be installed/studied etc. first, so that's not even an issue, yet.

personally, i have no opinion just questions


----------



## Crossroads (May 21, 2004)

Getting the reefs has to better the fishing, it doesn't matter if the commercials or shrimpers jump all over them. Getting more fishing habitat in Texas waters is a winner for everybody. If you want to argue and politic about regulating the reefs, fine but do that after they are up and breeding fish.


----------



## James Howell (May 21, 2004)

That pretty much sums it up in a nutshell.



Valkyrie said:


> Getting the reefs has to better the fishing, it doesn't matter if the commercials or shrimpers jump all over them. Getting more fishing habitat in Texas waters is a winner for everybody. If you want to argue and politic about regulating the reefs, fine but do that after they are up and breeding fish.


----------



## CoastalOutfitters (Aug 20, 2004)

I also agree, but the state is going to ask the same questions for regulation purposes, and NOAA/GLO sure isn't going to go for this if they bounce around on the seafloor.

I say we have a big banquet , sell reefs and you get to put your name on one and get a lat/lon certificate, then have all the shop/ag classes in the highschools build them as projects, then we can get Exxon and Dow to pay for the installs...............


----------



## Captain Blood (May 27, 2004)

Coastaloutfitters, I am surprised that you don't know already! There is a group pushing for the state water reefs. It is called the RECREATIONAL FISHING ALLIANCE. Finally we have a collective voice that - not only is fighting the beauracracy that wants to continue to lower and restrict our rights to fish. Why re-invent the wheel with another "collective group"?

1-888-JOINRFA

Oh, and opinions are like belly buttons....EVERYBODY HAS ONE!


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

James, nobody has said anything about charter/headboats. I consider these recreational fishermen. I am for the reef program but the reef program is just a very small step in the right direction. Yes I am against commercial fishing period. Through history the demise of fish species have been caused by commercial overfishing. If you don't believe me just do a google search on overfishing and start reading.

James, my point is not one thing will solve the problem, it may help or it may not. We only have so many fish out there and we have to protect them and give them the chance to survive and the way to do that is to develope a management plan for the whole fishery and not just one segment. I do believe Jim said the same thing when he said that the commercial and blackmarket fishing is a problem and needs to be addressed.

Wet Dreams, I don't see where there is a loss of habitat for snapper in the western GOM. If there is I would like for you to send me a link where I can get that info. I believe the problem is overfishing by certain segments of the industry

Tom and Jim,

I have a couple of question that you should have the answer to. 

What will be the increased survival rate of juvenile Red Snapper when the reefs are deployed?

When we implement the reef program what is the projected increase in red snapper harvest by recreational fishermen.

How will this increased recreational harvest and the increased survival rate affect the longterm goals of the TAC?


----------



## jjjansk (Jan 21, 2005)

I have been reading everything that gets posted about the proposed "TGBR" and almost all of the question that are repeatedly asked have been answered. 




Will this be off limits to shrimping? The shrimpers will be aware of the 1mile corridor and unless they want to take the risk of losing a net, they will stay clear of it.
Will the shrimpers oppose the "TGBR" plan? The shrimpers are not against the plan, anything that takes pressure off them they see as good.
Will commercials be able to fish the "TGBR"? There is something in the works that will prohibit commercial fishing. 
Do we need to do extensive studies to see if they really work? NO Alabama has already done this and it is a huge success. 
What will be used for the reefs? There have been a few pics posted of available materials, the ones posted above and the ones pictured in this thread. http://2coolfishing.com/ttmbforum/showthread.php?t=47824&highlight=reefs
What will prevent the reef from being over fished? The massive size and number of locations on the "TGBR"
 

These are all repeated question that seem to keep coming up. The answers above I did not make up, they came from either Jim's or Tom's posts. 



This will be a *BIG *win for the rec fisherman all along the Texas coast. We should be thankful we have people as passionate as Tom and Jim to spend the countless hours needed to make the "Texas Great Barrier Reef "a reality&#8230;..



Jason


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

More structure? I am all for it. 

The big question in my mind is the bang for the buck. How long are these reefs going to last in the bottom conditions b/w Galvest. & Matago? Last time I talked to some folks about this, they were real clear that one can't just dump stuff (outside a "bank") and expect it to last as a reef.

Whats the sink rate on these proposed structures if deployed outside a bank?


----------



## manintheboat (Jun 1, 2004)

Great point. I wonder the same thing. Hopefully these reefs are designed to where they will not sink into that soft mud as quickly. I think that Tom had an answer for that question a few months ago, but do not remember what he said. Hopefully he can weigh in.


----------



## wet dreams (May 21, 2004)

The fish lose habitat every time a rig is removed, look back at the Bucaneer Field, the 4 in a row among countless others. I have no idea how many rigs were at the Buc Flds 20-30+ but now its 2-3. I do know the shrimpers got to love 'the clean sweep' that is done now when a rig is removed. ANY habitat has got to be good. WW


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*Texas Great Barrier Reef*

Howdy,
JJJAnsk - thanks for your post - it says alot, but some people just won't listen.









Ernest - that's going to be part of the process...research. Nobody, and I mean nobody, can say for certain what will happen relative to sink rates here off of the Texas coast. Personally, I think it's a distraction device to prevent people from even attempting it. Part of the process will be deployment of various designs in various bottom conditions...divers will monitor the condition of specific reefs as part of an ongoing research effort to determine the effectiveness of each. We are prepared to do that - and guess what? Once we do that, then WE WILL be able to say for certain what will happen. One example is the floating rope concept - the idea (besides skirting the clearance issue) is to provide a structure with as large a footprint as possible, with the correct weight ratio to minimize subsidence. The point is that there are ways to address the environment here off of Texas, other than just being a naysayer. Also, there is a reefing effort underway off of Louisiana - I believe their bottom is siltier than ours.

As far as bang for the buck - believe me, if we're talking about deploying 4,000 reefs PER YEAR, it's kinda like throwing something up against the wall...we'll see what sticks. And with that kind of volume, I will personally guarantee that ALOT of it will stick. Bang for the buck? Most of the reefs will be paid for by sponsorships or grants - the dollars generated by these reefs (through increased participation in the sport) will FAR outwiegh the costs. Reduction in TAC will result in an economic train wreck - plain and simple...where's the bang for the buck there, and why aren't you asking that?

I also see this as an opportunity to promote offshore fishing to offshore fishermen of the future - kids that are 7 to 14 years of age...right now, offshore fishing may entail runs of 30, 40, or 50 miles to get to some good structure. If you can provide a multitude of structures 10-15 miles from the jetties, parents would be more likely to take their kids out there. I know I would if I knew that we could come in a short ride if it roughs up or the weather turns on you. Wouldn't that alone be worth the bang for the buck?

Also, the rigs mentioned above are a great example of what happens when you place structure there (or remove it). There used to be alot of rigs on Heald Bank and that was the place to go. Now that most of those rigs have been removed, the fishing is not so great. The MMS is planning to remove about 4,000 rigs in the next 10 years...what's going to happen to the fish populations when that happens? I remember one rig that got removed about 10 years ago near the Buccanneer field (340?)...we went out the the day after they carted it off, and porpoises were having a field day throwing snapper up in the air...it was a massacre because the snapper's refuge was now gone. Another example is the Shipp/Minton paper where they illustrate a large spike in the snapper populations around the same time (1950's) that oil rigs were placed in quantities.

I'm not afraid.

All the best,
Tom Hilton


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

*Slicing the Cake before bluperints for kitchen are dry- lol*

With all due respect we have a task force set up to work on the reefing project. Tom Hilton, Mark Switzer and I set up the RFA task force. Dick Stone started the reefing project for the Federal gov. and ran it for years will
hold a place on the task force. We are bringing in Staff from all Agencies to sit on the task force that will be involved in all aspects the reefing project. 
This should help collapse some time frames. We feel we have a fairly good handle on what we are doing and what the outcome will be. Just go dive Alabama and give us a report and see if it matches the data we have from them on population dynamics. Second opinions are always welcome.

We will be holding meetings to Present a General overview to Coastal Community in the future. We want to invite Mayors,County Judges,Commissioners,Chambers of Commerce to pre sell the Economic and Fisheries enhancement benifits to them. This entire effort is bigger than large even xxxlarge.

The idea of who gets to fish the Reefs before they are built is classic. The Fish in the Gulf of Mexico belong to all Americans. 95% of them access the Fishery via a for hire vessel. Yes the Recreational for Hire sector has just as much right there as Individual private boat owners. Kinda like the Sky belonging to Corporate Jets only. That would sure slow down air travel if we had to access the sky via private jet only. Just remember there are around a Million Texas Saltwater Anglers that will and should get to voice their thoughts. RFA strongly believes in the Republic form of Government. We feel special intrest have really gotten us in a big train wreck in the GOM Red Snapper Fishery. The permitting process will be wide open for public comments once this hits the Texas Register.

I agree with the statement about Commercial Overfishing being the problem.
RFA recognized early on Highseas longlining and Commercial Overfishing were devasting our fisheires. We have branched out since our humble beginings.

We are donating quite a few personal dollars and time at this point pushing this project. We will be setting up a Fundraiser to support Texas RFA and The Texas Great Barrier Reef Project. We will have one in Port Aransas/Corpus and
the other in the Greater Houston Area.

I have seen the Great Barrier Reef in Australia. I fished it for 34 days in one season. I was a Member in the Lizzard Island Game Fish Club. I have been there several different times. # 10 Ribbon Reef has been fairly productive
for 1000# plus black Marlin. Inside the reef the fish populations are incredible.
I have spent some quality time on various reefs around the world. I have experienced first hand not just classroom.

I am very proud of this project and welcome everyone to get on board.
Email Tom or Me if intrested in helping with setting up fundraising events or
helping aquire donations for the fundraising efforts.

Jim Smarr
Texas RFA
361-463-1558
[email protected]


----------



## BEER4BAIT (Jun 24, 2005)

Let me know if you need help from the state. I'm connected big time.


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Tom and Jim

What is the time frame for all of this taking place???


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

Tom, I would suggest that the information on sink rates is either known or could be calculated quite easily. Not by me, but by the engineers in the oil and gas industry which have been messing with this issue for years. Bet they could calculate it pretty quick and with very little in the way of additional information in light of the rather extensive work than has been done on bottom conditions in association with rig deployment. I would further suggest that even educated guesses on this issue will go along way advancing this proposed project. 

Wasn't there a bunch of this type of work done in association with the proposed sinking of the Orinskie, or whatever the name of the ship was that went to another state? 

How about with respect to wrecks in the area. Take the Aegan Sun (or whatever the name of that wreck with the buoy just this side of the Heald banks is) for example? When did it go down, what was the max. height, whats the height now (I would wager 6 inches or less), what type of ship was it? At least we could get a starting point from that info. 

Bottom line - I would bet there is ton of this info out there already that could be assembled to overcome some of the objections associated with this being a short term band aid due to the sink rate.


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

*Demographic Artificail Reef Fish Study*

Jim and Tom,

Do you have a demographic artificial reef fish study that shows how reef placement affects future populations of fish on the reef. I think a short term goal of creating reefs all along the coast are not realistic but a long term goal of starting on the upper coast and working south would be viable.


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

Bugaboo

Let me guess you fish out of upper coast. These need to be done in all areas.
Fair and Equitable seems to be first thouhgt that comes to mind as far as placement.
Alabama has a wealth of information. Please read it then you will know what we know.

I for one do understand population dynamics. I have read 17 volumes of the administrative record involving all aspects of the Red Snapper universe. 

Build it and they will come. 

I once saw a quote by Will Rogers talking about an information problem. Once you know what we know you will fully understand what we are proposing is right on target.


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Jim,

I have been reading it. One of the studies which makes a good point is that the reefs placed closer to existing structure developed a sustainable population much quicker than those just placed in open water. I believe everyone wants the reefs to develope sooner than later. You're right there is some pretty interesting reading regarding the Alabama artificial reef program. I also agree, build it and they will come, just how fast will they come? We need to do this to protect as many fish as possible as soon as possible.

Some other things do come to mind when looking at artificial reefs. I like Tom's models of the reefs you propose to build. They appear to have plenty of cover to protect fish from all predators including nets and to provide forge for game fish. I can't help to wonder though that if the Alabama reef program is as successful as you say why wouldn't we look at modeling the Texas reefs after Alabama's. Is there a cost factor or enviromental issues involved? If their's is cheaper and cleaner to deploy wouldn't it make sense to go that route or are Tom's models cheaper and cleaner? What is the status of the reefs in Alabama after Hurricane Katrina? I believe they held up very well, if so would't that be another reason to look at modeling after theirs or will Tom's models hold up better? What is the lifespan of the Alabama reefs vs Tom's models? 

Jim,
I am not slamming the program we just need to make sure , as was said earlier, the most bang for the buck as soon as possible. I know the RFA task force will review all of this and probably have already and can provide us the details very soon.

Good Luck from the upper coast


----------



## Marlintini (Apr 7, 2005)

lets stay focused on getting the reefs established.


----------



## manintheboat (Jun 1, 2004)

I think that Tom was talking about using the same reef pyramids as they used or are using in Alabama. I could be wrong on that one.


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

manintheboat, 

That would be a good thing...


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

These are vast improvements on the Alabama reefs. Yes the reefs did survive as I understand it from talking to the Alabama folks in the know at the Mobile Council meeting.

We are focused on the issues at had. We will be announcing a major fundraising effort soon to expidite the program. We will be holding one in the Houston metro area along with one in the Corpus Metro area. The Texas Great Barrier Reef Project will be the most imortant work done in Texas in this Century. Lets all work toward getting it done
ASAP.


----------



## Lumberjack93 (Jun 15, 2004)

http://www.artificialreefs.com/ARIGalleries.cfm

http://www.reefball.org/

Lumberjack93


----------



## BICWANN (Nov 17, 2005)

Calmday said:


> Cmon man be positive. More structure equals more fish. Quotas are already reached every year so how could this increase total catch? As for funding Tom H came up with a plan for corporate funding that I thought was great. I will post the link to the thread when I find it.


Sorry to disagree, but more structure equals more potential habitat for fish...not more fish. Potential habitat equals a potential higher concentration of fish in one area and that *= *a higher potential to catch more fish. Not a bad thing, don't get me wrong!



However, a higher potential to catch more fish (snapper) so close to shore = as Tom says, a higher potential for small 17 foot boats (who normally don't fish for snapper) to access these areas which = a potential to over fish the red snapper fishery, especially if the current regulations do not change. We will be concentrating an already declining population of red snapper in the gulf making them more accessible to over fishing.



What Bugaboo is saying is that it is not a bad idea but you need a plan to ensure over fishing does not happen. 



Good ideas have to start somewhere, but great ideas need work...they need to be thought out, and every potential problem (as many as possible) needs to be addressed completely.


----------



## Calmday (Jul 7, 2005)

Oh Lord please help me.


----------



## Chuck (May 21, 2004)

Calmday said:


> Oh Lord please help me.


 I totally agree....with that kind of thinking going on by a couple of posters, we would still be debating how big to make the hole in the middle of the wheel while carrying loads on our back!

Thanks Tom and Jim for carrying the ball on this. It looks like you have ALL but two supporters on this.


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

I agree with the statement about Commercial Overfishing being the problem.
RFA recognized early on Highseas longlining and Commercial Overfishing were devasting our fisheires. We have branched out since our humble beginings.

With all due respect, the RFA admits that commercial fishing and longlining were devastating our fisheries. I say they still are. It really makes me sick to see that we are not attacking the real problem of commercial overfishing. The TGBR program is a great program to supplement a reduction in commercial overfishing as well as shrimp bycatch. With both we could reach the 2019 population goals by 2010 and enjoy relaxed limits.

I just feel like we have reached a panic stage and have abandoned attacking the real problem. We need to stop the overfishing and then concentrate on the recovery. The captain of CHA CHING said it best, The only solution that I can think that will help recreational snapper fishing is to have no fishing zones for the commercial boats and enforce it. Don't let the commercial boats fish inside of 50 miles. I know in Hawaii commercial boats are banned inside the first 80 miles from any shoreline.

LORD HELP US if we don't get the commercial entities under control.


----------



## CoastalOutfitters (Aug 20, 2004)

Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Pearland
Posts: 410
















Coastaloutfitters, I am surprised that you don't know already! There is a group pushing for the state water reefs. It is called the RECREATIONAL FISHING ALLIANCE. Finally we have a collective voice that - not only is fighting the beauracracy that wants to continue to lower and restrict our rights to fish. Why re-invent the wheel with another "collective group"?

1-888-JOINRFA

Oh, and opinions are like belly buttons....EVERYBODY HAS ONE!

I belong to a few other org. that i would be glad to push for their effort, but since you obviously have it totally under control, will pass.


----------



## Captain Blood (May 27, 2004)

I belong to a few other org. that i would be glad to push for their effort, but since you obviously have it totally under control, will pass.

__________________
Century 2400 twin 150 Yami's Team YOLO
B.O.A.T.........break out another thousand 

maybe if the other .orgs became involved (in a positive way) they could help the organizations that are doing somthing with this incredible boondoggle of an issue. Another old saying....you are either part of the solution or part of the problem...which is it?


----------



## BICWANN (Nov 17, 2005)

Chuck said:


> I totally agree....with that kind of thinking going on by a couple of posters, we would still be debating how big to make the hole in the middle of the wheel while carrying loads on our back!
> 
> Thanks Tom and Jim for carrying the ball on this. It looks like you have ALL but two supporters on this.


Chuck,

Never said we were not supportive....Just want to make sure everthing is thought through.


----------



## BradP (May 24, 2004)

It's time for some folks to create a Texas Org to step out of the rfa and cca realm and pursue this on their own. CCA and RFA are too involved with other issues, we need a one issue minded organization to gather and collect funds to present to TPWD to start the process. A local group albeit similar to SCA that will focus on nothing more than rebuilding the snapper habitat in the 9miles of TX coast. Thats my thoughts anyways. The NMFS and Gulf Council and the TAC problems are big player issues, I would rather see this TX organization look around those problems with the snapper and work only with TPWD and local Cities to gather the materials and funds to make TPWD realize we are not going to back down from increasing the # of arty reefs in our waters.


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*Reefs*

Howdy,
BradP - I'm afraid I don't understand your assertion that the RFA is "too busy with other issues" to competently address the artificial reefing project. Please elaborate.

From my perspective, it's because of the RFA that the artificial reefing corridor is even on the radar. We have met with TPWD twice thus far specifically talking about the Texas Great Barrier Reef, how it will be accomplished, and how it will be funded. The GLO sent a representative to the last meeting, as Commissioner Patterson understands the importance of this project to the coastal communities.

We were at the meeting in Victoria, where the TPWD representative and others (you know who you are) did not even want the issue of artificial reefs discussed. They wanted to control the content of the discussion in addition to dictating who would attend this open meeting. All they wanted to address was; not whether we were going to get $screwed, but just how did we want to get $crewed relative to TAC reduction. And you want to put this in the hands of TPWD? With all due respect, TPWD has lacked a vision regarding artificial refs - RFA-Texas is providing that vision for the future, like it or not.

Jim Smarr attended the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council meeting for 2 days in San Antonio this month. Several key players approached Jim and asked about our efforts with the Texas Great Barrier Reef project.

We drove over to Mobile Alabama to address the Gulf Council and went on the record that the creation of artificial reefs were a vital part of the equation when looking at snapper management (and it's not even in their equation). I didn't see any other "like-minded individuals" there from Texas, and I was looking.

We have meetings with members of the Texas Legislature scheduled in April to specifically discuss the Texas Great Barrier Reef.

BradP, it's insulting to me that you are able to so easily blow-off all of our efforts to promote the Texas Great Barrier Reef Project. I don't know what else could possibly have been accomplished by ANYBODY. We are committed to this endeavour, and look at it as a lifetime project...it's not something that will ever be "complete".

Jim Smarr, Chairman of RFA-TX is on record as saying; "We feel this reef project will be the most important project of this century along the Texas coast". That's a pretty strong statement of commitment IMHO.

BradP, again, I'm interested to hear your explanation on how RFA is too busy to address this issue.

All the best,
Tom Hilton

P.S. Here's a press release from the RFA; 
*RFA TEXAS LAUNCHES "GREAT BARRIER REEF PROJECT"*

RFA-TX has launched "The Texas Great Barrier Reef Project" with the assistance of Richard Stone. Mr. Stone headed up the National Marine Fisheries Service artificial reef program Mr. Stone serves as a consultant to RFA and National Marine Manufacturers Association (NMMA). This project will span the entire Texas coast from Orange to Port Isabel. These reefs will be placed approximately eight and a half miles offshore in Texas waters. The reefs will be in reach of most Texas anglers.

RFA-TX is working with Texas Parks and Wildlife, Texas General Land Office and Commissioner Jerry Patterson on the implementation of the project. RFA-TX has also invited members of the Governor's staff to participate in the task force in order to assist with expediting the permitting process.

The artificial reefs will provide long-term benefits for Texas coastal communities. "Many species will colonize the reefs leading to greater recreational fishing opportunities. We feel this reef project will be the most important project of this century along the Texas coast," said Jim Smarr, Chairman of RFA-TX


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

I think it is a great Idea. Let's start today. Any help needed I would be more than glad to do what I can.

Thanks for the effort, I am looking forward to the results.


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Brad I think they have a task force specifically working on the reef prgram. This is a very involved process that will probably end up requiring enviromental impact studies, public hearings, public and corporate reviews, economic impact studies and permitting process that our government will require to approve and fund the project. I believe that they are doing right by focusing their attention on one item instead of spreading all of their resources thin trying to do it all. It is the same as the SCA buying licenses back, they are concentrating on what they feel is best to support the overall fishery. IF the CCA would do the same on by catch then we can reach our goal. The management of the fisheries in the GOM is way too big for one group but a group effort will put the fishery at the top of the pyramid in the long run.


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

*By Catch Reduction*

Folks the bycatch reduction goal has been surpassed via fuel prices, imports and yes an act of God as in two Hurricanes. Steps are being implemented to cap the numbers of shrimpers getting back into the system. The nastsy little secret is now out This problem has been solved.

The Real Problem is Illegal Commercial Fishing and the Black Market Sales
killing the breeding Sows. Remember they spew millions of eggs each time they spawn.

Providing habitat for these billions of fry and halting the Illegal Fishing in all sectors will save the fishery not wasting time chasing the last shrimper over the horizon.


----------



## Wahoo Man (May 21, 2004)

Tom
I think the job that you and 
Jim are doing is great and will be a benefit for all Texans in the long run. I got the privilege to meet Jim at the snapper meeting in Port A, and he seems to be a man with a wealth of knowledge and willing to fight for what he believes in. I feel we should all get behind this movement and support it, because more habitat is always better then not enough, no matter how you look at it. There was a good article in the Angler magizine this month about the Texas reef program, so its also getting national exposure. Again Thanks for all the hard work and effort that you and Jim are doing.

WE ALL NEED TO STEP UP TO THE PLATE WHEN THE TIME COMES AND THEY NEED OUR HELP, COUNT ME IN.

Andy 
Captains Playmate


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

Thanks Wahoo Man I enjoyed the chat between the burger and fries. LOL. I'll bet you laughed all the way home after that encounter with my Dinner guest. Thanks for the kind words and most of all spending the time you and your brother did to attend the scoping meeting. It was a long ride home for us both that night.


Jim


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Coastal,

I say we have a big banquet , sell reefs and you get to put your name on one and get a lat/lon certificate, then have all the shop/ag classes in the highschools build them as projects, then we can get Exxon and Dow to pay for the installs...............

This is probably one of the better ideas I have heard. Let's take it further and have Penn, Shimano, Mustad and any others contribute and have blocks named after them. After all they stand to benefit tremendously from this.


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

*Fundrasing*

Bugaboo-

We have two fundraisers to support the reefing project on the drawing board.

We will be doing the Fundraiser with the ability to purshase reefs as a part of the overall program. I think this will be an easy way for everyone to get on Board with the project. These funds would be specificly set aside for reefing in a separate account. We will have a a silent auction and live auction to raise funding to promote the program which will be separate.Tom Hilton, Anne Appling and Dr. Buddy Wheeler will be heading up the fundraising committee. These folks will need help so please jump in. Anne Appling has been associated with the Cattle Barrons Ball fundraising efforts. Anne is a huge asset as far as fundraising goes. Dr. Wheeler is from Sugarland and is well known for his past fundrasing when fishing is involved.
We want to kick the events off ASAP. These events take a little time to put together but will really get "The Texas Great Barrier Reef Project on the map".

Please Contact us to join in and be on the ground floor of this" Project of the Century".

We will post up a formal list of contacts soon. Any suggestions on dates,locations ect. would be appreciated. Until then contact Tom Hilton or

Jim Smarr.


----------



## 8seconds (Sep 20, 2005)

*What about divers?*

I am surprised no one has mentioned getting support from dive shops and organizations. The presence of numerous reef would provide a smorgasboard of locations for recreationl divers within a short boat ride from shore.

Granted, some of these _would_ be spear fishermen. But, unless I am mistaken, I do believe spearfishermen are prohibited from harvesting Game fish in Texas waters.

0


----------



## CoastalOutfitters (Aug 20, 2004)

kinda like the get to name your own star................ LOL


----------



## ding-a-ling (Jul 29, 2005)

8 seconds, 
You can spear snapper in state waters - they are not listed as game fish by TPWD , http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/publications/annual/fish/definitions/. And yes, I am sure you would get support from divers/dive agencies along the coast - more structure would be welcome, especially closer inshore.


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

We have been contacted by a dive group from the Corpus area supporting the TGBR. 

Jim


----------



## BICWANN (Nov 17, 2005)

*Secret Spots*

Suggestion. Maybe a new thread could be started and titled "Secret Spots" and all those interested can post the coordinates for snapper holes that are not so well known. If we have a large group participating up and down the Texas Coast, especially from those individuals that make their own reefs, we should be able to tell what the extent and location of the current reefs in the Gulf are. Tom and Jim, I think this would give you guys a good starting point.....you could even adopt these areas as the building blocks of the TGBR. You could even sell the naming rights for these reefs to be named after those individuals that disclose their locations. Who knows, there may already be 4,000 reefs in state waters along the Texas Coast that just are not known. At a later date, you can use this same process for reefs outside of state waters.



This method should reduce the need for initial funding as reefs have already been built, and provide a unique opportunity to study the economic and biological impacts of initiating a reef program along the Texas Coast. In addition, this may provide the immediate boost to local coastal economies that is needed.



So c'mon all you 2coolers, start posting your spots!


----------



## pescador1 (Aug 12, 2005)

*reef idea*

Someone I know filled used tires with cement on the bottom. They caught numerous snapper over these self created reefs. They threw out a tractor tire or two and marked the spot on the gps when they came back next year they had snapper. What a great use for all the land fill tires. They decompose very slowly and are not very toxic to the environent. Think hoh many reefs couls be made with old tires.


----------



## Lured Away (May 25, 2005)

Bicwann,

ARE you for real??? Man I know I did not just read that.


----------



## BICWANN (Nov 17, 2005)

Lure Away,

Is that a problem?


----------



## Lured Away (May 25, 2005)

??


----------



## Calmday (Jul 7, 2005)

BICWANN said:


> Suggestion. Maybe a new thread could be started and titled "Secret Spots" and all those interested can post the coordinates for snapper holes that are not so well known. If we have a large group participating up and down the TexasCoast, especially from those individuals that make their own reefs, we should be able to tell what the extent and location of the current reefs in the Gulf are. Tom and Jim, I think this would give you guys a good starting point.....you could even adopt these areas as the building blocks of the TGBR. You could even sell the naming rights for these reefs to be named after those individuals that disclose their locations. Who knows, there may already be 4,000 reefs in state waters along the TexasCoast that just are not known. At a later date, you can use this same process for reefs outside of state waters.
> 
> This method should reduce the need for initial funding as reefs have already been built, and provide a unique opportunity to study the economic and biological impacts of initiating a reef program along the TexasCoast. In addition, this may provide the immediate boost to local coastal economies that is needed.
> 
> So c'mon all you 2coolers, start posting your spots!


OK You go first.


----------



## Specialops (Oct 29, 2005)

"The Kings New Clothes"
I think we should do that for secret kinfish spots too - BOBBY - you can PM them to me and I will check them out to see if they are worth while for posting.


----------



## BICWANN (Nov 17, 2005)

Calmday said:


> OK You go first.


All my spots are in Mr.Hilton's book!

I think it would be a good start to the TGBR project.

What do you guys think? Jim, Tom, Anyone


----------



## Angler 1 (Apr 27, 2005)

Bicwann, 

Ask RIK if he is willing to give up some secret spots.


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*"Secret Spots"*



BICWANN said:


> Suggestion. Maybe a new thread could be started and titled "Secret Spots" and all those interested can post the coordinates for snapper holes that are not so well known. If we have a large group participating up and down the TexasCoast, especially from those individuals that make their own reefs, we should be able to tell what the extent and location of the current reefs in the Gulf are. Tom and Jim, I think this would give you guys a good starting point.....you could even adopt these areas as the building blocks of the TGBR. You could even sell the naming rights for these reefs to be named after those individuals that disclose their locations. Who knows, there may already be 4,000 reefs in state waters along the TexasCoast that just are not known. At a later date, you can use this same process for reefs outside of state waters.
> 
> This method should reduce the need for initial funding as reefs have already been built, and provide a unique opportunity to study the economic and biological impacts of initiating a reef program along the TexasCoast. In addition, this may provide the immediate boost to local coastal economies that is needed.
> 
> So c'mon all you 2coolers, start posting your spots!


Well, it's obvious that when someone posts up with such "enlightening observations" with only 8 posts AND AN ALIAS has an ax to grind. Besides, what you are suggesting is prepostorous. It goes against the grain of most fishermen.

You ask; What do I think? I think you're an idiot - not even a question.

Oh well.

I appreciate all the support that we have received thus far, and I'm here to tell you that we have just begun.

*Idiots be damned. *

The wheels are in motion...the genie is out of the bottle...I don't give a **** what what you say naysayer, I am going to make this happen.

All the best,
Tom Hilton


----------



## Lured Away (May 25, 2005)

Tom you just can't fix stupid!!!


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*Stupid*



Lured Away said:


> Tom you just can't fix stupid!!!


Ha! 
Well, there's an old saying; "If you're going to be stupid, you've got to be tough"!

All the best,
Tom


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

What did yall put in that last batch of "Heifer Dust" ???? LOL


----------



## BICWANN (Nov 17, 2005)

Tom Hilton said:


> Well, it's obvious that when someone posts up with such "enlightening observations" with only 8 posts AND AN ALIAS has an ax to grind. Besides, what you are suggesting is prepostorous. It goes against the grain of most fishermen.
> 
> You ask; What do I think? I think you're an idiot - not even a question.
> 
> ...


Tom,

As I stated before, I am not in opposition to the program. I was just trying to help you guys out.

I ask you,why does it go against the grain of most fishermen?

Bicwann


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

*Which is it TGBR or Fishing spots*

*barrier reef* _n._ A long, narrow ridge of coral or rock parallel to and relatively near a coastline, separated from the coastline by a lagoon too deep for coral growth

Tom,

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't this what you plan to build? If so wouldn't you need as much info on the structure already there so you could interconnect them. I know you will get it done sooner or later but now I am really curious about the TGBR is all about.


----------



## catchemdallas (Jun 11, 2004)

ok guys, Is this something i can goto homedepot, make, and then tow offshore to drop?


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

*Bugaboo re read chapters 1 through 6*

We will re test on them for those that missed that assignment. LOL

Tom Hilton has been very up front here about the Texas Great Barrier Reef Project. He has shared a wealth of information with everyone that reads this forum. There are many people that have given countless hours to help get this project well on the way in a very positive manner. I think our intent is very clear and has been from day one. We want to change Texas Coastal Fishing for the Texas Recreational Anglers. We want to strengthen our fisheries and our Coastal Fishing Communities at a time when everyone else is willing to take a back seat to the current management plan and watch us lose our sport with reduced TAC in the Red Snapper Fishery. The Reef will allow many species a place to hide from the shrimp nets not just Red Snapper but many other sought after species.

The Minton/Shipp document says it all we are habitat limited in areas of the Gulf of Mexico. Simply scattering shell on the Gulf floor seems to provide cover for snapper fingerlings. The Snapper pups show up almost immediately. There has been a ton of research done to prove up that habitat is the key to a viable nursery involving numerous species.

We have expert advice from folks that have been working on reef projects for 
thirty years sitting at the table. We feel we are where we need to be.

This is a great forum to bring everyone up to speed on the TGBR. We are pleased with the support of the forum.


----------



## CoastalOutfitters (Aug 20, 2004)

just out of curiosity, why couldn't the worn out rigs that are being pulled and barged off,be layed over along the 9 nm line?

they are already there, their position is already on the maps, it reduces cost of transportation, maybe the oil companies could sell them to TP&W for say $1 each to remove liability issues.

oh, thats too easy, never mind...................


----------



## BradP (May 24, 2004)

Tom, its not an answer of RFA or CCA we need them both to better the snapper fishery... but for building ONLY state water reefs its the answer of I would like to see an organization focus solely on reefs within 9 miles where the group could send all its attention to TPWD and not Gulf council or NMFS. I'm sorry but honestly I have not seen RFA or CCA have results within this arena. RFA's focus seems to be on all aspects of the snapper fishery which is GREAT. But I think to be a complete success in the department of building funds to create state water reefs it will take a whole different group with a different focus to hold meetings, build funds, and speak with TPWD. RFA could aid the process but with an all volunteer offshore group similar to SCA created one would know that all funds and donations would be directed to that one cause and not any other. The cause of building state water reefs is really all I'm concerned with.

Because we do not have the data to support (unfortunately they don't go by common sense data) alot of the proposals we need to either increase the TAC or have the first five fish rule. I agree on both of their proposals but I look at this like I did the trout proposals by TPWD, TPWD had the data to run those models that were asked. Gulf Council and NMFS don't have recent data, I think in order to be successful you would have to get either professors from TAMUG, UMISS, or Alabama or a collaboration of the fisheries biologists in TX, LA, and ALA/MISS to come up with new data to refute their claims. Thats just my thoughts though, I could be wrong but it seems alot of the talk that was made at the meetings wasn't truely heard or understood because we didn't have any recent data signed off on biologists that they would agree with.


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*reefs*

Howdy,
Bicwann - it is not in a fisherman's nature to give up snapper spots, especially those that are not well-known. There's not near enough spots inside the 7.5 to 8.5 mile corridor in my book, Rik's or Christoph's to make much of a difference. The sheer volume of reefs afforded by the Texas Great Barrier Reef will dwarf anything currently out there - trying to design it based on what little structure is there is not feasible. The idea is to develop a uniform corridot just inside the 9 mile line so that there is no miscommunication on it's whereabouts. This is important so that shrimpers know where to avoid losing their nets. We will also need to be careful to avoid pipelines and such.

There are laws against dumping materials offshore. Nobody is going to give up the coordinates of reefs that they have illegally deployed for possible legal repercussions in addition to reason #1 above.

There are material and weight specifications that must be adhere to, so no, you can't go to Home Depot to construct one and go deploy it. There is also a permitting process that will be required. The weight requirement is going to demand a very large boat to safely deploy it.

We have developed on large scale strategy for the overall project, and are now working out the details on how to accomplish it.

Any and all support would be appreciated - we are getting a great response via PM and emails. Our focus for the near-term is to do a fund-raiser where we will raffle off a new boat or truck, or both!

To quote BradP; "I'm sorry but honestly I have not seen RFA or CCA have results within this arena. RFA's focus seems to be on all aspects of the snapper fishery which is GREAT. But I think to be a complete success in the department of building funds to create state water reefs it will take a whole different group with a different focus to hold meetings, build funds, and speak with TPWD."

Brad, I've already illustrated that RFA is dedicated to this cause - you are in denial. I talked with Mark Schultz the other day, and he expressed interest in changing SCA's direction to aid in the reef project. I encouraged him as any help would be appreciated, but frankly, the SCA is not equipped or prepared to accomplish what the RFA can. Anything the SCA can do to help our efforts (and not splinter the cause) would be appreciated.

Your claim that there have been no results speaks volumes about your understanding of what is going to be required to get this project accomplished.

All the best,
Tom Hilton


----------



## CoastalOutfitters (Aug 20, 2004)

Tom,

What has been the response of the various agencies so far? receptive , neutral ?

When do you honestly forsee that the first reef could be deployed ?

thanks, Bob


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*reefs*

Coastal Outfitters,
I agree - oil rigs should utilized more than they are now. We would like a review of them by NMFS or the Gulf Council to be considered EFH's (Essential Fish Habitat). Magnuson/Stevens prhibits removal or destruction of EFH's. There is a big concern over liability here.

The response from various agencies have been overwhelmingly positive - we are showing them that this is a very good investment for the long-term health of the coastal communities.

We are in the process of building full-scale prototypes as we speak. These will be on display at the upcoming fundraiser. I would venture to say a reasonable estimate of initial deployment to be early 2007.

All the best,
Tom


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

*Brad P*

RFA has asked for and gotten longline studies to prove we have a much better stock of very large sow snapper on the mud flats. IE the reason for the Spike in the stock assesment of biomass. We fought this for 6 years without help. The Minning and Minerals folk ran a study around the oil platforms. We understand there are more two year old Red Snapper around these platforms than we have credited for the entire Gulf of Mexico. These structures are less tha .0005 % of the total area of the Gulf of Mexico. Brad we have pushed for updates to the assesments like the current reduction in effort in all sectors. We have brought into play the unbelievable Black Market in the Red Snapper Commercial Fishery.
We called a meeting in Victoria Texas to stress these points with the Chairman of the Gulf of Mexico Fisheries Council Robin Reichers who is also a wheel with TPWD Coastal Fisheries all the above items were discussed. Brad we have been engauged for 8 years in the Red Snapper Fishery. We did a mortality study in conjunction with UT funded by Judy Jameison via a foundation she chairs. We know all the folks involved in the Red Snapper regulatory sector on a first name basis. Understanding the system is key to solving the problem with data. We have done our share of running studies and bringing studies previuosly done to the public and regulators attention. I feel we have been very instrumental in getting data pushed forward.

Brad we have asked for funding on a scale never before seen in Texas to provide a jump start for the TGBR project. We even asked in a recent meeting to add 500,000 dollars to cover deployment of current stockpiled reef material
sitting waiting to be delpoyed at TPWD. We are working on 20,000,000 million dollars for the TGBR project. We have been received very well at the Agency level on the TGBRP. We have several very large Foundations willing to jump on board in the very near future. We are not going to release all the contacts until they have sent us a letter of commitment. This project is the LARGEST CONSERVATION HABITAT PROJECT ever launched in Texas or the WORLD for that matter....... Yes we are busy at RFA but guess what we can "MULTITASK" with all due respect. Board meetings are held via conference calls to expedite hot issues. Getting where we are today has taken years of study and hard work by a few very caring individuals who have volunteered countless hours and personal dollars to review all aspects of our Recreational Sport. We are committed as we are volunteers and truly care at Texas RFA.
If we were being paid maybe we would not be intrested in solving problems as quickly since the paycheck would be in the mail no matter what the outcome.
My Office is an 40 gig hard drive on a notebook computer and a cel phone
that stays on 24/7 just in case someone some where comes up with a brainstorm to help Recreational Fishing or the support Industries so vital to our sport.I have exceeded my 4500 minutes on my plan but so what I feel it important to let people have the ability to voice their opinion to me as Chairman of RFA Texas.

Brad just what is it you think we are not doing as Tom Hilton asked that we need to be doing?


----------



## CoastalOutfitters (Aug 20, 2004)

Tom thanks,

If, in theory the oil co's were to sell the rigs to TP&W as stated above for a minimal fee, then couldn't they be re-used ? This could make up a part of the new reef system and save temendous amount of expense to the oil co.s 

trouble is, i don't know who you would even ask


----------



## CoastalOutfitters (Aug 20, 2004)

If we get to use the oil rigs as well, i name them the

*Impenetrable shrimper reef of death*


----------



## Lured Away (May 25, 2005)

Now thats funny, Coastal


----------



## BradP (May 24, 2004)

Tom, no offense but SCA has done more actual work for the status of Texas fishery than RFA has ever done so I would hope your attitude would not take a "splinter the cause" turn. Sure they don't "talk" as much as RFA does but it's all about the actual results and not talk. I believe in what you could do Tom, if you are truely heading this up without involvement from the Texas RFA than that is another story.

I think to be successful in the building of these reefs the ONLY party you need to be concerned with is TPWD and local enviornmental orgs. Sorry but having to go thru NMFS and Gulf Council like RFA wants to is not the answer. 

If you want to take offense to my messages go for it, they are not meant to harm only to state that in the nature of "actual" results RFA Texas has not proven themselves. So if you could distance yourself from them and their "words", I'm sure your efforts with TGBRP will work and I will be glad to help out when it comes to fundraising and paying dues.


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

*Brad P. You are unaware I guess of what we have been up to*

Brad,

Cedar Bayou and Vinson's Slough will be open in 2007. This saved 70,000 acres of wetlands in the Coastal Bend from being lost. You know the story behind this I am quite sure. Lynn Edwards and SCBI are working on this project. We squezzed the seven agencies and some very prominent Texans to agree to clean up their mess down there. It took a Federal Lawsuit and some "Guts" to pull off that one. We backed off once the promise was made by a State Official the funding would be taken care of and an extensive study would be done to insure the success of the project. We were promised the Agency would oversee the completion and they are currently doing so. We stopped the regulations that would have removed motor traffic in the Coastal Bend and were the only folks that took the powers to be on involving both of these task. Ask the folks involved how they feel about our help. Guess what Brad Brown Cedar Cut is the next on the list for opening along with several other passes up and down the coast. This will save a vast wetlands/nursery area in your backyard.(MultiTasking Again) Grants are being written as we speak to solve these problems. We will be instrumental at RFA in seeing these projects pushed through. I fail to understand how you with a straight face can say RFA Texas has had no impact on the Recreational Fishing Community.

We have not asked Gulf Council or NMFS for any help as we are dealing with Texas 
State Waters on the TGBR project. We have asked for Federal Funding to the tune of 
20,500,000 dollars for reefing projects. I guess we will have to ask where you got the idea the Gulf of Mexico Fisheries Council or NMFS were involved in this Reefing project. The man that started the "National Artificial Reefing Projects" for NMFS who is now retired and a Consultant was asked to help with dealing with Federal Agencies like Coast Guard and US Corps to expedite the permitting process. His name is Richard Stone PhD and it cost dollars to have his help. I am amazed once again how the few seem to always seem to throw rocks when a project as large as this one is being birthed.

Brad we welcome others to help in whatever way they feel they can. There is always room for more funding to purchase reefing structure and deploy it. There are currently some small approved sites down south. We are trying to help in your backyard. Doing this involves changing some restrictions at Federal Level. These regulations once changed will allow for everyone to participate in these areas if they have funds to buy and deploy the structure. Right now under current regulations there is no way to put 
currently available reefing structure in place. Tom has worked around some of the restrictions with inovative designs. We have the folks at the table to correct these issues. There is a great deal of information we are not at liberty to discuss yet.

Brad lots of folks think very favorably about what we have achieved. I am bewildered by your comments. I guess we can't be all things to all people.

SCA has done a terriffic job with their stated mission statement and are to be congratulated. My hat is off to all of the efforts and hard work involved.
FYI I did spend two days cutting up and hauling off one of the Shrimp Boats in Aransas Pass as a volunteer one weekend. I found muscles I never knew I had via aches and pain after that one. I meet a quite a few great 2cooler's during that 'workout".

Maybe we can agree to disagree on the +'s and -'s of RFA Texas. Maybe when you see Cedar Bayou/Vinson's Slough, Brown Cedar Cut or the GTBR project producing rewards in the near future for Recreational Anglers your mindset might just change. Not to mention being able to access the Flats around the Texas Coastal Bend using your outboard motor.

Jim Smarr
361-463-1558
[email protected]


----------



## Calmday (Jul 7, 2005)

Jim you're a better man than me.


----------



## CaptRickD (Aug 12, 2005)

*Bycatch*

If everyone dropped off one roll of razor wire on their way out...


----------



## longboarder76 (Dec 16, 2004)

Question????
The reef project is to be in state waters, where or how far off of shore are yall thinking. The reason I ask this is because I am assuming yall would put these reefs in sand/mud flats correct? I see post that state shrimpers "agree" or "welcome" the idea. Have yall done any real communications with shrimpers about this project? I just see them becoming a problem b/c this would cause them to loose drastic amounts of money. When Texas waters open in July for shrimping season, that is when shrimpers make large amounts of money b/c the white shrimp are in the sand/mud flats. Just like when BRD's were implemented, the shrimpers association filed a lawsuit.
I am all for this project and would love to see it happen, but I was just really wondering if yall thought the shrimpers would just roll over and agree with the project also.


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Tom and Jim
Just out of curiousity, what do the shipping and barge companies have to say about these. I just can't help to wonder if these reefs may alter their routes or create a hazard to commercial traffic?

Also I can see other benefits to the reef, can you imagine the number of sheephead and redfish that will be on it?


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*reefs*



BradP said:


> Tom, no offense but SCA has done more actual work for the status of Texas fishery than RFA has ever done so I would hope your attitude would not take a "splinter the cause" turn. Sure they don't "talk" as much as RFA does but it's all about the actual results and not talk. I believe in what you could do Tom, if you are truely heading this up without involvement from the Texas RFA than that is another story.
> 
> I think to be successful in the building of these reefs the ONLY party you need to be concerned with is TPWD and local enviornmental orgs. Sorry but having to go thru NMFS and Gulf Council like RFA wants to is not the answer.
> 
> If you want to take offense to my messages go for it, they are not meant to harm only to state that in the nature of "actual" results RFA Texas has not proven themselves. So if you could distance yourself from them and their "words", I'm sure your efforts with TGBRP will work and I will be glad to help out when it comes to fundraising and paying dues.


Brad, you are obviously not informed of the facts, and are in complete denial. Last time I checked, I had a "Founding Father SCA" sticker on my bumper - I AM a Founding Father of the SCA and proud of it. It is a good organization and has accomplished alot, but I know what I'm talking about when saying the RFA is infinitely more capable of tackling this job. There is a BIG difference between raising funds to complement an existing TPWD program, and developing the concept of this reefing corridor (which we at RFA have done), going thru the processes required, and understanding the fine details of the bureaucratic system and what is going to be required to get the job done. Did I mention the lobbyists and attorneys needed at the state and national levels?

RFA has proven itself - do your homework and you will be educated. Jim covered alot of their accomplishments - i don't need to belabor that..

The ONLY party to be concerned with is NOT TPWD nor local environmental orgs. Good luck with that if that's what you are wanting to do. You obviously need to do your homework here as well.

We are not going thru NMFS or Gulf Council either. Again, you obviously don't understand the intricacies of the processes involved. We placed the subject of the need of artificial reefs on the record there - that will be important down the road, but I won't "talk" about that.

I do not plan to distance myself from the RFA. We do talk the "talk", but I'm here to tell you Brad, that we walk the "walk". Your insinuation that the RFA is all "talk" and has accomplished nothing relative to Texas fisheries is an out and out lie. I don't need to defend RFA, their record speaks for itself. They are certainly not the same as Coastal Con Artists.

You also claim previously that RFA has accomplished nothing regarding this reefing project YET - again, that statement speaks VOLUMES about your total incomprehension of what is needed to accomplish this task. I outlined the "actions" that we have done this year regarding the TGBR, yet you remain in denial that those were actually "actions". We are on the bus and 8 states away while you are at the bus station just buying a ticket.

I'm surprised and disturbed at your attitude Brad - What exactly is your beef with the RFA? Really - let us know, as I'm interested to know where you are coming from.

All the best,
Tom Hilton

Longboarder - we have the shrimping interests on our side. They understand the importance of this project to all involved and we don't anticipate any lawsuits forthcoming over this. The Texas Great Barrier Reef extends along the entire Texas coast just inside the 9 mile line and is actually separated into 5 segments by shipping lanes and anchorages areas where we cannot deploy reefing material.


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Jim,

You said you have asked for funding, what act or proposition will that fall under. I am sure there are many like me that would like to follow it to stay infromed.


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Tom Hilton said:


> The Texas Great Barrier Reef extends along the entire Texas coast just inside the 9 mile line and is actually separated into 5 segments by shipping lanes and anchorages areas where we cannot deploy reefing material.


Tom what will this do to erosion and sanding on the beaches? I am sure the currents will change dramatically with this much reef being produced.


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

Bugaboo

I WOULD LIKE TO FOLLOW.SEE AND KNOW .

We have released way more information than most folks would have. Tom is the Committee Chairman on the Texas Great Barrier Reef Project for RFA Texas. I will let him field questions. We do need to keep a few things confidential until the time is right to make them public. I don't do what if questions as we could spend years playing that game. I will leave those to our Phd who has delt with Reefing Programs for 30 plus years when we cross that bridge.

Jim Smarr



Jim


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Jim,

I think it is very important for us to know how it is going to be funded. If this is going in as a rider then we need to know so we can voice our opinion to our congress person and representative. With the war and the fiasco with FEMA I fear that money won't be that easy to come by.


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

It is unencumbered funding. No need to worry.


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

I read ya, so which fund is it taping into? LOL


----------



## Mike Jennings (Oct 11, 2005)

Bugaboo, I bet that RFA would accept your commitment to fund a couple, but from your comments on a couple of threads here, I have a hard time believing that you are genuine, but you do a good job of ignoring repeated answers to your questions ,and stirring the pot..as you have already been told ' you can look to the success of the Alabama reef project for many of the answers you are seeking and as to funding stand back and wait to see like the rest of us ..Mike


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Reel Nut there are many unanswered questions here. As for the success of the Alabama project the only thing successful is an increased recreational catch. I have asked before now I will ask more direct and since you seem have seen the answer here maybe you can tell me. Where is the data that shows each fish caught by location, size and when it was caught. Until someone can produce that data then the success of the Alabama program is suspect plain and simple. The only thing I have been able to find is interviews with state officials telling everyone how successful they are but no where can I find the data to prove it.

As for the funding, if someone,an organization or business cannot come out and be honest in their business dealings then that puts the integrity of that group in question. This is just my opinion of politics and the business world today and in no way reflects what may be going on here. Only time will tell.


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*reefs*

Howdy,
Bugaboo, I'm with Reel Nut here. We have alot of plates spinning and having to answer all of your questions is getting to be a time-consuming task. It's obvious you are not going to be convinced when we do respond, so I don't any point in responding any further as I too have my doubts about your intentions.

It's not a matter of being dishonest when talking about funding - until the deal is done, then everything will be on the table...until then, it will not. Calling into question our integrity is out of line.

We also have BradP trying to splinter the cause (Brad, if another group was trying to raise funds for shrimp buyout when the SCA was forming, you would say the same thing). We need to be united here, not devisive.

We are focusing on the task at hand and will keep you informed when they become available.

All the best,
Tom Hilton


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

_Tom, There is no disrespect here to the RCA or their integrity. I clearly stated that this does not necessarily reflect what is going on here. What I do have a problem with is getting answers, you and the RFA are asking for support in the form of my money but will not give us the whole story or data to support it so it kind of leaves me in the dark. Look at it from my point of view, would you give money to a cause that is destined to fail? I am not saying that the TGBR will fail all I am saying is that I want to make sure that this is a well thought out process that will benefit all aspects of the economy, enviroment and not jeaopordize anything I have a vested interest in. Yes I have my opinion of the project and overall it is favorable provided it is being done for the right reason preserving fisheries for years to come._


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*reefs*

Howdy,
Bugaboo - I will respond once more even though I said I wouldn't....we have not asked anyone to give any money yet, although several members of this board have offered to buy multiple reefs. We are in the formulation stage - when the time is appropriate, then we will start raising funds...right now we are paying for everything out of our own pocket.

Anyone contributing funds will be fully informed what will happen with them at that time. Until then, we are focused on the task at hand.

Please be patient. Good things come with time.

All the best,
Tom Hilton


----------



## BICWANN (Nov 17, 2005)

REEL NUT said:


> Bugaboo, I bet that RFA would accept your commitment to fund a couple, but from your comments on a couple of threads here, I have a hard time believing that you are genuine, but you do a good job of ignoring repeated answers to your questions ,and stirring the pot..as you have already been told ' you can look to the success of the Alabama reef project for many of the answers you are seeking and as to funding stand back and wait to see like the rest of us ..Mike


ReelNut,

The real question is how will the reef program will affect the Gulf Snapper population? You may increase your harvest ratio but it may cause a depletion in the overall population. Not sure...just a question that may be raised during coordination with the agencies.


----------



## Lured Away (May 25, 2005)

I can tell you guys that Tom and Jim along with many others have put thousands of hours and dollars into this reef. I thank Tom and jim big time for all the work they have and will do, For this state!!!!.

Bobby


----------



## BradP (May 24, 2004)

Tom I had dropped the issue after my last post but if insist, don't speculate what I would or wouldn't say. You welcomed SCA and their help but claimed and I qoute Anything the SCA can do to help our efforts (and not splinter the cause) would be appreciated. 

It's that type of attitude that hurts an organization and already has. Tom, I'm glad you are involved and I will be there to when the donation events are held, but I would hope that TGBRP steers clear of being associated with a larger natl organization.


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*reefs*

Howdy,
BradP - I asked you before and will ask you again;

What exactly is your beef with the RFA? Really - let us know, as I'm interested to know where you are coming from.

It's one thing to sit there and throw rocks - it's another thing to explain (or not explain) why you are doing so.

I have explained why I feel that the RFA can help - that much is clear. You have not explained why it would be detrimental for the RFA to be involved - you just throw rocks which doesn't help any organization.

All the best,
Tom Hilton


----------



## OffShore Man (Jan 10, 2005)

jim smarr said:


> Thanks for the kind words and most of all spending the time you and your brother did to attend the scoping meeting. It was a long ride home for us both that night.
> 
> Jim


Andy what the he#* was i born in florida? it is becoming very confusing. Bait shop people, people at gas stations, Fishing Guides and now the RFA. Maybe I was kidnaped by evil Cowboys and brought to west texas and spent the next 18 years as their Slave. That would explain my destain for the desert and love of Bluewater. But in all sincerety Jim it was nice to meet you and Andy is the closest thing to a brother I know. **** good fishing teacher too. You and Tom keep up the good work. Oh and andy if we are brothers I want my time on the island back!! thats got to beat farming cotton and chasing cows.LMAO


----------



## BICWANN (Nov 17, 2005)

I had to come up with some scheme to get your attention and to prove a point. For those of you that took the bait *hook, line, and sinker,* it seems that you share the same views as me and Bugaboo and many others based on the Private messages we have been getting on this issue. However, it appears that you share the view on a more localized level..."the exact spot". We are looking at the big picture "the Gulf Snapper Population". 



I could say that based on the lack of response to my outlandish suggestion, it is clear that Tom is right.....fishermen do not want to give up their spots. I know I wouldn't. Any self respecting offshore fisherman that would give a secret location would find that it was pounded and nothing is left. So close to shore....it is possible that this area could be hit on a daily or weekly basis never to yield what it did before it was so well known. 



This is what I am trying to get across.....With the creation of the reefs, we can catch an increased percentage of fish due to the reefs attracting more fish (just like in Alabama) - true!....but we could be depleting a resource to un-sustainable levels if we do not manage it appropriately. 



Just imagine that if everyone participated in publishing their secret spots. An immediate use of these areas by recreational fishermen (especially those fishermen near metropolitan cities (such as Houston)) would commence. Combine that with an aggressive commercial presence and access to these areas relatively close to shore, and presto!..... I suspect you would have a sharp decline in the snapper population along the Texas Coast. 



Tom and Jim, 



We are not against the project.....In fact the idea is a good idea, but we are simply looking at the big picture. It is much bigger than just building the reefs.....it involves a plan....a plan that incorporates management of the resource (both commercial and recreational) and enforcement to ensure that what you propose will work for not just my generation but for your kids and mine. I would suggest incorporating a management plan along with the reef program.



We are just trying to help.....I would not be surprised if these issues that we brought-up, will be brought-up in some way shape or form from various resource agencies during your permit review. Just something to think about! 



Tom,



In reference to your last post stating that Bugaboo is "out of line". I would say that about your name calling incident earlier this weekend. So to put you and I on level ground, I say this "Those in Glass houses should not throw stones". No offense taken on my part, I hope none on yours...just equal ground.

Now that we are even and I have said my piece, I will refrain from commenting on the issue any further.


----------



## CAPSIZED (Aug 10, 2004)

That is a stupid philosophy. Snapper and many other species of fish are only here because of the structure so more structure = more fish, period.


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Capsized, If you want to just catch more fish go to a catfish pond where they can restock it everyday for you.


----------



## CoastalOutfitters (Aug 20, 2004)

I ask this simply because i haven't seen them around, is the SCA still around and what is their website?


----------



## CAPSIZED (Aug 10, 2004)

Bugaboo said:


> Capsized, If you want to just catch more fish go to a catfish pond where they can restock it everyday for you.


Where did that come from?


----------



## jd10g (Jun 6, 2004)

if y'all are really worried about this species then why don't y'all move to end snapper fishing for 15-25 years and let them regenerate? just fish for and consume other species. it's not like there are only snapper out there


----------



## S-3 ranch (May 26, 2004)

we need both inshore and off shore reefs as the fish move around . or just halt shrimping altogether , most shrimper haul as close to any structer as they can put out the reefs but at random so nets get shreaded and the cost of shrimping goes up it would halt lots of mom and tien boats down my 2 ct


----------



## Kenner21 (Aug 25, 2005)

jd10g said:


> if y'all are really worried about this species then why don't y'all move to end snapper fishing for 15-25 years and let them regenerate? just fish for and consume other species. it's not like there are only snapper out there


 Umm just because you're not fishing for snapper doesn't mean you won't catch snapper and in the process kill snapper. Might as well consume them, not to mention the rec fishermen aren't the problem ..it's the commercial and shrimpers ...now if they want to volunteer to take 15 years off I for one would be glad to see it.


----------



## jd10g (Jun 6, 2004)

Kenner21 said:


> Umm just because you're not fishing for snapper doesn't mean you won't catch snapper and in the process kill snapper. Might as well consume them, not to mention the rec fishermen aren't the problem ..it's the commercial and shrimpers ...now if they want to volunteer to take 15 years off I for one would be glad to see it.


not dealing with you. that was a thoughtless comment about not fishing for them and catching them. everyone already knows this. and rec. fishing only adds to the depletion of a species so YES they are part of the problem. . . . that's if you look at the long term big picture not just in this past weekend's icechest pic

so I ask . . . .

I'm just curious and not going to read all the past posts but . . . has any marine/fisheries managers and/or conservationists posted anything about this topic?


----------



## King Bling (Mar 10, 2006)

jd10g said:


> not dealing with you. that was a thoughtless comment about not fishing for them and catching them. everyone already knows this. and rec. fishing only adds to the depletion of a species so YES they are part of the problem. . . . that's if you look at the long term big picture not just in this past weekend's icechest pic
> 
> so I ask . . . .
> 
> I'm just curious and not going to read all the past posts but . . . has any marine/fisheries managers and/or conservationists posted anything about this topic?


NMFS's own data shows that if the rec's were completely shutdown it will still take over 20 years to recover the population. So then with whom does the problem really lie?


----------



## jd10g (Jun 6, 2004)

King Bling said:


> NMFS's *OWN* data shows that if the rec's were completely shutdown it will still take over 20 years to recover the population.


does NMFS supply you with data where shirimping would be prohibited?

and yes it's NMFS, a respectable source, but do you know how many models and charts and graphs and variations of all these there are? NOT saying that figure is incorrect but in all honesty they (no one) truthfully knows what will happen when some action is taken.


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*Nmfs*

Howdy,
jd10g - You need to understand that NMFS used to be called US Dept of COMMERCIAL Fisheries...it's kinda like The War Department switching it's name to Dept of Defense. It may sound more Politically Correct, but it doesn't change the animal.

So, be careful when claiming that NMFS is a "respectable source" - there's often more to the picture than meets the eye.

All the best,
Tom Hilton


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Good Point Tom, Maybe they can combine the two to be the National Department of Defense of Commercial Fisheries.

Just out of curiosity, what is the biomass of the snapper that will deem it recovered?


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Good point Tom,

Maybe it should be called the Department of Defense of Commercial Fisheries.


----------



## Kenner21 (Aug 25, 2005)

“The future of red snapper is tied directly to reducing shrimp trawl bycatch. More than 80 percent of juvenile red snapper mortality is due to bycatch,” said Pat Murray, CCA Director of Conservation. “The directed fishery has stayed within its quotas and done everything the Council has asked us to do in the past, while the shrimp industry continues to decimate red snapper stocks. Penalizing recreational anglers again by lowering our catch limits is pointless. It is not logical for the Council to set total allowable catch (TAC) limits before factoring in meaningful bycatch reduction for the shrimp fleet.”



From the CCA website....


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*cca*

Kenner21,

CCA propaganda, plain and simple.

Tom Hilton


----------



## Kenner21 (Aug 25, 2005)

Well he asked for conservationists insight

Tom, 

While I have your ear where is the good data?? ...if NMFS isn't a good source and CCA is propaganda where should be be looking for data that might have some merit too it. 

thanks,
nate


----------



## manintheboat (Jun 1, 2004)

The problem with CCA is that they are not concerned with the entire problem. They have stated shrimpers are the problem, not commercial fishing interests. This opinion by itself should bring up red-flags as to the position of CCA in this matter. This is really disturbing because GCCA's biggest triumph was the Red Drum fishery. The biggest factor that contributed to the rebound was stopping the commercial netting of red drum. Why would CCA turn a blind eye to the commercial snapper fishing interests? Why the fixation with shrimpers? I agree that bycatch is a serious factor, but it is folly to ignore the damage done by commercial fishing. This is the path they are taking and it will end up costing the recreational fishermen.


----------



## BEER4BAIT (Jun 24, 2005)

*Rfa*



Kenner21 said:


> Well he asked for conservationists insight
> 
> Tom,
> 
> ...


PM Jim Smarr


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*snapper*

Nate,
That's a very good question, and I wish more people would ask these type of questions instead of taking these government agencies at their word. Sometimes, these agencies don't exactly tell the truth.

The snapper issue is a very complex one which is affected mainly by 3 sectors; recreational fishermen, commercial fishermen, and shrimpers.

The problem as I see it is the Gulf Council is making decisions based on data that is not current or missing, in addition to data that is an outright lie.

*The data that is not current;* 
Shrimping effort back in the mid 1990's was pegged at 177,000 nominal days per year. 2005 data (and this is pre-Kratina/Rita) shows that effort had been reduced by economic factors down to +_105,000 nominal days. That is over 40% reduction in effort. In addition, BRD's have shown to be about 18% effective in removing bycatch. Since there is a 40% reduction in effort, that equates to the 40% reduction in bycatch mandated by M/S in itself...add in the 18% and we are looking at close to 60% reduction in bycatch. Factor in the 2 horrific hurricanes which destroyed a BUNCH of boats and infrastructure, and I would venture to guess that effort is down 80% or more. To sit back and simply blame shrimper bycatch is a cop-out, an excuse, a distraction, created to avoid having to address the real issues. (CCA, I know you are monitoring this - but are you listening?) This information is from studies by Benny J. Gallaway, Ecologist and President of Ecological Research Associates in Bryan Texas. [email protected] There was a group studying shrimper effort that helped produced this.

In addition, there were (I believe) over 35,000 recreational boats destroyed by these hurricanes. Recreational effort is not going to be what it has been for the last few years. This data is not being taken into account at this time.

*The data that is missing;* 
1) MMS did a study extrapolating data showing there were more baby snapper AROUND THE OIL RIGS ALONE, than the Stock Assessment showed existing in the ENTIRE GULF OF MEXICO!!! The oil platforms comprise about 1/2 of 1% of the surface area of the Gulf, yet they are holding more snapper than their data is showing. This data is missing from the Stock Assessment and if it was included, it would show that there is NO overfishing occuring.
2) The fish that mysteriously disappeared from the Stock Assessment when the longliners were moved out to the 50 fathom curve are not accounted for now. There was no provision to add them in. RFA asked for (5 years) to conduct longline surveys which are just now being included. These recent longline studies are showing the stock to be in much better shape than previously thought. This segment of fish diappearing from the S/A further skews the figures to be in an overfished status. *ROY CRABTREE, BILL HOGARTH, AND ANDREW KEMMNER OF NMFS HAVE CHOSEN TO IGNORE STRONG EMPIRICAL DATA AND INDEPENDENT PEER-REVIEWED STUDIES CITING SERIOUS FLAWS IN THE STOCK ASSESSMENT. Crabtree is the driving force behind the proposed TAC reduction to 5 million pounds. What is his logic? Stock is in better shape than thought, and recreational effort is down. What is the urgency here Mr. Crabtree?*
3) Habitat plays a critical role in sustaining/promoting the growth of snapper populations. The Minton/Shipp document shoes a spike in snapper populations in the 50's (which coincided with the introcduction of oil platforms). Alabama has proven to take 40 miles of barren area and turn it into a snapper metropolis. This type of data needs a prominent place in the Gulf Council's agenda if they are serious about snapper populations.

*The data that is outright lie;*
*1) The claim that commercial fishermen have failed to meet their 4.651 million pound quota for the last few years by bringing in only 3.4 million pounds +_. That's a lie.*
This means that, on average, these commercial fishermen are only going out and catching their trip limit 10 times per year, or less than once a month! Common sense says otherwise. We have eyewitness accounts, direct conversations with law enforcement officers that say otherwise. *THE PROBLEM IS A CRITICAL LACK OF ENFORCEMENT TO VERIFY WHAT ACTUALLY BEING BROUGHT TO THE DOCKS.* Also, when attending the Gulf Council Meeting in Mobile, several commercial fishermen went on the record saying; *"If you want to cheat, GO TO TEXAS!"* What does this say about our enforcement here? Do I blame the TPWD Game Wardens or NMFS enforcement officers on the coast? *No.* They are doing the best with what they have to work with. I heard that Game Wardens here get $150 per diem for gas for their trucks AND boats. That's not going to cut it. We are working to get a Line Item in the State Budget to give Enforcement the priority it deserves.

*2) IFQ'S are going to solve all of our problems. That's a lie.*
Right now we can't verify if our laws are being followed, and the implementation of IFQ's will only make enforcement harder to acheive. IFQ's are a bad idea - there are better ways to do it. There needs to be certified landing docks or "weigh stations" that ALL commercial boats coming into port should be required to go thru when coming into port. There should be no off-loading to a truck then transporting to a "certified" IFQ weigh station. VMS systems can be disabled, and did I mention offloading to ghost boats offshore? When there's a profit motive involved, people will find ways to go around the system.

I could go on, but I think you get my point - I second BEERFORBAIT'S suggestion to contact Jim Smarr. He is a wealth of (accurate) information, and I for one sincerely appreciate his efforts on behalf of recreational fishermen here in Texas.

All the best,
Tom Hilton


----------



## Aces Full (Aug 10, 2005)

My hat is off to Jim & Tom, and I will continue to keep track and do whatever I can to help. Back to the TGBR project...When it gets built, are you (RFA) going to go out everywhere else and remove all the existing structure? Will all the spots in Rik's book be nonexistent after the completion of the TGBR project. WIll we be able to get a refund on all the books and maps? Are ya'll gonna send divers down there with little signs instructing the snapper to stay withing the confines of the project and that offshore platforms are "OFF LIMITS" If you do, then my daughter and son will never be able to catch their own snapper and it will be all your fault. (tongue in cheek)

Keep up the good work!!! Let us know when San Antonio needs to get invloved!


----------



## gostomskij (Jan 14, 2005)

OffshoreAggie said:


> My hat is off to Jim & Tom, and I will continue to keep track and do whatever I can to help. .....Are ya'll gonna send divers down there with little signs instructing the snapper to stay withing the confines of the project and that offshore platforms are "OFF LIMITS" QUOTE]
> 
> Since Red Snapper are part of the "aqua-culture" I believe they are "Aggies", hence, can not read... That being said, they will continue to be available at all rigs (mostly) located offshore...
> 
> ...


----------



## Aces Full (Aug 10, 2005)

"That being said, they will continue to be available at all rigs (mostly) located offshore..."

Victor,

I can't wait to get home and tell the kids there are people out there actually looking out for their best interest and the interest of recreational fishing...

"Sorry, it was a cheap shot....I just couldn't resist"

right after I pull the knife from my backside.

Ray


----------



## gostomskij (Jan 14, 2005)

OffshoreAggie said:


> "That being said, they will continue to be available at all rigs (mostly) located offshore..."
> 
> Victor,
> 
> ...


Ray,

With out a doubt, Tom and Jim (RFA) are looking out for all our best interest. Without them OUR children might not have the chance to enjoy the "good ole days". With a little luck, and a HUGE amount of time and personal sacrifice, the TGBR will happen. Good luck to everyone involved!

Victor


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Tom,
I think you see the light now. The commercials and lack of enforcement are the problem with the Red Snapper fishery. What the NMFS does not realize is that commercial fishing is all commercial fishermen know so by reducing the TAC they have done nothing. Sure enforce better, reduce the TAC and they will cotinue to fish and decimate not only the Red Snapper stock but everything else. All they would do is move onto something else, AJ, bee liners tunas. That's why it is important to stop the commercial exploitation of our resource.

If you want to help the enforcerment report every commercial boat to TPWD as they come in and let them start getting checked. Don't just stand by and watch our resource get exploited.


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*snapper*

Howdy,
Bugaboo - of course I see the light...I've been the guy standing behind the light holding it on this problem for some time now.

Tom


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

WOW- we have a convert Tom. It is even his idea now. Full conversion. He believes there
might just be a problem with "Commercial Overfishing" as the driving force behind the 
Red Snapper Fishery. I knew the "Heifer Dust" would clear up the vision of ole Bugaboo if given enough applications. Tom looks like you found the right application in the last dusting.


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Jim, I have always held a distaste for commercials and outlaws, since the blackened redfish days I believed commercial fishing will be our down fall for all fisheries. That's also not to say habitat isn't important, we see what it does to our speckled trout fishery with the grasses in the bay, but I am just in the opinion if unchecked the commercial sector can wipe out your fishery faster than you can replace habitat and do good with it.


----------



## BICWANN (Nov 17, 2005)

He stated that from the begining!!!!!


----------



## Ono Loco (Aug 4, 2005)

any of you order red snapper at a resturant? if so you are part of the problem..


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*Ah Caramba!*

Bicwann and Bugaboo,

Obviously, yall are brothers. What was that Lured Away was saying?

Ah Caramba!!!

Tom Hilton


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Tom, Focus your energy on the commercials, you can do some serious damage to them through state avenues vs federal. You have their ear at TPWD so hit em hard through the state. You can accomplish a lot of your goals if you just think about it.

Incidently, can the RFA lobby to get the state to change how funds are allocated. It really sucks that fishing and hunting monies go into the general fund and TPWD doesn't get near what is taken in from that sector. If they would get all the money then they may have enough for better enforcement.


----------



## BEER4BAIT (Jun 24, 2005)

*Not to highjack sorry*



Bugaboo said:


> Tom, Focus your energy on the commercials, you can do some serious damage to them through state avenues vs federal. You have their ear at TPWD so hit em hard through the state. You can accomplish a lot of your goals if you just think about it.
> 
> Incidently, can the RFA lobby to get the state to change how funds are allocated. It really sucks that fishing and hunting monies go into the general fund and TPWD doesn't get near what is taken in from that sector. If they would get all the money then they may have enough for better enforcement.


We the people need to do that, you brought up a good subject that deals with the reefs. You guys in H-town area want to know what material that can be used for this reef. The Battleship Texas and the San Jacinto Mon., yes Bugaboo is 100% correct about your state leg. and senate stealing from the TPWD, Stealing from the TPWD, said it again. They want to act like nothing is wrong but if your boat took on 70,000 gals of water a day would you want to keep it? This should be an outrage for the people of Tx and the towns close to it. Remember this next time you're shaking hands with your reps. So start deciding where to sink this stuff cause the kitty was robbed and there is no $$ to repair at all.


----------



## BEER4BAIT (Jun 24, 2005)

They had a word for that..........................let's see.................oh Taxation without representation!


----------



## BICWANN (Nov 17, 2005)

Tom Hilton said:


> Bicwann and Bugaboo,
> 
> Obviously, yall are brothers. What was that Lured Away was saying?
> 
> ...


not brothers...sidekicks


----------



## dlove (Aug 26, 2004)

I cannot possibly see how the reef program is going to hurt yall act like thes are the same fish that are already out there. The existing rigs and reefs are still going to support the same population if not more because now the fishing presure will be spread out, and the new reefs will support a new generation of snapper. With 4,000 new reefs a year thats alot of snapper and just because they can produce 500 lbs of snapper those are keeper fish there will be alot of undersize fish there to take there place. Look how many undersize fish are around state water rigs these fish would be bycatch if not for the rigs. These reefs will serve the same purpose saving young snapper which grow to large snapper. I just don't understand yall's thinking that there will be more presure, I think there will be a major boom in fish population and a slight increase in fishermen. And if the fishermen boom then thats that many more people to fund the building of reefs we may be able to build 8,000 per year.

BUILD IT AND THAY WILL COME


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*Bugaboo and Bicwann*

Howdy,
Bicwann sent me a PM on Friday. I have since then PM'd both Bicwann and Bugaboo multiple times asking for their REAL names. It's hard to have an intelligent conversation with some anonomous "experts" derailing the conversation with inconsequential claims and information.

Needless to say, they have both declined to reveal their names. When someone hides behind an alias and makes fools of themselves as these two have repeatedly, there is a reason why, and it's not directed towards the good of the fishery. For someone who claims; _"I am someone that looks at the whole picture and not just an immediate fix. That is what I do for a living and have been very successful at it"_, it seems odd that you wouldn't want to put your name to your words as I do.

So, Bugaboo and Bicwann, what are your REAL names? What do yall have to hide? Lay it out on the table. What's your agenda here? If ya'll can't come out of the closet, then you have nothing to offer worth reading so quit wasting our time.

When looking at the "Whole Picture", you can't ignore the fact that you just can't fix stupid! I don't even know why I try.

Thomas J. Hilton
Texas A&M Class of '79


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Dear Mr Hilton,

Have a nice day and good luck on your endeavor.

Ah Caramba


----------



## gruenerfriede (Apr 9, 2006)

*Your Idea is ok but........*

I have been following this discussion on my friends computer at work and i could not help myself to chirp in with some of my thoughts.

The ONLY WAY YOU WILL HELP OUR FISHING RESOURCES is to make this a SANCTUARY and I would support you on this.

It is beyond my understanding that you believe or would like to make others believe that by building reefs and attrackting fish (Snapper) from other areas and then fishing for them, will produce more fish. I get the feeling that there is some commercial interest behind this.

I understand that one of the members has been banned from this forum because he asked some tough questions. He did not use any profanity or anything that should have warranted this action. I guess the questions he raised were to tough to answer or he hit to close to the truth.

Communist China censors its internet content.
CONGRATULATION and WELCOME to Their CLUB


----------



## BICWANN (Nov 17, 2005)

Tom,

As I stated before, I was done talking about this on this thread.

Sorry you feel that way. Good luck as you proceed.

B



Tom Hilton said:


> Howdy,
> Bicwann sent me a PM on Friday. I have since then PM'd both Bicwann and Bugaboo multiple times asking for their REAL names. It's hard to have an intelligent conversation with some anonomous "experts" derailing the conversation with inconsequential claims and information.
> 
> Needless to say, they have both declined to reveal their names. When someone hides behind an alias and makes fools of themselves as these two have repeatedly, there is a reason why, and it's not directed towards the good of the fishery. For someone who claims; _"I am someone that looks at the whole picture and not just an immediate fix. That is what I do for a living and have been very successful at it"_, it seems odd that you wouldn't want to put your name to your words as I do.
> ...


----------



## predator22 (Feb 2, 2005)

I have not had an opportunity to visit with Tom Hilton yet, but I have visited with Jim Smarr. I can tell you from my independent research and the information Jim Smarr has sent me, both of these guys are right on when it comes to the issues of the current state and solution of the Red Snapper fisheries.

From my desk at Texas Outdoor Council we aligning with their position. On Friday I met with Senator Kyle Janek's office to discuss the need for a line item in law enforcment budget to help curb the problem of over fishing.

To believe shrimp by-catch is the beginning and end to Red Snapper depletion as stated by CCA in a recent press release is not accurate. It might have an affect, but it is not the overall problem or solution, and for a group to focus solely on that issue as a means to correct the problem, is not doing justice to anyone.

We have a major problem in the areas of proper law enforcement. For example, right now in the Valley they are running "Operation Pescador" with three game wards to patrol Falcon Lake and the Gulf to stop US and Mexican illegal fishermen. Over the last several months one of the wardens was injured and the other got transferred. This is not an operation, and until the funds are allocated to enforce current law the problem of Red Snapper depletion is going to continue.

Between US illegal fishing and Mexican illegal fishing, this issue is going to continue. As of now in Federal Waters the Snapper fishery is patrolled by the US Coast Guard. I don't even need to elaborate on how ineffective that is.

Under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act their is clause that gives the states the authority to patrol and enforce these laws beyond their state boundaries. So there are measures we can take as a state to help if the funds are allocated.

If 50% or more of Snapper catch originates from Texas points of origin, then this is a Texas issue, and we need to be the front runners at correcting the problem.

RFA has done a great job and bringing light to the issue with sensible and manageable solutions.

It is also important as sportsmen regardless of what organization you support, to look at the real facts and make common sense decisions.

I can tell you with all my research into the environmental whacko's and animal rights groups, if Sportsmen and so-called right conservation groups don't pull their head out we are going to be in trouble.

I believe RFA is right on and as an organization TOC supports them. We are doing what we can to help bring light to the issue.


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

*GRUENERFRIEDE -And the answer is plain and simple NO DOWNSIDE end of Story*

Billions of fry including a multitude of species will be attracted to the artificial reefs. These fish would otherwise be lost due to predators and even some to bycatch. This process will not move fish from deep water to the new reefs to a great extent.
Saving Billions of fry will make a huge impact covering numerous species. This in effect will be a sanctuary as Shrimping efforts will be nonexistent. Commercial fishermen will have the same limit recreational fishermen have soon in State Waters so they will not be a factor. One drop with a bandit rig and they would be over their limit. This would leave them wide open to serious fines.

Snapper do not migrate per peer reviewed studies conducted by NMFS that is their story and I am sticking to it.. 

There is NO DOWNSIDE end of story.

Jim Smarr
361-463-1558
[email protected]
[email protected]
rfatexas.org


----------



## Mont (Nov 17, 1998)

gruenerfriede said:


> Communist China censors its internet content.
> CONGRATULATION and WELCOME to Their CLUB


and welcome to your own special club. Try and pass 3rd grade, before you call me out.


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*reefs*

Howdy,
Well, shine light on cockroaches and they go scurrying. Notice that they still don't want their names known? Goodbye to you Bicwann and Bugaboo, and good luck in your future masquerades. Ah Caramba!

Now that they are claiming to leave the thread, here comes gruenerfriede with his first post, sounding strangely similar to the first two. What a coincidence! You compare this board to communist china and make claims that are unsubstantiated - nice first thread! Mont, can you trace their ISP's? I think you'll find a match.

predator22 - you are right on with your perspective and your actions - I look forward to meeting you soon.

We went to a meeting last week that included the Land Commissioner, Railroad Commissioner, and Head of TxDOT. We're meeting this week with a member of the Texas legislature regarding the Texas Great Barrier Reef. We'll keep you informed of our progress, as it is progressing very rapidly.

All the best,
Tom Hilton


----------



## jim smarr (May 21, 2004)

*gruenerfriede- I left out a very important point*

This Statement your first and only post is way off base. Mont does a good job keeping this board and his others on track. This is a fishing board not a "Marine Sancuary" or make the Gulf of Mexico a "Marine Petting Zoo" Board. Mont and many others here have spent countless hours and personal dollars making our Sport better for all as we are with the reefing project with the support of 
99.9999% of the people we have come in contact with.

Jim Smarr
Chairman Texas RFA
261-463-1558
[email protected]
[email protected]


----------



## Bugaboo (Apr 17, 2005)

Anybody know what gruenerfriede means????


----------



## predator22 (Feb 2, 2005)

*gruenerfriede.....*

*Call me anytime. I will be happy to discuss with you this issue. *

*By the way who are you guys and who do you represent?*

*Zack Hall*
*832-724-2868 (Cell Phone)*


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*gruenerfriede*



Bugaboo said:


> Anybody know what gruenerfriede means????


It's German for Bugaboo or Bicwann or Village Idiot - they are all interchangeable.

Tom Hilton


----------



## BEER4BAIT (Jun 24, 2005)

*Yes*



Bugaboo said:


> Anybody know what gruenerfriede means????


Nothing now.


----------



## Captain Blood (May 27, 2004)

*have some huevos for breakfast*

Just the facts! Jim and Tom have continually presented us with facts that are supported. Not suppostiion and guess work that these two anonymous commentors have speeled off. Lucky for all offshore fisherman that even the naysayers are represented by the honest and informed information that has been provided by RFA via Smarr and Hilton.
Your guys with your propoganda and misinformation are lucky to live in a country that allows people from other nations to gripe and complain and even carry another countries flag in protest The only difference here is that those people have the guts to publicly state who they are, as well as what they believe, (even though I may not agree with them)and do not hide behind the anonymaty of cyberspace. So what I am saying is before you start labeling communist or nazism to folks who voice their opinions openly try not hiding behind this board and honestly state who you are and what you believe and not just call names and run for cover. In other words, have some guts!


----------



## CoastalOutfitters (Aug 20, 2004)

Tom, Jim,
After your meeting with the "State" guys last week, who is the division that is going to take this from the TX Govt. side ?

Is it TP&W as a park?

or a joint state dept. venture?

thanks, Bob


----------



## Smallfrye (May 21, 2004)

Could we start a new post ? It seems the focus may be less corrupted from here on.

Tom and Jim: 

I too am interested in your approach and why you decided to re invent the wheel rather than work within the existing reef program at TP&W ? 

Would you provide a brief summary of the proposal you are promoting to the officials named, so readers can consider the facts without the clutter associated with that posting.

Your facts are generally sound but there is much more to consider when proposing a reef structure such as yours. The magnitude of cost and geographic limitations will probably cause you to reconsider this tact. 

Your (RFA) affect on public officials and influence within the rec. fishing community is well known and respected. The focus you have brought to past objectives can only be good for this project but be careful not to make the same mistakes made by the scores of reef builders before you. Success is easy,examples cover the GOM; copy the past.
BR,
Jim


----------



## Tom Hilton (May 24, 2004)

*snapper*

Howdy,
I agree - this thread has gotten a bit off track. We will initiate a new one when appropriate (soon).

Coastal Outfitters - we are still working on the exact relationship of what will happen. We will be forthcoming when appropriate.

Smallfrye - TPWD has a different philosophy on the reef program, and we are trying to set a new course, (we have invited TPWD to participate in the Texas Great Barrier Reef). Of the 58+ reefs that TPWD has out there, 50+ reefs are way beyond the reach of the average angler. The concept is to bring the reefs to the guys with 17' center consoles and make it easy for them to access - not make a commitment in time, money, and safety to venture 80+ miles offshore (or down south) where the majority of TPWD reefs exist. The magnitude of our concept will also provide a nursery for fish of all species that is unparralleled in scope and magnitude seen before in THIS state.

In my work as map-maker, I have come to understand what other states in the Gulf are doing relative to the artificial reefing programs...I look at Texas and ask WHY aren't we doing the same? You are correct, there is no need to re-invent the wheel, and that is our point...there are examples in place demonstrating how successful, pro-active reefing programs are enacted by other states which are attempting to emulate. We are not re-inventing the wheel - we are just bringing the wheel to Texas.

Jim, there is a crisis looming. NMFS is pushing for a TAC reduction of possibly almost half of current regs. This will decimate the charterboat/headboat industries across the Gulf, and cause a large segment of recreational fishermen to either give up snapper fishing or turn outlaw. If we are able to develop a plan to counter-act the TAC reduction in federal waters by providing fishing spots in state waters, we foresee an energizing effect on the industry instead of a decimating blow.

TPWD, in our last meeting, suggested that we just supplement what they are already doing - we could add reef material inside of their existing reefing areas. They are missing the whole point - their existing reefing areas are geographically undesirable...we need to take a step back and ask who are we making these reefs for? Right now, as I said, the benefits are not being reaped by the average fisherman - we intend to change that.

In addition, TPWD is facing severe funding shortages. They have (as you know) been collecting material for reefing, but do not have the funding to deploy it! We are not looking to TPWD for help in funding, but in fact have offered to help deploy their material with our own funding. We welcome any assistance in this effort by TPWD and plan to help them where we can.

We are pushing for a line-item for TPWD enforcement. We are looking to increasing spending caps for TPWD in the Texas legislature, as TPWD cannot access 100% of the $$ that licensing revenues generate.

We are addressing the cost and geographic limitations and believe they are surmountable - as a Coast Guard official said last week; "Anything is possible".

All the best,
Tom Hilton


----------



## BEER4BAIT (Jun 24, 2005)

*Ok*



Bugaboo said:


> Anybody know what gruenerfriede means????


**** Green Peace, Das gottem douched Didn't he:rotfl:

Can we start a new thread..............Please?


----------



## jd10g (Jun 6, 2004)

predator22 said:


> *By the way who are you guys and who do you represent?*


that's kinda obvious . . .

know-it-alls and themselves. although there are many good ideas, i don't see them gettin' started any time soon


----------

