LJ Conditions has it all wrong, Clipboarders are good

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by PAL

I think many people here are mis-stating the purpose of most of the clip-boarders, whether assigning them nefarious motives or inflating the purpose of the data.

Unless the scheme has changed in the past few months, this cheap labor (mostly college students) collects catch data for the state California Recreational Fish Survey (CRFS) program.

The state data is used by the federal Pacific Fisheries Management Council. The PFMC is focused on management, not no-touchy BS. The MLPA is an end-run around the PFMC. The enviro groups hate it.

The PFMC sets species catch quotas. When the quotas are hit, it can trigger an early closure. For examples, the rockfish and lingcod shut-downs in the 2000s. INACCURATE CATCH DATA CAN CAUSE EARLY CLOSURES, AS HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES UNDER THE PRIOR MRFS PHONE SURVEY! We don't want to return to those days.

It's to our advantage if the PFMC has accurate information so management truly works.

As I've said before, my opinion is your should do whatever feels right. Some of the survey takers ARE misinformed, like the one someone ran into at Shelter Island a few months back that thought La Jolla was closed. Others are enthusiastic kids with an interest in the ocean because they actually get out and enjoy the resource, the kind of people we want to stay in the marine biology business.

Some aspects of kurtfish's original post sound odd to me, as if it is only part of the full story. By this logic, the newish Channel Islands MPAs must be overfished, because no one is reporting any catch from them. Recreational mackerel take is minuscule. The PFMC allocation must be enormous. As I understand it, only the damn enviro groups tout declining catch numbers as evidence of overfishing. The equations are much more complex for fisheries *management* scientists.

Whatever, go fish!

So the info the clipboarders get is only used for managing open / closed season, and limits? It doesn't get to the MLPA closure process?

,,,, I feel stupid.

[PAL]

^That's it's main purpose, management. I can't say whether the data works its way into other studies. It's collected via state money, so it's probably public and finds other uses.

The science behind the MLPA is is predominantly about habitat, which fishes benefit from it, and the theories behind larval dispersement, and gross manipulation of said theories to fit a predetermined outcome (you didn't think I'd miss a chance to mention the MLPA's agenda-driven "science," did you?).

So far as I've observed, there's a philosophical gulf between the biologists who favor the MLPA and those who work in fisheries management. Maybe Owyn can weigh in on the different methodologies.

[Rusty]

So I was launching on Saturday and saw DFG Clipboarder that I have seen on the sporties a lot. I asked him what their information is used for and he basically said the same thing as Paul. They use it for rockfish quota, determining seasons' lengths, and limits. He said it is also a "general way to keep track of, and manage fisheries." I asked him about MPLA closures and how this information relates, and his answer was that "they get information from many sources." On the way back in I shared my Cuda, Checker, bait and other catches with him. My new philosophy on sharing with them (now that I know why they're there): I will share with the clipboarders I like.

[kurtfish]

DFG and NOAA are agencies that do impact the development of and implimentation of local fishing regualtions. More and accurate data will help us all battle the environmentalists that just want to close us down.

Let's keep open minds to our friendly data collectors and Rusty's questions prior to sharing his results are a good way to get comfortable with the process and the people behind the research.RecFishYearinReview2010.pdf

[Matt]

Well I will continue with my "no talking" policy towards the clipboarders, as I fought the mlpa from the beginning I noticed a lot of data seeming to come from out of nowhere....for instance north of the pier was never on the agenda and then after the "where do you fish" and "clipboard" questioning suddenly that are is gone.....not sure if my mistrust is well placed but just as a standard policy "loose lips sink ships"


Fuck the MLPA!

[FISHIONADO]

Can't let Matt have the last word! After a long day on the water and only seeing you gnarly smelly fishermen out there I'm a sucker for a girl with a smile. I'll tell her my favorite fishing spot and where I was born and SSN and astrological sign. It would all be bullshit anyway, I might even do it with a New Zealand accent.

Seriously though, I always chat with them and share what I know and I get good info from them about current conditions and what they have seen the last couple days etc.

[stuppid]

What one has to worry about in my opinion is who is going to interpret the data and how are they going to use it. I can imagine two ways. High fish counts can help you and hurt you. If they are using fish counts to estimate the total fish population then high fish counts can help because high fish counts would equate to a healthy fishery. If they already have an estimate of the fish population by some other means then high fish counts could be interpreted as over take. If they have a low estimate of the fish population and the take is high they will have to take measures to reduce the take. I don't have any idea how they use the data but it is the pits when you feel that you cant trust the government to do the right thing whatever that might be.

[bus kid]

Originally Posted by Matt

Fuck the MLPA!

couldn't have said it better myself.