Originally Posted by Ttmako (Post 342201)

Here is my take.
The proposed amendment is about allocating the harvest limit. I’m concerned the limit is artificially low because of extremely poor effort and catch estimates. The new MRIP survey data is just as poor as the MRFSS data.
The next time you are surveyed, either in person or over the phone, tell them how infrequently you go out and how little you catch. They take the data and extrapolate it to the registered fisherman in your area. This is not a time to boast and tell them how much you fish and catch. If the regulators insist on using a flawed methodology, then we need to provide them with our "poor effort" statistics.
Instead of debating slicing up the artificially low allowable catch, regulators would be better off accurately measuring effort and landings data.

Originally Posted by Ttmako (Post 342229)

Please explain why its incorrect?

Originally Posted by RussA (Post 342247)

Because it has been done both ways, and still the same outcome.

What organization are you from?

Originally Posted by Bigadam119 (Post 342250)

It's a double edged sword with them. If we report catches are down then fish stocks must be down. If catches are up, we overfished. It's a joke!