ANOTHER SURVEY COMING

The DFW is hoping to put out the FMP survey by this Friday.  We had a call in Last Friday with the departments lead biologist to suggest changes to their first draft.  In addition to several other changes, (basically we rewrote the whole thing), we asked that they start out by saying this is a fishery management plan, not a species protection plan that we are creating.  The species is in no danger, we are just discussing how easy divers want it to be to find abalone and the trade of is opportunity vs. accessibility.  Another suggestion was that they put a line for comments below each question so if there's any ambiguity or uncertainty you can clarify the intent of your answer.

It is important that as many divers as possible fill out and return the survey.  I'll post the link when it goes out but this is definitely one of those times that if you don't vote, don't complain later.

The DFW is hoping to put out the FMP survey by this Friday.  We (?) had a call in Last Friday with the departments lead biologist to suggest changes to their first draft.  In addition to several other changes, (basically we rewrote the whole thing), we asked that they start out by saying this is a fishery management plan, not a species protection plan that we are creating.  The species is in no danger, we are just discussing how easy divers want it to be to find abalone and the trade of is opportunity vs. accessibility.  Another suggestion was that they put a line for comments below each question so if there's any ambiguity or uncertainty you can clarify the intent of your answer.

It is important that as many divers as possible fill out and return the survey.  I'll post the link when it goes out but this is definitely one of those times that if you don't vote, don't complain later.

Might want to clarify who  "We"  is.

Also will others (like me) get to read (at least a summary) of the working plans, or will the survey just be another sampling of divers wishes without seeing what's currently on the table?

Looking forward to the link,

Thanks for putting this up and your efforts in this arena.

We-

On the call was Milo, Jim, and myself with SCAN.  I was also representing Watermen's Alliance, Jim was also representing RFA.

Jack Likins was on the call, and Bill Bernard. (Red Abalone Diving on NCKA)

Working info-

All the working info is on the departments web page.  I would not say that there have been any proposals yet, just discussion.  All suggestions are up for discussion. 

Here is a link to the departments FMP web page.

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/redabalonefmp/

Thanks for the info,

That's an interesting mix of people,

Do want to touch some more about the "atmosphere" and more of a "take" on it from my perspective of the meeting that was held last Friday before the survey comes out, and thank you josh for starting the thread. I venture say all the constituent reps who attended the conference call knew we were going to go public, be informative at some point because of the significance the abalone angler survey will play in the development of the FMP process. This is it.

From the onset of the call, yes as Josh describes, it is fair to say each constituent rep had serious concerns with the draft abalone angler survey. Yes, saying (basically we rewrote the whole thing), we asked that they start out by saying this is a fishery management plan, not a species protection plan that we are creating. The species is in no danger, we are just discussing how easy divers want it to be to find abalone and the trade of is opportunity vs. accessibility. is fair, but there is more, and its deeper than just that alone.

What I think became clear, and we called it ! We nailed it ! Hammered it down !
So what is it ?
Well for those who took (did) the last abalone angler survey back in late 2012 or was it early 2013 that was generated because the DFW claimed triggers were cross, thus reductions were mandated per the ARMP and all, and the results of that survey were presented to the commission at the adoption hearing meeting, June 2013 which resulted in the regulation changes for the started of the 2014 abalone season right; ask yourself, if in fact, that survey we took just by the questions asked lead one to select just what the commission in fact did adopt. If so, what I have to say from here is also accurate.

That abalone survey back in late 2012 or was it early 2013 was designed to produce a desired outcome. 1) to get you to accept reductions 2) pick your poison on how to do it. 3) last minute compromise on the regulation package.

How many of you at the 2013 F&GC regulation reduction adopting hearing back in June of 2013 saw me, and the DFW abalone manger and his boss, as public testimony was being given having dialog. Last minute compromise. The DFW wanted a 12 abalone annual limit, compromise was the 9/18. The deed was done before anyone got to the podium to testify. I was just being informed of what the outcome was going to be before the commission said it. But, it just so happens that what was adopted also turned out to be the highest percentage responses to the abalone angler survey of late 2012 or was it early 2013 now did it not. Thus the importance of this new abalone angler survey to be shortly released.

So what is "we called it" Nailed it. Hammered it down. Each rep at that call knew right from the day before, because that was when we became privy to what the draft questions were, we all knew right from the start that once again the DFW was up to there old tricks so to speak with this new abalone angler survey.

This abalone FMP process is not about needed reductions or not. This FMP process is about what an abalone fishery can be, once removed out from the auspicious of the ARMP. Out from the ARMP is going to become so. What is practical and what we can have is a abalone fishery manged in Regions, Zones, Areas. Each of these zones can have their own annual limits, there own bag limits, and many things most not accustomed to now.

However, when this abalone angler comes out and whatever it should be or not do not bite into thinking on the small scale and the me, me, me factor, please. Think in a bigger picture please. By small scale thinking I mean take this question we fielded, and by the way it was asked to be remove from the questioner because it was a leading question to move you towards a direction the DFW abalone managers perhaps wanted us and you to go: How important is the (9 Sonoma, 18 Mendocino) annual limit to you?
Most "we" your reps pointed out that the average abalone constituent would mark #5 extremely important, the highest value.

That my fellow abalone constituents I suggest is the wrong answer, and should be marked #3 neutral, and I venture to say, if you understand what this FMP process can be about and is supposed to be, the correct answer to the question is (#1 not important at all.)

In all fairness and after many years of dialog with the DFW abalone management guys......hey I really think they took in a lot of positive from us and I would not be surprised that if in deed we see a lot of changes for this angler survey.

What we also need to address and want to have addressed is how the DFW assesses abalone stocks. The DFW assesses abalone populations with ANOVA mathematics in mind, and to me this explains why the disconnect most abalone divers have between what they see in the water and what ANOVA survey's says the abalone are.

I also used a poor choice of words saying the DFW is up to their old tricks again, true but not a good understanding of intent. Old tricks better worded and I think its happens in automatic mode from DFW persons, and it does affect their thought processes, the DFW always comes from IMHO maximum precautionary thinking processors. To have fisheries, the maximum precautionary processors can not be on 24/7.   

More to come.