Home | Tournaments | Calendar | Weather | Merchandise | Sponsors |
|
Off Topic Area Enjoy a virtual beer at the bar, and talk about anything else on your mind that may not pertain to spearfishing. |
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
01-30-2015, 07:30 AM | #1 |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Port Charlotte Fl
Age: 76
Posts: 2,480
|
This is important...to all of us...
|
01-30-2015, 09:19 AM | #2 |
Team Headhunter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Slowcala, FL
Age: 59
Posts: 4,074
|
Re: This is important...to all of us...
The members may have special interests but the reasoning behind the push to have them removed is due to their support of Sector Separation. Have you at least read the executive summary on what the issue is about or are you just listening to the same sword rattlers that promoted the individual state revolt that has cut our red snapper limits to nothing? There may be some ding dongs on the Gulf council but their are much bigger ones working on the other side. People are receiving money on both sides of this issue and only one of them has made a positive impact on restoring our fisheries..... and it isn't a 501-C organization.
__________________
The Moose is Loose ! "SUPER SPORTY" |
01-30-2015, 05:25 PM | #3 |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Port Charlotte Fl
Age: 76
Posts: 2,480
|
Re: This is important...to all of us...
So.... as a commercial fisherman,,your taking a stand against the FRA?
|
02-02-2015, 08:38 AM | #4 | |
Team Headhunter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Slowcala, FL
Age: 59
Posts: 4,074
|
Re: This is important...to all of us...
Quote:
I've read and studied the facts and positions put forth by both sides. If you would like to debate my stance concerning sector separation and why I feel it is a good option for fishery management in the Gulf I am more than happy to give you first shot at explaining your personal issues with it. Here is the passed proposal the fishery managers put forth: http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/sustainabl..._am40_feis.pdf Feel free to post up the "Executive Summary" and counter points provided by the FRA, CCA or any other group concerning the flaws of sector separation. Getting back to the commercial fishing and the FRA. When the FRA was founded they supported and defended attended gear and commercial spearfishing. How well do you feel that support is working out for that particular user group now?
__________________
The Moose is Loose ! "SUPER SPORTY" |
|
02-03-2015, 08:19 AM | #5 |
Grounds Hog Day
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Pinellas County, Where else?
Posts: 2,914
|
Re: This is important...to all of us...
I am Denny O'Hern, and I approved this post....
No need to 'rattle my sword' here. The three Council members in question clearly violated Magnuson. Not some technicality, but a violation so serious as to warrant criminal charges with a penalty of up to five years in jail along with civil penalties of significant fines. Let it slide? Not a chance. Read Magnuson for the language regarding this violation. Have fun, as it will take you a while to follow the codes and requirements. As for the scam called sector separation, start by digesting this, from a non-501(c)(3) group: The suddenly accelerated speed at which the Council seeks to subdivide the recreational red snapper fishery into two individual components or “sectors” is unacceptable for an action that will likely have far reaching impacts on local communities, the economy, state-based conservation funding, thousands of recreational anglers, and ultimately the charter/for-hire industry for which it is meant to help. A decision of this magnitude requires careful deliberation and calculated safeguards to ensure that the best interest of the American public is first and foremost. Furthermore, there are several concerns regarding potential statutory violations that must be fully explored and resolved before moving forward with any such fundamental change to the interpretation of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the way we manage marine recreational fisheries in the United States. We fear thorough analysis of these concerns has not been sufficiently undertaken by NOAA Fisheries or the Council relative to Amendment 40. It is difficult to understand why red snapper management is so unique that it requires such a radical departure from methods that have successfully managed the vast majority of our fish and terrestrial wildlife resources. Indications are that the red snapper stock is recovering well ahead of schedule, which suggests that the current problems with red snapper are not biological, but rather man-made. It appears that some failure of our federal fisheries policy is producing a system in which access to a healthy fishery resource is being funneled through fewer and fewer entities. Unnecessarily restricting public access to a sustainable resource is an undesirable and untenable result for any wildlife resource management system, and one that should be avoided at all costs. Fundamentally, we struggle to see where Amendment 40 offers a solution to the challenges facing the recreational sector. For the private recreational component, which represents by far the largest number of recreational red snapper anglers, it virtually ensures few, if any, days to fish in federal waters. While we fully support a better management approach to alleviate the hardships of an extremely short recreational season on the charter/for-hire fishery, providing more days of fishing for a select few while completely ignoring the impacts to the majority of participants is irresponsible. Other options that address the needs of the recreational fishery as a whole should be on the table. Finally, the controversy surrounding Amendment 40 and the Council and NOAA Fisheries willingness to move forward without first reaching consensus among the affected stakeholders, or even within the Council’s own reef fish committee, presents a more pressing question as to the Council’s ability to effectively manage the nation’s fishery resources in the Gulf of Mexico. The fishery management councils were entrusted by Congress to find a balance between the needs of our fisheries and the people who participate in the fisheries. Striking a fair and equitable balance among the participants of the red snapper fishery is a critical step that is clearly missing from Amendment 40. As a voice for America’s sportsmen and women across the nation, we urge you to table any further consideration of Amendment 40 until such time as a thorough analysis of the scientific, legal, economic and cultural impacts of sector separation have been completed and alternative management approaches, such as regional management, have been appropriately considered. CSC
__________________
Protecting and promoting the rights of offshore spearfishers and anglers. Join us! http://www.thefra.org Check out OFFSHORE HUNTER Waypoint management software for the serious spearfisher. Got numbers? http://www.offshorehunter.com |
02-03-2015, 09:59 AM | #6 | |
Team Headhunter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Slowcala, FL
Age: 59
Posts: 4,074
|
Re: This is important...to all of us...
Quote:
The way I see it the fishery managers have found a way to improve the system that serves recreational fishermen. It's not a total solution to the vast number of issues that plague the process of protecting and regulating our fisheries but it is one piece of the puzzle that fits in providing relief for an important group of recreational anglers.
__________________
The Moose is Loose ! "SUPER SPORTY" Last edited by kmoose; 02-03-2015 at 01:19 PM. |
|
02-03-2015, 07:01 PM | #7 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 238
|
Re: This is important...to all of us...
Once I learned they do not count snapper from artificial structure in the upper gulf yet they count take as any snapper, the vast majority of which came from artificial structure and once I read Dr Shipp's assessment from Dauphin Island Sea lab of the real estimate of snapper now to past historic times, I gave up. Also any idiot could look over the side of the boat pulling up to any rig in over 25' of water and see snapper stocks were high in upper gulf. I don't know how long the NOAA biologist have been checking stocks but I've been diving upper gulf for 50 years and 10 years ago it was obvious that other species such as triggerfish were being decimated by the imbalance long before they figured it out. Now to find out this typical graft and special interest in DC is no great shock, it how our system works now. Who is going to make the most $$$ out of the deal not decisions based on real biological research. Up until the late 1800s deer, duck, bear and turkey were for sale at any market. It became obvious to a handful of RECREATIONAL sportsman, not market forces that this was unsustainable. If you want a fish go get yourself. This thread should be under general discussion not buried here.
|
02-05-2015, 09:06 AM | #8 |
FSDA Freedive chair
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Apollo Beach, FL
Posts: 373
|
Re: This is important...to all of us...
There is a better way and those "rogue" state management agencies have done it and are doing it- it is called universal angler registry. It was called for in Magnuson but NMFS never instituted it wholly. LA and AL did and instituted a requirement for rec fishermen to register if they want to fish for red snapper. The fishery agencies were able to shrink the survey pool for determining catch to just that segment of the fishery not every citizen in the state with a license. FL is following suit with their reef fish angler registry. Why does it matter to define the universe of anglers? When NMFS starts chopping the total allowable catch for data uncertainty they are now applying those percentages to a smaller number of anglers who participate in that particular fishery. 2% uncertainty of let's say 1 million anglers included in survey field is a lot smaller hit on the TAC than 2% of the entire population. Using these angler registries AL and LA both were able to show NMFS was overestimating catch by 70%! There is your answer and why 5 state management agencies have chosen to go noncompliant and several are instituting these registries.
As for the violations that occurred, these were serious nondiscloures of conflict of interest. It is not illegal for a voting member of a council to have a conflict of interest if they disclose it (though they are supposed to recuse themselves if the conflict of interest directly affects a particular vote). It is illegal under severe federal penalty not to disclose a conflict of interest, in this case all 3 members did not disclose they were on the board of a commercial advocacy organization that lobbied for amendment 40! And two of these voting reps were supposed to represent the recreational sector! As for amendment 40, the way this was pushed through and manipulated is far scarier than the result (that 48% of all red snapper are going to 1,300 federal permit holders with unlimited seasons while Recs and state charters have 1 day). This scheme was concocted by an organization of AL and Destin charters, rammed through with overwhelming public opposition (except one meeting in Destin-hmmm) and against the votes of all five Gulf state fishery management agencies. Where was the final vote held and where is public input meeting tonite being held? Anyone? The council does not have the authority to do this or to quote FWC commissioner Jablonski on the issue "it is not their job to pick winners and losers." This is not a rec vs commercial issue. It is not even a rec vs. charter issue- some of the biggest opposition is coming from federal charter permit holders who are more worried about precedent of fairness and federal overreach than lining their own pockets. This is about balanced representation of all shareholders-rec and commercial- and keeping corruption and big money interests out of a shared common resource. Equal access is the bottom line- whether you own your own boat, use a charter or depend on local commercial fishermen for your fish.
__________________
http://www.floridaskindivers.com Last edited by wvandeman; 02-05-2015 at 09:14 AM. |
02-05-2015, 09:25 AM | #9 | |
Naval gazer extraordinair
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 42,214
|
Re: This is important...to all of us...
+10
Divide and conquer is their M.O.. Don't let them do it. It is ALL about this... Quote:
__________________
“If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind?” ― Frederic Bastiat, The Law |
|
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|