Handguns
Subscribe
Home› Conservation Front
Tom Hilton
Posts: 1,595 Captain
Email to Steve Branstetter
Tom Hilton
Posts: 1,595 Captain
Here is the email below that I sent to the point man on the Gulf Charterboat Exempted Fishing Permit - Steve Branstetter [email protected]
The word needs to get out to all Gulf charterboat captains who fish for red snapper as to the consequences of how it will affect THEM if/when Sector Separation/Cooperatives/IFQs are implemented. According to Mike Jennings (Cowboy) and other pro-sector separation people, the effect will be the elimination of a substantial number of their competitors (YOU). One guy even referred to it as a Hostile Takeover - no joke. You need to be informed of how this will affect your charter for-hire industry BEFORE you lend your support to the concept, as it will undoubtedly result in a substantial reduction in the number of charter vessels here in the Gulf. Look for entrance requirements such as income qualifiers, those who can document that they "substantially" fished the fishery, etc. etc. As the guy said, as in all LAPPs, there will be "winners" and "losers". The main purpose of IFQs is to consolidate the fishery into a smaller number of participants.
The effect on the private recs will be just as devastating, if not more so, and remember that this is not just about red snapper - it will spread to every federally-managed species that swims out there in the Gulf. We are probably looking at a lottery fish tag system.
Mr. Branstetter,
You are listed as the contact person on the NOAA site regarding the Gulf Charterboat Exempted Fishing Permit, and I have some questions as to how these EFPs will help determine if this is really the way we want to go with our future fisheries management.
As you know, the Alabama Charterboat EFP has essentially been cut-and-pasted from the Headboat EFP.
The Headboat EFP sliced off 286,457 pounds of red snapper from each of this year's and next year's recreational TAC for the 17 headboats participating in the program to harvest. That's an average of 16,850 pounds per boat, per year, correct?
I believe that the Gulf Council/NMFS is looking to give to the Alabama Charterboat Cooperative about 366,000 pounds of red snapper to be subtracted from our total recreational TAC to be harvested by the 90 charterboats in the cooperative. That's about 4,067 pounds per boat, correct?
If you consider that the Gulf-wide charterboat count is about 1,200 vessels, then how do you see this Sector Separation/Cooperative/IFQ scenario playing out relative to its impacts on the entire Gulf-wide charterboat fleet, assuming that the Gulf Council goes forward with Sector Separation and it's preferred alternative of allocating 47% of the recreational TAC to the "For-Hire Sector"?
Please provide a hypothetical scenario of what would happen, based on an 11 million pound TAC.
According to my calculations, 47% of the 49% rec allocation based on a total 11 million pound red snapper TAC results in 2,533,300 pounds for the "For-Hire Sector". 2,533,300 / 1200 vessels = 2,111 pounds per boat.
That's a MUCH smaller amount of fish than what the EFPs are being given - SUBSTANTIALLY SMALLER.
How then, are these EFPs going to be able to provide any meaningful insight into the feasibility of Sector Separaton/Cooperatives/IFQs when the number of fish given to those EFP participants do not reflect the reality of what would happen if/when this program was implemented across the Gulf?
Is the solution to this dilemma to substantially consolidate the number of for-hire boats participating in the program?
If not, then how do you see this program working for the Gulf charterboat fleet that fish for red snapper? Please provide specifics on what each boat would be given based on a realistic, hypothetical scenario.
One thing I would recommend, if you are truly interested in seeing if these EFPs are a viable option, is to reduce the number of fish per vessel to be more in line with reality - these EFPs are not meant to be deceptive are they?
Thanks in advance,
Tom Hilton
The word needs to get out to all Gulf charterboat captains who fish for red snapper as to the consequences of how it will affect THEM if/when Sector Separation/Cooperatives/IFQs are implemented. According to Mike Jennings (Cowboy) and other pro-sector separation people, the effect will be the elimination of a substantial number of their competitors (YOU). One guy even referred to it as a Hostile Takeover - no joke. You need to be informed of how this will affect your charter for-hire industry BEFORE you lend your support to the concept, as it will undoubtedly result in a substantial reduction in the number of charter vessels here in the Gulf. Look for entrance requirements such as income qualifiers, those who can document that they "substantially" fished the fishery, etc. etc. As the guy said, as in all LAPPs, there will be "winners" and "losers". The main purpose of IFQs is to consolidate the fishery into a smaller number of participants.
The effect on the private recs will be just as devastating, if not more so, and remember that this is not just about red snapper - it will spread to every federally-managed species that swims out there in the Gulf. We are probably looking at a lottery fish tag system.
Mr. Branstetter,
You are listed as the contact person on the NOAA site regarding the Gulf Charterboat Exempted Fishing Permit, and I have some questions as to how these EFPs will help determine if this is really the way we want to go with our future fisheries management.
As you know, the Alabama Charterboat EFP has essentially been cut-and-pasted from the Headboat EFP.
The Headboat EFP sliced off 286,457 pounds of red snapper from each of this year's and next year's recreational TAC for the 17 headboats participating in the program to harvest. That's an average of 16,850 pounds per boat, per year, correct?
I believe that the Gulf Council/NMFS is looking to give to the Alabama Charterboat Cooperative about 366,000 pounds of red snapper to be subtracted from our total recreational TAC to be harvested by the 90 charterboats in the cooperative. That's about 4,067 pounds per boat, correct?
If you consider that the Gulf-wide charterboat count is about 1,200 vessels, then how do you see this Sector Separation/Cooperative/IFQ scenario playing out relative to its impacts on the entire Gulf-wide charterboat fleet, assuming that the Gulf Council goes forward with Sector Separation and it's preferred alternative of allocating 47% of the recreational TAC to the "For-Hire Sector"?
Please provide a hypothetical scenario of what would happen, based on an 11 million pound TAC.
According to my calculations, 47% of the 49% rec allocation based on a total 11 million pound red snapper TAC results in 2,533,300 pounds for the "For-Hire Sector". 2,533,300 / 1200 vessels = 2,111 pounds per boat.
That's a MUCH smaller amount of fish than what the EFPs are being given - SUBSTANTIALLY SMALLER.
How then, are these EFPs going to be able to provide any meaningful insight into the feasibility of Sector Separaton/Cooperatives/IFQs when the number of fish given to those EFP participants do not reflect the reality of what would happen if/when this program was implemented across the Gulf?
Is the solution to this dilemma to substantially consolidate the number of for-hire boats participating in the program?
If not, then how do you see this program working for the Gulf charterboat fleet that fish for red snapper? Please provide specifics on what each boat would be given based on a realistic, hypothetical scenario.
One thing I would recommend, if you are truly interested in seeing if these EFPs are a viable option, is to reduce the number of fish per vessel to be more in line with reality - these EFPs are not meant to be deceptive are they?
Thanks in advance,
Tom Hilton
Replies
The EFPs were designed to demonstrate the success of a preconceived business model.
That's why it is imperative to get the data FIRST then make decisions on which way to go - these jokers have it backwards - intentionally, because once the data comes out, it would most likely show there is not even any need for Sector Separation, IFQs, etc..
The EFPs were designed to demonstrate the success of a preconceived FICTITIOUS business model since it is impossible to give 16,000 pounds to each headboat in the Gulf or 4,000 pounds to each charterboat in the Gulf. If they did so, then the For-hire portion of the recreational TAC would need to be almost 6 million pounds alone, and the total Gulf red snapper TAC would need to be around 26 million pounds. I don't see that happening anytime soon.
Capt. Tom,
Excuse the deletion of most of your post when I quote your post, but I just have one question to ask. Can you teach me how to communicate effectively with others, like you do? Gosh, you do it so well. For example:
How well did all those inflammatory and demanding bolds and red letters work out for you? I'm sure that really drove a point home, and thus generated an immediate response to try to fully answer your questions.
How did ending every paragraph with a rhetorical/hypothetical question that had no answer work out for you?
How did all your simple math (divide total quota by total boats) work out for you?
How did ending your email with a sarcastic comment/question work out for you?
I only ask because this is truly a novel way to write a business letter (at least as I was taught), and if it is the new way to win friends and influence people, I need to learn it!
Thank you in advance for future guidance
It has worked out well, by the way - gotten some interesting emails from Gulf Council members who hadn't connected the dots on this scam.
Funny how con artists want you to look over there while they are robbing you over here. The truth shall stand the light of day - your scam, therefore, will not.
glad you got answers from Council members, since you stated here that you sent the query to a person at NMFS. guess your queries were broad based. That's always a good thing; to get a variety of opinions.
I wonder how many charter businesses will be destroyed by Sector Separation? 200? 400? 600?
How many charter captains will be forced out in what notreely refers to as a Hostile Takeover?
If any boats are eliminated it will probably be those part timers or those who think it's just cool to have a charter boat. I'm sure the long time, full time, depend on their business for their income ,professional fisherman will be able to thrive.
I disagree - greed has blinded you guys.
The greed of the private of the private recs caused this.
ah........ so you posted a statement that you sent a specific request to one person, but now you say you sent it to multiple people (unbeknown to the rest of us readers), and you got replies from your "others"
can one inquire as to who the others were? Or is that private, and not transparent?
you constantly want transparency. Where is yours? You specifically said you sent an email to ONE person. Where is your transparency?
What do you care who I sent it to? Again, you seem to misconstrue what I said - I never said that I sent it ONLY to one person. Come to think of it, I think I forwarded it on to some other people.
Why not speak of something relevant to the issues, such as how Sector Separation/IFQs are going to reduce the Gulf red snapper charter fleet substantially? How about poking some holes in my "fuzzy math"?
The numbers don't lie. Wish I could say the same for some of the people pushing this Hostile Takeover.
the first statement I quote from you is in direct contrast to the second (note the bold).
If you had said, I sent this to the point man and bunch of others...... your credibility would be better. But, no.......
you speak with forked tongue, my friend. I know not of which to believe.
Why don't you speak of something relevant, instead of just spewing rhetoric?
Bubba got owned
Now the numbers are paranoid and delusional?
Like I said - the numbers don't lie. Can't say the same about you and your cohorts pard. You can't dispute the numbers, so you attack the messenger.
much as expected, NO transparency and more 'You'll have to pass it first" to see what
it will be like.
I will attempt to answer the questions you ask, that I can.
Is this Alabama scheme (commenting) going to work the same way?
Yes, the comments are via email to a NOAA server. There is not any way to let the public have access to NOAA servers. The system to which you refer, regulations.gov, is actually relatively new to our system, and is the first opportunity the public ever had at seeing comments during the comment period. However, use of that portal is not appropriate for this type of comment solicitation.
How many active CFH permit holders that actively fish for ARS will be included? Were used for calculation and sampling purposes. How many are associated with iSnapper or its founders or principles or directors?
As of right now, the Alabama Charterboat EFP has not been approved and issued. Should it be approved, calculations of an allocation would be estimated based on the vessels wishing to participate in the program.
Would a Recreational Angler wide referendum be called for if the idea of converting this “EFP or “Pilot” into a full FMP?
To create any IFQ requires a referendum. Who gets to vote in a referendum is those who substantially fished; the Council sets the boundaries on what is considered substantially fished.
is it NMFS/NOAA policy to put all recreational fishing in a IFQ or Fish Tag scheme?
NMFS supports concepts preferred and promoted by the Councils. If a Council chooses to evaluate the benefits/impacts of a limited access program, that is their prerogative.
Actually more like ask for a Glass of Water and get a stick of dynamite instead.
My reply was not unexpected given the precedent set by the folks at NOAA and
its NMFS. They have proven to be anything but transparent. I am awaiting any
response to my follow-up e-mail, which I have cc'd to council members and congressional
reps regarding the lack of an open and transparent process.
In this case its NOT the EFP requesters fish, but the entire Recreational Fishing
communities, so without sector separation yet approved, it is relevant information to
all recreational stakeholders. The only reason they may claim for withholding such
information would be for confidential business matters.......which has neither been
established nor would be appropriate for establishing such a management measure.
FOIA test coming.
Maybe you should reexamine position, step back and take a deep breath. Read this blog again
http://oneanglersvoyage.blogspot.com/2014/03/red-snapper-anglers-embarrass-us-all.html
Don't take it as gospel but do give another thoughtful opinion a chance to resinate before you dismiss it.
Guessing you prefer or think its OK to keep Public input request comments "Secret" until
after a decision is rendered?
Do You also prefer to allow a law to be passed without details until after its passed?
Do you think its good to exclude the stakeholders from having a say it what is done
with their fish?
Seems your opposed to what most people want and what data itself shows. I'm guessing
your commercially vested in the fisheries? Perhaps a member of the SAFA?
So, still have not heard any attempt to reply to the question of "If MRIP has eliminated
the gross Overestimation or Recreational Effort clearly defined in MRFSS"? You seem to think
that's a "Broken Record" or " Flogging a Dead Horse"......but that would only be true if it
was addressed and answered. As to "Flogging a Dead Horse".......or perhaps resurrecting
one would be better, Why is it OK to ignore overwhelming public input, and keep resurrecting
the 'Dead Horse' that is Sector Separation, just because a handful of people want it for
purely economic reasons?
Below is my letter to Branstetter again - where are the conspiracy claims? Apparently it is "paranoid and delusional" to ask questions about something that clearly doesn't add up. Certainly was amusing to see the concern regarding who this was sent to.
Apparently the Plan is to eliminate any "part-time" charter captains from the industry so that the "hard-working full-time professional captains" can divvy up their fish for their own use. Pretty disgusting really.
I would venture to say that the headboats in operation are pretty much full-time operations, so there shouldn't be much if any attrition in that part of the equation. Since the Gulf-wide headboats have accounted for about 14% of the rec quota over the years, that would mean that they get about 754,600 pounds based on an 11 million pound TAC. That's about 10,000 pounds per vessel - NOT 16,850 pounds/vessel, on average.
If the for-hire sector as a whole gets their 47%, that would leave 33% for the charter fleet, or about 1,778,700 pounds for the CFH operators / 1125 permits = 1581 pounds per vessel. But wait a minute, the Alabama boys think they deserve over 4,000 pounds per vessel - where are those fish going to come from? According to one of the captains at Zekes Marina, all of the Gulf charter captains are "one big happy family" and everyone is going to be treated the same. I don't see that happening. Greed is the driving force here, and fisheries science nor the truth for that matter have NOTHING to do with it.
The "answer" to this dilemma, according to Dr. Shipp is to do an "honest" stock assessment - one that counts all the fish swimming around the oil platforms and artificial reefs. That, coupled with improved data on effort/landings would result in a 6 to 8 month red snapper season, FOR EVERYONE - recreational fishermen who fish aboard headboats, charterboats, and private rec boats. If notreely, Bubba, and their cohorts believe that the feds' are being "honest" in their data presentations, I guess that is their right, but clearly their data does not match reality and is designed to create a crisis where there is none in order to justify their march towards privatizing our Public Trust Resources through Catch Shares.
Mr. Branstetter,
You are listed as the contact person on the NOAA site regarding the Gulf Charterboat Exempted Fishing Permit, and I have some questions as to how these EFPs will help determine if this is really the way we want to go with our future fisheries management.
As you know, the Alabama Charterboat EFP has essentially been cut-and-pasted from the Headboat EFP.
The Headboat EFP sliced off 286,457 pounds of red snapper from each of this year's and next year's recreational TAC for the 17 headboats participating in the program to harvest. That's an average of 16,850 pounds per boat, per year, correct?
I believe that the Gulf Council/NMFS is looking to give to the Alabama Charterboat Cooperative about 366,000 pounds of red snapper to be subtracted from our total recreational TAC to be harvested by the 90 charterboats in the cooperative. That's about 4,067 pounds per boat, correct?
If you consider that the Gulf-wide charterboat count is about 1,200 vessels, then how do you see this Sector Separation/Cooperative/IFQ scenario playing out relative to its impacts on the entire Gulf-wide charterboat fleet, assuming that the Gulf Council goes forward with Sector Separation and it's preferred alternative of allocating 47% of the recreational TAC to the "For-Hire Sector"?
Please provide a hypothetical scenario of what would happen, based on an 11 million pound TAC.
According to my calculations, 47% of the 49% rec allocation based on a total 11 million pound red snapper TAC results in 2,533,300 pounds for the "For-Hire Sector". 2,533,300 / 1200 vessels = 2,111 pounds per boat.
That's a MUCH smaller amount of fish than what the EFPs are being given - SUBSTANTIALLY SMALLER.
How then, are these EFPs going to be able to provide any meaningful insight into the feasibility of Sector Separaton/Cooperatives/IFQs when the number of fish given to those EFP participants do not reflect the reality of what would happen if/when this program was implemented across the Gulf?
Is the solution to this dilemma to substantially consolidate the number of for-hire boats participating in the program?
If not, then how do you see this program working for the Gulf charterboat fleet that fish for red snapper? Please provide specifics on what each boat would be given based on a realistic, hypothetical scenario.
One thing I would recommend, if you are truly interested in seeing if these EFPs are a viable option, is to reduce the number of fish per vessel to be more in line with reality - these EFPs are not meant to be deceptive are they?
Thanks in advance,
Tom Hilton
I di dnot know that now in this country that working part time at something you love was bad.....
How many cottage industries exist in this country borne out of a part time passion and when the heel did so called Full Timers decide they owned the fishery and can make demands....
Seems to me, that since this move (an illegal one) will significantly impact all recreational anglers, then under the law a referendum vote is required (just like in the commercial IFQ).
As long as we are still in America people are free to do what they wish and if being a part time charter captain is what they wish then that is their choice and for you or anyone else to look down upon them for that is UnAmerican...
Hell I put myself through college as a part time charter captain....
https://www.facebook.com/RecAnglers?notif_t=page_new_likes
I really don't see how what you wrote is actually going to change anything. It comes off as a rant. Has this ever worked for you? How do you think your comments will actually get NMFS to actually come to your conclusion?
You seem to have knowledge regarding charter for-hire business, good. Then why didn't you comment on what the Federal Register Notice asks for " NMFS specifically solicits comments from the public regarding the appropriateness of the potential number of vessels that would be eligible to participate in the pilot study authorized by the EFP and on the economic effects to the surrounding communities if the EFP were to be issued."
Yes, it has worked. Educating the general public about what is really going on has resulted in actions taken to stop the corruption - they don't like it when light is shone upon them when they are attempting to dupe the public.
The point of writing to the Gulf Council and NMFS directly is that it provides a paper trail documenting that they have been notified of the discrepancies in their numbers, and alerts the general public that there is something amiss here. If this is really all about "accountability", then it should start at the NMFS/Gulf Council level - the accounting doesn't add up, and I really don't give a **** if it comes across as a rant, this action is nothing short of felony theft of our Public Trust Resources. There will be lawsuits forthcoming over this power/profit grab, as I don't see the states sitting back and letting this happen unopposed.
What does it really matter how many vessels are participating in the pilot study? It's not the economic effects if the EFP was issued, it's the devastating economic effects if they implement Sector Separation/IFQs in the recreational Gulf fisheries.
A law was passed and signed by the president.
That law the MSA, restricted an already limited access federal for hire fishery for red snapper.
The states expanding their red snapper fishery has exacerbated the problem for the industry.
Don't believe I stated that one couldn't couldn't dabble in the for hire industry. I just don't think that under the current conditions in red snapper fishery and if an IFQ program is implemented. Those that have a long and large landing history shouldn't be weighed equally to those who do it part time or for enjoyment.
If you feel sector separation is illegal, hire an attorney and take it to court.
Where was your free to do what we wish American spirit when the net ban was proposed or when most federal commercial fisheries were restricted with LAP'S.
Do you think it's so UnAmerican when collage students are restricted from being commercial fisherman to help pay for their tuitions.
Do you think it's so UnAmerican when a licensed commercial fisherman can't catch a redfish in florida and sell it because someone in a $ 90,000 boat wearing his weakened warrior outfit wants to catch and fondle it.
BOB since you don't know what my family has done and sacrificed for this country, I think it pretty dam obnoxious for you to insinuate that I'm UnAmerican because OF how I think IFQ'S should be distributed within an already existing LAP.
Tom I'll add Charles Witek to your conspiracy theory!
Do you want me to put him above Bigfoot and the Aliens or between them on the list.