Handguns
Subscribe
Digital Now Included!
Current Subscribers Click Here.
Current Subscribers Click Here.
All Florida Sportsman subscribers now have digital access to their magazine content. This means you have the option to read your magazine on most popular phones and tablets.
To get started, click the link below to visit mymagnow.com and learn how to access your digital magazine.
Replies
The generic letter sent by the government is actually public record, so if I wanted to I could contact NMFS and ask for all responses to a specific item. They may redact the names of those replied to. Mostly these letters say 'thanks for your response' and not much else.
Tags, in some hunts/states there are mandatory reporting conditions. Like some hunts in AK, if you don't report your use or non-use of a tag, you can't get another one and may get a lovely fine as a bonus. Deer rarely have enforced reporting requirements; but rare/big game animals do.
Ah but problem is nobody has been counting their historic landings.....merely what some report via MRFSS....
It was also noted that in 2009/2010/2011 in hopes of sector separation and IFQ that some monkey business occurred with reporting...
My ask is this:
CFH is responsible for 20% of the federal effort and so they only need 20% federal stock to supply their customers (remember they aren't selling fish, but rides out to go get fish). Federal stock accounts for about 58% so will the Federal CFH sector be happy with 11.6% of the quota (this equates to about 600k pounds)
https://www.facebook.com/RecAnglers?notif_t=page_new_likes
uh...... learn to read sarcasm into a post. IFQs are not simple to design or implement. No one can give you an explanation of how something is going to work until the skeleton of the system is designed. And that is up the Council. You can make all the hypothetical guesses you want; until the Council comes up with some kind of design, you can't know how its going to come out.
ACME said in this thread that is has to be law to see it. No. Look at how the grouper/tilefish IFQ came about (red snapper is different because Congress said how it would be laid out). The Council first chose IFQ vs other LAPPs or no action. The Council then identified criteria for substantial participation, and offered up a string of options on various aspects that had been identified by its Advisory Panel, made up of reef fish fishermen. The substantial participants voted in a referendum to let it go forward or not. The Council then proceeded to narrow its choices during the development of the amendment and the public could read the draft document and comment on it, during the Council's development phases. Only after it was completely developed, t's crossed and i's dotted, was it turned into reality.
But until the Council develops something, there is no "what is the outcome?" answer. they could go a variety of directions, and for this for-hire IFQ proposal, several options are being considered on how to divvy up the pie, since there is no individual catch histories.
Oh, and I wasn't asking for your private emails. You posted a long email you sent to NMFS; I was asking what was NMFS reply
your answer was quick but generic. That reply to you is public. ACME has posted two replies here in this thread he got from NMFS regarding his questions.
Although I guess my question is a moot point, since you admitted in this thread http://forums.floridasportsman.com/showthread.php?161321-Email-to-Steve-Branstetter&p=2018804&viewfull=1#post2018804 that all your sentences ending in question marks were not really questions.
CB........ It is with great sadness and a heavy heart that I must let you know Bubba has passed on. The forum moderator made every effort he could to resuscitate Bubba, but it was in vain. So, BubbaII was born, and the circle of life continues.
The Council consists of 17 voting members: the Southeast Regional Administrator of NMFS (or his designee), the directors of the five Gulf state marine resource management agencies (or their designees), and 11 members who are nominated by the state governors and appointed by the Secretary of Commerce. Appointments are three-year terms with a maximum of three consecutive terms. In addition, there are four nonvoting members representing the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of State, and the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission.
The Council meets five times a year at various locations around the Gulf coast. Prior to taking final action on any proposed rule change public hearings are held throughout the Gulf. Public testimony is also heard during the meeting at which final action is scheduled. Proposed rule changes are then submitted to NMFS for further review and approval before implementation.
When reviewing potential rule changes, the Council draws upon the services of knowledgeable people from other state and federal agencies, universities, and the public, who serve on panels and committees.
I think some people need to understand the council is a representative body. The majority opinion is irrelevant if council values the values the merit of the minority.
If the majority feel that the council members that represent them are not following their wishes they need to pressure their governors to change the members.
If they feel the council system is flawed. They need to pressure their federal lawmakers to change the MSA.
Those who think the council and the NMFS is breaking the law, take them to court!
Bottom line Given the current make up and council process the council has turned into the proverbial self licking ice cream cone in that it is a self perpetuating system that has no purpose other than to sustain itself.
Complain to your governor!
The 11 appointed members you note represent the following:
Commercial: 4
Rec CFH: 2
Rec private: 3 (including Bob Shipp, who is listed as an other....... but basically represents CCA)
Other: 2 (not including Bob Shipp)
So, when you throw the 5 state directors in, who vote however their governor/commissioner told them to vote (which is mostly in support of private rec), you have an automatic 8 votes for private rec, 2 for CFH, 4 commercial, and 2 other (who are often told by their state how to vote if they want to remain). So, its not so hard to swing a 9-8 vote.
You couldn't get a fair verdict from a jury of your best friends if the judge and prosecutors managed to manipulate the evidence they were allowed to take in the deliberation room.:rotflmao
The systems broke, but go ahead and keep putting lipstick on your pig. You said you were used to wallowing with the hogs.:grin
UNLIKE the commercial IFQ scheme, the Owners or Stakeholders of this User Groups
fish are the Harvesters, NOT Boat or Business owners. They may fish from many platforms
but again are all one and the same, the Recreational Angler. What is being suggested is
taking away a large chunk of their total quota to give to a boat or business owner so as
to control What and when recreational anglers may attempt to harvest. This is why the
Recreational Anglers user group deserves to know details before allowing the train to
get rolling. Once in motion it will be hard to stop, even if it derails, or goes down a really
bad set of tracks (staying with the train analogy). Why would a passenger ever by a ticket
for a train ride without knowing where its going.
You would think that those pushing this scheme have already run scenario's, and would not
mind sharing them. They did remember? But as unfavorable as most outcomes were for most
that list was removed. It does indeed amount to 'Passing it First and then see what it will be'.
Might as well ask for a blank, signed check from a publicly funded account. My response from
the NMFS did pretty much confirm this. It may sound more impressive to lay out a timeline
of events leading from the various decisions, but in the end its make it law and then determine
what it means and who it affects. The Stakeholders deserve better. The stakeholders deserve
the promised transparency and inclusion the NMFS claimed would occur. The Stakeholders of
this issue is the Recreational Angler catching the fish , NOT the Boat Owner, Business Owner,
Captain, or eNGO.
ya know........ I think I agree with you....... but I'm not sure what you said. The analogies could go either way. There is a lot of lipstick being put on a lot of pigs right now.
my point was that there are 5 state directors who vote however their state tells them to vote; whether its right, wrong, or indifferent, and couple of "at-large" seats that the states try to manipulate. They swing any final vote. It doesn't matter if there are also 2 commercial and 2 recs, or 4 recs and 1 commercial....... depending on the topic.
So speaking of analogies that could go either way, why don't you share with us the meaning of your avatar you have chosen?
Bubba (as my avatar) was a pretty sharp cookie, but perceived to be an idiot. I figured when I starting posting (lurked for a long time), I would be perceived as an idiot. Does that make your day? Does that make you feel better that I declare myself an idiot?
Dude, I've been there, done that, got the T shirt, wore it out until its only function is to wipe wax off my car.
Makes me feel better than if you were declaring the rest of us here as idiots.
But don't sell yourself short, it takes a pretty smart fellow to dole out the party line propaganda as eloquently as you do.:grin
BY the way his name was Junior not Bubba, just sayin.
uh....... its an analogy.