2 million dollars allocated

ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 9,046 Admiral
for a federally permitted Charter (not headboat) vessel VMS, observer program for the GOM (voluntary of course).
Real time, hard data for the charter fleet, something they can bring to the bargaining table at allocation time.

Prolly good for 350 or so boats.

saying.
I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.

Replies

  • HuckleberryHuckleberry Posts: 180 Officer
    Thats the difference between getting things done for your sector and sitting behind a computer and complaining .
  • ACME Ventures FishingACME Ventures Fishing Posts: 851 Officer
    VMS does nothing to ensure better data. its Enforcement to ensure those engaged don't cheat and allow
    enforcement to make sure of such. Electronic Logbooks provide the data needed and could have been
    required for CFH like Headboats without sector separation and all the cost. The $2 Million certainly could
    have been better spent collecting Good data on fish like Red Snapper so that "All User groups" could benefit
    rather than a handful of special funded ones. I's awaiting an answer back on whether any of the dual permitted
    boats already running VMS will be funded in this scheme. In the South Atlantic a Electronic logbook plan is
    being worked on to actually get the better needed. The states are having to take it upon themselves at the
    request of the recreational angler to get better effort data from the recreational angler since the Feds and those
    lobbying for the separatist refuse to do so or allow to happen. A lot has been done and brought forward like the
    various plans to rework what is so broken now....unfortunately the special interest with purely profit in mind have
    fought it every step of the way and even have Obama promising to Veto any chance at fixing it. EDF paid Obama a lot
    and he owes them and their funded groups it seems.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 9,046 Admiral
    I believe there is electronic logbooks in the package.

    ACME, do you really think anyone of the boats that volunteer will be compensated with cash????

    And why do you feel that a step toward accountability is some sort of scheme?
    So of you guys are your own worst enemy.
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 9,046 Admiral
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    ANUMBER1 wrote: »

    only thing wrong with this press release......

    gulfseafoodnews.com/2015/06/03/gsi-helps-gulf-charter-captains-take-the-lead/

    Senator Shelby told Gulf Seafood News. “This important grant provision that I included in the fiscal year 2015 Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations Bill will allow real-time electronic reporting of red snapper for charter boats in the Gulf for the first time.”

    Yeah, he made sure 2 million dollars is committed to that effort. But, that is not new/additional money; its simply an unfunded mandate to transfer existing funds to cover this endeavor. So, something else has to give way; a fishery independent survey (which is what everyone wants to be expanded) is cancelled, contractors get laid off, etc. So, to do this work, some other data collection program gets cut.

    What part of this doesn't Congress understand?
  • Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,580 Captain
    BubbaII wrote: »
    only thing wrong with this press release......

    gulfseafoodnews.com/2015/06/03/gsi-helps-gulf-charter-captains-take-the-lead/

    Senator Shelby told Gulf Seafood News. “This important grant provision that I included in the fiscal year 2015 Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations Bill will allow real-time electronic reporting of red snapper for charter boats in the Gulf for the first time.”

    Yeah, he made sure 2 million dollars is committed to that effort. But, that is not new/additional money; its simply an unfunded mandate to transfer existing funds to cover this endeavor. So, something else has to give way; a fishery independent survey (which is what everyone wants to be expanded) is cancelled, contractors get laid off, etc. So, to do this work, some other data collection program gets cut.

    What part of this doesn't Congress understand?

    Bubba - I applaud you Sir.
  • ACME Ventures FishingACME Ventures Fishing Posts: 851 Officer
    ANUMBER1 wrote: »
    I believe there is electronic logbooks in the package.

    ACME, do you really think anyone of the boats that volunteer will be compensated with cash????

    And why do you feel that a step toward accountability is some sort of scheme?
    So of you guys are your own worst enemy.

    "Real Hard Data" and 'VMS Enforcement' are 2 different animals. Electronic reporting which
    could be accomplished without the 'Pork' and under existing permit allowances without Sector
    Separation would provide the "Real Hard Data". Its a "Scheme" because its being sold as a Data
    and Accountability issue when in reality its not. As Bubba stated it really takes away funding from
    what is needed most, the pure fishery data such as stock assessments and effort collection. That
    well describes a "Scheme". Someone is going to make 2 million dollars, and while no CFH owner is
    going to get CASH out of this money is going to be allocated on their behalf and that is the basis of
    my question to the Feds. Is any boat already running a VMS as a dual permitted boat going to have
    taxpayer money allocated for them on this program? If an answer cannot be provided to this, where
    is the real accountability or transparency? VMS really is not going to get what we fishermen or the
    fisheries itself needs, better science based data collection. The 2 Million spent on this Scheme will
    only take away from what we need most. So, Who is really wanting what is best for our fisheries and
    fishing communities....Those pushing the VMS scheme...or those asking for more money to be spent
    on actual Hard Data Collection?
  • surfmansurfman WC FLPosts: 4,948 Captain
    Right on!
    Tight Lines, Steve
    My posts are my opinion only.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 9,046 Admiral
    k.

    lol
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • VMS = Stealing your numbers!
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    Tom Hilton wrote: »
    Bubba - I applaud you Sir.

    Capt. Tom, given our past, I'm not sure if you are truly in agreement, or being sarcastic. I hope the former, but want to clarify?

    Maybe I'm wrong, but as I read that bill/charge, it told the Center to reallocate. I think the Center Director even told the the Council that.

    So, what do they want? The additional data of more surveys, or cut those out to support this new reporting requirement (at the expense of some resource survey for an assessment)? Cause that kind of money doesn't come by telling people to turn their office light off before they leave at night. That kind of reallocation comes from cutting some other big project.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 9,046 Admiral
    So, accountability is bad unless it meets y'alls criteria?

    I saw this in the NW section also with arguments against FWC's reef fish registration requirement.

    They are both a step in the right direction IMO.


    I don't quite get it?
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • ACME Ventures FishingACME Ventures Fishing Posts: 851 Officer
    ANUMBER1 wrote: »
    So, accountability is bad unless it meets y'alls criteria?

    I saw this in the NW section also with arguments against FWC's reef fish registration requirement.

    They are both a step in the right direction IMO.


    I don't quite get it?

    The main opposition to the FWC Reef Fish Permit was from the very ones that were pushing
    Sector Separation....right here in this forum. They also questioned Alabama and Louisiana's
    data program. Seems the NMFS had things just like they wanted it, and couldn't let better
    data get in the way.

    Accountability.....at what cost? VMS makes sure that certain user groups don't cheat. It does not
    collect catch data, effort, biomass or any of the other data that is actually needed to manage our
    fisheries for the benefit of all user groups. AND, by reallocating money for it, actually takes away
    from what is needed most. We hear they are trying to tie electronic logbook reporting to it, BUT,
    electronic logbooks, which could provide much needed data could be required with the simple
    up or down vote of the council, and without VMS or AM40.

    When Jane Lubchenco was installed on the throne, catch Shares already existed, but what she
    did mirrors this move. She took money from the fisheries science and research budget and reallocated
    it to Catch Share promotion and management. So much for science based management.

    This move is huge step backwards hard data collection. Its interesting that the very group pushing
    it is one and the same as the AM40 crowd, including the OC commercial seafood lobby, EDF and their
    funded Commercial and Charter collaborative. Nothing they have done in recent history was about better
    science based data or about better access for all user groups, but really only created a bigger divide among anglers and reduced access for the biggest and most profitable user group as far as economic impact goes.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 9,046 Admiral
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • surfmansurfman WC FLPosts: 4,948 Captain
    How would this help them at the bargaining table? Crabtree claims rec anglers take 100,000 pounds of red snapper a day yet when it came time to allocate they split it and gave rec anglers the lesser amount. Do commercial fishermen take 110,000 pounds a day? Seems to me that if they really wanted to be fair and correct about it then the split should have been more like 20-80, 20% comm. and 80% rec. I know those numbers are probably off a little but, surely you get my point?
    Tight Lines, Steve
    My posts are my opinion only.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 9,046 Admiral
    It's gonna help those charter boats get a larger share of the rec pie.
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • surfmansurfman WC FLPosts: 4,948 Captain
    That I believe, it will happen anyway, whether they collect any data or not, but if they spend the money then they can say they did a study, the results can be made to look like what ever fits their desires.
    Tight Lines, Steve
    My posts are my opinion only.
  • Mackeral SnatcherMackeral Snatcher Posts: 10,581 AG
    BINGO
    THERE SHOULD BE NO COMMERCIAL FISHING ALLOWED FOR ANY SPECIES THAT IS CONSIDERED OVERFISHED.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 9,046 Admiral
    surfman wrote: »
    That I believe, it will happen anyway, whether they collect any data or not, but if they spend the money then they can say they did a study, the results can be made to look like what ever fits their desires.
    And this is why all hope is lostl
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • surfmansurfman WC FLPosts: 4,948 Captain
    I don’t know man, we’ve been told we couldn’t get it done before. :)
    Tight Lines, Steve
    My posts are my opinion only.
  • Got TA GoGot TA Go Posts: 2,608 Captain
    VMS is a tool for tools.

    Comm guys like it because they can track the boats they own but don't operate. Too cheap to put in a SPOT system or any other tracking device.

    The monies allocated now for the SS boats will just be a grab to see who gets free gear. Nothing more, nothing less.

    VMS doesn't stop bad fishermen from doing bad things. It doesn't even help prosecute them unless they are caught by human eyes. It doesn't stop them from not turning it on. It doesn't stop them from turning it off and then claiming they had an electrical problem.

    All VMS does is provide the Govt Tools and their cronies with an opportunity to say, "Look at what we did to help the fishery!"

    And like almost ALL Govt programs...it fails to meet its goal.

    Rob
    www.gottagofishinginkeywest.com


    Hero's Don't Wear Capes....They Wear Dog Tags.
  • Mackeral SnatcherMackeral Snatcher Posts: 10,581 AG
    Rob, you better hunker down, I see a full assault coming your way.:grin
    THERE SHOULD BE NO COMMERCIAL FISHING ALLOWED FOR ANY SPECIES THAT IS CONSIDERED OVERFISHED.
  • Got TA GoGot TA Go Posts: 2,608 Captain
    Rob, you better hunker down, I see a full assault coming your way.:grin

    MS... I've sat through the brief's on effectiveness of VMS. I've talked to the LEOs that have seen the tracks of the comm guys operating in closed areas but couldn't make a case because a vessel couldn't get out there in time to catch them operating in the closed area.

    I'm familiar with the gear and have even held new prototype VMS units in my hand that are "tamper free"... unless you kill power to it.

    The Snapper/Grouper Comms in the SA want to make VMS mandatory on their boats so that the Govt has to pay for them.

    Nobody can argue those facts.

    Rob
    www.gottagofishinginkeywest.com


    Hero's Don't Wear Capes....They Wear Dog Tags.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 9,046 Admiral
    The reef boats here didn't want them, don't like them, and resent paying the 39 or 49 dollars/month for a service that doesn't work half the time (e-mail to hail in/out).

    The Snapper/Groupers guy in the SA rejected the VMS.
    As far a making a case on VMS tracks, I don't understand why not as the feds have no problem making them in the NE US.
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • Got TA GoGot TA Go Posts: 2,608 Captain
    ANUMBER1 wrote: »
    The reef boats here didn't want them, don't like them, and resent paying the 39 or 49 dollars/month for a service that doesn't work half the time (e-mail to hail in/out).

    The Snapper/Groupers guy in the SA rejected the VMS.
    As far a making a case on VMS tracks, I don't understand why not as the feds have no problem making them in the NE US.

    A1... And there lies part of the problem.

    There is a huge disconnect between want the fishermen/public want and what gets pushed through Council. Just like with S/S, in the SA there are members in the Comm Sector that sit on the Council with me that pushed hard to make it mandatory...even though we all know few like it.

    The charges get even higher than that if you operate near a closed or critical area and get pinged more.

    Like the boats operating near or in the FKNMS, Dry Tortugas, Riley's Hump, etc...

    I'll see if I can find the videos we were shown that show boats operating in closed areas or on the edges (inside them) that were not brought up on charges...only issued warnings since CG/NOAA/LEO couldn't make it out to where they were operating.

    Briefing was given by NOAA LEOs.

    Rob
    www.gottagofishinginkeywest.com


    Hero's Don't Wear Capes....They Wear Dog Tags.
Sign In or Register to comment.