Home Conservation Front

regional management

Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,589 Captain
Here's an excellent video explaining why we need to fire the Gulf Council and hand over the management of our fisheries to the states;

https://vimeo.com/141539357

Here's the list of locations for the scoping meetings this week - please try to attend - they are at 6:00 PM

http://gulfcouncil.org/council_meetings/public_hearings_scoping_meetings.php

All in-person meetings begin at 6:00 pm local time and will end
no later than 9:00 pm local time. Webinars begin at Eastern Time.

Mon, October 19, 2015
Amendments 39, 41, & 42
Courtyard Marriott Gulfport Beachfront
1600 East Beach Blvd.
Gulfport, MS 39501
228-864-4310
Amendment 39
Hilton Garden Inn
6717 South Padre Island Dr
Corpus Christi, TX 78412
361-991-8200

Wed, October 21, 2015
Amendment 39
Hampton Inn & Suites
2320 Gulf Freeway South
League City, TX 77573
281-614-5437

Amendments 41 & 42
Adult Activity Center
26251 Canal Road
Orange Beach, AL
251-981-3440

Mon, October 26, 2015
Amendments 41 & 42
Marriott Clearwater Beach
Sand Key
1201 Gulf Blvd.
Clearwater Beach, FL 33767
727-596-1100

Tues, October 27, 2015
Amendment 39
Hilton St. Petersburg
Carillon Park
950 Lake Carillon Dr.
St. Petersburg, FL 33716
727-540-0050

Tues, November 3, 2015
Amendments 41 & 42
Courtyard Marriott
142 Library Drive
Houma, LA 70360
985-223-8996
Tues, October 20, 2015
Amendment 39
Renaissance Mobile
Riverview Plaza Hotel
64 South Water Street
Mobile AL 36602
251-438-4000
Amendment 39
Embassy Suites San Antonio
10110 US Highway 281 N
San Antonio, TX 78216
210-525-9999

Thurs, October 22, 2015
Amendment 39, 41, & 42
Embassy Suites
570 Scenic Gulf Drive
Destin, FL 332550
850-337-7000

Amendments 41 & 42
Hilton Galveston Island
5400 Seawall Blvd.
Galveston, TX 77551
409-744-5000

Wed, October 28, 2015
Amendment 39
Webinar
Click here to register!

Thurs, October 29, 2015
Amendments 41 & 42
Webinar
Click here to register!

Mon, November 2, 2015
Amendment 39
Doubletree
4964 Constitution Avenue
Baton Rouge, LA 70808
225-925-1005
«1

Replies

  • surfmansurfman WC FLPosts: 5,988 Admiral
    Boy that would be nice.
    Tight Lines, Steve
    My posts are my opinion only.

    Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for.  Will Rogers
  • Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,589 Captain
    Scoping meeting tonight in Galveston for AM 41 and 42. Just as we have said all along, AM 40 does nothing but sets the stage for Catch Shares/IFQs in the Gulf recreational fisheries, and that is what AM 41 and 42 are designed to do.

    AM 40 has been in existence for one year and what have they done with it, other than steal more fish than they deserved to get them a 45 day season in 2015. Do the math - 7 million pound rec quota X 42.3% = 2,961,000 pounds x .8 buffer = 2,368,800 pounds / 1,250 charter boats = 1895 pounds per boat / 80 pounds (5 limits of 8 pound snapper per trip) = 23.6 trips, or about 1/2 of the days they were given. In other words, they were given almost double of what they should have gotten - where did these fish come from? Stolen from the rest of us, and is a large reason we only got 10 days to fish this year.

    One guy last night blamed our 9 day season last year on state noncompliance - he must have forgotten about the lawsuit filed by the enviro-funded stooges that was the DIRECT cause of our season being shortened so drastically.

    You will see in AM 41 and 42 the options of implementing Individual Fishing Quotas (IFQs), collaboratives, fish tags and other forms of Catch Shares.

    Considering that AM 40 is set to expire in 26 months, why then are they attempting to implement programs that REQUIRE AM 40? To privatize the fishery of course - doing what's best for the fishery (or recreational fishermen and communities) has NOTHING to do with it. It will also be interesting to see what happens with the AM 40 lawsuits - all of this could be spinning of the wheels since AM40 has a good chance of being struck down by the courts.

    Just underscores the underhanded deceit associated with this boondoggle and those pushing for it.
  • Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,589 Captain
    Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority Act Moves Forward
    Hearing in House Resources subcommittee on Oceans Shows
    States are "Ready, Willing and Able" to Assume Red Snapper Management

    WASHINGTON, D.C. --A coalition of organizations representing the saltwater recreational fishing and boating community applauded the House Resources subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans for its hearing on H.R. 3094, the Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority Act. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Garret Graves (R-La.) and 28 bi-partisan co-sponsors, will grant legal recognition to the plan adopted by the Fish and Wildlife agencies of all five Gulf states to assume management of the Gulf red snapper in federal waters.

    "The five Gulf states demonstrated once again that they are prepared to take over management of the fishery in a more responsible way," said Jeff Angers, president of the Center for Coastal Conservation. "The states are already using state-of-the-art monitoring methods that will enable them to ensure the sustainability of the snapper fishery and enable every sector of the fishing community to equitably share in the harvest. Congress should act quickly to pass this important measure that will give legal recognition to the historic cooperative agreement by the Fish and Wildlife agencies of the five Gulf states - Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas -- to assume management of Gulf red snapper."
    Testimony at the hearing drew a stark line between those reaping financial benefits of federal management and angling families who have found their seasons continually shortened despite the largest population of red snapper in modern times.

    The management agency for every Gulf state has come to the same conclusion - federal management of red snapper is a failure," said Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation Fisheries Program Director Chris Horton. "We are grateful to Rep. Graves for not only identifying the fundamental problem, but also working with the states to craft the necessary solutions. His legislation gives hope to hundreds of thousands of people who have lost all confidence in the federal management process."

    Rep. Graves received letters of support for H.R. 3094 for all five Gulf states prior to the hearing each expressing concern over the federal government's dramatic departure from established wildlife resource management practices.

    "With the federal government now focused on private ownership programs for industrial harvesters and the charter/for-hire sector, the ability of recreational anglers to be a part of the process is being eliminated," said Patrick Murray, president of Coastal Conservation Association. "These privatization programs have completely altered the landscape of the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, where proceedings are now dominated by businesses. We aren't talking about eliminating the commercial fishery; we only want to ensure that if recreational anglers want to go snapper fishing with their family in their own boats, they have an opportunity to do that."
    ###

    The Recreational Saltwater Fishing Coalition includes American Sportfishing Association, The Billfish Foundation, Coastal Conservation Association, Center for Coastal Conservation, Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation, Guy Harvey Ocean Foundation, International Game Fish Association, National Marine Manufacturers Association, Recreational Fishing Alliance and Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership.
  • notreelynotreely Posts: 653 Officer
    Amendment 39 died today in Panama City and the Graves bill took a beating. The FWC commissioners realized that states like Texas are trying to screw Florida fisherman. Funny how a Texan is moderator on Florida fisherman forum pushing his states agenda!
  • Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,589 Captain
    notreely wrote: »
    Amendment 39 died today in Panama City and the Graves bill took a beating. The FWC commissioners realized that states like Texas are trying to screw Florida fisherman. Funny how a Texan is moderator on Florida fisherman forum pushing his states agenda!

    On the contrary, it is the preferred alternative of the EDF-funded folks that illustrates the very need for each state to manage its own resources/fishermen. Go to the minutes of each meeting held on this and you will the enviro shills pushing Action 2/Alternative 2 - not me, even when my state would supposedly get a 109 day red snapper season based on what the ecosystem could sustain. "Screw Florida fishermen"? No, not even in the equation, although one could certainly argue that maintaining the current system screws Texas fishermen without a doubt.

    The enclosed graph is from the AM 39 doc at;
    http://gulfcouncil.org/docs/amendments/PH%20Draft%20RF39%20Reg%20Man%2010-9-15.pdf

    What the EDF-funded folks are pushing with AM 39 is to maintain Sector Separation but then divide the private recs' TAC among the states - as you can see, if Action 2, Alternative 2 is adopted, Texas fishermen (with 7% of the allocation) would get a 109 day red snapper season while AL/FL fishermen (EACH state with an average of 20% (totalling 40% of the Gulf red snapper)) would get between 8-11 days. THAT is what notreely and his EDF benefactors are pushing - not me, but it does highlight rather vividly how unfair the current system and sector separation are.

    I also think you could easily extrapolate that the same is happening for the recreational fishermen fishing on for-hire vessels as well, so why would ANY rec fishermen in the western Gulf, whether he fishes from a private or for-hire vessel, want to be managed as a whole as we are now or with Sector Separation?

    It is clear that each part of the Gulf has its own ecosystems, numbers of anglers, proximity to the fish, etc., and yet the Separatists, such as notreely, would prefer to separate the fishermen based on the PLATFORM that they fish from rather than what the ecosystem off of the port they fish from can SUSTAIN. Kinda anti-thesis to the supposed "sustainability" touted with the Catch Sharecropping scam, isn't it?

    One could argue that anglers who are fishing well within the sustainable constraints of their ecosystem, such as western Gulf anglers, where they have more fish and less fishermen, are being penalized by what is happening in the eastern Gulf. Separate the Gulf based on ecosystem management principles, and Texas anglers get about 10X the number of fishing days. Separate the Gulf based on arbitrary parameters such as the PLATFORM from which they fish, and Texas anglers get penalized ten-fold relative to their eastern-Gulf counterparts. (REALLY makes you wonder why ANY Texas charter captain would be endorsing Sector Separation when it is clear that it screws Texas recreational fishermen (their customers).

    One could also argue that Florida and Alabama anglers have been accounting for about 60% of the recreational red snapper landed in the Gulf over many years, yet have not impacted the biomass whatsoever on that side of the Gulf. What does that tell us? It says that the regulations in place over many years have been working, that those fishermen are not overcapitalizing the fishery, and there is no supposed need for the "solution" - Sector Separation and Catch Shares. If there are less fish and more fishermen fishing in the eastern Gulf, catching 60% of the fish, sustainably, then why is everyone concerned about the western Gulf which has MORE fish and LESS fishermen? Why not focus on those fishing communities and what THEIR ecosystems can sustainably withstand?

    Oh yeah, it really has nothing to do with the fishermen or the fish - it's all about the privatization of the public trust resource that Catch Shares represent, right notreely?

    I am fighting for EVERY recreational fishermen in the gulf now, and future generations. The fact that I am a native Texan has nothing to do with it.
  • notreelynotreely Posts: 653 Officer
    Texas Tom , I watched the the FWC commissioners who control marine fisheries in Florida (WHICH IS ONE OF THE STATES) direct Martha Bademen to vote against Am 39. The commiissioners even said that if Am 39 passed without Florida support, they would opt out of the plan. That would make Am 39 as big of joke as you calling people EDF funded and enviro shills. Now that the FWC commissioners kicked the [email protected]!! out of Am 39 I guess you'll have to add them to your dillusional list of EDF funded enviro shills! The commissioners also directed director Wiley to back off his support of the Graves bill because it could dismantle the IFQ program which they now seem to love.

    So I quess you'll have to bust out the heavy duty aluminum foil because the conspiracy theory in your head must be growing!
  • Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,589 Captain
    Whatever - I'll join in and agree with you and call Amendment 39 in it's present form a joke. It really is, since, like Sector Separation, it is based on totally bogus data. It's amusing to hear the old tired wornout tin foil stuff come up since you don't have anything better.

    Here's an email that I sent a while back to various parties/Gulf Council members, including Ms Bateman - I knew that AL/FL reps would never vote for something where Texas fishermen got so many days while AL/FL fishermen got so few.

    Hello all,

    Take a look at these graphs taken from the Amendment 39 document off of the Gulf Council website;
    http://gulfcouncil.org/docs/amendments/PH%20Draft%20RF39%20Reg%20Man%2010-9-15.pdf

    Table 3.1.1 is one that I have cited many times in the past. Texas headboats supposedly caught 58% of ALL the Gulf headboat red snapper. Gulf-wide, all headboats (including Texas) account for about 14% of the Gulf red snapper landings, yet Texas headboats alone account for almost 70% of Texas red snapper landings. Bogus, to the extreme, yet it is this type of data that Sector Separation (Amendment 40) was based upon.

    Table 3.4.2.3 directly contradicts Table 3.1.1. Texas headboats average around 51,500 angler days vs 174,791 angler days for the rest of the Gulf headboats. How is it possible for Texas headboats to account for 58% of the Gulf headboat red snapper landings when they only have 23% of the angler days? Answer: It's not possible, yet it is this type of data that Sector Separation was based upon, and is what they want their version of Amendment 39 to be based upon.

    Lastly, Table 2.2.2 illustrates the very need for regionalization even though this is the preferred alternative by the EDF-funded folks. This maintains Sector Separation by keeping the Gulf charter boats separated from the Gulf private recs, but divides up the private rec TAC by state (region). If this was implemented, they estimate that Texas private recreational anglers would get a 109 day red snapper season while Florida and Alabama private recs would get between 8-11 days. In other words, the way we are being managed now, as a whole, Texas private recreational anglers are getting the shaft for what is happening over off of AL/FL. I think the case could also be made that Texas charter recreational anglers are also getting a proportional sized shaft due to AL/FL charter landings. Why would ANY Texas charter or private rec captain/angler want to be managed the same as those over in FL/AL (both conventionally and with Sector Separation) as it is clear that we would be much better off with fishing days based on the actual number of fish and effort/landings OFF OF TEXAS. We have more fish and less fishermen, so we should be fishing more instead of placating the eastern Gulf interests. It also points out the fantasy of the states agreeing on who should get what - I can guarantee you that AL/FL state reps will not vote for their fishermen getting 8-11 days while Texas fishermen get 109 days.

    I think this needs an investigation of the highest order since the feds' data not only contradicts itself, it is inflicting immense harm and damage to many Gulf recreational communities due to their complicity in promoting the scam to privatize our fisheries through Catch Shares. It is this data that illustrates the need to remove the management of the Gulf fisheries (including commercial fisheries) from the Gulf Council and placed in the hands of regional managers, free from federal interference and corruption.

    Tom
  • notreelynotreely Posts: 653 Officer
    Texas Tom not a good week for you and the Texans trying to take away fishing opportunity from Florida fisherman. First the FWC commissioners come out against regional management and now poor David Vitter lost his bid to be Govener of Louisiana. Rumor has it the new Govener favors federal management. A new direction for the Louisiana state director ? Maybe you can spend your energy convincing your state of Texas to support a recreational A.P.,Instead of trying to sell Florida fisherman on this pro Texas regional management plan. Senator Vitter also announced he will not run for the senate after his term is over next year. This should give senator Vitter plenty of time to presue his expensive hobby of tagging snapper!
  • Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,589 Captain
    Notreely,
    I would be careful about making false accusations on this forum (again).

    You have incorrectly asserted that I support AM 39; "....that states like Texas are trying to screw Florida fisherman. Funny how a Texan is moderator on Florida fisherman forum pushing his states agenda!"

    As I posted already AM 39 is a joke, and even though YOUR EDF benefactors' preferred action 2/alt. 2 that gives Texas fishermen more fishing days than Florida fishermen, I am against it. So, in effect, it is you who is pushing a version of AM 39 that is detrimental to Florida anglers - not me. I expect a retraction and apology for your intentional misstatement.

    I think Florida anglers should be managed based on what Florida fisheries can SUSTAIN, just as I advocate for management for Texas anglers based on what Texas fisheries can SUSTAIN. I know, a nefarious position for sure, but that is what I am pushing. There is no scientific rationale for managing Florida fishermen based on what is happening in Texas, and vice versa.

    Federal mismanagement depends on managing the Gulf fisheries as a whole, which is the very reason it is such a dismal failure, and cannot SUSTAIN itself.
  • Got TA GoGot TA Go Posts: 2,608 Captain
    notreely wrote: »
    Amendment 39 died today in Panama City and the Graves bill took a beating. The FWC commissioners realized that states like Texas are trying to screw Florida fisherman. Funny how a Texan is moderator on Florida fisherman forum pushing his states agenda!

    I'm from Texas, Live in Florida, Vote in Florida.

    Have a Boat in Texas and a Boat in Florida.

    I believe in States Rights and want the Feds out of our waters.

    Is that a bad thing, IYHO?

    Rob
    www.gottagofishinginkeywest.com


    Hero's Don't Wear Capes....They Wear Dog Tags.
  • Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,589 Captain
    "The FWC commissioners realized that states like Texas are trying to screw Florida fisherman. Funny how a Texan is moderator on Florida fisherman forum pushing his states agenda!"

    Multiple untruths here - Texas is not trying to screw Florida fishermen. I am also not pushing AM 39 - I oppose it in its present form. I believe that the fishermen from each state should enjoy the bounties of what the fisheries offshore of that state can SUSTAIN. Nefarious concept, I know, but THAT is what I am pushing - not another tool to give Roy Crabtree even more leverage to shut down our fisheries.

    "Texas Tom not a good week for you and the Texans trying to take away fishing opportunity from Florida fisherman."

    That's a patently untrue statement, and it appears that a FS moderator (You, Rich) are not only endorsing it, but come on ConFron slapping the hand of another moderator who is doing his job here.

    "Maybe you can spend your energy convincing your state of Texas to support a recreational A.P.,Instead of trying to sell Florida fisherman on this pro Texas regional management plan."

    Another flat out lie - I am not endorsing AM 39 - it is a joke. However, Notreely and his EDF-funded cohorts ARE endorsing Action 2/Alternative 2 which WOULD be a pro Texas regional management plan - I certainly am not endorsing Action 2 / Alternative 2, but that doesn't stop you Rich, a moderator on this board, from attacking another moderator in public. You know very well that your concerns could have been communicated via PM but you preferred to make it a public spectacle. Not indicative of very good moderation, in my OPINION, especially from one who is on the Executive Committee.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,060 AG
    Why do we have a Texan moderating a conservation forum for Florida Fisherman? Particularly one who does little moderation and a lot of voicing his own opinion, who brings his own agenda, and who has business interests (i.e., https://www.realtime-navigator.com/) that undoubtedly skews his perspective on these issues?
  • Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,589 Captain
    What exactly is my agenda Tarponator?
  • Got TA GoGot TA Go Posts: 2,608 Captain
    Tarponator wrote: »
    Why do we have a Texan moderating a conservation forum for Florida Fisherman? Particularly one who does little moderation and a lot of voicing his own opinion, who brings his own agenda, and who has a business interest (i.e., https://www.realtime-navigator.com/ ) that undoubtedly skews his perspective on these issues?

    Oh...let me jump in there and take a swing at the answer.....

    Let me start with the disclaimers first...

    I was born and raised in Texas. I grew up Commercial Fishing in Texas. I now live in Key West (15 years) after spending the majority of my Adult life in the Navy. I have 2 boats, 1 in Texas, 1 in Key West. I am a Charter Captain who gets paid by my clients to go out and find fish for them. My business partner in the Texas boat has a subscription, which he pays for, in the product that Tom offers (very good one I might add). I do not have a subscription to Tom's product as it would not service me very well for the type fishing I do here in the Keys.

    End Disclaimer

    Conservation on a Federal Scale is something that impacts all of us on every coast. I personally see it as an obligation of every person in every State to be involved.

    It isn't a matter of pitting one State against the others. Each State is represented on the Council, in what I believe could be a better way considering that Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana has as much representation as Florida with a combined coast line not equal to the State of Florida.

    On these Councils you have various entities, all with their own interests in the fisheries that undoubtedly skew their perspective.

    On these issues of Federal Management and looking to question Tom, notice we use our names since we are noted for our positions in Federal papers, I would be more interested in your opinion of the Florida State Rep to the Gulf Council, who was nominated by the Gov, chose to vote on issues that were against Florida's input on the subject.

    And when I say that, I mean FWC and the Gov office gave an official position...and the Representative voted the exact opposite of that position.

    Of course you won't find him here on FSFF in Confron, and I'm willing to bet you have no idea who or what I'm talking about.

    If you do, please, give us your opinion on that.... Since the person I'm talking about was born and raised here in Florida... built his businesses here in Florida.... Continues to represent Florida to the Federal Fisheries Managers with the power of voting on the behalf of Florida....

    Even when he is voting the exact opposite of what the majority of Florida residents spoke about in public hearings and opposed.

    Yet, Our Rep discarded all that we as State Citizens, FWC and State Gov wanted... and voted the other way.

    Surely he couldn't be seen as self serving.

    Now if Tom wanted to get involved is say... the upcoming Mutton Snapper hearings, which I doubt he'd do... but if he did, I'm pretty sure he'd know what he was talking about.

    I'd love to hear your take on that, since we are on the subject.

    There is not much Moderating that goes on here in Confron. As long as there are no threats of violence, etc... We are here to exchange thoughts and ideas. Much as we do in public hearings.

    There are cops present at public events... the occasional spirited conversation that has to be toned down, but that about it.

    Not often will you find Comms, Recs, Charter guys aligned on any issue.

    Nature of the beast.

    And I'm a States Rights guy. The fish that are in Texas catching fish using Tom's product... I'm never going to see here in the Keys.

    And in case you missed it...when SAFMC decided to shut down RS in the SA... They used data from the Gulf to do it.

    Just a piece of Fisheries Trivia for you.

    I'd like to hear your thoughts on the Muttons, and what if anything we should do about our State Rep that voted the opposite of how WE commented.

    Sincerely,
    Rob
    www.gottagofishinginkeywest.com


    Hero's Don't Wear Capes....They Wear Dog Tags.
  • Got TA GoGot TA Go Posts: 2,608 Captain
    Tarponator wrote: »
    Why do we have a Texan moderating a conservation forum for Florida Fisherman? Particularly one who does little moderation and a lot of voicing his own opinion, who brings his own agenda, and who has business interests (i.e., https://www.realtime-navigator.com/ & http://easyridersportfishing.com/) that undoubtedly skews his perspective on these issues?

    Oh... And if you are going to use a website I am affiliated with (Easy Rider), don't forget my other affiliated website:

    http://gottagofishinginkeywest.com/

    Thanks for the plug! :USA
    www.gottagofishinginkeywest.com


    Hero's Don't Wear Capes....They Wear Dog Tags.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,060 AG
    Thanks for the correction. Post fixed. I was referring to Tom, not you, but now that you mention it....
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,060 AG
    Tom Hilton wrote: »
    What exactly is my agenda Tarponator?

    We all have our own agenda, myself included. To address your question: Your agenda is obvious to me. However, I'll leave how to interpret your agenda to the readers of this forum.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,060 AG
    Got TA Go wrote: »
    Oh...let me jump in there and take a swing at the answer.....

    Let me start with the disclaimers first...

    I was born and raised in Texas. I grew up Commercial Fishing in Texas. I now live in Key West (15 years) after spending the majority of my Adult life in the Navy. I have 2 boats, 1 in Texas, 1 in Key West. I am a Charter Captain who gets paid by my clients to go out and find fish for them. My business partner in the Texas boat has a subscription, which he pays for, in the product that Tom offers (very good one I might add). I do not have a subscription to Tom's product as it would not service me very well for the type fishing I do here in the Keys.

    End Disclaimer

    Thank you for the disclaimer and sharing with us your potential conflicts of interest. I think it is important for all of us to consider the source when discussing these issues, and I wish all of us were as honest and upfront as you have been.

    In the same spirit, here's my own disclaimer: I do not have any commercial interest in any fishery whatsoever -- I work in Information Technology. I'm a Florida resident for all of the past 36 years and I am 100% recreational fisherman. I fish almost entirely for tarpon, with a few trips a year offshore or inshore for other species (reds/trout/snook/drum/grouper/snapper/etc.), and I generally spend a day or two each year fishing with guides. I have a number of close friends who are guides, commercial fishermen (including IFQ holders), and, of course, other recreational fishermen.
    Got TA Go wrote: »
    Conservation on a Federal Scale is something that impacts all of us on every coast. I personally see it as an obligation of every person in every State to be involved.

    Agreed. However, this is not a federal fishing website. This is the website and forum for Florida, and conservation isn't just defined as those species that have federal management. Furthermore, it's not participation that I was questioning, but rather moderation. Personally, I would prefer someone without a commercial interest and/or someone who actually resides in our state to moderate the forum -- and it was under this guise that my (loaded) question was asked.
    Got TA Go wrote: »
    On these issues of Federal Management and looking to question Tom, notice we use our names since we are noted for our positions in Federal papers, I would be more interested in your opinion of the Florida State Rep to the Gulf Council, who was nominated by the Gov, chose to vote on issues that were against Florida's input on the subject.

    And when I say that, I mean FWC and the Gov office gave an official position...and the Representative voted the exact opposite of that position.

    Of course you won't find him here on FSFF in Confron, and I'm willing to bet you have no idea who or what I'm talking about.

    If you do, please, give us your opinion on that.... Since the person I'm talking about was born and raised here in Florida... built his businesses here in Florida.... Continues to represent Florida to the Federal Fisheries Managers with the power of voting on the behalf of Florida....

    Even when he is voting the exact opposite of what the majority of Florida residents spoke about in public hearings and opposed.

    Yet, Our Rep discarded all that we as State Citizens, FWC and State Gov wanted... and voted the other way.

    Surely he couldn't be seen as self serving.

    You underestimate my knowledge, but that's OK, I'm used to it and my intent here is not to beat my chest, but rather to suggest that the same self-serving nature of the rep in question is the same self-interest I'm calling into question when business owners (like you and Tom) are asked to moderate forums here. Is that really in the best interest of our fisheries or our forum? Or, will moderation and spirited participation by these individuals lead toward a skewed view of conservation as is so obvious to me as a reader and critical thinker?

    Got TA Go wrote: »
    Now if Tom wanted to get involved is say... the upcoming Mutton Snapper hearings, which I doubt he'd do... but if he did, I'm pretty sure he'd know what he was talking about.

    I'd love to hear your take on that, since we are on the subject.

    I don't consider myself well-read enough on the mutton topic to voice an opinion, but I will do some reading when I get the chance, and I'm not shy about voicing my opinion here or anywhere, as you're well aware.
    Got TA Go wrote: »
    There is not much Moderating that goes on here in Confron. As long as there are no threats of violence, etc... We are here to exchange thoughts and ideas. Much as we do in public hearings.

    When a moderator voices his opinion -- and there's certainly no shortage of moderator's opinions in this forum -- it's viewed differently by the readers. So the moderation is done in a much less obvious way, and I would not minimize it's effect. Don't believe me -- look at this forum's participation level since you two took over as evidence of this. Not everyone will have the guts or take the time to respond to posts from moderators like I do -- they will go (and have gone) elsewhere.
    Got TA Go wrote: »
    There are cops present at public events... the occasional spirited conversation that has to be toned down, but that about it.

    Do the cops participate in these events? There's a reason why they don't, and it hits on the same reason I noted in the prior quote/point.
    Got TA Go wrote: »
    Not often will you find Comms, Recs, Charter guys aligned on any issue.

    Nature of the beast.

    Agreed. We should all have a voice, and there's power in sharing it and discussing these issue freely and openly. However, that's not what I'm concerned about. Who moderates this forum is what I am questioning, not who participates in it.
    Got TA Go wrote: »
    And in case you missed it...when SAFMC decided to shut down RS in the SA... They used data from the Gulf to do it.

    Just a piece of Fisheries Trivia for you.

    I didn't miss it, and like many of us, I'm disturbed at the lack of data and the way in which it is being (mis)used.
    Got TA Go wrote: »
    I'd like to hear your thoughts on the Muttons, and what if anything we should do about our State Rep that voted the opposite of how WE commented.

    Again, I don't have a strong enough knowledge of the topic to answer your question, but it doesn't come as a surprise to me that self-interest may have been a factor in the split between the two -- and that's precisely why I don't think either of you should be moderators here.

    Respectfully...Mike
  • Got TA GoGot TA Go Posts: 2,608 Captain
    Tarponator wrote: »
    Respectfully...Mike

    Thank You for an honest and straight forward response.

    In these days, it is both rare and refreshing. To me at least.

    As a Charter/For Hire guy... I fish the same rules as the recreational anglers and have never sided with the Charter only side as what we saw happen in the Gulf with SS.

    On the SA side, I voted against allowing Capt/Crew bag limit sales of fish. I am pro-conservation releasing as many fish as my clients allow once their needs are filled. I have long held the position that if you look at fisheries stocks, no species that is banned from commercial sale is in an over fished status.

    Obviously not a popular position for the Comm Sector.

    If things of this nature were left purely for the direct straight up Recreational Angler... I would be OK with that. For years I have tried to get the Avg Joe angler involved.

    Let's take an angler like you for example, and I'll throw in hypotheticals and some pulled from thin air numbers just for arguments sake.

    We have an angler that his primary fishery is Tarpon (C&R). In order to fish, he buys a license, maybe a stamp or two for it (what the heck, they are cheap and I might want to grab a lobster).

    That license doesn't come with any boundries... Isn't issued for a specific fishery nor body of water.

    We have bag/possession limits...seasons, gear exclusions, etc... to manage the fish.

    Problem is... Because that guy has a license, he can fish any fishery he wants to. So when it comes to bag limits/size limits, annual catch limits, etc....

    He is counted in ALL of them. Doesn't mean he's going to go out into 600' of water and drop a bait down for a Snowy Grouper, ever in his life....but because he has a license that allows him to, he gets accounted as a participant in the fishery as soon as he buys a license.

    And lets say for Snowy Grouper, the Govt says there are 1M Snowies in the water. So, since there were no numbers tracking the amount of Snowy Grouper being caught by the recreational sector, we now have to divide the allowable catch between the Comms/Recs and make sure we leave a reserve stock in the water to keep making babies.

    Let's say they give the fishery a 50% allowable harvest (500K Snowies).

    Now you go back and look at what you have on record as a historical catch and the only numbers you have are based on the Comm sales receipts, because they Govt didn't track Recreational catches. So you look at the numbers from the Comms and see that they historically caught about 490K snowies a year. Since you've already identified 500K as the allowable harvest, that leaves 10K snowies for the entire rec/for hire sector.

    Since there are 2M licensed recreational anglers in Fl, that means that 2M anglers are now going to fish for 10K snowies. But how will we know when 10K is reached?

    We do dockside intercepts and then extrapolate the data to come up with an estimation of the number of fish caught by a known number of licensed anglers.

    This is done by the number of fish seen or reported as being harvest.

    So if you have 2M licensed anglers fishing for 10K fish and in the first 30 days 1K snowies are intercepted that means that you are close to predicting the date to close the fishery after you apply a release mortality rate that is based on the fact that you have a 1 Snowy per vessel limit.

    But does that mean that every fishing day 2M anglers are fishing for Snowies?

    Of course not. Problem is...we have no way of knowing.

    Now, lets take our hypothetical angler into account.

    How do you think he is going to feel about managing that Snowy Stock?

    Is he the guy that those of us that do fish for them want representing our interests?

    What do you think would happen if all of a sudden all the licensed angler in Florida went out and bought a Snook Stamp? How long of a season do you think that would be?

    And for the record... The Snowy example I gave you, in real life, Recreational guys get 3% of the allocation and close to 5K fish. But it isn't based on just Florida's licensed anglers.... It's based on every Licensed Angler from North Carolina to Pensacola.

    There's more to this Conservation thing than using circle hooks and venting tools, and it applies to all of us.

    Confron isn't just meant for Florida residents. Not the way Karl had envisioned nor grew it.

    It's a place to share information.

    Sincerely and Respectfully,
    Rob
    www.gottagofishinginkeywest.com


    Hero's Don't Wear Capes....They Wear Dog Tags.
  • Got TA Go wrote: »

    What do you think would happen if all of a sudden all the licensed angler in Florida went out and bought a Snook Stamp? How long of a season do you think that would be?

    There would be a lot more money invested in snook research.

    What do you think would happen?

    Got TA Go wrote: »
    Confron isn't just meant for Florida residents. Not the way Karl had envisioned nor grew it.

    I've spoken to Karl many times over many years about this very thing.

    As late as 3 weeks ago.

    Karl never grew it or was directly involved or influential in it's direction or organization at all.

    An I'm pretty sure he never expected this kind of behavior by representatives of Florida Sportsman much less invoking his name in supporting it.

    But that's just me.
    "If I can't win, I won't play." - Doris Colecchio.

    "Well Gary, the easiest way to look tall is to stand in a room full of short people." - Curtis Bostick

    "All these forums, with barely any activity, are like a neglected old cemetery that no one visits anymore."- anonymouse
  • Got TA GoGot TA Go Posts: 2,608 Captain
    An I'm pretty sure he never expected this kind of behavior by representatives of Florida Sportsman much less invoking his name in supporting it.

    But that's just me.

    You are entitled to your opinion.
    www.gottagofishinginkeywest.com


    Hero's Don't Wear Capes....They Wear Dog Tags.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,060 AG
    I would think the sampling and assessment methods would figure out that only a small fraction of the 2m licensed anglers actually fish for snowies. I understand the data collection methods are imperfect, and there is certainly room for improvement, but it's not like they are making up the results of the telephone surveys. The answer for snook, a fish that is much easier to "count", is not dissimilar.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,060 AG
    And I would like to reiterate, against the backdrop of the Wickstrom comment, that I'm not -- in any way -- questioning anyone's participation in this forum. Like you I think, the more voices in this conversation and the more people involved in it, the better. I'm simply calling into question who should be moderating this forum. Should it be a resident of Texas? Should it be someone whose livelihood -- his ability to put food on the table for himself and his family -- depends on one side of this argument (i.e. longer seasons) winning?

    Or, posed in a different way: If we are to question the ability of member of the GMFMC ability to see through her own self-interest, shouldn't we question the same in ourselves?

    I really don't feel like it is an unfair question, nor one to be avoided. Yet it has.

    It could be simply that the population of FS moderator candidates is so small that this is the best FS could do (which is my sneaking suspicion). So, perhaps it's time to enact some slot limits on these obviously overfished moderators. :)
  • Got TA GoGot TA Go Posts: 2,608 Captain
    Tarponator wrote: »
    I would think the sampling and assessment methods would figure out that only a small fraction of the 2m licensed anglers actually fish for snowies. I understand the data collection methods are imperfect, and there is certainly room for improvement, but it's not like they are making up the results of the telephone surveys. The answer for snook, a fish that is much easier to "count", is not dissimilar.

    Yes, the data collection is now and has always been the issue.

    Until we find a way to refine the MRIP data, the data will always be flawed.

    There have been several easy answers to help pinpoint the actual user base in a known fishing universe which would bring more accurate data into play, yet both the GC and SAFMC has deemed those methods to hard.

    Yet with the current system, we have data that is discarded by the scientist that designed the system and deem the data as unreliable. And that based on a system they designed.

    In all my years being directly involved as a member of SAFMC Snapper/Grouper AP.... I have not seen a single improvement on data collection that did not financially benefit a Govt agency or NGO.

    The focus has turned to managing the fishermen, not the fish.

    Sad State of Affairs.
    Tarponator wrote: »
    It could be simply that the population of FS moderator candidates is so small that this is the best FS could do (which is my sneaking suspicion). So, perhaps it's time to enact some slot limits on these obviously overfished moderators. :)

    Can this be taken as an interest for a non-paying position, in an hostile Cyber-World environment for which the onlookers delve into your personal life for any opportunity to take potshots at your positions on various fisheries issue?

    :USA

    I understand how you feel.

    Thats what got me into this place in the beginning.

    Rob
    www.gottagofishinginkeywest.com


    Hero's Don't Wear Capes....They Wear Dog Tags.
  • Got TA GoGot TA Go Posts: 2,608 Captain
    Oh... Mike,

    If you need any background data on the Mutton issue, let me know.

    It's a issue born right here in KW, and after 6 years of the Feds wiping their hands with it... the State is finally taking notice and asking all the right questions. :wink

    Rob
    www.gottagofishinginkeywest.com


    Hero's Don't Wear Capes....They Wear Dog Tags.
  • :grin It's not an opinion. It's the God's honest truth.

    And something I've invested far too much of my life in realizing Karl's hope of bringing an awareness of fisheries regulation, water policies, free and responsible access to public waterways , fisheries laws, regulations and principles of responsible behavior throughout the recreational community; to move it forward within the law that I have and always will be committed to.

    I don't need any American flags to or patriotic rhetoric to justify that. Only the science and facts.

    I am always willing to listen to those who present an opposing views.

    I am not willing to shut down that conversation or am willing to threaten them with censorship, which we have seen here.

    Karl, who I deeply respect and consider a mentor and guide, reminded me when I was a much younger and aggressive member, like our new friend here, "Gary, let them post whatever they want. They will tell people where the problems are."

    He is very wise.

    Threatening people as a representative of FS flies in the face of that philosophy and is indefensible.

    This is not ConFron or as I say confrontational. It is bullying.

    It's long past time we let people of both sides express their frustrations in this controversy and not advance an agenda under the flag as a FS moderator.

    Either play along or moderate as impartial moderator.
    "If I can't win, I won't play." - Doris Colecchio.

    "Well Gary, the easiest way to look tall is to stand in a room full of short people." - Curtis Bostick

    "All these forums, with barely any activity, are like a neglected old cemetery that no one visits anymore."- anonymouse
  • Got TA GoGot TA Go Posts: 2,608 Captain
    Either play along or moderate as impartial moderator.

    And at what point have I threatened anyone?

    I don't make threats. And I don't tell the FSFF community that it is my forum and that I will operate under my own rules as I see fit.

    I wonder which "Mod", Past and or Present, that would be?

    Oh look... Sea grass! Close the area to access except for guides who know what they are doing! By God, this is a national park!!

    Move Along
    www.gottagofishinginkeywest.com


    Hero's Don't Wear Capes....They Wear Dog Tags.
  • first-law-of-holes-200x200.jpg
    "If I can't win, I won't play." - Doris Colecchio.

    "Well Gary, the easiest way to look tall is to stand in a room full of short people." - Curtis Bostick

    "All these forums, with barely any activity, are like a neglected old cemetery that no one visits anymore."- anonymouse
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 12,196 AG
    My name is Art Cannon, I am a commercial fisherman here in Fl, and am a director with Organized Fishermen of Florida.
    I came on this site to try and correct some of the misconceptions about fishery management/commercial fishing in Fl and the GOM.

    I have never trolled Confron, always been upfront, I am caustic at times and will respond as I am treated, call me immoral and I'll question you or your mother's morality.. Oh well.
    There are some on here view dissenting opinions as a threat, Tom Hilton is one of them.
    When Tom was just a member it made for entertaining reading and some lively discussion, now that he's a moderator, not so much.
    It's all threats and bullying now, same old same old on folks he don't even know. I'm surprised he hasn't been sued for libel.

    Just my .02... Rob, you be getting a little texan too.
    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.
Sign In or Register to comment.