General State of Florida's Fishery

2»

Replies

  • gettinwet wrote: »
    So what do you advise them to do and who is them? Pardon my ignorance but I'd like to know how this works. Somebody somewhere is making a decision that impacts me directly so I would like to have a voice in the matter. Looking for the Wizard of Oz so to speak.........

    No wizardry here, just some dedication. My specialty is HMS the billfish, swordfish, tunas, sharks. My main goal is to protect the recreational swordfishery off Florida coast.

    As an ICCAT member, I advise on negotiation strategy for our international fisheries which also are HMS. In this capacity we review negotiation options and help mold the US State Department position to protect our fisheries both domestic and throughout the Med, North and South Atlantic.

    In both areas, HMS AP and ICCAT AC, I am the recreational swordfishery specialist or representative.

    We have not had Pelagic Longlines in the Florida East Coast zone since I have been on the panel. I consider that a feather in my cap!

    You will find that often Advisory Panels are there only to meet a legal mandate. I do believe we have a direct and important impact at ICCAT.
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    Both those things are far from true.

    As for money talks on the regional councils , not quite true either as Art can attest to. Legacy regulatory policies and federal employees who cannot be fired rule those.

    A handful of appointees don't influence anything there. The agenda is set by NMFS through the regional director, who is also a voting member. NOAA determines fisheries policy. Its not a democracy or even science, it is an autocracy beyond oversight, reach, or political influence.

    Not intending to derail this thread with this reply, but Gary.........

    I've been watching the Gulf Council's ineptitude lately. The 5 state directors, 2 CCA reps, and 1 CCA sympathizer are all voting as a bloc. Every vote anymore is 8 to 8 (if the Chair abstains, or Crabtree abstains on an allocation vote, which he can't vote on).

    Regional management, realllocation, etc. All those votes have been close. The only one that recently broke that 9-8 or 8-9 or 8-8 vote was sector separation, as long as the 3 yr sunset was included. Then the Chair voted for it, and it became a 10-7 vote, instead of a 9-8 vote.

    CCA is controlling the states, and has 3 members (basicaly) on the Council. Not saying that's wrong, but your insinuation that NMFS is driving the bus right now is a bit off.

    When Council members suggested establishing a private angler red snapper advisory panel to develop innovative forward-thinking management concepts besides 9 day seasons, who voted it down? The 5 state directors, the 2 CCA people and the CCA sympathizer.

    ^^^^^^^^^^^

    And while I'm on my soap box........ the Council is so micro-minded on recreational red snapper, its letting other things slide into the abyss.

    Greater amberjack is overfished and overfishing. What did they do? reduce harvest by a whopping 60K, increase the rec size limit to extend the season and reduce landings (it normally closes about now) and decrease the comm trip limit by 500 lb.

    Gray triggerfish is overfished and overfishing. They've done about all they can do. So, what did FL do last year? Open the season almost all year to the point there was no rec quota for this year (it closed in Feb). So what did AL do this year? Opened it back up in July........

    Gag assessment says the stock is in good shape. The public said its not, so what did the Council do? Nothing..... just don't increase harvest.

    Hogfish is tanking everywhere. Its good in the Gulf, but overfishing and overfished in South Florida and the Atlantic.

    They are ignoring every other reef fish to pay homage to all mighty recreational red snapper, which is a rally point, but really a minor component of overall recreational salt water fishing.

    Thank god the mackerels are in good shape, or they'd be ignoring them for all the wrong reasons too.
  • Gary S. ColecchioGary S. Colecchio Posts: 24,922 AG
    What did you say your name was again?
    "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
  • Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,580 Captain
    "innovative forward-thinking management concepts..."

    That sounds like something an EDF stooge would say.....
    There's nothing innovative nor forward thinking about Catch Shares - they have already proven NOT to work since they caused the biggest fisheries disaster in history in the NE groundfishery.

    "or Crabtree abstains on an allocation vote, which he can't vote on)." Funny, but Crabtree voted on Amendment 40, didn't he? Sector Separation divided the allocation, remember?

    Again, the enviro-funded crowd picking and choosing which "facts" to push based on the direction of the wind.

    BTW, red snapper is the focus right now, but the privatization concept will encompass ALL federally-managed species, if these enviro-funded folks get their way.
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    Tom Hilton wrote: »
    "or Crabtree abstains on an allocation vote, which he can't vote on)." Funny, but Crabtree voted on Amendment 40, didn't he? Sector Separation divided the allocation, remember?

    Crabtree didn't vote on the selection of the years that led to allocation. He voted to approve the amendment after the rest of the Council voted on the allocation itself. There's a difference.

    He voted several times to not select No Action for Amendment 28 (reallocation of comm/rec). He supported reallocation to the recs; seems to me, it was the amount of reallocation and why a specific percent was supportable that caused him to abstain or vote. The vote to select the 2.5 percent shift was 12-5 (I just checked the minutes to make this edit).

    And Tom, you just want to go on with 9 day seasons vs looking at alternative management options? your Texas representatives sure seem to lean that way. They've voted no to any change. One of the Council folks made a good point at the last meeting; if that "give it to the states" option dies (seems the Council can't agree on regional management, and I doubt it survives in congress), the Council has nothing else in the works to do anything different.

    Gary, I countered your statement that NMFS is running the show with observations on recent council votes; I would have assumed you would have tried to defend your statement (although I doubt you can with any validity), so you default? I'd prefer to hear your position and views as to why you think NMFS is running the show.

    So why do you think the 5 state directors and the 3 CCA members voted to not form an Advisory Panel to look at new private angler options, when the charter boat, commercial and "other" folks all voted to do so?
  • Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,580 Captain
    What's specifically the difference? AM 40 separates the allocation from the private recs, therefore it is an allocation issue.

    A better question is why the members of the other sectors are so concerned with what happens with the private recs when they have been totally separated? Why have they taken it upon themselves to stick their big noses in our business? Oh yeah, they know this private rec AP would be stacked with pro-catch share minions - having Harlon Pearce as the chair of the private rec data collection AP illustrates the ABSOLUTE joke of it all.
  • markw4321markw4321 Posts: 171 Officer
    BubbaII wrote: »
    So why do you think the 5 state directors and the 3 CCA members voted to not form an Advisory Panel to look at new private angler options, when the charter boat, commercial and "other" folks all voted to do so?

    Geez I don't know maybe because the 5 state directors and the 3 CCA members know that Roy and his staff minions will ensure that the advisory panel will be saturated with hand picked edf funded and approved members to ensure that the advisory panel recommends options to the council that the majority of private recreational gulf anglers don't want.

    While we are asking questions,bubbatucus why did the supposed recreational council members like Pam Dana and John Greene vote for amendment 40 when,the,majority of recreational anglers and the reef fish advisory panel was against it.
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    markw4321 wrote: »
    Geez I don't know maybe because the 5 state directors and the 3 CCA members know that Roy and his staff minions will ensure that the advisory panel will be saturated with hand picked edf funded and approved members to ensure that the advisory panel recommends options to the council that the majority of private recreational gulf anglers don't want.

    While we are asking questions,bubbatucus why did the supposed recreational council members like Pam Dana and John Greene vote for amendment 40 when,the,majority of recreational anglers and the reef fish advisory panel was against it.

    Mark,

    Good questions, if misguided, in my opinion.

    As to the AP selection, "Roy and his minions" don't pick the AP, the Council does as a Council (Roy is one vote) We'll never know how that stuff comes down because its all in closed session. But, its pretty obvious the 5 directors and 3 CCA members can really influence the selection process; they are half the vote. Why would those CCA oriented folks vote to include members they don't want? Its their specific part of the fishery. Why wouldn't they pick people they want to come up with new ideas? Obviously, the old ones aren't working...... or do you like 9 day seasons?

    Why did the charter boat representatives vote for sector separation? I think that is a self answering question. They want separated from the private angler group and all the negative impacts of the current recreational fiasco. They voted to represent their portion of the recreational sector.
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    Tom Hilton wrote: »
    having Harlon Pearce as the chair of the private rec data collection AP illustrates the ABSOLUTE joke of it all.

    harlon was not chair of an AP; he was chair of a data collection committee on the Council (not a private rec data collection committee), and now is off the Council. I'm lost by this statement. He pushed for electronic reporting by all sectors, which is being developed by the Council. Commercial landings are reported electronically, weekly. Headboats are electronic, weekly. The Council is developing charter electronic reporting, weekly. And the private anglers have begged for electronic reporting like ISNAPPER; there just isn't a mechanism to suck up all that self reported private angler data and validate it........ yet.

    To the fella that posted the first thread, I hope this isn't too far off your original question, and maybe you're learning something? I apologize for derailing your thread.
  • The state of Florida's fisheries is pretty good. The feds continue to ignore calls to fix the
    extremely unreliable recreational data collection system, but like other states in the region,
    Florida has stepped up and took it upon itself to do something. The Gulf side already has
    started and the South Atlantic side is in the works. Something the feds have ignored for so
    long is any meaningful attempt to find out how many recreational anglers actually participate
    in OFFSHORE fishing. Florida is taking a good step to collect this data. While Anecdotal is
    often cited and even used to close fisheries by the feds (even recently), any mention of such
    regarding increased stocks is brushed off as meaningless. The Feds Council system has more
    and more become a mouthpiece for the NMFS, with agenda's set from DC, and in most cases
    the plan enacted. Even when the council tries stepping up and doing whats right. we see a veto
    shut it down. While there is little trust in the Federal management system, the state has some good
    idea's. By and large, the Fisheries too are healthy and growing. Some like to proclaim that its because
    of the feds this has happened. In the Gulf with Red Snapper this really shows the reality of it. The
    ARS stock is so healthy now, that other stocks are suffering. The rebuilding of the ARS stock had its
    big start while anglers were allowed to fish half the year. While the access to the stock has been cut
    to nearly nothing for the family level angler, the stocks continue to grow. Remember they were growing
    while fishing half the year took place. Despite claims of more and more effort by increased angler
    participation, data does not actually exist to support such. Remember the economic collapse and the
    hoards of offshore boats layed up and on the auction block? well despite $4.00 a gallon fuel and the
    economy, the feds still claimed that effort increased! The Fisheries continue to grow, both on the Gulf
    side and Atlantic side of Florida. All we need is for the Federal Managers to start doing the right thing
    and actually using the budget allocations for fishery science and research rather than the hundreds of
    millions they have spent in recent years promoting and funding Catch Shares management schemes.
    Think of how much fishery data we could have collected with that much money....rather than funding
    a privatized Fish Lord management plan.
  • :applause
    "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
  • will's dadwill's dad Posts: 102 Deckhand
    Well said
  • surfmansurfman WC FLPosts: 5,208 Admiral
    Again, Right On!
    Tight Lines, Steve
    My posts are my opinion only.
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    You know... for once, ACME, I totally agree with you. For years, NMFS has argued MRIP (or MRFSS) wasn't a quota monitoring system, and couldn't ever be one, especially for short seasons. MRFSS/MRIP is not designed for that; its a program to track national annual trends.

    Now that the states (in the Gulf) are developing their own quota monitoring systems, for some reason, those data have to be correlated and calibrated to MRIP. Why? If NMFS said MRIP wasn't a good measure of quota tracking in-season, but simply a way to track trends over time on an annual basis, then why do state tracking systems have to show similar numbers?

    I'm gonna go back to something I asked on the last page. Sorry, but its the question no one wants to answer.

    (1) Commercial IFQ report their landings every trip, electronically. These reports are verified by dockside intercepts.
    (2) Commercial dealers report their purchases weekly, electronically. These reports are verified by state trip tickets and the dockside intercept.
    (3) Headboats report their catches, weekly, electronically. These reports are verified by dockside intercepts.
    (4)Charter boats have asked the Council to develop a method to have them report weekly, electronically. NMFS is developing that system, which will verify their self reported data. The Council is developing an amendment to the Reef Fish FMP to require it.

    Who's left? The private anglers group. They keep saying they support electronic self reporting. So, why did the 5 states, and the 3 CCA members (one of whom developed Isnapper), not support development of an AP to look at better private angler self reporting with verification (or other private angler management options)? hmm.....
  • Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,580 Captain
    BubbaII wrote: »

    Who's left? The private anglers group. They keep saying they support electronic self reporting. So, why did the 5 states, and the 3 CCA members (one of whom developed Isnapper), not support development of an AP to look at better private angler self reporting with verification (or other private angler management options)? hmm.....

    Perhaps because they know that the system is broken, and the AP would be stacked with pro-catch share minions?

    Perhaps there is no need for a self-reporting system for private recs? There are time-proven methods for managing anglers/fish that DON'T inevitably lead to Catch Shares.

    Question for you; Why is there such an urgent need for this micro-management for red snapper and not for redfish, flounder, trout?
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    Tom Hilton wrote: »
    Question for you; Why is there such an urgent need for this micro-management for red snapper and not for redfish, flounder, trout?


    I never said anything about catch shares; I was talking alternative management and new data collection. Neither of which have to be catch shared.

    As to the quoted question: That's easy. Those other species aren't federally managed (OK, redfish in the Gulf is managed, but closed). Red snapper is federally managed; and specifically identified in the Magnuson Act (when quotas are met, fishing stops). So, the Council has to make sure that it meets Magnuson mandates. Right now, that means a 20% buffer on red snapper for rec fishing due to management uncertainty.

    You really like leaving 1 mp in the water just because the season is so short MRIP can't monitor it with any kind of management certainty? You don't want something different? Cause I'm not seeing you identifying anything different to make it better. Just identifying that the status quo sucks........
  • CountryBumpkinCountryBumpkin Fla. Piney WoodsPosts: 1,360 Officer
    BubbaII wrote: »
    So, the Council has to make sure that it meets Magnuson mandates.

    Yes Buddy.............when it suites their agenda............when it doesn't, not so much.

    Just identifying the part of the status quo that sucks........ :wink

    I say......I say son.......new & improved my tail feathers.

  • Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,580 Captain
    BubbaII wrote: »
    I never said anything about catch shares; I was talking alternative management and new data collection. Neither of which have to be catch shared.

    As to the quoted question: That's easy. Those other species aren't federally managed (OK, redfish in the Gulf is managed, but closed). Red snapper is federally managed; and specifically identified in the Magnuson Act (when quotas are met, fishing stops). So, the Council has to make sure that it meets Magnuson mandates. Right now, that means a 20% buffer on red snapper for rec fishing due to management uncertainty.

    You really like leaving 1 mp in the water just because the season is so short MRIP can't monitor it with any kind of management certainty? You don't want something different? Cause I'm not seeing you identifying anything different to make it better. Just identifying that the status quo sucks........

    The Gulf States Red Snapper Authority
  • Pescatoral PursuitPescatoral Pursuit Posts: 5,065 Admiral
    Wow, a lot of inside baseball being thrown around here. Hard to keep up with the alphabet soup...


    gettinwet wrote: »
    That's exactly the type of fish market I'm talking about that used to be commonplace! Where's this one at - I'd love to support it! The only thing we have here in Orlando is Lombardi's and they have gotten very expensive over the past few years.

    Check out Restaurant Depot on Princeton just west of John Young behind the walmart. Last time I was there they had a nice selection of fresh, whole fish.
    cuda-title2_zpsb81e4f1d.jpg
    greggl wrote: »
    Strive for self-sacrificial levels of empathy and sympathy. We are only set free by becoming the scapegoat, or sin eater', rather than picking a target and 'throwing stones.'
    nuevowavo wrote:
    Think you're pretty clever? Think again. Time for a break.
    :rotflmao
  • BubbaIIBubbaII Posts: 328 Deckhand
    gettinwet wrote: »
    That's exactly the type of fish market I'm talking about that used to be commonplace! Where's this one at - I'd love to support it! The only thing we have here in Orlando is Lombardi's and they have gotten very expensive over the past few years.

    Since I derailed your thread, let me offer some comments as to your posts on page 1. Everything is expensive. Seafood has always been and always will be considered a luxury food item in the U.S. I can remember buying shrimp at the shrimp processor as it came off the day boat for $1.10 or $1.25/lb. Now, its 15-18/lb, just like all the fish. But back when it was $1.25, chicken was 30 cents a pound; good round steak was 69 cents. A really good T-bone steak might run you $2.00/lb.

    you made a comment that apparently commercial fishing has perhaps destroyed markets. Someone replied a lot went out of country and, as I understand it, some of that is true, as the demand is higher (because people in the U.S. won't pay $18/lb for seafood vs $6-8, or even $10/lb for good beef).

    But, you can get good local seafood, as has been pointed out to you. As to destroyed stocks; most commercially marketed fish are not overfished. Go here to see a map of overfished/overfishing stocks. Other than red snapper, most aren't really mainstay species in U.S. fish markets (amberjack maybe). The fish stocks are healthy. But compared to years ago, with better information on stock status and stock potentials through better assessments, quotas have been reduced, so fish are not so abundant in stores, perhaps.

    http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/fisheries_eco/status_of_fisheries/archive/2015/second/overfished_overfishing_stocks_q2_2015.pdf
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 11,523 AG
    Why would you feel that?

    The difference now is that commercial fishing is regulated and you can't bring a fish you catch to the back door of your local restaurant.

    Well, maybe you can.

    Once.

    You aren't so naive to think it only happens once, are you?

    If so, you would be surprised to hear the stories I hear on this topic. I believe it is far more rampant than your post, above, might indicate if the stories I hear are to be believed (and I do).
  • No, I am not naïve. Please stop necroing my posts. Thanks.
    "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
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 11,523 AG
    Sorry, I'll try to only respond to your latest round of comments. lol
  • gill nettergill netter Posts: 236 Deckhand
    Im late to the party....

    You cant find a great selection of affordable river fish in a nicely stocked retail fish market because most of the fish were caught with nets. The fish arent being sent out of state. The fish are there, but they cant be properly harvested. The demand is there, but cannot be met with the rediculous harvest tools that are allowed nowadays. I live in Fort Pierce Florida. Pre net ban there were 3 retail markets that supplied fish, shrimp, and crabs to this town...pop 120,000. Business was good...not so much now
2»
Sign In or Register to comment.