# OUTLOOK FOR RED SNAPPER NOT TO GOOD!



## CAPT. PAUL REDMAN (Oct 3, 2007)

<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">Roy Crabtree just called me and I regret to inform you that the Agency has denied the Gulf Council?s recommendation for a 10% effort reduction based on hurricanes and economics in the red snapper rebuilding plan. Thus, it will be published in the federal register this week that the recreational regulations going into effect next year will be;<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">16 inch size limit<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">2 fish bag limit<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">June 1- September 30 season (122days)<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">Say good-bye to Cobia and King's they will be severly targeted


----------



## FenderBender (Oct 2, 2007)

Wow thats bad for the charter boat business...


----------



## CAPT. PAUL REDMAN (Oct 3, 2007)

THATS BAD FOR EVERYTHING ESPECIALLY OUR LOCAL ECONOMY.


----------



## whome (Oct 2, 2007)

Let me break this down for all of you weekend warriors....

122 days open snapper season

16 Saturdays and 16 Sundays.....32 weekend days total

Out of those 32 weekend days lets say half will be fishable due to weather...

This takes you to 16 fishable days...

Now your honeydo's and other family plans lets you fish 8 of these 16days...

So now you have eight days to snapper fish.....You may think these numbers are extreme, but for a lot of people who can only fish weekends they may not be too extreme...I am fortunate enough to fish any day I want to with my work schedule and have been able to for the last 15 years...it's too bad more people didn't get involved....:banghead


----------



## spearfisher (Oct 3, 2007)

That sucks.


----------



## John B. (Oct 2, 2007)

> *CAPT. PAUL REDMAN (10/23/2007)*<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">...<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">Say good-bye to Cobia and King's they will be severly targeted


<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">you got that right!:banghead


----------



## flats stalker (Oct 2, 2007)

triggers and amberjacks too.:banghead


----------



## Travis Gill (Oct 6, 2007)

:bangheadWe mostly Billfish but snapper aren't tohard to catch when we stop and try for them. Do the peolpe who make these laws not fish? I'm sure it will impact other species, casuing them to become over regulated in the future


----------



## Brad King (Sep 30, 2007)

<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

Well after 13 years in the Charter industry I guess I got out at the right time.. That is horrible there is alot of guys that make a living guiding snapper charters.

What a crock of shit!!!</BLOCKQUOTE>


----------



## spear-it (Oct 3, 2007)

Yea those Marlin steaks are looking real good now. It only takes one 100 inch blue marlin to have good size BBQ.

Too little too late


----------



## Ruskin_Raider (Oct 2, 2007)

Willcommercial regs be affected as well?


----------



## lobsterman (Sep 30, 2007)

That is a bunch of bologna. They are catering to the commercial fisherman.


----------



## JoshH (Sep 28, 2007)

Whens it end this year?


----------



## John B. (Oct 2, 2007)

> *wishiniwasfishin07 (10/23/2007)*Whens it end this year?


 october 31st is the last day.


----------



## REEL FEISTY (Oct 17, 2007)

Like Paul said it will hurt the other fishing as well. I for one and like most of you are going to try and come home with a full box of fish and if it is not snapper it will be something else till they stop that also! Still trying to figure out how to come home with a half an AJ?


----------



## JOHNJOHN205 (Oct 2, 2007)

red snapper will probally soon be regulated simalir to the rockfish in va.


----------



## JoshH (Sep 28, 2007)

> *JOHNJOHN205 (10/23/2007)*red snapper will probally soon be regulated simalir to the rockfish in va.




Yeah and then like Sturgeon.......


----------



## BJW (Oct 1, 2007)

It wasn't too many years ago that you could buy redfish and speckled trout at the seafood market. Along came the blackened redfish craze and other pressure and these two species were taken off the commercial market and declared sportfish. Why can't the same be done with red snapper? I'll answer the question myself: money.


----------



## J.Sharit (Oct 3, 2007)

That's why I won't buy snapper or any other seafood at the markets or at restuarants. If I can't catch it on my own then I'll do without it.But I can honestly say I don't support the commericalaspects of harvesting from an already over harvested marine environment. I enjoy the sport but if we gotta cut back then so should we all!Ifwe all put ourmoney where our mouths are at we'd make a big dent in the profit element evolved with this situation.


----------



## Xanadu (Oct 1, 2007)

Not to really stir too much shit, but your title says "outlook for snapper not to(o) good."



Now, I don't know all the facts and stats, but I do know that for some reason, Gulf Snapper are viewed as overfished. If they're overfished, then this is GOOD NEWS for Snapper and maybe in a year or two they'll raise back up the limits once they've recovered. Surely, shrimp by-catch has been reduced due to less effort. 



If the science is bad, then get a lawyer. This is certainly a class actionable problem if every recreational fisherman is being hosed due to faulty data. Call Mike Papantonio. He likes snapper!



In the meantime, why not rephrase this and say "Outlook for snapper limits not good" or "Outlook for Joe Pattis excellent." Work to declare the Snapper gamefish, but please quit with the misleading posts.



No matter what your opinion, this change is surely good for Snapper.


----------



## bonita dan (Oct 3, 2007)

Well I guess we better make them 2 fish count now,won't we! All I see for the future of the snapper fishery is culling,illegal harvesting,regular joes sticking an extra fish in the wifes purse and more BS to get the FWC to ransack the honest persons boat lookin for fish:hoppingmad Yea that makes things much better for the red snapper population and for my blood pressure!


----------



## X-Shark (Oct 3, 2007)

> *Xanadu (10/23/2007)*Not to really stir too much shit, but your title says "outlook for snapper not to(o) good."
> 
> 
> 
> ...




This part of your post answered your statement. 





> Now, I don't know all the facts and stats




Have you ever been involved in suing the Government? NMFS has been sued in the past. Aprox 9 times if I'm not mistaken? One case was won. I talked to the man personally in Al. earlier this year at a NMFS meeting that brought that case on and did win.

I asked "What did you get out of it?" He said satisfaction and I'm Broke!



Several of us have "Tried" to be informative as to what was going on in the past. If you were truly interested in what was going on, you would be more involved and spend some time getting more education on the subject.



I'm not just pointing this at you Xanadu. Other's are guilty also.


----------



## Xanadu (Oct 1, 2007)

Feel free to point at me. I don't fish for Snapper and I really don't care too much, but I don't like misleading and inflammatory posts. And I don't like you guys acting as if this is bad for snapper. It isn't.



It may be bad for you charter guys and it may even be bad for recreational guys in the short or long run, but it isn't bad for snapper. We're going to have increased culling and increased taking over the limits by those who don't care about the laws. Patti's and other fish sellers will make more money selling imported fish or domestic snapper at increased prices. Charters may suffer some loss of revenue too. But Snapper are not going to decrease because of this change and that is what was implied by the OP.



Also, COBIA are not going to be affected in any material way. Snapper are not going to decrease in population because of this so a bunch of the "facts" presented on this thread are not facts. Now, I am all for whining and complaining about govt injustice, but we have way, way more people fishing every year. We have faster boats and more of them with better electronics and more people chasing a finite resource. The only logical thing is for the take to have to decrease per person because there simply are not enough fish to keep 12 per person per day anymore. Also, all the dire economic predictions have not been borne out. Gas and diesel are 3 times more now than 6 years ago. Limits have decreased and seasons shortened. But there are still more boats and people fishing now than ever. There are still new guys going into the charter business and still people making a living running boats. And, frankly, for the charter guys to act all upset about the plight of snapper due to lower keep regulations is just dishonest. Add to that the fact that many of them are acting like they care about the fishery by saying its just going to wipe out other species is completely hilarious when you realize that if they really cared about the fishery, they'd change professions to keep from damaging it or go to catch and release. They haven't so the words ring hollow.



jmo.


----------



## flats stalker (Oct 2, 2007)

i only think the charters are going to fill the cooler,no matter the species,if not snapper than what?they are not going to get 2 snapper per customer and call it a day.


----------



## X-Shark (Oct 3, 2007)

> I don't fish for Snapper




I know.  But you have refused to educate yourself about this and keep spouting that what NMFS does is good.



Yet we have repeatedly tried to help you understand that if you put BAD data into something that you want to get data out of, what do you think you will get? Answer: BAD Data!



I saw 200 people give testament in Al earlier this year. [Rec,Charter & Comm] Many of these people gave open invitations to any members of NMFS to come on their boat FREE of charge and see for themselves what is going on. I still have not heard of any of the NMFS taking anyone up on that.


----------



## John B. (Oct 2, 2007)

looks like the charter guys may need to start running white trout charters.... hell, they taste better than snapper.:letsdrink


----------



## flats stalker (Oct 2, 2007)

> *VS200B (10/23/2007)*looks like the charter guys may need to start running white trout charters.... hell, they taste better than snapper.:letsdrink


thats the second reference to white trout today,gotta jones going,getting the 3 mile shakesoke


----------



## John B. (Oct 2, 2007)

> *flats stalker (10/23/2007)*
> 
> 
> > *VS200B (10/23/2007)*looks like the charter guys may need to start running white trout charters.... hell, they taste better than snapper.:letsdrink
> ...


nah.... they make good "green meat" BAIT!--

i just always use them as a reference because they are damn near the easiest fish in the water to catch.


----------



## flats stalker (Oct 2, 2007)

> *VS200B (10/23/2007)*
> 
> 
> > *flats stalker (10/23/2007)*
> ...


 salt water catfish charters.


----------



## SKIFFY (Oct 6, 2007)

guys, i dont think anyone is happy with the limits!!! 

but i dont see why everyone gets all mad with the fwc for coming on their boats!!

you shouldnt have anything to worry about if your not keeping illegal fish!

also if they didnt search people's vessels and write tickets,There would be no snapper!!


----------



## flats stalker (Oct 2, 2007)

i think most people are upset because commercial fishing does more harm to the resource but i see no cuts in their allotment.


----------



## John B. (Oct 2, 2007)

> *flats stalker (10/23/2007)*i think most people are upset because commercial fishing does more harm to the resource but i see no cuts in their allotment.


i think that's exactly the reason... hell, it's a good thing the yankees that buy them don't know what tripletail, or scamp taste like... then we'd be in trouble.

red snapper = :sick


----------



## fishaholic (Oct 2, 2007)

Any word on what the regs will be in State waters?


----------



## Chuck's Charters (Oct 3, 2007)

FWC wrote me and said that once the federal rulingsare permanent, the state regs willbe the same as thefederal regs.


----------



## lobsterman (Sep 30, 2007)

<SPAN id=_ctl1_ctlTopic_ctlPanelBar_ctlTopicsRepeater__ctl25_lblFullMessage>Xanadu:

Feel free to point at me. I don't fish for Snapper and I really don't care too much, but I don't like misleading and inflammatory posts. And I don't like you guys acting as if this is bad for snapper. It isn't.



Obviously you don't know about the limits. The Gov't and State are limiting the weekend warriors while they are increasing the amount of poundage that a commercial fisherman can bring in . Now just exactly how is this going to help the snapper population. All it does is stop one group from catching them and allowing another to catch them. Something is wrong with this picture. I say if it is good for the goose it is good for the gander.


----------



## Hook (Oct 2, 2007)

Just forinformation; does the new regs. mean 2 snapper total ie: mingo, lane,ect or just 2 Red and thenlimits for others?


----------



## freespool50 (Sep 29, 2007)

i see both sides of the issue. i know the charters want to protect their livelihood. i know the recr fishers want their piece too. but really, tell me you guys, who gets up in the morning thinking " gee, i ONLY want to catch snapper today"? very few if any. we all want to fill our boxes with anything we can catch. yes, snapper are a beautiful fish, but it stops there. they are only so-so table fare. i would rather have sheepshead than snapper. before you laugh, have someone cook them up the same way and do a blindfold taste test. either you wont be able to tell the difference or you wont say that one tastes worse than the other.

as for other species being overfished, i dont foresee too many people getting into fishing THAT WERENT ALREADY FISHING and then targeting other species. i reference my above statement, we do not all only go after snapper. the exception are kings and cobes and grouper and billfish. other than those fish, what else is largely targetted? everything else is bycatch. those that are already fishing will still fish for those other same fish just like they always have. 

so tell me, are you going to stop going out in the gulf just because you cant keep a red snapper? if you arent, then im willing to bet the charter guys wont stop either. which brings up another question for the charter guys. how many of your customers actually charter a boat for bottom bumping to catch their groceries as opposed to just going out and catching fish? i'd guess not many. so why would that stop the chartering? just market your charters a different way during the off season and charge a little more during the on season.

i guess my point is, there are many posting making dire predictions about other species, but i for one dont see that happening. someone posted about too many snapper eating other fish. but hello, arent snapper food for other fish also? so what about the science of the food chain? last time i checked, snapper were not at the top. are you telling me that 40 years ago there were no trigger, grouper, scamp, aj, tripletail, vermillion, kings, cobes, due to all the snapper eating all the other fish???? 

im no treehugger and i love taking all the fish im allowed to take. but except for the charter guys who make a living targeting snapper, does this really affect you all that much???

so for all you guys whining and complaining about the state of affairs, put your money where your mouth is. BOYCOTT any restaurant or seafood house that sells red snapper during the off season COMPLETELY. if the businesses are supporting what you percieve as an unfair govt tactic, then why should you support them? of course i am really NOT calling for a boycott, just trying to make a point. let the flaming beginopcorn


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

> *Xanadu (10/23/2007)* It may be bad for you charter guys and it may even be bad for recreational guys in the short or long run, but it isn't bad for snapper. We're going to have increased culling and increased taking over the limits by those who don't care about the laws. Patti's and other fish sellers will make more money selling imported fish or domestic snapper at increased prices. Charters may suffer some loss of revenue too. But Snapper are not going to decrease because of this change and that is what was implied by the OP.
> 
> Also, COBIA are not going to be affected in any material way. Snapper are not going to decrease in population because of this so a bunch of the "facts" presented on this thread are not facts. Now, I am all for whining and complaining about govt injustice, but we have way, way more people fishing every year. We have faster boats and more of them with better electronics and more people chasing a finite resource. The only logical thing is for the take to have to decrease per person because there simply are not enough fish to keep 12 per person per day anymore. Also, all the dire economic predictions have not been borne out. Gas and diesel are 3 times more now than 6 years ago. Limits have decreased and seasons shortened. But there are still more boats and people fishing now than ever.


Xanadu

you like to jump onposts and flame people for not having scientific data or metrics that prove their statements. 

- Do you have scientific dataor facts to back up the following statements from your quote? or is itjust your opinion?:

- it isn't bad for snapper. We're going to have increased culling and increased taking over the limits by those who don't care about the laws. Patti's and other fish sellers will make more money selling imported fish or domestic snapper at increased prices. Charters may suffer some loss of revenue too. But Snapper are not going to decrease because of this change and that is what was implied by the OP. 

- Also, COBIA are not going to be affected in any material way. Snapper are not going to decrease in population because of this so a bunch of the "facts" presented on this thread are not facts.

- We have way, way more people fishing every year. ........there are still more boats and people fishing now than ever.

I for one would like to see the metrics and data along with your assumptions that backup your post.

Otherwise i sayyouare wrong. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For freespool - let me know where there is a restaurant in Pensacola that sells genuine red snapper caught in the GOM. I am not aware of one. Additionally,I have cut back on my trips to the Gulf because of red snapper regs andI will put off buying a new boat thatI was planning to buy next year for a few years to see what happens with bottom fish regs.current regs and pending regs for AJ, grouper, red snapperdo not support a decision by me to spend 50k+ on an offshore boat for bottom fishing in the near term.

MarkW


----------



## Xanadu (Oct 1, 2007)

> *X-Shark (10/23/2007)*
> 
> 
> > I don't fish for Snapper
> ...






Wrong. You and the others have continuously posted that this is BAD FOR SNAPPER. It isn't and you are being disingenuous. I clearly understand the bad data in bad data out scenario and I don't disagree the NMFS is a bunch of idiots. But the knee jerk political BS you and the others here are spewing is not better than the bad data they're using. Simply put, the reduction in season and take limits will not decrease the population of snapper and it will not decrease the population of cobia.



It may decrease the population of dollars in the charter boat's wallets and increase the number of dollars in Joe Patti's coffers. So, while I am all for gutting the NMFS I think you'd be better off and more honest if you were to stick to the truth than to act like George Bush and Al Gore and scream the sky is falling when it isn't. There are no terrorists in Pensacola, the water in the bay isn't going to start boiling next week and the Red Snapper are not going to become extinct due to NMFS bad data. 



The objection to this rule change is because its taking something away from YOU. Not because its bad for the snapper, but the first post states otherwise.


----------



## Xanadu (Oct 1, 2007)

> *markw4321 (10/24/2007)*
> 
> 
> > *Xanadu (10/23/2007)* I for one would like to see the metrics and data along with your assumptions that backup your post.
> ...


----------



## lobsterman (Sep 30, 2007)

xanadu: you didn't answer my post.


----------



## snake 166 (Oct 2, 2007)

I have sat through several council meetings which addressed the population analyses for various options including size, limit and season length. Season length is a big driver because it apparently reduces effort. 

Unfortunately the analyses (and the analyst) never anticipate how the fishing community will respond to the changes. A case in point is the simultaneous introduction of 13" length and IFQ for commercial fishermen. NMFS approved the length reduction because the commercials were killingand discarding many fish under 15" and they had a market for small whole snapper. One would think it would be good for the snapper to allow the quota to be filled with fish that were in effect dead already. Well, guess what. When IFQ went into effect fishermen changed tactics and started fishing for big snappers because they could fill their quota with less effort. Taking the breeders out of the population is bad for the snappers.

I like to fish for snapper, when the new rules go into effect, I will fish for bigger snapper. I would much rather catch one 10 lb snapper than 4 at 16 inches. I won't cull but I will use bigger baits and bigger hooks to target the bigger fish. Is that good for the snapper? I don't know but I bet the fishery managers have not factored the impact of changing behavior on the part of the fishermen into the equation. They constantly get surprised by unintended consequences and that is why the rules change so frequently that they never understand the cause and effect relationship of their actions.


----------



## Tuna Man (Oct 2, 2007)

> *Hook (10/24/2007)*Just forinformation; does the new regs. mean 2 snapper total ie: mingo, lane,ect or just 2 Red and thenlimits for others?


I'm sure that the new limits that may be porpoised will be on RED SNAPPER only and not effect the others.

Once the Government takes something away from the people, we have "a snowball in hell's" chance of getting it back.


----------



## freespool50 (Sep 29, 2007)

For freespool - let me know where there is a restaurant in Pensacola that sells genuine red snapper caught in the GOM. I am not aware of one. Additionally,I have cut back on my trips to the Gulf because of red snapper regs andI will put off buying a new boat thatI was planning to buy next year for a few years to see what happens with bottom fish regs.current regs and pending regs for AJ, grouper, red snapperdo not support a decision by me to spend 50k+ on an offshore boat for bottom fishing in the near term.

MarkW[/quote]

mark, i agree with your decision. im starting to rethink owning a boat as well. it would be way less headache and EXPENSE than chartering. so, there is another piece of the equation not mentioned. if we recr fishers go out less on our boats, but still go out on charters, would that make up for the percieved loss in the snapper charter business for tourists who think red snapper is "all that"?

so there i see a trickle up/down effect already happening with economic consequences on the local economy. but i wont stop fishing. if i dont go offshore that much then i will target inshore more. and we all know that since the net ban, inshore fishing is much better now:banghead

as for restaurants that sell red snapper locally. i havent taken a poll but i would like to believe the true local ones sell it. aegean breeze, skopelos, uhhhhh, im running out. just two i can think of. even then? even pattis doesnt always carry local snapper. but the snapper in GOM are going somewhere. some have to stay here, right? or does it cost too much for the locals sell it? 

i dont have a true position on this matter. just an opinion. with that being said, i am also a corporate sponsor of the RFRA. i suppose that says something. maybe, maybe not


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

Freespool,

I think you hit a major point withthe trickle down theory of impact on the local economy.The question I have with respect to economics is what is the best use of the red snapper resource regarding the allocation of the GOM red snapperTotal Allowable Catch?Commercial or Rec? 

By the way you are probably right there are some restaurants that don't serve vietnamese catfish and call it gulf red snapper.

MarkW


----------



## Xanadu (Oct 1, 2007)

> *lobsterman (10/24/2007)*<SPAN id=_ctl1_ctlTopic_ctlPanelBar_ctlTopicsRepeater__ctl25_lblFullMessage>Xanadu:
> 
> 
> 
> ...






Sorry, I didn't see your question mark. :shedevil



And I do know about the limits, but that wasn't my point. My point is that lies and misleading posts put people off and make the outsider less likely to take up effort to help. People like me who don't care about snapper, but do care about fishing are less likely to step into the fight if you keep up with misleading us in a very political and direct way. Environmentalists in general will stand to save the snapper and I suspect they'd come to help in force if you were to make the TRUE point that you've addressed. Giving more to the commercials isn't helping the snapper. It isn't helping anyone and I agree totally with you until you get to the rationalization that "what's good for the goose is good for the gander."



We're not talking goose and gander. We're talking about snapper, recreationals and commercials. Commercials are causing the most damage. Recs are second. IMHO, when you throw out the BS that this law is bad for snapper, you're lying or wrong. It's bad for recreationals and charters, but lets not kid ourselves. Charters are businesses just like commercials. They may not be as bad or take as much, but they are in it for the money and I see nothing wrong with that. All I see is misleading people being a bad strategy and not up to the high standards of most on this board.


----------



## Xanadu (Oct 1, 2007)

> *markw4321 (10/24/2007)*Freespool,
> 
> 
> 
> ...






Now, we're talking truth and facts and this is the argument that needs to be made. The highest and best use of the GOM snapper, based on economics, is certainly recreational. Game fish status would be a great idea, imho, and even a limited harvest like we're seeing with redfish.


----------



## lobsterman (Sep 30, 2007)

Xanadu: I understand where you are coming from, but to up the poundage for commercial fleet and take away from a Rec fisherman will in no way help the snapper. It just changes who can keep the snapper.


----------



## snake 166 (Oct 2, 2007)

The proposed rule change maintains the 50/50 ratio for commercial and recreational.


----------



## lobsterman (Sep 30, 2007)

I just talked to a commercial snapper fisherman in Half Hitch a week or so ago and he said they raised his catch limit from 60,000 lbs to 90,000 lbs. Now how do you see that as 50 / 50. And that is just one fisherman out of how many in the state of florida.


----------



## Hook (Oct 2, 2007)

It would be interesting to find out how many / much of the commercial boats go after Red Snapper and how many go after Mingo Snapper et. allto sell? Let's say pounds of Red VS pounds of Mingos each season. we might find out a ery interesting outcome. 

Not to cause a stir but in the 60's restaurants menu said Gulf Red Snapper then years later it said Gulf Snapper and now itjust says Snapper.:doh


----------



## Chuck's Charters (Oct 3, 2007)

the initial allocation that the commercials received at the beginning of the year was just a partial allocation and the rest of their intended allocation was distributed about a month ago.


----------



## lobsterman (Sep 30, 2007)

Hook: As you well know there are usually both species on each and every spot. and when you drop bait down you don't exactly have a choice as to which snapper hits it. My guess is if it is legalfor them to keep they keep it


----------



## snake 166 (Oct 2, 2007)

Proposed rule is 2.55M lbs commercial and 2.45M lbs recreational.

Mingos (vermillion snapper) are managed under a different plan. When the boat pulls up to the dock they toss the mingos in a seperate basket for weighout.


----------



## capt mike (Oct 3, 2007)

Amen Lobsterman!



I go to meetings and digest all this flawed data, newsletters and bulletins and try my best over the years to look at all this from both sides of the fence and only someone ill informed or not real smart can still think that the NMFS is even considering the real truths in any of these important topics. This is all political between the commercial fishermen, the CCA and our government fisheries so called experts. As long as the government can keep us fighting with each other they can do two things. First these so called "fisheries managers" can continue to draw these ridiculus salaries and the ignorant scientists can keep getting their big grants to employ their friends in these crazy endeavers. The government knows full well that if they took these funds {your tax money} and built massive habitat in the gulf along with aquaculture projects to raise these species and raise finfish for food for these fish that they in turn could actually turn the gulf red!!!! This has already been done in other parts of the world with simalar species but you can't even get your government to look at this alternative because all these so called experts are connected in this entitlement program, which is a form of welfare for them at our expense.we as americans,fishermen and women and taxpayers deserve better. Until we band together as one- recreational,commercial, shrimper,oysterman and anyone who derives pleasure or a living from the Gulf Of Mexico and demand that they change course and ignore their stupid decisions nothing will change!!!! 

:usaflag


----------



## Chuck's Charters (Oct 3, 2007)

all you have to do is follow the money. Large commercial snapper operations spend mega bucks lobbying. lobbying is nothing but legalized bribery.


----------



## Xanadu (Oct 1, 2007)

> *lobsterman (10/24/2007)*Xanadu: I understand where you are coming from, but to up the poundage for commercial fleet and take away from a Rec fisherman will in no way help the snapper. It just changes who can keep the snapper.






You're mixing things up a bit, I believe. They re-allocated according to the number of permits and the historical landings. They didn't increase the allotment for each commercial fisherman. The guy you talked with is simply getting more of the total purse from the 55/45 split.


----------



## lobsterman (Sep 30, 2007)

I see said the blind man as he picked up his hammer and saw.


----------



## Halfmoon (Oct 3, 2007)

> *capt mike (10/24/2007)*Amen Lobsterman!
> 
> I go to meetings and digest all this flawed data, newsletters and bulletins and try my best over the years to look at all this from both sides of the fence and only someone ill informed or not real smart can still think that the NMFS is even considering the real truths in any of these important topics. This is all political between the commercial fishermen, the CCA and our government fisheries so called experts. As long as the government can keep us fighting with each other they can do two things. First these so called "fisheries managers" can continue to draw these ridiculus salaries and the ignorant scientists can keep getting their big grants to employ their friends in these crazy endeavers. The government knows full well that if they took these funds {your tax money} and built massive habitat in the gulf along with aquaculture projects to raise these species and raise finfish for food for these fish that they in turn could actually turn the gulf red!!!! This has already been done in other parts of the world with simalar species but you can't even get your government to look at this alternative because all these so called experts are connected in this entitlement program, which is a form of welfare for them at our expense.we as americans,fishermen and women and taxpayers deserve better. Until we band together as one- recreational,commercial, shrimper,oysterman and anyone who derives pleasure or a living from the Gulf Of Mexico and demand that they change course and ignore their stupid decisions nothing will change!!!!
> :usaflag


I agree!!! I have been through it as a Commercial guy. It takes All the the groups as one to tell the Govt. what to do. Until then, they will do whatever helps them.(GOVT) Once everyone realizes that, then you can fight them. But this fighting amongst the classes won't get you anywhere.

Once everyone is ready to do that call me I will be glad to help. Until than they will take it away from you and you all be to busy fight'n against each other just like everything else in this country.


----------



## David Ridenour (Sep 28, 2007)

> *markw4321 (10/24/2007
> 
> - We have way, way more people fishing every year. ........there are still more boats and people fishing now than ever.
> 
> ...


*

Mark, I recently read an article in a magazine and I don't remember which one it was, but the jist of it was about the current shortage and predicted serious shortage of boat ramps due to the increase in boat ownership as well as the reduction of available waterfront property for public use.I wasn't about to pay the $4500 for the research but this article tends to support a predicted increase in boat usage and ownership as well. http://freedonia.ecnext.com/free-scripts/comsite2.pl?page=description&src_id=0285&purchase_type=ITM&study_id=2249

Honestly as far as the Charter business goes, how much of their business is tourists as opposed to local fishermen? I would think tourist really just want to "Deep Sea fish", bend a rodand don't really care as much about filling coolers as locals may think. Ask the mates how many of the customers give their catches away at the end of the charters. I've never really understood why you guys haven't argued just to close the red snapper fishery all together for all involved for a few years.That would honestly "protect" the snapper and give you guys time to establish the no fishing zones and drop all the reefs you wanted in those areas.As a rec fisherman you know they will be there when the ban is lifted, but your nemesis, the evil commercial guys might not live through a couple of seasons without the red snapper. Maybe we ought to be pushing for an alternative to the commercial harvest of red snapper.

http://www.snapperfarm.com/2006/aboutsnapperfarm.htm

http://www.saltwatersportsman.com/article.jsp?ID=21012151

http://www.starbulletin.com/2001/04/27/business/story3.html*


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

<P align=left>Xanadu<P align=left>Came back to stir the pot with you on your quote and assumption "that we have way, way more people fishing every year" <P align=left><P align=left><P align=left>below article indicates thatthere wasadecline in the total number offishing particpants in Florida and nationallybetween 2001-2006. <P align=left>MarkW<P align=left><P align=left>Florida Fish Busters December 2007 *<P align=left>Florida Still Reigns Supreme--as Fishing Capital of the World *<P align=left>By: Bob Wattendorf, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission <P align=left>Florida cannot be beat as the No. 1 place to cast a line, pitch a lure or land a lunker. No tall fisher?s tale here ? this title has been earned, according to a survey by the U.S. Census Bureau. <P align=left>Every five years the Census Bureau conducts the "National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation." This survey is the gold standard for comparing outdoor recreational activities between the states. Once again it proves that Florida is the number one fishing destination, according to the 2006 results. <P align=left>The facts tell where anglers go for the best fishing opportunities. Florida provided 46.3 million days of recreational fishing in 2006 versus 41.1 million days in Texas, the second highest state. Of fishing days spent in Florida, 4.8 million days were by tourists (nonresidents), while Wisconsin, the second highest state for tourist days, provided 3.8 million days. In terms of nonresident anglers, Florida is also number one with 885,000, versus No. 2 North Carolina with less than half that at 395,000. <P align=left>But the story does not end there. Overall Florida again ranked first in number of fishing participants age 16 and older with 2.77 million. Runner-up Texas had 2.53 million participants. However, in 2001 Florida had 3.10 million anglers, so there has been a decline of approximately 11 percent over five years according to these estimates. <P align=left>If you look at the decline as a percentage of the population, which has been rapidly increasing, the percent decline is a little more dramatic. In 2001, national rates were 16 percent and in Florida 17 percent of the population fished. Those rates dropped to 13 percent nationally and to 14 percent in the Sunshine State in 2006. On the positive side, the number of fishing days per angler has increased nationally, with the average angler fishing 17 days out of the year in 2006. <P align=left>Anglers in Florida spent $4.4 billion in 2006, allowing Florida to claim another No. 1 spot as the place where anglers spend the most money. The Lone-Star State was second best with $4.3 billion spent on fishing. Recreational fishing dollars helped to support 75,068 jobs in Florida, again making it No. 1, with Texas trailing behind with 58,938 jobs. This economic trend is great news for Florida partially because state and local taxes from the sale of fishing-related goods and services generated $441 million for general funds. <P align=left>In spite of the national estimates of fishing participation for all U.S. anglers (does not include foreign anglers) over 16 years of age decreasing, actual fishing license sales for both freshwater and saltwater have increased in Florida. From 2001-02, with 1,070,577 licenses sold to 2006-07 with 1,188,092, there was an increase of 11 percent in the sale of saltwater licenses. Freshwater license sales increased, from 587,413 sold in 2001-02 to 630,078 in 2006-07, showing an increase of 7 percent. Although not enough to keep pace with the population increase, it is certainly better than competing states. <P align=left>In calendar year 2006, the National Survey estimated 2.77 million anglers fished in Florida, and during fiscal year 2006-07 (July 1 to June 30), 1.55 million fishing licenses were sold. This discrepancy is partially the result of seniors (age 65 and older), resident saltwater shoreline anglers and several other groups, including those fishing from licensed saltwater piers or charter boats, being exempt from licensing. <P align=left>No one can dispute the facts and figures. Florida remains the Fishing Capital of the World because of great resources and responsible management. With a huge variety of fish, fishing waters and fishing styles to choose from, along with year-round fishing weather, there is little doubt that Florida will remain the place to go fishing. You can help ensure a vibrant future with high quality, sustainable and safe fishing opportunities by being an ethical angler, mentoring a youth or friend and keeping your license current. <P align=left>Additional information and relevant links are also posted on our Frequently Answered Questions page at www.MyFWC.com/fishing/faqs. Click on "What is the value of Florida?s Fisheries?" <P align=center>Instant licenses are available online at MyFWC.com/License or by calling 1-888-FISH-FLORIDA (347-4356) _

Visit MyFWC.com/Fishing/Updates for more FishBuster columns. _


----------



## pappastratos (Oct 9, 2007)

Like I have always said, or asked,,, how is the 2 16" snapper I catch 3 or 4times per year affect the overall population when the commericalguys catch thousands & kill all the fish theycatch ?Even the small ones die they release after flopping around the boat for 30 minutes...


----------



## jimmyjams4110 (Oct 20, 2007)

> *pappastratos (12/14/2007)*Like I have always said, or asked,,, how is the 2 16" snapper I catch 3 or 4times per year affect the overall population when the commericalguys catch thousands & kill all the fish theycatch ?Even the small ones die they release after flopping around the boat for 30 minutes...


B/c there are alot more of you then of them.


----------



## biggamefishr (Oct 26, 2007)

sounds like the outlook for red snapper is great......however, the lookout for snapper fishermen isn't so good


----------



## Mr. Mike (Oct 4, 2007)

This is not rocket science stuff!!

Legal or not, hunters who want more deer, plant more fields, put out more feeders, lease more land etc.

Endangered species are provided more habitat and time limit protection, that is, when the population increases to a safe level, they are taken off the endangered list and are once again hunted for sport.

It seems to me like providing a lot more habitat for reef fish would go a long way in solving this problem.

Alabama (very small coastline) has a great deal more reefs than north florida counties andhas a lot more fish!

Put Red Snapper on the "gamefish" list.

By the say, <U>out of state buyers</U> of florida/alabama red snapper sell "Mingos" in their markets as "Red Snapper".


----------



## Hook (Oct 2, 2007)

How many Kings are you willing to eat:sick


----------



## outdoorsalways (Dec 13, 2007)

The problem with 2 is that we now want them to be as big as possible.So we throw back all the small ones.In return flipper gets fatter and we get madder.I may be wrong in numbers but I think commercial fishermen get 500k lbs and they are done.How do you regulate that All of us have better ideas and mine is to shorten the season,lower length,and raise limit. Same amount of fish per year less to flipper and less overhead(gas,bait,food,beer,etc. But who am I,just another rookie with an opinion!!!!!!!


----------



## thereeldeal (Nov 29, 2007)

Push for gamefish status like we had to do with snook, permit,and redfish this is a limited resource best used in the recreational and charter industry. Commercial fishierman can still target deep water snapper and grouper that do not have such economic importance to the recreational angler 

just a thought


----------



## Spork (Oct 20, 2007)

First of all, I would like to say that I love to fish. No, wait, it should be I LOVE TO FISH. Snapper, grouper, trout, redfish, triggerfish, cobia, you name it I love to catch it. I also like to eat fish. Most of the time (but not all), if I catch a fish that's legal and that I like to eat I keep it. I don't keep every kingfish, bluefish or jack crevalle I catch. I don't keep any jacks actually, but they sure are fun to catch. If I've got a legal redfish on the boat then obviously all the other legal fish go back in the water.

But here's my main point: Xanadu is right. The reduced limit is not bad for snapper, but bad for snapper fishermen. I like to go offshore bottom bumping, I especially liked it when I was up in Pensacola because I knew I could at least catch a few snapper. Now that I live down in Largo it's not such a big deal because I have to go 15 or 20 miles offshore to catch a red snapper anymore. Personally I like to eat mangrove snapper better than red snapper. Plenty of mangrove snapper around.

I don't think the 2 snapper limit is going to affect other species like Capt. Redman suspects. It will affect my going on a local charter boat though, if I know I'm going to go offshore with a big chance of catching red snapper more than any other fish, then I'm not going to spend the money (especially with gas prices they are these days and charter boats charging fuel surcharges) on going out and catching a mess of fish that I have to release. I can catch tarpon for about $50/day or less on my own boat. compared to $200 for a charter that I have to release fish on.

I do think that the recreational/commercial bickery has to stop, but that's not going to happen unless the commercial fishery has the same limits placed upon it that the recreational fishery does. Which won't happen until the recreational "lobby" comes up with the money to pay the folks that make the laws.


----------



## Spork (Oct 20, 2007)

> *thereeldeal (12/15/2007)*Push for gamefish status like we had to do with snook, permit,and redfish this is a limited resource best used in the recreational and charter industry. Commercial fishierman can still target deep water snapper and grouper that do not have such economic importance to the recreational angler
> 
> just a thought




Oh yeah, that was my other point, but I forgot to make it:doh! Thanks man


----------



## SolarFlare (Oct 3, 2007)

I am a diehard localINSHORE fisherman, butI do like to go offshore 2-3 times/yr, for some different fun and some tastymeat. While there are many more knowledgeable on this subject than me, I would like to think that as a member and current Chair of the SRC Marine Ad committee, thati at least have some reasonable level of knowledge regarding the economics and the ecology of this subject.

My opinion and viewpoint for the little difference that it will make is:

1- NMFS _published_ data is flawed, inadequate, and often selfserving for the particular lobbying group that has the most $$! They often ask the questions as in surveys for example,in a manner that only allows the recipient to give them the answer they seek for their political interest or viewpoint!

2- This point is revealed throughout the entire fishery data collectionprocees whether it deals withinshore speciesor offshore species!

3- The CCAwas formed with great intentions and often times does a lot of good, however some that direct and speak forthat organization have become so enmamored with their own self, they have lost sight of their truepurpose. Too often a tree hugg'n mentality is taken with no thought to other viewpoints or realities.

4- The charter industry is doomed at the current pace of and continuing restrictions applied by the feds and to follow by the State. Add these restrictions to the fuel and addtional costs of doing business in these times, and itleavesus with very few surviors if any. NOTE:I believe the charter group is more conscienous of the need for conservation in order to perpetuate their trade and their enjoyment than the commercial fishery.

5- The commercial fishery isimportant as well,but far too often it is the "rape and pillage" mentality of a segment of that group that leads to unnecessary bycatch and mortality!

6- Shrimpers- hey I love shrimp, but it appears they kill more fish than the recreational fisherman could ever catch; andI get sick :sickeverytimeI see them draggin in the bay, stripping everything from habitat to livingspecies in reach of the net!

7- Because of the regulations, and from memoryI believe the mortality rate of the fish/snapper released hovers in the neigborhood of 75%. So is it overfishing or is the anal method of restrictions that kills more fish?

8- Locals- will still fish andgo after snapper, but they will go less frequently and there WILL be a lotof pressure applied to other species, it's a rob Peter, pay Paul kind of thing!

9- Tourism- the majority of people are not going to spend $150+/hd to catch 2 red snapper on a private charter. I am not talking about a party boat with 50 people, they are boat riders, not fishermen! It's simple, if they don't come to fish they don't spend their money for rooms, restaurants, fuel, gifts etc!

10- I am all about responsible fishing, reasonable conservation, perpetuation of our fishspecies for the future, but NOTbased on politics and money!

I'll leave all this up for debate from the forum faithful, but in my opinion, there definitely is a group of conservationists out there that wants to prevent us from one of our most enjoyable recreational opportunties and that is FISHING....*<U>next up may beyour favorite species!:doh</U>*


----------



## Spork (Oct 20, 2007)

Bay Pirate,

I agree with your post except for the part of putting pressure on other species. 

You think that folks will go out fishing just for cobia or just for grouper or any other species of bottom fish now? 

When I go out fishing I go out to catch fish. I may target a certain species when I fish, but I'm fishing for what I can catch at the time.

Even when I've gone out snapper fishing I've caught lots of other fish. Amberjack, grouper, tuna, shark, whatever, I've always abided by the laws though and kept what was legal (if I wanted).

I suppose if I was limited to only 2 snapper though then it might cause me to fish longer and therefore catch other species, is that what you're thinking?


----------



## Spork (Oct 20, 2007)

Still not convinced. It may put a little pressure on other species, but if all you're targeting is snapper, once you have your limit you're done. Right? 

The last time I fished for red snapper was in Pensacola last year. We caught 20 snapper for 5 people. My son wanted to drop one more time and I told him if he caught a snapper we'd have to let it go. Well he dropped it down and it was fighting and fighting and wound up to be a big triggerfish. We went home though after that.

Ok, so the snapper limit is 2 fish for red snapper. You catch 8 snapper between 4 people. Is that not enough fish to eat for 8 people despite the size? Let's say you have a limit of snapper and 2 amberjack over 28" and maybe even 2 gag grouper 22" or better. Between 4 people. 

Is that not enough fish for 4 people for a couple of weeks? I would think so.

Here's the only problem that I have with the whole situation:

Once the situation gets better where we could catch 3 or even 4 per person again, who's gonna actually make the decision to make the change? Just like redfish which you can catch one after another over the slot in Pensacola, but you can't keep any.

Edit: Look I'm not for everybody keeping everything they catch, but once the rules change, who's to say it'll be better for the fishermen even thought the stocks support it?


----------



## SolarFlare (Oct 3, 2007)

Nothing like Redfish Spork, 95% of the redfish you throw back live, 25% of the red snapper live, 2 different animals so to speak.

And if handled right even more redfish live, not so with snapper from deep water (bladder blows out)and flipper lurking!

This is like an argument that looks for eternal perpetuation!

I bow to completion.

:bowdown:bowdown:bowdown


----------



## First Catch (Oct 1, 2007)

There is onefactor that been severly overlooked by many people, or just plain ignored. This is SHRIMP TRAWLERS. I can't remember exactly what magazine it was (I believe Florida Sportsman), but that most snapper killed during snapper season are not from recreational fisherman or charters, but trawlers. Almost all of those killed are juvenille red snapper as well. Just thought I'd see if anyone else knew about this, or knew why nobody is regulating these trawlers, especially with the limited bag limit and season now.

As a side note, how do you all release the snapper back into the water, especially if the bladder is inflated? I've seen and heard that the correct way to vent the bladders is to take a hypodermic needle and stick it just behind a pectoral fin, just under the skin.


----------



## Xanadu (Oct 1, 2007)

> *markw4321 (12/14/2007)*<P align=left>Xanadu<P align=left>Came back to stir the pot with you on your quote and assumption "that we have way, way more people fishing every year" <P align=left><P align=left><P align=left>below article indicates thatthere wasadecline in the total number offishing particpants in Florida and nationallybetween 2001-2006. <P align=left>MarkW<P align=left>_
> 
> _


Get a bigger spoon. An 11% decline (alleged) does, in no way, mean that there is less pressure on fish - snapper in particular - than in previous years. 11% fewer anglers armed with electronics that have advanced at light speed would easily render your point useless, but if you go back and realize that we're talking about a longer period than just the past 5 years. 

Who cares, your point was dumb anyway. There are more people fishing now than ever before. There are more anglers and boats capable of fishing for snapper than ever before. Of course, there are also stupid regulations and it appears they're backed up by bad science adn a political preference for commercial fishermen.

But here is the deal. I have a Ray c120 on my boat. I don't bottom fish. With the new tech, I run over spots every time I go anywhere that I would never have seen previously. My last 2 boats have been well equipped with modern electronics, but neither of them shot the bottom at cruise speed like the new stuff. Boats are better, ranges higher, electronics better, tackle better, techniques are better and there are more of us. Do you fail to understand that? 20 years ago, we fished at the nipple and hardly ever saw another boat. We'd be lucky to be in radio range most of the day. Now, we see 24' center consoles at the freaking NW FLorida Slope or Lloyd's Ridge. Boats from PCB fish the nipple for god's sake. Are you really going to try to argue that there is less pressure on the resource?


----------



## Xanadu (Oct 1, 2007)

> *Bay Pirate (12/15/2007)*
> 
> I'll leave all this up for debate from the forum faithful, but in my opinion, there definitely is a group of conservationists out there that wants to prevent us from one of our most enjoyable recreational opportunties and that is FISHING....*<U>next up may beyour favorite species!:doh</U>*




All your points are good, but in this last statement, you lose me entirely. I disagree. There are no conservationists out to get us. Nobody wants to prevent us from fishing recreationally except perhaps the big money commercial guys. You are incorrect and I ask that if you disagree, you please provide one single bit of proof or evidence. It may seem like "the man is out to get you", but he's not. There are very simple and identifiable issues influencing this problem. There is no PETA plot against rec snapper fishing.


----------



## First Catch (Oct 1, 2007)

<DIV class=Quote>*capt mike (10/24/2007)* <HR class=hr noShade SIZE=1>Amen Lobsterman!

I go to meetings and digest all this flawed data, newsletters and bulletins and try my best over the years to look at all this from both sides of the fence and only someone ill informed or not real smart can still think that the NMFS is even considering the real truths in any of these important topics. This is all political between the commercial fishermen, the CCA and our government fisheries so called experts. As long as the government can keep us fighting with each other they can do two things. First these so called "fisheries managers" can continue to draw these ridiculus salaries and the ignorant scientists can keep getting their big grants to employ their friends in these crazy endeavers. The government knows full well that if they took these funds {your tax money} and built massive habitat in the gulf along with aquaculture projects to raise these species and raise finfish for food for these fish that they in turn could actually turn the gulf red!!!! This has already been done in other parts of the world with simalar species but you can't even get your government to look at this alternative because all these so called experts are connected in this entitlement program, which is a form of welfare for them at our expense.we as americans,fishermen and women and taxpayers deserve better. Until we band together as one- recreational,commercial, shrimper,oysterman and anyone who derives pleasure or a living from the Gulf Of Mexico and demand that they change course and ignore their stupid decisions nothing will change!!!! 







</DIV>

I believe that sometimes we may never truly know why some things are done. With all the lobying and what not in the government, some things can be lost in the confusion. As well as some corruption, as EVERY government will eventually have. By no means am I trying to attack the politics of this country, for I amthankful to be living here.:usaflag I just think that it's our job as recreationaland charter fishermento keep up with, and try to figure out why these laws are passed and see if there is anyway we can help tofix the root of the problem. An example of this would be the shrimp trawlers I talked about in my last post, which could be the root of the problem of why red snapper are being "targeted" as a severely regulated species.


----------



## snake 166 (Oct 2, 2007)

There isn't any body out to get us. Not commercials, not NMFS and not conservation organizations.

The stock assessment uses data that comes from 3 sources. Private/charter recreational fishermen through the MRFSS; commercial fishermen through dockside inspections at wholesale markets; government research boat catches.

The data says that the red snapper are much younger (smaller)than one would expect from a well managed stock and are therefore overfished.

The question is: are they sampling the real population or a subset that is not representative. I think the latter. You have to look at where they get their samples. For recreational fishermen, they are sampling snappers caught from overfished public reefs. For commercial fishermen they are sampling snappers caught under the derby system on short close in trips also on overfished spots and from the government research boats who knows because they are not professional fisherman.

Most of you know that any charter captain that makes his private spots can take his charter to big fish most anytime he wants but he doesn't do that forshort trips (the trips that get sampled by the MRFSS technicians)

Donny Walker, a commercial fisherman, reported to the GOMFMC that when they went from Derby to IFQ his average fish went from less than 2 lbs to 7 lbs. Why? He picked the fishing days, was able to run farther and catch big fish which means he can fill the box and come home sooner and not work as hard.

Hopefully the NMFS will figure this out and get some "new" data, like they did with red grouper and all of the sudden the stock is OK. In the mean time, we just have to deal with it.


----------



## The Raven (Oct 8, 2007)

Trust your government. Your government is good. Do not disparage the actions of your government, as they are trying to take care of you, and protect you from yourselves. 

There would be no fish were there no government. Your government will determine your needs, tell you what your needs are, and then provide for your needs.


----------



## floridafisherman (Oct 1, 2007)

I don't have a dog in this hunt but will play devils advocate. Let's say of 100% of the snapper eating public there is 10% who actually go into the gulf and catch their own then that would leave 90% to count on commercial fisherman to catch the snapper they will consume. Now would you rather have 9 times more boats and fisherman anchoring up in the gulf catching an increased recreational bag limit or allow the limited amount of commercial guys to do the fishing for the majority of the snapper eating public. In my opinion (no facts) all and all the recreational/charter snapper fishermen will harvest more fish then the commercial guys, due to the fact that there are many, many more recreational fisherman. 



Donning my Flame Retardant Suit.


----------



## Xanadu (Oct 1, 2007)

Hey Pirate, Thanks for taking the time to be involved. If you've seen the enviros out to stop fishing all together, I take your word for it. I know there are PETA idiots tossing blood at fur wearers and telling kids fishing hurts fish. Of course, catching fish does hurt fish - but who cares?



Anyway, I just don't think there is a large underground movement to stop recreational fishing unless its run by commercial fisherman. Enviro whack jobs that far out on the edge are just idiots and loners. Good for them, they're not going to hurt us.


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

> *floridafisherman (12/17/2007)*I don't have a dog in this hunt but will play devils advocate. Let's say of 100% of the snapper eating public there is 10% who actually go into the gulf and catch their own then that would leave 90% to count on commercial fisherman to catch the snapper they will consume. Now would you rather have 9 times more boats and fisherman anchoring up in the gulf catching an increased recreational bag limit or allow the limited amount of commercial guys to do the fishing for the majority of the snapper eating public. In my opinion (no facts) all and all the recreational/charter snapper fishermen will harvest more fish then the commercial guys, due to the fact that there are many, many more recreational fisherman.
> 
> Donning my Flame Retardant Suit.


FloridaFisherman,

Thanks for your post. I see the issue in a whole different light now. Commercial fisherman are "the farmers of the sea". Commercial fishermanare in business to ensure the non-fishingpublic get to eat red snapper. How philanthropic of them!

Mark W


----------



## biggamefishr (Oct 26, 2007)

> *markw4321 (12/17/2007)*
> 
> 
> > *floridafisherman (12/17/2007)*I don't have a dog in this hunt but will play devils advocate. Let's say of 100% of the snapper eating public there is 10% who actually go into the gulf and catch their own then that would leave 90% to count on commercial fisherman to catch the snapper they will consume. Now would you rather have 9 times more boats and fisherman anchoring up in the gulf catching an increased recreational bag limit or allow the limited amount of commercial guys to do the fishing for the majority of the snapper eating public. In my opinion (no facts) all and all the recreational/charter snapper fishermen will harvest more fish then the commercial guys, due to the fact that there are many, many more recreational fisherman.
> ...


difference is that farmers own their land, raise their crops, then harvest them,they buy their own seed and replenish their crops every year. commercial fishermen don't do any of that except harvest, they don't own the water, and they don't replenish the resources that they take from....so its not fair to the farmers to group them into the same category as commercial fishermen


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

So commercial fisherman are really not farmers.Wow I am learning more and more. What aboutred snapper being categorized as being overfished? Does it make sense that commercial fishermanareableto catch 13 inch red snapper and sellthem since red snapperarecategorized as being overfished by the gov?

MarkW


----------



## Stuart H. Brown (Oct 4, 2007)

I don't thinkthere would be a mad rush of snapper lovers out buying boats if it was taken off the menus. Thanks to all that do participate somehow. Recreational should get more limit because there are more of us and combined we have a greater affect on the areas around us.

Lets turn "Old Stinky" into a hatchery and grow some fish.

My .02 SHB


----------

