# Sector Separation Questions



## WAReilly (Jun 2, 2014)

PLEASE DONT KILL ME ON THIS ONE!! There are a couple things I don't understand about this whole issue. 

1. What make them (whomever is trying to create sector separation) think the recreational fishermen have exceeded their red snapper quotas? How can this be proven or proved false? Where did this idea come from?

2. How will it affect recreational fishermen? I'm under the understand that the separation will provide both side with essentially the same quotas. Who would be getting shorted?

Again, I just don't understand the issue here. The only thing I hear people say about it is that it has to do with money. 

Please understand that, to this point, I have been completely unaffected by this issue because I have never caught or even eaten red snapper.


----------



## Burnt Drag (Jun 3, 2008)

The sand on the beach isn't a good place under which to keep your head, sir.


----------



## hsiF deR (Oct 4, 2009)

I will attempt to answer. This is what I understand to be the case. I'm in no way an expert and could likely be wrong.

1. Catch quantities are based on TAC limits. There is no way of knowing what the recreational actual catch is because there are allot of people with no reporting. The commercial side has records of weights as they sell by the pound wholesale. Recreational TAC is estimated. There is no way of proving it without an actual count. Sector separation likely derived from commercial industry.

2. It affects recreational fisherman by not being allowed to keep fish. The quota may be split 5050 but it's a select few that get 50%. Basically you are being sold out. We get 2 each for a few days a year. While SS gets thousands of pounds until their numbers are reached.


----------



## WAReilly (Jun 2, 2014)

Burnt Drag said:


> The sand on the beach isn't a good place under which to keep your head, sir.


I completely agree, but in my defense, we moved out here in March. I started fishing out here in May. I started reading tie bits of this on here after I joined in June, but couldn't seem to get a grasp on the issue.


----------



## WAReilly (Jun 2, 2014)

hsiF deR said:


> I will attempt to answer. This is what I understand to be the case. I'm in no way an expert and could likely be wrong.
> 
> 1. Catch quantities are based on TAC limits. There is no way of knowing what the recreational actual catch is because there are allot of people with no reporting. The commercial side has records of weights as they sell by the pound wholesale. Recreational TAC is estimated. There is no way of proving it without an actual count. Sector separation likely derived from commercial industry.
> 
> 2. It affects recreational fisherman by not being allowed to keep fish. The quota may be split 5050 but it's a select few that get 50%. Basically you are being sold out. We get 2 each for a few days a year. While SS gets thousands of pounds until their numbers are reached.


So this brings a couple more questions to me...

1. If "they" can't prove that the recreational fishermen have actually exceeded their limits, how can sanctions legally be placed upon them? Hearsay doesn't hold up in court. 

2. Why are the commercial fishermen only under the poundage limits where the rec guys are under both poundage and daily bag limits? Which goes back to... How do "they" know when rec guys have reached their poundage quota?


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

http://www.al.com/outdoors/index.ssf/2014/08/sector_separation_amendment_di.html


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

http://www.joincca.org/articles/687


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

http://www.theonlinefisherman.com/f...version-of-catch-shares-and-sector-separation


----------



## SaltAddict (Jan 6, 2010)

"They" can place sanctions because "they" control the laws (this should make anyone/everyone angry). 

"They" have NO IDEA what rec fishermen catch every year. If we get 100 days of snapper season, "they" say we caught too much. If we have a 9 day season "they" still say we caught too much. (Smelling like bullshit yet?)


----------



## 153 Large fish (Nov 30, 2013)

Recreational fishermen aren't taking the lawmakers to lunch or on free fishing trips etc...that's what lobbyists do....


----------



## 153 Large fish (Nov 30, 2013)

If they are so endangered, why can you buy them at the fish market?...Buncha BS


----------



## SHunter (Jun 19, 2009)

Just my thoughts on the topic. The commercial fish brokers are paying for the lobbyist. We don't have that voice in government. Much of the fish caught here are shipped to New York, Canada and overseas where people will pay more for red snapper than we are willing to pay. Several years ago Channel 5 had a good news piece on an outfit out of Orange Beach that was packing fish to be shipped in huge containers up north. The Destin channel had a captain filmed talking about the money in shipping snapper out of Florida. 
Most of us here on the forum are working stiffs so it is difficult to make some out of town meetings and I think some of us get complacent and think that it will all work out. I have been wondering if sales for tackle, fishing boats, etc. spirals downward, if we would get more help as a voice from these folks. Maybe they have been speaking up and I haven't heard but I think that it will take some big business to come in with us to lobby. Now I feel like the rec fishers and the charter boats have been thrown into the mix to bloody ourselves. 
Red snapper are not endangered here but not as plentiful in other parts of Florida, and although the excuse was used by some, I do not believe that it was ever about that. Follow the money. The excuse that I have been hearing is that all people should be able to have snapper on the dinner table and not just those of us who have boats. This to me is a joke because of the high cost of a pound of red snapper in the marketplace. Not many restaurants have it on the menu any longer. When I was a kid almost all had snapper on the menu. Folks, that "endangered" snapper is heading out of town packed in ice.


----------



## 153 Large fish (Nov 30, 2013)

How much does a commercial fishing license cost?...then you can keep just about what ever you want...right or ?...I mean I spend so much money on fishing and get to keep very little, with all the slots and off seasons etc...


----------



## Jet fishin (May 5, 2012)

SHunter said:


> Just my thoughts on the topic. The commercial fish brokers are paying for the lobbyist. We don't have that voice in government. Much of the fish caught here are shipped to New York, Canada and overseas where people will pay more for red snapper than we are willing to pay. Several years ago Channel 5 had a good news piece on an outfit out of Orange Beach that was packing fish to be shipped in huge containers up north. The Destin channel had a captain filmed talking about the money in shipping snapper out of Florida.
> Most of us here on the forum are working stiffs so it is difficult to make some out of town meetings and I think some of us get complacent and think that it will all work out. I have been wondering if sales for tackle, fishing boats, etc. spirals downward, if we would get more help as a voice from these folks. Maybe they have been speaking up and I haven't heard but I think that it will take some big business to come in with us to lobby. Now I feel like the rec fishers and the charter boats have been thrown into the mix to bloody ourselves.
> Red snapper are not endangered here but not as plentiful in other parts of Florida, and although the excuse was used by some, I do not believe that it was ever about that. Follow the money. The excuse that I have been hearing is that all people should be able to have snapper on the dinner table and not just those of us who have boats. This to me is a joke because of the high cost of a pound of red snapper in the marketplace. Not many restaurants have it on the menu any longer. When I was a kid almost all had snapper on the menu. Folks, that "endangered" snapper is heading out of town packed in ice.



Correct "Red Snappers are not endangered...."

How ever, "recreational fishing is!"


----------



## LopeAlong (May 23, 2011)

153 Large fish said:


> How much does a commercial fishing license cost?...then you can keep just about what ever you want...right or ?...I mean I spend so much money on fishing and get to keep very little, with all the slots and off seasons etc...


A gulf reef permit cost you about $5k with vms. Then your allowed to fish for all non quota fish at your leisure. Vermillion, whities and jacks ( when season is open). If you'd like and you can you can lease pounds of red snapper quota for about $3.50 a pd. that puts a 8lb snapper at about $28. But you have to sell all if the fish to a federally licensed fish house. Oh in FL you have to have a Restricted Species license to land them there. And that requires history of sales.


----------



## Tom Hilton (Oct 4, 2007)

"If you'd like and you can you can lease pounds of red snapper quota for about $3.50 a pd. that puts a 8lb snapper at about $28."

That's what this is all about - Sector Segregation - Amendment 40, etc. - putting a price on each and every fish that we catch - setting up a system through Sector Segregation/Catch Shares to create revenue streams for corporations, paying them Resource rent on what we ALL already own so that they can skim $$ off of each and every fish we catch.

When you are on the ground floor of the conversion of a Public Trust resource into a private commodity as Lopealong (Bobby Kelly) is talking about (and promoting), that's a MASSIVE transfer of wealth from the many (American Public) to the few (well-connected corporations). Once transferred, it never comes back - it's gone forever.

Other industries that profit from Public Trust Resources, such as mining, timber. oil, grazing, etc., ALL pay the nation for the privilege, that is, EXCEPT for the Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper IFQ Program - they don't pay a penny. The other distinction is that the other industries are not gifted ownership of anything - EXCEPT for the Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper IFQ Program which has been gifted (for free) ownership of a majority of OUR Red Snapper (51%). The push now is to increase that private ownership % from 51% to over 75% via Sector Segregation / Catch Shares. That ultimately means that the majority shareholders in the Gulf (private recreational fishermen) are given a fraction of what they should rightfully have.

The whole scam is disgusting to the highest degree, and the average American has no idea it is happening.


----------



## LopeAlong (May 23, 2011)

Where were you when the block leases for oil and gas rights in the gulf were formed?


----------



## Tom Hilton (Oct 4, 2007)

Oil companies pay the nation Resource Rent for the privilege of profiting off of our Public Trust Resources.

Americans "leasing" Red Snapper to other Americans and pocketing all of the money is felony theft. In order to lease something, that infers that you own it - nobody has the right to own/lease what we ALL already own.


----------



## tbaxl (Mar 13, 2013)

Tom, again our thanks for being such a vocal leader in the fight for our fishery.


----------



## PapaG399 (Jul 16, 2013)

I just got this from our local CCA office. We need to show up in force:

Please promote their attendance at Okaloosa Walton Community college Student Services BLD room 302 on October 17th at 7 pm. ECRA is hosting a presentation by the Congressional Sportsman Caucus about recreational fishermen’s future access to the fishery. This Caucus lobbies the Congress and Senate as well as State Governors. We need to show them that the Florida Panhandle private recreational fisherman *DOES care* about their right to fish! IF we have a good showing, the representative of CSC will inform Washington that private recreational fishermen in the Florida Panhandle are worth their attention. If we sit like defeated people and refuse to show up, the message to Washington will be that the fishermen in the Florida Panhandle don’t really care so let’s not waste our time and resources fighting for them. 

ECRA is covering ALL expenses for this event and, it’s right here in our area. All your club members have to do is to show-up. *The main topic of discussion will be what sector separation will mean for private recreational fishermen.* Please let your members know that ECRA is inviting them to attend this event *free of charge*. We are trying to save fishing for them but they need to help by showing up. If we all join together and work together to save our right to fish, we will be unstoppable but, if recreational fishermen give up before the fight is over, our defeatist attitude and lack of action will guarantee private recreational fishermen will lose their access to the fishery. Who will be to blame? - Private recreational fishermen for not standing up for themselves! I hope and pray that the masses will wake-up and take action before it’s too late. Once the ruling is made, it will be almost impossible to change it back. 

I will need an approximate count of people who are committed to show up on the 17th so that we will have enough chairs set up. We want to FILL the room! Remember, it’s FREE and it’s all being put together to help the private recreational fisherman.

The Gulf Council meeting in Mobile will be October 20-24th I’m not sure which day they will have public comments but as soon as I find out, I’ll let you know.


*Candy Hansard*
President 
Emerald Coast Reef Association Inc.
P.O. Box 273 ~ Niceville, FL 32588
www.ecreef.org
O: 850-729-7619
C: 850-582-1359


----------



## LopeAlong (May 23, 2011)

Tom Hilton said:


> Oil companies pay the nation Resource Rent for the privilege of profiting off of our Public Trust Resources.
> 
> Americans "leasing" Red Snapper to other Americans and pocketing all of the money is felony theft. In order to lease something, that infers that you own it - nobody has the right to own/lease what we ALL already own.


Leasing harvest rights. Same thing oil and gas companies do every single day. They are making billions upon billions of dollars out of the gulf. Where are you picketing them? You even support them by buying their products. What's the difference between BP, Marathon, Shell, Hess etc ect and me? Nothing! They paid about $3mil per 3 square mile block and make millions of dollars per year. I'll bet the ratio is about the same with my 4 permits and the business I do a year. Why aren't you calling them theives? 

40 is going through. The votes are there. CCA's little postering letter will make no difference. Remember the words FEDERAL MANDATE. They will come back to haunt you. I wish you'd go ahead and state your true agenda. 

Before you ask mine is to guarantee access to more than 146 people that had the access this year. I'm sick and tired of telling clients/friends that because they can't vacation in the right time of year they have to throw these fish back. And I'll make another thing VERY clear to everyone on this forum. I'm wrapping up the best year I've ever had! Over 250 trips and counting. I don't need to own a red snapper to make money. I want more people to be able to catch them.


----------



## Tom Hilton (Oct 4, 2007)

I'm talking about IFQs - the system is setup so that none of the commercial red snapper fat cats pay the nation a penny for the privilege of harvesting our Public Trust Resource.

You are a fairly vocal whiner about not being able to fish state waters like private recs.

The Charter Fisherman Association guys like Hickman, Cantrell, and Jennings are also the loudest whiners when it comes to supposedly being denied access to our state water red snapper fisheries for the "millions of non-boat owning Americans. However, they all seem to be fishing year-round in our state waters fishing for, yes, red snapper. 

As usual, saying one thing and doing another in order to try to justify the privatization of OUR fish.


----------



## LopeAlong (May 23, 2011)

Tom Hilton said:


> I'm talking about IFQs - the system is setup so that none of the commercial red snapper fat cats pay the nation a penny for the privilege of harvesting our Public Trust Resource.
> 
> You are a fairly vocal whiner about not being able to fish state waters like private recs.
> 
> ...



As usual your tellings lies! Lies lies and more lies to sway people. I'll start in order as you listed them

All permit holders pay a user fee. $25 for the first permit and $10 after that. So that's more than a penny

My good friends are fed up with federal permit holders bring treated like second class citizens in regards to our state seasons. We have never faulted anyone for catching fish in state water. Looks like Jennings is advertising his state guide boat. Something I'm sure he has done out of necessity to stay competitive in business. 

OUR fish belong to EVERY US CITIZEN, not just gulf state residents. 

Here's a question for you because I do see your argument. Would you support 40 if it didn't "gift" fish but was set up like a derby like it's slated to the first few years? That way both private and cfh get the access that we all should.


----------



## LopeAlong (May 23, 2011)

But if it's the ratio of earned/paid then I'm sure we could greatly debate that with what you pay for your info from CU and repackage.


----------



## Tom Hilton (Oct 4, 2007)

What lies? I'm not telling lies, as I stand behind each and every word I say. Claiming that I am telling lies in itself a lie Bobby Kelly - you are the liar here.

The commercial red snapper IFQ program and it's participants not only do not pay the nation a penny for the privilege of harvesting our Public Trust Resource, but in fact are costing the nation's taxpayers millions of dollars to pay for the management and enforcement of the program. Yes, they charge a pittance in the 3% Cost Recovery Fee and permit fees, but the costs of running the program is closer to 20% a net deficit that the taxpayers are forced to pay.

I am not granted exclusive access to anything like the IFQ program does - comparing apples to oranges.

Amendment 40 sets up the possibility of implementing recreational IFQs - plain and simple - that is the ONLY reason behind it.


----------



## Burnt Drag (Jun 3, 2008)

Bobby, there are 2 issues that keep me from jumping on the bandwagon. Really, there are more, but I'm going to talk about the 2 biggies. 1. The resource is (except for the EFPs) a public resource. On that, you've agreed per our conversation on the radio. But you added, "My Public" to that, and that means privatization. These fish don't belong to you and me. They belong to the people we take fishing and the people who fish from their own boats. If 40 passes and we're "gifted" these fish, we can do as we please with them. That leads to number 2. There is no fair way to divide the fish amoung the reef permit holders. I know b/c I got screwed out of a 200 pound permit and thrown under the bus by the decisions of the NOAA heads. There will be captains/owners that come away like fat rats and some that come away screwed like an un-paid prostitute.


----------



## Tom Hilton (Oct 4, 2007)

"Looks like Jennings is advertising his state guide boat. Something I'm sure he has done out of necessity to stay competitive in business."

Exactly. He, you, Hickman, and other EDF-funded captains all whining about not being able to fish state waters, yet here we are, with Hickman, Jennings, Walker, and others running state water trips whenever they want, year-round. 

Not very truthful, is it?

And guess what? Sector Separation wasn't needed to solve the problem now was it?


----------



## LopeAlong (May 23, 2011)

Jim we fish our permits every day. The guys who make a living doing this will get more fish. The same way the commercial guys that fished it and reported all of their sales. Not sure how many pounds you got but no one made you sell them. Honestly if they just give us a derby I'll be happy. 

Exactly my point! These fish belong to everyone and they will go home with everyone. How many snapper do you have? Do we operate our business like they do in places like Hawaii where the crew keeps the fish? No, they go home with everyone, i.e. The Public. 

Hilton, there's gonna be a lot more state water guide boats if 40 doesn't go through like Hickman, Jennings and walker


----------



## Tom Hilton (Oct 4, 2007)

More threats if you don't get your way. Don't you get tired of threatening people or trying to assault them?


----------



## tbaxl (Mar 13, 2013)

LopeAlong said:


> Jim we fish our permits every day. The guys who make a living doing this will get more fish. The same way the commercial guys that fished it and reported all of their sales. Not sure how many pounds you got but no one made you sell them. Honestly if they just give us a derby I'll be happy.
> 
> Exactly my point! These fish belong to everyone and they will go home with everyone. How many snapper do you have? Do we operate our business like they do in places like Hawaii where the crew keeps the fish? No, they go home with everyone, i.e. The Public.
> 
> Hilton, there's gonna be a lot more state water guide boats if 40 doesn't go through like Hickman, Jennings and walker


More state guide boats are fine as long as we all are getting screwed together and no special treatment for any group. If 40 does pass I think the injunction will shut it down for all. Once again we are all in this together as it should be. As for you hate having to tell you out of town customers they can't catch the fish, well I hate having to tell my family they can't keep the fish so again we are all in this together. You went with division so expect no pity here as I do not either.


----------



## sailfish218 (Sep 17, 2014)

*Sector Separation*

Sector Separation is certainly not a "done thing" when it comes to amendment 40.
The vote takes place on Oct. 23rd. in Mobile, Al. 
You have a right to show up there and, should. You have a right to speak or, have someone speak on your behalf. If you sign up to speak, someone else can also give you their two minutes to allow you to continue with your thoughts. 
I guarantee that there will be a ton of commercial boat and charter guys there fighting for their rights.
This information is all available on line. 
There has been a recent barrage of letters against this crap by the States along the Gulf. CCA is great at getting the info out to fishermen. If you are not a member of CCA, you should be. They are a great advocate group for all fishermen.
Make sure you go on line and voice your displeasure with your congressmen from your area. It takes a few minutes. Blast the living hell out of them.
The council is made up of 17 APPOINTED individuals from the Gulf states. The vote is very close. It can be swayed by pressure. If we are not going to show up at meetings enmass, who do we have to blame?
Currently the commercial boats have 49% of the catch allotment. The balance divided by the Charter boats and private licenses. They want more and it can only come from one source,us! The only thing that works is fairness in fishing for all. They fish, we fish. Same days. Charter guys get the worst screwing because they are trying to make a living on day trips that have been going on for years without any signs of depletion of Red Snapper stocks.
You have to get in the fight!


----------



## LopeAlong (May 23, 2011)

sailfish218 said:


> Sector Separation is certainly not a "done thing" when it comes to amendment 40.
> The vote takes place on Oct. 23rd. in Mobile, Al.
> You have a right to show up there and, should. You have a right to speak or, have someone speak on your behalf. If you sign up to speak, someone else can also give you their two minutes to allow you to continue with your thoughts.
> I guarantee that there will be a ton of commercial boat and charter guys there fighting for their rights.
> ...


Very excellent post! 9-8 if Ansen votes against it like we think.


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

LopeAlong said:


> Very excellent post! 9-8 if Ansen votes against it like we think.


 http://www.gulfcouncil.org/about/fishery_council_members.php
Is the below listing how you orange beach gentlemen have the votes 9-8 in favor lined up and counted?

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

Voting For Amendment 40 - 9 votes
NMFS 
Dr. Roy Crabtree,
Regional Administrator

John Sanchez 
17931 SW 288 Street 
Homestead, FL 33030 2012/2015 Comm/obligatory

Roy Williams, Vice Chair 
3485 Welwyn Way
Tallahassee, FL 32309 2013/2016 Other/at large

David Walker 
401 Diane Drive
Andalusia, AL 36420 2014/2017 Comm/at large 

John R. Greene, Jr. 
Intimidator Sportfishing, Inc. 
25833 Tealwood Drive 
Daphne, AL 36526 2009/2015 Rec/obligatory 

Leann Bosarge 
Bosarge Boats
5301 Ladner Avenue
Pascagoula, MS 39581 2013/2016 Comm/obligatory 

Corky Perret 
68 Ravine Lane
Poplarville, MS 39470 2012/2015 Other/at large

Greg Stunz 
6300 Ocean Drive, HRI 314
Corpus Christi, TX 78412 2014/2017 Other/at large 


Harlon Pearce 
LA Fish
P.O. Box 486
Kenner, LA 70063-0486 2006/2015 Comm/at large 



Voting Against Amendment 40 - 8 votes

Pamella Dana 
Sure Lure Charter Company
P.O. Box 1575
Destin, FL 32540 2011/2014 Rec/at large

Martha Bademan 
(designee for Nick Wiley)
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Division of Marine Fisheries Management
Farris Bryant Building
620 South Meridian Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399

Kevin Anson, Chair (designee for Chris Blankenship) 
Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources
Marine Resources Division
P.O. Box 189
Dauphin Island, Alabama 36528

Dale Diaz 
(designee for Jamie Miller) 
Department of Marine Resources
1141 Bayview Avenue, Suite 101
Biloxi, Mississippi 39530

Myron Fischer 
(designee for Randy Pausina) 
Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries 147 West 107th Street
Cut-Off, LA 70345

Robin Riechers 
Texas Parks and Wildlife Department
4200 Smith School Road
Austin, Texas 78744

Campo Matens 
4554 Emory Avenue
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70808 2012/2015 Rec/obligatory

Douglass Boyd 
P.O. Box 759 
Boerne, Texas 78006 2010/2016 Rec/obligatory


----------



## tbaxl (Mar 13, 2013)

How did Intimidator Sportfishing get on the board as a rec? That is a commercial operation and the rec vote should have gone to a true recreational entity. I guess that is a way of stuffing the ballot box. Both the council members from Alabama should have to pay a hefty price it 40 passes, they are nothing but traitors in my book.


----------



## tbaxl (Mar 13, 2013)

Just looked at my schedule, I have to work but will try to be there just the same. We all should be calling our respective state members until then to put some pressure on them. Mr. Green and Mr. Walker are going to be hearing from me a lot in the next couple of weeks especially Mr. Green, he needs to look as to where many of his customers come from.


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

tbaxl said:


> Just looked at my schedule, I have to work but will try to be there just the same. We all should be calling our respective state members until then to put some pressure on them. Mr. Green and Mr. Walker are going to be hearing from me a lot in the next couple of weeks especially Mr. Green, he needs to look as to where many of his customers come from.


Mr. Greene and Mr Walker are as committed as they come to making sure 40 passes in my opinion. Good luck. The tx and florida governor's need to get hold of Mr. Stunz and Mr Williams the two at large members in order for 40 to not pass in my opinion. You can bet the charter, commercial captains and edf have been working on them for some time. It is also possible that others might swing one way or the.other.


----------



## Candy (Jan 6, 2008)

Mark,

Just curious, where did you get the list of how each voting member was planning to vote?


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

Candy said:


> Mark,
> 
> Just curious, where did you get the list of how each voting member was planning to vote?


It is just my own opinion based on what I have seen out of sitting gulf council members. I hope I am surprised and the outcome is against 40. Do you project a different vote tally or outcome?


----------



## tbaxl (Mar 13, 2013)

Well with the Intimidator berthed at Orange Beach Marina, all who are on this board need to call OBM to put some pressure on Mr. Green. He votes yes we recs will no longer see a need to purchase fuel from said marina and they can go the way of Zekes. Kind of a boycott the marinas where the charter guys do business.


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

I have had a couple of people pm me to tell me that Greg Stunz 9TX) is against amendment 40 and the Pam Dana (Fl) is for amendment 40. It is close but either way if Roy or his designee votes it is 9-8 for sector separation.


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

tbaxl said:


> Well with the Intimidator berthed at Orange Beach Marina, all who are on this board need to call OBM to put some pressure on Mr. Green. He votes yes we recs will no longer see a need to purchase fuel from said marina and they can go the way of Zekes. Kind of a boycott the marinas where the charter guys do business.


 you have my support.


----------



## tbaxl (Mar 13, 2013)

Then pick up the phone and make a phone call, I have.


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

https://d3dkdvqff0zqx.cloudfront.net/groups/coastal/images/cca_advocbanner2013.jpg> 
Anglers speak out against red snapper privatization scheme More than 1,000 comments opposing Amendment 40 flood Gulf Council

Recreational anglers across the Gulf Coast are letting it be known that they are not happy with the direction of red snapper management in the Gulf of Mexico, as a monumental vote on the future of the fishery looms next week at a federal fishery management meeting in Mobile, Alabama. In this latest round of comments, more than 1,000 anglers have sent messages to members of the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council in just the last three days asking them to focus on ensuring fair management of Gulf red snapper for everyone and not just select individuals. Since introduction, this misguided proposal has elicited thousands of comments in opposition.

The comments from anglers are aimed at a highly controversial proposal known as Amendment 40 - Sector Separation, which is widely viewed as a misguided response to a broken federal management system. That proposal would take roughly half the recreational quota of red snapper and reserve it solely for the charter/for-hire industry for its own use. Amendment 40 is the critical first step to enacting a catch share program for charter/for-hire operators, modeled exactly like the ownership program for the commercial red snapper sector in which less than 400 individuals own 51 percent of the entire fishery. If approved, it is virtually certain that up to 75 percent of the entire Gulf red snapper fishery will be locked up by private businesses forever.

"This is a huge moment for recreational anglers as it will set a precedent for how federal fisheries are managed from this point forward," said Bill Bird, chairman of CCA's National Government Relations Committee. "Federal fisheries management has backed itself into a corner and convinced itself that assigning private ownership rights is the only way out of the mess that it has created. That is completely unacceptable. If privatizing wildlife resources is the only answer, then it is time to completely rebuild the management system because it has hit rock bottom."

In recent weeks, the states of Florida <https://www.votervoice.net/link/clickthrough/ext/395755.aspx> , Texas <https://www.votervoice.net/link/clickthrough/ext/395756.aspx> and Louisiana <https://www.votervoice.net/link/clickthrough/ext/395757.aspx> have each sent letters to the Council in opposition to Amendment 40. In 2012, the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus <https://www.votervoice.net/link/clickthrough/ext/395758.aspx> urged the Gulf Council to abandon the concepts of sector separation and catch shares. In 2009, four Gulf state governors <https://www.votervoice.net/link/clickthrough/ext/395759.aspx> wrote to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce in opposition to catch share programs and privatization proposals for wildlife resources. Nonetheless, proponents of privatization have kept the idea alive and have found a willing partner in NOAA Fisheries, which has proven incapable of properly managing recreational fisheries.

"The federal system has failed the angling public and is about to set us adrift with no recourse," said Bird. "The Council must see past the chaos of the moment and forge a solid path forward for everyone. Amendment 40 will simply lock this broken system into place. If this is the best federal management can do then it is past time to let the states take a greater role."

For more information on the controversy over Amendment 40, visit www.JoinCCA.org.


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

Charter Fisherman’s Association * Alabama Charter Fishing Association * Destin Charter Boat
Association *Clearwater Marine Association * Mississippi Charter Boat Captains Association

October 15, 2014

Mr. Kevin Anson, Chair
Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council
2203 North Lois Avenue, Ste 1100
Tampa, FL 33607
Dear Chairman Anson:
The charter industry is the only way that hundreds of thousands of fishermen are able to access the Gulf of Mexico’s offshore fisheries each year. Since 2008, we have urged the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council to take action to protect charter access and ensure that all users of the red snapper fishery continue to be able to share the resource fairly and equitably. As things now stand, the charter industry and all of our customers are on the verge of completely losing access to red snapper fishing. On behalf of all of the members of the Charter Fisherman’s Association, Alabama Charter Fishing Association, Destin Charter Boat Association, Clearwater Marine Association, and Mississippi Charter Boat Captains Association, we urge the Council to approve Amendment 40 at next week’s meeting for the following reasons:
1) A one-size-fits-all approach to management is not working. Amendment 40 presents the recreational sector with the opportunity to tailor management and accountability to the different needs of each component.
2) The charter sector is suffering undue economic harm. The economic harm caused by the current regulations is disproportionately impacting the federally-permitted charter sector, and immediate action by the Council is needed to preserve what is left of our industry. A 9-day season with no access to fishing in state waters has hurt our businesses and the local economies that depend upon us. We need this regulation in place by the 2015 fishing season.
3) The American public is losing access to this fishery. The overall benefit to the nation is increased by ensuring that non-boat-owning anglers continue to have recreational access to this offshore fishery. Status quo management, which is neither fair nor equitable, has resulted in the non-boat-owning public’s access shrinking to unacceptably low levels. Since 2003, when the permit moratorium was passed, the number of for-hire permits has declined by 19% (from 1693 to 1368). Charter landings during that time period decreased from 48.3% to 16.1% in 2013.1
4) The MSA expressly allows for separate allocations. Amendment 40 is clearly legal under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and separate management for charter and private sectors is already a matter of fact due to the federal charter for-hire permit moratorium and Amendment 30B prohibitions.
5) Separate management will help prevent recreational overages and continue to rebuild the red snapper stock. By fixing a percentage of the recreational quota under a sector that is limited entry and more easily monitored, the Council will be able to reduce management uncertainty and the likelihood of
1 Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council and NOAA, Draft Options for Amendment 40 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico (August. 2014) (“Amendment 40”) at 23.
overages in the short term, and move toward more accountable management in the long term. Additionally, the analysis in Amendment 40 notes that because discard mortality is much lower for charter boats (31% compared to 69% for private anglers), the stock may benefit if there is an increase in fish harvested by the charter sector.2
6) There is significant public support for Amendment 40. The Council has gathered extensive public input on Amendment 40 through public hearings, public testimony at Council meetings and online comments.
Representatives from all of our organizations have spoken in favor of this Amendment at state Commission meetings, public hearings, and Council meetings. Significantly, support for this action has been voiced not only from the charter industry (captains, crew, and customers) but also other fishery stakeholders including coastal chambers of commerce, commercial fishermen, seafood industry, environmental organizations, and local governments. In fact, over 1200 online comments have been
submitted in support of Amendment 40. Those who cast Amendment 40 supporters as a small minority
are completely wrong.
Attached to this letter is a briefing document that provides more rationale for our position and dispels some of
the misinformation that has distributed to the Council in recent weeks. Please consider these comments part of
the administrative record for Amendment 40.
Finally, we request that the Council not delay action on Amendment 40. Some stakeholders have advocated
that the Council postpone any consideration of Amendment 40 in favor of shifting focus to Amendment 39
(Regional Management). While we encourage the Council to continue exploring Amendment 39, that proposal
provides no reason for delay of Amendment 40, since the proposals are not inconsistent. The charter industry
and our customers need your help now to secure this change by fishing year 2015. Regardless of how the
separate quotas are ultimately managed, we ask the Council to pass Amendment 40 at this meeting to affirm
that (a) it is committed to ensuring that the CFH sector continues to survive and provide public access, and (b)
the two recreational sectors are truly different and need different approaches to management.
Sincerely,

Captain Mike Jennings 
Captain Tom Steber 
Captain Mike Colby
Charter Fisherman’s Association 
Alabama Charter Fishing Association 
Clearwater Marine Association
Captain Gary Jarvis Captain 
Tom Becker
Destin Charter Boat Association 
Mississippi Charter Boat Captains Association
cc: Dr. Roy Crabtree, NMFS Southeast Regional Administrator
Doug Gregory, Executive Director, Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council


----------



## Tom Hilton (Oct 4, 2007)

"Those who cast Amendment 40 supporters as a small minority are completely wrong."

That's pretty good. As usual, they rely on thinking that if they SAY something, then it MUST be true. After all, if it were actually true, they would show the documentation to prove it. But then again, look at who we are dealing with here - they have never provided any viable scenarios of what would happen if Sector Separation was implemented - there is a reason for that.


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

tbaxl said:


> Then pick up the phone and make a phone call, I have.


dont blame me bro. There are more people pn the PFF interested in "furries" and "home style restaurants" than there are interested in knowing the ins and outs of how they are about to lose fishing priveleges to a bunch of charter boats and God forbid take any of the smallest actions to try and stop them.


----------



## sailfish218 (Sep 17, 2014)

*Sector Separation*

Great to see all of the super posts regarding our plight with the Gulf Council.
People, if we do not show up at the Renaisance in Mobile, in force on Wed. and let ourselves be heard at the public comments hearing, we are giving up. I guarantee that the room will be full of charter boat guys and their interests. 
We will be there! Maybe 4-5, maybe 10. How many people does it take? We are making headway and finally being heard. What does it take to get 50 people there and crowd the room to let them know they are selling our fishing rights off to the commercial industry.
Did you know there are only around 400 commercial boats fishing for red snapper in the gulf? All 400 are under contract by only 14 owners. Talk about a monopoly!
This amendment 40 is an atrocity! There is no other way to describe it. 
Hitler was allowed to take over Germany and march through Europe because no one said anything. 
Do not allow your rights to be walked on. Keep up the good fight. Keep posting and, make your friends aware of what is going on. 
Show up on Wed. Oct 22. and let them know how you feel. 1,000 people would get the news people there.


----------



## AndyS (Nov 22, 2011)

markw4321 said:


> Charter Fisherman’s Association * Alabama Charter Fishing Association * Destin Charter Boat
> Association *Clearwater Marine Association * Mississippi Charter Boat Captains Association
> 
> October 15, 2014
> ...


Really? 

Well, pardon me if I fail to see much difference in a fisherman paying someone else for a boat ride & a fishing license & me paying for my own license & the costs of operating my own boat. We're both catching fish for our own tables.

There are no "_two recreational sectors_" .... a rec fisherman is a rec fisherman is a rec fisherman no matter whose boat s/he's fishing off of.


----------



## Tom Hilton (Oct 4, 2007)

Sector Separation, by it's very name, is designed to segregate fishermen based on arbitrary parameters no different than the color of their skin, religious preference, or sexual orientation, for the purpose of enacting different, DISCRIMINATORY regulations on one group while giving preferential treatment to the other politically well-connected group. That is the ONLY reason to SEGREGATE the fishermen.

Why should an American recreational fishermen be discriminated against based on a decision he makes while walking down the dock regarding whether he decides to fish from a for-hire boat or a private rec vessel? He is still the same fisherman regardless of what what kind of boat he chooses to fish from, catching the same fish, from the same waters, with the same fishing license. The separatists seem to forget that it is the recreational fishermen who are catching the fish - not them. Fish that we ALL own - not them.


----------



## AndyS (Nov 22, 2011)

Tom Hilton said:


> .... Why should an American recreational fishermen be discriminated against based on a decision he makes while walking down the dock regarding whether he decides to fish from a for-hire boat or a private rec vessel? He is still the same fisherman regardless of what what kind of boat he chooses to fish from, catching the same fish, from the same waters, *with the same fishing license*. ...


Ummm, not exactly ... individual licensees are contributing much more to State coffers per capita than those fishing under a charter boat's license.

My out-of-state buddy pays $47 per year for a license to come fish off my boat for maybe a week all told.


----------



## Tom Hilton (Oct 4, 2007)

The recreational fisherman is fishing under his individual fishing license to catch the fish was my point - I think we are saying the same thing.

I think it's a bit different in Florida where the fishermen fishing on a charter don't need a license, but by and large, most Gulf fishermen have their own fishing license.


----------



## Burnt Drag (Jun 3, 2008)

Andy, I'm glad you chimed in here. We always need that "out of the box" thinking that your drivel lends to the conversation. That said, if NOAA fisheries, excuse me, if EDF/Investor fisheries approve this, they're simply plugging one small hole and leaving a much larger hole that's flooding the ship. 
They're thinking that bringing acountability via Vessel Monitoring Devices and catch reporting will solve the issue. It's BullChit. They ignore any measure to bring accountability to the pure rec sector. Any ideas to bring accountability to the pure rec sector are dismissed, ignored, or mocked. There's a way to do it, logically, legally,
and sanely. 
Only when the Feds decide that they must have a way to address all the catch data will I support any action they take. You can't fix "some" of your problems and expect the others to magically go away.


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

Commission's stand for anglers deserves recognition

A crucial vote on a highly controversial management measure for Gulf red snapper is scheduled for next week during the Gulf Council's meeting in Mobile. Known as Amendment 40 - Sector Separation, it is a radical departure from traditional management methods that will allow a broken management system to stay in place for most recreational anglers, and grant special access privileges to a select group of charter/for-hire operators.

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission exhibited the type of visionary leadership necessary to address this complicated issue with a thoughtful letter to the Gulf Council, stating that Commissioners were concerned private anglers would be "cast as an after-thought in the Council's sector separation proposal and would face additional severe harvest cuts under the proposed allocation shift."

As the critical vote draws near, proponents of this privatization scheme - environmental groups, commercial fishing entities and a select few charter/for-hire businesses - are applying tremendous pressure to undermine FWC's stand for anglers and our continued access to the resources of the Gulf. It is important for us to let FWC Commissioners know that we appreciate their support and are grateful for their leadership and foresight.

Please take a moment to send a message to the Commission and let them know we are proud to stand with them in this fight.


Click the link below to log in and send your message:
http://www.votervoice.net/groups/coa...360&atid=28312​


----------



## Contender (Apr 4, 2012)

It makes more sense to me, if there is a change in allocation, to allocate half of the commercial TAC to the Charter/for Hire group and let non-hire recreational anglers have all the recreational quota. I would imagine the economic impact would increase, the Charter Captains would have their quota and the recreational anglers should get more days. The losers (if that term actually applies here) would be the 14 people that currently benefit from the most from the commercial licenses. Or how about this idea, buy those 14 out, give the entire commercial quota to the Charter fleet.


----------



## tbaxl (Mar 13, 2013)

markw4321 said:


> dont blame me bro. There are more people pn the PFF interested in "furries" and "home style restaurants" than there are interested in knowing the ins and outs of how they are about to lose fishing priveleges to a bunch of charter boats and God forbid take any of the smallest actions to try and stop them.


Not blaiming you, you are preaching to the choir. Lots of talk but many anglers are relying on someone else to make the effort. Those same anglers will also be the ones to complain the most, on these boards.


----------



## Burnt Drag (Jun 3, 2008)

Contender said:


> It makes more sense to me, if there is a change in allocation, to allocate half of the commercial TAC to the Charter/for Hire group and let non-hire recreational anglers have all the recreational quota. I would imagine the economic impact would increase, the Charter Captains would have their quota and the recreational anglers should get more days. The losers (if that term actually applies here) would be the 14 people that currently benefit from the most from the commercial licenses. Or how about this idea, buy those 14 out, give the entire commercial quota to the Charter fleet.


I'm certain the commercial sector would go along with forfieting half of their poundage for the sake of the charter industry. It sounds good on paper, but the commercial guys would laugh at your suggestion. Forgive my sarchasm. The only way things will change is when there is universal accountability. The fact that the State of Alabama counted about half of what the feds say was caught in the 9 day season should be enough evidence that the fed method of counting fish is screwed up mythology at best. Dr. Crabtree should be very embarrassed.


----------



## Contender (Apr 4, 2012)

I don't think any of the groups are going "go along" that is exactly why we are having the current debate. For the last several years there has been a lot of discussion about the ARS, quotas, who is right and who is wrong. What I am suggesting is a different frame on the conversation.

Several other species have been declared "game fish" and commercial harvest has ended for them. Maybe it is time for the same strategy for ARS.

What is best for the resource? How would that end be achieved? Why should a few hundred fishers and 14 processors benefit at low cost from a resource that belongs to all of us? The greatest good for the greatest number if applied in this case would likely yield a different answer than what we have now.

So my suggestion is find a way to end commercial take of ARS, reallocate the TAC to rec and charter. If sampling is flawed then devote the resources necessary to collect good data. Have the fishers invest in the data collection and reap the benefits of improved data. 

This is not the most complicated or complex problem out there and can be solved, however, it will take more effort and will than has been demonstrated to date. It is a modern version of the "Tragedy of the Commons".


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

Contender said:


> I don't think any of the groups are going "go along" that is exactly why we are having the current debate. For the last several years there has been a lot of discussion about the ARS, quotas, who is right and who is wrong. What I am suggesting is a different frame on the conversation.
> 
> Several other species have been declared "game fish" and commercial harvest has ended for them. Maybe it is time for the same strategy for ARS.
> 
> ...


Whose effort and will do are you planning on changing and how?


----------



## AndyS (Nov 22, 2011)

LopeAlong said:


> OUR fish belong to EVERY US CITIZEN, not just gulf state residents.


For once I agree with you. 

Let's then let "_EVERY US CITIZEN_" abide by the same seasons & bag limits, regardless of whose boat they're fishing off of.


----------



## Contender (Apr 4, 2012)

It will take the effort of of many and likely disparate groups and individuals. The shift away from market hunting of wild animals required both top down and bottom up. A major shift in fisheries management will most likely require both. That said there have been successes (as viewed by many recreational anglers) most notably Red Fish and Pompano here in the West hydro dams have been removed to improve salmon migrations, so it isn't a hopeless battle.

Personally, I have recently joined CCA, may join other conservation groups if I find some that support these efforts. I have written my representatives, NMFS and state leaders. 

I'm not going to criticize anyones action or inaction. Most have jobs, families, many aren't "joiners" and would likely prefer to go fishing than write a letter. It is hard to go to meetings and it can be difficult to speak out/up at a meeting. On the other hand we can all do something if we want. I have not done much, and I intend to do more.


----------



## Burnt Drag (Jun 3, 2008)

Contender said:


> It will take the effort of of many and likely disparate groups and individuals. The shift away from market hunting of wild animals required both top down and bottom up. A major shift in fisheries management will most likely require both. That said there have been successes (as viewed by many recreational anglers) most notably Red Fish and Pompano here in the West hydro dams have been removed to improve salmon migrations, so it isn't a hopeless battle.
> 
> Personally, I have recently joined CCA, may join other conservation groups if I find some that support these efforts. I have written my representatives, NMFS and state leaders.
> 
> I'm not going to criticize anyones action or inaction. Most have jobs, families, many aren't "joiners" and would likely prefer to go fishing than write a letter. It is hard to go to meetings and it can be difficult to speak out/up at a meeting. On the other hand we can all do something if we want. I have not done much, and I intend to do more.


 Good luck. What you're saying makes sense, but it's about as likely in this climate as a January heat wave in Alaska. The commercial sector "owns" their poundage. That's right, they have legal ownership of the poundage of ARS. That's what Lopealong Bobby Kelly wants for himself; ownership of a formerly public resource. It's a selfish, un-American, un-Constitutional sham. Next thing you know, these selfish people will want their own sections of the Gulf that you'll have to go around or stay away from. It is the same thing.


----------



## PapaG399 (Jul 16, 2013)

Congress has now weighed in and asked the council to table the vote. 

http://www.sportsmenslink.org/uploads/page/CSC Letter Red Snapper Amendment 40.pdf


----------

