Electronic Charter Vessel Reporting (Responses)
 Share
The version of the browser you are using is no longer supported. Please upgrade to a supported browser.Dismiss

 
View only
 
 
Still loading...
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
1
TimestampEnter your full nameemail addressCity, State, Zip CodeCheck all that applyComments
2
10/22/2015 18:22:39Capt Cliff CoxSweetjodyfishing@gmail.comDestin, Florida, 32540Charter/Headboat For-HireI support electronic logbooks. I am currently using ELB and VMS to report my landings. This is the best way to streamline the data collection for the CFH sector.
3
12/9/2015 18:30:54Brandon VaughanSaltydogcharters@yahoo.comMadeira Beach, FL, 33708Charter/Headboat For-HireAction 1: Alt 1 or 2
Action 2: Alt 1 or 2
Action 3: Alt 1

Weekly online reporting should provide the necessary information to achieve the desired goal.
4
12/9/2015 22:42:08John Dahagiancaptfunyet@aol.comlittle Torch Key, Fl. 33042Charter/Headboat For-HireAction 1: preference Alternative 1
Action 2: preference Alternative 1
Action 3: preference Alternative 1
Frequent reporting is more of a burden on charter operators than should be expected by fisheries managers. It is their job to gather the data and requiring the anglers to do their work for them is burdensome and intrusive. Installation of electronic reporting devices on small charter boats is impractical and the cost prohibitive for an industry where the profit margin is so small.
5
12/10/2015 9:48:04Harry Julianharry@purefl.comNaples, FL 34102Charter/Headboat For-HireRequiring reporting while underway creates a safety issue as the distraction of the crew away from watchkeeping duties and attending to the customers is compromised. Leave the system as is.
6
12/10/2015 17:44:38Thomas P. Steber, Jr.tom@zekeslanding.comOrange Beach, Al. 36561Charter/Headboat For-HireI am totally in favor of:
Action 1 - Alternative 4
Action - 2 Alternative 4
Our Head boat Pilot Program has worked VERY WELL.
Action - 3 Alternative 2 (ALL Charter for Hire
7
12/10/2015 20:27:33Gene Bubby Hailbubbyhail@comcast.netMarco IslandCharter/Headboat For-HireThere is no reason for reef permit on 25 foot charter boat , permit should be for commercial boats that sell there fish. We dont sell fish we take people out for good time. Vessel monituring device will run our batteries dead every night, we turn batteries off at night.I have 2 charter boats one with reef permit one with out. I can keep Grouper under 9 miles with one with out, how stupid is that .No to all changes and do away with reef permit for small boats.
8
12/10/2015 20:44:08Gene Bubby Hailbubbyhail@comcast.netMarco IslandCharter/Headboat For-HireReef Permit is double edge sword for small Charter boats. we cant keep Mangrove Snapper under 12 inches in backwater and we cant keep Grouper Offshore but I can with second boat without permit This whole permit should be revised or done away with has any one looked at this how rediculous this is. My clients can not believe i can keep Grouper in one boat but not the other with permit.Reef permit should only be for commercial fisherman that sell there fish we dont sell fish.Vmd will run batteries dead in 25 foot boat and drive customers away.
9
12/10/2015 21:04:53Gene Bubby Hailbubbyhail@comcast.netMarco IslandCharter/Headboat For-HireReef permit must be revised before u people run us out of buisiness. You can not put vessel md on 25 foot boat no room and will kill batteries.Should be for 35 foot boats and bigger that sell fish or headboats that do a lot of damage wiping out bottom areas.If not at least revise parts of it so we can keep mangrove snapper under 12 inches backwater. we rarely catch them that big inside should be 10 and over like normal and Grouper under 9 miles like i can do with second charter boat with no reef permit. Like we dont have enough to worry about with out all this. Dont make life on water so tuff for every one.
10
12/10/2015 21:22:18Gene Bubby Hailbubbyhail@comcast.netMarco IslandCharter/Headboat For-HireMaybe Charter boats in panhandle and alabama and that area do things different than we do in Collier County, buSat we dont sell our fish so we dont need reef permit. We take recreational fisherman out for good time and some keep occasional fish to eat other wise all fish are released.So permit should be revised to say small Charter boat under a certain size taking 6 passengers or less or over certain size with selling fish endorsement.We must be allowed to keep Mangrove Snapper in back water at normal size and Grouper under 9 miles like i can in boat with out reef permit. Please let some one that under stands how stupid this permit is.
11
12/10/2015 22:42:23Robert F. Zales, IIbobzales2@gmail.companama city, FL 32401Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire, NGO, OtherAction 1, I support Alt 2, weekly reporting
Action 2, I support Alt 2, weekly reporting
Action 3, I support Alt 1, NO ACTION
There is no need to require a tracking device on my vessel. I dept and arr at the same slip at the same dock on each and every trip. I routinely dept at the same time each day and return at the same time each day as I operate on a schedule. The vast majority of charter boats operate in a similar way. A tracking device serves no real purpose to enhance quota monitoring.
Weekly reporting of data is more than adequate for the purpose of management and quota monitoring. The science center staff and nmfs staff have all stated that weekly reporting is all that is needed. The nmfs or science center do not have the funds or manpower to handle daily trip reporting which in many cases will be several trips during the day. A tracking device will increase the financial burden on me and could possible cause a dramatic loss of income should the device fail before I am to depart. This will also create a social burden on my customers as if I am not allowed to sail odds are other boats will be booked and the customers will lose their opportunity to fish. In many areas cell service is not available to local ports so reporting before the end of a trip will be impossible. All areas of the Gulf are not the same so a one size fits all will not work.
Bob Zales, II
12
12/11/2015 8:20:09Vic Vazquezcaptvic@naplescharterfishing.netnaples, Fl. 34119Charter/Headboat For-HireI do not approve of any recording method that will put additional financial strain on my business. The current closures have already done enough damage as it is, resulting in canceled and lost charters because of not being allowed to keep fish. I would like to see the bag limits reduced as much as possible to allow for year long availability to harvest the fish. As in the case with grouper, a 1 Red and 1 Gag limit per person, year long would be totally acceptable to me. I would not oppose a recording method where I could log on to a web site at the end of each week to report my catch. A daily recording will not be sustainable in my opinion as too many will just not do it.
13
12/11/2015 11:20:10richard w. russellenterprisecharters@comcast.netmarco island fl. 34145Charter/Headboat For-HireAs one of thousands of long-time charter operators in the Gulf of Mexico, I would like to encourage the Gulf Council to make whatever changes to current law as simple as possible for our businesses to impliment. I have no problem with being compliant with existing size and catch limits, and am prepared to be boarded at any time by law enforcement for an inspection of my catch, but hope that you somehow don't go overboard with additional requirements for time-consuming and complicated reporting. Any other input from me could be solicited if you would like. Capt. Rich Russell www.enterprisecharters.com. 239-269-7192 30 year experienced Gulf of Mexico charter captain
14
12/11/2015 11:41:22Adam R Millerbsacharter@cox.netDestin FL 32541Charter/Headboat For-HireAction 1:Alternative 3
Action 2:Alternative 3
Action 3: Alternative 1 NO VMS, NO VMS, NO VMS

Needed Action 4 is to have all gulf fisherman weigh their fish, none of the proposed actions touch the weight of the fish, for real management it is vital that all fish are weighed!!!! It can be easily accomplished through fish scale kiosks.
There has to be trip limits on commercial sector!! For hire group has to have one trip per day during season!! Party boats bag limit should be reduced to red snapper per person!!!! The season for red snapper should be closed to all anglers the months of June and July(spawn months) and opened weekends only April, May, September and October.
I ask the council to end Sector Separation.. it is a bad idea and has been a bad idea since it started years ago. If it was a true management plan it would have been implemented years ago.
The fish kiosk weigh system will work and I would enjoy the opportunity to meet council members on this management tool.
NO VMS:NO VMS:NO VMS and END sector separation!!!
Thank You
Adam (Bud) Miller

15
12/11/2015 11:47:27Daryl Carpenterreelscreamersft@aol.comGrand Isle, LA. 70358Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-HireI would like to submit my recommendation that "No Action" be taken on all three actions. I see multiple issues with all three actions all the while, do not see that it would serve to improve science as it is reported to do.

All three actions are too broad in that it would simply approve a blanket rule that would then be sent to a committee to be designed. There would be no stakeholder or Council input on the final product.

It also seems odd that these actions seem to be 'fast tracked' through this system. The federal government just approved a pilot program to test these systems on the CFH fleet. While approval of those monies was based on testimony that there was a large portion of the fleet just jumping at the chance to have these VMS systems. It seems now that the organizers of this pilot are having difficulty finding a representative sample of vessel owners who actually want to be burdened with this. None the less the monies were approved and the pilot is trying to get off the ground. It would seem that the prudent thing to do would be to allow this pilot to take it place prior to moving forward on these actions.

An alternative will be offered following these comments.

Action 1 - No action - Preferred alternative 4 would only work in rural ports if it was based on a satellite system, a sure way to mandate VMS. Six pack charter vessels in my area often leave from and return to private docks as the customers wish, this system would not work and/or would severely impact customer service should it be made that I would have to return to a specific dock following each trip. On the same point, should I name my primary marina as my departure dock, there are specific event weekends where we are asked to stay away as the marina is overcrowded with small and/or paddle craft. We often fish and or finish up our day a lot less than 1 hour from the dock. Often our trips are ended because of weather or a customer request, in this instance there would be very little pre dock notice and certainly no time for an agent to respond, making the data useless. There are many arguments against this type of system in this industry but I will finsih up with one more and save the others for later. The NMFS is on record that they do not have staff, funding or the ability to digest daily reporting and have stated that reporting of a less frequent nature would provide the same desired results.

Action 2 - involves headboats of which I am not one so I will reserve comment on this action.

Action 3 - No Action as per charter boats. Again the information suggested in this action is not necessary to conduct better science. The NMFS is not capable of digesting such data. The ability to provide this data would require CFH vessels to purchase and maintain additional equipment that aside form the initial cost will have a monthly obligation. In a world where we are discretionary spending and the Gulf Coast economy is suffering any additional expenses serves to place us one step closer to not be viable. It has been stated in Council documents that this information would assist in the discard mortality data in reference to red snapper. I find that these statements are very misleading. VMS tracking is capable of reporting vessel position but it is not capable of knowing what we are fishing for. We could be fishing trawlers, grass patches, platforms and targeting any depth or species of fish. Using this information would surely provide highly inaccurate discard data.

I believe that the State of Louisiana has a handle on improved data collection and is proving so with LACREEL. I am to understand that each of the Gulf States have now seen the possibilities and are moving forward with data systems that will soon make MRFSS / MRIP a thing of the past. these systems have shown that data collection is capable of taking place without placing the additional burden on the independant operator of a costly electronic system that not only does not have the industry buy in but does not have the support of the enforcement personnel that it would take to make it function as designed. We should strengthen and support further development of the state systems that are already years ahead of what the federal government can offer.
16
12/11/2015 14:35:07Ryan Stoneryanjstone@yahoo.comSan Antonio, TX 78233Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-HirePlease see my position on proposed actions below.

Action 1: Alternative 1 - No Action
Action 2: Alternative 1 - No Action
Action 3: Alternative 1 - No Action
17
12/11/2015 15:35:23Christopher Nailcnail1@cox.net70131Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-HireI received letter regarding the possible changes for Charter Vessel reporting.

I strongly disagree with implementation of an approved electronic device due to cost, impractical to keep working, not necessary to manage fish stocks. Seems like another way to discourage fishing altogether and drive up the cost and labor involved for everyone with reef permits that don't always even fish for reef species, but would have to have on-board and working regardless. Most of us in Venice only occasionally fish for reef vs tuna.

I also strongly disagree with electronic reporting before arriving at the dock for reasons of impractical due to internet connection / phone connection / secretarial work, and not necessary to manage fish stocks.

Regulations need to be simplified. We gave Amber Jack during snapper season years ago, only to have it closed early the following year... now it closes early every year. Year after year it is more restrictive and harder to fish stretches of time without missing an email notification of a season or change to the regulations. This is confusing for everyone to keep track of and plan their business accordingly.

Sincerely and concerned,
Capt. Chris Nail
18
12/12/2015 9:25:56Bill CreamerCudabill@knology.netPanama City, fl. 32408Charter/Headboat For-HireIn my opinion, action 1, which I believe is, No action, is the preferred alternative.
I am a fisherman, not a score keeper. It is not my job to do your job. Granted, you have failed miserably at stock assessment and effort by biasing your data, picking and choosing the most conservative computer models on stock assessment, and the most liberal on effort. That is not practicing "good science".
You are now being pressured by outside money and influence to privatize a public resource.
I provide a service to my customers, that is to allow them access to a public resource that they would not otherwise have access to. They are fishing recreationally. That's it. No agenda other than to have fun and catch a few fish for supper.
My "office" is a small open air bridge where I don't even have enough room to mount a radar, let alone protect a computer and logbooks, or be able to write or type on a keyboard in any kind of sea.
My suggestion is to eliminate the dual permitted vessels, who are the only ones that are for forcing the rest of us to install electronic data collection and tracking devices on our vessels. We all know what this is about. They are trying to gain a competitive advantage that will allow them to transfer their commercial quota to charter quota. At the very least, pass an amendment that will prohibit intersector trading, and write it in stone.
Oh, and do the job you were tasked to do! Don't try to pass it off to me. I don't mind, very much, the MRIP. Don't mind telling you occasionally, when I fish and how many people are fishing. But forcing me to purchase a complicated piece of electronics and install it in a severe marine environment, and be willing to cancel trips when, yes when it malfunctions, is unacceptable. And the part about telling you where I'm fishing..., no, I see through that one too.
In summary, do your job. Practice good science. Stop being influenced by money and outside interests. Stay off my boat.
Have a nice day.
Bill Creamer
19
12/12/2015 16:58:15William Wells Jrbilly@mgfishing.comMetairie, La 70001Charter/Headboat For-HireI have 3 boats and 3 permits(under south pass charters, wild bill, and a historical captains license) and fish out of Venice, La a very remote and iffy in the cell service department location. Forcing vms and electronic logbooks would put a huge burden on my business. Due to the remoteness it is very difficult to get someone to come service anything and when you can get someone its never fast. A broken vms could put me out of business for who knows how long. I am 100% against either of these ideas but if logbooks are something I must do then I feel weekly reporting would be more than adequate.
Capt. Billy Wells
20
12/12/2015 17:05:55george d ellercaptgeorge@earthlink.netdestin,fl,32541Charter/Headboat For-HireA vms type device and or fish tags are the only way to deliver realtime catch data for the for hire fleet.this does away with guessing and extrapolating.fishtags i think would be easiest to start with.with tags the nmfs would know how many red snappers can be taken before the season even starts.a elctornic device is a good wayto start.
21
12/12/2015 17:11:45Kevin Carter BeachKevin@mgfishing.comMetairie, La. 70006Charter/Headboat For-HireI 100% oppose any VMS on charter boats. for action 1 I choose alternative 1 On action 2&3, Inchoose alternative 1 as well.

Capt Kevin Beach
Mexican Gulf Fishing Company
Full time charter since 1999
22
12/12/2015 19:26:17Capt Steve Rosstiaross1@yahoo.comCharter/Headboat For-HireThe requirement for Electronic Reporting will be a burden on our Business due to the additional cost we would have to bear along with the cumbersome requirements and additional time it would take to report each and every fish! If your equipment were to fail then I would NOT be able to run my business causing loss of wages necessary for us to even maintain our business.
23
12/12/2015 21:01:44michael shortgethookedcharters@yahoo.comgalveston, tx. 77554Charter/Headboat For-HireAction 1...Preferred Alt 4
Action 2...Preferred Alt 4
Action 3..Alt 2 sub b
24
12/13/2015 11:37:37Lee Davidson mclean ivLeemclean4@gmail.comNew Orleans la 70124Charter/Headboat For-HireThere is no way a vms system will work for Venice charter captains. It's just completely impractical to think that we operate like the commercial guys do. I do agree with the electronic log books though.
25
12/13/2015 14:44:00Kevin Carter BeachKevin@mgfishing.comMetairie, La. 70006Charter/Headboat For-HireI 100% oppose any VMS on charter boats. for action 1 I choose alternative 1 On action 2&3, Inchoose alternative 1 as well.

Capt Kevin Beach
Mexican Gulf Fishing Company
Full time charter since 1999
26
12/14/2015 6:35:58Kevin Carter BeachKevin@mgfishing.comMetairie, La. 70006Charter/Headboat For-HireI 100% oppose any VMS on charter boats. for action 1 I choose alternative 1 On action 2&3, Inchoose alternative 1 as well.

Capt Kevin Beach
Mexican Gulf Fishing Company
Full time charter since 1999
27
12/14/2015 12:40:49Michael Vollemlv@kwikool.comHoustonCharter/Headboat For-HireTh "preferred alternative" for charter vessels is a horrible idea. Many charters are captains chartering alone and this demands that a captain stop being a captain and to report his catch while still on the water. This method has a complete disregard for passenger safety with absolutely NO benefit. And because many boats are very busy and running almost every day during the fishing season, daily reporting would be unduly burdensome. I believe that alternate 2 is the best choice for safety and is a reasonable time limit for charters to report.
28
12/14/2015 13:17:23darrell hinglegalvestontxfishingguide@gmail.comgalveston, Tx, 77550Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial Fisherfor charter and headboat reporting actions I would like to see action 1, alternative 4,
action 2, alternative 4
action3, alternative 2.

I have had a vms on my boat for over a year now and with the simplicity of use there is no reason we as charterboat operators shouldn't have this tool. I believe this should go hand in hand with our separate fishery management plan and could open the door to lots of possible options for helping our business grow.
29
12/14/2015 14:08:48Sam Youngyoung456@aol.comMarco Island, FL, 34145Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-HireAction 1. I vote "Alternative 1, NO Action."

However, I have no problem with Alternative 2, as long as I only need to log on and document ONLY the days I did charter (I charter Part-Time) and that the format for reporting is fast and user friendly. Also, I assume, because it's the only thing that makes sense, is that reporting a days catch would only be limited to what was brought to shore for consumption vs. how many Blue Runners were caught......


I am adamantly OPPOSED to the "preferred Alternative 4."

Alternative 2. I support Alternative 1, NO ACTION.

Action 3. I support Alternative 1, NO ACTION. I have Federal Permits because that's where I fish, not State waters.

30
12/14/2015 20:32:29Gray Longgolongcharters@gmail.comGonzales, LA 70737Charter/Headboat For-HireI feel very strongly that none of these actions should be taken. Instead, the Gulf Council should adopt the policies and procedures the State of Louisiana is currently using to track the harvest of Red Snapper. They are extremely thorough both at the dock as well as with weekly phone/email surveys. They are calculating actual and factual harvest numbers. This is being done without the expense of electronic tracking devices. An expense and hassle that we certainly can do without. All for really tracking red snapper and possibly Amberjack.
31
12/14/2015 22:38:23Brian Louis Bracknellbrianbracknell@gmail.comMobile, Al, 36605Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial FisherAs a owner/operator of a multi-passenger charter boat operating on the Alabama gulf coast, I support the use of VMS & electronic log books as a tool to report day to day operations of my vessel (Action 1 & 2 Preferred Alternative #4, Action 3 Preferred Alternative #2). I think this is a step in the rite direction to manage our sector as to not exceed quotas & hopefully over time offer more flexibility to operate our businesses. Since I am already required to have an operational VMS on my vessel for my Gulf Of Mexico reef fish permit, I would like to see the charter reporting be incorporated into the same system we are using on the commercial side(Thrane). Thank you for your time & efforts, Capt. Brian Bracknell
32
12/15/2015 13:55:50Capt.Scott D. Moore67smoore@gmail.comLaVernia,TX,78121Charter/Headboat For-HireI support the following:

Action 1 alternative 2

Action 3 alternative 1
33
12/15/2015 20:04:25Sidney Dalton Kennedydalton@duesouthcharters.netGulf Breeze, FL 32563Charter/Headboat For-HireI have invested money in my permits and am all about keeping the level playing field. Just remember that the six pack operators are usually single handed. The Captain is also the entertainer with the passengers, unlike a head boat. How is that person supposed to drive the boat and submit an accurate report that is useful to the council? Per regs, his first and foremost responsibility is to his passengers. Please keep that in mind. Another item is gear location, size, and accessibility on a small vessel, especially a center console like my 26' Glacier. Thanks!
34
12/15/2015 22:37:10James Greg Perrygperry@asplundh.comMagnolia, Texas, 77355Charter/Headboat For-HireI am in full agreement on reporting our snapper catch if we keep sector separation. My question is how will we report it. If we have a VMS unit is there a charge for the unit and bigger question is there a monthly subscription charge? I do not like the subscription charge. I do not fish each month of the year and this would be an expense I cant afford. On when I have to report the catch: when I am on the charter I devote my time trying to please my clients and show them a good fishing experience, not reporting to you what the catch was. I can do that after my clients have gone home. So lets do that within 24 hours after the trip via emails. Main thing from me NO Monthly Subscription Charges. Thanks and have a Very Merry Christmas.
35
12/16/2015 20:48:54Richard L RussellCaptritchie1@hotmail. com36536Charter/Headboat For-HireI'm all for reporting and regulating but do not agree if it is going to cost us fisherman to have devices installed.
36
12/17/2015 0:35:32Edward Joseph burgerEddieburged@charter.netWalker la. 70785Charter/Headboat For-HireI don't believe electronic vms machines are practical for the center console charter fleet which most of us are in Louisiana

Personally I don't really have the space for any more electronics or the ability to afford any more right now

Also it would have to be extremely tough as center console boats are wet when it gets rough and electronics are constantly getting ruined on out our boat

Also I was informed that if the vms system is broke then we can not leave the dock

How am I to explain that to someone else who just took vacation to come down with their family to fish that I can no longer take them

37
12/17/2015 6:41:03Veran O. Blackburnmexicobeach.bz@mchsi.com32410Charter/Headboat For-HireI WILL NOT COMPLY
38
12/17/2015 13:28:32Gary Foldenjcgfolden@mindspring.comLargo, FL 33770Charter/Headboat For-HireFirst of all, your recommended online comment site on page 7 of your Public Hearing Guide does not work!!!

Alternative 1 is my strong choice. Your alternative 4 is not and option. I run my boat alone, no mate, and have an older phone (by choice) and would not be able to forward info before arrival at the dock. Absolutely NO on alt. 4.
39
12/17/2015 13:50:27mark f hubbardmhubbard@hubbardsmarina.com170 johns Pass boardwalk Madeira beach fl 33708Charter/Headboat For-HireI am of support:
1. in action 1, alternative #2 note NO VMS
2. Action 2, Alternative #2 like we are doing now, Note NO VMS
3. Action 3, Alternative # NO Action NO VMS or any other name for it.
VMS is too much too fast. Make these reporting changes, finish putting other fish into the for hire sector as a hole not separating the for hire party and charter boats. Like ARS and let some time go by.
40
12/17/2015 18:55:02Jason Simmonsijsimmons99@gmail.comPensacola, FL, 32526Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-HireAs a permit holder, I do not support the proposed electronic reporting requirement for position recording. I am a small charter business. Having to spend money on an electronic reporting system to install on my vessel would be a financial burden. I do support timely and accurate harvest reporting requirements. A smart phone capable application for iPhone and android would provide a convenient way to report this information with minimal cost to the captain. Zone reporting would help with the location data. For example, for each trip a captain could click on a map to indicate the lat and Lon "block" he or she was fishing in for that trip. The resolution for these blocks could be set up to provide adequate statistical relevance.
41
12/17/2015 19:14:56ray tysoncaptray@stingrayfishingcharters.companhandleCharter/Headboat For-HireI have no problem providing and reporting information on trip catch. However, I operate a small charter service from a private dock and keeping expenses to minimum is a must for the survival of my business. Requiring a VMS on my vessel or restricted departure/arrival ports would simply shut my business down. If I-phone apps can be implemented for reporting that would be fine, but to push VMS reporting on federal charter vessels would be unreasonable.
42
12/17/2015 23:17:26Shane cantrellAndrewscantrell@gmail.comGalveston, Texas, 77550Charter/Headboat For-HireDecember 15 2015

Dear Chairman Anson and Gulf Council Members:

Thank you for the opportunity to address the council on the modification of reporting requirements for charter vessel and headboats. This is a huge opportunity for these vessels to provide timely, accurate data while increasing accountability.

Our organization represents federally permitted charter captains and their customers across the Gulf of Mexico as well as across the country. We are the largest organization of federally permitted vessels in the region and have the following recommendations and concerns for the Gulf Council's consideration:

Any modifications to reporting requirements for charter vessels and headboats should be paired with and tailored to management measures for these vessels as outlined in Amendment 41 and 42. Management and development of reporting requirements are inherently linked and must be tailored to management measures for of these vessels. Ignoring this in the development will yield a duplicative and fruitless initial effort as management evolves.

The Council should direct NOAA to consider whether the electronic reporting system can be designed so that charter vessels and headboats should have the flexibility and choice to use a variety of electronic reporting devices rather than being specifically limited to a Vessel Monitoring System. There are several available ideas like a smartphone application, or location enabled logbook or transponder that would be sufficient for charter vessels and headboats.

Data should be submitted electronically in any future reporting system prior to reaching the dock to best inform land based validation and enforcement personnel.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide input and look forward to continuing to develop these modifications this January in Orange Beach. Additionally, please feel free to contact me with any questions or to provide any feedback to our organization.


Sincerely,

Shane Cantrell, Executive Director
Charter Fisherman's Association
512-639-9188
shane.Cantrell@iCloud.com
43
12/18/2015 13:20:23mark f hubbardmhubbard@hubbardsmarina.commadeira Beach fl 33708Charter/Headboat For-HireTo: NMF, Gulf Council public testimony, from Webinar 12/17/2015
From: Mark f Hubbard, Hubbard’s Marina three fed permits and just purchased two more = five
Re: Gulf Council public testimony, from Webinar 12/17/2015
Date: 12/18/2015

This is my public testimony choices:
Actions #1 modify frequency and method of data reporting for charter vessels
Preferred Alternative #4
Action # 2 modify frequency and method of data reporting for Head Boats
Preferred Alternative #4
Action # 3 modify reporting requirements requiring vessels or catch locations reporting
Alternative # 1 NO ACTION!!!!
This action should be put on hold till action 1 and 2 is implemented and is used for three years. Let these actions 1 and 2 take effect. These actions will increase the data, speed up the data and give location of area fished. The dock side intercepts that are called on for a VMS use the same effort in these new actions 1 and 2 to verify catch and location increasing the “accountability measure” all without the use of “VMS electronic device” that in my opinion is unnecessary and egregious. I resent the fact that as a professional coast guard captain I cannot be trusted to fill out log books correct and honestly. I feel offended that a government agency can penalize, accuse, and mandate this idea!
I do not understand how a government agency can mandate an “Idea” to a captive participant “fed permit holders” mandating a unknown system, equipment, rules that will have an economic impact, and social impact and a business impact without the end user “Fed Permit holders” or anyone for that fact knowing what the plan is!
Does not seem right, the judicial responsibility of Gulf Council, NMF, Noaa, should stop this action now. Where is the economic impact study? Proper public education? Public testimony of the stake holders?
Mark Hubbard, 100 ton Merchant mariner Captain, boats owner, life time party charter boat operator. Hubbard’s Marina 170 Johns Pass Boardwalk Madeira beach fl 33708
44
12/18/2015 13:24:59mark f hubbardmhubbard@hubbardsmarina.commadeira bch fl 33708OtherTo: NMF, Gulf Council public testimony, from Webinar 12/17/2015
From: Mark f Hubbard, Hubbard’s Marina three fed permits and just purchased two more = five
Re: Gulf Council public testimony, from Webinar 12/17/2015
Date: 12/18/2015

This is my public testimony choices:
Actions #1 modify frequency and method of data reporting for charter vessels
Preferred Alternative #4
Action # 2 modify frequency and method of data reporting for Head Boats
Preferred Alternative #4
Action # 3 modify reporting requirements requiring vessels or catch locations reporting
Alternative # 1 NO ACTION!!!!
This action should be put on hold till action 1 and 2 is implemented and is used for three years. Let these actions 1 and 2 take effect. These actions will increase the data, speed up the data and give location of area fished. The dock side intercepts that are called on for a VMS use the same effort in these new actions 1 and 2 to verify catch and location increasing the “accountability measure” all without the use of “VMS electronic device” that in my opinion is unnecessary and egregious. I resent the fact that as a professional coast guard captain I cannot be trusted to fill out log books correct and honestly. I feel offended that a government agency can penalize, accuse, and mandate this idea!
I do not understand how a government agency can mandate an “Idea” to a captive participant “fed permit holders” mandating a unknown system, equipment, rules that will have an economic impact, and social impact and a business impact without the end user “Fed Permit holders” or anyone for that fact knowing what the plan is!
Does not seem right, the judicial responsibility of Gulf Council, NMF, Noaa, should stop this action now. Where is the economic impact study? Proper public education? Public testimony of the stake holders?
Mark Hubbard, 100 ton Merchant mariner Captain, boats owner, life time party charter boat operator.
Hubbard’sMarina 170 Johns Pass Boardwalk
Madeira beach fl 33708
45
12/18/2015 18:58:46John Rossettijohnrossetti20@comcast.netNaples, Fl 34112Charter/Headboat For-HireYour preferred alternative 4 for charter boat reporting is both onerous and dangerous! The finacial hardship of the electronic reporting from the water would be substantial. In addition, this requirement would be a danger to the safety of the vessel and it's passengers. When returning to port a captains primary responsibility is the safety of the vessel and it's passengers and he must deal with general navigation, weather, wind, waves, other vessels, and obstacles in water (crab traps, etc). This proposed action takes away a captains focus on this primary responsibility! I can say with a fair amount of certainity that very few charter captains have a secertary that can handle this chore while we navigate. Give us a break and let us get back to port and get our passengers safely off our boats before you receive your data. Really, is a few hours going to make any difference?
46
12/19/2015 21:25:37Capt. Aaron Kelleycaptaaron@goingdeepcharters.comBrazoria, Tx, 77422Charter/Headboat For-HireI am against vms on my boat. Reporting weekly via IPhone should be sufficient.
47
12/21/2015 20:36:27Shane cantrellAndrewscantrell@gmail.comGalveston, Texas, 77550Charter/Headboat For-HireDecember 15 2015

Dear Chairman Anson and Gulf Council Members:

Thank you for the opportunity to address the council on the modification of reporting requirements for charter vessel and headboats. This is a huge opportunity for these vessels to provide timely, accurate data while increasing accountability.

Our organization represents federally permitted charter captains and their customers across the Gulf of Mexico as well as across the country. We are the largest organization of federally permitted vessels in the region and have the following recommendations and concerns for the Gulf Council's consideration:

Any modifications to reporting requirements for charter vessels and headboats should be paired with and tailored to management measures for these vessels as outlined in Amendment 41 and 42. Management and development of reporting requirements are inherently linked and must be tailored to management measures for of these vessels. Ignoring this in the development will yield a duplicative and fruitless initial effort as management evolves.

The Council should direct NOAA to consider whether the electronic reporting system can be designed so that charter vessels and headboats should have the flexibility and choice to use a variety of electronic reporting devices rather than being specifically limited to a Vessel Monitoring System. There are several available ideas like a smartphone application, or location enabled logbook or transponder that would be sufficient for charter vessels and headboats.

Data should be submitted electronically in any future reporting system prior to reaching the dock to best inform land based validation and enforcement personnel.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide input and look forward to continuing to develop these modifications this January in Orange Beach. Additionally, please feel free to contact me with any questions or to provide any feedback to our organization.


Sincerely,

Shane Cantrell, Executive Director
Charter Fisherman's Association
512-639-9188
shane.Cantrell@iCloud.com
48
12/22/2015 10:39:21David Dewberrypelicanadventures@gmail.comDestinCharter/Headboat For-HireI am against the VMS units. there is much easier and less expensive ways than the cost of over $4000 per unit to tax payers or owners, when you already know what zone we are fishing in and data collection can be done very easy via mobile phones. It really makes one question why Thrane & Thrane has so much pull with NOAA.

I ended up selling my commercial permits because I had such a problem with VMS unit not working correctly. I was being threatened that I would loose by permits because you were not getting the signal but when I would call Thrane & Thrane, they would say it was working.

I am all for good data collection. However, I think we should use common sense when paying for it. Please act as though the money were coming out of your own pocket when you decide weather or not a $4000 VMS unit plus subscription for each boat is really significantly beneficial or not.

Thanks for you time,
David Dewberry
49
1/2/2016 16:12:33MIKE ELLERMIKE@FISHDESTIN.COMDESTIN, FL 32541Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial Fisher, OtherWE NEED DAILY ELECTRONIC REPORTING FOR ALL CHARTER/ PARTY BOATS AS WELL AS REPORTING BY ALL PRIVATE BOAT ANGLERS. THIS IS LONG PAST DUE.
EITHER FIRE BONNIE AND HER DATA CREW OR MAKE THEM MOVE INTO THE 21ST CENTURY.
50
1/7/2016 17:42:50terrence sheatj@fishanddivetampa.comClearwater, Fl 33755Charter/Headboat For-HireI run 2 Shea Fishing and Diving Charters out of Clearwater. We have 3, six pack charter for hire boats. Two that have federal permits and 1 that just has t he state of Fl 6 person license. I have no problem reporting our landings in an effort to improve the terrible data we have now. I have had my business for 8 years, run more than most, and rarely ever get asked what we actually catch. I find it absurd. Please feel free to contact me as I would like to help improve our fishery. Capt TJ Shea 813-385-2169
51
1/26/2016 12:53:31Chris Bartoninfo@reeldiversioncharters.comCortez, FLPrivate Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial FisherHaving Charter boats submit their catch report prior to arriving at the dock is not a feasible option. It would be a waste of clients time to make them wait while we weigh each individual fish, write it down, and log it on the way in.

This would be much easier if we were able to weigh fish and record the information once we got back to the dock. We would then be able to upload the information after our clients left.

Several vessels in our area do not have an additional deckhand, which further limits the ability to accomplish this task.
52
1/27/2016 10:51:12James G. Stonecaptainjamesgstone@gmail.comPensacola, FL 32507Charter/Headboat For-HireIt is my opinion that if you're (council) are wanting all CFH, and Headboats install and maintain VMS gear, that you should also require all Private vessels install and maintain the same equipment you're asking the CFH and Headboats. Private vessels make up a huge portion of the fishing effort. I do not necessarily oppose record keeping or reporting, it's just oppressive and offensive to force CFH and Headboats install, pay for, and maintain VMS type reporting devices when there are so many viable alternatives such as reporting to NMFS websites.
53
3/31/2016 14:03:28Celia Crowecelia_crowe@yahoo.comVidor Tx 77662Private Recreational AnglerThe american families deserve a snapper season that is changed you must consider the great expense fisherman go to in order be get a few days of fishing and so many factors weather waves tides and winds affect being able to fish for so many anglers, I have lived here all my life and it is a shame the power of money by commercial endeavers outways the american angler please change the laws on snapper season there is plenty if your commercial markets dont reuin it
54
5/16/2016 9:22:01Maxwell Bermangroupermvp@gmail.comSafety Harbor, FL 34695Private Recreational AnglerIn the litigation concerning Amendment 40, there is a threshold legal issue for the Court to resolve. That issue is whether there is a legal distinction between a component definition that groups for-hire anglers versus one that groups federal for-hire permit holders. If the component definition is for-hire anglers, these anglers have access to state water charters and have not suffered a diminution in fishing access. If the definition is federal permit holders, these holders are not fishermen.
55
5/19/2016 14:09:06Warner Fosterjwkillntime@gmail.comPanama City, Fl. 32405Private Recreational AnglerStrongly encourage adoption of Preferred Alternative 4.

Have heard stories where Charter and Head boats of hire are failing to properly report their catches.
Because they are commercial fishing operations they should have the same reporting requirements as any other commercial fishing vessel.
56
9/10/2016 17:41:19Stacy Rodrigueztubincuban1@yahoo.comSpring HillCharter/Headboat For-HireI do not agree with this. Just more red tape for someone running a small Charter business. Most captains that recently started to do Charters had to pay a ridiculous price for the permits in the first place (20k) and now what are you going do...Put more regulations, more red tape, more cost. All I can say RIDICULOUS! !!!! Oh and when I am throwing Red Snapper back by the dozens because they are so endangered a commercial guy 100 yards from me is keeping hundreds of 12 inchers.... Again RIDICULOUS....
57
9/11/2016 10:21:27Captain Douglas Godwinlovetofish1960@hotmail.comrotonda west fla. 33947Charter/Headboat For-HireI have only had my business running for 3 years and still are trying to build my client base. To put an electronic device on our boats for 6 pack charters is ridiculous and is a financial burden. If you have to keep your batteries on during the time you are not on your boat that is not going to happen to me. I take at most 4 trips to 5 trips a month. The recreational anglers are doing more damage to the reef fish than charters boats by far. if you want to regulate someone then regulate them. There is only a handful of reef permit holders in my area but when you are offshore fishing you see boats anchored all over the place. Why pick on the guy who is trying to make a living.
58
9/11/2016 19:07:21steven impallomeniflatsman45@gmail.comsummerland key,florida 33042Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial FisherOn action 1I support alternative 1. On action 2 I support alternative 1. On action 3 I support alternative 1. On action 4 I support alternative 1. I believe it is the job of fisheries management to collect the data. To force it on small boat operators is extremely burdensome and could be costly to us as well. I would encourage you to find other ways to do your job and leave us alone. If anything work with captains on a volunteer basis. Please don't make our jobs harder than they already are.
59
9/12/2016 15:04:39Gary Foldenjcgfolden@mindspring.comLargo, FL 33770Charter/Headboat For-HireBackground: 38 years FULL time captain, both commercial and charter.
Just what I need, more government intervention into my business. I am not sure why we need to even go this route at all. I am not pleased to see that the GMFMC sent out the booklet listing all the alternatives. Interesting that the GMFMC seems to italicize and underline their favorite "preferred alternate 4" which is the most invasive of all actions. I hope everyone voices their opinion for Alternative 1 : NO ACTION

Perhaps none of this foolery would have been necessary if there was better management of the fishery. The government got it right for two years, 2008 and 2009 when they closed grouper to EVERYONE during the spawning season of February and March. NEVER in nearly four decades of fishing have I seen such a recruitment of young groupers - both Gag and Red. Had the 'feds' stayed the course, we might all be enjoying some of the best grouper fishing in decades.

Thanks for reading this. Again, Alternative 1: NO ACTION

Capt. Gary Folden - Clearwater, FL
60
9/12/2016 16:33:20Charles E. Guilfordfish@charismacharters.comMexico Beach, FL 32410Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial FisherAct-1 - No - act data report.
Act-3 - No - act trip report
Act 4 - No - act- use MRIP
Charter and headboats are not the problem. Individual recreational fishermen are the major problem. NOAA prescribes too many regulations without current valid information. The restrictions on Gulf Red Snapper has caused the species to be totally out of NATURAL order, way too many extra large fish.
61
9/13/2016 14:34:52Thomas P. Steber, Jr.tom@zekeslanding.comOrange Beach, Al. 36561Charter/Headboat For-HireIn reviewing the public hearing guide:
Action 1 - agree with preferred alternate 4
Action 2 - agree with preferred alternative 4
Action 3 - Hail out agree with preferred Alternative 2 - option a & b
Hail in agreed with preferred alternative 3 - option a & b
Action 4 Hardware/software - agree with preferred alternative 4, a & b

Our vessel Zeke's Lady was involved in the Headboat pilot program. Although there was a few issues. I worked great.
from a enforcement tool to a reporting tool.

1. The only way it will work is for ALL Charter for-hire vessels to be on this program.
2. will allow a great management tool for NMF & Gulf Council
3. our headbout has been reporting for over 20 years, so there is no reason that 6 passenger vessels can do the same.
4. This will allow, eventually a year around fishery with no over fishing.
5. Will allow the hundreds of thousands on American anglers that do not own a boat. Access to American Red Snapper.
6. And finally give some accurate data so, NMF can have a better than ("Best available data") data collection.
62
9/13/2016 21:57:38Romulus A Whitakerrom@hatterasrelease.comhatteras, NC 27943Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial FisherIn reference to For-hire logbooks and reporting requirements. Action 1 Preferred Alt. Require federally permitted charter vessels to submit fishing records electronically before arriving at dock. Let me get this straight: Most states and federal govt. say it is illegal to text and drive. So now you are telling me that I must take time away from captaining my vessel to submit a fishing report. That is ridiculous. I very seldom have a day traveling back and forth to fishing ground that I don't have to make some kind of steering adjustment to avoid a sea turtle, board, pallet, grass bed or some kind of obstruction. Not to mentions once you are inside an inlet you have boat traffic, ferries, ships, sandbars, rock jetties, shallow water and numerous other hazards to contend with. I would think you would open yourself up for a lawsuit if I wipe out my strut, shaft, and propeller ($25,000) while submitting a fishing report. If this logbook is truly to gather fishing data rather than put more pressure on the for-hire industry I can't imagine what 24 or 48 hours difference would make. You are asking us to do what every licensed driver in US would be given a ticket for. I would prefer weekly reports.
63
9/14/2016 10:05:18ELIOT LABBE'ELIOT@CASCOBR.COMBATON ROUGE,LA.70810Private Recreational AnglerGIVE MORE RED SNAPPER DAYS TO THE FAMILIES OF LOUISIANA.I FEEL MY YOUNG SONS ARE GETTING ROBBED !!WE SPEND A LOT OF MONEY ON BOATS,TACKLE,PARTS,FUEL,CAMPS.......
64
9/15/2016 11:19:42Gary Jarvisgjabd@aolCharter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial Fisher, OtherIt is way past time to require E log books for the CFH sector to begin to improve data collection and harvest rates in recreational fisheries. Not only will a harvest censuss type log book improve data collection but it will give managers more near real time actual information that will allow better management decisions. The industry has been asking for E log books for a decade to develope a confidence in the data collection systems. And to show feal catch numbers instead of computer generated speculation on harvest. There have been numerous pilot programs to beta test the technology and it is well documented that this technology works.. This needs to be approved at the Oct meeting and put into space by Jan 1
65
9/16/2016 12:13:03Capt. Chad Haggertdoubleeagledsf@aol.comClearwater, FL 33767Charter/Headboat For-HireAs a two year participant in the EFP for the Headboat Collaborative, I saw the evidence first hand that the real time reporting offered. We used VMS as well as reporting requirements made before landing. I can support these changes, IF they are paired with regulatory changes for the Headboat and CFH fleet. Implement these changes along with Amendments 41 & 42. If the goal is to access better data and you are going to hold the CFH fleet accountable for that, we need some flexibility in our fishery.
66
9/16/2016 13:05:09randall t josseyrandyjosse@aol.com32322Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial FisherDO NOT REQUIRE VMS ON CHARTER/HEADBOATS. I HAVE HAD A VMS FOR COMMERIAL FISHING AND THE COST IS TO MUCH,IF YOU WANT THEM YOU PAY ALL THE COST THAT IS ATTACHED TO THEM.THAT IS 70 OR MORE $ A MONTH .YOU HAVE GOT THE SEASONS ON EVERY FISH OUT THERE SO THAT CHARTERS WILL ONLY BOOK WHEN MOST FISH ARE OPEN.WITCH IS WHEN YOU OPEN RED SNAPPER FOR JUNE AND HALF OF JULY. I JUST GOT OUT OF THE COMMERIAL REEF FISH BUSS. DUE TO GETTING SCREWED ON THE IFQ PROGRAM AND THE COST AND AGGRAVIZION .
67
9/17/2016 9:01:40Thomas L Stephenscaptain_tom98@yahoo.comBradenton, Fl. 34212Charter/Headboat For-HireMy comment is for Action 1. Alternative 1 or 2 makes the most sense to me. Daily reporting is just too much to ask since it can be a long day on the water and a trip the next day doesnt leave time to do this.
Relating to Action 4. Alternative 1 is my choice. There could be a form on line that would make this an easy task. I see no reason to know the vessels position to report catches.
68
9/17/2016 15:39:03Brent Gaskillcaptbrent@summervacationcharters.com33743Charter/Headboat For-HireThe council needs to broaden their scope of what they consider to be an offshore charter boat. There are a few of us that run small boats (mine is 24') in the backcountry and bays the majority of the time but hold our permits so that we can occasionally run past 9 miles for kingfish or reef fish legally. There is not room for this type of equipment on these boats. The burden of this type of expense for reporting is to great for only a handful of trips offshore a year. This change will put legal charters out of business while the ones running illegally will still operate with no enforcement.
69
9/19/2016 16:12:16Thomas C. Seckmancseckman@sbcglobal.netHaslet, TX 76052Charter/Headboat For-HireI fish from a 32 foot center console boat, with limited room for additional electronics. I'm concerned about finding a place on my boat for a Vessel Monitoring System, and would want as small and unobtrusive a unit as possible.

Hail Out and Hail In requirements are ok with me, but there are no marinas in Sargent, TX where I operate my business. The only reason I can see for notifying you of my arrival is so officers can meet me and check my catch, which I don't mind, but I would be unable to come in to another, bigger, port where they might normally operate. I've built my business in Sargent, I have my own dock, and must stay there.

Capt Cole Seckman
Reveille Sportfishing
70
9/20/2016 9:50:01joel gantfishdaddycharter@yahoo.comhernando beach,Fl 34607Charter/Headboat For-HireI'm a small charter captain out of Hernando Beach, FL. In our area we do not have the tourist charter that they have more south of us. Do to this our rates are about half of what they charge. With this in mine, I can not afford to pay for a monitoring device or a monthly charge for this.Doing this would more than likely force me out of charting. With all the Actions 1 thru 4, I would like to see Action 1 taken. I don't have a problem reporting my catches from charters, I just feel it isn't fair for us small charter to have to incur a cost that we can't afford. Thank you, Capt. Joel Gant "Fishdaddy Charter"
71
9/21/2016 15:24:41Steve L Barnestxfishingguide@gmail.comPottsboroPrivate Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-HireVMS will not work for small 6 pack charter boats. These boats are fast and reporting on the fly will not work. VMS units will be exposed to elements and the shock from smaller faster boats is not what they were designed for.
72
9/22/2016 17:00:08Joyce Rios Wagnercaptainjoyce2000@gmail.comPort Richey, FL 34668Charter/Headboat For-HireRe: Action 1, Action 2, Action 3, and Action 4
I think there should be no action until other avenues are explored. It would be far more cost effective to send divers to the reefs and let them count the fish on the bottom than imposing the cost and effort for the vessels to report catches via a NMFS approved VMS permanently affixed to the vessel!
If a vessel is regularly traveling to the middle grounds and catching the current limits of all species, even those reports would not impact the overall picture. The areas I fish are up to 35 miles west, 10-15 miles north or south. I regularly encounter one or two 6 packs and 1-2 head boats. I can guarantee that we/they are not maxing out on limits.
Is all this effort into developing these ACTIONS to thin out the charter fishing captain population rather than monitor the fish population. Do you count each commercial fish taken? Are they restricted to size limits? Are individual recreational fishermen who are the majority of the vessels on the water mandated to report also?
How about monitoring the Goliath Grouper population and opening a season or tag lottery to control that species. Two divers witnessed multiple skeletons surrounding the home of a Goliath while retrieving my anchor.
How many man hour dollars were spent on this drawn out project/study. We could have developed spawning areas and restocked the Gulf! Why isn’t common sense ever included in our bureaucracy?
I hope these questions will spark an interest in exploring reasonable solutions… NOT including NMFS approved VMS!
73
9/23/2016 7:55:22Edward J Schroedergalvestonpartyboats@sbcglobal.netGalveston, Texas 77550Charter/Headboat For-HireI am writing to support Alternative 1: No Action for all proposed modifications to Charter Vessel and Headboat Reporting Requirements.
We (Galveston Party Boats, Inc) operate two headboats, one with a capacity of 86 and another, 100. We do not need additional obstacles to running fishing trips. We already submit electronic reporting forms with probably 95% submitted the same day as the trip and 100% no later than the next day. The preferred alternatives adds to the already heavy workload of the captain and crew and frankly, serves no purpose. There is no reason to saddle us with this mandatory reporting before the boat arrives at the dock. The nature of our business dictates that we have a set departure and set return time for our trips. These times are published and advertised. Furthermore, we can already predict the preferred alternative coming with a stipulation that no vessel can sail if the VMS is not working. In 2016 we missed 7 or the 44 day red snapper season due to weather. Would we really be expected to cancel a trip with 100 passengers on board, paid and ready to go, because of a VMS issue? As previously stated, our departure and arrival times are prepublished and are not secret.
We used a VMS for this reporting system in 2015 as we were part of the head boat collaborative. The equipment and service were not cheap and the time stamps were consistently wrong. The VMS company could never solve that issue.

If the Gulf Council cannot restrain itself from implementing yet more burdens on us, we ask that a provision be made to allow the phoning in of hail out and hail in information in the event of some type of VMS failure. To do otherwise would place us in the position of having to cancel a trip with 100 customers and a potential value of $9000. Those trips cannot be made up at some other day. I hope you can appreciate the situation of having customers make reservations weeks, if not months in advance, arriving for their fishing trip and preparing to enjoy a nice day on the water, only then to be told the trip cannot go due to the VMS? Unlike a commercial trip, we cannot make up such days later. This rule, which seems to be strictly for the convenience of the government, should not be imposed without an alternative method of reporting in event of a VMS failure.
74
9/27/2016 11:00:10Charles Paprockijmpaprocki@gmail.comPanama City,FL 32408Charter/Headboat For-HireWe favor option 1, No Action or at the most, Option 2. . This is an undue burden and expense in an already over-regulated industry. The constant changes of species regulations have already had a huge negative impact on our business. The requirement of having a VMS is an expense and burden that may put some in the industry out of business. These further regulations would have no impact on the accuracy of reporting catch data. In our opinion, it would hinder it. I hope all federally permitted vessels get to vote on these further burdens to our industry.
75
9/27/2016 11:57:50Randy FeiklsFeiklsr@gmail.comPortland TX. 78374Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-HireI have been a charter boat operator for nearly 20 years. During which time I have participated in both mail in and home based electronic reporting via computer. Both systems were reasonable in terms of requirements for equipment, cost, information requested and time.
My operation has been on smaller vessels 27' , 31' and 38'. We provide primarily fishing trips but also offer sightseeing excursions and typically limited to 24 for hire trips per year or less. My primary responsibility while conducting these charters is the safety of passenger and crew. We do not always have the best sea conditions to operate in here on the western Gulf of Mexico, however we do not make trips when those conditions are beyond what can be safely accomplished. Vessel size is a determining factor in those decisions to make the trip or not.
With that said I believe that the reporting at sea could have a detrimental impact on the safety of the vessel and all on board particularly for smaller vessel operations such as mine. It would be quit difficult to enter Data, positions, catch type etc... while trying to operate a vessel in any type of sea condition above 2' or less which is a rarity in our area. The type of equipment and reporting is yet to be determined however anything beyond a simple single push/ touch of a button which would record location and fish type automatically would be difficult and distracting. Texting while driving is a big safety issue, this would be similar .
A second concern is the type of VMS equipments required space, power, connectivity and cost especially for smaller vessels and businesses.
A web based system or APP for a mobile device , phone, tablet seems to be a more practical solution that would be accessed for reporting upon returning to port. This is as described as being currently used by head boats in action 4 and would use the existing cellular networks or Internet infrastructure. Reporting at sea beyond a certain distance would require connectivity through some other method such as GPS satellite systems. This would be costly and could compromise safety on smaller vessels.
A requirement to Hail in or Hail out if as the existing requirement described in action 3 for the commercial permit holders would not fit my business model well; fishing, sight seeing and recreational use. Perhaps the preferred alternatives have some option for not reporting when the vessel is being used for purposes other than those requiring the permits. It needs to be considered. I also find it to be to much government invasion of my privacy.
I could support the following:
Action 1: alternatives 2 or 3
Action 2: not applicable to my operation however Alt. 3 or 4 seams much more practical for those types of operations.
Action 3: Alternate 1.
Action 4: Alternate 1.

76
9/27/2016 13:27:12Edward Johnsoned@fish-factor.comNokomis, Fl 34275Charter/Headboat For-HireI run a small operation in an open boat. I average 2 -3 trips a week, mostly half days, many in state waters, and take up to only four anglers But, I stay legal with Federal permits for an occasional 30 mile trip.
My main concern is policing the many charter captains that run 15 miles plus with out Fed permits. There is little or no enforcement.. Once you stop them, then put what ever data regulations that the Feds want in place.
.
77
9/27/2016 14:53:33Capt Sam Youngyoung456@aol.comMarco Island, FL 34145Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-HireAction1: Modify Frequency and Mechanism of Data Reporting
I support Alternative 1, "No Action" because the alternatives listed make no sense. Surely you should not have to report daily only to say, "No charter Today, or Yesterday." I have no problem supporting a reporting requirement only for the days that I charter, which is 20% of my time. Even full-time Charter Captains get bad weather days/weeks that they don't fish, so why be compelled to login everyday to report you didn't fish. Come back to me with some alternatives that are well thought out and I'll consider them, but don't make busy work for us if we aren't fishing.

Alternative 2: Modify the Frequency for Headboats
I don't run a head boat so have no perspective that warrants my taking a position. I defer to the head boat Captains. However, I would add that the Preferred Alternative is akin to texting while driving by making the Captain report on the water before arriving at the dock: big safety issue here!!!

Action 3: Trip Notification and Reporting Requirements

I support Alternative 1: No Action. I have federal permits that I use solely for Charter fishing, so why would I have to Hail In or Out if this is my only use of them? BTW, who the heck would I be "hailing In or Hailing Out" too??? Is this done via VHF or??? Please be more descriptive in your explanations and options. Examples would be helpful to set expectations, don't you think?

Alternative 4: Hardware/Software Requirements for reporting fishing records and location.

I support Action 1: No Action The data from reporting locations via GPS for charter vessels would create so much data that the Council has no bandwidth to capture and use the data in any meaningful way. This is just dumb, not to mention onerous. Who is supposed to pay for such a device. I can't charge enough as it is on a charter to make up for such a tracking device. Furthermore, I'd like to use a web based portal to report catch data, but the Council has no examples of the data they seek to collect. I'd like to see a prototype of the catch reporting tool to determine if it's something that makes sense, and at least add comment to so that if adjustments need to be made, they are done before something is forced down our throats. It's like you're trying to sell me a car but you won't show it to me or let me test drive it. It would be crazy to support any of the alternatives without more information on the data you're trying to collect. Am I supposed to keep track of how any blurunners I caught and threw back, or is the data you're looking for just catch data? Please show us some templates of what you're proposing, because from what I'm reading, this all seems half-baked, at best.

I have no problem complying with a reporting requirement, I think it would be great, and help to add to the science, but I can't agree with such vague proposals that essentially disallow charter captains to participate in the process that will work for everyone. I can't support any tracking mechanism for charter boats at all, our catch limits for a six-pack are not that large to warrant the expense unless the council absorbs it. And if I fish or dive recreationally, I would want to turn it off.
78
9/27/2016 18:38:55John Topicztopiczj@gmail.comClearwater FL 33759Charter/Headboat For-HireI've been in business since 1966 and operate a '43 foot charter boat by myself and feel that electronic reporting while at sea is an extra burden on me and takes away from time spent on my business and passengers. I would not be opposed to reporting catches at home from my computer or by way of a weekly logbook. Please consider the fact that not all for hire vessels carry crew and electronic reporting would be a distraction and hardship. Thanks for your consideration.
79
9/28/2016 13:17:31Sam Maisanosbmaisano@gmail.comLargo 33778Charter/Headboat For-HireAlternative 1 for all actions (No Action). As a charter boat operator for more than 15 years I strongly oppose VMS on my boat, it is a safety hazard as it will drain or weaken my batteries and can leave my captain and customers stranded while on the water. It is also a safety hazard to report while on the water, many center console charter boats operate with only a captain as we do. This would be a distraction from operating the vessel safely and monitoring the clients.
80
9/28/2016 17:04:50Curtis Randall Kingrandy.papardarey@yahoo.comLeague City, Texas 77573Charter/Headboat For-HireThis would be very burdensome for Charter Boats. Captains have enough to do on return to shore and dealing with boat traffic, safety of passengers and crew, docking, fish cleaning, etc. These trips often only last a few hours and are sometimes as frequent as twice per day. Reporting changes of location during the trip would likewise be extremely burdensome on captains and crew. This is an entertainment business. Having to stop the entertainment to report every move to the government would divert the captain and crew from their basic tasks of safety and entertainment.
81
9/28/2016 21:49:45skipper wrightcaptskipw41@yahoo.comCoden Al.36523Charter/Headboat For-Hire I have been in and around the fishing industry all my life, I',m 57 years old and started working with my father on his charter boat out of Dauphin Is.Al. when I was only 6 years old, I also hold a US.3,000 ton Ocean Master / Master of towing License and am on my 9th renewal, working in the gulf of Mexico oil field with divers, doing pipeline construction,Tie-ins and removal along with platform service and removals,for over 35 years,,I also own a charter fishing service out of Dauphin Is.Al.

I am not in favor of any applications on adding any more monitoring equipment, fishing restrictions or reporting task onto the Charter Boats at all,,They are already over tasked and over restricted as to what fish they can and can't catch already, to the point of going out of business,,

VMS monitoring,
I do not agree with or will ever endorse the use of VMS or AIS on charter boats, It is to easy for someone on another vessel to keep track of your vessel and to use it to steal your privet bottom fishing spots. Any kind of an AIS or VMS system allows other people the chance to steal your fishing spots by getting your location from the equipment by tracking you,, VMS or AIS systems are fine on commercial vessels with commercial poundage catch permits,, but not for charter for hire vessels,,,

Bottom Catch Reporting,
I do not believe that a captain should take his or her attention away from operating the vessel in order to send in a fish catch report on the way in to the dock, It's not a safe way of operating a vessel with people or passengers on board, The safety of the vessel and people on board is more important then sending in a fish catch report, that can be sent in after the vessel is secured to the dock,, Safety First,

From: Capt. Skip.Wright
SummerTime Charters LLC
Dauphin Island Alabama
82
9/30/2016 15:58:15Michael H. Colbycaptmike50@hotmail.comClearwater, FL 33756Charter/Headboat For-HireELB's with approved monitoring should be implemented as quickly as the Council process allows. A near to real time estimate of effort, catch and discards and timely evaluation are critical to our management process.
83
10/1/2016 8:23:48richard gomezcaptainconch12@yahoo.comkey west, fl. 33040Charter/Headboat For-HireThe key West ch. boat assoc. is against any form of monitoring device on our vessels. We feel that the phone survey, and more importantly the at the dock survey and fish measuring and counting, is going to be as good as it gets. Fishermen do not feel that they should have to deal with any additional burden to our overburdened business. The only thing that will be accomplished by this monitoring system will be bad feelings and false data.
84
10/14/2016 8:42:45ernest doshiergeckosportfishing@gmail.comocracoke,nc 27960Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial Fisherany expense that comes out of this such vessel monitoring systems or any other type of required onboard reporting equipment be taken on by the council or nmfs and not the fishermen.if you want this done then you provide the equipment to do it.
85
10/26/2016 11:53:36Bobby WilliamsthreesonsIV@aol.comBiloxi, MS 39530Charter/Headboat For-Hire
Let it be known that the Mississippi Charter Boat Captain’s Association is very much against the Vessel Monitoring System that the National Marine Fisheries is trying to implement. The reason for this is the majority of our fishing charters booked are in State waters, we have to travel 13 miles in order to be in Federal waters. If you would like to further deliberate our views, please contact us.

Sincerely,

Mississippi Charter Boat Captain’s Association
86
12/14/2016 9:41:21cap[ Tom Adams adams4tomadams@gmail.comport st joePrivate Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-HireIf alt 2,3,4 require a VMS definetly no way if by smart phone possibly but for now --until a better amendment is written. I would have to say Status Quo as is.
87
12/30/2016 8:24:58Capt tom Adams4tomadams@gmail.comport st joe, fl 32456Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-HireThe VMS system is not a good system and will do nothing to help the charterboat/headboat industry or the fisheries in the gulf. For any kind of reporting the VMS is not the way to go. It is not working out for the commercial fishermen and it will definitley not work for charterboats
88
12/30/2016 8:40:16Capt tom Adams4tomadams@gmail.comport st joe,fl 32456Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hireaction 1 alt 1 or 2 only NO VMS
action 2 same
action 3 alt 1 only NO VMS
89
1/10/2017 11:42:19Michael Eller Destin2000@cox.netDestin fl 32541Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial FisherWe need to move forward with electronic log books today!!!,!,!
90
1/31/2017 23:06:07joe nashcaptjoenash@gmail.comorange beach, Al 36561Charter/Headboat For-HireI think every charter for hire federally permitted boat fishing for any regulated species should be required to have electronic logbooks on board no more excuses, money should not be the issue and tracking us is definitely not an issue nowadays, we have nothing to hide only something to gain. lets get with the program. thank you
91
2/1/2017 8:45:04Stan Phillipsdestinfishinginfo@gmail.comDestin, Florida 32541Charter/Headboat For-HireI own and operate the charter boat Destination in Destin, Florida. I do support the use of electronic log books for the charter for hire industry. This is a measure that will certainly lead to accurate, real time data collection, and hopefully, sustainable access to the fishery for our customers. It is most definitely worth the time it takes to fill out and submit the form and the monthly fee if it accomplishes those two things.
92
2/6/2017 15:18:20sam youngyoung456@aol.commarco island, fl 34145Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-HireYou really mean to make me put a VMS on my boat when I do only 10-15 charters per year?

Really????? If true, NOAA is way out of bounds.
93
8/4/2017 7:31:19Capt. Dylan Hubbardinfo@hubbardsmarina.comMadeira Beach, FL, 33708Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-HireCouncil Members,

We strongly agree that ELBs are a great idea and daily electronic reporting is a great idea and a non-issue, however, the requirement of a VMS or VMS type device is unrealistic and would be a hindrance on any vessel taking passengers offshore. We are not commercial anglers, we are bound by our guests and their schedules and we do not have flexibility to wait if our VMS acts up. Also, this VMS data is being used to close our fishing areas so we would strongly encourage Alternative 1 under Action #3 allowing us to continue without VMS on board our vessels.

We feel using the summary data to close fishing areas is wrong, and we do not want to see the head boat and charter boat VMS pings to be summarized and used to close areas like we have seen the commercial VMS data used at past meetings.

Again, in conclusion we support collecting and supplying better data but we feel that monitoring our exact positions is an unnecessary hindrance and will in no way help our fishery. We are working hard to help create a sustainable fishery and are hungry to supply the council with better data so please consider not mandating these VMS for our vessels and putting a hindrance on supplying that data.

Thank you for your time and consideration,
Capt. Dylan Hubbard
Owner/Operator Hubbard's Marina
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
Loading...
 
 
 
Form Responses 1