Reef Fish Amendment 28 - Allocation
 Share
The version of the browser you are using is no longer supported. Please upgrade to a supported browser.Dismiss

 
View only
 
 
Still loading...
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTU
1
TimestampEnter your full nameemail addressCommentsCity, State, Zip CodeCheck all that apply
2
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````Nancy Goodhopenancygoodhope@gmail.comNo to red snapper reallocation!
Why Reallocation Is Not The Solution:
1.Reallocation will not give recreational fishermen
a longer fishing season over time.
2. Hurting our commercial fishing businesses is not
the way to help recreational fishermen.
3. Reallocation is not fair to the commercial
fishermen that have stayed within our
sustainable quotas.
4. Recreational fishermen deserve a management
plan that gives them longer seasons, lets them
count their fish, and is done sustainably.
St. Augustine, FL 32086Other
3
7/30/2015 14:27:52Michael K. Orbachmko@duke.eduI would like to comment on the allocation alternatives in Draft Amendment 28 of the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico, June 2015. In the spirit of full disclosure, I was employed as a contractor by the GMFMC in the late 1980s and early 1990s as a facilitator for the development of the original Red Snapper IFQ proposal which was approved by the GMFMC but which was subsequently held up for over a decade by Congressional action. When the IFQ program was finally approved and implemented, it was in approximately the same form in which we had originally designed it. That design was the product of over 30 consensus-building workshops which I moderated and which were held in ten locations around the Gulf of Mexico over a two year period. I am also a member of the Board of Directors of the Ocean Conservancy which, through our New Orleans office, worked with the Council to pass and implement the IFQ program in the last decade, and also plays a role in the restoration planning in the wake of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

When we were developing the commercial IFQ program in the early 1990s, there was discussion of the possibility of some form of limited access for the recreational sector in the Red Snapper fishery, everything from license limitation to some form of recreational IFQ. Even then there was the potential for over-runs of recreational harvest due to insufficient and lax management of that sector, including by the individual Gulf states. Our conclusion then was that we should focus on the commercial sector, because that was the sector that had the most to gain from IFQ management in support of the overall goals of the Reef Fish Plan. It was clear that the issues of the recreational fishery would have to be addressed in the long run.

However, the current allocation alternatives in Draft Amendment 28 again raise the question of both the effectiveness of the management of the recreational sector, including by the states, and of the appropriate allocation between the commercial and recreational sectors. There is, of course, no perfect allocation formula, and allocations will always have to be made on the basis of judgments based on biophysical and socioeconomic data, standards such as “fairness and equity”, and political values and interactions at both the state and federal levels. However, I would like to make two points.

First, it would be difficult to justify a reallocation of harvest from the commercial to the recreational sector on the basis of “fairness and equity” when the recreational sector has a significant history of over-runs of their historical allocation and in light of reluctance to engage in appropriate management by the Gulf states. Both of these factors are referenced in the amendment and supporting documents. This would essentially be rewarding the recreational sector and the states for mismanagement of the recreational harvest of the Red Snapper resource. This same comment applies to the objective of increasing the allocation to the recreational sector to in essence justify that sector’s over-runs.

In addition, the shift in draft Amendment 28 from the “net economic benefit” to the “fairness and equity” standard is a productive one, because it emphasizes the point that the issue is not just dollars, but the

“value” of those dollars to the different human communities in which they circulate. Commercial fishing communities are dependent on economic benefits in a very different way from recreational fishing communities, and those differences must be taken into account in allocation decisions under the M-SFCMA.

Second, this situation will ultimately not be resolved until the recreational sector is brought under clearly understood, monitorable, accountable and responsible management. That is what the IFQ system did – with the participation of commercial fishermen -- for the commercial sector. I believe that the Council has not fully considered alternatives for such management of the recreational sector.

For example, one of the most successful examples of the restoration of a fishery with both significant commercial and recreational components is that of the Atlantic Striped Bass fishery. In that case, stimulated by the plans of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), the Commission and many of the individual states adopted a “tag” program for the recreational fishery wherein a limited number of “tags” were issued for each recreational fish allowed to be taken. This provided both a clear, accountable record of the number of fish taken by the recreational sector, and a means to limit that harvest in accordance with the prescribed quota. This system worked well because of the unique state-federal partnership formed under the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Fisheries Management Act (Atlantic Coastal Act), under which the federal government provides ‘back-up’ authority for the ASMFC in enforcing uniform state-federal management functions (that is, neither the states nor the federal government can manage such resources effectively on their own). I do understand that the situation in the Gulf is different from that of the Atlantic, owing to the absence of a Gulf of Mexico equivalent of the Atlantic Coastal Act, and that fish “tags” may or may not be the appropriate mechanism in the case of Red Snapper. However, advantage should be taken of examples such as Striped Bass to inform more effective management of the Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper fishery.

Thank you for your consideration of these comments.

Santa Cruz, CA, 95060 Other
4
7/30/2015 12:54:25Edwin Lamberthedwinlamberth@yahoo.comDear Council Members:

I am asking you change the preferred alternative in Amendment 28 to Alternative 9. It the only alternative which reflects the accuracy of MRIP recalibration and changes due to size selectivity. Alternative 8 is just a half measure. It addresses MRIP recalibration only, when we all know that both elements must be taken into account. Please change the preferred Alternative to Alternative 9. Thank you.

Regards,

Edwin Lamberth
Mobile, AL
Mobile, AL 36608Private Recreational Angler
5
7/30/2015 8:52:55Carolyn F. Woodcarlyke@gmail.comDear Gulf Council,

Do not take the commercial red snapper allocation and hand it over to the recreational sector. The CCA has convinced you that reallocation will give the recreational sector more days to fish. This is simply not true. Reallocation will not give recreational fishermen a stable fishing season. On the contrary, here’s just a small sample of what reallocation will do… and it’s not good:

Hurt fishing businesses that support the nation.
Disrupt the seafood supply chain and access to red snapper by all consumers.
Take red snapper off the plates of the 97% of Americans who want to enjoy red snapper but can’t go catch it themselves.
Undermine the work the commercial sector has done to help rebuild red snapper population.
NOT prevent recreational overharvesting.
Hurt the red snapper population in the long run by increasing effort in the eastern Gulf where the population is most vulnerable.
Unfairly penalize commercial fishermen for staying within their quota while the recreational sector went over their quota in 21 of 23 years (between 1991 and 2013) by over 18 million pounds.
Cause the very problem recreational fishermen are facing – instability and uncertainty that prevents them from planning for their fishing year.
Set a dangerous and very real precedent for taking away commercial red grouper, gag, shallow, deep, and tilefish quotas.
Sets a dangerous and very real precedent for taking away charter opportunities in order to “solve” private angler problems, or taking away commercial crab/lobster tags to hand over to the recreational fishery.

I strongly support Amendment 28 Alternative 1 (No Action) because reallocation is not the solution.

Carolyn F. Wood

Red Snapper Commercial Fisherman
Dauphin Island AL 36528Commercial Fisher
6
7/30/2015 8:50:23Derek Figueroaderek@seattlefish.comThank you for the opportunity to comment. Seattle Fish Co is a seafood distributor located in Denver, Colorado. Amendment 28 will hurt businesses, not just in the Gulf, but throughout the United States. Reallocation to the recreational sector will disrupt our access to red snapper and, by extension, prohibit those thousands of consumers that we directly and indirectly serve through a network of restaurants and retail outlets from having access to red snapper. Please do not take red snapper off the plates of the 97% of Americans who want to enjoy red snapper but don’t go catch it themselves. Denver, CO 80238Other
7
7/30/2015 8:19:15Derwyn Bookerdodablu@sbcglobal.netI support the red snapper reallocation plan to reallocate snapper quota to the for hire sector. Please vote for this reallocation.Houston TX 77059Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial Fisher
8
7/29/2015 18:04:33James M. Clementscaptjmclements@aol.comPlease do not change the allocation of red snapper. What good will it do to take fish from the commercial sector and the public when it will NOT extend the recreational season more than a day or two?

Please concentrate on regional management and other ways to help the recreational sector.
Carrabelle, Fl. 32322Commercial Fisher
9
7/29/2015 13:25:29james hendersonjhenderson14@comcast.net The recreational fisherman are not able to count weigh and measure their catch. It sickens me knowing how much destruction occurs and wasted resources . I see this loss as they feed the porpoises looking for the big fish. They need to agree weighing counting and measuring their catch. I am a disgusted recreational fisherman that takes pride in knowing about all lifes species and their life cyclesgalveston tex 77551Private Recreational Angler
10
7/29/2015 10:34:51Robert L. Honakerannab22@cox.netAs a commercial fisherman, I DO NOT want to change the allocation. The system is working great now. Do change it. we have done our part to rebuild the Red Snapper population. It is strong as ever now.
What you need to do is have the recreational fisherman stay with in its quota. Don't take fish out of the mouths of people that don't fish and wish to buy them, just to satisfy the recreational side of the house.
Please do your job and vote against the reallocation.
Fort Walton Beach, Fl 32548Private Recreational Angler, Commercial Fisher
11
7/20/2015 15:00:11Chris Hortonchris@sportsmenslink.orgRE: Amendment 28 to the Reef Fish Management Plan – Support Alternative 9

Dear Chairman Anson:

On behalf of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation (CSF), I want to thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the alternative options for Amendment 28 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico. Though a re-examination of allocations between the fishery sectors for red snapper is long overdue and the Council has neglected that responsibility for more than 20 years, we can, and do, appreciate the inherent difficulty of trying to arrive at an ultimate decision. However, given the guidelines of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA) and the National Standards pertaining to reallocation, and equally as important the mandate that fishery management councils use the best available science when making management decisions, it is clear that Alternative 9 is the requisite choice.

The original allocation of 49% recreational and 51% commercial was set in 1990 and based on harvest data from 1979-1987. While the commercial landings were largely accurate during that time period, the recreational harvest was estimated using the poorly designed Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey (MRFSS). In fact, Dr. Patrick Sullivan, as chair if the National Research Council, deemed MRFSS “fatally flawed” in a 2006 presentation to Congress on the effectiveness of the survey. The recently implemented Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) has replaced MRFSS and demonstrated how MRFSS grossly underestimated recreational angler harvest. Essentially, for more than two decades, recreational anglers have been unfairly allocated a smaller portion of the overall quota. As a result, Alternative 8, which looks to recalibrate the allocation based on the new best available science, shouldn’t be an alternative for debate at all, but rather an automatic “reset” of the incorrect sector allocation originally set in 1990. This corrected baseline allocation should then serve as a starting point for discussions relative to truly reallocating based on the current social, economic and environmental conditions.

Although other alternatives look to reallocate some arbitrary percentage to the recreational sector that may be greater than the new baseline allocation offered in Alternative 8, only Alternative 9 looks to add additional allocation based on sound science. As the average size of red snapper has increased, the recreational sector has harvested their hard poundage quota more quickly (though with fewer fish being removed from the population) prompting the need for shorter seasons when trying to stay underneath a theoretical maximum pounds available for harvest. However, hard poundage quotas are not the optimum way to manage fish and wildlife populations for anglers and hunters. In fact, only fisheries with a commercial component are primarily managed using a pound or biomass model. All of North America’s wildlife, as well as inland fisheries, are successfully managed based on number of animals harvested as a percentage of the total annual mortality of the population, not on pounds. Alternative 9 actually takes a step in the direction of this better management system by recognizing recreational anglers select for larger fish, even though it’s still just one fish being removed from the population.

It is clear that anything but a dramatic shift in allocation to the recreational sector will not solve the dilemma of short seasons for recreational anglers. However, Amendment 28 is not intended to solve the problem of short seasons, but rather an opportunity to correct poor science while adjusting allocations based on the best available science. For this reason, we urge the council to choose Alternative 9 as the preferred alternative.

Sincerely,

Chris Horton
Director of Fisheries Programs
Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation
Washington, DC 20003NGO
12
7/13/2015 5:50:37John W Deanjwdean@hmvcpa.comI support option 9

shreveport, laPrivate Recreational Angler
13
6/9/2015 10:24:01Kirby Klyscaptnkirby@yahoo.comAny change will be directly detrimental not only to the ones who harvest the public resource, IE Red Snapper, but hugely more to all Americans, restaurants, and locals that cater to vacationing people who don't want to eat imported "orange roughy" or some other type of imported fish. Additionally any increase on the recreational side would be spread so thin that in reality, there would be no appreciable change in angling effort, scheduled trips, or ancillary purchases. Where is the upside when the down side is so easily quantified? If existing data does not support the largerl economic benefit coming solely on the side of the overall benefit for all Americans, and/or visiting tourists, then I would submit that the data sets/parameters need to be re examined. Thank you. High Springs,Fl. 32038Commercial Fisher
14
6/5/2015 6:59:40Robert Gillbgillbgill@embarqmail.comThe principal difficulty with Amendment 28 is that it does absolutely nothing to address the problems of the red snapper fishery in the Gulf of Mexico. Instead of focusing energy on solutions, the undue attention spent on this non-solution suggests there is little to no interest in actually dealing with the problems. For example, a major concern of recreational anglers has been the increasingly shorter seasons, and properly so. Amendment 28 has virtually zero impact on that issue and does not begin to deal with the root causes of the problem. What should be an earnest discussion and effort to improve the situation has degraded into finger pointing and name calling. On the one hand, we have states asserting rights to greater and greater portions of the stock, leaving fewer fish available for the federal season, and on the other we have the states, senators and congressmen, and legislators deriding the federal managers for unacceptably short seasons in federal waters. Additionally recognition of the fundamental problem of some 6,000,000 recreational anglers in the Gulf versus something less than 1,000,000 available red snapper seems to be totally ignored by all, including the federal managers, the states, and the anglers involved. When you consider the number of trips each angler takes, the ratio goes somewhere north of 40 to 1. Yet no one, and I mean no one, is considering a management plan that addresses this real and basic problem. And we wonder why there is continuing conflict?

Amendment 28 neither deals with the true problems that are driving this conflict nor does it resolve any of them. It serves only to increase the heated rhetoric, serve as a flag waving banner around which to rally by individuals and organizations, and divert attention from truly dealing with the problem. It is a false chimera and leads everyone down a primrose path, upon which we will circle right back to where we started. Until the managers, states, organizations, stakeholders and interested parties are willing to recognize the problems that need to be solved to move forward, and are willing to roll up their sleeves and engage in the very hard work of dealing with them, there will never be an end to the bickering and divisiveness. Amendment 28 does absolutely nothing to help the situation. It stands only as an ugly symbol of our mutual impotency on this issue.
Crystal RiverOther
15
4/27/2015 19:19:31Dave Registerusnrxdoc1@yahoo.com 4-27-15

Counsel,
When the ACL is increased new quota shares are given to IFQ account holders that currently have shares. What about giving any new distributed shares to those who need it most! Give it to the commercial fisherman that has very little or no shares, but that has landings? Is this not fair to help out the fisherman who needs it most? Why give more shares to the 10-15 people who “own” most of the shares.
If we don’t help the new commercial fisherman there will be no new young growth in our industry. How many GOM reef permit holders have little or none and have landings? Buying allocation from someone who was given the shares has made these armchair fisherman and big fish house dealers extremely rich! It is time to redistribute or at least give any new shares to those who have none or very little.


Dave Register
St Pete Fishing LLC

St. Pete Fl 33708Commercial Fisher
16
3/27/2015 7:06:45elizabeth andersonmiraclestriprealty@wowway.netI support alternative 1 ' no action" and I oppose amendment 28. panama city, fl. Private Recreational Angler
17
3/25/2015 4:32:59Brian swindle Charterboatdeliverance@gmail.comI am against any reallocation until the recreational sector becomes accountable. It makes absolutely no sense to take quota from a sector that is historically fished under the quota and move it to a sector that has fished over the quota every year. I'm invested in all 3 sectors cfh commercial and rec. we have several other amendments in the works to help the rec side (40&39) and until we have time to try those out this amendment is total nonsense. Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial Fisher
18
3/12/2015 8:36:36Donna Tryonmdtryon82@outlook.comI thought that it had already been determined that any reallocation from the commercial sector would result in little if any gain in recreational access. For some reason this council seems determined to forge ahead using this approach rather than to radically change their failed recreational management .

This proposal will negatively impact some of the problems/issues which are being considered in Amendment 36. The fact of the matter is reducing the commercial quota will compound existing issues regarding by-catch and cost of shares and allocation.

Finally no reallocation from commercial to recreational should be allowed until a new recreational management system is in place which insures accountability.
Gulf Breeze,Fl,32563Private Recreational Angler, Commercial Fisher
19
3/8/2015 10:23:56Jesse Zepeda jessegzepedaI am against Amendment 28 , on the point of a life long witness of our Fishery off The Texas Coast , It is OBVIOUS that the over fishing ,from 1973 - the year of 2000 that the overall pressure / Shrimping / fishing , Killed the Gulf of Mexico . Now that the Shrimp Boats are gone , The Gulf has come back 10 times over ! WE HAVE LEARNED FROM THE PAST ! We will never put The Gulf in Jeopardy again !! So lets go on to the next PROBLEM Like POLLUTION AND SO ON !!!Houston Texas 77098Charter/Headboat For-Hire
20
3/4/2015 10:58:32Louis Stephen Loupsteve_5@bellsouth.netI am 100% in favor of Amenment 28 to reallocate a portion of the commercial quota to the recreational sector.Glynn La. 70736Private Recreational Angler
21
2/8/2015 17:53:31chris niquetcpniquet@hotmail.comI am against amendment 28 in all forms until the council shows that there is a fish management plan that does not take fish from a sector that is in compliance and give them to a sector that is not. Also the recational sector must be in compliance with the catch limits.lynnhavenfla32444Private Recreational Angler, Commercial Fisher
22
2/2/2015 11:38:03Louis Loupsteve_5@bellsouth.netI am 100% in favor of amendment 28 and Alternative 6. Glynn la. 70736Private Recreational Angler
23
1/29/2015 6:03:43Darrell Hinglegalvestontxfishingguide@gmail.comUntil the recreational fishery has a handle on the accountability issue no reallocation should be considered. The recreational fishery has been overfished and took a 20% buffer to stop it while the commercial fishery stays within their catch limits.Galveston TX 77563Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial Fisher
24
12/8/2014 19:36:37Thomas Tatumthomas@kingtuxrentals.comAs a person who comes from a non-Gulf state to spend my vacation dollars in Gulf states, I've been dismayed to see the Red Snapper fishery managed with little or no historic consideration for the recreational fisherman. I contend that Alternative 4, an increase of 10 percent for the recreational fishermen to be the one which will spark an immediate boom for the tourism industry. I also contend that among the ACT, Alternative 1 is more desirable. Admittedly, the fish stocks are healthy and there is no overfishing. The fishery should be declared by all to be restored and not "overfished". That status should seem obvious to all but those who have an agenda not influenced by facts and logic! Announce that the fishery has been restored, the fishery opened to the recreational fisherman and you'll see a boom in tourism in the Gulf region not seen in decades!Kennesaw, GA 30144Private Recreational Angler, Other
25
8/3/2015 13:57:01Dean Coxdeancox@mchsi.comAlternative 1 no action Please.
Don't take fish from an accountable, sustainable,enforceable, fishery sector and give to a non accountable sector that has exceeded it's quota and hampered the rebuilding process. Instead please allocate any increase in baseline quota to commercial reef fish fishermen who have been maintaining reef fish permits and associated costs.
Santa Rosa Beach,FL . 32459Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial Fisher, Other
26
8/4/2015 23:32:00Jim StanleyJStanley222@YAHOO.COMWhat a mess you guys have made of this fishery, Unless you are one of the IFQ Baron's that is handed over "For Free" tons of IFQ per year your pretty well screwed, at this point I would have to say let AM28 pass and give it to the recreational guys. I would rather go back to derby fishing the 200lb daily limits and when the quota is meet shut the commercial season down, alot more money could be made by the real fishermen.BrownsvilleCommercial Fisher
27
8/5/2015 6:12:01Carl Salamonecarl.salamone@wegmans.comTo Whom It May concern
We are a supermarket chain with 86 stores in the Northeastern U.S. Product from the Gulf are in demand by our customers as so many travel South during parts of the year.
Red snapper is one of the most popular species. To lose this species by allocating more to recreational fishing would not serve our customers.
Thank You
Carl P. Salamone
V.P. Seafood Sustainability
Wegmans Food Markets
Rochester, New York
Rochester, New York 14624Other
28
8/5/2015 6:36:57Thpmas Maddendrtmadden@aol.comI went deep sea fishing with a relative a few years ago and the captain of the charter business said, when we returned, that the gulf was all fished out. Those statements along with the mess the oil industry has provided has left the Gulf waters in real trouble. Between the fishing industry and the oil industry, the Gulf is being destroyed. It is time to reverse that situation and begin taking steps to stop the destruction of our source of food and life.Akron, Ohio 44313Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial Fisher
29
8/5/2015 6:50:54Paula Morganpaulaym@earthlink.netI simply am a consumer of Red Snapper. It's my favorite fish. I feel there is a need to think outside the box so as not have reallocation efforts just make other problems.

Red Snapper has been 100% sustainable since 2008 and red snapper rebounded from the brink of collapse. Please focus on real solutions and not fish grabs that hurt fishermen and consumers. Thank you.
33019
30
8/5/2015 7:51:53mark casorsvpmcaso@yahoo.comDear Gulf Council Members:

I do not live on the Gulf coast or own an offshore fishing boat. My access to this shared American resource is through my grocery store and favorite local seafood restaurants. "Amendment 28" would hurt those community businesses and consumers like me.

"Amendment 28" is a false promise to recreational fishermen who will not experience long-term stability or longer seasons as a result of this change. Instead of destroying the balance in the fishery, why not focus on fixing recreational management without hurting American consumers?

This "reallocation" proposal is divisive, unfair and comes at a time when demand for local and sustainable seafood is at an all-time high. Please oppose Amendment 28 and preserve fairness and balance in the fishery for those of us who do not have the luxury of catching our own red snapper for the dinner table.

Sincerely,

Mark Caso
enid ok 73701Other
31
8/5/2015 9:53:52kelly byrneskellbex@yahoo.comDear Gulf Council Members:

I do not live on the Gulf coast or own an offshore fishing boat. My access to this shared American resource is through my grocery store and favorite local seafood restaurants. "Amendment 28" would hurt those community businesses and consumers like me.

"Amendment 28" is a false promise to recreational fishermen who will not experience long-term stability or longer seasons as a result of this change. Instead of destroying the balance in the fishery, why not focus on fixing recreational management without hurting American consumers?

This "reallocation" proposal is divisive, unfair and comes at a time when demand for local and sustainable seafood is at an all-time high. Please oppose Amendment 28 and preserve fairness and balance in the fishery for those of us who do not have the luxury of catching our own red snapper for the dinner table.

Sincerely,
Kelly Byrnes
montecitoOther
32
8/5/2015 12:09:39William (Bubba) Cochranebubbagoodnews@gmail.comMy name is Bubba Cochrane.
I’m a commercial red snapper fisherman from Galveston, Texas, commercial snapper fishing for over 25 years.
I am the owner and operator of the F/V Chelsea Ann – a bandit vessel that relies on red snapper year round. I also operate a red snapper charter business.
Thanks for the opportunity to comment on Amendment 28.
I support alternative #1 (NO ACTION)
I have many concerns with red snapper reallocation. First of all, reallocation will take allocation from my small fishing business and turn it over to a sector of the fishery that has exceeded its quotas in 21 of the last 23 years. That’s not only unfair and inequitable, but it doesn’t promote conservaton and actually puts the health of the stock at risk – overfishing is what crashed the stock in the first place, and we can’t afford to go backwards by letting the recreational sector (with an effectively infinite number of fishermen) take too many red snapper. I shouldn’t be penalized because the recreational fishery has been mismanaged. Commercial fishermen do not want reallocation, and a vast majority of charter fishermen oppose it because it sets a bad precedent – just look at our public testimony at every Gulf Council meeting since Amendment 28 was started. We’ve been saying the same thing time and time again – reallocation is not the solution to the problems of the recreational fishery.
Galveston, TX 77550Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial Fisher
33
8/7/2015 11:17:10jason carrollsnaptapper32@hotmail.comGive the control to the states and extend state waters ! It is clear that the Federal Gov. has done nothing but mismanaged our fishery. Give it to the states !vidor,tx 77662Private Recreational Angler
34
8/7/2015 13:23:20Larry Huntleylbhuntley@aol.comDear Sir:

I know you’ve heard many arguments concerning amendment 28, and I’ve commented in the past, but I would like to reemphasize my major concern before final action.

In my mind, it comes down to “who owns the fish?” If we believe the American public does, then you must ensure all Americans are getting both access and their fair share. I know economics must be considered, but a little research will verify that approx 96% of all Americans and 88% of Floridians depend on the commercial fisherman to provide their fresh seafood. The present allocation of gulf red snapper allocates 49% to recreational fishermen and 51% to the non-fishing public. Maybe the alternative to amendment 28 should be recommending a greater share to the non-fishing public, or at least leave the current percentage alone.

Gulf of Mexico fish markets and restaurants sell all the fresh, local-caught red snapper they can get to both locals and visitors. Please consider “who owns the fish” and support alternative 1.

Thanks,

Larry Huntley, Pensacola
Pensacola, Florida, 32526Commercial Fisher
35
8/8/2015 8:51:06Stephen Maiselmaiseltown@live.comDear Council Member,

My name is Stephen Maisel. I have been in business for over thirty years commercial fishing. I employ three people and each one, including myself, has a family to support. Please do not support the reallocation of red snapper as proposed by Amendment 28.
Amendment 28 is not the solution to the recreational fisherman’s overfishing problems and short seasons. This amendment will only hurt fishery businesses like my own. It is not fair to commercial fishermen, who have stayed within their quota and rely on those resources to be reprimanded for the actions of the recreational sector who have continually overrun their quota twenty-one of twenty-three years by over eighteen million pounds. Reallocation is harmful to ninety-seven percent of the American public who do not fish but want to enjoy red snapper in a restaurant or purchase it from the market. Commercial fishermen have worked long and hard to rebuild the red snapper fishery so that everyone may benefit from it. Reallocation will only undermine the process we have molded and create a vulnerable and unstable fishery for everyone. Additionally, reallocation would set a precedent for other species that we rely heavily on such as gag, red grouper, and other shallow water grouper.
I ask you to support commercial fishing by voting for Alternative 1 on Amendment 28, which is no action. Reallocation is not the answer.

Respectfully,


Stephen J Maisel Jr.
Palm Harbor, FL 34683Commercial Fisher
36
8/8/2015 18:35:05Kathleen Brazerkbrazer33@yahoo.comI support alternative 1.
1.Reallocation will not give recreational fishermen a longer fishing season over time.
2.Hurting our commercial fishing businesses is not the way to help recreational fishermen.
3.Reallocation is not fair to the commercial fishermen that have stayed within our sustainable quotas.
4.Recreational fishermen deserve a management plan that gives them longer seasons, lets them count their fish, and is done sustainably.
I believe that this the only logical solution.
Methuen Ma 01844Other
37
8/9/2015 5:43:13Jean McMakeniowajem@hotmail.comI grew up in Louisiana and have been saddened for years at what has been happening to the Gulf of Mexico and coastal regions.
Sustianable harvested fish are vital to survival of the fisheries, as is working hard to significantly reduce the toxic runoff from local watersheds and especially the Mississippi River watershed.
HuxleyOther
38
8/10/2015 14:40:22Glenn CoxGinGlenn10@gmail.comWe go fishing in Florida and used to live in Florida. We are avid fish lovers of fresh, wild fish, NOT imported!! We have seen documentaries of fish raised in Asia and they put antibiotics and growth hormones into the supply they raise. We live in a land locked state and we have to drive to Branson, and go to Landry's to get good seafood. It comes from the Gulf of Mexico.

Why does government regulation and control have to invade every aspect of the GOOD that belongs to Americans? Seriously, after hurricane Katrina and the BP oil spill, the fishing industry is making a comeback, as are the restaurants and tourist industry. Why do you have authority over the natural rights that belong to inhabitants of this nation? Are you part of Obama's plan to give all the business to foreigners? This is an outrage. My Dad and family use charter boats to get out on the waters and fish when visiting the Gulf Coast. When we were there last time, you could only catch what the Fishing Commission allows. You people are like the insurance, tax and health agencies that suck the money out of the public and what you give in return is NOTHING! We bought red snapper today from our local health food store. We went on the Internet to look up recipes and after the Tallahassee Register posted this Amendment 28, my wife and I were infuriated that you would place this burden on the economy, of all restaurants that order their fresh fish from the Gulf Coast, the fishing industry as well as sporting anglers. I am personally sick of this government playing God. Please grow a conscience because this is wrong and not fair to anyone.

Cotter, AR 72626Other
39
8/10/2015 17:59:02Brian lewis blewis131@hotmail.comI do not support any reallocation of red snapper until this management council starts using the best science available .

Andy Strelcheck has clearly showed the council that any increases in allocation will not give that many more days to fish for red snapper in the year .

There needs to be a better system of counting fish for the recreational sector and until that occurs there should not be any Red Snapper taken from the commercial sector and shifted over.
I also feel that until the council solves the bycatch issue in the eastern gulf there should be no action taken on amendment 28 .
The commercial sector has had an ifq system that is working out and doesn't need any disruption by this amendment .
The commercial sector is limited to what we can catch and sell
Let's not forget we lost Red drum from the commercial harvest .
The recreational sector has many other species of fish it can catch all year .
I have been very patient as our fisheries are getting rebuilt and taking away from an accountable fishery and giving it to an unaccountable fishery is not the best science available in my opinion
Council needs to vote no action on this amendment
Clearwater ,fl 33765Private Recreational Angler, Commercial Fisher
40
8/12/2015 12:57:57Ben Weberben@louisianasaltwater.comThe Louisiana Charter Boat Association supports alternatives 5 or 7 on Amendment 28, allocation of red snapper.

Ben Weber
Executive Director
Louisiana Charter Boat Association
(225) 421-9130
ben@louisianasaltwater.com

www.louisianasaltwater.com
Mandeville, La, 70445Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire
41
10/21/2015 7:23:54Carl Salamoinecarl.salamone@wegmans.comDear Gulf Council Members:

I do not live on the Gulf coast or own an offshore fishing boat. My access to this shared American resource is through our valued suppliers in the Gulf. Our customers rely on us to supply Gulf Seafood on a regular basis and enjoy the variety. "Amendment 28" would hurt those community businesses and the many customers in the Northeastern U.S. who enjoy these species.

"Amendment 28" is a false promise to recreational fishermen who will not experience long-term stability or longer seasons as a result of this change. Instead of destroying the balance in the fishery, why not focus on fixing recreational management without hurting American consumers?

This "reallocation" proposal is divisive, unfair and comes at a time when demand for local and sustainable seafood is at an all-time high. Please oppose Amendment 28 and preserve fairness and balance in the fishery for those of us who do not have the luxury of catching our own red snapper for the dinner table.

Sincerely,



Carl P. Salamone
V.P. Seafood Sustainability
Wegmans Food Markets, Inc.
Direct Phone-585-464-4676
Cell—585-314-0509
E-Mail-carl.salamone@wegmans.com
“Always go with your passions and never second guess them.”

Rochester, N.Y. 14624Other
42
10/21/2015 9:26:43kelly byrneskellbex@yahoo.comDear Gulf Council Members:

I do not live on the Gulf coast or own an offshore fishing boat. My access to this shared American resource is through my grocery store and favorite local seafood restaurants. "Amendment 28" would hurt those community businesses and consumers like me.

"Amendment 28" is a false promise to recreational fishermen who will not experience long-term stability or longer seasons as a result of this change. Instead of destroying the balance in the fishery, why not focus on fixing recreational management without hurting American consumers?

This "reallocation" proposal is divisive, unfair and comes at a time when demand for local and sustainable seafood is at an all-time high. Please oppose Amendment 28 and preserve fairness and balance in the fishery for those of us who do not have the luxury of catching our own red snapper for the dinner table.

Sincerely,
Kelly Byrnes
montecitoOther
43
10/21/2015 10:38:00Jean McMakeniowajem@hotmail.comWe deserve sustainable management of marine stocks and resources....we must protect our natural resources for future generations.HuxleyOther
44
11/9/2015 15:46:21M. D. Evansmillarddevans@bellsouth.netAlternative 8 does not allocate a sufficine increase to the recreation sector to reflect the actual landings over the last several years.

Alternative 9 most closely resembles the actual catch over the last several years, followed by Alternative 4.

My concern with Alternatives 5, 6, and 7 are the provision to maintain current quota if ACL is under a threshold. The problem with these alternatives is if the ACL is reduced it will severely affect the recreation sector.
Mobile, AL 36618Private Recreational Angler
45
12/27/2015 16:59:36Dean Coxdeancox@mchsi.comCouncil members and constituents I urge you to vote alternative one no action on amendment 28.Then please move forward with amendment 36.Santa Rosa Beach FL, 32459Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial Fisher
46
1/6/2016 14:23:06Capt Tom Adamstomadams@mexicobeachcharters.comI would suggest that the council pass amendment 28 option 9. I have been going to a lot of meetings and listening online when unable to attend. I have heard from the commercial side how much more money they are making now since IFQS They were given way too much in the very beginning. 57% for the recreational side is fair.

Capt Tom Adams
PORT ST. JOEPrivate Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire
47
2/10/2016 13:27:15Catherine Huntcchunt205@yahoo.comthis is an online comment for Amendment 28, Allocation.Monroe Twp, NJ 08831Private Recreational Angler
48
2/11/2016 11:14:06mark casorsvpmcaso@yahoo.comI do not live on the Gulf coast or own an offshore fishing boat. My access to this shared American resource is through my grocery store and favorite local seafood restaurants. "Amendment 28" would hurt those community businesses and consumers like me.

"Amendment 28" is a false promise to recreational fishermen who will not experience long-term stability or longer seasons as a result of this change. Instead of destroying the balance in the fishery, why not focus on fixing recreational management without hurting American consumers?

This "reallocation" proposal is divisive, unfair and comes at a time when demand for local and sustainable seafood is at an all-time high. Please oppose Amendment 28 and preserve fairness and balance in the fishery for those of us who do not have the luxury of catching our own red snapper for the dinner table.

Sincerely,
enid ok 73701Private Recreational Angler
49
2/19/2016 8:04:37Testgulfcouncil@gulfcouncil.orgtesting pageOther
50
2/27/2016 2:39:45mark casorsvpmcaso@yahoo.comDear Gulf Council Members:

I do not live on the Gulf coast or own an offshore fishing boat. My access to this shared American resource is through my grocery store and favorite local seafood restaurants. "Amendment 28" would hurt those community businesses and consumers like me.

"Amendment 28" is a false promise to recreational fishermen who will not experience long-term stability or longer seasons as a result of this change. Instead of destroying the balance in the fishery, why not focus on fixing recreational management without hurting American consumers?

This "reallocation" proposal is divisive, unfair and comes at a time when demand for local and sustainable seafood is at an all-time high. Please oppose Amendment 28 and preserve fairness and balance in the fishery for those of us who do not have the luxury of catching our own red snapper for the dinner table.

Sincerely,

enid, ok 73701Private Recreational Angler
51
10/4/2014 10:45:23Robert ExbyRJ@exby.netI am a 70+ retiree is South FL who only fishes from shore so I probably will never be effected by this amendment. I have spent most of my adult life in Colorado hunting and fishing and have seen similar well meaning management schemes. When you try to finesse Mother Nature too much you rarely achieve your goals. Seems to me this amendment is only pitting two groups against each other to see who will get the advantage over the other.
Think you will only create animosity and not solve the underlying problem.
Estero, FL 33928Private Recreational Angler
52
9/24/2014 13:41:04William L. Reevesbr14@msstate.eduI think that national parks are for the use of American citizens and other visitors.
The federal government, state governments, and local governments should work together to enhance habitats and opportunities for Americans to enjoy these national treasures. Such things as building and maintaining reefs and expanding forests, grasslands, and wetlands should be priorities.
Starkville,MS 39759Private Recreational Angler
53
9/8/2014 12:06:19david svobodasvoboda2@slb.comYOU have made a mess of this fishery and it is about time YOU put an end to what YOU are doing. YOUR entire system is flawed.
Are YOU ready to listen to GOOD common SENSE...Please keep ALL offshore platforms in place as long as possible since these are the BEST man-made "reefs" EVER...
START using sound techniques...we are in a TECNO-world unmatched EVER use the tools we CAN...
Statistical counting is WRONG no gray area WRONG ....Reef Fish numbers have shifted..... TOO Many Red Snapper---are crewing up the balance...but YOU will never know it since YOUr political TIES/VIEWS are scewing(screwing) it all up....
C'mon how can YOU keep it up....Louisiana Waters ARE TEAMING with ALot of reef FISH ----and red snapper are becoming "almost " a nuiscance....
If not then why do FLORIDA commercial boats come here to catch RED-Snapper, Amberjack,Grouper and ANY other FISH that pays MONEY....its NO secret....
I can only say PLEASE fix it but if YOU do nothing else stop the shenanigans....statistical counting is no longer of USE

take a lesson from Hunting...
PLEASE sell a SNAPPER tag or better yet a DEEPWATER tag to see who is going out there...and PUT someone at the landings to see what is being caught OFTEN....tell them to be nice and maybe it will work !!!
thibodauxPrivate Recreational Angler
54
9/5/2014 15:28:11Raymond Scott Childresssstfish@juno.comI am against the reallocation of red snapper from the commercial sector to the recreational sector. Why would any sane person take fish from an accountable sector of the fishery and give them to a recreational sector that is completely unaccountable. The rec sector needs to realize that they need to become accountable at some point due to the ever increasing number of anglers in the Gulf.

Respectfully,

R. Scott Childress
Odessa, FL 33556Private Recreational Angler, Commercial Fisher
55
8/25/2014 7:51:31David MennekeDave@advancedmedicaldisposal.comIf the season is going to be cut back for recreational fisherman, it should be cut equally or more for commercial fisherman. Commercial fisherman take more fish. If the supply of red snapper is is getting less it is because the commercial people are taking too many.St. Petersburg, Fl, 33712Private Recreational Angler
56
8/19/2014 14:39:27kyle schwabjkschwab1@att.netI would like to get more information about the recreational harvest in Louisiana specifically. I have read the data about total recreational harvest in the gulf states. Thank you.baton rouge LA 70808Private Recreational Angler
57
8/18/2014 17:22:47Jan Pourciaupourciau@lmoga.comI oppose the preferred alternative. I am in favor of alternative 1.Baton Rouge, LA 70820Private Recreational Angler
58
8/18/2014 17:22:31Lauren Pourciaulpourciau@gmail.comI oppose the preferred alternative. I am in favor of alternative 1.Baton Rouge, LA 70820Private Recreational Angler
59
8/18/2014 17:22:17Nolen Pourciaunolenpourciau@gmail.comI oppose the preferred alternative. I am in favor of alternative 1.Baton Rouge, LA 70820Private Recreational Angler
60
8/15/2014 12:04:10George Ghiorseghiorse@comcast.netI am in favor of Action 1, Alternative 4 as a first choice with Alternative 6 a second choice. I also not in favor of any buffers or overage adjustments at this time due to the fact that the data for recreational catch is flawed. If/when a time comes when recreational catch data collection is more accurate, buffers will no longer be an issue. Solve the problem with the data collection instead of this band-aid approach after the fact.Richmond, TX 7706Private Recreational Angler
61
8/9/2014 12:37:45Harry Garberhgarber@garbercc.comI am 100% opposed to sector seperation. The federal Government has created a crisis where there is none with their horific fisheries management. This can all be resolved by improved catch and stock data which most states are now providing. There is no reason for sector seperation except fot the fact that NMFS cannot run a fishery as it should. NMFS needs to be completly overhauled and the fisheries off of each states coast should be run by the respective state because it is in their best interest to protect it.AlabamaPrivate Recreational Angler
62
8/7/2014 12:56:18Paula Johnsontrigger1fish@gmail.comI support either Alternative 4 or Alternative 6.

The commercial sector is being bought up by individuals who simply are trying to turn the Gulf of Mexico Fishery into a stock market commodity. Of course these individuals will use their money to try to stop recreational fisherman from fishing.
Private Recreational Angler
63
8/6/2014 14:47:26Mike Millermmille007@hotmail.comBased on what I have seen the stock assessments are not very accurate. The red snapper recreational 8.5 day window was a joke. The fishery should be an equally shared resource and not just those holding commercial tags. I have no issues with the size or bag limits but I do take issue with the red snapper recreational season of a little more than a week.Clearwater, FL 33756Private Recreational Angler
64
8/6/2014 14:41:15James D. Oldsonjimmy.oldson@ineos.comLimit the amount of Federal involvement regarding the management of AL water as much as possible. Find a better way to get an accurate fish count of Red Snapper because they have taken over the ecosystem(s) off the coast of AL. Stop blaming the recreational fisherman for the impact on fish quota's....it's fantasy land. Allow fisherman to keep 4 snapper >16" and <24", this will reduce the number of fish killed trying to catch 2 large vs. 4 take home. Limit the commercial/boats from fishing inside the 10 mile mark, this will prevent them from decimating inshore reefs most often fished by recreational fisherman on small boats....I see this often. Consider different season lenths based on licensed size of boats or split the season for the small boats, weather prevents the little guy from going out and often by shortening the season puts them at risk because it pressures them to fish in extreme conditions...just a few thoughts...I have many more.....most of all...keep the Federal government away from managing fish in the Gulf of Mexico, the Federal Government could not manage themselves out of a wet paper bag right now.....60% of the population would agree with that statement today August 6, 2014.36526Private Recreational Angler
65
8/5/2014 10:36:28David Eggemandavidegg59@gmail.comI support alt. 6Tallahassee, FL 32309Private Recreational Angler
66
8/4/2014 15:58:31Joshua Gary SankesJoshsankes@gmail.comI am strongly against this amendment and any other involving sector separation. The mismanagement of our fishery especially red snapper is a travesty. You continue to punish anglers who work full time and those who are only able to fish on the weekend with these short seasons. Why not make the season open year round but only on the weekends?Sarasota,fl34231Private Recreational Angler
67
8/4/2014 12:03:23Gary Poyssickgarypoyssick@mac.comWe publish TheOnlineFisherman.com.

Sector Separation and the inevitable Recreational Catch Shares is a terrible terrible idea.

We are strongly opposed to it and will be making this a very important issue in the November elections. We have enjoyed millions of visitors to our site and continue to grow in our effort to provide information, education, and entertainment to recreational anglers.

We are taking a strong position opposing this change and will make sure we educate our readers.

Leave us alone. Focus on real valid data collection. Focus on obeying the MSA.

Gary Poyssick
Publisher
TheOnlineFisherman.com
Saint Petersburg, Florida 33704Other
68
7/31/2014 18:09:26Jonathan Bennettgrouperkng1@msn.comI lose money every time the council changes their mind. You can't provide a single shred of evidence on the red snapper fisheries nor grouper fisheries yet you still shutdown my sole source of income. I am more than willing to install a vms and report landings stop trying to pin the recreational sector against the for hire recreational sector.


Clearwater, FL,33764Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire
69
7/31/2014 13:30:33Angel Kotowskililsassiesmommie@aol.comIn a town that is mostly tourist and a small local population I feel you would be better off going after the companies out there that are over fishing and have nothing to do with the local are, no taxes, fees or any other impact. We have only lived here for over a year and we love to fish but why bother if you can only do it a few weeks a year. To me this is dinner you take off my table, cause if it is legal size its dinner. panama city beach fl 32408Private Recreational Angler
70
7/27/2014 22:11:39Sam Hendersonsamchell90@yahoo.comThe NOAA/NMFS, councils need to get out of recreational fisheries management. Just like the rest of the federal government you are failing the US citizens.
All the Gulf States fish and wildlife departments have many victories to their credit in the management of public wildlife and fisheries resources. The states collect real unbiased data that can be used by biologists to set seasons and limits. I have personally witnessed and it is a well known fact what the states did with the Red Drum.
The management of Red Snapper can be so simple why can our Federal Regulators not get it right?
Gordon, TX. 76453Private Recreational Angler
71
7/24/2014 11:52:27Jason Descantjdescant@gmail.comNO to Sector Separation!

Fix the data!
Clearwater, FL 33755Private Recreational Angler
72
7/21/2014 17:10:35Rich NormanRN7755@msn.comI fish on the Headboats in the Tampa/St. Pete area. Unlike the operators that think agencies are all out to get them so they can make more money (?) I understand regulations and basically support them. My big question on this one is though, how the heck will private boaters be monitored? If the idea is they have to report their catch, that just isn't going to happen. It won't. End of story. It would be a total disaster if more quota was taken from the boats that bring tourist dollars by the millions into each area because a portion is allocated to private boaters that will absolutely be impossible to administer. As it is, these boats are suffering monetarily because of reduced and closed seasons, often at the last minute, as it is. These boats are going to go out of business and the impact will be huge. Keep up the good work though. But please be realistic and think of the consequences.st petersburgPrivate Recreational Angler
73
7/15/2014 16:14:20Laurance f Pentelcaptdeadfish@yahoo.comalternative 5, giving 75% of any additional quota over the baseline that the commercial ITQ's were based on benefits everyone... the commercial quota holders you were "given" the rights to fish now worth over $50 per pound and the recreational anglers whose price per pound is probably way over $100 ( invested to catch per year) at this time. Anything less for the commercial side will make them feel cheated , even though they are being "given" millions of dollars, and anything less than 75%on the rec side will result in lawsuits costing the taxpayer millions of dollars....................Santa Rosa Beach, Fl 32459Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial Fisher
74
7/10/2014 8:13:50Darsel Tebo Jr.teboseahawkone@yahoo.comAfter all these years I'm confounded. The brightest minds in marine biology continue to attempt to focus the vast majority of their efforts on catch limits. Rather than taking 5% of the coastal waters and closing them to shrimping or any other bottom trawling method. THUS allowing the juvenile fish a food rich nursery to develop.
I'm talking about from the bank of the bay out to the limit of federal water. 5% of the Mississippi coast 5% Alabama coast same for Fla., La. and Texas. Then every year you don't have to be oh the tilefish next year it's the turtles then the grouper or snapper. You wouldn't have to close it to hook and line fishing. Just the fishing methods that would destroy the bottom grasses, algae and structure such as it is in the gulf.
Now to the size limit of snapper and grouper. Let those fisherman keep those 2 or 4 pan sized fish if that's what they want to do. I've got a picture of a 29 3/4 lb. red snapper hanging on my wall. It was about 10-12 years ago. I think the limit was 4. Anyway the other 3 were large in their own right just not that large. All sows I don't know how many eggs a 29 lb. sow produces I'd guess it's one whole hell of a lot more than 4 lb. sow.
Just my humble opinion.
Byram Ms.39272Private Recreational Angler
75
7/7/2014 8:48:31Rixey Broussardrixey_44@hotmail.comAnyone that fishes the Louisian area offshore 30 miles plus out can tell you that the platforms are full of Red Snapper. This years 9 day season was a big let down for the recerational fisherman, with the cost of up keep on a boat and all the fees associated with offshore fishing this 9 day season did not justify any of the cost us recreational fisherman have to under go. It was a big let down for me and my family who love to snapper fish. I was only able to fish 3 out of the 9 day season due to mother nature and work demand. I really hope there is a seconde season put into place for 2014 and a extended season for the years to come. It is a shame to go out and attempt to land other types of fish and all you catch is red snapper, and have to watch the sharks attack the snapper once released. This is a waste of meat. I hope something changes.
Thanks,
Abbeville La, 70510Private Recreational Angler
76
7/3/2014 8:29:35Darrell HingleDarrell_hingle@yahoo.comI oppose reallocation, giving more pounds of quota to the recreational sector as long as they continue to be unaccountable and keep over fishing their quota. The commercial side continues to be accountable and work within the system and the rec side should too. Just not at the commercial fisheries expense. Hitchcock,Tx 77563Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial Fisher
77
6/25/2014 15:14:03Marion Newtonmjnewton1@cox.net As an avid fisherman and scuba diver I have seen the red snapper stock increase through management which is great but I think the recreational fisherman are being unfairly treated . The way the determination of how many fish is taken is flawed not every saltwater fisherman targets snapper as a matter of fact I would think it is a very low number so how can they include all license holder be counted against the quota.Baldwin La. 70514Private Recreational Angler
78
6/25/2014 11:00:37Bob Bryantbob.bryant@subocorp.comThank you for this opportunity to address this body on matters that affect millions of anglers, thousands of businesses, and tens of thousands of jobs Gulf wide.
To say the least the recent nine day Red Snapper season in the Gulf of Mexico should be an embarrassment, not only to this council, but to the National Marine Fishery Service as well and especially for the Southeast Region Office and its director.
NARA and the anglers we represent question the validity of such a management practice and continue to question the assumptions and estimations made by NMFS. This council has the power and authority to not only question, but also to refuse to consider this data in its decision making process.
We ask that this council view any data currently coming from NMFS as suspect, and with increasing confidence that something is amiss, we only need to be reminded that just this week, NOAA had a different data scandal break in its “INTENTIONAL” manipulation of climate data to support its desired outcome.
As the conditions at sea continue to refute the numbers in NOAA offices; we also must wonder if there is any data manipulation at play in our fishery management process. If anything our recent 9 day season has shaken to the core our faith and confidence in NMFS, NOAA and SERO.
Now as to the matters at hand:
Draft Amendment 28 to the Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Management Plan Red Snapper Allocation
The NARA supports the Preferred Alternative #5 as stated in the Draft Amendment 28; date June 2014. In addition we would ask that the Council consider that persistent under fishing of the commercial quota, be allocated to the recreational sector as well.
It has been noted that the commercial allocation has once again been under-fished and there are still reports that there is a significant export market for red snapper. How can you tell a tax paying citizens that there access to the public trust resource is closed, yet those in Canada and Japan are free to purchase what we as free citizens cannot go catch?
33710Private Recreational Angler, NGO
79
6/19/2014 18:39:18Mike Thierrycapthierry@aol.comI feel like the charter head boat industry in the Gulf of Mexico is in big trouble. Many people, charter captains and business people I know, have gone out of business and are going out of business. The charter/head boat industry creates jobs directly and indirectly.

Socio-economic benefits of this industry are huge. The industry gulf wide carries tens of thousands of anglers every year that have no access to fisheries to our gulf's great resources.

As charter/head boats we give the general public a platform to enjoy these public resources. Without charter/head boats they would be unable to have access to this public resource that a lot of people look forward to being able to use each year.

It is past time for sector separation. It is time charter/head boats have their own quota. What we are doing now is not working at all.

We want to have an accountable sector. We are a stake holder in this fishery. We have always taken care of it and want to continue to be able to do so. We are professional fishermen and understand the importance in taking care of our fish stocks. We have very few dead discards. We catch very nice fish so there is no need for high grading.

The time is now for the Council to move forward with sector separation.

We need to get all states the same seasons. It is not fair or equitable for some states to have longer seasons than others. Since these states have longer seasons it takes away from the states that are staying compliant with federal law.

I can not count the number of days that Alabama charter/head boats have lost due to other states non-compliance. This represents a significant amount of lost income due to this inequity.

Somehow politics and special interests needs to be put aside so as to save a quickly dying industry. Also for the many citizens whose only means of enjoying their public resource is by going fishing on charter/head boats.

Thank you for your consideration,
Capt. Mike Thierry
251 490 3565 cell phone email capthierry@aol.com
Dauphin Island, AL 36528Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire
80
6/17/2014 4:17:18Kirby Klyscaptnkirby@yahoo.comPerhaps this amendment should be rephrased. Reallocation between those who can harvest their own seafood and those who don't.

As a commercial fishermen, I am harvesting a public resource for the benefit of the vast majority of Americans.

Where is the most economic benefit going to occur? Proper inclusion of what most Americans do and spend in resort coastal communities (and by extension, any seafood restaurant), having a seafood meal is important. The ancillary benefits to other businesses have to outweigh the economic benefit that 3% of the population has.

Giving any portion of the allocation away robs the American public.

Recreational fishermen can more easily switch between species, catch fish we can't, and would only benefit marginally in the overall scheme of things, perhaps getting another day of fishing for Red Snapper.
Ft. White, FloridaCommercial Fisher
81
6/12/2014 9:39:46robert houkroberthouk@tds.netI vote yes on alternative 6 on ammend 28.Private Recreational Angler
82
6/12/2014 9:29:20robert houkroberthouk@tds.netI vote yes on RFA 28Private Recreational Angler
83
6/5/2014 12:59:55Bill Huddlestonhudd68@yahoo.comI have written about how ridiculous the limits on snapper are.Can you guys even count all your fingers.Snapper are everywhere around the rigs and frankly all of you government people are idiots.DeQueen Ar 71832Private Recreational Angler
84
5/29/2014 17:39:28Robert C Cox Jrrcoxjr@aum.edu I have noticed your misguided reports about Red Snapper. The truth since the no fishing due to Deepwater Horizion disaster. that red Snapper have took over the other artificial reefs, so it's increasingly hard to catch grouper And other fish because the red Snapper take the bait before the other fish. Point 2 You allow oil companies under federal mandate to blow up abandoned platforms that kill thousands of Red Snapper. It's reported three platforms a week are blown up. MAKE THEM USE DETCORD EXPLOSIVE ROPE. detcord cutting the rig would destroy it without killing near much marine life.Wetumpka,Al,36092Private Recreational Angler
85
5/26/2014 12:09:24Chris Salespiinthesigmasky@gmaail.comWhile fishing Gulf I'll ask, "what's the limit on XXX fish?" and the going joke is , "I don't know, let me check with my lawyer." It's funny, but it's true, the rules change so much you need an attorney to figure it out. There really are so many fish, enough to keep beyond the current limits, yet we are forceed to throw them back and in many cases watch the dolphins enjoy them or watch them die due to poor recovery from the deep. The rule changes do nothing but make things confusing. Already, fish are being stolen from the public domain for commercial fisherman. Too, I think you are running a real risk where folks just say, screw it and keep the fish regardless of the rules. Folks should always follow the law, it's the right thing to do, but it's not followable. Anymore like the American Revolution, Prohibition, drugs, firearms and fireworks, the more restrictive you make the rules, the more you shorten seasons or eliminate them, the more they misalign with common sense, the more Americans are likely to exercise their freedom and just do what they want. Think about it, here's an analogy; if we say the speed limit is 5mph on the highway, there will be no accodents, but it's unreasonable and everyone will speed anyhow. The problem now is the fishing rules are really asking us not to drive (0 mph) - that's crazy man, just freakin' crazy. If you truly want to manage the resource, then use rules that truly manage. I think this is hitting the point where each state needs to take over managing the federal waters out to 200 miles. Seems they can better manage their interests. There are no interests for the Feds, the economic benefits accrue to the economies of the states.Freeland, MI 48623Private Recreational Angler
86
5/24/2014 20:08:57Amber Brunerbrunerbay@gmail.comI believe the only way to ensure that large corporations will not be able to knock the individual out of thier rights to the gifts of our planet is to ensure that we have a safety net in place and enforced accordingly, otherwise the individual will have no rights to any personal enjoyments of our Earth!Jacksonville Florida 32210Other
87
5/20/2014 11:56:45Daniel Bellerivebellerivedanielpaul@gmail.comOnline and mail in reporting would be what I am for until the science catches up to-it self.

"The recreational angler".

I am going to sit back and think about this type of person:

I come up with someone that has no reporting requirements at all. I would vote to keep the current commercial red snapper fish allocation the way it is, except of-course to lower the over all cost of allocation to the general public for food consumption. I am stating below facts:

The cost to lease one pound of red snapper for someone that does not hold shares is $3.25. I must come up with close $5,000, before I go fishing and must know someone to lease from.

I think all of the fish being sold is inflated to the point of no return. I think it is out of control.

I like the fact as a recreational angler I do not report to anyone. I would be all for NO REPORTING but, when you travel from Southwest-West, FL: 60 to 70 miles off shore to get within a habitat range of a certain species, you should be allowed to keep more fish as angler for foregoing the type of recreation. Either that or bring more people with you as I would do.

As a commercial fisher I would say that more allocation be given to the commercial sector to fish for those who do not have the means to catch red snapper. I don't know enough of the past amendments to red snapper why the allotted allocation is difficult to get from current shareholders.

Status quo as some have been saying I say if you are going to try to manage reef fish in a state of "going against lawful state NMFS rule making make it an original rule".


Please, consider a reef fish license that has reporting requirements. If you have a $20,000 boat with $5,000 with of equipment and spend $300 in fuel to travel to catch 10 fish for yourself you would not be against the reporting of caught fish. I am not for a tag system or a allowable catch system.

I am typing about a new type of regulation that someone has yet to implement.

Stop changing the regulations so often. And deeming the fish stocks when you have not a clue of the sector this amendment is for.
Fort Myers, Florida 33966Commercial Fisher
88
5/14/2014 17:32:07Josh Leavellspecksunlimited@yahoo.com9 day season on red snapper for recreational fishermen??????? What a crock of shit. Absolutely ridiculous. I will never buy a commercial caught fish. Ever.77573Private Recreational Angler
89
5/13/2014 11:19:15Alyssa Crenshawalyssa@maildg.com"I vote yes on Alternative 1 concerning Amendment 28"

Frankston,TX 75763Other
90
5/5/2014 17:59:16jeffery s lassitercatchit2010@yahoo.xomthe ifq system is unfair to all except your chosen few ifq holders when will person with active commercial permits be able to work their in the ifq you have made greedy millionars of of a few fishermen while killing the others ,the whole systtem is a mess and should be scraped

wewahitchka fl 32465Charter/Headboat For-Hire, Commercial Fisher
91
5/5/2014 11:47:10David Holleydrholley@knology.netWe need a longer Snapper season as everyone don't live on the coast and can't just go fishing anytime.Valley AlPrivate Recreational Angler
92
5/5/2014 9:05:12Ray AdkisonRay.adkison@ymail.comI vote NO on Alternative 6 concerning Amendment 28. As someone who grew up on the water, i would nothing more then to be able to catch snappers. That being said.I believe that the implementation of Alternative 6 would be Detrimental to not just the local economy but on a national level. From the fisherman to the people in fish houses in new york and everyone in between.Youngstown FI 32466Private Recreational Angler
93
5/5/2014 6:42:20Capt. James Piccapt@jp2fish.comI support all legislation that takes control of snapper fishing out of the hands of a few big money interest and into the hands of recreational fishermen. Snapper as well as other species should not be for sale to the highest bidder or a select few. This is a resource which everyone should benefit.
Keep up the good work.
Panama City Florida 32401Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire
94
5/1/2014 20:16:38Jeff brownJbdoneright64@aol.comTo whom it may concern. I am concerned about the whole snapper ordeal. Including size limits,seasons for commercial and recreational fishing. I have chartered 3 trips in the last four years for recreational fishing. I have seen things that just disgusted me. You see growing up as a young man my father had a rig that we kept all up and down the panhandle and chartered fishing. I'm telling you this because I care ! What I have witnessed is 15 to 20 snapper floating dead in the water because of their size. Not once but many times I the last four years. Once out of Port st.joe and twice out of capt Anderson's marina. Since the 2 per person limit went into effect, if they would catch fish larger than what's in the box , just keep it and take one out of the box and throw it overboard ! You know as well as I do that when you pull a fish up from the botto
, it's dead. Small, big, either way you should have to keep it. Last year I went out, we had 10 people on the vessel and probably caught 60 or so snapper and kept 20. What a waste and imagine that multiplied what that's doing to the population ! It's not just me either, I've talked to captains and people who charter rigs, and this is commonplace ! Just putting my 2 cents worth in because I care.
Phenix city,Alabama 36869Private Recreational Angler
95
4/28/2014 12:57:39michael Vollemlv@kwikool.comThe actions in amendment 40 seem like a thought out plan to help charter captains survive and give recreational fishermen their share. the one loophole that needs to be closed are commercial fishermen running charters under the guise of commercial fishing. they run "charters" all year round at the expense of real charter and head boat permit owners. Close all loopholes for the commercial permit boats using their commercial status to run charters in this amendment. Houston,TX 77045Private Recreational Angler, Charter/Headboat For-Hire
96
4/28/2014 11:09:04Warner fosterjwkillntime@gmail.comTotally don't understand the allocation percentages of any fish to either recreational or commercial. Why, because commercial fishers report gutted weight and recreational fishers whole weight. As you well know there is a huge difference in weight between gutted and not gutted.
Make the weight measurement (gutted or not) the same for everyone.
If commercial fisher are allowed to continue using gutted weight, then non commercials allocation percentages should be substantially increased.
Thank You,
Warner
32405Private Recreational Angler
97
4/21/2014 8:04:48Joseph Gerard Rossjgr@centralpaper-al.comOn the Alabama Gulf Coast we have trouble catching anything other that Red Snapper. We rarely catch other reef fish. Our 20,000 man made reefs have been booming with Red Snapper. (Check the latest edition of Saltwater Sportsman). We regularly throw back Red Snapper under 12 lbs. because we usually catch them exceeding 15 lbs.
If we have caught more by weight with the same bag limits, there is a simple measure of a slot limit that could make this easier. Only 1 of 2 fish limit cannot exceed 10 lbs. I don't know where you got your info but it looks like it comes from a lot of assumption instead of true data. You ought to get out there and take a look for yourself. I have no reason to lie. I get to fish maybe 5-6 days max. Snapper is one of the main reasons I spend that much money to fish. Please consider a different plan other than shortening the season. I would love to hear your response.
Birmingham, AL. 35243Private Recreational Angler
98
4/18/2014 23:30:20Chris Saleswaytopearofdice@yahoo.comJust returned from Gulf of Mexico fishing and the waters are overpopulated with red snapper. In fact, they get in the way of catching grouper. So you need to increase red snapper keep! Alternative 4 is best of the choices because it provides most to individuals, although 0-25% to commercial is best option. Drop the commercial quota proportionately across all commercial licenses, and as commercial fisherman no longer utilize their license, prohibit transfer and cancel the license. Individual citizens have the right to the fish before commercial. As time goes on, if the quota is not being fully utilized by recreational, have a special recreational season like October 2013.Freeland, MI, 48623Private Recreational Angler
99
4/17/2014 9:27:49Terry Boswellboswellt180a@yahoo.comI support option #5 allocate 75% any increase over 9.12 million pounds to the Recreational sectorDefuniak Springs, FL, 32435Private Recreational Angler
100
4/17/2014 7:21:20thomas reynoldspickett11@tampabay.rr.com I am a full time commercial fisherman part time rec and I am very opposed to reallocation. The fishermen that are stakeholders in this fishery are accountable and are not a constantly growing number.The recreational sector will never quit getting larger even if you gave them 100% eventually they would be down to very few fishing days anyways. I feel the rec problem is perpetual and reallocation is not the way to address it. cortez,fl-34215Private Recreational Angler, Commercial Fisher
Loading...
 
 
 
Sheet1