# Red Snapper- Quotas, Bag Limit, Regional Management



## GandyGirl (Jul 26, 2010)

Ahoy, 
There are some very important red snapper issues being discussed by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery management Council.

First, Council is working on determining the 2013 quota for red snapper and is also considering reducing the recreational bag limit to 1 fish as a way to increase the number of fishing days. Please watch this video presentation and send us your comments on the issue before the end of January. 




Next week the Council is hosting a series of scoping workshops that deal with the idea of regional management or recreational red snapper. We will be traveling to a number of different cities across the Gulf asking for pubic input.
All meetings will begin at 6pm and finish no later than 9pm.

January 14, 2013 
Doubletree by Hilton 
4964 Constitution Avenue  
Baton Rouge, LA 70808 

Holiday Inn Express
 2440 Gulf Freeway  
Texas City, TX 77591

January 15, 2013 
Hilton Garden Inn
 6717 S. Padre Island Drive   
Corpus Christi, TX 78412 

Four Points by Sheraton
 940 Beach Boulevard 
Biloxi, MS 39530

January 16, 2013  
Hilton Garden Inn
 23092 Perdido Beach Blvd.  
Orange Beach, AL 36561

January 17, 2013  
Destin Community Center
 101 Stahlman Avenue  
Destin, FL 32541

January 22, 2013 
Hilton St. Petersburg Carillon Park 
950 Lake Carillon Drive  
St. Petersburg, FL 33716

If you won't be able to join us at the workshops you can still submit your comments. Follow this link to our 'Scoping Documents & Proposed Amendments' page and scrolling down to the section titled "Reef Fish Amendment 39 - Regional Management of Recreational Red Snapper.

http://www.gulfcouncil.org/fishery_management_plans/scoping-thru-implementation.php

(A short video explaining the possibility of red snapper regional management will be posted on the above link before the end of this week.)

Also, please don't hesitate to contact me directly if you have any questions about this stuff: [email protected]

If you want to get more direct info on what the Council is doing 'like' at www.facebook.com/GulfCouncil

Your Chum, 
Emily


----------



## Jolly Roger (May 21, 2004)

Feds have done nothing but screw offshore recreational fishermen, trust nothing they say.

TPWD needs to manage Texas offshore fishermen. Enough of this one size fits all approach, and enough of big government telling us what is best. Feds have failed miserably.


----------



## Capt. Blood (Apr 1, 2010)

*Do a meaningful stock assessment before more reduction!*

Watched it.... SOS...(not save our sector) Same Ole Stuff!

Until the feds do a *meaningfu*l stock assessment (and take into account the fish on rigs AND quit destroying EFH) then they continue to GUESS and err on the side of screwing the fishermen. Sorry im kind of cynical, but its nothing new and public comments over the past 15 years in which i have followed participated in this fishery has been an absolute waste of time. Roy Crabtree et al will continue to do exactly whatever there enviro handers dictate! Glad i sold my boat and and bought golf clubs.


----------



## TXFishin (Apr 26, 2010)

X2



Jolly Roger said:


> Feds have done nothing but screw offshore recreational fishermen, trust nothing they say.
> 
> TPWD needs to manage Texas offshore fishermen. Enough of this one size fits all approach, and enough of big government telling us what is best. Feds have failed miserably.


----------



## GETREEL (Oct 15, 2010)

Wow, those are some great choices. How about 1 fish per boat all year long, that would be just dandy! I guess we sholdn't complain, were lucky we have state :texasflag snapper all year. Whats next regs on mahi and wahoo too, got to love the feds.:headknock


----------



## TXFishin (Apr 26, 2010)

The way Red Snapper are being spoon-fed, limits are this big mystery and no one knows until midnight, the fact that I can only keep 2 snapper during a very short season yet go to a fish market and buy 1,000 lbs of snapper fillets or as much as I can afford (why not apply same caught or bought), and no long term static conservation plan, all these speak louder than any words that they just do not want people catching red snapper and there is too much money involved.

It is obvious it is $$$ related other wise there would be a long term plan, othersie if they are so endangered just allow no keep for 2 to 5 years and spend the tax money on better things as opposed to the millions spent on snapper reg enforcement, or offer red snapper tags which would allow better management of the species and prevent culling out the smaller ones when a bigger one was caught, etc.., the list of logical ways to manage this could go on for ever

Small companies have done the same thing, instead of firing an employee they don't like and having to pay unemployment, the manager harass the employee until he quits or finds another job, same thing is going on for gulf fishing regs, they can't just say no red snapper for 5 years afraid of the response, so lets make it so convoluted that every gives up


----------



## TXFishin (Apr 26, 2010)

It is basically just moving a "puddle" around without surveying the land, look at trigger fish, a lot of head-boats, because of the snapper restrictions, started running trigger fish trips and now they are out of season and soon to be added to the endangered list and spoon-fed out

I know some people that moved to Texas to get away from things like this, and the translated saying goes "How did the camel get in the tint, he first stuck his nose in", well I think we are way past the nose



GETREEL said:


> Wow, those are some great choices. How about 1 fish per boat all year long, that would be just dandy! I guess we sholdn't complain, were lucky we have state :texasflag snapper all year. Whats next regs on mahi and wahoo too, got to love the feds.:headknock


----------



## Empty Pockets CC (Feb 18, 2009)

I've said it once and I'll say it again...They can't write us all tickets AND I haven't caught a red snapper in federal waters in quite a while...
You can only follow the rules until they become unreasonable. "You can't spit on a sidewalk in Texas." Ya....right...


----------



## williamcr (Aug 8, 2006)

1 fish for 3 anglers?
This has gotten out of control.


----------



## ronhamilton (Mar 2, 2011)

As of this writing there are only 13 comments on the council's page. And they are leaning toward option 2 which means they dont buy the gas. They are not going to read the 2coolers comments here. Hit the button and leave a comment its like voting. Remember what happened last election.


----------



## williamcr (Aug 8, 2006)

I guess if you don't have any friends then you don't get any snapper


Sent from William's iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bjd76 (Jan 12, 2008)

*Thanks for the Opportunity*

As you are well aware, this is an emotional issue with us recreational fisherman for a number of good reasons. Thanks for producing the video and pointing us to where we can voice our opinion.

Fellow fisherman, post your comments on the site. If you've taken the time to object and post here about everything that's wrong, do it where it counts - on their web site. Put it on public record!


----------



## fishtruck (Aug 9, 2004)

Are you F U C K I N G KIDDING ME! I don't even fish for those baitfish but you are KILLING the charter [email protected]!?!?!? And giving it all up to the commercial guys. Three people on the boat and you can keep ONE small fish???? You have been HAD!

Rob C


----------



## Always-Gone-Fishing (Feb 20, 2006)

Rob, as you are well aware of they aren't very good for marlin but they do alright as strip for swords. Pretty good cerviche on the way to the pointy fish grounds. And butterflied they produce some good grouper sammiches. But tell us how you really feel and don't hedge any of your explicitives 

Give a man a snapper and he'll eat for a day - teach a man how to butterfly a snapper and he'll eat for a week.

Carry on,

AGF


----------



## Jcopp71 (Aug 30, 2011)

Am I the only one surprised by their commercial assessment? It seems to me the commercial guys would have a much larger catch estimate. I don't but the fact they only catch 51%..... Am I missing something here? I guess the deck is stacked.


----------



## Jcopp71 (Aug 30, 2011)

Just posted my two cents on their site, took five minutes to tell them they are idiots, you can read other comments there, it is interesting what the other areas of the gulf, Alabama, and Florida fishermen are saying. Go check it out.


----------



## TXFishin (Apr 26, 2010)

Only 20 comments so far? Come on people speak up!!

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Atgbk2rxQkqhdHByby1ad0F0THZiMGtoVTdIVDJ6cWc#gid=0


----------



## ROBALO23 (Jul 7, 2011)

As mentioned above one fish would kill the Charter guys!! Not that I care.... This should get interesting .


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

Actually, it was one of the charter guys on the Council who voted FOR 1 fish - Johnny Greene I believe. 

He felt more days were more important.

He is one of the "recreational" reps on the Council.


----------



## capt mike (Sep 8, 2005)

Appreciate your concern there, Robalo 23 . Who do you reckon I am taking out there ? Answer is folks just like you that don't own a boat . Mike Nugent


----------



## whos your daddy (Jun 2, 2004)

capt mike said:


> Appreciate your concern there, Robalo 23 . Who do you reckon I am taking out there ? Answer is folks just like you that don't own a boat . Mike Nugent


Thank you Capt.Mike , you beat me to it. What a rediculous statement. People who book a charter trip more times than not depend on us to take them offshore so they also can enjoy our resource. Be glad you are fortunate to afford your own boat and can go offshore. Some folks are not that fortunate. I for one am tired of this whole red snapper fiasco. I have lost a few friends over this whole red snapper mess recently, but not anymore.


----------



## TXFishin (Apr 26, 2010)

It went from 20 to 26 comments on the Gulf Council's website?

Am I one of the few that find it intelectually insulting to think that they expect the general public to believe that the Red Snapper regulations make sense?


----------



## MMMMGOOD (Aug 16, 2005)

More fishing days is more important than more fish on each trip....Am I missing something here...Since when did spending say $400 x 4 trips =$1600.00 become better than $400.00 to catch the same 4 fish the first time become better..........This is just stupid logic......I know the limit of 4 doesn't exist I was just using an even number as an example.......


----------



## Kenner21 (Aug 25, 2005)

hilton said:


> Actually, it was one of the charter guys on the Council who voted FOR 1 fish - Johnny Greene I believe.
> 
> He felt more days were more important.
> 
> He is one of the "recreational" reps on the Council.


There is a charter captain sitting on the council as a recreational rep? That is ludicrous. Who else is "representing" the recs?


----------



## TXFishin (Apr 26, 2010)

I try not to justify the cost of a fishing trip based on the amount of fish i put in the box, if I liked to eat fish that much, i could just sell the boat, 50,000, and spend and average of $300 a month at a good fish market and have more fresh fish than I could eat and never have to worry about weather, regulations, maintenance, issues, you know the list 

I try to go out every decent day i can regardless of what is in season during the summer months, so season length does not mater to me as much I guess, but in general a shorter season reduces the odds of weather, work, other obstacles all lining up to allow a day to go out, this is what happened last season with all the 25+ wind, and they said because of this not many boats were going out as expected so they added an extra snapper season weekend or something, and now saying the quota has been exceeded?

I still think the best solution would be snapper tags, use the short 6 week season as a base or formula using their logic, and lets say you had good weather and went out both Saturday and Sunday for the entire season, that would be 24 red snapper? So just issue 24 red snapper tags a year, like the red fish tag, and when the fish is boxed you have to tag it with the date and length of the fish on it to prevent culling, and then if you want to participate in the conservation efforts you could mail the tags back to the fishery management council and they would be able to have a much more accurate and granular picture of how the actual population is doing with minimal resources involved.

Wild life is not a commodity that can be managed by the pound like gold, rice or beans, it is the quantity and quality of the fish and their life cycle in relation to their environment and to ensure the proper ratio is mainted is what conservation is about. Environmental changes need to also be considered, as global climate changes the wild life follows, certain wild life that used to exist only in a particular areas start showing up in areas they never existed and vice-versa


----------



## ROBALO23 (Jul 7, 2011)

Mike and Who's yours daddy I got a boat and I love catching those STATE water snaps. Anybody who makes money off a resource like you two is why were in this mess. So enjoy yalls one snap a year...!!!


----------



## Wahoo Man (May 21, 2004)

ROBALO23 said:


> Mike and Who's yours daddy I got a boat and I love catching those STATE water snaps. Anybody who makes money off a resource like you two is why were in this mess. So enjoy yalls one snap a year...!!!


Robalo23,

It's easy to make comments about people if you don't even know them. I have meet Mark many times back in the tournament days and I have talked to Mike many times on the issues of our fisheries. These guys have more concern about our fisheries then you could imagine. So if you don't have something good for the topic "shut the ****up. All we are looking for is a fair and manageble way to do what we all love to do. This isn't us against them. It's us against the idiots that make the regulations. Try doing your part and you'll feel alot better about it.

Andy

P.S. I'm a rec fisherman just like most on this board.


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

What Wahoo Man said...x2.

Back to the subject at hand;

The federal government has no authority to tell states what to do in the territorial waters - the proposed "regional" management is nothing more than a way for Roy to punish those states who refuse to mirror federal regs in their state waters.

What decisions would be made "regionally" Emily?

Would the regional managers have control over assessing the fish in their region? No, I didn't think so.

Would the regional managers have control setting the quota for their region? No, I didn't think so.

Would the regional managers have control over determining how many fishing days are in their season? No, I didn't think so.

Exactly what are the supposed advantages for regionalization as currently proposed Emily?

Thanks in advance,

Capt. Thomas J. Hilton


----------



## BIG PAPPA (Apr 1, 2008)

*Hhhhmmmmmmm*

When Snapper are Outlawed, Only Outlaws will have Snapper..


----------



## ROBALO23 (Jul 7, 2011)

Look here Wahoo man tell me how the Charter guys are trying to help us rec guys that own boats. Ever heard of SOS???? So you shut the &$% up.


----------



## capt mike (Sep 8, 2005)

Robalo 23, I can understand your frustration but Port Aransas Boatmen Assoc has been spending time and money opposing Sector Separation and Catch Shares from the Git Go . Try not to paint everyone with the same brush .


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

Robalo - Capt Mike has nothing to do with SOS Amigo, and in fact has been fighting the good fight against catch shares / sector separation.


----------



## Empty Pockets CC (Feb 18, 2009)

BIG PAPPA said:


> When Snapper are Outlawed, Only Outlaws will have Snapper..


If you are not an outlaw by now they have already taken from you.


----------



## ROBALO23 (Jul 7, 2011)

Except my apology then..... I shuda said SOS guys in my first post. One guy on a favorite radio show of mine really ****** me off.


----------



## Tom Andrews (Jun 7, 2006)

Emily ....I have spent considerable time and money attending these "scoping" meetings and have long wondered exactly how the term "scoping" is defined by the council. People like Jim Smarr and Tom Hilton have spent countless hours interacting with the council with results being a shortened season and reduced limits every year. Direct testomony as to the abundant red snapper stocks (here in Texas) seem to have fallen on deaf ears.When Snapper are seen foaming on the surface starving to death due to the council managements efforts and we see a reduction on quotas logic would dictate something is wrong.Offers to take council members offshore to see for themselves so far unanswered. So the questions are ..How much consideration is given to the public comment and direct testimony? How is scoping defined by the council ?Are these meetings required by law and merly a formality not affecting outcome? Does the law require updating stock assesments anually before voting? As council members are they permitted under the law to interact with lobbyists?


----------



## fishtruck (Aug 9, 2004)

"As council members are they permitted under the law to interact with lobbyists??

I bet so! And even if it doesn't I bet they do.


Y'all are being SCAMMED! 

Rob C


----------



## En Fuego (Jul 26, 2006)

As for the council, they do not care what we have to say at all - it's a farce - it will be zero in 2014 and a completely protected resource for the commercial sector.

To that end, those people who were on the dock with us rec boat owners and chose to try an end-around with the SOS instead of getting on the right side of this WITH us, I think it would be hysterical to see you SOS guys lose your arse and go completely bankrupt.

I will personally sponsor a keg party at the GYB docks for every SOS Charter Captain that goes out of business as a result of this. Greedy ****tards.


----------



## BFTMASTER (Aug 25, 2009)

Just submitted my comment.

May just be a formality, but it is what I can do, other than eat those Red SOB's offshore.


----------



## Ducksmasher (Jul 21, 2005)

Alternative 4: 0 fish per 4 angler limit with a 120 day season makes perfect sense to the council!

I truly believe will see this level of absurdity.. Those who want to catch snapper will just be outlaws. Is outlaw really that bad of a label? Look what it did for Merle, Waylon, Jhonny, Kris, and Willie! Sorry, but when the regulations become so restrictive they limit the pursuit of happiness, I believe we all know what we gotta do.


----------



## Loco Pato (Jun 22, 2004)

En Fuego said:


> As for the council, they do not care what we have to say at all - it's a farce - it will be zero in 2014 and a completely protected resource for the commercial sector.
> 
> To that end, those people who were on the dock with us rec boat owners and chose to try an end-around with the SOS instead of getting on the right side of this WITH us, I think it would be hysterical to see you SOS guys lose your arse and go completely bankrupt.
> 
> I will personally sponsor a keg party at the GYB docks for every SOS Charter Captain that goes out of business as a result of this. Greedy ****tards.


 With the record tourism on the island doubt youll see many bank rupt charter boats and since all the fed permitted CFH boats in the GYB supported SOS your wish would be a tough call. Put the keg in front of the two 36 Contenders and the 42 Bertram in the first three slips on your dock next time you go to your boat neighbor as they aint going anywhere snapper or no snapper **** Tard.


----------



## Mike Jennings (Oct 11, 2005)

En Fuego said:


> As for the council, they do not care what we have to say at all - it's a farce - it will be zero in 2014 and a completely protected resource for the commercial sector.
> 
> To that end, those people who were on the dock with us rec boat owners and chose to try an end-around with the SOS instead of getting on the right side of this WITH us, I think it would be hysterical to see you SOS guys lose your arse and go completely bankrupt.
> 
> I will personally sponsor a keg party at the GYB docks for every SOS Charter Captain that goes out of business as a result of this. Greedy ****tards.


The problem with that is that you can't bankrupt us wit a Zero Red Snapper Season so enjoy you Keg. In light of it all that has happened I am seeing record years ! Unlike you I wish nothing on us all but prosperity and calm seas ! Meanwhile I'll keep fishing for a living while the rest cry on the interweb! See everyone in Mobile. Capt. Mike Jenning One of the original authors of SOS and President of the Charter Fishermans Association


----------



## Mike Jennings (Oct 11, 2005)

What seems the most ironic is that had we done nothing we would all still be in the same situation we are now. So enjoy your 27 day Red Snapper season


----------



## Ducksmasher (Jul 21, 2005)

Mr H, your myopic view will have far reaching consequences, mark my words.


----------



## Mike Jennings (Oct 11, 2005)

En Fuego let me put it this way. If you want a prime example of just how inefective you are with your childish post on this Forum and how little you influence the fishery by wishing I'll will on others. I offer this challenge . PUT ME OUT OF BUSINESS AND I WILL BUY THE KEG. My clients don't care about your politics or mine . All they care about is catching fish and that we will continue to provide. So step up or shut up! Open Challenge hot shot and I am the only one that has anything to lose here. So show everyone on the board just how big a ole boy you are.


----------



## Capt'nDanG (Mar 20, 2006)

I can second what loco pato says. In Galveston we are extremely lucky to have such a great jetty system that we can keep busy. 27 days sure is going to suck. Guess I'm going to have to learn how to catch other species rather than just snappers to keep my books full.


----------



## Ducksmasher (Jul 21, 2005)

Mike Jennings said:


> En Fuego let me put it this way. If you want a prime example of just how inefective you are with your childish post on this Forum and how little you influence the fishery by wishing I'll will on others. I offer this challenge . PUT ME OUT OF BUSINESS AND I WILL BUY THE KEG. My clients don't care about your politics or mine . All they care about is catching fish and that we will continue to provide. So step up or shut up! Open Challenge hot shot and I am the only one that has anything to lose here. So show everyone on the board just how big a ole boy you are.


ironic post is ironic..


----------



## BlueBound (Aug 19, 2005)

*Hysterical*



En Fuego said:


> As for the council, they do not care what we have to say at all - it's a farce - it will be zero in 2014 and a completely protected resource for the commercial sector.
> 
> To that end, those people who were on the dock with us rec boat owners and chose to try an end-around with the SOS instead of getting on the right side of this WITH us, I think it would be hysterical to see you SOS guys lose your arse and go completely bankrupt.
> 
> I will personally sponsor a keg party at the GYB docks for every SOS Charter Captain that goes out of business as a result of this. Greedy ****tards.


I have fished with almost all of the best charter boats at GYB and personally know most of their families. So, to say that it would be "hysterical" for them to go out of business is a very bold statement.

There are always 2 sides to every debate and if you have skin in the game, make your voice heard. Bashing charter boat operators on a public internet forum may be a way for you to blow off steam but, as Mike and Loco Pato have said, the charter boat business is going strong so don't plan your keg party anytime soon. If there is one, than I'll personally serve the beer.


----------



## BlueBound (Aug 19, 2005)

*Question*



En Fuego said:


> As for the council, they do not care what we have to say at all - it's a farce - it will be zero in 2014 and a completely protected resource for the commercial sector.
> 
> To that end, those people who were on the dock with us rec boat owners and chose to try an end-around with the SOS instead of getting on the right side of this WITH us, I think it would be hysterical to see you SOS guys lose your arse and go completely bankrupt.
> 
> I will personally sponsor a keg party at the GYB docks for every SOS Charter Captain that goes out of business as a result of this. Greedy ****tards.


En Fuego,

Let me ask you a question. Would it be "hysterical" if your company went completely bankrupt?


----------



## Jcopp71 (Aug 30, 2011)

Mr Hilton, correct me if I am wrong, I read the fisheries brief on the regional management and it looked like it might be a good thing, although it was hard to read because of the scientist techno speak that is in it. The report seemed to say the regional idea is spawned because they believe the biomass in the western gulf to be stronger than the eastern gulf? I thought that was a good idea, where am I wrong?


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

Jcopp71 said:


> Mr Hilton, correct me if I am wrong, I read the fisheries brief on the regional management and it looked like it might be a good thing, although it was hard to read because of the scientist techno speak that is in it. The report seemed to say the regional idea is spawned because they believe the biomass in the western gulf to be stronger than the eastern gulf? I thought that was a good idea, where am I wrong?


I don't know and that's why I have been asking the same questions that nobody wants to hear, much less address.

Yes, the biomass is larger in the western Gulf - why? The thousands of oil platforms have come together to unwittingly create the world's largest de facto artificial reef which supports this biomass.

You would think the regulators would acknowledge this fact and not only mitigate the loss of habitat associated with those structures with an aggressive artificial reefing plan, but at least preserve some of the older rigs that have very complex ecosystems built of a half a century of growth.

But, they won't.

Most of the commercial red snapper IFQ owners live in the eastern Gulf but I believe their boats fish in the western Gulf. In my view, Texas recreational fishermen have been getting the shaft for years, and regionalization would only exacerbate that.

Texas, if managed by its own region, would automatically be fishing fewer fishing days in the federal EEZ due to our year-round state water season. Of course, we could relinquish this 365 day access to our state water fish in order to gain maybe 5 or 6 days per year to fish in the federal EEZ. That's a LOT to give up, especially when noting what Mont has been saying for a long time - the end game is to totally close the federal EEZ recreational snapper fishery. What happens then?

If you look at Texas as its own region, another issue pops out; according to the NMFS figures, Texas recreational fishermen account for about +_10% of the Gulf red snapper TAC - let's say 500,000 pounds. I don't have the commercial IFQ landings handy, but I would venture to guess that Texas offshore waters account for about 33%, or about 1,500,000 pounds. So here, you have a region that has an allocation % of 25% recreational, 75% commercial. Is that how we want our Texas red snapper harvested? Well, that issue is not on the table, is it?

I'm listening.....

Capt. Thomas J. Hilton


----------



## Swells (Nov 27, 2007)

hilton said:


> Yes, the biomass is larger in the western Gulf - why? The thousands of oil platforms have come together to unwittingly create the world's largest de facto artificial reef which supports this biomass.


You made some good point but you're only talking about half of Texas here, since the lower coast doesn't have anymore offshore platforms. Why does everyone forget about all the snapper between Port A and Port Isabel? It's freaking Red Snapper City.

Not arguing with you, but the rigs are thick off the Louisiana and upper Texas coast and not down here, so that can't explain the great numbers of red snapper down south here. It is so thick with snapper and shark that every day the TPWD and Coast Guard have to run down the illegal Mexican _longas_ from Playa Bagdad.

Some speculate that maybe our red snapper came up from Mexico rather than from the Mississippi Bight, although genetics hasn't helped differentiate them. But it ain't the artificial reefs or oil rigs and that's a fact. We just have more hard bottom, live bottom, and rocks. Just take a look at Rik's book for numbers. I don't know if he even got all of Bill Fisher's "shrimper numbers" in there.

Any regional fish manager could tell you that, not that regionalism will fix much as you say. Sorry to be biased but I live down here on SPI and I know the history. Not many snapper IFQ permits were issued down here because a lot of mom & pop operations simply went out of business, and few had any historical catch records prior to 2005.

When you talk about "Texas" though, let's talk about all of it, please sir.


----------



## Jcopp71 (Aug 30, 2011)

The System is rigged of course. On the topic of rig removal, I have seen some if the rig removal vessels, but I have heard they take the rigs out with Dynamite? Is that true?


----------



## En Fuego (Jul 26, 2006)

If my business, and yes I own my own business, banded together with others in my industry to try to take a publicly owned resource and sequester it off for our personal gain at the expense of everyone else, then I would not expect for anyone to cry me big crocodile tears if I went belly up.

I didn't say it WOULD make you go out of business, but you guys made your bed with this SOS play, and now you you have the audacity to act all pissy when you get called out on it?!?!?

You SOS guys are the biggest friggin' hypocrites on the planet. We have all seen you whining for the last few years about how absolutely devastating the reduction in snapper catches have been to your business, SO MUCH SO THAT YOU BANDED TOGETHER TO TRY TO CURTAIL AND/OR ELIMINATE RECS' ACCESS TO THE RESOURCE. So pardon me if I take what you have said to it's logical conclusion.

Just because you CHOSE to make your living off the water does not mean for ONE SECOND that you are entitled to greater access to the resources than anyone else.

There are NUMEROUS charter captains, GOOD charter captains, that chose NOT to go the SOS route, so I am NOT painting all For Hire sector guys with the same brush.

I stand by what I said, and I will make no apologies unless I am somehow inaccurate in my understanding of the SOS stance.

If I am wrong, I am man enough to eat my words, as I have done before on this forum.

So tell me SOS guys, did you or did you not try to limit access to the Red Snapper fishery by the rec sector for your own benefit?


----------



## Loco Pato (Jun 22, 2004)

No Andy It would increase access for rec anglers especially the majority of rec anglers in this country whom dont own their own offshore boats, something only a few of us have the ability to own. Name one GYB Fed permitted captain that does not support SOS, Sector Seperation ? (that means owns a CFH permit) And that is who could even vote if it ever came down to a referendum. In fact most of my fishing customers own bayboats and belong to the CCA and support what we have been doing for the last few years, yes i do a poll and get them to sign support sheets. As far a privatizing any public resource..I cant even keep a reef fish on my charters only the priv rec fishing public can keep them thus they reap the benefit of any new CFH system ( we would do a pilot first anyhow to see if it had merit). SOS was always about better data collection and a sep managment system for charter boats and as you can see on this blog lots of complaining and no one agreeing to do something that will work so we decided to find something that would work for us. At least Hilton shows up at the meetings and pitches his plan but none of yall are there to support him..Night Andy..BTW all the GYB capts enjoyed your ****Tard comment in your above post.


----------



## ROBALO23 (Jul 7, 2011)

Scott Hickman Stop avoiding the question !!!! What would Sos do for the thousands of mosquito fleeters like me who have a boat???? And please quit saying you need a 100-200 thousand dollar boat to catch snapper thats such a crock!!!


----------



## En Fuego (Jul 26, 2006)

Its a self serving contention to say that SOS provides more access to the resource. Individuals without a boat already have that access to the resource if they so choose to hire a charter. EVEN IF the SOS guys got more days of access than the recs, I would contend that the sheer numbers of private boat owners taking friends and family on occasion throughout the summer would by far eclipse the number of people who fish Red Snapper via charter.

The SOS guys just thought they could do and end around so that they and the commercials would be the only one who had access, and in order to fish for Snapper your only choice would be to buy it in the store or book a charter.

As for the better data collection, that is a red herring. If the NMFS wanted better data, they could get much better data than you and the other SOS captains could provide - they don't want better data - they are quite content serving their own agenda with data they acknowledge and fully accept as flawed.

As I sit here and type this I realize what a dumb argument this whole thing is all the way around. Any snapper that I land is inside 9 miles anyway where I can keep 4. Other than that, they don't make the best Ling, Mahi or Yellowfin bait. For me it is a matter of principle, not practicality.

As for referring to you SOS guys as ****tards, I agree that that crossed the line, and for THAT, and THAT ALONE, I apologize.

Besides that, I stand by what I say until I'm shown the error in my thinking.

Night Scott - you know me - I live to entertain.


----------



## broadonrod (Feb 26, 2010)

En Fuego said:


> Its a self serving contention to say that SOS provides more access to the resource. Individuals without a boat already have that access to the resource if they so choose to hire a charter. EVEN IF the SOS guys got more days of access than the recs, I would contend that the sheer numbers of private boat owners taking friends and family on occasion throughout the summer would by far eclipse the number of people who fish Red Snapper via charter.
> 
> The SOS guys just thought they could do and end around so that they and the commercials would be the only one who had access, and in order to fish for Snapper your only choice would be to buy it in the store or book a charter.
> 
> ...


You are the man ! Get Tight Sucka! Tell them how it is bro.... Red snapper and blue marlin are way to easy to catch anyway ... See ya soon on the big pond bro! Bamb !!!!


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

En Fuego,
You are right on target for the most part.

For Hickman to claim that charter boats provide access for the majority of rec anglers in this country whom dont own their own offshore boats is absolutely false and he knows it. It's just EDF propaganda that has been scripted for their corporate shills to splash out there as the supposed truth.

Truth is that neither Hickman nor his cohorts at the Charter Fisherman's Association, or their parent corporation, The Environmental Defense Fund, can provide one scintilla of documentation to show the number of offshore anglers fishing, at all, much less those fishing on cfh vs private rec vessels. That is a fact.

It's just scripted sound bites that make them sound more important than they really are. The recreational fishermen who fish on CFH boats are no more, no less important than any other recreational angler, nor are they to be provided unfair and inequitable access to the resource over other recreational anglers.

As far as privatizing the resource, just refer to this quote from the EDF catch share progress report:

*"The work we are doing with a core group of for-hire recreational fishermen, whose movement we helped develop and continue to support, called SOS (Save Our Sector), will be important to continue to move catch shares forward in the for-hire sector of the recreational red snapper fishery. SOS now has over 200 supporters across all five Gulf states. This membership, which includes boat owners and crew members, reflects a significant portion of the 1,100 licenses in the for-hire fleet. The group's work was a key factor in the Gulf Council's October decision to consider separation of the recreational sector into for-hire and private angler sectors in the generic Annual Catch Limit/Accountability Measures amendment, which will be subject to public hearings in either December or January and likely voted on next summer. The amendment will form the foundation for a for-hire IFQ and harvest tags for private anglers."*

Hey Hickman - there it is (again) straight from the whore's, uh, I mean horse's mouth...*FOR-HIRE IFQs...rights based fisheries management*...etc. etc. Enough of the BS Scott - it's abundantly clear, and has been for some time what you jokers are attempting to do despite all of your misleading statements.

For all of you who think fish tags (harvest tags) are a good idea, you may want to re-think your position, as that is the EDF plan for private recreational fishermen. Let me repeat: * The Environmental Defense Fund is NOT your friend.* Anyone - please provide one instance where EDF has done ANYTHING to actually help the private recreational angler. Hint: you won't find anything.

The answer is an honest stock assessment that counts the fish around artificial structures combined with an honest accounting of effort/landings - we can, and should be fishing at least 6 months out of the year for snapper, right now.

Remember, this is not just about snapper - it's about EVERY federally managed species that swims out in the Gulf of Mexico.

Capt. Thomas J. Hilton


----------



## En Fuego (Jul 26, 2006)

_*SOS now has over 200 supporters across all five Gulf states. This membership, which includes boat owners and crew members, reflects a significant portion of the 1,100 licenses in the for-hire fleet. *_

Wow - so less than 20% support - and they are bragging about it!?!?!

You figure EACH of the 1,100 licensed captains have AT LEAST one crew member, then the translation is *over 90% of the licensed For Hire captains on the Gulf Coast realized what a %[email protected]&$ move it was to support sector separation, and decided that they wanted no part of it.*

The thing these SOS geniuses don't realize is that through their self-serving greed, they played right into the other side's hand - divide and conquer.

Smart - _REAL_ smart.


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

Swells said:


> You made some good point but you're only talking about half of Texas here, since the lower coast doesn't have anymore offshore platforms. Why does everyone forget about all the snapper between Port A and Port Isabel? It's freaking Red Snapper City.
> 
> Not arguing with you, but the rigs are thick off the Louisiana and upper Texas coast and not down here, so that can't explain the great numbers of red snapper down south here. It is so thick with snapper and shark that every day the TPWD and Coast Guard have to run down the illegal Mexican _longas_ from Playa Bagdad.
> 
> ...


Sammie,
You have absolutely no idea whether or not the snapper offshore of Mansfield/SPI aren't there as a result of artificial reefs/oil platforms, so please don't claim that as fact.

Could be a similar situation as what they are experiencing off of the NW Florida coast off of Tampa where they are enjoying an influx of red snapper where they had none before. Where did they come from? The artificial reefing areas offshore of Alabama/FL panhandle - storms such as Ivan and Katrina, as Dr. Shipp says, "reshuffle the deck", re-distributing the fish to areas that have none, greatly expanding their territory.

Capt. Thomas J. Hilton

PS - Hickman always makes fun of my math, but strangely never makes fun of Crabtree/Strelcheck's fuzzy math that is causing all of this mess we are experiencing now. His statements also claim that the CFH vessels provide access to the majority of Americans, yet the feds' math shows that the *private rec vessels land about TWICE as much poundage as cfh vessels*. So, on one hand, private recs are a small part of the equation when convenient to say so, then on the other hand, they are a large part of the problem due to "being out of control", when it's convenient to make that argument. What a crock of BS.


----------



## Swells (Nov 27, 2007)

According to SEDAR-15, the red snapper population (biomass) crashed in the 70s and 80s when the platform and rig counts in the Gulf were the highest. Now that's weird, huh?

Snapper biomass increasing despite hundreds of platforms being cut down? Could it be? :question:


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

this is the same sedar that says the snapper are in trouble today.

enough said.


----------



## capt mike (Sep 8, 2005)

The main thing that seems to be kicking our butts in all this madness is the ever increasing average size of harvested Red Snapper . I know it goes against the established ways of doing stock assesments but at some point I wish they would try to step outside the box and try to use some kind of value system that combines weight and numbers instead of just weight . Just reading my own thoughts shows it to be clear as mud , but look at it this way . Under a 4 million lb tac , with a 2 lb average weight, as an example, how many fish were being harvested ? Many more head of fish than today, wouldn't you say ? Yet the stock continued to grow and prosper . Why couldn't the average weight be discounted and a target number of Red Snapper to be harvested used instead ? There has to be a way , instead of this incessant butting of heads against walls . I would accept any reason for not being able to do something like this as long as it isn't the old "we've never done it this way"
ploy. Hope everyone goes to either the Texas City hearing this evening or Corpus tomorrow . Mike Nugent


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

Good points Mike. One point to remember here is that the increased size of fish is just one factor leading to our butts getting kicked - the other, more profound factor is SUPPOSED catch rates. Even when you factor in the larger size of fish, the NMFS claims that we are increasing our effort (effort compensation) and being more successful catching (catch rates) resulting in 4-5 times the number of fish landed per season day per person than in pre-MSA reauthorization times.

The BIG problem with that scenario is that it flies in the face of virtually all other indicators which show a sharp, downward trend in offshore fishing participation. Even the NMFS' own website shows about a 40% DECREASE in recreational offshore fishing effort since 2006. (See enclosed graphic from the NMFS portal). Here's the link in case you would like to do your own queries; http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st1/recreational/queries/

What makes Gulf of Mexico red snapper fishermen so unique in that they supposedly INCREASE their effort exponentially in order to be able to harvest the poundage that the NMFS claims when their own figures show a marked downward trend across the board, across the Gulf?

There needs to be an investigation into this apparent, appalling inconsistency which is causing so much harm to our Gulf coastal communities.

Since the commercial red snapper fishery sells their fish by the pound, they should be managed by the pound.

Since the recreational red snapper fishery has a daily bag limit (number of fish per day), they should be regulated by the number of fish, just like other fishing regulations and wildlife venues such as deer, quail, and duck hunting.

Again, the Gulf of Mexico recreational red snapper fishermen are managed differently than other offshore fishermen, such as those who fish for tuna, wahoo, dorado, etc. which are ALL managed by the FISH.

Just another example of how the system is rigged AGAINST the Gulf of Mexico recreational red snapper fisherman.

Capt. Thomas J. Hilton


----------



## hangON and watch this :) (Jun 10, 2010)

that's CRAZY, one fish...SERIOUSLY!!!!


----------



## whos your daddy (Jun 2, 2004)

I do my best thinking while sitting in the deer stand. Well this past weekend in west texas I did some thinking. I started off as a recreational fisherman years ago. Spent alot of time on the water learning on my own. For the last few years, I have been a charter captain. I love this job. Its not my main source of income though. I have a regular job. I charter on weekends and weekdays if the customer wants to go offshore during the week. I usually stay booked every weekend in the summer. I have many freinds who run a charter business as thier living. Its a hard living for sure. Therfore I understand thier stance. The business put food on thier tables, sends thier kids to college, etc. Our daughter recently discovered she loves to offshore fish. She even checks bouyweather on a weekly basis on her cell phone to check the seas, she is 10 years old. I have had many of my friends ask me what my stance is on this red snapper fiasco. My first statement was that I support the Sector Allocation/Separation movement. Well after thinking about this over the weekend, I have come to the conclusion that I need to fight for my daughters future in securing a fishery that she will be able to enjoy when she gets older. I am a recreational fisherman at heart. Thats where I started and I never forget where I come from. I hope that the government wakes up and changes the system, but does anyone have faith in our government anymore? We also operate 3 sucessful offshore fishing tournaments annually in Matagorda and Sargent. We rely on recreational fisherman to come out and have the chance of catching some good fish and win alot of prize money thanks to some outstanding sponsors. I am a current member of the CFA. But tomorrow, I will request my name be taken off thier website and I will resign my membership. I have lost some good friends over this issue in the past few months. Its time to mend fences and fight for whats right.


----------



## Wad_Slinger (Jun 25, 2012)

*Would a tag system work*

Just curious if a tag program of some scientific nature would work? Like a deer tagging system. example 12 tags per person.


----------



## Sabine Flounder Pounder (Jun 15, 2011)

It's just like the lottery guys, if you don't play, you difinitely won't win. The council has asked for input from the recreational fishermen and what have they received? Not very much interest is what they are seeing. I commend Captain Tom Hilton for the long fight that he has fought through the years, but gentlemen, he can't do it alone, out of the 100s to 1000s of private recreational fishermen in the Houston/Galveston area ( excluding guides or other charter boat captains) only two showed up at last nights meeting and they drove over from Orange. I heard that there were some good ideas that the council is considering, but if no one shows any interest it may just end up being a good thought. They are admitting that their system is flawed and not working and are basically asking for input from the guys that are out on the pond fishing.

Texas has one more chance tonight at the Corpus meeting, and I encourage everyone that can, please attend that meeting. I love to fish offshore but the way it is now it's not worth the expense to go out there and possibly there is room for change if enough interest is shown from us.

Here's a few things that were mentioned:

1. Dividing the Gulf into three management regions and Texas as being one.

2. Letting the state regulate the Red Snapper out to 200 miles ( now I love that Idea)

3. When issuing tags was mentioned, one of the meeting leaders wanted contact info. from the man, desiring for feedback, at a later time.

My son attended the meeting and he came out feeling more positive than negative.


I know for years, we had to swallow what they threw at us, but maybe this time we may have a chance at some positive changes.

Hopefully Captain Tom Hilton was there and if so, please give us your thoughts on the meeting.

:headknock :headknock :headknock


----------



## mredman1 (Feb 4, 2007)

*Comments*

I registered my comments.

Mike


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

whos your daddy said:


> I do my best thinking while sitting in the deer stand. Well this past weekend in west texas I did some thinking. I started off as a recreational fisherman years ago. Spent alot of time on the water learning on my own. For the last few years, I have been a charter captain. I love this job. Its not my main source of income though. I have a regular job. I charter on weekends and weekdays if the customer wants to go offshore during the week. I usually stay booked every weekend in the summer. I have many freinds who run a charter business as thier living. Its a hard living for sure. Therfore I understand thier stance. The business put food on thier tables, sends thier kids to college, etc. Our daughter recently discovered she loves to offshore fish. She even checks bouyweather on a weekly basis on her cell phone to check the seas, she is 10 years old. I have had many of my friends ask me what my stance is on this red snapper fiasco. My first statement was that I support the Sector Allocation/Separation movement. Well after thinking about this over the weekend, I have come to the conclusion that I need to fight for my daughters future in securing a fishery that she will be able to enjoy when she gets older. I am a recreational fisherman at heart. Thats where I started and I never forget where I come from. I hope that the government wakes up and changes the system, but does anyone have faith in our government anymore? We also operate 3 sucessful offshore fishing tournaments annually in Matagorda and Sargent. We rely on recreational fisherman to come out and have the chance of catching some good fish and win alot of prize money thanks to some outstanding sponsors. I am a current member of the CFA. But tomorrow, I will request my name be taken off thier website and I will resign my membership. I have lost some good friends over this issue in the past few months. Its time to mend fences and fight for whats right.


Commendable post Capt. Holland! I believe that the government will only change the system when forced to, and hopefully, the wheels are turning in that regard. I hope your daughter can fish offshore for the rest of her life as I also hope for my children.
God bless America,
Capt. Thomas J. Hilton


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

Sabine Flounder Pounder said:


> It's just like the lottery guys, if you don't play, you difinitely won't win. The council has asked for input from the recreational fishermen and what have they received? Not very much interest is what they are seeing. I commend Captain Tom Hilton for the long fight that he has fought through the years, but gentlemen, he can't do it alone, out of the 100s to 1000s of private recreational fishermen in the Houston/Galveston area ( excluding guides or other charter boat captains) only two showed up at last nights meeting and they drove over from Orange. I heard that there were some good ideas that the council is considering, but if no one shows any interest it may just end up being a good thought. They are admitting that their system is flawed and not working and are basically asking for input from the guys that are out on the pond fishing.
> 
> Texas has one more chance tonight at the Corpus meeting, and I encourage everyone that can, please attend that meeting. I love to fish offshore but the way it is now it's not worth the expense to go out there and possibly there is room for change if enough interest is shown from us.
> 
> ...


 Howdy,

I attended the regional management scoping meeting last night in Texas City and of course, it was mostly populated with CFA supporters, Jeff Barger (who is he with now - Ocean Conservancy or EDF?), and a few older guys that I did not recognize.

I believe regionalization is Roy's answer to implementing catch shares in the recreational fishery. Pay attention to some of the input questions - should private anglers and cfh anglers be managed differently? AM's must developed for each region - should there be payback provisions if they exceed their quota? Etc. etc.

I believe the Plan is to provide the opportunity for the different regions to implement catch shares if they desire - divide and conquer by carving up the Gulf and implementing them in regions most populated by pro-catch share captains. Once catch shares are implemented in 1 region, the NMFS will continue to punish the other regions until they say Uncle!

In one respect, we are ALREADY managed regionally; the Gulf Council manages the Gulf REGION, the South Atlantic, Mid Atlantic and NEFMC all manage their own REGIONS. If the Gulf region exceeds its quota, it doesn't affect the other regions, yet in THIS plan, if one region exceeds its quota, ALL of the other regions are affected. This is from the regional management guide; " Under a regional management system, recreational red snapper fishing would close in the entire Gulf when the quota is met, regardless of which regions have harvested their allocation." Just another tool to put the squeeze on us.

I could actually support a regionalization plan if each region was indeed insulated from the actions of other regions, and more importantly, insulated from federal meddling and control. If each region was managed wholly by the state fisheries managers, who performed the assessments for their region, set their quota for that region, set their bag limits/seasons for their region, determined their desired allocation % between recreational/commercial fishing in their region, and developed their own accountability measures for that region - they could still report to the Gulf Council so that the Gulf Council ensures that the overall mandates to protect the fish are met.

Unfortunately, that's not what we have here.

In addition, this regionalization issue is really just a distraction from the *REAL* issue at hand - the total corruption of the biomass data that has reduced our access to a mere fraction of what it should be right now, today. They are wanting us to divvy up the crumbs when in reality, according to Dr. Shipp, we should be enjoying a much larger pie - fishing for 6 or even 8 months and (quote) "not even put a dent in the red snapper population". THAT is what we should be fighting for at this time - not dividing the Gulf or reducing our bag limits to 0.5 fish.

The large pecan pie in the enclosed graphic represents the enormous biomass of fish that actually exists in the Gulf that rightfully and legally belong to ALL of us, and that is being denied to us. The smaller pecan tart, cut into 5 unequal sections, represents what the NMFS wants us to believe to be the size of the biomass and for us to accept the meager crumbs they are offering.

I say no way Roy. It will be quite interesting to see the results of this "benchmark" assessment or to see if is longer a "benchmark" but indeed modified to lesser standard as I have heard will happen.

The other bit of corruption here by the feds is the refusal to account for the number of private rec offshore anglers in a meaningful, accountable fashion. This allows them to over-estimate effort and under-estimate biomass, creating a crisis where none exists, and attempting to justify the implementation of catch shares in the recreational sector.

The answer is an honest stock assessment that counts all of the fish around artificial reefs and oil platforms, and for our 6 month red snapper season to be reinstated immediately. We do have the preeminent red snapper scientist in the Gulf saying that is the answer, and I believe him.

Capt. Thomas J. Hilton


----------



## buzzard bill (Jan 21, 2010)

*Agree With Need For Honest Stock Assessment*

" . . . The answer is an honest stock assessment that counts all of the fish around artificial reefs and oil platforms, and for our 6 month red snapper season to be reinstated immediately. We do have the preeminent red snapper scientist in the Gulf saying that is the answer, and I believe him. . . "

Capt. Thomas J. Hilton

X2 on that answer Tom. Thank you for attending and thanks for the recap of what was discussed.


----------



## Snookered (Jun 16, 2009)

hilton said:


> yet in THIS plan, if one region exceeds its quota, ALL of the other regions are affected. This is from the regional management guide; " Under a regional management system, recreational red snapper fishing would close in the entire Gulf when the quota is met, regardless of which regions have harvested their allocation."
> Capt. Thomas J. Hilton


that's what I'm reading too, which will effectively re-instate the "derby" mentality of recreational fishermen (both private and CFH)...get out there and catch our allocation before another state/region does....and meanwhile grab some of theirs....

not only will it re-instate the "derby", but it will ENSURE that the landing "guesstimates" will exceed the TAC every single year, resulting in less and less days on the water....

I believe Mont when he says the end-game is to stop harvest of federal red snapper in the recreational sector....the current management system has no alternative ending besides that.....

which would imply that the Management System of snapper needs to change, but that would require NMFS to 1)admit their system is flawed, and 2) re-vamp the regulations.....

and all this change is proposed right before the new stock assessment comes out? why the push at this juncture?

I'll be at the one tonight in corpus, asking these questions.....OH! and thanks Tom for the report on the meeting up the coast....
snookered


----------



## Mont (Nov 17, 1998)

I believe we have reached the point of what a Trekie would describe as 
Kobayashi Maru. In other words, the outcome is now independent of anything within our control or anything we do or any way we react to it. For those of us that understand how the only person ever to prevail in that particular test won it, is even more telling. That was done by reprogramming the computer that ran the simulation. Our own real life example in the RS fishery is very similar in that all of what is happening is really happening only on a computer simulation of a fishery. Reality has little, perhaps even nothing, to do with the results that simulation produces. 

I apologize for not being in attendance last night. I literally had personal business that was supposed to take 15 minutes run into over 3 hours of dealing with it, and I won't walk into a meeting after it starts.


----------



## Jolly Roger (May 21, 2004)

freaking great, now I want some pecan pie........got to call the wife before she leaves work.


----------



## Txfishman (Jun 20, 2004)

I was there, 100% recreational, comments on record. Don't think I could deal with myself if I did not at least make an effort to make a difference.

My personal stance is that the Feds have not been successful thus far and they are giving the states a crack of opportunity to possibly influence the process, in my opinion we should jump on it.

The regionalization process outlined is so complex and overwhelming based on what Emily presented, that I just don't see it working out in the long run. The immediacy of the deal is states, like Louisiana, are starting to push back on the Supremacy Clause. Based on discussions last night, if LA insititutes its state water program, the Federal season will lose 12-14 days of fishing based on proposed 27 day season. If a couple more states go this direction, the Fed season goes to ZERO. This is for the entire Gulf not just Louisiana. 

Two resounding themes in the room:

We need an accurate count of the fish and we need recreational accountability. Not sure how either is going to be accomplished, but this circus will not be dampened until we get there (and maybe a less liberal administration in DC).


----------



## Sabine Flounder Pounder (Jun 15, 2011)

Thanks Capt. Tom, I was sure that you would attend the meeting and I totally agree with you and your assessment of the biomass, but what do we do?

At 61 yrs. of age I have fished all of my life, mostly inshore but have been on the big pond throughout my life. I can remember spending 3 days on the pond in the mid 80s and going out 120 miles, yes we caught a few snapper but only on the 3rd day, just couldn't find any Snapper and only fished rigs.
I have been going a few times a year in the last 5 or 6 years and how things have changed. I have had no problem getting my limit in short order, for instance this past season I went out with my son 60 miles to a rock, first drop came up with a 20 lb. Snap. second drop got cut off by a shark, third drop came up with a 15 lb. Snap. in less than an hour we had a 5 man limit of 15 to 20 lb. Snappers all off the first rock that we stopped at, the only reason it took us a while was because we had to drift over the rock then reposition for another drift. Afterwards we went to a nearby rig to try for some Ling or other species, all we could catch off the bottom were Snapper and more Snapper, we caught, vented and released Snapper, till our arms gave out.
How can they say that the stock is depleted to the point that they must restrict us Recs. even more. What do we have to do to get their attention? How do we fight this FIGHT?


----------



## Swells (Nov 27, 2007)

Mont are you saying that the fishery model - the simulation - was cooked to achieve political purposes? Heads would roll is that could be proven.

Tell us more about this.


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

Swells said:


> Mont are you saying that the fishery model - the simulation - was cooked to achieve political purposes? Heads would roll is that could be proven.
> 
> Tell us more about this.


I believe it can and WILL be proven. Apparently there are honorable, high powered attorneys that are looking into the possibility of filing a class action lawsuit based on the preponderance of evidence.

The damages to Gulf coastal communities due to the willful and knowing manipulation of the data to achieve political ends FAR exceed the damages done by the BP oil spill, in my opinion. Orange Beach, Alabama alone has experienced close to a billion dollars in lost revenues since the Hijack.


----------



## williamcr (Aug 8, 2006)

Tom
I hope you are right 


Sent from William's iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## G-2 (Feb 3, 2011)

I just put my comments on there and am very surprised that there are only 57 entries so far. That is not a lot of voices on such a huge problem. We need to get more people to post their/our views.


----------



## jamesjimbooo (Jun 9, 2009)

Where is CCA and all the other organizations we have all dumped our MONEY into to protect our fishing rights???


----------



## Angler 1 (Apr 27, 2005)

Really CCA? You said a mouth full as dumped your money into........ CCA is a business that makes big profits, there main interest is not what you think it is.


----------



## Snookered (Jun 16, 2009)

jamesjimbooo said:


> Where is CCA and all the other organizations we have all dumped our MONEY into to protect our fishing rights???


CCA was there last night (and well represented at that)....a statement was read, and hopefully they'll post it up somewhere....it would make everyone know they're in this game pretty deep....made me proud as a member....
snookered


----------



## Snookered (Jun 16, 2009)

Emily did a fine job of moderating last night, given the circumstances.....Regionalization is a complex issue with many implementation questions that would have to be fleshed out.....I apologize in advance for my synopsis, I'm all over the place....

at the end of the day, we're STILL looking at the Council setting the TAC (and corresponding Days at Sea (DAS) for the entire Gulf.....Regionalization will do nothing to improve the issue because the TAC will still be based on the SEDAR and MRFSS numbers.....see Hilton's previous post about the pie....the statisticians are starting with flawed or incomplete numbers on stock assessments, and removing (what I think) are too many pieces due to state non-compliance, discards, outlaw catches, etc. (Total Removals are too biased, erring on the "safety side" of rebuilding stocks, I understand that's likely a requirement of Magnuson, but it sucks)....

There were a lot of questions about implementation, accountability, how regions were to be defined, landing history data, current catch estimates, what is the current effort (boats vs. licenses, how that's determined) who's going to do the stock assessments for each region, the reinitialization of the "derby-fishery", and a myriad of other issues that would need to be fleshed out for regionalization.....I'll say it again, see Hilton's post about the pie (now I want some pecan pie)....

The real issue is of course the *data*.....one component that was scoped last night was the way regions had their TAC set.....this, I think, could be the only shining light that could come from this new management approach....

if you do comment on this issue, please everyone focus your comments on using Biological Abundance to determine each regions' TAC.....I believe this will "push the science" back towards how the TAC is determined from the top.....

now, Regional Managers will likely be required to do the assessment studies, and that will entail $$ (through sampling gear, personnel, boats, etc).....and basing the TAC on Biological Abundance will likely have to be done more often than the current stock assessments are being done, again costing more $$....

however, if we all KNOW that we have more snapper in the water than Feds think we do, we have nothing to lose, correct? Since the Council will still maintain contol of setting TAC, all we have to do is prove we have more snapper than they think we do, and we'll get more pie back.....simple enough, correct?

Other than that, the outlook is bleak.....I directly asked Emily that if LA went non-compliant, what would that do to the DAS? and MS? and AL? and FL? Mont has been dead-on the entire time, and the Council would be MANDATED by Federal Regulations (Magnuson) to close the Federal Red Snapper harvest.....a Zero-Day Federal Season.....

and I believe that's why the Council is scoping various alternatives to the current system......they can see the "End-game" scenario as well....and they're trying to do what they can to avoid this.....

so, make your comments, please make them lucid, don't shoot the messengers, and realize that the Council 1) has Federal responsibilities and 2) is actually trying to help.... Emily fishes too.....she gets it....

thanks Emily for putting together the presentation and having patience with the crowd......please tell Doug I said "hello", I had to skate out of there pretty quick and didn't get to visit.....
snookered


----------



## willyhunting (Apr 21, 2006)

Angler 1 said:


> Really CCA? You said a mouth full as dumped your money into........ CCA is a business that makes big profits, there main interest is not what you think it is.


The current Chair of the Council, Doug Boyd of Boerne, is on both the state and national Board of Directors of CCA. I would say that is as involved as you can get....


----------



## capthoop (Jan 13, 2007)

CCA was well represented at the BR meeting in La. monday night. RFA was also there. We had individual recs, charter boat captains, and even marina owners. It was informative but they could not tell us what (Roy Obama) was going to do with his my way or nothing additude!

Capt Hoop
Our Freedom


----------



## bioman (Jul 6, 2005)

maby i didn't read the post but nobody mentioned that is Louisiana gets state waters extended to 10 miles it cuts the snapper season by 17-20 days, and they will make the federal waters a protected. no fishing for snapper in federal waters well that is what i understood


----------



## capthoop (Jan 13, 2007)

fishologist said:


> maby i didn't read the post but nobody mentioned that is Louisiana gets state waters extended to 10 miles it cuts the snapper season by 17-20 days, and they will make the federal waters a protected. no fishing for snapper in federal waters well that is what i understood


La. will most likely go non complient. That will stir up the pot. There is no telling what (KING ROY) will try to do. This could also get the other gulf states to call an end to the misrepresentation of our fishery.


----------



## Skeeter2525 (Mar 30, 2012)

Angler 1 said:


> Really CCA? You said a mouth full as dumped your money into........ CCA is a business that makes big profits, there main interest is not what you think it is.


I would like to know where they sit in all this so will someone please enlighten me.


----------



## Jolly Roger (May 21, 2004)

Skeeter2525 said:


> I would like to know where they sit in all this so will someone please enlighten me.


They are there for the fish, not the fishermen. Even if the data is wrong.

CCA has stabbed Rec fishermen in the back before with Red Snapper. I have no faith CCA will do the right thing for Rec fishermen now, they have never done so in the past. If you knew CCA's history on this issue you would feel the same.


----------



## Skeeter2525 (Mar 30, 2012)

Well I hope they are on the right side this time or they definitely will lose my support and those of many of my friends. We have attended the last few fundraisers here in Boerne and been big contributors over that time. Natural resources are for all to use and at this time snapper are over abundant if anything. If they are for the fish they should want us to keep more snapper so the hoards don't eat all the other species.


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

I remember the NMFS mantra at the scoping meetings back in the mid-2000's - quote: "We could totally shut down both the recreational and commercial red snapper fisheries, and if we don't do something about the shrimper bycatch, the red snapper biomass would still never recover". Or, how about this well-known sound bite from CCA; "80% of every year class of red snapper is killed due to shrimper bycatch..." 

We were promised, when they tied the recreational red snapper quota to the shrimper bycatch issue thus resulting in less fishing days, that when they were successful in reducing the associated juvenile red snapper mortality from shrimper bycatch, that we recreational fishermen would be rewarded with them returning us our fishing days.

They conveniently "forgot" that promise once shrimper bycatch was reduced by the mandated amount. Once season days or bag limit numbers are taken away, they NEVER are given back. That's why there should be NO REDUCTION in the red snapper daily bag limit that is on the table today.

Just another link in the chain of outright lies by our federal fisheries managers over the last decade or so. They want accountability from us? As with anything, they should practice what they preach BEFORE they mandate that from anyone.

It would be interesting to hear from some of the CCA reps on this site what the CCA position is regarding the ABSOLUTELY ZERO credit given to Gulf recreational red snapper anglers even though their lawsuit-driven shrimper bycatch reduction has been attained. That was the reason for the lawsuit wasn't it?

Capt. Thomas J. Hilton


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

But Tom, the Texas Parks and Wildlife people - you know the same crew you insist should manage snapper - made those exact same claims. They repeated those words virtually verbatim when asked about the snapper fishery.

Isn't the explanation here that the science of the day supported that conclusion? And, since then the science has moved forward?

Isn't that what everyone has been demanding? Better science?

So, if the Fed's and CCA are liars that can't be trusted due to the by catch claim, doesn't that mean the Texas boys are similarly liars?


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

I don't remember TPWD filing a lawsuit over it. CCA filed the lawsuit, and they should have an official stance regarding the outcome of their actions instead of having a hack attorney who THINKS he's smarter than EVERYONE else continually defend their actions on this site.

The science has since debunked the myth that 80% of every year class of red snapper could be killed as shrimper bycatch, hasn't it? A lot of similarities with how that sound bite was used to push an anti-shrimper agenda just as Lubchenco used Oceans of Abundance "science" to push the anti-fishing catch share agenda. Oceans of Abundance, also, has been debunked as sensationalist garbage designed to push an enviro, anti-fishing agenda. 

Again, it would be interesting to hear from some of the CCA reps on this site (other than the usual hack attorney garbage) what the OFFICIAL CCA position is regarding the ABSOLUTELY ZERO credit given to Gulf recreational red snapper anglers even though their lawsuit-driven shrimper bycatch reduction has been attained. There has to be an official stance regarding the outcome of their actions I would think.

Was the reason for the lawsuit REALLY just about the fish and "**** the torpedoes" in regards how it negatively affected Gulf of Mexico recreational fishermen? It's an honest question (which was never answered in the above post BTW), as the large majority of dues-paying/benefit supporting CCA members are recreational fishermen - not environmentalists.

CCA has stepped up efforts in recent years in the offshore arena, which I do give them kudos for doing - I'm simply asking for answers to why nobody hears anything these days about shrimper bycatch being a problem yet we recreational anglers are still being hammered into oblivion.

Capt. Thomas J. Hilton


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

So, attack CCA some more rather than acknowledge that the very crew you propose to regulate snapper made those exact same claims during the relevant time period. Got it. 

Further, I've explained the lawsuit numerous times on this site. Again, the lawsuit defeated an regulatory plan that did not conform to the law. Plain and simple. 

The Federal Court had NO authority to dictate the contents of any further regulatory plan, other than it must conform to the law. Similarly, the CCA had no authority to dictate the contents of any future regulatory plan. The authority to craft the regulatory plan is vested in the regulators. Same as it ever was. 

A regulatory plan that was based on bogus assumptions and did not conform to the law was in no way "good" for recreational anglers. Or, anybody for that matter. 

CCA does have an official stance on the lawsuit. They defeated an unlawful regulatory plan. 

CCA will not come to this site and respond to your ridiculous accusations. They don't play in the mud with pigs. They have actual, real life professionals that have better things to do than banter with you in the internet or respond to your silly, pretend "honest" questions.


----------



## Jolly Roger (May 21, 2004)

Ernest said:


> . They have actual, real life professionals that have better things to do than banter with you in the internet or respond to your silly, pretend "honest" questions.


Like supporting the Feds when they want to lower the limits and fishing days for Red Snapper, or support the Feds when they want to stop grouper fishing. The guys at CCA do not have time or want to waste the effort to worry about the peon's needs when it comes to offshore fishing.


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

You took this as an attack on CCA? Whatever, but to be expected from you, who I guess is NOT an actual, real life professional that has better things to do than banter on the internet or respond to silly, pretend "honest" questions. Your point is very clearly made about your credentials counselor. I talk to CCA reps all the time on the internet about the issues for cripes sake.

Asking a question regarding the outcome of THEIR lawsuit is not an attack, nor is it a "silly" question. Every Gulf of Mexico recreational fisherman DESERVES an answer. Since the large majority of CCA membership (and resulting $$$) is comprised of recreational fishermen, I don't think that they have BETTER things to do than respond to an honest question in regards to a subject that has affected these fishermen so much.

*Why are you even responding to this post Ernest, since I have asked for CCA reps to respond, when after all these years you have repeatedly stated that you are in no way affiliated with CCA? * Who are you to determine whether or not CCA reps will come to this site? Who are you to state their official stance?

Again, it would be interesting to hear from some of the actual CCA reps on this site (other than the psuedo CCA reps) what the OFFICIAL CCA position is regarding the ABSOLUTELY ZERO credit given to Gulf recreational red snapper anglers even though their lawsuit-driven shrimper bycatch reduction has been attained.

Thanks in advance,
Capt. Thomas J. Hilton


----------



## Snookered (Jun 16, 2009)

I do NOT represent CCA, but I am deeply involved.....this statement (at least portions thereof) were read the other night at the scoping meeting by a CCA representative....
snookered

The concept of regional management of red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico has been born out of the frustration felt by many anglers towards federal management. By almost any account, red snapper are more abundant now than perhaps any point in history. Management has finally worked and no one wants to go back to the days when red snapper were small and hard to find. On the other hand, no one should be content with a management regime that is unable to find a way to reap the benefits of success.

CCA supports driving management of marine resources to the lowest level of government possible. That position is staked in the belief that the states simply have a better grasp of how to manage these resources in ways that ensure their health and stability. At the same time, state agencies have proven their expertise in providing the greatest access to those resources and maximizing the benefits of those resources for their citizens. Almost every one of this country’s great marine conservation success stories has been engineered by the states.

Contrast that against our experiences with NOAA Fisheries. After decades of management, participants in the red snapper fishery are being rewarded with a 27-day season and a two-fish bag limit. Proposals have been made that may yet reduce it to a one-fish bag limit in a desperate effort to increase the number of days in the recreational season and prevent a widespread revolt against federal management. While season length is indeed crucial to the recreational sector, days alone do not make a quality fishery. The current situation is unacceptable, and that is with a fishery that by all accounts is recovering wildly. Rather than hoping that NOAA Fisheries will someday figure out how to copy the success of the states, we believe that proposals to allow the states to take greater control of management deserve serious consideration.

The transfer of management responsibility would be no easy task, and countless details remain to be fully explored. Issues over enforcement, monitoring, state boundaries and compliance will have to be resolved. However, CCA believes that the best results will be achieved through negotiations between the states themselves, with as little federal influence as possible. Additionally, in the development of this proposal it should be specified that states have the ability to manage the entire fishery – both recreational and commercial – as they see fit.

As pointed out at the Gulf Council’s recent Reef Fish Committee meeting in Tampa, regional management as it is being considered is not a panacea to the current problems facing red snapper. However, recreational anglers have more faith in the ability of the states to successfully manage our marine resources than in NOAA Fisheries. CCA views regional management as a potential path to achieving our overriding goal of healthy marine resources and increased access to them for the greatest benefit of the public.


----------



## Snookered (Jun 16, 2009)

I guess I could have posted this as well, has some important links in it....this was an e-blast to members.....
snookered








Call to Action*Gulf Council Seeking Comments on Regional Management of
Recreational Red Snapper*​
The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council recently announced projections that indicate the 2013 recreational red snapper season will be the shortest ever, at just 27 days. That is a shocking announcement when coupled with what appears to be an astounding red snapper recovery. Faced with unprecedented frustration from anglers and Gulf States alike, the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council is now seeking public input on a proposed amendment that examines regional management of recreational red snapper.

Regional management of recreational red snapper is at the very earliest stages of discussion and an extraordinary number of details remain undefined. In the most basic terms, Regional Management would give states more control to propose red snapper management measures tailored to specific regions of the Gulf of Mexico. However, it should be stressed that Regional Management as currently being considered will not give states total control over this fishery. The states will be limited by what the federal fishery management system gives them to manage. The federal government would still determine the total allowable harvest and the states would have only the ability to determine things like seasons, limits and other regulations within the same overall parameters.

Copies of the *Regional Management scoping document* a can be downloaded from the Gulf Council's website.

Coastal Conservation Association supports driving management of marine resources to the lowest levels of government possible. That position is staked in the belief that the states simply have a better grasp of how to manage these resources in ways that ensure their health and stability. At the same time, state agencies have proven their expertise in providing the greatest access to those resources and maximizing the benefits of those resources for their citizens. Almost every one of this country's great marine conservation success stories has been engineered by the states.

While many details to Regional Management are lacking at this point, CCA generally views Regional Management as a potential path to achieving our overriding goal of healthy marine resources and increased access to them for the greatest benefit of the public.

CCA has provided* testimony* at a recent series of workshops on Regional Management that were held along the Gulf Coast, but we also encourage our members to make their own voices heard on these issues as well. Comments can be made to the Gulf Council online at this *LINK*:
http://www.gulfcouncil.org/council_meetings/comment_forms/RF%20Amendment%2039%20-%20Regional%20Management%20of%20Rec%20Red%20Snapper.php​


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

Thanks Snookered - I saw that announcement and applaud CCA's views on the subject of regionalization - we can certainly agree that the states have a far superior track record of fisheries/wildlife management than the feds ever dreamed of achieving. What we are facing here in the Gulf Red Snapper fishery is in fact, a federal disaster created by the federals themselves.

Of particular interest is CCA's statement regarding that states to have the ability to manage the entire fishery - both recreational and commercial - as they see fit.

Right now, MOST of the red snapper landed off of Texas are commercially harvested - probably to the tune of 80% commercial/20% recreational - maybe even 90% commercial/10% recreational. Is that the most beneficial use of our Public Trust Resource in the waters offshore of Texas?

Good question CCA.

A better question would be; *How could Texas recreational anglers POSSIBLY be overfishing red snapper when they are only allowed to catch and land 10-20%(?) of the fish that are legally allowed to be landed offshore of Texas? *Is that fair and equitable? Nope, not in the least.

Perhaps the answer to my original question is that there is no resulting benefit of the lawsuit in regards to increasing anglers' fishing days since the 80% snapper bycatch mortality was indeed erroneous "science" - a fallacy - an impossibility.

Could it be that reducing the shrimper bycatch in itself had no net effect (no pun intended) on the red snapper population due to the extremely high natural mortality rate for juvy snapper, and thus no resulting impact on increasing the fishing days for recreational anglers?

If it DID have an impact, where are our increased fishing days as promised? I know the CCA does not implement policy, but it can certainly be asking some of these types of questions as well since it was involved in the outcome of the process with it's lawsuit.

Capt. Thomas J. Hilton


----------



## Swells (Nov 27, 2007)

Just wondering how you arrived as 10-20% of the total TAC for recreational red snapper fishing. Seems like even when considering discards, recreational fishermen always go over the 49% allocation set by the NMFS. 

If you mean private recreational as being no headboat, charter, or 6-pack for hire fishing, maybe I could sorta see your point. But being that all the numbers are so faked and jacked-up, with a bogus fish model and bad landings data, I don't have any faith - in any estimates. -sammie


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

sammie,
these are the types of issues we should be exploring (that the feds don't want us exploring) when discussing regional mgmt. CCA is suggesting that the states control all of it - rec and comm fishing in each region, and I agree.

if most of the commercial landings come from the western Gulf, it represents a disproportionate % here offshore of Texas.

let's look at a hypothetical scenario as I do not have the exact landings numbers in front of me...this scenario is based on a 10 mp tac gulf wide (status quo).

Based on 10 mp tac, the commercial sector is allocated 51%, or 5,100,000 pounds, rec sector gets 4,900,000 pounds. Based on estimated landings %'s, I am assuming that 60 % of commercial landings come from waters offshore of Texas (future "Texas Region"). This equates to 3,060,000 pounds.

I believe historical recreational landings for Texas = about 17% of the rec landings come from Texas waters, or about 833,000 pounds.

The total poundage of snapper caught off of Texas would then be 3,893,000 pounds - the legal amount of fish landed in a "Texas Region" - this would be the tac.

Rec % would be 833,000/3,893,00 = 21%
Commercial % would be 3,060,000/3,893,000 = 79%.

The Florida commercial IFQ owners have been landing and profiting off of the huge majority of our Texas red snapper for years - is that what we really want? Would it not be more beneficial to Texas for our local economies/fishermen to reap the benefit of our fish?

Even if we maintained the 49%\51% split in this new Texas Region (that % could be set by the state as it sees fit) that would equate to 1,907,570 pounds for the recreational fishery (over double our previous poundage), 1,985,430 pounds for the commercials.

Could certainly be something worth considering when looking at regional management.

Capt. Thomas J. Hilton


----------



## Swells (Nov 27, 2007)

Could well be sir, although I am still confused.

Here are the NMFS fish landings for red snapper, 2011:

3,567 thousand pounds all of Gulf
948 thousand pounds Texas 
27% commercial red snapper landed in Texas

We really don't know where the fish were caught, a problem I admit and Florida lands the most about of red snapper - about half of it. However, I doubt many snapper boats fish off Texas and lands their catch in Florida, since that would be a waste of diesel and ice.

http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st1/commercial/landings/annual_landings.html


----------



## Jolly Roger (May 21, 2004)

CCA late to the dance again, by about five years. At least now they are not wanting the State of Texas to adopt the Feds regs.

CCA flip flops often, Red Snapper are not the only species of fish they have done this on. I really do hope that there all to important people who control the money and power that have no time to concern themselves with trivial affairs of the average Joe fishermen have seen the light of day and pulled there ego driven oversized heads out of there ***.

But I would not bet on it.



Snookered said:


> I do NOT represent CCA, but I am deeply involved.....this statement (at least portions thereof) were read the other night at the scoping meeting by a CCA representative....
> snookered
> 
> The concept of regional management of red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico has been born out of the frustration felt by many anglers towards federal management. By almost any account, red snapper are more abundant now than perhaps any point in history. Management has finally worked and no one wants to go back to the days when red snapper were small and hard to find. On the other hand, no one should be content with a management regime that is unable to find a way to reap the benefits of success.
> ...


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

i think landings for RECREATIONAL ONLY in the Gulf were somewhere around 4.5 million pounds.

total landings were in the 8,000,000 pound range for the whole gulf.


----------

