# TPWD Sets Public Meetings to Gather Input on Red Snapper Exempted Fishing Permit Appl



## LanceR (May 21, 2004)

*TPWD Sets Public Meetings to Gather Input on Red Snapper Exempted Fishing Permit Application*

AUSTIN- The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) is seeking public input on a proposed plan that, if approved by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), would allow the state to manage the recreational red snapper season in federal waters during 2018 and 2019. TPWD projects state waters to remain open 365 days a year.

The proposed plan, detailed in an Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP) application submitted by TPWD in February, seeks authority for the state to establish opening and closure of the red snapper fishery in federal waters off the Texas coast. The application also suggests consolidating all recreational anglers â€" private recreational anglers who fish from their own vessels and private recreational anglers who fish from for-hire vessels â€" into one sector. If combined, TPWD projects a 104-day recreational red snapper season in federal waters. Until two years ago, all recreational anglers were treated as one sector for the purpose of managing the Gulf red snapper fishery.

NMFS has offered an alternate scenario that suggests there is a reduction in the allotted poundage quota for the charter for-hire segment to calculate the length of the proposed season. Under the scenario of a reduced allotted poundage, TPWD projects that the red snapper season for all recreational anglers in federal waters would be 64 days.

NMFS has also suggested that the for-hire sector remain within its current management structure set by the federal government. Currently, the for-hire sector across the Gulf of Mexico receives its own fishing season independent of the private recreational angler season. Regardless of the two scenarios presented, if the for-hire sector is removed from the current EFP plan and remains under its current management structure then its fishing season would be 51 days. The projected number of fishing days for the private recreational angler sector is 82 days in both scenarios when managed independently from the for-hire sector.

Additional details on the EFP application, and opportunity for public comment are available on the TPWD website comment portal. The public is also invited to comment during a series of upcoming public meetings where details of the EFP application will be presented.

PUBLIC MEETINGS

March 27, 2018
7:00 p.m.
Hilton Hotel - Clear Lake
Atlantis Room
3000 NASA Parkway
Houston, TX 77058 

March 27, 2018
7:00 p.m.
Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi
Natural Resources Building, Room 1003
6300 Ocean Drive
Corpus Christi, TX 78412 

March 27, 2018
7:00 p.m.
Port Isabel Event and Cultural Center
309 E Railroad Avenue
Port Isabel, TX 78578

TPWD Coastal Fisheries staff will be presenting a Facebook live webinar and responding to questions and comments on the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Facebook page on Wednesday, March 28 at noon.

The public comment period is open until April 2, 2018.


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

"Another factor which should be weighed in the discussion of percentage shares of the recreational fishery being asked for by each state, is where the biomass is located in these fisheries? Based on a recent analysis and past stock assessments of this fishery, the biomass in the western gulf is 200 percent higher than in the eastern gulf. The most recent analysis suggests that the area off of Texas accounts for 42% of the total gulf-wide biomass."

I am glad to see that they are using biomass estimates and not just landings to determine the season days, which certainly points in favor of Texas anglers when talking state management here. I would hope that eventually state management would include commercial fishing as well since the majority of commercial red snapper fishing occurs in the western Gulf by eastern Gulf boats.

Also points out how Sector Separation ain't all it was cracked up to be, doesn't it?

Then again, it's hard for anyone to attempt to make any sense from the numbers I have to admit. Thanks to TPWD for all the hard work trying to do what's best for Texas anglers.


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

I did the online form. It was pretty straight forward. Doubtful I can make the meeting but I really hope that TPWD can get control of our fishery.


----------



## Snookered (Jun 16, 2009)

hilton said:


> "Another factor which should be weighed in the discussion of percentage shares of the recreational fishery being asked for by each state, is where the biomass is located in these fisheries? Based on a recent analysis and past stock assessments of this fishery, the biomass in the western gulf is 200 percent higher than in the eastern gulf. The most recent analysis suggests that the area off of Texas accounts for 42% of the total gulf-wide biomass."
> 
> I am glad to see that they are using biomass estimates and not just landings to determine the season days, which certainly points in favor of Texas anglers when talking state management here. I would hope that eventually state management would include commercial fishing as well since the majority of commercial red snapper fishing occurs in the western Gulf by eastern Gulf boats.
> 
> ...


I've been keeping my eyes peeled for that exact stat! where did you find it, in the EFP?

thanks for the info Lance, and does those scenarios include chopping the weekdays out like last year, but having the regular state water snapper outside of the federal weekend season, also like last year?

I am scheduled to be out of country, or I would definitely be there at the corpus meeting....someone please take good notes...
snookered


----------



## LanceR (May 21, 2004)

Snookered,

The EFP is for two years - 2018 and 2019. As currently proposed in the Texas EFP, state waters ware projected to be open 365 days both years and the federal season (this year) would open June 1. The EFP provides some flexibility whereby the federal season could open earlier, later or incorporate some type of split season. We would certainly like to hear from Texas recreational anglers to see what they prefer.

Regarding the biomass estimates, you can find the presentation (Tab B ^(c)) that was given during the last Gulf Council meeting here: http://gulfcouncil.org/meetings/council/archive/january-council-meeting-2018/. The manuscript that provided the information for the presentation can be found at http://doi.org/10.1080/19425120.2016.1255684 . If you have problems accessing either of these documents send me an email and I'll forward them to you.

Lance


----------



## Snookered (Jun 16, 2009)

thanks Lance! sorry I'm going to miss all the fun! I'll give you a call when I get back in the country and get my feet under me....

good luck with the meetings!
snookered


----------



## solo2067 (Nov 18, 2006)

*Red Snapper Proposal*

Red Snapper Proposal

Comment online through 12:00 a.m. April 3, 2018.

https://tpwd.texas.gov/business/feedback/public_comment/proposals/201804_red_snapper_proposal.phtml


----------



## capt ryan (Jun 19, 2012)

Finally a solution that makes sense and can actually work. Of course the TPWD can manage the Texas Gulf Coast better at the local level rather than the Feds trying to do it across the whole GOM. Its amazing that our forefathers who created this Great Country gave us the solution to so many things. Why do some insist on trying to do things the hard way? I tip my hat to the TPWD for the work it has done and the hard work ahead of them. My prayers are with you. This is exciting news!


----------



## Momma's Worry (Aug 3, 2009)

*Sapper Wars.....*

Great News ............


----------



## fishinguy (Aug 5, 2004)

What is the likelihood that NMFS relinquishes control?


----------



## Empty Pockets CC (Feb 18, 2009)

solo2067 said:


> Red Snapper Proposal
> 
> Comment online through 12:00 a.m. April 3, 2018.
> 
> https://tpwd.texas.gov/business/feedback/public_comment/proposals/201804_red_snapper_proposal.phtml


Done

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## MTSkibum (Mar 12, 2014)

The problem with all of this is, i am just as concerned about keeping an amberjack in the next 2 years as i am a snapper. 

This is because for some reason, my wife really likes amberjack in the 35-40" range. Well she used to anyways, i have not gotten to keep one the last couple years.


----------



## Fisheramen (Jun 28, 2010)

Done. 

Will be at the Clear Lake meeting.


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

A couple of weeks ago I suggested that perhaps it would be better to wait until after this new independent assessment of the Gulf red snapper biomass was completed before doing these EFPs. I felt that if they moved forward using only historical landings data, Texas anglers (both private rec and for-hire) would get the short end of the stick and that this new independent assessment data could shed some light on reality.

TPWD cut to the chase and made what I consider an ingenious move by asking the NMFS to include the Gulf's biomass as a factor in this equation, and they have apparently done so. Since Texas has 42% and Louisiana has over 20% of the Gulf red snapper biomass based on the NMFS' own current assessment models, that means that the western Gulf contains over 62% of the Gulf red snapper and the eastern Gulf has about 38%.

The eastern Gulf states have a little more than 1/3 of the fish, yet they account for over 75% of the landings. The western Gulf has about 2/3's of the fish and about 25% of the landings, yet we are all managed exactly the same regardless of where we fish.

Something is amiss here, don't you think?

Of course, the Feds' don't want these EFPs to include the for-hire boats since that would upset the continuing, relentless, onward march to implement Catch Shares in our recreational fisheries via Catch Shares and the resulting giveaway of our fish to a few for-hire corporations for their private ownership at the expense of all Americans. They also don't want the commercial red snapper industry included in these EFPs. So.....as far as the Feds' are concerned, their version of "state management" only includes private recreational fishermen and excludes about 75% of the fishery which would remain under federal control. States would get a whopping 25% to "control". Ridiculous. In my opinion, the states should get 100% control of the fisheries offshore of their coasts and determine what is best for their state - right now, that is certainly not the case. Remember, this is the United STATES of America - not the Federal Government of America.

Texas and Louisiana want to include their for-hire boats in their EFPs since that would give recreational anglers who choose to fish on charter and headboats more days to fish than would be available through the Federal Sector Separation scenario. It's very interesting to me that if they lump private recs and for-hire fishermen together as one unit (as they should be!) into a new "Texas Recreational Sector", then we would *ALL* get 104 days to fish in federal waters in each of the next 2 years and state waters would remain open 365 days/year. *(OVER DOUBLE THE NUMBER OF DAYS THAT THE FOR-HIRE WOULD GET UNDER SECTOR SEPARATION)!* Once again, TPWD has stepped up to the plate for *ALL* recreational anglers, despite the rhetoric from the EDF-funded crowd that TPWD doesn't care for Texas for-hire corporations. The NMFS wants to cut the for-hire poundage which would be based on one year; 2016. Why? Seems to me that the CFA and other EDF-funded piuppet organizations should be pointing their fingers at the NMFS for cutting their season days, but I don't see that happening since that might upset their benefactors.

Texas would also have the option of maintaining the division between private recs and for-hire inside of their EFP. If done according to the current figures, the for-hire rec anglers would get 64 days and the private recs would get 82 days. The NMFS wants the for-hire anglers to get just 51 days under their version of Sector Separation. Obviously, it's much better for EVERYBODY to be lumped in as one "Texas Recreational Sector" - everybody that is, EXCEPT for the greedy profiteers masquerading as conservationists (refer: EDF-funded puppet organizations).

Interestingly, these EFPs could be considered a form of "Sector Separation" actually, but would be based on sound fisheries management principles instead of a nefarious Plan to convert our Public Trust Resources into private commodities as the current form of Sector Separation has been hell-bent on doing.

Separating the Gulf into 5 Sectors (each state would be its own sector) makes much more sense than managing the Gulf fisheries as one unit and/or segregating the recreational fishermen based on what type of boat they are fishing from. The ecosystems, biomass, and fishing effort vary widely when looking from Brownsville, Texas to Key West, Florida and all points in between. Managing the Gulf as one unit is akin to managing Alabama deer herds based on what is happening with Texas deer populations/hunting effort, but that is EXACTLY what our Federal fisheries managers have been insisting upon for many years now, using dubious data collection methods and unverifiable claims to justify their actions. They are intentionally using knowingly-flawed data to push the Catch Share scam - the federal fisheries agency charged with enforcing our fisheries laws in itself violating many of the laws mandated inside of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

I know for a fact that the Charter Fishermans Association is still telling captains to stay the course with Sector Separation since it will make their permits much more valuable once the fish are attached as assets to their federal reef fish permits. I know for a fact that CFA leadership is still promoting the idea of Permit Fishing Quotas (PFQs) for the Gulf charter fleet and Individual Fishing Quotas (IFQs) for the Gulf headboat fleet (which is currently the preferred option in Amendments 41 and 42 by the way). I know for a fact that they are also touting the virtues of intersector trading where quota could be leased/sold between the commercial and for-hire sectors. THAT is their goal. Nevermind that this would reduce THEIR CUSTOMERS' access by over 70%. They consider that to just be "collateral damage" required in order to gain "ownership rights" to our fish, and I'm not talking just about red snapper here. AMs 41 and 42 already have expanded their scope to include greater amberjack, triggerfish, gag grouper, and red grouper. Next on the list will be dorado, wahoo, kingfish, etc. Informed captains should be reaching out to their Alaska halibut counterparts where Sector Separation and intersector trading has resulted in charter cpatains being forced to pay $400 per halibut to the local Sea Lord in order to have enough fish to take their customers fishing. It's a scam to the highest degree.

These EFPs represent a sizable shift away from the steady downward course that our recreational fishing seasons have taken since the 2006 reauthorization of Magnuson and implementation of Catch Shares in our Gulf fisheries. Last year's 49 day season for the for-hire and 3 days for the private recs was the straw that broke the EDF-funded camel's back as it exposed the unfairness and insanity of what is currently called "Federal fisheries management policies". Of course, Crabtree still holds the puppet strings at the moment, and we'll see what happens at next month's Gulf Council meeting, but I am cautiously optimistic about what these EFPs could mean for our fisheries access for years to come.

I recommend go here to give your comments to TPWD:
http://tpwd.texas.gov/business/feedback/public_comment/proposals/201804_red_snapper_proposal.phtml

*Proposal 1: What is your opinion regarding the TPWD Exempted Fishing Permit application as submitted to the National Marine Fisheries Service requesting authorization to manage the recreational red snapper fishery during the 2018 and 2019 red snapper season in federal water?*

My answer: *Agree Completely.* TPWD has a proven track record of stellar fisheries management over many decades as well as persistently fulfilling their mission; "To manage and conserve the natural and cultural resources of Texas and to provide hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation opportunities for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations." This TPWD EFP as presented to the NMFS is a step that furthers both of these very important facts.

*Proposal 2: If the Exempted Fishing Permit is approved, what is your opinion on whether the private recreational angler sector should be managed separately (by TPWD) with the for-hire sector continuing to be managed under the current federal fishery management plan?
*

My answer: _*Disagree Completely.*_ There is no scientific, ecological, or economic justification for managing our fisheries based solely on the type of vessel your feet are standing on. Further, there is no scientific, ecological, or economic justification for managing Florida anglers the same as Texas anglers - there are great differences in biomass, ecosystems, and fishing effort and sound fisheries management should not be based on a "one size fits all approach". TPWD is proving to have the best interests of for-hire and private recreational anglers alike by presenting a Plan that provides hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation opportunities for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations for ALL Texas anglers.

*Proposal 3: If the Exempted Fishing Permit is approved, what is your opinion regarding whether the private recreational sector and the for-hire sector should be combined and managed by TPWD?*

My answer: *Agree Completely.* The proof is in the pudding. Under TPWD's proposed EFP to the NMFS, combining Texas private recreational anglers and those who fish aboard for-hire vessels would result in an astounding 104 day fishing season for red snapper in federal waters in each of the next 2 years! Compare that to last year's mandated 3 days for the private recs while the Gulf for-hire got 49 days - totally unfair and based on incomplete data driven by a politically/profit-motivated agenda under the federal Sector Separation scenario. Luckily, TPWD stepped up last year to get the 39 day extended season and keep state waters open during the week and in the fall, and this year's EFP is exemplary work. Thank you.

Best,
Tom Hilton
www.Freedom2Fish.org


----------



## awesum (May 31, 2006)

Thanks Tom for the detailed assessment


----------



## ding-a-ling (Jul 29, 2005)

awesum said:


> Thanks Tom for the detailed assessment


X10
I am very glad you have the knowledge, tenacity, and you care enough to keep us up to date on this convoluted issue Tom. It's good to be able to get a brief summary of what's going on occasionally instead of trying to keep up with all the BS on my own so please keep the updates coming.


----------



## texasgwp (Oct 26, 2006)

ding-a-ling said:


> X10
> I am very glad you have the knowledge, tenacity, and you care enough to keep us up to date on this convoluted issue Tom. It's good to be able to get a brief summary of what's going on occasionally instead of trying to keep up with all the BS on my own so please keep the updates coming.


Ditto Tom for the thoughtful comments. It is important that the recreational community go online and give their comments, just as Tom and others have already done. I'd also encourage participation at the public meetings next Tuesday as that will be an excellent opportunity to seek any needed additional clarity.

It is time for TPWD to manage the entire recreational fishery and provide access opportunities for all anglers, regardless of what vessel they choose to board. That is why I voted:

Proposal 1 - agree completely
Proposal 2 - disagree completely
Proposal 3 - agree completely


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

Listen up - if Texas recreational anglers want to get out from under the current debacle known as Federal Fisheries Management, you NEED to step up and voice your opinions on the TPWD portal above and you *NEED* to attend one of the meetings next Tuesday. This is our chance.

The Governor is getting lobbied heavily by the EDF-funded puppet organizations and word is that they will make the determination of whether to include the Texas for-hire boats in this EFP based on public input.

It's up to you - do you want Buddy Guindon, Scott Hickman, Mike Jennings, Shane Cantrell, Michael Miglini speaking for YOU? I certainly don't - they don't represent me or any recreational anglers' interest - just their own pocketbook. Interesting to note that Buddy Guindon and Scott Hickman got invited to attend the Recreational Fishing Summit in DC next week - the deck is being stacked by people that certainly don't have recreational interests in mind.


----------



## James Howell (May 21, 2004)

Done. Reef Fish permit holder that voted:
Proposal 1: Agree Completely
Proposal 2: Disagree Completely
Proposal 3: Agree Completely


----------



## KevinA (May 22, 2004)

done.


----------



## tpool (Aug 21, 2005)

Done! Thanks again Tom!!!!

T-BONE
(tpool)


----------



## blaze 'em (Jun 4, 2012)

Done

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk


----------



## ding-a-ling (Jul 29, 2005)

hilton said:


> Listen up - if Texas recreational anglers want to get out from under the current debacle known as Federal Fisheries Management, you NEED to step up and voice your opinions on the TPWD portal above and you *NEED* to attend one of the meetings next Tuesday. This is our chance.
> 
> The Governor is getting lobbied heavily by the EDF-funded puppet organizations and word is that they will make the determination of whether to include the Texas for-hire boats in this EFP based on public input.
> 
> It's up to you - do you want Buddy Guindon, Scott Hickman, Mike Jennings, Shane Cantrell, Michael Miglini speaking for YOU? I certainly don't - they don't represent me or any recreational anglers' interest - just their own pocketbook. Interesting to note that Buddy Guindon and Scott Hickman got invited to attend the Recreational Fishing Summit in DC next week - the deck is being stacked by people that certainly don't have recreational interests in mind.


Tom, you better have gotten invited to the Rec Fishing Summit next week and, if not, then why not???? You fish, build/deploy reefs, run Realtime-Nav services and have been involved in the Gulf fishing scene for decades in TX.

It's all a game in DC, they know it, we all know it, and the whole thing is rigged and money/greed/power are the primary drivers.

But the idea that a Rec Fishing Summit in the capitol has those guys going is like putting North Korea on the UN Human Rights Committee!!


----------



## snapper tapper (Dec 21, 2006)

done


----------



## Texas76mako (Jan 22, 2017)

Thanks Tom! Submitted


----------



## gater (May 25, 2004)

*Snapper*

Thanks Tom for all the hard work. Done!


----------



## bjd76 (Jan 12, 2008)

Done


----------



## trebledamage80 (Sep 7, 2016)

DONE!!!


----------



## sabotage (Sep 17, 2013)

Done, thanks for all you do Tom. Is there anywhere else that is requesting public comments of the proposals for each state or state management as a whole? The comments for the Texas proposal is thru the TPWD, is there somewhere else to comment for *ALL* gulf states having control of the management of their waters collectively? On a federal level maybe? Please excuse my ignorance if this has already been addressed.


----------



## lapesca67 (Apr 9, 2008)

Done


----------



## TrueblueTexican (Aug 29, 2005)

*It about time !!!*

Done --


----------



## dlbpjb (Oct 9, 2009)

Done...


----------



## RobATX (Apr 5, 2011)

Done...


----------



## Load&Go (Jul 16, 2004)

Done 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## ctcrop (Jan 5, 2012)

Done! Thanks Tom & everyone else for pushing for us!


----------



## TXFishin (Apr 26, 2010)

Done and forwarded to my buddies

Relentless


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

sabotage said:


> Done, thanks for all you do Tom. Is there anywhere else that is requesting public comments of the proposals for each state or state management as a whole? The comments for the Texas proposal is thru the TPWD, is there somewhere else to comment for *ALL* gulf states having control of the management of their waters collectively? On a federal level maybe? Please excuse my ignorance if this has already been addressed.


Howdy - yes, and thanks for bringing up the federal response portal. Go to: http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=NOAA-NMFS-2018-0029 and click on "Comment Now". Comments need to be received by April 2, 2018.

It's important for Texas federally-permitted charter captains to post up their view on whether to keep Texas CFH in the EFP - I have talked to quite a few who are in support of the Texas EFP. TPWD's mission statement emphasizes providing the best access for Texas fishermen and hunters now and for generations to come and they don't care what kind of boat you are fishing from. TPWD has stepped up for ALL recreational fishermen by including the charter boats in this EFP - the EFP provides for at least 64 days for federally-permitted boats to fish and possibly as many as 104 days (about *DOUBLE* what the federal Sector Separation will be allowing). As a federally-permitted captain, you need to ask yourself; Do I want to take my customers fishing at least 2 weeks longer each of the next 2 seasons than federal Sector Separation and then take a look where to go from there or do I want to continue with the Sector Separation as it exists, with the promise of reducing your customers' access by around 70% when/if PFQs/IFQs are approved? Can you trust TPWD to do what is right for Texas fishermen/hunters or can you trust Roy Crabtree to do what he promises? From personal experience, I can tell you that Roy has not lived up to his promises to the federally-permitted captains/private recs in the past, and I don't have any reason to believe he will do so in the future.

*NOW* is the time to put your support behind the Texas EFP. I'm 100% positive that the Plan behind Sector Separation is *NOT* in your best long term interests. When/if PFQs/IFQs are implemented (they are the preferred option right now in Amendments 41 and 42), coupled with Electronic logbooks, you will NOT be getting 40+ days to fish each year. The numbers show that you would have enough fish for maybe 15 days, and that's IF they split the allocation evenly among captains across the Gulf. I'm 100% positive that will not happen either, due to income qualifiers, historical landings, etc., so some captains will be left with practically no fish. Just look at what happened in the commercial red snapper fishery when they implemented IFQs. Since many won't have enough fish to make it worthwhile, many will sell their permits and fish allocated to those permits. Gary Jarvis and others have suggested a 2% cap of ownership of permits/allocation - you need to ask yourself why? Putting a 2% cap on ownership puts in place a legal system to reduce the number of permits from the current 1,200+ to as little as 50 (50 x 2% = 100%). If Jarvis and other EDF-funded folks were REALLY interested in protecting YOUR access, they would be calling for a 1,200th cap on ownership - in other words, making sure that all existing permits stay in the fishery instead of being consolidated like what happened in the commercial red snapper IFQ.

Those captains that try to hang on with meager allocations to their permit will need to lease their fish from their local Sea Lord - currently in the Galveston Yacht Basin, there are about a dozen captains running the commercial catch share experience trips. Only Hickman, Cantrell, and maybe 1 or 2 others are getting enough fish from the local Sea Lord (you know who) to make it work. Do you really want to have to rely on how the local Sea Lord feels that day when doling out how many fish (and how much $$/pound) he will be willing to allow you have each time you go fishing? Also interesting to note that Hickman/Cantrell are some of the most vocal supporters of Sector Separation but they don't even take out charters anymore - they are doing the commercial catch share experience trips. I'm surprised there hasn't been more of an outcry from the true federally-permitted captains about the intrusion of the commercial guys into the recreational charter business. Commercial is commercial and they need to keep their noses out of our recreational fishery.

TPWD deserves ALL of our support right now.


----------



## tpool (Aug 21, 2005)

Done again on http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=NOAA-NMFS-2018-0029! Thanks again Tom!


----------



## Empty Pockets CC (Feb 18, 2009)

Iâ€™d like to know what the Bluefin out of Freeport thinks about all of this. Agree or disagree? Just curious. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

Empty Pockets CC said:


> Iâ€™d like to know what the Bluefin out of Freeport thinks about all of this. Agree or disagree? Just curious.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Great question. I had left a message for Ned to call me to get his view on it but haven't heard anything yet.

Cowboy's deckhand is telling people that they will only get 9 days if Texas CFH is included in the Texas EFP. Misinformation at its finest (or worst).


----------



## rocketguy (Oct 29, 2011)

Tom,

I reviewed some of the comments in the regulations.gov website and found a lot of FL captains are *extremely* opposed to the EFP put forth by TX and LA. Why is that? Common sense doesn't seem to apply here.

I will be at the meeting Tuesday night at the NASA Hilton. Even after a full workday and grad school class after work, I feel this issue is strong enough to make me attend.


----------



## hog (May 17, 2006)

*I Got'r Dunn 2*


----------



## ronniels (Jun 13, 2007)

*TPW Meeting*

Any registration required to attend the meeting in Clear Lake?


----------



## rocketguy (Oct 29, 2011)

ronniels said:


> Any registration required to attend the meeting in Clear Lake?


No. The meeting is open to the public.


----------



## RobATX (Apr 5, 2011)

Bump



hilton said:


> Listen up - if Texas recreational anglers want to get out from under the current debacle known as Federal Fisheries Management, you NEED to step up and voice your opinions on the TPWD portal above and you *NEED* to attend one of the meetings next Tuesday. This is our chance.
> 
> The Governor is getting lobbied heavily by the EDF-funded puppet organizations and word is that they will make the determination of whether to include the Texas for-hire boats in this EFP based on public input.
> 
> It's up to you - do you want Buddy Guindon, Scott Hickman, Mike Jennings, Shane Cantrell, Michael Miglini speaking for YOU? I certainly don't - they don't represent me or any recreational anglers' interest - just their own pocketbook. Interesting to note that Buddy Guindon and Scott Hickman got invited to attend the Recreational Fishing Summit in DC next week - the deck is being stacked by people that certainly don't have recreational interests in mind.


----------



## RobATX (Apr 5, 2011)

http://tpwd.texas.gov/business/feedback/public_comment/proposals/201804_red_snapper_proposal.phtml

http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=NOAA-NMFS-2018-0029

PUBLIC MEETINGS

March 27, 2018
7:00 p.m.
Hilton Hotel - Clear Lake
Atlantis Room
3000 NASA Parkway
Houston, TX 77058

March 27, 2018
7:00 p.m.
Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi
Natural Resources Building, Room 1003
6300 Ocean Drive
Corpus Christi, TX 78412

March 27, 2018
7:00 p.m.
Port Isabel Event and Cultural Center
309 E Railroad Avenue
Port Isabel, TX 78578

TPWD Coastal Fisheries staff will be presenting a Facebook live webinar and responding to questions and comments on the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Facebook page on Wednesday, March 28 at noon.

The public comment period is open until April 2, 2018.


----------



## ReelHazard (Jul 4, 2016)

I'd like to know the names of all the companies/captains running these catch share trips that you're talking about. Do you have a list?



hilton said:


> Howdy - yes, and thanks for bringing up the federal response portal. Go to: http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=NOAA-NMFS-2018-0029 and click on "Comment Now". Comments need to be received by April 2, 2018.
> 
> It's important for Texas federally-permitted charter captains to post up their view on whether to keep Texas CFH in the EFP - I have talked to quite a few who are in support of the Texas EFP. TPWD's mission statement emphasizes providing the best access for Texas fishermen and hunters now and for generations to come and they don't care what kind of boat you are fishing from. TPWD has stepped up for ALL recreational fishermen by including the charter boats in this EFP - the EFP provides for at least 64 days for federally-permitted boats to fish and possibly as many as 104 days (about *DOUBLE* what the federal Sector Separation will be allowing). As a federally-permitted captain, you need to ask yourself; Do I want to take my customers fishing at least 2 weeks longer each of the next 2 seasons than federal Sector Separation and then take a look where to go from there or do I want to continue with the Sector Separation as it exists, with the promise of reducing your customers' access by around 70% when/if PFQs/IFQs are approved? Can you trust TPWD to do what is right for Texas fishermen/hunters or can you trust Roy Crabtree to do what he promises? From personal experience, I can tell you that Roy has not lived up to his promises to the federally-permitted captains/private recs in the past, and I don't have any reason to believe he will do so in the future.
> 
> ...


----------



## RobATX (Apr 5, 2011)

The meetings are tonight. I'm thinking about driving to Clear Lake from Austin to represent recreational anglers. I don't really feel like I have a right to gripe about rules if I don't at least speak out when I have the chance. 

Is anyone else going?


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

I'll be there.


----------



## jamesw (Dec 1, 2014)

If it's a typical public meeting make sure to sign up for the public comment period. You will typically get just 1 or 2 minutes to make your comment so keep it concise and to the point.

Thanks for attending to everyone that goes.

James


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

Here's a post copied from another site - it's an email sent by an unknown captain, but it contains some interesting, notably FALSE claims. My comments are in bold.

"Florida federal charter operators,

There is an issue moving through management right now that would take half of the federal red snapper days allocated to permitted Florida charter boats and give it to those in Texas, and to some extent Louisiana. It was mentioned at the Gulf Council meeting in January that the Gulf-wide charter season for 2018 would likely be a little over 50 days (Roy Crabtree). Then each of the five states applied for individual Exempted Fishing Permits to manage red snapper themselves. Charter operators supported this idea for the benefit of the recreational community with the expressly stated condition that it NOT include to federally permitted vessels who, for the most part, have adjusted their operations to work within the current summer federal charter boat season. Gulf charter boats actually underfished their allocation by over 20% each of the last two years and most operators have been content to keep things consistent for their business model.

_*I believe the Florida CFH is guaranteed 51 days - don't see anything that would take away half of their fishing days.*_

Now Texas has shocked everyone and said they want to include their for-hire fleet in the proposed Texas state management plan and requested a higher share of the allocation than they were to be given. With this plan the state of Texas is now promising their *72 boat for-hire fleet* over 100 days of federal waters red snapper charter fishing, which will cause the other Gulf states to lose fishing days. Floridaâ€™s 50 plus day season would now be cut in the neighborhood of 25 days so Texas boats can fish 100 days. Sound fair to you? It isnâ€™t. There are 684 permitted boats in Florida (80%), there are 72 in Texas (7.5%).

*The large majority of federal reef fish permits in Florida are in areas largely devoid of red snapper. The Florida panhandle has 299 permitted boats and is where the majority of snapper are landed there. Texas has 219 federally permitted vessels - NOT 72. I believe this reveals the Sector Separationists plan to reduce the 219 down to as little as 72. This would be accomplished via Permit Fishing Quotas where a % of the for-hire allocation is allocated to each permit as their "assets". Of course, as what happened in the commercial red snapper fishery when IFQs were implemented, there were a few "winners" and a WHOLE BUNCH of "losers". Some charter operations will get little to no quota ("part-timers", regional historical landings, income qualifiers, etc.) and will either sell their permit and allocation to guys like Hickman or Jennings (guaranteed winners in this) or try to hang on and lease their quota from Buddy Guindon or other Sea Lords via Intersector Trading. THAT is the Plan if they continue to move forward with Sector Separation at the federal level. This is also why the charter AP voted to approve a 2% cap on ownership - effectively implementing a legal mechanism to reduce the Gulf charter fleet from 1,200+ to as little as 50 (50 x 2% = 100%).*

With this brief application, the state of Texas is now trying to go against the recommendation of the Gulf Council, the charter fleet of the Gulf of Mexico, and NOAA fisheries. They essentially came out with this maneuver unexpectedly AFTER the Council approved it. This means the Council can no longer do anything to stop it, which I believe they would. Its has gone to NOAA fisheries now. NOAA is now the last chance stop the Texas Exempted Fishing Permit application for the for hire-fleet. If they hear it from enough charter fishermen they may very well deny Texas what they are trying to pull off. Thatâ€™s where you come in. Below is the direct link to the comment page for this issue, and some talking points so YOU can leave a message to NOAA quickly and easily and let them know you as a for-hire operator do not support the inclusion of federally permitted charter boats in any state management EFP plans. In particular you should mention Texas and how they want to take away half the fishing days from our states for-hire red snapper fishermen and give it to their own guys based on different criteria than all the other states. State management is fine for the recreational community, it may work better for them. On the charter side having three states not including us and two that are (with one attempting a big fish grab) there is simply no equitable way for individual states to manage the federal charter fleet.

*Managing the Gulf red snapper as one unit makes no scientific, ecological, or economic sense - nobody wants to take fishing days away from anyone. It's time to implement fisheries management plans based on REAL fisheries management principles instead of avenues to create revenue streams from the privatization of our Public Trust Resources. And remember, none of these jokers were crying foul when the Gulf Council approved AM 40 (Sector Separation) DESPITE an overwhelming 97% of Gulf fishermen (private and for-hire) AGAINST it.*

The bottom line is that much of the Gulf fleet has worked together for years to secure their own consistent allocation and shared in the benefits of that program equally. This stunning move by the state of Texas attempts to undermine and fracture this unity and start an allocation war between the for-hire boats of each state that no one wanted. Speaker after speaker said the same thing to the Gulf Council in New Orleans in January: Yes, we support giving the states management of red snapper as long as our federal for-hire sector is not pulled into it. Texas has now chosen to ignore those requests.

*So, what they want with this regional management EFP is to keep the commercial and for-hire out of it (75% of the fish) and let the states manage a whopping 25%. *

What can you do? Click on the link below, hit the comment button, and tell NOAA fisheries to REJECT THE TEXAS AND LOUISIANA EXPEMPTED FISHING PERMT APPLICATIONS!

Hereâ€™s ten reasons why. Choose your favorite(S) or state your own:

1.It will cut the number of federal red snapper charter fishing dates in Florida in half, so Texas can have more. Florida has the most permits of any state by far, 80%, and all of them oppose the business reductions the Texas EFP will cause. In other words, more than 80% of the charter fleet in the Gulf of Mexico opposes the Texas and Louisiana EFP plan to manage the Gulf of Mexico charter fleet.

2. Many of us have already booked dates, taken deposits, and our clients have made travel arrangements for a 50 day season.

3. Texas and Louisiana used different landings criteria than the other states to figure their share, which is inequitable. * (Currently, 62% of the Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper biomass off of Texas/Louisiana with 25% of the landings, yes, that is inequitable).*

4. â€œThis would be inconsistent with the Gulf Councilâ€™s recommendation that NOAA Fisheries issue the EFPs as long as the length of the Gulf-wide federal for-hire component season is not affected.â€ â€" NOAA FISHERIES QUOTE

5. Will trigger an allocation battle between states charter for-hire fleets that no one wants.

6. Is regarded by some as an intentional directed attack on the Gulf charter industry in an attempt to cause in-fighting and resentment between fishermen who have worked together for years to create the current fishery management plan.

7. The Gulf Council does not support the Texas EFP, nor the Louisiana EFP. The industry does not support it, NOAA fisheries does not support it. DENY THE TEXAS AND LOUISIANA EFP APPLICATIONS!

8. Such a management process would violate National Standard 4, "Conservation and management measures shall not discriminate between residents of different states. If it becomes necessary to allocate or assign fishing privileges among various United States fishermen, such allocation shall be (a) fair and equitable to all such fishermen; (b) reasonably calculated to promote conservation; and (c) carried out in such manner that no particular individual, corporation, or other entity acquires an excessive share of such privilege." by discriminating between residents of different states since their federally permitted charter for hire vessels would have a significantly unfair advantage over those in neighboring states. *NS 4 would not apply here since this is a research experiment and is EXEMPTED from normal regs.*

9. We have adapted to the current federal for-hire management plan. It works for us. We ask NOAA to see to it that Texas is not able to destroy the system we have built and adapted to.

10. NOAA Fisheries has no authority in issuing EFPs to open federal waters only off certain states, and NOAA Fisheries could not, through the EFPs, prohibit Texas and Louisiana federally permitted for-hire vessels from fishing during the both the season covered under the EFP and the Gulf-wide federal for-hire season."

*ALARMIST PROPAGANDA AT IT'S WORST.* *The whole idea behind managing the resource regionally is so that it would not affect other regions - what is happening off of Alabama/Florida should have ZERO bearing on what is happening off of Louisiana/Texas.*

Step up NOW and make your voice heard either tonight at the Texas EFP meeting, or on the TPWD or NOAA comment portals.


----------



## 2wahoo (May 21, 2004)

done


----------



## sabotage (Sep 17, 2013)

I'll be there, and hopefully a lot of others will be too.


----------



## texasgwp (Oct 26, 2006)

I will be there.


----------



## SaltWater_Warrior (Mar 7, 2008)

Thanks Tom ! I did see the Florida post on The Hull Truth. A lot of back and forth bickering on fake news !

See you tonight ! And I am trying to round up some Sea Aggies !


----------



## BullyARed (Jun 19, 2010)

I won't be able to go today but someone can ask a question that they should use 25 red snapper tags per fishing license per year and can fish for red snapper at any time. The current rule puts the fishermen at risk of their lives trying to catch snappers in bad weather and no flexibility.


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

If they went to fish tags, there would be enough for 0-1 tags per person per year - not everyone would get a tag.

Fish tags are Catch Shares.

Just say NO! to fish tags and Catch Shares.


----------



## sea sick (Feb 9, 2006)

any way to listen in or watch the meetings online tonight?


----------



## flipflop (Jul 31, 2016)

After making the meeting tonight, what I got out of it was someone from the rec side better hurry up and get Texas some representation at the federal level. How in the world can you allocate only 16% of the catch to Texas and that to include the recs and for hire boats. We'll be lucky to see a 30 to 40 day season and that'll be weather dependent. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## mikozz (Jun 6, 2006)

My son and I both attended the meeting tonight & we both spoke in favor of the TPWD plan. The head of the Coastal Fisheries Division, Robin Riechers, gave an outstanding presentation to roll out the proposed EFP plan. Really wish there had been more Recs there since it felt like we were outnumbered by CFH guys about 10-1. There were a number of reps present from the governor's office, congressional offices, etc., and unfortunately most of what they heard were CFH guys speak about how the new program will negatively affect their businesses. A few of us Recs spoke with Robin after the meeting & he confirmed it really is important for Recs to show up to these meetings. The Feds have incompetently mismanaged the snapper fishery for years & TPWD is now fighting the good fight to take control so they can PROPERLY manage it, with the end goal of giving BOTH RECS AND CFH folks more days on the water. The least we can do is freaking show up to the rollout meeting! I know everyone is busy, traffic sux, the yard needs watering, etc., but hey I'm a CPA & this is my busiest time of the year. I'm working 7 days a week 14+ hours a day, my office is a 2 hour drive away in traffic and I still made the meeting. IMO, if you don't vote with your feet you lose your right to gripe. Think about that the next time the Gulf Council slaps us with another 3 day season.


----------



## bjd76 (Jan 12, 2008)

flipflop said:


> After making the meeting tonight, what I got out of it was someone from the rec side better hurry up and get Texas some representation at the federal level. How in the world can you allocate only 16% of the catch to Texas and that to include the recs and for hire boats. We'll be lucky to see a 30 to 40 day season and that'll be weather dependent.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


I was there last night as well. Thanks to all Rec fisherman that came out...but we still need more to attend these meetings! CFH comes out in force to support their self-serving agenda. Why would (some) CFH NOT want more days to fish? Ans: Because it de-rails their effort to maintain sector separation and obtain catch share allocation and thereby control a significant portion of the fish making the Rec fisherman a captive audience for them (if you want to RS fish more than 3 days a year, pay me to go).

To your point, NMFS has been screwing Tx and Texans for years with inaccurate data and manipulation of the data and regulations. No matter how you look at it - amount of Bio-mass, miles of coastline, population, habitable area, registered boats, # of fisherman, etc, our allocation has not been fair or made sense. Many of us have pointed that out to NMFS and our political leaders but to no avail... until now. While this is not where we should be, it is a step in the right direction.

State control is absolutely necessary because the Feds are not playing fair, not to Texas and Rec fisherman.

I encourage all Rec fisherman to see where a given CFH stands on this and if they are against managing as a combined group, strongly consider fishing with someone who supports fairness to all Recreational Anglers and not their own personal, greedy agenda.

http://http://tpwd.texas.gov/business/feedback/public_comment/proposals/201804_red_snapper_proposal.phtml

Again thanks to all that did attend and if you didn't, make sure you post to the comments board (link above) before April 2: 1.Agree, 2.Disagree, 3.Agree. Doing so will get you the best season and help restore control to Texas! No brainer!!!


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

The meeting last night was about 70% commercial and for-hire captains and most all of them did not want to be in the Texas EFP for some reason. Apparently they have motives for staying in Sector Separation other than wanting more fishing days for their customers (such as gaining ownership of our fish through Catch Shares, which is surely coming their way if it continues as it is). The good news is that the meeting in Port Aransas had about 75 people there with a large contingent of federally-permitted charter captains in attendance, and *100%* of them spoke *IN FAVOR* of being included in the Texas EFP. I haven't heard what happened in Port Isabel yet.

At the Clear Lake meeting, the President of The Charter Fishermans Association spoke first and said that ever since Sector Separation was implemented, the Gulf for-hire fleet has become "more accountable" and have "underfished" their quota. I stopped him after the meeting and asked him to please give me their accounting of the Texas charter landings for the last 2 years. He said that he would happy to give me the Gulf-wide charter landings but I told him I already had that - I wanted to see their so-called "accounting" of the Texas charter fleet landings and how they stayed within the egregiously low poundage that the Feds' data says they did. He said that he could not give that to me. Strange, coming from someone claiming to be "accountable" not being able to provide a simple accounting of the Texas charter fleet landings when asked. To his credit, he has contacted me this morning asking what information I was looking for - perhaps he will provide the Texas landings numbers from the last 2-3 years as requested after all.

If *REAL* numbers were used, it would most probably show that the Gulf for-hire fleet has NOT underfished their quota each year since SS was implemented. The ONLY reason Sector Separation looks attractive to them today is that the Feds' have doled out 46, 49, and now 51 days with absolutely no regard to the law that they stay within a quota. The federal agency tasked with enforcing our fisheries laws is knowingly violating those same fisheries laws by intentionally ignoring this in their zeal to sell the idea of Sector Separation as a good thing.

The Environmental Defense Fund and The Charter Fishermans Association have hired a firm out of College Station to perform a survey of Texas charter landings for the past 2-3 seasons. Since the Plan with Sector Separation is to implement Permit Fishing Quotas (PFQs) for the charter boats and Individual Fishing Quotas (IFQs) for the headboats, gifting ownership of a % of OUR fish to these federal permit holders to own as their own assets as was done in the commercial red snapper fishery with IFQs.

Thus the need to document their landings history *before* PFQs come into play. If they implement PFQs based on the current data, Texas CFH will take a devastating hit.

I talked with a few Galveston charter captains after the meeting and they actually believe that if PFQs are implemented, ALL permit holders will get EQUAL % of the fish allocated to their permits. Personally I cannot see how the AL/FL captains, who have been running 2-3 trips/day and accounting for about 70% of the charter for-hire landings would reduce their paychecks to allow for Texas charter captains to have an equal share. Looking at the AM 41 documentation, the initial distribution would most likely be a combination of equal shares (33%), passenger capacity (33%), and historical landings (33%). Texas charter captains will not fare well here.

Another thing they are wanting to do is cyclical redistribution, where they have complex formulas on redistributing quota to boats that fish more from boats that fish less - according to a Louisiana charter guide I recently spoke with, this will be the death knell for the average 6 pack operator.

So, as what already happened in the commercial red snapper fishery, if/when Catch Shares are implemented in the for-hire fishery, here will be a handful of "winners" and a much larger number of "losers" - those not having enough quota allocated to their permit to make it worthwhile to go fishing anymore. So they either sell their permit and allocation to another permit holder, or they hold on and lease their fish from the local Sea Lord at whatever price he can extract from them. THIS is the Plan.

Another captain did his due diligence and contacted a captain in Alaska fishing in the only other recreational fishery in the nation operating under Sector Separation; the Alaska halibut fishery. He told him what had happened there - they implemented Sector Separation, gave the for-hire their quota, then began reducing that quota until they didn't have enough fish to take their customers fishing. Their "solution" was to have the charter outfits to lease their fish from their local Sea Lord, at $7/pound. So, when a customer catches a 100 pound halibut, the captain has to tell the customer that fish is going to cost (at least) $700 (depending if the captain puts any % on top of the Sea Lord's price). Is that REALLY a solution? No, it's a scam whereby they have diverted the royalties that SHOULD have been paid to the nation for the privilege of harvesting our Public Trust Resource and put those $$ into their private bank accounts. The nation nor the fishery receives a penny (other than the paltry 3% Cost Recovery Fee). So, today, here in the Gulf, the commercial IFQ Sea Lords lease their quota to hard-working commercial fishermen at $3.65/pound, the fishermen sells his catch for a gross net of $1.35/pound (still has to pay for the expenses of going fishing after paying the Sea Lord), and the nation gets about 15 cents/pound. The is messed up. I suggest that all Gulf for-hire captains to contact their counterparts up in the Alaska halibut fishery and let them hear it straight from the horse's mouth.

THIS is EXACTLY what the Plan is here in the Gulf for-hire industry with not only red snapper, but you can see that they have already added Greater Amberjack, Triggerfish, Gag and Red Groupers to their entitlement list. I say entitlement, because these jokers feel they are "entitled" to own OUR fish. The problem is, the large majority will not be owners, but Catch Sharecroppers.

If I didn't have so many good friends and customers who are charter captains, I would just say let them go ahead down this road of destruction, but I can't.


----------



## ding-a-ling (Jul 29, 2005)

That is correct, the Corpus meeting was well attended and it seemed the entire room was agree, disagree, agree on the three proposals with numerous fed permitted folks there as well as recs.


----------



## RobATX (Apr 5, 2011)

I wonder why the disconnect between commercial and Charter captains based on which meeting they attended regarding were they stand on things.

Kind of makes it seem like they are not as unified as we believe they are. This whole thing makes my head spin...especially now that TPWD is involved. I just want to take my kid fishing and put a few in the cooler.


----------



## Empty Pockets CC (Feb 18, 2009)

Now that the State of Texas is involved, which is a pretty reasonable group of people, the comms theft charade is up. Bad science, which lead to corrupt numbers that any middle schooler could understand. 
Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered. 
The comms will get slaughtered now that reasonable people at the state know the truth. 
Thieves suck. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

RobATX said:


> I wonder why the disconnect between commercial and Charter captains based on which meeting they attended regarding were they stand on things.
> 
> Kind of makes it seem like they are not as unified as we believe they are. This whole thing makes my head spin...especially now that TPWD is involved. I just want to take my kid fishing and put a few in the cooler.


I asked the same question to a few captains out of Galveston/Freeport that I know are in favor of the Texas EFP and to the man it was; â€œNobody wants to come to these meetings with the EDF Mafia standing at the back of the roomâ€.

They fear for their trucks in the parking lot and of course their boats in the marina if they speak out in public against the EDF privatization scam.

I understand. My truck has been knifed as well as other things done while at meetings across the Gulf that I canâ€™t really say on a public forum with kids reading.


----------



## bigfishtx (Jul 17, 2007)

Once TPW has public meetings, they already have their minds made up, and the public meetings are just for show. I fully expect them to support the extended season.


----------



## Momma's Worry (Aug 3, 2009)

*Snapper Wars*



bigfishtx said:


> Once TPW has public meetings, they already have their minds made up, and the public meetings are just for show. I fully expect them to support the extended season.


I concur.....and TP&W needs to stay out of the politics and focus entirely on managing the fisheries for the recreational tax payer's benefit and use ...you know the one's who spread all the wealth in pursuing fishing,make our economy run,support jobs,sales,etc and get the least in return ......


----------



## photofishin (Aug 7, 2009)

hilton said:


> I asked the same question to a few captains out of Galveston/Freeport that I know are in favor of the Texas EFP and to the man it was; â€œNobody wants to come to these meetings with the EDF Mafia standing at the back of the roomâ€.
> 
> They fear for their trucks in the parking lot and of course their boats in the marina if they speak out in public against the EDF privatization scam.
> 
> I understand. My truck has been knifed as well as other things done while at meetings across the Gulf that I canâ€™t really say on a public forum with kids reading.


I'd highly suggest when attending these meetings to take someone with you who can covertly video these types of "parking lot events"...even better if that person has his/her LTC.


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

Please take time to comment in favor of the states managing the red snapper fisheries (BOTH PRIVATE AND FOR-HIRE) offshore of their respective coasts. Here is the link to both the federal and TPWD comment portals - YOU HAVE UNTIL MIDNIGHT TONIGHT TO COMMENT;

http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=NOAA-NMFS-2018-0029

https://tpwd.texas.gov/business/feedback/public_comment/proposals/201804_red_snapper_proposal.phtml


----------



## enielsen (Dec 27, 2004)

hilton said:


> Please take time to comment in favor of the states managing the red snapper fisheries (BOTH PRIVATE AND FOR-HIRE) offshore of their respective coasts. Here is the link to both the federal and TPWD comment portals - YOU HAVE UNTIL MIDNIGHT TONIGHT TO COMMENT;
> 
> http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=NOAA-NMFS-2018-0029
> 
> http://tpwd.texas.gov/business/feedback/public_comment/proposals/201804_red_snapper_proposal.phtml


I keep getting this message from the TPWD site when I go to submit.

Query failed: (3) Data too long for column 'ip' at row 1

Have tried several times.


----------



## surfcowboy (Jun 29, 2005)

I've seen Mr. Gary Jarvis has posted 4 times saying Texas and Louisiana are playing unfairly. 

I say this. if the western gulf has 60%+ of the RS population but we don't make a dent in the amount of catch in the total percentage of snapper caught. That should realize somethings wrong. That we are effected by weather more then the east coast during the crappy season lengths. 

Also with the high percentage of catch on the east coast with the lower population would indicate they are over-fishing the RS every year. so they should have their quotas reduced, or it should be split down the middle east of Louisiana boarder gets 50% and vise versa.


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

Once again, our federal fisheries managers have shown that the Public Comment process is a sham designed to cover their backsides.

Despite the public comments being about 7-1 (TPWD comment page) in favor of keeping the CFH in the EFP, (similar results on federal portal), Roy Crabtree has declared that the NMFS will not accept any EFP that includes the federally permitted charter permit holders. So, this means that the states get to manage about 25% of the fishery while the federal government controls 75% with the intent of privatizing that portion. If the states were allowed to manage the charter folks, it would disrupt the onward March to give away ownership of our fish to the for-hire permit holders.

Yesterday, the IFQ AP was 2 votes short of recommending to the Council that they place ALL species managed under the Gulf Council in an IFQ program. In addition, Buddy Guindon poo pooed the idea of IFQ Shareholders paying royalties to the government (as they should have been doing since 2006), and submitted a white paper suggesting the private recs be required to pay royalties for every fish we catch.

Unfrickingbelievable.


----------



## Kenner21 (Aug 25, 2005)

hilton said:


> Once again, our federal fisheries managers have shown that the Public Comment process is a sham designed to cover their backsides.
> 
> Despite the public comments being about 7-1 (TPWD comment page) in favor of keeping the CFH in the EFP, (similar results on federal portal), Roy Crabtree has declared that the NMFS will not accept any EFP that includes the federally permitted charter permit holders. So, this means that the states get to manage about 25% of the fishery while the federal government controls 75% with the intent of privatizing that portion. If the states were allowed to manage the charter folks, it would disrupt the onward March to give away ownership of our fish to the for-hire permit holders.
> 
> ...


Well it's good to see nothing has really changed:headknock, is there anyway to get a copy of what Mr. Galveston SeaLord submitted?


----------



## TeamJefe (Mar 20, 2007)

So should we be yelling at our state legislators or our US legislators? Or both?


----------



## cuzn dave (Nov 29, 2008)

What's a Red Snapper?


----------



## ccbluewater (May 21, 2004)

Was a season decided upon, and announced? Saw a post on FB from a charter operation from Galveston that season was announced, and 51 days starting June 1st. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk


----------



## 22Conch (Feb 28, 2009)

ccbluewater said:


> Was a season decided upon, and announced? Saw a post on FB from a charter operation from Galveston that season was announced, and 51 days starting June 1st.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk


Any updates?


----------



## ccbluewater (May 21, 2004)

22Conch said:


> Any updates?


I haven't seen anything other than what I posted above. Who knows?!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

Roy Crabtree declared that the NMFS would not approve any state EFP that included the federally-permitted charter boats - this could upset the apple cart when it comes to gifting away ownership of our Public Trust Resources (our fish) via Permit Fishing Quotas and Individual Fishing Quotas (currently the Gulf Council's preferred alternatives). Crabtree is leading the charge to implement Catch Shares in our recreational fisheries via Catch Shares (PFQs/IFQs) - nothing will change while Roy is at the helm of this sinking ship.

So, the Gulf for-hire boats will get 51 days although nobody has been able to explain how they can justify 46, 49, or even 51 days when they only have enough fish for about 15 days. Sector Separation has been expanded to include amberjack, triggerfish, gag and red groupers. The IFQ AP brazenly suggested that the Gulf Council gift ownership of ALL fish managed by the Gulf Council - this would include Cobia, Wahoo, King Mackerel, etc. - as I have said for many years, Sector Separation / Catch Shares were really never about just red snapper it's about privatizing ownership for ALL federally managed species, and it is now on the horizon apparently. 

Now the Sea Lords are intruding into our recreational charter industry with the Commercial Catch Share Experience Trips. Check out the seafood market website owned by our local Sea Lord in Galveston where they are marketing these Catch Share trips "FOR FREE", Redfish Trips for $550, and Nearshore trips for $1,100. Hmmmm, why would I want to pay $550 or $1,100 to go offshore when I can go "FOR FREE"? How can a traditional charter outfit compete against this; No 2 fish/person daily bag limits and the ability to fish 365 days/year? (Answer): They can't. It's a mafia-style coercion message being sent to charter captains - conform, or you (your business) will be rubbed out. They are setting the stage for intersector trading where the charter outfits will be required to pay their local Sea Lord for the fish their customers catch as they are currently doing in the A;laska halibut fishery. Charter captains are paying their local Sea Lord $7/pound for each halibut they catch, on TOP of their charter fee. Local Sea Lords here in Texas are charging $20/pound for red snapper (That's $400 for 1 20 pound red snapper).

TPWD is reviewing the revised EFP since the charter boats were yanked out of their plan and reviewing their options. Previously the private recs were guaranteed at least 82 days in the Texas EFP - we will see what happens next week at the Gulfport Gulf Council meeting.


----------



## Load&Go (Jul 16, 2004)

Thanks Tom - always informative


----------

