Time to get it on. Are you on the FRA email list? Sign up below (click here)

WE FISH AND WE VOTED
Representative Steve Southerland, FL 2nd District, was re-elected despite the sleazy actions of some so-called environmentalists, as previously mentioned. Between the admitted $350,000 from a scam group and a reported million dollar shot of Democratic party money to unseat a Republican, Steve Southerland faced a formidable opponent: Well funded lies. But the RECREATIONAL ANGLER and other Southerland supporters rose up and slapped down the efforts to steal an election based on outside money and total lies. The sleeping giant stirred once again.

The time for improving fisheries management is now. We must act to save and recover jobs needlessly lost to this march on our fishing rights. We need to peel back the shroud of secrecy around the workings of our fisheries managers. Fatally flawed data is just the tip of the iceberg. Congress can effect a solution.

The shenanigans will continue until we all act as one. That is a tall order, as some have much more to lose than others. In a larger sense, and what many don't see, is the effect on every citizen of our great country. The economic and social impacts of unnecessarily eliminating fishing opportunities are ignored in lieu of flawed data and multiple 'precautionary' levels of science and management that perpetuate the careers of bureaucrats. The time for the sleeping giant to fully awaken is upon us.

Time to get it on. Are you on the FRA email list? Sign up below (click here)

FISHING CHAMPION TARGETED FOR DEFEAT WITH ENVIRO $

Below is an opinion piece by Captain Bob Zales, who is an icon in the fisheries management arena. His opinion is shared by the FRA board and membership.

Read below the opinion piece to see the verification of such audacity by an 'enviro' group. Time for the sleeping giant to stand up and shut down this threat to our very way of life. Read on. Oh yeah, VOTE TODAY if you have not done so. Make a special effort to get the vote out for Steve Southerland, District 2 Florida Representative. Call your friends. It is critically important.

Captain Zales writes:

For everyone to see how the EXTREMISTS, WACKO, SCUM OF THE EARTH ENVIROS work in trying to eliminate fishermen and boaters and all users of our resources from the water, take a look at the email below from Dave Wilmot co-founder and self declared President of ocean champions. I know dave have sat on nmfs advisory panels with him and can tell you from personal experience that his mission in life is to eliminate fishermen and users of our resources from free access to our oceans. He is just one example of the EXTREMISTS, WACKO, SCUM OF THE EARTH ENVIROS who spend not just thousands of unearned money, but millions of dollars to end our way of life, harm our families, and destroy our communities.

Yes, hell yes, if you are one of these EXTREMISTS, WACKO, SCUM OF THE EARTH ENVIROS, this message is also for you and comes from BOB ZALES, II, Charter Captain and family member of a 47 year business. As a disclaimer for any of the other idiot supporters of these EXTREMISTS, WACKO, SCUM OF THE EARTH ENVIROS, know that this message if from me, by me, and me alone and not approved by any organization I am affiliated with although I highly suspect the vast majority of the people who are also members feel the same as me.

Folks, this is why we can’t fish. Why we have to run miles around areas closed to fishing, why we have 90% of our seafood imported, why we have lost thousands of fishing jobs, have families who have lost their heritage, and communities in despair. Next time you see an EDF, Ocean Conservancy, Marine Fish Conservation Network, Oceana, Pew and any other extremist enviro member or supporter, thank them, for working so hard to end your way of life.

For those who will receive this email please send to everyone you know. For those who will try to make something out of this and assert this message is from any org I am affiliated with PLEASE send this on to whoever. My disclaimer above speaks for me and should any EXTREMISTS, WACKO, SCUM OF THE EARTH ENVIROS want to talk to me I will be more than happy to call you an EXTREMISTS, WACKO, SCUM OF THE EARTH ENVIRO to your face.

Explicitly

Bob Zales, II

CITIZEN of the UNITED STATES of AMERICA and home of FREEDOM

Thank you Steve Southerland, for all you do to protect my rights and to ensure our country remains free!!!!!

Friends,

We expected an attack from the enviros, and now that we know just how they operate, we need to inform our friends and family. Everyone needs to know how the left works and who works with them to defeat good men like Steve Southerland. Please pass this on to everyone you know, post it on your facebook page and encourage all your friends and family to vote. Ask them to vote for Steve in district 2 and to vote for Romney everywhere. America deserves better.

THE ATTACK:
FRA FINDS THE FOLLOWING REPREHENSIBLE AND WORTHY OF PUBLIC BACKLASH

Dear Jeff,

To date, we’ve been a little coy about the details of our campaign to “Sink Southerland.” We simply didn’t want to give away any information that could help Ocean Enemy #1. However, with the election a day away, there’s no time for Southerland's campaign to respond, so we wanted to let you know what your generous support enabled us to do.
FRA FINDS THIS REPREHENSIBLE AND WORTHY OF PUBLIC BACKLASH
First, we were able to contribute over $350,000 to this campaign! That’s more than we’ve ever spent on a single race, and it couldn’t have happened without you!

No group can impact a race on its own, however, and we’re proud to have been part of a strong coalition where everyone played to win. If you’ve ever wondered what a comprehensive ocean political campaign looks like, here’s what we were able to do thanks to your support:

Partner on a poll with House Majority PAC in mid-September that showed the race was very close and Southerland was vulnerable. This was an important indicator for groups watching the race.
Fund two weeks of anti-Southerland TV ads in both major markets in the District.
Launch a ground game that had trained professional canvassers making two passes of 30,000 homes to persuade fence sitters and turn out the anti-Southerland vote.
Complete person-to-person “get out the vote” phone calls for 20,000 more homes.
Run anti-Southerland radio ads the week leading up to the election.

FRA FINDS THIS REPREHENSIBLE AND WORTHY OF PUBLIC BACKLASH
Our partners bought more TV, digital media, and tracking polls, allowing us to collectively cover every conceivable channel.

This was a HUGE campaign that left nothing on the table. Will it be enough? Tomorrow will tell!

Elections Matter,


David Wilmot, Ph.D. President and Co-Founder	Mike Dunmyer Executive Director

P.S. Thanks also for your support of our endorsed candidates. In our push to help elect 40 champions, we were able to endorse and support 46. Tomorrow will be a big day for the oceans!

Paid for by Ocean Champions, www.oceanchampions.org, and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

__________________________________________________
SPEAK UP ON PROPOSED GULF GAG REGULATIONS

The NMFS and the Gulf Council are looking to further restrict recreational gag fishing in the Gulf. Time again for you to sound off on the issues. Below is the public hearing schedule for the scoping meetings. Watch for the FRA video on these issues, due out this Thursday. You will receive an FRA Alert with the time and viewing instructions. Background documents are available on the FRA web site now. Talking points available at the time of broadcast on FRA Fish Eye TV.

The FLYER

GAG RULES Document

Triggerfish Document

Legislator
Contact List

We have a flyer that you need to read and then get out.
Click to GET THE FLYER. SPREAD IT AROUND. POST IT EVERYWHERE.

Gulf Council Public Hearings:
Framework Action to Set 2013 Gag Recreational Season
Reef Fish Amendment 37 - Gray Triggerfish Rebuilding Plan

The Gulf Council has failed to post the meeting times on their website, and has ignored inquiries. We suggest that every angler call the Council office to confirm the starting time of the nearest meeting.
888.833.1844 or 813.348.1630

_____________________________________________________________________________________

TIME FOR ACTION HAS PASSED
8/21/12

WATCH LIVE AS THE GULF COUNCIL HEARS PUBLIC INPUT REGARDING SECTOR SEPARATION
Congress, national fishing groups, charter organizations and nearly every recreational angler comment oppose sector separation. Why does the Council continue down this path to destruction? Because Jane Lubchenco, head of NOAA, is pushing it, with the aid of Environmental Defense Fund.
All for the profit of a few at the expense of many.

Read the following from Tom Hilton, who has provided us with a transcript of EDF's report on their influence in catch shares.

Then read the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus letter to the Gulf Council.

And remember the words of Congressman Bilrakis' Aide when she spoke to the Council in Tampa last June: 'Congress has chosen not to fund catch shares. What are you people doing?'

The FRA will go on record once again opposing sector separation. The Gulf Council should recognize that they are being played as fools by EDF.

IF Council ignores overwhelming stakeholder input and moves forward with this insipid plan to usurp a public resource, we will raise unholy hell with Congress to force the Council to adhere to Magnuson.

From Captain Tom Hilton:

EVERY bluewater fisherman needs to make their voice heard on Sector Separation / Catch Shares - remember, this is not about red snapper - it's about EVERY federally-managed species in the Gulf. Your rights are being taken away with this for-profit scam, which BTW, does nothing for the resource itself...just the pocket books of a select few charter guys.

If this comes to pass, not only will you have to pay the regular charter fee, but you will be charged for each fish you catch. Say you catch a 20 pound snapper, the capt will ask; "Hey, you want to take that home? If so, that fish will cost you $100 ($5/pound dockside price). If not, that's ok too, as I will simply sell it to the local fish house when I get back to the dock".

That's for charter operations - inter sector trading/leasing will require this type of transaction.

The EDF Plan for private recs is to institute a fish tag system - here is an excerpt from the EDF Catch Share Progress Report;

"Our work to promote catch share management for all Gulf reef fish continues to bear fruit. In June, at our urging, the Gulf Council established a new advisory panel to explore a catch share plan for all remaining reef fish, including three subgroups: commercial, recreational for-hire and private anglers. EDF and key allies have secured voting positions on the panel.

We expect that the commercial sub-group will easily move forward with a plan to add all remaining reef fish (19 more species in total, including amberjack and gray triggerfish) into the existing IFQ program. The for-hire and private angler sub-groups will explore catch share and accountability measures for reef fish, including red snapper and grouper. The recreational discussions will undoubtedly be long, heated and challenging. Part of their charge is to discuss intersector trading.

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. (200 crew members, wives, babies, cousins, and captains reflect a significant portion of the 1,100 licenses?) 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.

To demonstrate that vessel monitoring systems and electronic logbooks can work in for-hire recreational fisheries and provide the accountability necessary for catch shares, EDF is conducting a two-year pilot project with SOS. Internal discussions with NMFS officials indicate strong agency support for the SOS management plan, which includes use of electronic logbooks, and is resulting in meetings and dialogue among the group, NMFS officials and key members of Congress. While working with key for-hire leadership to develop an IFQ concept design for-hire catch share, we funded and worked with SOS leadership to launch an SOS web site to serve as a consistent source of information for interested parties."

The time is NOW to stand up and fight.

Capt. Thomas J. Hilton

As you can see, it will take some congressional intervention to stop this travesty. People should be losing their jobs over this. The Council needs bury sector separation or resign their positions.

Read what the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus just wrote to the Council (hint: NO sector separation). Click here for the letter in pdf.

Tell 'em at gulfcouncil@gulfcouncil.org. Copy us at fra@tampabay.rr.com so you have a record of submitting comments.

Public input starts today, August 22, at 1:15 Central time, 2:15 eastern. Watch it live on FishEye TV.

________________________________________________________________________________

TAKE ACTION !!! ANGLERS NEED TO CALL CONGRESS NOW.

FATALLY FLAWED DATA STRIKES AGAIN

MORE JOB LOSS, LESS FISHING

From the Gulf Council meeting in Texas comes word that, as the FRA warned might happen, the recreational Red Snapper quota for the Gulf has been exceeded for 2011. The average size of the landed fish is .5 pounds higher than projected which, when multiplied by the fatally flawed fishing effort data, results in an OVERAGE for this year. Not only will there be no fall season; NEXT YEARS’ SEASON IS SURE TO BE SHORTER THAN 48 DAYS.

Fatally flawed data combined with voodoo math results in the most ridiculous management measures on record. Apparently the economic impact of this voodoo math means NOTHING to NMFS. After all, why should it? The more problems NMFS creates, the more funding they can get to hire more people to create more problems.

Here is a novel idea- FIX THE PROBLEMS THAT ALREADY EXIST! Recreational information is still fatally flawed, DESPITE TWO congressional scientific evaluations and blueprints provided to NMFS for a sound data collection system. In the real world, people would be losing their jobs over this epic failure.

Another concern of the FRA may be realized: the sector separation advocates have the incentive and ability to over-report landings of Red Snapper on their charter boats. The incentive comes from the idea of getting a bigger piece of any pie that might be divided among charter fishermen. (Funny how this is not their pie to begin with.) This over-reporting could account for a large portion of the recreational landings. This is yet another reason why sector separation needs to be rejected NOW.

JOB LOSS VERSUS JOB CREATION

The average salary for St. Pete’s NMFS office probably hovers around $75,000, with full health care benefits, fat time off and vacation pay schedules, and an assurance that the employer will not close or move to a foreign country. Meanwhile, the decisions made by NMFS are economically destructive, with ZERO concern for the displaced/affected. As proof, check out NMFS lame estimates of economic ‘activity’ attributable to all grouper fishing in the Gulf. Send an email to roy.crabtree@noaa.gov and request the value of the estimate for recreational grouper fishing in the Gulf which his staff estimated in the last Economic Impact Statement. PLEASE BE POLITE in your email. Please be aware that receiving a response is not assured. After all, Roy’s boss has continued to ignore direct questions from a US SENATOR, so far with no consequences.

TAKE ACTION; MAKE A DIFFERENCE

Have you had enough yet? It is time to REALLY make some noise. If you and your friends have not yet contacted Congress, please see the call to action below and sound off this week. Congress is very aware that this mismanagement is unnecessarily costing us jobs. There are several pieces of legislation in the works, along with several oversight hearings being conducted or planned. Stay tuned and please share this with your friends.

the FRA can always use fuel for the machine. Just a few bucks goes a long way. If you don't want to participate in the DEATHSTICK fundraiser, please consider donating a few dollars to the effort. Thanks!

TAKE ACTION NOW!!! GULF AND SOUTH ATLANTIC ANGLERS NEED TO CALL CONGRESS ASAP.

Gulf and South Atlantic CALL TO ACTION

The Gulf and South Atlantic Councils continue to use flawed data and outdated science to make unnecessary regulations which are costing us JOBS. The Councils are being forced by National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to take actions based on KNOWN TO BE FLAWED data that even the Council members find a little hard to believe. NMFS is getting more than a little help from Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), Pew Trust, Ocean Conservancy and others funded by the pro-catch share movement.

The squeeze play to force catch shares on us all includes the absolute reduction of effort UNTIL ownership of the resource (catch shares) is established. Then watch how the fish stocks will have ‘miraculously’ rebounded. Then you will be able to catch all fish you can afford to simply by RENTING YOUR FISHING RIGHTS FROM WAL MART, who will continue to own them in perpetuity. The term ‘sharecropper’ comes to mind, as does the term ‘stolen’.

As more anglers become aware of the nature of and motivation for catch shares, the sleeping giant that is the angling community will begin to make its overwhelming presence and value known to legislators as well as those who conspire to steal our fish. I wonder what would happen if EVERY ANGLER decided to BOYCOTT WAL MART FISHING DEPARTMENTS? Would the Walton family ‘get it’?

Due to your efforts, Congress is very aware of the behavior of NMFS. Congress does not like to be defied or ignored by its agencies and Congress is taking action, with several pieces of legislation being filed and oversight hearings being conducted. There is even legislation by Rep. Jones to FORCE the Councils to WEBCAST EVERY MEETING. This is greatly satisfying to the FRA, as we were the first ones to webcast a Council meeting (it was a South Atlantic meeting), and, for a long time, the ONLY ones who were broadcasting the meetings. That was all made possible because of FRA members and supporters just like you. Now it may become law.

It is now time for another round of registering your concerns and requests with your elected officials. Please call your Senators and your Representative ASAP (numbers below). This is as easy as ordering a pizza, but way more important. REMEMBER: Be polite and be nice. You are asking for their help. The following is a suggested script:

My name is ________and I am a resident of city/state. I am a recreational angler. I fish and I vote.

I would like to speak with the aide that oversees fisheries issues. (IF YOU ARE TRANSFERRED, IDENTIFY YOURSELF AGAIN, including the I fish, I vote comment.)

Please deliver this message to (Senator/Representative name). Flawed data and outdated science are causing the loss of many jobs due to the actions of National Marine Fisheries Service. Many more are about to be lost. These are skilled jobs that will not magically come back in the future.

The NMFS and Gulf and South Atlantic Councils appear to ignore the fishing public, favoring instead the special interests such as Environmental Defense Fund, Ocean Conservancy and Pew.

Please support all legislation that holds the National Marine Fisheries Service and NOAA accountable for their actions.

In the Gulf, Gag Grouper and Red Snapper are abundant, yet we have a 42 day red snapper season and a gag season of ONLY TWO MONTHS, based on the same flawed data and outdated science. South Atlantic Red Snapper is more abundant than ever, yet it is closed year round until further notice based on flawed data. Thousands of jobs, billions of dollars and people’s livelihoods lost.

Please don’t let NMFS ignore your requests for answers and your demand that an agency follow congressional intent and the law. Please hold NMFS accountable for their actions and PLEASE stop the closures that are killing my community and my country.

I am strongly opposed to catch shares and sector separation. (OPTIONAL BUT HELPFUL: Please listen to the FRA representatives that visit you in Washington. They have information that I would like them to share with you.

Thank you for your time.

Take action and make your voice heard.

2011 Representative links and phone numbers for all SE US states:

Alabama:

Member Name

DC Phone

DC FAX

Senator Richard C. Shelby (R- AL)	202-224-5744	202-224-3416
Senator Jeff Sessions (R- AL)	202-224-4124	202-224-3149
Representative Jo Bonner (R - 01)	202-225-4931	202-225-0562
Martha Roby (R-2)	202-225-2901	202-225-8913
Representative Mike Rogers (R - 03)	202-225-3261	202-226-8485
Representative Robert B. Aderholt (R - 04)	202-225-4876	202-225-5587
Mo Brooks (R-5)	202-225-4801	202-225-4392
Representative Spencer Bachus (R - 06)	202-225-4921	202-225-2082
Terri Sewell (D-7)	202-225-2665	202-226-9567

FLORIDA:

Member Name	DC Phone	DC FAX
Senator Bill Nelson (D- FL)	202-224-5274	202-228-2183
Senator Marco Rubio - (R - FL)	202-224-3041	202-228-5171
Representative Jeff Miller (R - 01)	202-225-4136	202-225-3414
Representative Allen Boyd (D - 02)	202-225-5235	202-225-5615
Representative Corrine Brown (D - 03)	202-225-0123	202-225-2256
Representative Ander Crenshaw (R - 04)	202-225-2501	202-225-2504
Representative Richard Nugent (R-05)	202-225-1002	202-226-6559
Representative Cliff Stearns (R - 06)	202-225-5744	202-225-3973
Representative John L. Mica (R - 07)	202-225-4035	202-226-0821
Representative Daniel Webster (R - 08)	202-225-2176	202-225-0999
Representative Gus Michael Bilirakis (R - 09)	202-225-5755	202-225-4085
Representative C. W. (Bill) Young (R - 10)	202-225-5961	202-225-9764
Representative Kathy Anne Castor (D - 11)	202-225-3376	202-225-5652
Representative Dennis Ross (R - 12)	202-225-1252	202-226-0585
Representative Vernon Gale Buchanan (R - 13)	202-225-5015	202-226-0828
Representative Connie Mack (R - 14)	202-225-2536	202-226-0439
Representative Bill Posey (R - 15)	202-225-3671	202-225-3516
Representative Tom Rooney (R - 16)	202-225-5792	202-225-3132
Representative Frederica Wilson (D - 17)	202-225-4506	202-226-0777
Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R - 18)	202-225-3931	202-225-5620
Representative Ted Deutch (D - 19)	202-225-3001	202-225-5974
Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D - 20)	202-225-7931	202-226-2052
Representative Mario Diaz-Balart (R - 21)	202-225-4211	202-225-8576
Representative Allen West (R - 22)	202-225-3026	202-225-8398
Representative Alcee L. Hastings (D - 23)	202-225-1313	202-225-1171
Representative Sandy Adams (R - 24)	202-225-2706	202-226-6299
Representative David Rivera (R - 25)	202-225-2778	202-226-0346

GEORGIA:

Member Name

DC Phone

DC FAX

Senator Chambliss, Saxby - (R - GA)	202-224-3521	202-224-0103
Senator Isakson, Johnny - (R - GA)	202-224-3643	202-228-0724
Barrow, John, Georgia, 12th	(202) 225-2823	(202) 225-3377
Bishop Jr., Sanford D., Georgia, 2nd	(202) 225-3631	(202) 225-2203
Deal, Nathan, Georgia, 9th	(202) 225-5211	(202) 225-8272
Gingrey, Phil, Georgia, 11th	202-225-2931	202-225-2944
Johnson, Henry C. "Hank" Jr., Georgia, 4th	(202) 225-1605	(202) 226-0691
Kingston, Jack, Georgia, 1st	(202) 225-5831	(202) 226-2269
Lewis, John, Georgia, 5th	(202) 225-3801	(202) 225-0351
Linder, John, Georgia, 7th	202-225-4272	202-225-4696
Marshall, Jim, Georgia, 8th	202/225-6531	202/225-3013
Broun, Paul C., Georgia, 10th	(202) 225-4101	(202) 226-0776
Price, Tom, Georgia, 6th	202-225-4501	202-225-4656
Scott, David, Georgia, 13th	(202) 225-2939	(202) 225-4628
Westmoreland, Lynn A., Georgia, 3rd	(202) 225-5901	(202) 225-2515

LOUISIANA:

Member Name

DC Phone

DC FAX

Senator Mary Landrieu (D- LA)	202-224-5824	202-224-9735
Senator David Vitter (R- LA)	202-224-4623	202-228-5061
Representative Steve Scalise (R - 01)	202-225-3015	202-226-0386
Cedric Richmond (D-2)	202-225-6636	202-225-1988
Jeff Landry (R-3)	202-225-4031	202-226-3944
Representative John Fleming (R - 04)	202-225-2777	202-225-8039
Representative Rodney Alexander (R - 05)	202-225-8490	202-225-5639
Representative Bill Cassidy (R - 06)	202-225-3901	202-225-7313
Representative Charles W. Boustany, Jr. (R - 07)	202-225-2031	202-225-5724

MISSISSIPPI

Member Name

DC Phone

DC FAX

Senator Thad Cochran (R- MS)	202-224-5054	202-224-9450
Senator Roger F. Wicker (R- MS)	202-224-6253	202-228-0378
Representative Travis Childers (D - 01)	202-225-4306	202-225-3549
Representative Bennie G. Thompson (D - 02)	202-225-5876	202-225-5898
Representative Gregg Harper (R - 03)	202-225-5031	202-225-5797
Steven Palazzo (R-4)	202-225-5772	202-225-7074

NORTH CAROLINA

Member Name

DC Phone

DC FAX

Burr, Richard - (R - NC)	(202) 224-3154
Hagan, Kay R. - (D - NC)	(202) 224-6342
Butterfield, G.K., North Carolina, 1st	(202) 225-3101	(202) 225-3354
Coble, Howard, North Carolina, 6th	(202) 225-3065	(202) 225-8611
Etheridge, Bob, North Carolina, 2nd	(202) 225-4531	(202) 225-5662
Foxx, Virginia, North Carolina, 5th	(202) 225-2071	(202) 225-2995
Jones, Walter B., North Carolina, 3rd	202-225-3415	202-225-3286
Kissell, Larry, North Carolina, 8th	(202) 225-3715	(202) 225-4036
McHenry, Patrick T., North Carolina, 10th	202.225.2576	202.225.0316
McIntyre, Mike, North Carolina, 7th	(202) 225-2731	(202) 225-5773
Miller, Brad, North Carolina, 13th	(202) 225-3032	(202) 225-0181
Myrick, Sue, North Carolina, 9th	:(202) 225-1976	(202) 225-3389
Price, David, North Carolina, 4th	202.225.1784	202.225.2014
Shuler, Heath, North Carolina, 11th	(202) 225-6401	(202) 226-6422
Watt, Mel, North Carolina, 12th	(202) 225-1510	(202) 225-1512

SOUTH CAROLINA

Member Name

DC Phone

DC FAX

DeMint, Jim - (R - SC)	(202) 224-6121
Graham, Lindsey - (R - SC)	(202) 224-5972
Jeff Duncan (R-3)	202-225-5301	202-225-3216
Tim Scott (R-1)	202-225-3176	202-225-3407
Clyburn, James E., South Carolina, 6th	(202)225-3315	(202)225-2313
Trey Gowdy (R-4)	(202) 225-6030	(202) 226-1177
Mick Mulvaney (R-5)	(202) 225-5501	(202) 225-0464
Wilson, Joe, South Carolina, 2nd	(202) 225-2452	(202) 225-2455

TEXAS

Member Name

DC Phone

DC FAX

Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R- TX)	202-224-5922	202-224-0776
Senator John Cornyn (R- TX)	202-224-2934	202-228-2856
Representative Louie Gohmert (R - 01)	202-225-3035	202-226-1230
Representative Ted Poe (R - 02)	202-225-6565	202-225-5547
Representative Sam Johnson (R - 03)	202-225-4201	202-225-1485
Representative Ralph M. Hall (R - 04)	202-225-6673	202-225-3332
Representative Jeb Hensarling (R - 05)	202-225-3484	202-226-4888
Representative Joe Barton (R - 06)	202-225-2002	202-225-3052
Representative John A. Culberson (R - 07)	202-225-2571	202-225-4381
Representative Kevin Brady (R - 08)	202-225-4901	202-225-5524
Representative Al Green (D - 09)	202-225-7508	202-225-2947
Representative Michael T. McCaul (R - 10)	202-225-2401	202-225-5955
Representative Mike Conaway (R - 11)	202-225-3605	202-225-1783
Representative Kay Granger (R - 12)	202-225-5071	202-225-5683
Representative Mac Thornberry (R - 13)	202-225-3706	202-225-3486
Representative Ron Paul (R - 14)	202-225-2831
Representative Ruben Hinojosa (D - 15)	202-225-2531	202-225-5688
Representative Silvestre Reyes (D - 16)	202-225-4831	202-225-2016
Bill Flores (R-17)	202-225-6105	202-225-0350
Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee (D - 18)	202-225-3816	202-225-3317
Representative Randy Neugebauer (R - 19)	202-225-4005	202-225-9615
Representative Charles A. Gonzalez (D - 20)	202-225-3236	202-225-1915
Representative Lamar Smith (R - 21)	202-225-4236	202-225-8628
Representative Pete Olson (R - 22)	202-225-5951	202-225-5241
Francisco Canseco (R-23)	202-225-4511	202-225-2237
Representative Kenny Marchant (R - 24)	202-225-6605	202-225-0074
Representative Lloyd Doggett (D - 25)	202-225-4865	202-225-3073
Representative Michael Burgess (R - 26)	202-225-7772	202-225-2919
Representative Solomon P. Ortiz (D - 27)	202-225-7742	202-226-1134
Representative Henry Cuellar (D - 28)	202-225-1640	202-225-1641
Representative Gene Green (D - 29)	202-225-1688	202-225-9903
Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson (D - 30)	202-225-8885	202-226-1477
Representative John Carter (R - 31)	202-225-3864	202-225-5886
Representative Pete Sessions (R - 32)	202-225-2231	202-225-5878

TAKE ACTION NOW!!! ALL THREE COMMENTS MUST BE SENT IN BY Monday, August 8 at the latest!

The Gulf Council is taking public comment on gag and grouper rules (Amendment 32), as well as the Annual Catch Limits amendment and Amendment 18 (Mackerel).

Below is some suggested commentary for each issue, in one easy to copy body of text. At the top of the commentary is a place for you to enter your personal information. Then simply paste into an email and send to:

ewsapp@hotmail.com; bgillbgill@embarqmail.com; labele@fsu.edu; rshipp@jaguar1.usouthal.edu; intimidatorcharters@yahoo.com; hkaywilliams@hotmail.com; tom.mcIlwain@usm.edu; nolrah@aol.com; info@superstrikecharters.com; douglassboyd@yahoo.com; jhendrix1706@aol.com; william.teehan@myFWC.com; Nick.Wiley@myFWC.com; chris.blankenship@dcnr.alabama.gov; Kevin.Anson@dcnr.alabama.gov; Corky.Perret@dmr.ms.gov; mfischer@wlf.la.gov; robin.riechers@tpwd.state.tx.us; roy.crabtree@noaa.gov; Jane.lubchenco@noaa.gov; dennis@thefra.org; gulfcouncil@gulfcouncil.org

Dear Gulf Council members-

I fish in the Gulf and have a great interest in the management of my fisheries. (ADD PERSONAL INFORMATION HERE, IF YOU WISH, such as business owner, boat owner, life long angler, etc.) I am submitting comments on THREE SEPARATE AMENDMENTS in this email; Amendment 32, Amendment 18 and the ACL/AM amendment, in that order.

My information, for the record:

Name
address
city/state/zip

Amendment 32

This quick list is followed by more in-depth comments on Amendment 32.

·         Do NOT reduce the commercial minimum size for gag.

·         INCREASE the minimum size for recreational gag to 24”. This would maximize the biological effect and minimize the social and economic impacts.

·         Make available the NMFS formulas used to determine season length, future effort and angler behavior.

·         Provide for the carryover of uncaught allowable recreational landings to the following year’s recreational allowable landings.

·         What part of NO CATCH SHARES and NO SECTOR SEPARATION did you not hear?

·         Concern of inflated gag landings driven by the speculation of sector separation. Incentive to misreport drives landings estimates through the roof.

·         Why is gag’s Maximum Sustainable Yield reduced by 25%? This is NOT a mandated reduction: This is policy not agreeable to the stakeholders.

·         Why is the concept of re-capture of undersized discards being flatly IGNORED despite OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE that it happens regularly?

·         Why is the evidence of an extremely low release mortality rate for gag being IGNORED? The Florida FWRI has the evidence, which is also supported by strong anecdotal evidence presented by participants in the FWRI tagging program.

·         The slot limit for gag should never have even been considered.

·         Why are the Interdisciplinary Planning Teams, formed and directed by the National Marine Fisheries Service, writing the regulations behind closed doors and without any accountability for formulation and methodology behind landings reduction estimates?

·         Red Grouper was healthy when NMFS tried unsuccessfully to stop all grouper fishing to protect the red grouper. Overwhelming anecdotal evidence of a healthy stock provided by anglers was proven to be correct two years later. We are experiencing the same with gag grouper today. How many jobs will you destroy with these unnecessary regulations?

·         Why has the SSC’s recommendation of reruns using the latest figures been ignored? Why are signs of crashing effort ignored?

·         A spawning closure is a spawning closure. Why would IFQs exempt commercial fishermen from a fishing closure to protect the spawn?

·         No additional time or area closures should be considered at this time.

These hearings are being billed as additional hearings due to the lack of availability of the documents for the last set of hearings, yet the documents for this hearing have only been available for a week. They were not on the website (the guide to the hearing is not the full document). Why did it take so long to make the documents available again? Does the Council realize the damage this does to credibility with the stakeholders? Many anglers are convinced that their input has no effect on the process.

This latest document contains absolutely no consideration of the 24” gag minimum size. There is also ZERO discussion of a provision for carrying forward unused allowable landings, such as those caused by overly restrictive regulations. Again, there is the appearance that public input means nothing.

A 24 “ gag minimum would allow for a far longer fishing season than any other management measure, yet it is ignored. The rational for ignoring the size increase is an increase in dead discards, yet that rationale is flawed in that it relies upon known to be inflated discard mortality rates.

Several years ago, a 24” gag minimum length was the Council’s PREFERRED alternative. Recent Council/NMFS documents showed a 24 inch limit would produce SIGNIFICANT landings reductions while having only a MINIMAL EFFECT on the anglers’ actual opportunity to fish, as closed seasons would be avoided.

The minimum size limit for commercial gag should NOT be reduced. It is below the 50% sexual maturity level of gag, which is at 23 ½ inches. This is far from sound management. Why would we encourage commercial fishermen to target smaller fish?

The 100% effort increase multiplier being used in the estimates of effort shift due to season closure is pure speculation and has no real merit as a plausible concept. Given the development of these ideas outside of the view and participation of the public (under the guise of IPTs), one can reasonably surmise that transparency means nothing.

The recreational sector has spoken loud and clear: NO CATCH SHARES. What more does the Council need? Or is the catch share agenda another of the Council’s damn-the-public-opinion steamrollering of the public’s rights? It certainly appears that the Council has wholesale ignored public input.

I am greatly concerned by the implications of inflated gag landings due to the incentive to misreport/over report landings by those who feel that doing so would possibly secure them a larger ‘share’ of a recreational pie, all at the expense of the recreational angler.

The document shows that Maximum Sustainable Yield is reduced by 25% and is renamed Optimum Yield. This is an arbitrary 25% reduction. It will now be even easier for the anti-fishing crowd to claim that anglers are overfishing. Optimum Yield should be set at the old Maximum Sustainable yield. That is, in fact, optimum. I am appalled by the automatic reductions. They are NOT required to be set so low by Magnuson. In fact, Magnuson does not prohibit MSY=OFL=OY.

Why is the concept of re-capturing not considered in the assessment of the stock? It is well known that scientific proof spanning fifteen years exists showing the daily re-capture of undersized fish is a regular occurrence, yet we treat every discard as a unique fish and apply a high release mortality rate. This discard rate is a major driver of regulations to eliminate fishing effort.

Why is new best available science showing minimal release mortality in under 100 feet of water NOT being used to estimate landings reductions? The state of Florida has tagging evidence indicating low release mortality and strong survival rates.

Why have we not done a full benchmark stock assessment when the Council’s own Scientific and Statistical Committee asked for it? Because of the once in 30 year red tide event, the assessment is showing that the stock was reduced by 1/3. This has been shown to be wrong, yet a new assessment is not on the five year schedule of assessments. The 2006 gag assessment was declared UNRELIABLE UPON ITS VERY COMPLETION IN JANUARY 2006.

Given that release mortality estimates HAVE been lowered (slightly), why is a 24” minimum size limit for recreational anglers not being considered? It would result in a nearly 30% reduction in landings. The reduction should be even higher now, given the knowledge that 2/3 of the released gag are in state waters with an average depth of less than 30 feet. We would expect a benefit of more like 40%. All that without destroying a person’s opportunity to fish. This would maximize the biological effect and minimize the social and economic impacts. THIS OPTION NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED AND LISTED AS PREFERRED.

A slot limit on a grouper is insane. Even your own Reef Fish AP rejected it unanimously.

We are concerned that the Council is once again using a couple of agenda-driven comments to paint the picture of the gag fishery in the northern gulf. The individuals are proponents of sector separation and recreational catch shares. This is another example of selective hearing on the Council’s part.

Why are the Interdisciplinary Planning Teams, formed and directed by the National Marine Fisheries Service, writing the regulations behind closed doors and without any accountability for formulation and methodology behind landings reduction estimates?

Just like with Red Grouper, overwhelming anecdotal evidence has been presented attesting to strong abundance, strong recruitment and a wide range of sizes available in the gag fishery. These all contradict the flawed, outdated gag assessment.

A spawning closure is a spawning closure. Why would IFQs exempt commercial fishermen from prosecuting fish during the spawn?

No additional time or area closures should be considered, other than a spawning closure in the winter, if necessary. There is not enough data to accurately assess stocks. How come we can be so precise about fishing areas?

Why has the SSC’s recommendation of reruns using the latest figures been ignored? Why are signs of crashing effort ignored? When all fishing stops, what will you manage?

Amendment 18

Who made the LATEST mistakes in the Federal Register notice of these meetings? Did Steve Atran get his Ph.D.? When did Orange Beach move to Florida?

Copies of the website and the Federal Register Notice (FRN) with the mistakes highlighted were submitted at the St. Pete hearing on August 2, 2011. Who will be held responsible? The last set of FRN’s regarding the May public hearings also contained critical errors. A request for determination of responsibility for that set of errors has been ignored by Steve Bortone. Transparency takes another hit.

Once again, no mention is made of how unrealized allowable quota is to be carried over into the next year. While this is a public theme of every single FMP and action, Council and NMFS continue to ignore the public, much like they ignore Congress.

NO reductions in current landings levels are acceptable, nor are any accountability measures that rely on in-season quota monitoring using the MRIP/MRFSS data. Refer to the NRC reports of 2000 and 2006 for rationale supporting exclusion of said data.

There is currently no need or indication of a need for further reductions in landings of recreational mackerel, cobia or dolphin. Why then would we make a decision which would FURTHER reduce economic activity generated by fishing? Fishing activity is projected to continue to decline, according to the US Fish and Wildlife Service.

Why was a control rule group established with NO fishing representation while having significant environmental group representation? Further, why was that group established in violation of the Council’s charter, yet its decisions were requested to be voted in as compliant?

Annual Catch Limtit/Accountability Measures amendment

Why was the control rule written by a group that included an Ocean Conservancy member, a PEW trust member and NO OTHER stakeholders whatsoever? Why were funds spent on an unauthorized group? Why was the unauthorized control rule group’s output accepted for use by the Council? Does this speak to transparency?

Why did the Council SSC use a P-star table paid for by Ocean conservancy, which differed from NMFS own p-star values? Who will be held accountable? Why was this allowed?

This invalidates all ACL/AM limits set using the Ocean Conservancy version of p-star thus far. Is there any wonder why the public has no faith in the management system? Council members are ultimately responsible for allowing this behavior.

Worthy of note is the LACK OF A PROCESS FOR UNUSED ALLOWABLE CATCH. Any overages are not carried forward. Why not? The public clearly requested this over the last three years, yet the public remains ignored.

Taking 25% off of the top, then another 25% for a ‘buffer’ in which Accountability Measures (fishing slowdown regulations) will kick in is tantamount to a fifty percent reduction, with NO BIOLOGICAL NEED for such a reduction.

The ‘old method’ gave us Maximum Sustainable Yield and allowed us to exceed that once in every four years, allowing for the cyclical nature of fish stocks.

Optimum Yield should be set at the old Maximum Sustainable yield. That is, in fact, optimum. Any automatic reductions are unnecessary, economically damaging and possibly even in violation of Magnuson. Optimum yield is NOT required to be set so low by Magnuson. In fact, Magnuson does not prohibit MSY=OFL=OY.

We should NOT suffer any further erosion of our fishing rights. We request that all Florida and Louisiana representatives assert that Floridians Louisianans have the RIGHT to fish. It is not a privilege.

This whole idea of setting Annual Catch Limits on data poor species is preposterous and designed to end fishing as we know it. The flawed data collection process has not been improved upon. Magnuson is being ignored or selectively observed. This is wrong and people should be held accountable for this.

How can ACL and AM be set when the data remains flawed and unreliable? Magnuson calls for two years of functioning Angler Registration before setting ACLs. Again, there is no mention in Magnuson of automatic 25-50% landings reductions.

I am concerned by reports of over-reporting of trips and landings by some members of the charter community. This practice seems to be in response to the push for recreational catch shares. The perceived benefit of this is to get the largest possible piece of any recreational pie that might be carved up and handed out in the future. The effect this will have on the effort and landings estimates for the recreational sector is astounding. Anglers already are suffering a shortened red snapper season due to increased landings and landed size of the fish. The effort estimates are still incredibly high. Could this be why?

Fish have tails. They don’t know that they are supposed to stay in one place, or not cross an arbitrary line. How then can we in good conscience close areas to fishing when the benefit is negligible.

There should be no accountability measures set until such time as we have reliable data upon which to make decisions.

Worthy of note is the LACK OF A PROCESS FOR UNUSED ALLOWABLE CATCH. Any underages are not carried forward. Why not? The public clearly requested this over the last three years, yet the public remains ignored.

NMFS and the Council ignored Congress about catch shares and sector separation. Given the recent memorandum from NOAA legal counsel regarding catch share programs, it is very easy to believe that there exists an agenda that will be advanced regardless of the law or Congressional intent. We now understand how NMFS consistently abuses its authority.

Do not move forward with the ACL amendment until such time as the control rule group issue and congressional intent are resolved. According to NMFS attorney’s interpretations of the Magnuson, the very act of discussing seething provides evidence of action. You have discussed a plan. Now you should hold off until the issues brought up in discussion are resolved.

TAKE ACTION NOW ALL THREE COMMENTS MUST BE SENT IN BY TUESDAY, JUNE 7TH at the latest!

The Gulf Council is taking public comment on gag and grouper rules (Amendment 32), as well as Annual Catch Limits and Spiny Lobster.

To reference what the issues are, go to our gag action page

Below is suggested commentary for each issue, which you can copy and paste into an email. At the top of the commentary is a list of the Council's email addresses, which you can easily copy and paste into the TO bar of an email.

Click for Gag/Red Comments
Click for Annual Catch Limits comments
Click for Spiny Lobster Comments

Use the following EMAIL LIST for all three comments (copy and paste)

In the SUBJECT LINE, PUT Amendment 32 comments

Dear Gulf Council:

Amendment 32 comments.

Please enter these comments into the public record for the Key West Council meeting.

The public hearing meetings appear to be in violation of the Federal Register Act, United States Code, Title 44, Chapter 15, section 1508, which states that 15 days public notice is required. The notice of change was posted in the federal register on April 29^th, less than 15 days before the meeting. Further, the change of location for the LA and MS public hearings were changed and not properly noticed in the federal register. How can you expect the public to believe that you care what they think?

I would like to get an official answer as to who exactly is responsible for these apparent violations of law.

The Council claims to listen to the public, yet the examples of ignoring the public are in these proposals. Where is the 24 inch gag minimum size? 22 inches is below the desired 50% sexual maturity size. The public called for a 24 inch minimum size as opposed to season reductions and/or bag limit reductions.

Where is the accountability measure that carries uncaught ‘allowable catch’ to the next year? Another LOUD and CLEAR request from the public appears to be completely ignored.

Why is there absolutely no consideration of re-capture and release of undersized gags in this process?

Why are Annual Catch Limits being set when the National Marine Fisheries Service has not even complied with the Magnuson mandate to fix recreational data? NMFS and the Gulf Council appear to be operating in defiance and contempt of Congress.

ABOUT THE DOCUMENT AVAILABILITY

Why were the documents not available until Wednesday afternoon before the hearings started? This is absolutely inexcusable and quite possibly a violation of Magnuson. I am sure that a NMFS lawyer will tell you otherwise. I will remind you that this is an OPINION that has caused members of Congress to take great umbrage with the interpretation of the law. After all, Congress wrote the law. It has become clear that NMFS legal opinions continue to defy Congressional intent.

There was NO announcement when the documents WERE posted to the website. Why not? Who made the decision to NOT tell the public that the overdue documents were finally available, albeit only electronically? The main document is a 27 MEG download. That is a HUGE file. The public is rightfully offended by the Council’s lack of respect and obvious disdain for meaningful public input.

Does the Council have any idea or even care about the people who have no or very limited computer access? This process has certainly denied the general public adequate time with the final proposals. The excuse of ‘we’re busy’ does not hold water. Amendment 32 had initial public hearings over a year ago, so this is not a last minute amendment. The council is not too busy to push catch shares and sector separation, as we can see by all of the recent Council activity.

While the Council spends hundreds of thousands of tax dollars on ‘outreach’ designed to ‘engage the angler in the management process’, they systematically deny us the opportunity to provide thoughtful comments on proposed regulations, as evidenced by the timeliness of document availability. This appears to violate the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

How docile do you think the public is that we will allow you to treat us this way? We request another round of hearings with at least fifteen days in which to review the documents prior to a hearing.

The recreational sector, including the majority of its for hire captains, have CLEARLY SPOKEN AGAINST SECTOR SEPARATION. So why is the Council staff preparing a sector separation amendment? How can the Council possibly deny its ignoring of public input?

ABOUT THE DOCUMENT ITSELF

The document shows that Maximum Sustainable Yield is reduced by 25% and is renamed Optimum Yield. This is an arbitrary 25% reduction. It will now be even easier for the anti-fishing crowd to claim that anglers are overfishing. What a crock of bad soup this is. Optimum Yield should be set at the old Maximum Sustainable yield. That is, in fact, optimum. We reject the automatic reductions. They are NOT required to be set so low by Magnuson. In fact, Magnuson does not prohibit MSY=OFL=OY.

Why is the concept of re-capturing not considered? We know full well and have scientific proof spanning fifteen years that daily re-capture of undersized fish is a regular occurrence, yet we treat every discard as a unique fish and apply a high release mortality rate. This discard rate is a major driver of regulations to eliminate fishing effort.

Given that release mortality estimates HAVE been lowered slightly, why is a 24” minimum size limit for recreational anglers not being considered? It would result in a nearly 30% reduction in landings. The reduction should be even higher now, given the knowledge that 2/3 of the released gag are in state waters with an average depth of less than 30 feet. We would expect a benefit of more like 40%. All that without destroying a person’s opportunity to fish. This would maximize the biological effect and minimize the social and economic impacts. THIS OPTION NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED AND LISTED AS PREFERRED.

A slot limit on a grouper is insane. Even your own Reef Fish AP rejected it unanimously.

This is a 3 billion dollar (Fisheries Economic of the US- DOC) mistake that the state of Florida will bear the brunt of. We have had enough of the mismanagement under which we have suffered for years. We demand accountability for mismanagement.

I request and fully expect another round of public hearings, based on final documents which will be made available AT LEAST fifteen days prior to the hearings.

Here are some comments on the Amendment, by section:

2.2 Action 2. Recreational Bag Limits, Size Limits, and Closed Seasons
2.2.1 Gag Scenarios

PUBLIC PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE:
New full benchmark stock assessment. Interim management to be 24 “ gag minimum size, 4 fish bag limit, 2 month spawning closure protection (Feb and March) for recreational AND commercial harvest.

If we have a spawning protection closure, it should be closed for all harvest.

2.2.2 Red Grouper Bag Limit
Preferred Alternative 3. Increase the red grouper bag limit to 4 fish per person. If, at the end of any season, it is determined that the recreational sector has exceeded its red grouper ACL, the bag limit will be reduced to 3 fish. If, at the end of any subsequent season, it is determined that the recreational sector has exceeded its red grouper ACL again, the red grouper bag limit will revert back to 2 fish.
Again, the rec sector does NOT receive the 5 red grouper bag limit (what we used to have).

Action 3 commercial dead discard adjustment – If dead discards are used in recreational calculations, then they should be used in commercial as well.

2.5 Action 5. Commercial Gag Size Limit
Alternative 1: No action. The commercial gag minimum size limit remains at 24 inches total length.

Female gag reach 50% maturity at about 23 inches (Figure 2.5.1). At smaller size limits, the majority of the fish will not yet have spawned. This will reduce spawning potential and could negatively impact the rebuilding plan. These words say it all. What is the motivation to kill fish before they reach sexual maturity?

2.6 Action 6. Time and Area Closures
*Note: more than one alternative and option can be selected as preferred

Alternative 1: No Action, Do not create additional time and area closures that prohibit fishing for gag and other reef fishes.

There is not enough data to accurately assess stocks. How come we can be so precise about fishing areas?

NMFS promised sector accountability when NMFS sold the catch shares idea to the commercial sector and then played recreational against commercial by using cross sector accountability measures. This was used to threaten the state of Florida into compiling with NMFS outrageous and arrogant demand that the state match the federal rules. The state of Florida FWC Commissioners all cited the fear of ‘punishment’ by NMFS if the state failed to bend to NMFS demands. A threat from a rogue agency should NOT be the reason for a state to ignore its own citizens. In fact, I will encourage the state of Florida to reject this ‘blackmail’ and to further hold responsible those who perpetrated the federal actions.

When will NMFS become accountable for their mismanagement?

The Council and NMFS violated federal law by moving two of the public input meetings after publishing in the federal register. Who is responsible for this?

I hope the Council will remember the Red Grouper debacle in which NMFS claimed Red Grouper were overfished/undergoing overfishing, in direct contradiction to the vast majority of observations and anecdotal evidence presented by the public to the Council and NMFS. A year and a half later, a new stock assessment VERIFIED THAT THE RED GROUPER WERE, IN FACT, HEALTHY at the time of the NMFS action, supporting the overwhelming anecdotal evidence presented by the public at the time.

Fast forward to Gag Grouper: The SAME THING is happening. Overwhelming anecdotal evidence is being ignored while unconscionable economic and social distress is being forced upon the public by this out of control agency (NMFS). When will accountability be provided for the mismanagement of our fisheries?

Thank you for your time. I look forward to a response.

Respectfully,

Your name

Address

In the SUBJECT LINE, PUT ACL/AM Amendment comments

Dear Gulf Council Members:

Annual Catch Limit / Accountability Measures Amendment comments

Why were the documents not available until Friday, April 29^th in the afternoon?

I request another round of hearings with at least fifteen days in which to review the documents prior to a hearing.

I heard that I could 'still submit written comments' since I did not have sufficient time to review the 250 plus pages of this document. If written comments mean so much, then why have the public input hearings in the first place?

There was NO announcement when the documents WERE posted to the website. Why not? Who made the decision to NOT tell the public that the overdue documents were finally available?

Does the Council have any idea or even care about the people who have no or very limited computer access? This process has certainly denied the general public adequate time with the final proposals. The excuse of ‘we’re busy’ does not hold water. The Council appears not ‘too busy’ to push catch shares and sector separation evidenced by all of the recent Council activity.

The ‘old method’ gave us Maximum Sustainable Yield and allowed us to exceed that once in every four years, allowing for the cyclical nature of fish stocks.

Optimum Yield should be set at the old Maximum Sustainable yield. That is, in fact, optimum. I reject any automatic reductions as unnecessary and possibly even in violation of Magnuson. They are NOT required to be set so low by Magnuson. In fact, Magnuson does not prohibit MSY=OFL=OY

We should NOT suffer any further erosion of our fishing rights. We request that our Florida representatives assert that Floridians have the RIGHT to fish. It is not a privilege.

We are concerned by reports of over-reporting of trips and landings by some members of the charter community. This practice seems to be in response to the push for recreational catch shares. The perceived benefit of this is to get the largest possible piece of any recreational pie that might be carved up and handed out in the future.

The effect this will have on the effort and landings estimates for the recreational sector is astounding. We already are suffering a shortened red snapper season due to increased landings and landed size of the fish. The effort estimates are still incredibly high. Why?

Fish have tails. They don’t know that they are supposed to stay in one place, or not cross an arbitrary line. Who will be held accountable for the mismanagement of our fisheries.

ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES

There should be no accountability measures set until such time as we have reliable data upon which to make decisions.

NMFS and the Council ignored Congress about this. Given the recent memorandum from NOAA legal counsel regarding catch share programs, it is very easy to believe that their exists an agenda that will be advanced regardless of the law or Congressional intent. We now understand how NMFS consistently abuses its authority.

Who developed the act’s and control rules? What is an Interdisciplinary Planning Team? Why is the public excluded from the IPT meetings? Why is the public denied the work product of the IPTs?

Respectfully submitted,

Name and address

In the SUBJECT LINE, PUT Spiny Lobster Amendment comments

Dear Gulf Council Members:

Spiny Lobster Amendment Comments

The Spiny Lobster Amendment appears to be more of the same ‘shell game’ of ACL and AM’s.

I strongly oppose any reduction below current Maximum Sustainable Yield. There is no biological need.

Since Congress has called for an accounting of NMFS policies on catch shares and other Magnuson interpretations, I opposed any further development of the ACL and AM’s for spiny lobster.

Magnuson makes no mention of reducing Maximum Sustainable Yield. MSY=OFL=ACL=ACT. Why reduce the opportunity to access the resource with no biological need to do so?

There is no provision for carrying underutilized quotas forward, despite repeated and overwhelming public input requesting such.

I am concerned that the Gulf Council ignores public opinion.

Finally, setting an ACL for Spiny Lobster is ludicrous, based on what we DO know about the stock. This arbitrary ACL could well indeed unnecessarily limit access to a healthy, sustainable fishery.

Thank you for your time. I look forward to a response.

Respectfully,

Your name

Address

Past Call To Action Call Congress and tell them you want oversight hearings on National Marine Fisheries Service. We call it CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS. We think you will find it contemptible, to say the least. Click here to TAKE ACTION on CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS.

OTHER ACTION TO BE TAKEN:

The Gulf Council and National Marine Fisheries Service both are taking public comment on gag grouper rules, for two different reasons. This is government at its most oppressive. Time to provide the backlash that these people just might understand.

Step ONE is to GET THE DOCUMENTS THAT THEY ARE USING TO STEAL YOUR RIGHTS.

You should get PRINTED copies of these documents from the respective agencies. You will need them in hand to take STEP TWO (to be announced). You should not have to use $100 worth of your own ink and paper to print the documents.

To reference what the issues are, go to our gag action page