South Atlantic Council set to debate issues
critical to recreational anglers
The upcoming meeting of the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council Sept. 12-16 in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, is one that could greatly impact the future of recreational angling in the region. Among the items up for discussion are an ad hoc, precedent-setting reallocation of dolphin from the recreational sector to the commercial sector, and a limited entry program for the charter/for-hire industry that would serve as the first step to privatization of marine resources.
The vast majority of dolphin harvest has historically occurred in the recreational sector, which depends on an abundance of the fish to ensure anglers have the opportunity to catch some. In fact, the original Dolphin-Wahoo Fishery Management Plan recognized the importance of dolphin to the recreational sector and the looming potential conflict:
Owing to the significant importance of the dolphin/wahoo fishery to the recreational fishing community in the Atlantic, the goal of this fishery management plan is to maintain the current harvest level of dolphin and insure that no new fisheries develop. With the potential for effort shifts in the historical longline fisheries for sharks, tunas, and swordfish, these shifts or expansions into nearshore coastal waters to target dolphin could compromise the current allocation of the dolphin resource between recreational and commercial user groups. Further, these shifts in effort in the commercial fishery, dependent upon the magnitude (knowing that some dolphin trips may land over 25,000 pounds in a single trip) could result in user conflict and localized depletion in abundance.
This conflict has occurred. The historic commercial fishery was largely composed of incidental catches made while targeting other species, but that changed significantly in 2014 and 2015 when dolphin caught in the commercial longline fishery increased substantially. In 2015, the commercial fishery was closed early because it caught its entire qu
If there were no “shareholders” on the council, there would be no commercial, recreational, or for-hire representation on the council. Should the rule be that if you have ever fished in saltwater for whatever reason you are excluded from participation due to conflict of interest?
If there were no “shareholders” on the council, there would be no commercial, recreational, or for-hire representation on the council. Should the rule be that if you have ever fished in saltwater for whatever reason you are excluded from participation due to conflict of interest?
Conklin replaced a good man that wanted to help all fishermen and the fish. Tom did not want catch shares or all the restrictions we have today. Conklin has a relationship with EDF - - -
Beaufort Boy can a person on the council be a “shareholder” and not have an direct benefit by council rulings towards his business profit margins and regional dominance. The whole system is broken
Big difference in voting on something that will allow you to fish a few more days vs. voting to transfer fish into your ACL so you can personally make more money.
The system is broken and certain individuals are going to sell the majority out for their own financial gain. Politics as usual.
Only solution is to shut down SAFMC and give all authority to the States through the natural resources departments.
Big difference in voting on something that will allow you to fish a few more days vs. voting to transfer fish into your ACL so you can personally make more money.
The system is broken and certain individuals are going to sell the majority out for their own financial gain. Politics as usual.
Only solution is to shut down SAFMC and give all authority to the States through the natural resources departments.
I haven’t fished offshore for a number of years. I listened to the radio and peeps were asking which fish you could keep. Speckled Hind…I knew wasn’t OK cause I looked it up before I went…what a shame it is. I stayed away from Red Snapper drops to avoid “catching” them…what a shame the intrusion is for the government to determine what I can and cannot catch…after paying the tax on fuel/boat/engine/equipment, licenses, registration…etc…etc…etc.
Who funds the tax base more…commercial or recreational? If I was running a charter business now, I’d quit.
The recreational ACL is 13 or 14 million pounds of dolphin (the commercial is 1.5 million lbs or so), and the recreational ACL is never comes close to being met. Don’t you think it is worth at least having a discussion about an allocation shift? What if the roles were reversed, and the commercials were giving up quota to the recreationals, would it be worth a discussion then?
The original poster (or CCA) left out the fact that there would be a commercial trip limit once 75% of the commercial quota was caught, essentially shutting down the longliners for part of the season. Hardly a “benefit” for those guys.
Really??? Then why is there even a discussion?
Truth is, the Council has no clue how many dolphin were landed on the Recreational ACL but they believe some of that ACL should be shifted to commercial ACL. Again, they are making rules and allocating resources without any real data. They are not Qualified to make these decisions. If these guys operated in the private sector with that type of mentality they would be fired.
This is the first step in reducing this fisheryfor the Recreational sector. The next steps will come easier and easier until we are sitting on the dock.
And don’t read me wrong, I’m not “anti-commercial” at all, I’m “anti SAFMC”. The system is broke, the deck is stacked, and they won’t stop until they can control the money that will be made by selling our natural resource.
The SAFMC has no idea how many Dolphin are in the ocean period. Who is to say that 13 or 14 million pounds is reasonable? Why does the whole quota have to be met? Why can’t fish keep swimming if we haven’t caught them all? It is the same twisted concept as spending all your govt money b/c if you don’t spend it you won’t get more next year!! Yes in that One example maybe a shift to commercial would be " fair " . The problem is that all the rules and political BS are heading towards a private ocean to benefit these particular groups and the commercial sector. The tax money generated by the citizens of this broken country and the tax revenue generated by recreational fishing spending far outweighs the commercial sector by a laughable percentage. Recreational anglers, I.E. the people that make up this country, should be the ones fishing for their own food until the end of time AND instead, the govt and all this BS is trying to keep us from fishing and then charge us a monopolistic rate to buy that fish to eat. There is just no reasonable argument against this. We, the people of this country, should be fishing for our own food in a sustainable manner without all this crazy political confusion.
The recreational ACL is 13 or 14 million pounds of dolphin (the commercial is 1.5 million lbs or so), and the recreational ACL is never comes close to being met. Don’t you think it is worth at least having a discussion about an allocation shift? What if the roles were reversed, and the commercials were giving up quota to the recreationals, would it be worth a discussion then?
The original poster (or CCA) left out the fact that there would be a commercial trip limit once 75% of the commercial quota was caught, essentially shutting down the longliners for part of the season. Hardly a “benefit” for those guys.
When does the conversation happen the other way? Since recreational population is growing and commercial is shrinking, what species have allocated TAC from commercial to rec? I'll give you a hint... NONE...
Once you give it up to commercial, you never get it back. Simple as that. If you want to argue otherwise, show me where it has.
The councils effort to manage dolphin is silly. This is a world wide commodity and the fish reproduce very rapidly. They travel huge distances . Mahi that are in the SAFMC area one week can be far away the next. Managing dolphin would have to be a world wide effort. The council is over reaching.
The councils effort to manage dolphin is silly. This is a world wide commodity and the fish reproduce very rapidly. They travel huge distances . Mahi that are in the SAFMC area one week can be far away the next. Managing dolphin would have to be a world wide effort. The council is over reaching.
From personal experience, of the many hundreds of times I’ve come back to the boat landing I’ve had a total of 1 instance where someone has measured and totaled my catch for the purposes of scientific data and estimation of quota. It was strictly voluntary.
So yes. I’d say the they have no clue what rec fisherman catch.
But I also do not want to be strictly monitored every time I go fishing.
As soon as you say their data is flawed they will propose some measure to watch over you. Next thing you know you’re going to have a vessel monitoring system on board and you’ll have to tag every fish you catch. And you’ll have to pay for every tag. BS.
Why do I even pay for a fishing “license”??? Why don’t they call it what it really is which is a tax. Your government should be giving you money to go fishing.
I hate politicians and even more, appointed government positions with no term limits. This is what happens as a result.
We have been telling the SAFMC that the data was flawed for many years! Instead of fixing it , they use the most inexpensive management method - Close vast parts of the ocean to fishing! MPA’s
I don’t think any of us are terribly happy with the current management scheme, but it literally is an act of Congress to change/modify the Magnuson-Stevens Act. US Rep Sanford and US Sen’s Scott and Graham are who you need to be contacting. The Gulf states are trying obtain control of gulf red snapper (Google HR 3094), no telling how that will pan out.
Back to the original subject of sector allocation…several years ago when black sea bass where “overfished and undergoing over fishing”, the total quota was split right at 50/50 between recs and commercial. Now it is 57% rec and 43% commercial. Also consider other fish that historically had commercial landings but don’t anymore (at least in SC)…most billfish, menhaden, adult black drum, red drum, speckled trout. I am certainly not advocating having a local commercial fishery for these species, just that over many years various species have been removed from the commercial sector.