to bottom fishing… Their “Alternatives” are listed below. Anything from a 1 sq mile closure to a 13.8 sq mile closure. Let’s not be naive. We KNOW that the closure pimps will not settle for 1 square mile.
Send them the appropriate mail now or forever hold your peace… You should all tell them to put their money where their mouth is… Tell them to create NEW artificial reefs in the 300-600’ range and close them all they want. But, don’t take EXISTING fishing grounds and keep whittling away at us. They have a 1 BILLION dollar budget and cannot give our state 1 MILLION each year for reef building?
Let me put this into perspective for you about the money… The pallid sturgeon in the Yellowstone river are thought to be endangered. They estimate that there are about 125 of them left. The government is proposing to save them by implementing a $59 MILLION dollar dam bypass project. Yes, $59 million for 125 fish. Imagine what we could do to the artificial reef system with a fraction of that money.
Also, the closure pimps* aren’t going to settle with bottom fishing either. This habitat is like no other in the world. Critical for many species, both dimersal and pelagic. Suits have been filed to get white marlin and others on the critical species list. Don’t you think the same logic can be followed to get the hole closed to trolling as has led us to this juncture with speckled hinds and warsaws?
It’s been discussed. It’s been in white papers. It’s part of the agenda. Sit on your hands and think that closures will get rid of bottom fishing commercial guys and that you don’t care because all you do is troll and bottom bump a little on the way in.
Don’t get mad when it’s too late and all we can do is say, “Told ya so.”
WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT?
You tell your elected leaders to pay attention to this just as much as you want him or her to pay attn to gun rights, tax laws, and everything else. Nothing will change if they think they don’t need to care about a little bit of ocean closed to some activity.
Some of us care a lot about all these closures. You will too when it’s your “favorite” spot or fish in front of the firing squad…
Skinnej touches on a point that we ( at least I don’t see discussed very thoroughly…) With all the money that NOAA has to waste, I mean spend, why don’t they spend more money on creating more fish habitat.
he mentions in the 300’ - 600’ range, I would argue for more artificial structure throughout the 60’ - 600’ range.
Amendment 36 would put in place hundreds of square miles of spawning Special Management Zones from North Carolina through east Florida to Key West, in which bottom fishing would be prohibited.
The Georgetown Hole is one of the proposed SMZs.
This despite nearly 700 square miles of existing deep-water Marine Protected Areas in which bottom fishing is prohibited, and nearly 24,000 square miles of existing deep-water coral Habitat Areas of Particular Concern in which bottom fishing is substantially restricted by prohibitions on anchoring and bottom longlines. There is no plan in place to evaluate and monitor the effectiveness of these existing closed areas, much less any new areas.
Public hearings in SC on Amendment 36 will be held next week:
All are 4 to 7 pm.
Monday, August 10:
Hilton Garden Inn, 5265 International Boulevard, N. Charleston, SC 29418
Wednesday, August 12:
Murrells Inlet Community Center, 4462 Murrells Inlet Road, Murrells Inlet, SC 29576
Written comments can be emailed to mike.collins@safmc.net (reference the name of the amendment in the subject line), faxed to (843) 769-4520 or mailed to Robert Mahood, Executive Director, SAFMC, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, N. Charleston, SC 29405.
Hopefully many on here went to the Charleston meetings… I am sure the SAFMC explained that transit and trolling would still be allowed thru these SMZ areas… what is not explained is if your out pleasure\for-hire\commercial and have any bottom fish aboard (example… you started bottom fishing on your trip because waves would not allow to be offshore and later in day\trip the waves laid down and you heard the tuna\dolfhin\wahoo were biting offshore in one of these SMZ\MPA areas, you would not be allowed to go troll because you had snapper\grouper species on board). This could mean you are subject to troll first and then travel out of the area and then bottom fish… we all know that most trips do not allow this with wind and such. WE ALL NEED TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE FINE DETAILS… I encourage all to voice your opinions thru public comment with any outlet you are comfortable with…
Georgetown Hole plan would ban bottom fishing across 15 square miles
POST & COURIER – "A federal plan is in development to put bottom fishing off limits across 15 square miles of the fabled Georgetown Hole, among eight other fish-spawning bottoms in the Southeast.
…On Monday, the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council staff began a final round of public meetings. A final council vote is expected by December. One version or another of the sanctuaries would be put off limits in July 2016. The total area could be as much as nearly 80 square miles. The public can provide input and comment until the end of August.
…The Council for Sustainable Fishing, an advocacy group for seafood business interests in the South Carolina and neighboring states, opposes it, because the sanctuaries would put hundreds more acres off-limits to bottom fishing, ‘despite nearly 700 square miles of existing deep-water Marine Protected Areas in which bottom fishing is prohibited.’
Farther offshore, nearly 24,000 square miles of existing deep-water coral also have bottom fishing restrictions, the council noted on its website. ‘There is no plan in place to evaluate and monitor the effectiveness of these existing closed areas, much less any new areas,’ said the posting."
Skinneej will tell you this has been trying to be approved for Y E A R S, kinda like Joe Riley and a tax increase, if it doesn’t pass the first time you are guaranteed to see it until it does. If approved I hope for the smallest area. Kinda like a budget request, submit one that is totally out of bounds and hope to get at least half.
I attended yesterday’s meeting from 6pm or so until maybe 6:45pm, and only one other member of the public was there during that time period. According to documents and the presentation: There are several size areas being proposed for GT Hole, the largest being 15.2 sq miles and the smallest 1.0 sq mile. The Snapper Grouper AP supports a 3.1 sq mile closed area at G-town hole. There is a sunset provision that in a nutshell states that Spawning SMZ’s will be reviewed/researched and if they are not these zones will be re-opened to bottom fishing. Like Fishmonger states above, as the amendment is currently written if you have bottom fish on board you cannot enter the SMZ. You can currently enter an MPA with bottom fish on board. The grand total square miles for all proposed sites between NC and Key West, if the maximum # is used, is 53 sq miles closed, but the Snapper Grouper AP is recommending 36 sq miles. Someone may want to check my simple addition on this but I’m certainly not arriving at “hundreds of square miles”.
I attended yesterday’s meeting from 6pm or so until maybe 6:45pm, and only one other member of the public was there during that time period. According to documents and the presentation: There are several size areas being proposed for GT Hole, the largest being 15.2 sq miles and the smallest 1.0 sq mile. The Snapper Grouper AP supports a 3.1 sq mile closed area at G-town hole. There is a sunset provision that in a nutshell states that Spawning SMZ’s will be reviewed/researched and if they are not these zones will be re-opened to bottom fishing. Like Fishmonger states above, as the amendment is currently written if you have bottom fish on board you cannot enter the SMZ. You can currently enter an MPA with bottom fish on board. The grand total square miles for all proposed sites between NC and Key West, if the maximum # is used, is 53 sq miles closed, but the Snapper Grouper AP is recommending 36 sq miles. Someone may want to check my simple addition on this but I’m certainly not arriving at “hundreds of square miles”.
First they wanted a few “experimental” MPA’s, and then they wanted to “reconfigure” the “experimental” MPA’s, and now they want to add in some “spawning SMZ’s”… These are the “Marine Reserves” that they have been talking about for 25 years now. Greg Waugh\David Cupka whittling away at this dream.
Here is the proof… Straight from the horse’s mouth:
Notice the dates on these documents… They source back to 1990. They have ALWAYS wanted to do this… They have ALWAYS had the same issue - the public doesn’t want a massive “no bottomfishing zone”… So, they have the ultimate solution in their own minds… T
PS, where is the “experiment” data that came from the “experimental MPA’s”? Did they prove the validity of MPA’s in the SAFMC? Of COURSE NOT… That’s why these have a different title “Spawning SMZ’s”… How much longer will these two pull the wool over the eyes of the council and the public?
If only we had access to the private phone calls and meetings that these two have outside of the context of the scheduled meetings…
There’s several SCDNR videos from SCDNR Area’s 51 and 53 that show what happens when an area isn’t fished for 10 or 20 years…lots of fish! Google search Rileys Hump and Gladden Spit for other very successful Spawning Zone sites.
There’s several SCDNR videos from SCDNR Area’s 51 and 53 that show what happens when an area isn’t fished for 10 or 20 years…lots of fish! Google search Rileys Hump and Gladden Spit for other very successful Spawning Zone sites.
I've seen a few videos of A51. They don't look any different than a lot of my live bottom spots that people don't know about. But both A51 and A53 are being fished. They are just not fished as heavily as the PUBLIC artificial reefs. They are NOT protected. They are only secret... Think about that... The are NOT MPA's... And, they are OPEN to fishing... IF you can find them... So, instead of roping off no-fishing zones in the ocean, why not just create 100+ more Area 51's? Riddle me that...
Basically you just proved that MPA’s are not needed… You indirectly mentioned the inherent problem with the federal government. That is, they don’t want to “invest” in the fishery by funding the creation of these 100+ new Area 51’s. Instead they take a “lazy boy” approach to fisheries management, by destroying fishermen…
That being said, if VMS slips through, our fishery will be destroyed for the exact opposite reason (i.e. the veil of secrecy will be lifted from every secret spot)…
Somewhere there’s a money trail,this was decided long ago by someone smart enough to leave enough scraps to throw out to make folks feel like they won something every now and then…
Our legislature, the ones that matter, aren’t gonna treat this like any proposed tax hike or gun law…just saying
Call me when y’all decide on a boat convoy…It ain’t gonna work but what else has and at least it will make the news.
4 or 5 hundred boats owned by folks not on the fence is my best idea.
Do you guys think SAFMC is doing this to deliberately hurt fishermen? I think they are doing it to preserve the species. I don’t see some big government conspiracy here guys. The GT Hole is a unique geomorphology that is a prime spawning ground for the fish we all want our grandkids to be able to catch. It’s a HUGE ocean. Let the grouper/snapper species spawn in big numbers there and they will eventually migrate out to find less competitive food sources where you can catch them. People can find somewhere else in that giant expanse of water to fish if they close a 15 square mile area and just to bottom fishing at that!
