Commercial vs. Recreational

I bring this up for discussion, as its own topic, because there seems to be a disparity in the two viewpoints. Thanks, Pierless, for providing the "Share the Gulf" link Share the Gulf » About The name itself is a face-slap to recreational fishermen because the implication is that recreational fishermen are hogging the resources. I suggest that the commercial fishermen coalition is projecting its own self-centered nature.

There's this lie on the "About" page:

"They are trying to reduce the portion of fish destined for restaurants and grocery stores and give it all exclusively to the recreational fishery."

"Give it all"? Well this simply isn't true. In the proposal for upcoming red snapper harvests, the choice that tilts most in the favor of recreational fishermen is a 59-41 division, a ten percent increase over the present 49-51 split. At the crux of the viewpoint difference seems to be this contention by the commercial gulf seafood advocacy group - "People shouldn't HAVE to fish, themselves, to get fresh, affordable seafood". I agree that the commercial fishery should exist, but not at the expense of those who are willing and able to catch their own! Why should the recreational fisherman (not an exact representation of who we are!) give up/give in to the commercial industry because we have invested our time and money into learning how to harvest the resource ourselves? It is not the place for recreational/self-reliant fishermen to provide price supports for those who can't or won't catch their own!

I catch my own bait. I purchase equipment, a saltwater license and a pier license. I have a boat. I purchase a license for the boat and the boating equipment necessary for success and safety. I've invested the time - half of a lifetime - perfecting (if I do say so myself) my fishing methods so that I'm successful. When I go fishing, it's only reasonable for me to expect stability in the availability of gamefish and to not have entire populations/schools wiped out by the commercial fishermen who have the ability to significantly deplete schools of pompano and mackerel and decimate populations snapper, grouper and cobia. How telling it was to see the commercial fishermen whining that they were shut out of access to speckled trout. Imagine what they would have done to THAT fishery! And the world didn't end when redfish were taken off the restaurant menus.

What I'm saying is -- Why shouldn't we, the recreational/self-sufficient fishermen, enjoy the benefits of our expertise? At least the fish caught by the recreational/self-sufficient fisherman will be consumed locally. There's a balance to be struck and that balance is that if a person doesn't want to (or can't) catch his own, then he has to pay a little more for somebody else to do it for him. That's not unreasonable and the burgeoning market will underpin those price supports for someone wanting fresh gulf seafood that he didn't "have to catch himself".

Agree, the commercial fishing lobby is selling a lie!

In all my life (almost 60 years), I have NEVER seen mackerel for sale at any Alabama "seafood" restaurant.

"Locally BOUGHT" and "locally CAUGHT" are almost always two very different things ;-)

I've been a lurker on this site for some time, and am a regular surf and sometimes pier fisherman the 4 or 5 times a year I can get down to the coast. But it seems to me that when you consider the total expenditure for gear\tackle\license\baits\boats\charters, fuel etc. etc. etc., expended by each recreational fisherman in comparison to total weight of the affected species harvested by that fisherman, and contrast that with the expenditure per pound harvested by commercial operations, a strong argument could be made that the total economic impact of recreational fishing for these species at least holds its own against commercial, and so should not be diminished in favor of increasing commercial quotas. (Lord knows my wife regularly accuses me of bringing home $100\lb fish, and sometimes she's not far wrong!) I haven't researched it, but does anyone know if any of the groups lobbying in Washington in support of recreational fishermen earlier this year are active on these proposed rules?

I just finished reading the ShareTheGulf website and nowhere did I see any recreational fisherman commenting. Everything written there is from Chef's and Commercial Boat captains. It seems to me that those who operate Charter and Head Boats would be commenting as well if what is being proposed was truely fair to both recreational and commercial fisherman. I would venture to say that recreational fisherman both inshore and offshore contribute a bunch more money to local communities than the commercial guys do. If you keep restricting what the recreational guys can catch you will see a reduction in the number of people who travel to the coast to fish diminish greatly. I'm only one person, but when my wife and I come to the Gulf Coast for a week I spend probably $2500 to $3000 depending on what we do when we get there. If you multiply that by however many people come to the Gulf Coast every year specificly to fish you are talking about a truck load of money that will be lost to the local ecomomy. Here is a case in point, for many years 50 of us from here in Knoxville would charter a bus and travel to Panama City for a 3 day/overnight trip on a head boat out of Captain Andersons Marina. We went specificly to catch Red Snapper and Grouper and everyone always brought home a cooler full of fish. Our cost for the trip was $500.00 per man which covered the bus, the boat which we would sleep on and one night in a motel after our last night on the boat. When we got to Panama City we would stop at half Hitch tackle and buy cigar minnows, line, rods, reels hooks etc. etc. so all told 50 guys would spend and average of $700 for 3 days of fishing. Lots of fun and lots of fish to bring home for our families to enjoy. Well several years ago the snapper and grouper regs changed to I think 2 snapper and 1 grouper per day and the days you could fished were also limited. Based on that we dicided it was not worth $700 to catch a cooler full of beeliners so we quit making the trip which resulted in Panama City losing $35,000 of our money. I have been fishing all of my life and God only knows how much money I have spent pursuing that sport, so when the day comes that I can't catch decent game fish for my enjoyment and table I will quit fishing and go play checkers as will many other people who enjoy fishing.

BigDawg, I'm sure that the strictly pro-commercial fishing advocacy group is not going to allow alternative opinions on their site. They represent the interests of strictly commercial harvest. I could be wrong here, but I would think that chartered party boats for recreational fishermen would have to conform to recreational limits. The charter/head boat captains' interests would, then, fall on the recreational side, as opposed to commercial side. It would be a HUGE boost to that part of the recreational market, were the snapper allocations to change to 59 percent (recreational) vs 41 percent (commercial). Tha's why everyone should go to the NOAA comments page and express their preferences for the ten percent allocation change. In reality, they will probably split the difference and make it 54/46, but it's still a good idea for recreational fishermen to weigh in on the red snapper proposal. The spanish mackerel increase is already a done-deal.

But you're right about the impact that recreational fishing has on the economy. The commercial fishermen take it and go. It's in THEIR interest to take the resource WITHOUT spending money! The recreational fisherman is there to enjoy the experience!

And here's another striking difference. There are several of us here who share our techniques/best practices for success. Who has seen the commercial guys helping each other similarly? Not me! They seem to be in it for themselves and their own selfish interests, so the "Share the Gulf" nonsense means "Let us have it for ourselves!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eym_sirius

I would think that chartered party boats for recreational fishermen would have to conform to recreational limits.

---

That was true until recently. Charter boats are pushing for a sector separation plan that gives them access to the fishery while private recs are cut off. Some head boats had a quota last year they could catch when the season was closed to others. This program will probably expand this year. Unfortunately charters (most but not all) are now also in the gang beating up on private recreational fishing.

How about someone putting a link on the Forum for the NOAA comments page so that we as recreational fisherman can comment on what is being proposed by them. Let's face it, we make no money from our fishing, we merely just fish for the fun of it and spend our hard earned dollars to enjoy the sport. Since we have no organization to speak for us, we need to speak for ourself and make a case for how we make a major contribution to the local economies.

Here you go, Big Dawg!

Scoping Documents & Proposed Amendments : Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council

I agree with you about comments. I think that the best strategy is to flood them with comments addressing the massive economic impact of recreational fishermen on the economy, while re-enforcing the idea that the goal of commercial fishermen is to spend as little money as possible harvesting the resource.

Likely, if nobody comments, the Fishery Management Council will conclude that nobody on the recreational side will care or speak out against an adverse decision. I suggest asking for more than you think they're going to allow, so that when they do settle on a middle-ground decision, it's still an acceptable one. (Like asking for 59-41, but settling for a 54-46 reallocation of the harvest, in favor of the recreational fishermen).

I usually average a thousand or more per week total expenses for my Alabama coast trips and make several trips per year. I wonder if Gulf Shores will miss mt money if I just switct all the way to fresh water loal fishimg.

Today I spent sometime reading the reports as to why changes are being proposed to the current Red Snapper regulations. I read all their charts and graphs which show how many pounds of Red Snapper recreational fisherman have caught over the last decade or so. What kept jumping out at me was they show no verifiable method of calculating those numbers. Knowing the commercial guys catch is easy as they can track how many pounds were sold to buyers. Since there are no check stations for recreational guys to take their snapper to for counting and weighing, the numbers used in their charts to justify making changes to the season and limits is nothing but smoke and mirrors. In other words they are pulling those numbers out of their ass and publishing them as facts. What a sham this is.

That is the view of big government. Make it to where there is nothing fun left in the land. And that we aee dependent on big business. Although there isnt a huge impact for each individual the rec. Fisher people as a whole need a voice/platform

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rwoods663

That is the view of big government. Make it to where there is nothing fun left in the land. And that we aee dependent on big business. Although there isnt a huge impact for each individual the rec. Fisher people as a whole need a voice/platform

---

I look at it differently after reading the studies. Big government HAS messed up the red snapper fishery, no doubt. Like a car being driven in reverse, using only the rear view mirror, we go WAY over that way, then over-correct and go WAY over the other way, never finding the sweet spot. But now, the choices offered include those that FAVOR the recreational fisherman! Let's jump on that! A ten percent reallocation in poundage that has the commercial cartel up in arms? It looks like the government is TRYING to do right by the recreational fishermen, at least in the case of red snapper (which I don't normally fish for). As well, the increase in poundage for spanish mackerel might SEEM to be a great thing for mackerel fishermen, but that depends on how strong the commercial market is for that fishery. If the market is expansive and strong, then the boats will be out scooping up huge schools. If the market is weak, then the commercial fishermen may pursue mackerel AFTER they've exhausted their limits on the other species. Most of the time, the pier fishermen will be unaffected by a limit increase for spanish -- but maybe at least the rule-makers are trying to do right by us (if it's something that recreational fishermen, by their responses, feel strongly about).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Dawg

Knowing the commercial guys catch is easy as they can track how many pounds were sold to buyers. Since there are no check stations for recreational guys to take their snapper to for counting and weighing, the numbers used in their charts to justify making changes to the season and limits is nothing but smoke and mirrors. In other words they are pulling those numbers out of their ass and publishing them as facts. What a sham this is.

---

You're right, BD! Fecundity and biomass studies don't reveal anything but trends and the harvest estimates on the recreational side are ALL approximations. I think that what is lacking are sound logic and sound enforcement practices, accurate harvest records, accurate scientific prediction methods and leadership that is results-based. I think that they first decide what they want the results to be and then manipulate the statistics, show through graphs and bars, to correspond with the already-decided outcome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eym_sirius

I think that what is lacking are sound logic and sound enforcement practices, accurate harvest records, accurate scientific prediction methods and leadership that is results-based.

---

That is the heart of the problem. This year, snapper caught by Alabama fishermen had to be reported. The end result was the state's estimate of total catch was only about half what the feds estimated we caught.

Yep, correct, calculating the commercial catch is easy, they must report what they sold and the buyers must keep records on what they bought and from who. Records don't match = someone getting fined or losing their permits.
Recreational catch is calculated using statistic based on a limited number of creel surveys, an estimate of the number of fisherman, an estimate of the number of hours spent fishing to produce an estimate of how many fish are caught per day which is then multiplied by an estimate of the average weight of the fish being caught to come up with an estimate of how many pounds caught vs. an estimated quota based on a whole other set of statistics.
Sure, bet that is reallllyyyyy accurate, no room for error in that calculation!

This is why AL MRD did their own intensive reporting and survey work last summer, to get much better numbers for all these factors. And its no surprise their estimate had much less statistical error and was a whole lot lower than the NMFS estimate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CarlF

Yep, correct, calculating the commercial catch is easy, they must report what they sold and the buyers must keep records on what they bought and from who. Records don't match = someone getting fined or losing their permits.
Recreational catch is calculated using statistic based on a limited number of creel surveys, an estimate of the number of fisherman, an estimate of the number of hours spent fishing to produce an estimate of how many fish are caught per day which is then multiplied by an estimate of the average weight of the fish being caught to come up with an estimate of how many pounds caught vs. an estimated quota based on a whole other set of statistics.
Sure, bet that is reallllyyyyy accurate, no room for error in that calculation!

This is why AL MRD did their own intensive reporting and survey work last summer, to get much better numbers for all these factors. And its no surprise their estimate had much less statistical error and was a whole lot lower than the NMFS estimate.

---

All the more reason for Alabama to set their own creel limits and season length for Red Snapper in Alabama waters. Other Gulf Coast states have, so why not Alabama? I personally love to fish for Red Snapper, but I refuse to spend the money for fuel for my personal boat or pay the cost of a head boat or charter trip under the current NMFS regulations.

What ever happened to the commercial and recreational landings sections available through the Outdoor Alabama website?
Marine Resources Division Fisheries Section | Outdoor Alabama

Up until the website was revamped ALMR published detailed landing data by method, by species and by month to allow the public to actually see for themselves where the resource was utilized. A search on the internet now reveals nothing but outdated data still lingering in cyberspace. WHAT IS GOING ON with ALMR?

Some interesting numbers I came across in my most recent search...
Lagniappe: Something Extra For Mobile

Quote:

---

To the editor: I am involved in the effort you write about (Holbert, March 14-27) and you’re missing some facts yourself. I became involved in the net ban because I found a dead loggerhead sea turtle in a gill net. You totally missed the "bycatch" issue, the main reason they banned the nets in Florida. Remember the dead sea turtle ad? Google the phrase "the destructive gillnets" and tell me you aren’t for the ban. And as for the "2 million Spanish" your buddy Vern Minton was quoted in the Mobile Press-Register in Oct. 2006 as saying definitively that the 2005 harvest of Spanish in Alabama was 2 million pounds. Are we not to trust the Director of Marine Resources of our own state? And by the way, before you automatically assume that a gill net ban would put so many out of business, check your facts. (1. 70% of all gill net license holders had gross landings of less than $25,000 and I don’t mean net landings. That means they made a few bucks at best and that’s 70% chief so where are all the lost jobs? (2. We have searched in vain for a large wholesaler of Spanish in Alabama and Wallace seafood co is the biggest and is one of only two. So, a million pounds of Spanish were caught in Alabama in 2005 and where were they processed? NOT ALABAMA. Where were they consumed? NOT ALABAMA. (3. 2.4 million pounds of mullet were harvested in 2005 mainly for roe, the fish simply being discarded. Where was the roe processed? NOT ALABAMA. Where was it consumed? NOT ALABAMA! I am available to discuss the real facts with you anytime you wish. I am VERY involved with the net ban initiative and supplied Jamie Ison with her talking points. Call me if you want the truth.
Sam Wilson CCA Alabama

---

Sounds like the 'Good Ole Boy Club" is alive and well in Alabama. Here in Tennessee we have slowly but surely retired most of our Good Ole Boys to the back porch where they can sip Jack Daniels and talk about the good ole days.

Pier#R, the MDR link you posted still has some current red snapper data. When you open that link look to the right and you will see an index of links. Open the "Red Snapper Mandatory Reporting FAQ" link. When that page opens you will see a headline, PRELIMINARY RESULTS of ALABAMA 2014 RED SNAPPER REPORTING. Open that link and you can see the data. Very interesting when compared to what the Feds are saying. Yet another reason that Alabama should take over the management of it's state waters.

That's right BD.
Those are the numbers ALMR came up with their MANDATORY RED SNAPPER reporting this past year.

I was referring to the sets of data for ALL fishes (and methods).
They used to have reports similar to the NMFS data queries @ MRIP Logon

The last report I obtained was dated 2013 and that only included data through 2011.
I'm just wondering is this an oversight or planned to deny the public ready access to catch data?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Dawg

All the more reason for Alabama to set their own creel limits and season length for Red Snapper in Alabama waters. Other Gulf Coast states have, so why not Alabama? I personally love to fish for Red Snapper, but I refuse to spend the money for fuel for my personal boat or pay the cost of a head boat or charter trip under the current NMFS regulations.

---

Alabama did this to an extent last year. However, the problem is that Alabama waters only go out 3 miles. While there are snapper to be caught within 3 miles, that is still very limiting. Alabama has declared that it now owns waters out to 9 miles -- just like LA and FL -- but this assertion has not been federally recognized, meaning fish in the 3-9 mile zone at your own risk. Feds will still write tickets in that zone, but state level officers will not with one caveat; to further complicate things, federal fisheries officers will ride out on ALMR boats (ALMR cannot turn them down without losing big funding) and ticket people who thought they were safe when they saw an ALMR boat approaching.

Also charter boats hate on this approach because federal permit holders have to obey federal regulations even when fishing in state waters. Your head spinning yet?