the assessment is already in the works, so the entire picture for the outlook of gag grouper could change just in the next few weeks. There is no need to cause this kind of uproar when man- agers know there are errors in the sci- ence. It only adds to the general feeling of distrust between NOAA and the recreational angling community.” In addition to the uncertainty in the stock assessment, recreational anglers are also frustrated that the proposed rule closes the recreational fishery entirely, yet allows the commercial sec- tor to land 100,000 pounds of gag grouper. The commercial quota is to allow “the retention of some acciden- tally caught gag that would otherwise be discarded dead at sea.” “In the recent history of this particu- lar fishery, federal managers have run roughshod over the interests of recre- ational anglers, and a total closure of gags based on known faulty science while allowing commercial boats to keep 100,000 pounds is just an another un- necessary slap in the face,” said Brewer. In January of 2009, CCA released an economic study by Gentner Consulting Group showing that the maximum eco- nomic value of the Gulf grouper fish- ery would be achieved by allocating
100 percent of the fishery to the recre- ational sector. However, at its meeting in February 2009, the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council chose to ignore the study and opted instead to proceed with an Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) program for Gulf grouper that proposed to permanently lock a significant portion of that fishery into the commercial sector forever. In September of 2009, CCA sued the fed- eral government in federal district court over the Gulf grouper catch share program. The suit is still under consid- eration by the federal district court in Fort Myers, Florida. “We have many challenges in feder- al fisheries, and the long-term solution for many of them is for NOAA to take a serious look at reallocating fisheries based on factors like economics and changing demographics,” said Brewer. “In the short term, however, NOAA can demonstrate a willingness to be reasonable and at least wait for the errors in the assessment to be corrected before deciding on a course of action for this fishery.”
Fisheries managers take
huge step toward righting allocations The Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Man-
agement Council and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Committee met jointly in November, and in response to a request from Coastal Conservation Association voted to begin an analysis of the scup fishery to determine whether a modification of the current allocation is needed. The current scup allocation, set back in the 1990s, gives 78 percent of the resource to the com- mercial sector, leaving only 22 percent available for public access. The analysis commissioned will look at current eco- nomic/social/biological aspects of the fishery, which will be used to deter- mine the proper allocation. “This is a precedent-setting devel- opment, and managers should be com- mended for taking the first steps to reallocating a fishery based on relevant current factors rather than outdated historical catches,” said Richen Brame, director of CCA’s Atlantic Fisheries Committee. “Demographics change, economics change, everything changes, but fisheries allocations have been frozen in time for decades. CCAhas long called for federal managers to conduct this type of analysis for every fishery to determine where the greatest economic and conservation benefits lie today.” CCA raised the issue of scup reallo-
A LEGACY OF CONSERVATION
OIN THE SPECIAL GROUP OF PEOPLE who have made a lifetime commitment to marine resource con- servation, and become a life member of CCA. With your one time $1,000 mem- bership contribution, you will receive this distinctive CCA life member display piece.
J
To create your own legacy of conser- vation and become a life member, contact Robert Taylor, CCA Director of Development, 1.800.201. 3474.
Coastal Conservation Association
6919 Portwest, Suite 100 Houston, Texas 77024
1.800. 201. FISH
www.joincca.org
52
www.joincca.org TIDE
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64