Red Grouper - Gulf of Mexico

[diligaf]

The FWC has proposed a new rule on red grouper to coincide with federal regulations. The FWC press release-

September 23, 2004
FWC PROPOSES NEW RED GROUPER
BAG LIMIT FOR GULF STATE WATERS

CONTACT: Lee Schlesinger (850)
487-0554

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) today
proposed a rule to establish a two-fish daily bag limit for recreational
harvest of red grouper in Gulf of Mexico state waters. This action would
match regulations that took effect July 15 in Gulf federal waters.
The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has determined that the
spawning stock of red grouper in the Gulf of Mexico is too low, and the rate
of harvest must be lowered for several years in order to allow the stock to
accumulate. To achieve this, the NMFS reduced Gulf red grouper harvest
rates by 9.4 percent by lowering commercial quotas for red grouper and
shallow water groupers and by implementing a daily recreational bag limit of
two red grouper out of the five-grouper aggregate limit.
No FWC action is needed regarding commercial quotas because a
current rule already closes state waters to commercial harvest whenever a
federal quota is reached and the fishery is closed in federal waters.
However, the Commission has determined that it is necessary to adopt the
daily two-fish recreational limit for red grouper (within the five-fish
aggregate grouper limit) in Gulf state waters in order to be consistent with
federal regulations and to help rebuild red grouper stocks in the Gulf.
Florida state waters extend nine nautical miles offshore in the Gulf, and
federal waters extend beyond state waters.
The FWC intends to conduct a final public hearing on its red grouper
rule proposal during its Dec. 1-3 meeting in Key Largo, and implement the
new two-fish recreational limit on Jan. 1 if the rule is approved.
-30-

[Spear One]

No surprise there! Once the Feds passed the rule..... it was etched in stone for the state to adopt it as well.

[diligaf]

Unfortunate, but true.

[Spear One]

The state is smart, they just sit back and let the NMFS do all the dirty work, and all they have to do is adopt whatever they do. That way the NMFS takes most of the heat and the state justifies it by saying.....we like to keep the state and federal regulations uniform so it is easier for the public to keep track of the laws.

[diligaf]

With the SEDAR process that has been adopted by the governing bodies, I’m afraid we are going to see a lot more of this.

[Denny]

The SEDAR process actually gives us a fighting chance.
Notice the 9.4% reduction in harvest is achieved on the rec side by a two red grouper out of aggregate five? The SAME reduction that was going to happen when a 45% reduction was needed!!!
The recreational guys took it in the shorts on this one. The FRA filed comments that put this disparity in writing, laying the groundwork for a possible declaratory judgement.

Had the original amendment 18 undergone the scrutiny of a SEDAR process, the BS science used to show the red grouper had improved (the basis for a 9.4% reduction called for by sec amendment one vs the 45% reduction called for by amend 18 originally) would have been laughed out of existence.

[diligaf]

Denny,

IMHO, the SEDAR process will hurt recreational fishing more than it will help. Taking it “in the shorts” on this one is just the tip of the iceberg. The process has made it more “justifiable” for the FWC to adopt federal laws or vice-versa just as Spear One explained in his post.

It’s too late to do anything about the SEDAR process - it is now entrenched. I hope I’m wrong, but we better get used to it. :(

[Denny]

Dave-
The FWC has generally historicaly followed the NMFS regs.
The SEDAR process gives us (the rec guys) the chance to be involved in the process of data analysis used in the promulgation of regulations. Make no mistake, my friend... WE made a difference in the hogfish SEDAR process. Hell, we even got the discussion rolling on jewfish harvest at the very same SEDAR meeting, a discussion which continued to take place at the Mobile and Key Largo Gulf Council meetings.

[RichT]

Sorry Dave,
But I also must disagree with your conclusions about the sedar process.
The SEDAR process actually gives us a fighting chance as Denny stated. During a SEDAR review, independent scientists and experts are reviewing the science UNLIKE what occured with secretarial amendment one and amendment eighteen where paid(off) scientists were left to submit unchallenged data with NO pier review of any kind.

[diligaf]

Denny & Rich,

Believe me, I hope you guys are right. Time will tell.

[Denny]

I havn't been right in a while....I'm due:D :D :D

[RichT]

Thats funny, I havent been wrong in awhile.:D :D
Unless of course you ask my wife.:rolleyes:

[Hogfish1]

I personally witnessed the SEDAR process debunk the junk science during the hogfish review. The right questions were asked and the flimsy answers didn't hold up. People saw the testing was biased and incomplete, the assumptions were wrong and therefore the wrong conclusions were reached. Peer review works. Before SEDAR most of the input was from people who had a conflict of interest. Now at least we have a voice. We need to add more voices to the defense of our fishing rights. Please join the FRA. Add your support and lets not have the wool pulled over our eyes any more.
Thank you Dennis for all the hard work and sacrifice.

[stainlessdeath]

Well said!