Reply to Mr. Leech

[Broadbill-Pro]

This is the former Pres. of the IGFA and former HMS Advisory Panel Member comments.

To all swordfish interests: HERE WE GO AGAIN

In spite of the so called "revitalization" of the longline industry by NMFS, nobody believes the new relaxed regulations will allow the longliners to meet their sword quota. This includes the longline industry, NMFS and anyone else that has been paying attention to what is going on.


First it is not "their sword quota" this quota belongs to all Americans and we all need to bond together to protect our right to continue fishing for swordfish and make certain that the US 3900mt quota is caught on gear that is as bycatch sensitive as possible. The PLL industry knows that it will take more than the proposed 13 EFP's to harvest the 1800 additional mt needed to meet the quota, it will take increased rec. catching/reporting, bouy gear, increased incidental catches and the possible development of a freezer fleet to accomplish this. These are not hugh hurdles for the user groups I mentioned. ICATT is not going to take away that quota in 2008 if in the next year we are able to show a 50% increase in our harvest. We must show intent to expand through what ever means possible. The 3900mt will be caught, regardless of the Nation doing the fishing. Mr. Leech suggests we give up and allow the fish to be caught by other Countries

They know in order to catch the US quota the only way is to fish in the spawning grounds/nursery area that is currently closed. If they (longliners) thought they could catch their quota in other areas they would not be so persistent in trying to get back to slaughtering the babies as they did in the 1970s and 80s. Remember they wiped out the recreational fishery in about 3 years back then. It took 20 years, a law suite and a closed area before it was worth fishing with rod and reel again. If the longliners get back in, even if it is north of Ft Pierce, history will repeat itself. It's unbelievable how NMFS can't seem to stand a healthy fishery. All they want to do is start depleting it again.


The FEC is not a spawning ground, it is an area where 40'' to 60'' swordfish congregate before moving into migration patterns. I will touch very lightly on the fact that nearly all fish harvested in the FEC by recreational and commercial fisherman are pre-spawn animals, the definition of juvenile mortality is used very loosely.


Some of us on the HMS Advisory Panel have been kicked off. Possibly because we refused to compromise on the closed areas. Now that they have some nubies on the panel they will try to get the newcomers to agree to some kind of deal where the longlines will be allowed back. Just because they are over the horizon doesn't mean longlines aren't killing the babies that are the future of the fishery. I hope the new panel members will stand fast.


One of the nubies refered to is Jason Schratwieser, he is the new IGFA represenative on the HMS-AP and the Conservation Director for the IGFA. I had the pleasure of speaking to him several times. He appears to be focused and at the same time open minded to all the issues. He is without a doubt a step in the right direction for the AP and the IGFA. I think the HMS Division choose new members with consideration to real time experience and local knowledge. It only takes one AP member to bring a position to the table, it is ultimately the public and the Director of NMFS who determine the fate of the fishery.


The so called "research" by longliners that "proved" circle hooks reduced the bycatch of undersized swords, turtles, sharks, etc., has never been available to the public, or for that matter even those of us on the HMS AP. Neither would NMFS give us the names of the people that made up the peer review panel. To the best of my knowledge, the research has never even been published. I asked for it but couldn't get it. I strongly suspect the circle hooks that were used in the research were either non offset or offset only 5 degrees. However, when the new rules allowing longlining were published, the longliners were allowed to offset hooks 10 degrees. The reason for this, according to NMFS, was because longliners couldn't bait their hooks if they weren't offset 10 degrees. BS !!! Scientist generally agree this eliminates the benefits of circle hooks. This would make the whole research effort bogus. I call on NMFS to publish and make this research publicly available. After all, taxpayer money paid for it.


A formal request for this information was made during the HMS-AP meeting. Mr. Leech's opinion is that the experiments were made with several different degrees of circle hook offset, he admittingly has no information as to the results of the experiments (but comments anyway). Information I received from PLL Fisherman states that a 30% reduction occurs in PLL swordfish harvest with the use of the 10% offset hook. We must keep in mind that commercial fishing is the objected purpose, a reduction of more than 30% harvest would surely question whether it is viable to operate.


Longlines have repeatedly held out this research as proof that longlining is a clean fishery. In reality, it is one of the dirtiest fisheries known to man, and specifically impacts billfish, juvenile swords, sharks, endangered turtles and some marine mammals. Why would NMFS want to revitalize this relatively low value industry at the expense of the highly valuable offshore fishing industry?
If they allow 13 longline vessels in the closed area, it will be the kiss of death and the beginning of the end for recreational swordfishing as we know it. They will once again come up with some "proof" that they can operate a clean fishery which we all know is impossible for indiscriminate longline hooks, circle or not. There is absolutely no reason they can't do their research in the Gulf Of Mexico or any other place. The baby swords aren't limited to the Florida Straights.


The Magnuson Stevens Fishery Act states (yes I read it all) that bycatch in all fisheries must be reduced to the maximum extent practicle. My personal experience has been 1 marine mammal and 2 turtle mortalities in 25 years of PLL, I think this number falls in the practicle catagory. In comparision to the hundreds of recreationally caught sailfish I have hooked with a #5 live bait hook in conjunction with a treble stinger hook while kingfishing, I personally feel my commercial experience was more environmentally sound than my recreational. Keep in mind that I have never used circle hooks on a PLL.

NMFS has an obligation to provide equal access of this fishery to all Americans, when the 13 million pound quota was being harvested in 1997, it was not a low value fishery, yet it was ultimately closed. I do not remember any articles from Mike Leech back then stating it would be a disaster to shut down an industry that so many families relied on. Do not throw the economic factor into it now, when you failed to see it in the past.

The last comment makes me wonder if the IGFA has any Gulf State Members and why we have not heard from them in regard to this comment? Another example of why there has been a flushing of the AP and the IGFA. It is high time that Marlin Magazine follows suit.


I was shocked to learn at the club meeting the other night that Ollie has somehow finagled his way into being allowed to buoy fish on an industrial scale in the closed area. I guess the writing was on the wall when NMFS allowed up to 35 buoys, when only about 10 to 12 can be worked in a somewhat conservative manner. This will undoubtedly result in many undersized swords being thrown back dead. Don't expect to ever see the results of his activities published anywhere either. I would love to see some dedicated sport boat follow him from a distance when he pulls the buoys and photograph the results. That is about the only way we will ever find out how bad the results will be. As usual, The whole operation was kept under wraps so the public wouldn't know in advance what is happening. Another closed door operation by NMFS.


I was at that meeting and recall Alley (not Ollie) volunteering the information about the survey long before it was published in the Fed Reg. This was my first AP meeting, when speaking to long time AP Members, they expressed to me that what had actually been stated at past meetings and your summary in Marlin Magazine were in no way similiar. I would hope for your sake that this shortage of memory is a bias and not a health issue.

Again as the experiment stands, I can not support it. 35 bouys is enough to monitor.

Rest assured, the longliner buoy gear operation is simply a prototype for future longliners to come in with industrial scale buoy gear, knowing the closed area is their only hope of catching their quota.
Everyone needs to get involved in this if you want to protect the future health of swordfish. Those of you who weren't around in the late 1970s and early 80s don't realize how quickly a fishery can be decimated.

Mike Leech


So we must decide that with a rebuilt stock is the issue really bycatch? From all information collected the bouy fishery is as clean as any commercial swordfishery can become. Is it not apparent that Mr. Leech's resentment for commercial fisherman clouds his ability to make reasonable suggestions in regard to this fishery? The idea of no commercial harvest on the FEC does not appear to be an option since bouy fishing has already taken a foothold.

My opinion is that there needs to be a way to allow all fishing sectors to exist within regulations and with minimal gear conflict. The attitude that one user group should only be allowed access to this resource is unreasonable and unrealistic.

[orange crush]

Is this Alley, maybe Alley Mercier?

[RiskTaker]

Vinnie:

Thank you very much for taking the time to disect ones comments, in this case Mike Leech (former IGFA- Man)', and then also responding in like kind from your vantage point. (I think you carefully avoided any bashing.)

Some people with a purely recreational, or Florida SE coast mindset, may not necessarily like some of these comments. But let the truth be told and we will make better decisions with the whole contextual truth on the table.

This is the type of dialogue and discussion that is going to get to the crux of the matter and give us all a better understanding of things, and possibly work collectively for the benefit of a healthy swordfishery, and help keep the "dynamic" quota in our court (the U.S. allocation).

Certainly, it is recognized that the appointed decision makers in N.M.F.S. is ultimately calling the shots on how it is going to be, and based upon their "rules of engagement".

There also seems to be a fair amount of public criticism, how N.M.F.S. finally deliverers the "Rules", apparently slanted towards the Commercial interest.

My suggestion is for everyone to reflect upon these things we may have discovered about ourselves, temporarily step back, review and reflect; hopefully, to polish up on the deficiencies. Then step back up to the plate: better informed, better mannered, less selfish and prepared to collaborate productively, with all of the right reasons as mutual Goals and Objectives.

The way I see it, many people have taken shots based upon partial truths and stood their ground based upon the same. I hope we can get better at seeing the truths from a full context perspective.

Our opinions and suggestions will have greater credibility, no matter which camp we are lobbying from. And somehow I am curiously optomisitic that they may be more closely aligned than in years gone by: it is a reach but I am not pesimistic.

Thanks again Vinnie. You personal feedback is enabling this posibility to learn, possibly change and mature in a good way. Without the counterpoints, this Conservation forum could quite possibly run amuck with information being shared from a purely narrow-minded recreational mind-set. Frankly, an overly-narrow mindset is simply Dangerous, in our world; today, tomorrow as well as yesteday. (Terrorists have narrow mindsets and lack-of toleration for other's ways that may be different than their own)

Vinnie:

One of your points listed above: you did not favor the experiment that Captain Alley is in progress to conduct. Please explain further. I was under teh impression from what he or Dave said at the meeting, that they would be fishing about 20 deployments of buoys, for about 60 sets of fishing sessions over a year's time. I also heard from Ron's post that there was a request to get EFP status, to carry a spool on-board and to also carry more buoys as back-ups. But I also read, to possibly fish them too.

What are the specific reasons you may object to this experiment? Is it fishing more than 35 buoys, or some information that came to light in Wash. D.C. To me "good" data and proper data handling is how decisons are qualified to be made. Without data, my opinion is that we are making decisions based upon other reasons. It seems like my opinion may be in the minority at this moment from the Rec. perspective, so I would like to better understand why. Until then I am holding my ground on this subject.

[Broadbill-Pro]

I do not disapprove of this experiment totally, the fact that the Kristen Lee is a slow vessel and the request to deploy more buoys than the current regulations provide concerns me if this is to be an experiment to examine the current bouy fishery.

The fact that the vessel is better suited for extended trips, more distant waters and product processing than the current buoy fleet is no secret.

Dave stated that they asked for a EFP, but were denied when in fact the permit is still under consideration. The proposal is to deploy 25 separate leaders with 4 buoys per leader when he stated 20 leaders at the meeting.

If the experiment is to provide data to possibly develope a fishery that borders what resembles a buoy/PLL system, then I think they should be upfront with their intentions.

IF that is the intention, I will go on record now that an exclusion to the highly used South Florida recreational area be considered to minimize gear conflict.

[RiskTaker]

double post of the same

[RiskTaker]

Here is an article outside of our typical forum cyberspace that readers may find as an interesting read. It is pertinent to the discussions in progress, and it may reinforce the urgency to cooperate as Fishermen: instead of solely as (recreational versus commercial) fishermen.

And this includes charter boats too because they achieve financial gain by engaging in a commercial fishing operation; albeit catering to recreational customers.

Check it out: The Commercial Fishing Debate

Buen Provecho and Happy St. Patty's Day. And just imagine that the Irish are beating the Pakistan team at the World Cup in Kingston, JA. It must be a special day with copious amounts of Barley pops. Arrgh, that was a beginning of a de-rail. I need to just turn the telephone off; maybe even the computer while I'm at it. Gottago. Later, y'all.

[CaptKen]

Originally Posted by Broadbill-Pro

I do not disapprove of this experiment totally,
[/b]

If you were in fact a true BORN Again REC fisherman like you want people to believe, You would be AGAINST this total disreguard for the REC sector !!

I cant help but think Wolf in sheeps clothing.

[Broadbill-Pro]

Originally Posted by CaptKen

If you were in fact a true BORN Again REC fisherman like you want people to believe, You would be AGAINST this total disreguard for the REC sector !!

I cant help but think Wolf in sheeps clothing.

I have always been and will always be a recreational fisherman. Because my profession was a commercial fisherman this "Born Again" BS surfaces from people who do not know me.

I don't care what anyone believes, I am not looking for votes. I put the truth out there, my words are posted for anyone to disprove. Your attitude is that to be a recreational fisherman you must stand together whether in the right or wrong. Sorry, my constitution is not as weak as some. I am not a follower.

[Gaitor]

Originally Posted by Broadbill-Pro

I have always been and will always be a recreational fisherman. Because my profession was a commercial fisherman this "Born Again" BS surfaces from people who do not know me.

I don't care what anyone believes, I am not looking for votes. I put the truth out there, my words are posted for anyone to disprove. Your attitude is that to be a recreational fisherman you must stand together whether in the right or wrong. Sorry, my constitution is not as weak as some. I am not a follower.

Yay, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of no fish ... I will fear no Rec Angler , or their opposing view, for thy Longline and NMFS ... they comfort me ... I will take up my boats into nearer waters, rape and pillage the juvenile swordfish and all other species who get in my way, And I will dwell in the house of my opinion forever.

[The BEAST]

Originally Posted by Broadbill-Pro

I have always been and will always be a recreational fisherman. Because my profession was a commercial fisherman this "Born Again" BS surfaces from people who do not know me.

Bro, I apologize in advance, but I couldn't help myself!

Sounds like the definiton of two-faced; in your own words. You are as recreational as I am a LL'er. Did you select the name Broadbill-Pro because of your vast recreational experience? C'mon Vinnie, admit it, you could use a bar of Dial, a quart of Dawn, a gallon of Clorox, and a tub of Red Devil lye and you still can't wash 25 years of PLL off of you.

I hope your son doesn't have to look at you 10 years from now and say "What happened to all the fish, Pop? Remember when we caught that pumpkin on a day Sailfish trip? What happened?" I guess that is when you will switch your colors back to recreational, again.

I lived through the last Swordfish rape. I'm sorry if you can't realize that we DON'T want to live it again. I hope all the darksiders who weren't here or are too young to remember the 80's and 90's can see through your "recreational friendship". You and your pals didn't take care of it when you had it!!!!

I'll take my chances with the foreign fleet catching the quota outside of the 200 mile boundary rather than you and your few remaing cronies TRYING to catch it on my front door step. You know they can't fill the quota and the real reason is to make some quick, easy, bucks with the more sought after, smaller cores. They can either, go out to sea and play with the "big dogs", or QUIT fishing.

I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt, actually thinking you might have "retired" and want the rec fishery to be here for your offspring. I'm sorry to say, but Vinnie, you are a wolf in sheeps clothing trying to play both sides with only one interest! You still have your hand in the pot. Put your appropriate avatar back under your name or did the people you represent tell you to stop giving yourself away?


Capt. Jim
The BEAST

[Broadbill-Pro]

I'll submit to you that a wolf does not show his face for all to see. I must be the dumbest one in the pack??

The proposed regulations in no way reflect the free for all that PLL'ers had in the 80's and 90's. I have been very vocal about the limitations that should be set, including a recreational only area from Marathon to Fort Pierce. I have favored an increased size limit for all sectors and the removal of bouy fisherman in the closed zones.

Again you approach me with this believe in what we do or you can not be one of us attitude. If the club is so narrow minded then I would rather be the wolf I am accused of being.

I would not wash away my commercial fishing experience if I could, it has given me the perspective to look beyond my needs of this fishery now and consider those who must continue to use it for economic reasons.

If being two faced means being considerate to both sectors, then I will take that label along with the others.

[CaptKen]

Vinnie

Take your new Ocean Master and glass in those GIANT fish boxes, A Rec fishermen dosent need um, Take your commerical liscense to the next sword club meeting and bring your son, stand up for everyone to see, then burn it in front of everyone, then maybe we can start to believe.


If your NOT a follower , get off the bandwagon of your buddies of Marathon to Fort Pierce BS. Close the whole state ! We dont want a commerical boat of any kind in the whole State of Florida !

[Ron.38 Special]

Before I get back to work, one thing for this thread,

As for removing bouy gear totally from the closed zone:

There is no way its going to happen. NMFS has embraced bouy gear as a very clean alternative to PLL fishing. They love it, they will promote it, and they will support it. But their may be restictions coming like maybe circle hooks, and hopefully a plan to stem the now uncontrolled growth of the fishery off the tri county area.

You also can see from this post that the recreational swordfisherman off our coast was screwed out of this entire fishery by the rape of PLL's, and for good reason, we don't want to take any chances again.

All the PLL fleet does is fish an area until there are not enough fish to catch them move to another area until it runs out of fish, then move farther away unitl it runs out of fish, thenmove again until it runs out of fish, then we find a new and remote place to fish, until it runs out of fish, then we try to go back to that old honey hole that we raped long ago and see if the fish ar back.

Heck some longliners have fish off here, until it collapsed, then moved to Grand Banks until it didn't produce, Then moved to Hawai until it didn't fit their needs, then move to South Africa until it doesn't fit their needs.

It's never ending fight, and I for one will not ever give up.

No, I don't think its my fishery, but I can protect it here so that's what I'm going to do.

Actually Blue Water should eventually thank us, we're just protecting the PLL's from themselves. They have a porven track record.

[Broadbill-Pro]

Ken,

The only fishing permit I hold is a FL. fishing license and the HMS angling, probably less permits than you do. Forgot the snook endorsement. I have the boat, permits are available and I certainly have the knowledge, so why am I not commercial fishing. This must baffle you?? Ask Relentless33 to post what I told him last week.

OK, Ken equal rights for everyone. I agree with that. I am antisapating your next post on the removal of bouy vessels.

Heck some longliners have fish off here, until it collapsed, then moved to Grand Banks until it didn't produce, Then moved to Hawai until it didn't fit their needs, then move to South Africa until it doesn't fit their needs.

Ron, Ron, are the gloves off again??

Florida was always a winter fishery for me, never saw a collapse when I was here. Went to the Grand Banks because that was the summer fishery, went to Hawaii because the 32,000# trip limit imposed was way short of our catching capabilities off the US Coast. Went to Brazil and South Africa to teach the PLL system, liked the girls and stayed. After 25 years I decided it was time to have a life other than the sea, the lack of fish has never been an issue for me.

[CaptKen]

Vinnie
If the decision were up to me, I wouldn't let a commerical vessel in the State of Florida including the buoy fellers. I have a few buddies doing the buoy thing, I still like um, they are still nice guys, Ive been with um and had a blast and would go again, but if I could give the final word they too would be done.
And what Alli is getting ready to do is a friggin joke ! no way He can patrol 30 buoys in a slow azzz diesel boat ! it is nothing more than a longline in disguise.

[RiskTaker]

Ron:

Again, thanks for all the effort, to help protect this fishery in a balanced way, such that the old behaviors learned the hard way are not repeated again.

I hope that we can all agree that the commercial interests is probably not very good at setting governance for appropriate self regulation. For that matter, there are probably plenty of recreational examples as well, where self regulation, is not demonstrated by good examples. If you do not take in excess and according to established limits, consider that behavior well regulated.

In both cases, the bottom line is that most people will exploit a resource until it is abused, it is in our nature. Therefore, we must try to help protect the resource from ourselves, both commercial and recreational, by setting appropriate limits.

The stories of commercial exploitation are rife with examples of taking it to the limit and beyond. We simply need to accept that for what it is. In the meantime we need to establish the regualtions to protect the resource for sustainability. No excuses, we must just do it.

I am a hunter: I want to take fish to eat. So don't get me wrong, as an ultra conservative to protect to the point of "No Take". But I firmly want to take, where there is still plenty to go around for my grandchildren to take, 20 years from now, and some to go around in the landlocked areas where commercial fishermen supply that demand but all within the limits of proper balance.

We must listen to the commercial interests for their concerns, but if the guideance that is recommended is not squarely in the MSY or conservation court, then those proposals must be rejected, because it may be good for business, but it is not good for the resource.

Without being overly self centered: we want a sustainable resource, in this case (forum) it is revolving about swordfish, and other by-catch type species. We want to continue to enjoy the fishing encounters that has recently been demonstrated, without backsliding into the days of want.

We must continue to be highly educated custodians of our planet's bounty. It seems like other creatures cannot do it for us. So it is our curse/our blessing to take ownership of these challenges. If we F**k it up, it is still our fault. I don't want to take credit for that. But we own the problem so let's deal with it. If it is called a fight, so be it. How can I help bloody my knuckles today. I will do so, then I will ask a friend for help and so on and so forth. We must prevail for all the right reasons. I will admit that selfishness is not one of the right reasons.

We really need to collaborate with the commercial interests as much as possible, but nobody should lower their standards, if they are already standing on the moral/ethical high ground, Period. There is a long history of mistrust with commercial entities, probably for very real reasons, that I have not personally witnessed but I will accept that statement AS-IS. But we have to get beyond that behavior today and moving forward. Pure focus on the pertinent issues, wthout the name calling. If there are lies presented, disprove them with the facts, don't rely on yester year's example to prove today's points, just for rhetoric sake.

Vinnie, your points of view on this forum are invaluable, in other words, very much needed: we cannot improve and advance without those challenges to the recreational mind-set. IMO, some recreational view points are too far slanted beyond the appropriate balance. If the shoe fits, I hope we learn from it to dial in more effectively.

If anyone says eliminate the commercial presence, I say to you that your awareness is too shallow and quite possibly guideance from that camp is too extreme to be the RIGHT guideance. If the shoe fits, learn from it.

We need to focus our attention, on methods or ways to reduce the stimulus to catch more fish, (a/k/a meet the ICCAT quota), not to kick it up a notch just because of that "Holy milestone", if we sincerely believe, and rely on sound science, that the end results will once again yield an over-fished fishery.

One more point, or at least until the next post , - if new nations are coming on-board to take fish from a fishery, we should feel obligated to share the global resource in a fair way, even if our (selfish US of A) slice of the pie is reduced, to meet that need. But I would also be so BOLD as to suggest that the pie be divvied up accordingly, but is there anything wrong with stipulating that the allocation to a given country cannot be transferred whatsover, to/by other more needy/greedy countries? If you don't use it now, it stays in the global Kittie this round. And there should be penalties for non-compliance (a/k/a binding resolutions), just like a recreational angler can receive a citation for exceeding the established rules of engagement.

I am very tired and annoyed with this recreational versus commercial bickering and mockery. I wish to communicate clearly and effectively with commercial interests, retaining the ability to look straight into their eyes, with the self-confidence that I am credible and trustworthy to suggest a responsible point of view, that is not intended to shaft them. Everybody, keep your eye on the ball: focus your energy on managing the resource effectively. Again, we already know the commercial sector will take fish: it is "just their job" to do exactly that. Perhaps we need additional effective A/P advisors that have a clear ethic to conserve appropriately, and recommend accordignly, to help influence N.M.F.S decisions. The public at large can also modify the N.M.F.S charter if we effectively coordinate the effort. Ron and Skip, Tim, RFA, TBF): thank you very much for being there when it matters. This is the beginning of how the business should be run: grass-roots diplomacy.

Let the commercial anglers fish, but it should not necessarily be appropriate to let them set their own limits, without equally represented counterparts.

If I was rambling, sorry for that, as it was uncensored and un-edited, I just typed as my mind sent the signals. No time to proof-read and revise.
Done - submit reply --- RT back to work .

P.S. - and I don't mind preaching to the choir.

[LIGHTS OUT]

Well put RT