CCA on red snapper. What you think?

[cordgrass]

[SIZE=4]Based Approach to Managing Red Snapper And Other Marine[/SIZE]
Fishes
A. Even the playing field and count the fish
i. Issue individual non-reusable tags for red snapper that would
account for the TAC.
ii. Place all of these tags, perhaps clumped into variable units of 10 to
100, up for public auction every year. Let anyone who so desires
to place their best bid and distribute to highest bidders - bidders
could be individuals, states or organizations.
iii. Those who buy tags can use them any way they desire - take the
fish home and eat it, give them as Christmas presents, sell them,
take their fish to a market and sell them. To ease enforcement, tags
would have to remain on each individual fish until it is finally
cooked and consumed either in a residence or at a restaurant -
every fish lying in a fish market would have to have the tag on it.
iv. Proceeds from the auction could be used to pay for program
administration, enforcement and research. This approach could
raise between $3 million and $15 million that could support state-
1

Page 2

of-the-art population estimates using genetic technology that
would eliminate the need to use MRFSS in assessments.
v. To allow for an orderly distribution of tags, they could be
auctioned quarterly.
vi. Once the auction program has had a chance to establish a 'free
market' price for tags, they could simply be sold at that price -
state agencies, fishing clubs, tackle shops, fishing organizations
and seafood dealers could sell them.
B. Advantages of this approach:
i. It would eliminate all the current costs associated with red snapper
endorsements and the IFQ program and reduce enforcement costs.
The only thing dockside enforcement would need to do would be
check size limits and see that every fish had one of the (non-
reusable) tags on it.
ii. It would allow for an elimination of minimum-size limits and
reduce discards. We believe this approach would create an
incentive to use fishing tactics to target larger, older fish (why pay
for a 1 lb. fish when the cost for a 6 lb. fish is the same) that would
result in an actual reduction in fishing mortality.
iii. It would eliminate the need for closed seasons and size limits.
iv. It would provide an accurate and controllable means of assuring
that annual catch limits are not exceeded without the flaws of the
MRFSS, logbooks, or self-reporting of landings.
v. The revenue raised would be most useful from a conservation
perspective.
vi. It is simple and arguably the most fair and equitable approach.
Every one - anglers, commercial harvesters, seafood processors,
investors, and conservationists would have the same opportunity to
access the resource,
vii. There would be no need for allocation decisions and costly
economic analyses. The free market would allocate the resource,
viii. It would set a precedent for the future of managing mixed
recreational/commercial fisheries. This approach could be applied
to Gulf grouper and South Atlantic reef fish as well.
ix. It creates a strategy similar to recent proposals to create some sort
of "rights based" (SEP) allocation that would extend seamlessly
across sectors.
x. A major disadvantage of IFQ systems for commercial fisheries is
that they make it very difficult for new entrants, particularly young
entrants, into the fishery. This approach would allow any young
fisher to buy some tags and begin selling fish.

Page 3

Potential disadvantages and problems of this approach:
i. Currently, law would probably not allow direct application of
collected fees to a red snapper conservation and management
program. We would have to be creative:
1. give the tags to the GCMFC to auction, administer the
program and send out funds to states and institutions for
use in research and enforcement under peer reviewed grant
program;
2. give up the revenues and make this a program where a
lottery is only used to distribute tags; or
3. seek changes in the law to permit this approach.
ii. Many may object to having to pay for accessing a common
property resource - even if this gives them the ability to control the
access to numbers offish and when they want to fish. Stressing
that the goal of this approach is for effective, fair and equitable
conservation would help to convince people to support this
approach.
iii. This is a significant departure from standard and comfortable
management approaches currently in use.
iv. Current IFQ holders would resist this effort. Perhaps this could be
countered by a means of phasing out existing quota shares using
funds collected from tag auctions.

[Cutty713]

cliff notes

[LaAngler]

what troubles me more is their support for closures on the atlantic side

they had a long long debate on 2cool on the tag issue, it was just an "idea" cca said...

[Hopedale Hustler]

idiotas

[The Old Caster]

Once again the CCA goes down on the side of BIG MONEY, and not the everyday fisherman. Fisrst snapper, then what?????????