Survey: New Tuna Regulations & PFMC

[Mark Mc]

Hi All, as you may know, the Pacific Fishery Management Council has a draft management plan for Highly Migratory Species (which includes albacore tuna). There will be public hearings & a written comment period. I'd like to get as many opinions from folks as possible, regarding the method by which data should be collected from sportfishers. I'll use your input to formulate my submitted comments to the PFMC. So here is an informal survey. Public hearings will be in Olympia on Jan 28, Astoria on Jan 29, and Coos Bay on Jan 30. For specifics, go to http://www.pcouncil.org/ then click on "highly migratory species" on left sidebar, then read intro & top link below it.

Thanks Very Much,
Mark Mc

-------------The Survey------------------
Q. 1 - 3 assume you go tuna fishing at least once or twice a year.

1. Have you ever been surveyed at the dock, regarding tuna or other highly migratory species, by someone other than state fish & game (such as a National Marine Fisheries Service employee)?

2. Have you ever been surveyed via the phone or by mail, regarding tuna or other highly migratory species, by someone other than state fish & game (such as a National Marine Fisheries Service employee)?

3. Would you participate in a voluntary survey each season, where you would submit your catch records & related data (where fished, size of fish, etc) to the PFMC or NMFS?

4. What do you think of a federal permit requirement for tuna sportfishers, costing perhaps $30. a year, whose goal it is to identify you so better data can be collected -- Acceptable method, or bad idea?

5. Do you have any ideas for how data can be collected from sport tuna fishers, for future management decisions?

[Pilar]

Way to go Mark Mc. Your first post is loaded with info. From what I read it appears that the Albacore Tuna and Blue Sharks targeted by Oregon fishers are in reasonable shape.

While the idea that managing these fisheries may make a difference, the report mentions repeatedly the minimal impact our West coast fishery has on the stocks. Based on that I see nothing but another tax on sportsmen in this licensing idea. I would volunteer the info and catch statistics to further the research.

What do you think?

[Sadie-Lynne]

I tuna fish every year and feel that there should not be an additional cost. I don't believe that Oregon or Washington fisherman have much of an impact on the tuna runs.

[Ryan Pultz]

hey look4elk do you go out in your own boat where do you launch from? I have always dreamed of fishing for tuna supose to be one heck of a fight. If you ever go out and you have an open seat let me know i will be happy to fill it.

[Pilar]

Hey Ryan, we go every year in several boats. Do you want on the list?

[Sadie-Lynne]

Hi Ryan. I don't go out in a private boat. What I do is each year I put together a couple of groups to go out on charters. Normally get enough people together to take the whole boat. I have been putting these together now for about 7 years. Its great fun. One thing that I find with the charters
is that only certian ones will allow you to use fishing rods the rest all use hand lines only, so if you take a charter and want to feel the fight you may want to find out if you will be able to use a rod and reel.

[Ryan Pultz]

Pilar Heck yeah put me on the list I would love to go out.
As for charted I would have to catch it on a rod and reel that would be a blast.

[Threemuch]

I have fished albacore in california for the last 7 years or so, probably 6-8 trips a year.

#1 Never.

#2 Never.

#3 Yes.

#4 Maybe, as long as it was used on researching an benefiting the fish I pursue. I have paid special fees before to see most or all of the money wind up in some general fund. What I don't want is an added cost for tuna because people think that we can afford it because we have boats and burn hundreds of gallons of fuel a season to pursue our prey. I make big time sacrifices to afford my fishing addiction, and I am not just some rich guy looking for something to blow his money on.

#5 I think the internet is a good way. Most guys who have the tools to chase tuna probably have internet access, if just to have access to the SSTs.

[Puffin]

Yeah, Ok. So the feds want me to give up tax money for fuel, cigars and whatever and then $30 more a year for a federal tuna license?

Not from me. The tuna chaser club is pretty expensive as it is. you know $30,000 for the boat and then $250 a day to run the boat. Let's not even mention how hard it is to find sea worthy fishers to put in the boat or weather to run that far to sea in.

so ...
1) No, not even once.
2) Again, no.
3) Sure, I'll do your research for you, just cover gas and expenses or grow some brass ones and go find out for yourself.
4) It's a tax and it sucks.
5) Internet, its free.

just a thought ...

[Pilar]

Hey, big Jon! good to see you here, brau!

Ok, I'll do the survey.

1) No one ever, official or otherwise.
2) No one ever.
3) Read Ifish!
4) No way
5) see #3

Hey Ryan, you're in. You don't get sea sick do you? Oh and BTW if you do, we don't return until the box is full or the day is done. Look for action anywhere from July through September. I'll keep you posted.

The charter fleet usually does handlines. Some will let you fish standup gear (rod and reel). The 'Irish' out of Newport is a great boat. We do both handline and standup at the same time.

[ 01-18-2002: Message edited by: Pilar ]</p>

[Mr. Fisherman]

O.K., I'll play

1) No, Are they paid to do that?
2) Again, no. Is this funded by the license fees I already pay?
3) Sure, I'll do your research for you, just cover gas and expenses or grow some brass ones and go find out for yourself. I loved Puffin's answer and just couldn't change a thing :wink: .
4) Not just NO!,. Would the Feds like to pay sportsfishers to collect the data? Say 60 days in a season at $250 for the boat and $30 per crew member? Per Day? I didn't think so but it never hurts to ask...
5) Internet, its everywhere and it's free as mentioned above....

Only 6 months to go. Better start tying up gear soon....

I can't wait....

[Mark Mc]

Hey Y'all, thanks much for the sincere, honest answers, even the part about growing brass somethings-or-other.

This is all about getting sportfishers represented with even marginally accurate data. The PFMC plan document makes it real clear that there is a dismal lack of data on how sportfishers impact tuna & other HMS. And the plan has a provision for future management of stocks, such as QUOTAS. Any harvest quotas (which will mean some % to commercial, and some % to sport, just like we have with Pacific Halibut) will be based in large part on historical catches & participation. The evidence is clear that the sport catch, ESPECIALLY in Oregon & Washington, is being under reported. No charter-boat
log books required in OR. Voluntary logbooks in WA (with a 69% compliance rate). And no reporting at all for sportfishers. So if sportfishers want to maintain as big a piece of the pie as possible, there had better be a way to count the fish caught. That's why I asked in the survey what method you'd prefer, because it has to happen one way or another.

It sounds like the consensus so far is: It had better not cost us anything, other than a postage stamp...

Best Fishes,
Mark Mc

p.s. if anyone is interested, I can e-mail you or post my "report" on this plan.

[Ryan Pultz]

Pilar Thaks i cant wait to hear from you on this

[Capt. Rich]

Mark,

I see that you are a busy man. Bat Batsford's Tuna Club also had your postings. Part of the problem of the PFMC's HMS FMP is that the committee is heavily dominated by the commercial industry. The last I checked there was not a genuine sportfishing member of the committee. With representation as it stands naturally some crazy ideas like a $30.00 user fee gets thrown in. HMS fishing has been the domain of the big boys for years. Now with more fuel efficient boats and better knowledge of the ocean, sport boats are now able to fish for tuna. Seeing a sport boat on the ocean fishing for tuna drives the big boys crazy. But sport anglers make up on a miniscule fraction of the total take of tuna. Thanks for keeping us informed.

[Captn]

Mark, please do post your plan. I think there is enough interest here at this web site. As we have learned information is power. While we don't always know what to do with it, it is always good to know what is going on. I think you comment that there is "GOING to be a way that the count is accomplished ONE WAY OR ANOTHER" is the note that we need to keep in mind. It dosent sound like any solution you come up with is going to get uniform praise. But keep us posted. Let me see how many times the Federal Gov. asks if you are happy with what they are doing. We dont have to like it, but we do have to deal with it.

[Capt. Rich]

Captn... You mean you don't like it when someone shows up at your door and says: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you?" In all seriousness I think that much of the supposed accounting of the sport catch is merely a shill to get a user fee on sport boats. Much of this hysteria is generated in California as the ports down there have a lot of sport boats fishing for HMS (Highly Migratory Species) fish. A few years ago there was a lot of controversy about the purse seiners that would swoop down on bluefin tuna in Monterey Bay and take all the fish before any sport boats could get any action. I think that much of this is an effort by the commercials to nip high seas sport fishing in the bud before it gets to be too popular and keep it in the hands of the big boys.