[loligo]

This why IFQ' don't work.....

And this is just the beginning folks.....

Don't believe the IFQ/ITQ hype....privatizing access to commercial fishing is a very very bad idea.....

Year later, red snapper program remains debatable

Naples News wrote:
Grouper fishermen say they weren?t given a large enough share of the red snapper allocation and have routinely gone over their limit because their grouper lines are increasingly snaring red snapper. Fishermen have to throw back thousands of pounds of dead or dying fish, they say.

To address that problem, the IFQ program included rules that allowed grouper fishermen to buy additional catch shares to cover their overage, but those shares are hard to find and too expensive to buy, grouper fishermen said.

Madeira Beach grouper fisherman Martin Fisher said red snapper bycatch is so plentiful that it creates an ?orange parade?? of red snapper floating off on the tide.

?The eastern Gulf of Mexico is just littered (with dead red snapper),?? Fisher said.

This post edited by loligo 06:59 AM 01/14/2008

 

[commfish]

Now this group says they work www.environmentaldefense.org/page.cfm?tagid=1166....Less bycatch, more profit.Happy,happy fishermen.

 

[twofinbluna]

Just look at what happened in New Zealand and you will see what happens when IFQs are put in place. A handful of big companies are all thats left. (The Bering Sea crab 'rationalization' is another good example)

This post edited by twofinbluna 08:20 PM 01/01/2008

 

[MakoMike]

It's simple economics!

The cost of one boat that is already out there catching additioanl fish is much less than the cost of another boat leaving port and going out to catch those same fish. So the boats that have the money behind them can afford to buy out the IFQs of other boats so that they can stay out and continue fishing. The net result is that the boats that have the capital to invest will invest it and buy out the shares of the smaller operators. Its microeconomics 101, no big mystery as to why it happens or the fact that it will happen unless preventative measures are put in place.

 

[loligo]

Simple? Simply [email protected]#$'d, is more like it.

MakoMike wrote:
The cost of one boat that is already out there catching additioanl fish is much less than the cost of another boat leaving port and going out to catch those same fish. So the boats that have the money behind them can afford to buy out the IFQs of other boats so that they can stay out and continue fishing. The net result is that the boats that have the capital to invest will invest it and buy out the shares of the smaller operators. Its microeconomics 101, no big mystery as to why it happens or the fact that it will happen unless preventative measures are put in place.

The rich eat the poor is really more like it......

 

[FishWisher]

Well, doh.

loligo wrote:
The rich eat the poor is really more like it......

What, you just figured it out? That's how it works everywhere, so why should comm fishing be any different?

 

[loligo]

FishWisher wrote:
loligo wrote:
The rich eat the poor is really more like it......

What, you just figured it out? That's how it works everywhere, so why should comm fishing be any different?

Is that an excuse or an affirmation or what?.....

 

[FishWisher]

Just a statement of fact. The uber-obvious conclusion to be drawn from this fact is - don't be poor. Do everything in your power to switch from eatee to eater demographic. When it comes to "public" resources, the "can't we all just get along" approach never works. It's a fish eat fish world.

 

[loligo]

FishWisher wrote:
Just a statement of fact. The uber-obvious conclusion to be drawn from this fact is - don't be poor. Do everything in your power to switch from eatee to eater demographic. When it comes to "public" resources, the "can't we all just get along" approach never works. It's a fish eat fish world.

Touche'

My thoughts exactly....personally, but in real life practice it isn't so simple, unfortunately.......

 

[loligo]

So, lets see if this wakes anyone up?

Remember the article-
Year later, red snapper program remains debatable -?

Ok- now heres a new one- A Way To Protect Fish And Fishermen

I love this part-
TBO wrote:

So last year, the council adopted individual fishing quotas, an approach championed by conservation group Environmental Defense and commercial fishing interests.

Under this system, a percentage of the annual catch limit is assigned to each snapper fisherman. The fishermen can buy and sell a share of their quota, which is based on past catches.

Oh thats lovely..... Which commercial interest's ? The ones who can afford to operate this way?, the ones who can afford to buy the others out?

Yep. Pretty smart, discriminate consolidate eliminate....and give us some more money to manage it all too, will ya?

 

[LooneyTunes]

It's all about cake

FishWisher wrote:
loligo wrote:
The rich eat the poor is really more like it......

What, you just figured it out? That's how it works everywhere, so why should comm fishing be any different?

The rules of free enterprise don't apply to commercial fishing. After all, they want the government to subsidize there upgrade of line to sinkline to save endangered whales from ensnarement.

Regarding commercial rule to change from floating line to sinkline

From Suffolk Life wrote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In fact a pilot project, funded to the tune of $50,000, is about to be launched for buybacks on Long Island, according to John Maniscalco, a marine biologist with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation in East Setauket.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Looneytunes
Dave

This post edited by LooneyTunes 10:30 AM 01/14/2008