Dangerous survey question

[Taxman]

I was filling our a survey regarding headboat fishing in the Gulf and this was one of the questions. Options was $10 per fish or $50 plus other variables on the next 2 screens.

Many recreational fisheries, including gag grouper, are managed through bag limits to help ensure the fishery is not depleted. An alternative management option used in some fisheries is where fishermen pay a fee per fish they retain. For the next two choices, assume that there is an alternative fishery management in place where there are no limits on the number of gag grouper you can retain (i.e. no bag limits), but rather a fee for each gag grouper retained.

The fees would be collected by the headboat operators as customers leave the vessel at port. The headboat operators would keep the money from the fees in return for operating under strict regulatory limits per vessel on the number of gag grouper that their customers can catch and keep for the year.

How acceptable do you find the fishery management option where there are no limits on the number of gag grouper you can retain (i.e. no bag limits), but rather a fee for each gag grouper retained?

Not only is this a bad idea but something tells me corruption would be a major issue

[knot2tight]

collect money in cash and then write out check? good luck with that

[1captainron]

Just when you thought you've heard it all! I will be charging $3 per Fluke this season, no bag limit and I will be sure to send a check! LOL!

[Gerry Zagorski]

Total crap and another money grab... Same thing as catch shares for the commercials. Pay money and take all you want.

The species is in trouble and needs to be protected.... But if you send us money you can take what you want.

[tjd24]

The grouper is in the mail.
I swear !!!

[swcody13]

Think of the precedent it would set for other fisheries... It would be the first domino of many.

[Joey Dah Fish]

I will gladly pay you Tuesday for 37 fish today

Originally Posted by Gerry Zagorski

Total crap and another money grab... Same thing as catch shares for the commercials. Pay money and take all you want.

The species is in trouble and needs to be protected.... But if you send us money you can take what you want.

Gerry.....you hit the nail right on the head. Turning a public resource into a profit making pay per fish production. That structure completely undermines fishery management on the surface based on the contents of the post. It's like the trout ponds where you pay for the fish you retain but in those cases someone owns the ponds, pays for the fish to be stocked, feeds them and makes money on the spread. How could anyone suggest charging for a public resource which belongs as much to the angling community as anyone else. And as others have already commented, how in the world would anyone administer that structure, it's impossible! It's all about money, politicians could care less about the health of our fisheries, they view them as just another opportunity to horse trade a public resource with someone for a personal pay day!

[Fin Reaper]

So is the money collected used to get male fish laid ?
I'm having a tough time understanding how me paying a per fish fee will insure healthy fish stocks

[Gerry Zagorski]

Originally Posted by Fin Reaper

So is the money collected used to get male fish laid ?
I'm having a tough time understanding how me paying a per fish fee will insure healthy fish stocks

Oh, come on.... They are going to use all that money on science to make the stock healthy... What would make you think otherwise

And the fish will be less expensive and you can keep your Doctors too .