Is it just me...?

[CaptTB]

Originally Posted by Irish Jigger

Couldn't this be been done on any day, on any boat, during the regular fluke season? All summer we fileted our fish at the dock, put the racks in a bag, tagged them, and put them in Petes freezer. I love fluke fishing and my season is over unless i want to pay to go on a party boat while my boat sits at the dock. I am all for the research 100% but its a tough pill to swallow watching the rsa boats going out fluking while iam in my slip waiting for the bass run.

What is being confused here (and that is partly my fault since my posts are so friggin long winded I don't blame all of you for not reading every word)
is the "research" part of this.

Yes, data is being collected from the boats actually doing the trips.

However, that is NOT the research being paid for with the purchase of the quota. Any data collected from the RSA trips themselves is a BONUS and is ABOVE AND BEYOND the research that is paid for with the purchase of the quota by these boats and the commercial boats.

There is a whole list of research projects that are currently being funded either in part or in whole with the money generated from the sale of the RSA quota from each species. Some research gets funded with quota from several species (it is irrelevant what the fish is, it is the money generated from the sale of those fish that pays for the research)

These projects are submitted to the MAFMC in 2009. They are then approved for the 2010 fishing year (some projects span multiple years) and quota is assigned to them to then be sold and help pay for or offset the estimated costs of those projects.

Early in 2010 the quota is auctioned off, and the money is then given to the research projects based on how much quota was assigned to each project and subsequently how much that quota sold for per pound.

The fact that additional data like lengths and weights is collected when those fish are actually harvested is simply additional data that did not cost anything to collect.

Here is an example of a few projects that were funded in the past couple years: (project name in italics, recipient of funds in bold)

Discard Mortality in the Summer Flounder Fishery: A New Approach to Evaluation - National Fisheries Institute

Data collection and analysis in support of single and multispecies stock assessments in the Mid-Atlantic: Northeast Area Monitoring and Assessment Program Near Shore Trawl Program - Virginia Institute of Marine Science

2008 Fishery Independent Scup Survey of Hard Bottom Areas in Southern New England Waters - Charles Borden and Eric Rodegast

Evaluation of Summer Flounder Discard Mortality in the Bottom Trawl Fishery - Cornell Cooperative Ext. of Suffolk County

Development of a Supplemental Finfish Survey Targeting Mid-Atlantic Migratory Species - National Fisheries Institute

[fsl1]

I think there is a difference without distinction here...

The RSA money comes from the private sector and doesn't go to "the man" at all if I understand correctly. The people using the resource pay for the research, which at first glance does not seem controversial at all.
However, my parents used to pay $6k per year in property taxes and it was all inclusive for school supplies, athletics, extracurriculars, etc. not to mention garbage and other services.

Now, I pay $30K on an adjusted basis and get no garbage service, we have "fundraisers" for a public school in one of the highest income areas in the US to buy pencils and paper, and we don't get deer picked up when they're dead on the side of the road.

The RSA money may never touch Govt. hands, but haven't they abdicated one of their old responsibilities without a commensurate reduction in the taxes we pay? What would the regulation be based on if not science? My municipality doesn't get any of the money that I pay my garbage company, but I never got a refund when they stopped providing it either.

Another interesting situation is "whose science" is being funded? A very different story if rec and commercial fishermen are both paying for the same "impartial" science. Ditto the science that us fishermen want to show that stocks are healthy and are willing to pay for but not if if it's used to show that we should stop fishing.

I applaud all of you who are so well versed in this issue; for those of you whose living is at stake it would be irresponsible if you weren't as informed. Like many other areas of regulation, there is sometimes a calculated morass of jargon, legalese, and double talk intended to make most people throw up their hands. Thank you all for sifting through it and helping us understand.

[shrimpman steve]

TB, you are a very patient man

thanks for your commitment

[jakesdad]

I am happy Tony is on our side. He is the attorney that everyone wants. You might like or not like what he says but he is 100% truthful and he is willing to explain it in layman's terms, even if he has to do it 10 times.

If it wasn't for his knowledge and persereverance, we might not even be having this discussion.

Thanks Tony, Henry

[CaptTB]

Originally Posted by jakesdad

I am happy Tony is on our side. He is the attorney that everyone wants. You might like or not like what he says but he is 100% truthful and he is willing to explain it in layman's terms, even if he has to do it 10 times.

If it wasn't for his knowledge and persereverance, we might not even be having this discussion.

Thanks Tony, Henry

Now if I could just find a way to make my time and effort in fisheries management generate lawyers fees instead of costing me money I'd be set!!

Guess I'd have to become an attorney first, but dammit that will cost more money!

Just a quick question, how do you pay for the permit by CHECK/CREDIT CARD or is it CASH ONLY PLEASE ? Can anyone answer THANKS

[CaptTB]

Originally Posted by barbarian

Just a quick question, how do you pay for the permit by CHECK/CREDIT CARD or is it CASH ONLY PLEASE ? Can anyone answer THANKS

Since you do not pay for the permit, the answer to your question is "You don't."