(6) comments Back to story

Gary Miller

The big difference between sport and commercial quotas is lobbying. Commercials have a great, 1,000 to 1, advantage in lobbying.

Bill Cochrane

Gary, you are showing your lack of knowledge about the snapper fishery.
If the commercial has this great advantage with 1,000 to 1 lobbyists, why is there so many politicians jumping on the bandwagon presenting bills that fight recreational accountability, seek to eliminate commercial fishing, and promise more fishing days to boat owning snapper fishermen? Answer: - CCA bought and paid for LOBBYISTS!

David Smith

Their goal was to eliminate commercial fishing all together.. and when thats done .. they turn on the sports fisherman.. .. and sports fisherman support this.. a wolve in sheeps clothing...been going on since the 80s

Bill Cochrane

David, who are you talking about when you say "their" and "they". ??

Bill Cochrane

Mr. Sargent, I am amazed that after all the research you have done on the recreational snapper issue, you think that the commercial snapper fishery has anything to do with the short recreational snapper seasons?
The recreational snapper fishery and the commercial snapper fishery are two distinctly different fisheries.
The commercial federal snapper fishery is controlled and enforced under an Individual Fishing Quota program. This system mandates 100% accountability and real-time data. There is a “royalty” or “tax” of 3% of each IFQ shareholders gross catch. Of course, there’s always that other federal tax on income. The size limit on snapper has been reduced to only 13 inches to drastically reduce throw backs.
The recreational fishery for federal snapper, on the other hand, needs an accountable, sustainable system, that can produce real-time data.
Why do national recreational groups think that hurting the commercial sector, or using conservation-based quotas is a bad idea, while claiming to be conservation based?
For some reason, the recreational problem always turns into a recreational vs. commercial thing. Why?
Could the Gulf States manage snapper in federal waters better that the feds? Think about that. Even when there was a very real snapper shortage years ago, the State of Texas allowed their state waters to remain open 365 day a year with twice the federal limit, allowing 4 snappers per day, and to this day still refuse to close state waters when the federal waters are closed. Is that really considered a good track record?
Part of the State plan is for the states to manage the commercial sector too. Again. Why? What does the commercial sector have to do with the short recreational season?
Are your opinions based on conservation, or the number of votes you hope to get by ignoring the real issues of the recreational sector, and blaming the commercial fishermen for the recreational problems?

Carol Dean

Don't be surprised by Bill Sargent's lack of information. He has never been good at doing research! Be glad that he is no longer involved in the Galveston County election process! Maybe now we can see some consistent integrity in our elections.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.