Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Great grouper debate near end?

Commercial and sport fishing groups spar over an upcoming study on the longline method.

By TERRY TOMALIN
Published November 14, 2005

After months of debate and controversy, hundreds of thousands of recreational anglers will learn Wednesday when they can once again fish for red grouper in the Gulf of Mexico.

But the story behind this historic meeting of the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council is about much more than a cheap fish sandwich.

It is a tale of power, money and old school politics. Since 1994, when Floridians voted overwhelmingly to ban nets from state waters, commercial fishermen and recreational anglers have battled for public opinion.

The billion-dollar commercial industry says sport fishermen are nibbling away at their piece of the pie. But the $5-billion recreational sector, which thanks to the Internet is better organized than ever, says commercial fishermen are depleting fish stocks for generations to come.

The federal government, charged with protecting the resource, now finds itself with the unenviable task of mediating between two warring factions.

"We question the federal government's numbers," said Dennis O'Hern, spokesman for the Fishing Rights Alliance. "We also suspect (federal fishery managers) too often make decisions to benefit the industry."

At the heart of the dispute is the Madeira Beach-based commercial longline fleet, an industry that lays miles of fishing line rigged with thousands of hooks on the sea floor.

Opponents think longlines kill indiscriminately, without regard for size, sex or species. They say longlines kill everything from sharks to endangered sea turtles.

The exact number of undersized grouper caught and discarded dead by longline vessels is also a matter of debate. Estimates range from 12 to 80 percent.

The Times has learned the federal government plans to hire Bob Spaeth, spokesman for the commercial longline fleet, to do a yearlong study on industry bycatch, then turn the results over to the National Marine Fisheries Service.

According to documents obtained under the federal Freedom of Information Act, Spaeth and his company, Madeira Marine Services, will be paid $317,625 in 2006 to determine "what percentage of the catch was non-marketable bycatch."

Last month, conservation and sportfishing groups were outraged after the Times reported Spaeth hired a former commercial fisherman once charged with possessing 77 undersized grouper to perform a similar, $101,000-taxpayer-funded study for Sarasota's Mote Marine Laboratory.

Now sport fishing groups are incensed at the latest revelation of the government using commercial fishermen to study the effects of their own industry.

"Why in the world would the government give that much money to the primary lobbyist for the longline fleet?" asked Ted Forsgren, executive director of the Florida chapter of the Coastal Conservation Association.

"That is a huge conflict of interest. How can (Spaeth) possibly perform an unbiased study of his own industry?"

Spaeth said he sees no conflict.

"It is called cooperative research with industry," he said. "There is no cloak and dagger stuff going on. The people who believe there is are the same people who think the president of the United States is skimming off the oil business."

* * *

Federal officials shut down the red grouper fishery Nov. 1, saying sport fishermen had caught too many of the prized fish.

If sport fishermen prevail at this week's meeting, it will mark a turning point in what many believe has been an industry-dominated system of fishery management.

The Coastal Conservation Association won a major legal battle last month when it persuaded a federal judge to overturn a federal plan that would have stopped fishing for all grouper, not just red grouper, for the months of November and December.

Like many in the sport fishing community, Forsgren thinks that longline bycatch is the single most important issue fishery managers will face in the coming year.

"With all the great universities and independent research institutes in Florida and throughout the country I cannot believe that (Spaeth) is the most qualified person to perform a study of this magnitude," he said.

O'Hern, whose organization joined the lawsuit against the National Marine Fisheries Service, was equally dismayed when told of the study.

O'Hern said sportfishing groups will dismiss the results of any industry-based study of bycatch.

"There is an inherent bias," O'Hern said. "They will use this study to legitimize what the (industry) has been saying all along ... that longlines don't have a high bycatch rate."

This week's Gulf Council meeting comes at a critical time. Last week, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced that U.S. seafood consumption rose for the third straight year. Also last week, 406 scientists called on Congress to force fishery managers to use "the best available science" to stop overfishing and not bow to pressure from the fishing industry.

The politics of the current system is one reason Panama City lawyer James Fensom chose not to be considered for a second term on the Gulf Council.

"The legal determination of a conflict of interest is so lax that even though a member and the member's relatives may make a living directly from a fishery, votes that have a substantial impact upon that fishery are not considered to be a conflict of interest," Fensom wrote in a letter to Gov. Jeb Bush.

* * *

The National Marine Fisheries Service is working with Spaeth and his organization, the Southern Offshore Fishing Association, on a referendum that if approved, would initiate a "partial" buyout of the longline industry.

Theoretically, the $35-million taxpayer-funded program would cut the longline fleet in half. But opponents of the plan - recreational anglers and commercial fishermen who use "vertical" gear - say the buyout would ultimately make the owners of large longline boats wealthier and put the small operators out of business.

Spaeth and a committee of other commercial fishermen mailed out ballots to 1,150 reef fish permit holders. Of the 568 ballots that were returned and deemed valid, 62 percent (350) voted against the plan, 38 percent (218) voted for it.

But federal officials plan to "weight" the vote, giving greater credence to fishermen with the highest catches. Under the federal Freedom of Information Act, the Times asked for an accounting of how the vote will be weighted.

Dr. Roy Crabtree, southeast regional director for the National Marine Fisheries Service, said he is inclined to deny the request. "If you know how the votes are weighted," he said, "then you will know how many fish a permit holder caught. That is privileged information."

Spaeth dismisses those who say his company has a conflict doing the bycatch study. He cited a three-year, $169,388 study by the Florida Fish & Wildlife Research Institute - which uses sport divers, including O'Hern of the Fishing Rights Alliance - to collect data on hogfish.

"If you think there is a conflict with our bycatch study," Spaeth said, "then there is a conflict with the hogfish study as well."

When told about Spaeth's comment, O'Hern laughed.

"That's ridiculous," he said. "To compare the hogfish study to an industry bycatch study isn't even comparing apples to oranges. It is like comparing apples to hamburgers. They are not even both fruit."

[Last modified November 14, 2005, 01:03:13]