Tidal Fish Forum banner

Save our Sealife Ban the Nets!

6K views 17 replies 14 participants last post by  FishOn! 
#1 ·
I found some interesting information about the Florida Save our Sealife campaign. We can do this. We have the numbers and we can get the signatures.

"The nets which the Save Our Sealife Amendment seeks to eliminate have been responsible for excessive and damaging harvesting of fish populations and are notorious for their unnecessary killing of other marine animals, such as turtles and dolphins. We have no choice but to take this issue directly to the people of Florida because both the Legislature and the Marine Fisheries Commission have failed to take adequate steps to control commercial netting. Save Our Sealife says that eliminating nets will help Florida's economy since both commercial and recreational fishing is threatened by fish-stock depletion. In coming weeks, the conservation coalition will recommend companion legislation to provide for compensation for those commercial net fishermen who may be impacted by the netting restrictions in the amendment.

This compensation could be funded through the state's saltwater recreational license fees."[30] Fish species subjected to gill netting, such as sea trout and mullet, have declined greatly and are continuing to fall. Other protected species are also killed in nets, as well as turtles, porpoises, manatees and birds. Eliminating the Florida nets will have no significant effect on fish supplies, and a restored abundance of marine life will support far more jobs than those involved in netting.[31]

The Florida Sportsman magazine clamored for a net ban a long time before the petition drive was launched. The Save Our Sealife Committee conducted a very effective petition drive on November 10, 1992 in which they collected 201,649 signatures outside the polling sites throughout Florida. According to their news release, the S.O.S. conservation coalition mounted the most successful one-day petition effort ever in America.[38]

With the success of that event bearing down on the fishing industry, it attempted to organize for the impending fight. There was no single, unified, statewide anti-net ban commercial fishing organization. There were only two statewide non-profits in Florida, Southeastern Fisheries Association and Organized Fishermen of Florida. There are numerous local commercial fishing groups without any professional representation or formalized structure. These two groups alone could not sustain a fight such as that which was about to occur.

Much of the information the Save Our Sealife PAC placed before the public appeared in outdoor writers columns as well as newsletters from the Florida Conservation Association, the Florida Wildlife Federation, The Florida League of Anglers, The Tropical Audubon Society of Miami, The Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund and the Florida Sportsman magazine.

The Save Our Sealife Political Action Committee set the agenda for the fight by accusing the net fishing industry, in the media, with a litany of evil fishing activities. The fishing industry was forced to answer all the accusations made against it by S.O.S. to the general public. As a result, the seafood industry had to fight on terms dictated by the net ban proponents agenda. The net fishermen were on the defensive throughout the entire net ban campaign.

As the issue became more intense, giant corporations, such as Time-Mirror magazines[39], Orvis Mail-order house catalogs and other sport oriented publications published information furnished by the Save Our Sealife Political Action Committee. Radio talk shows and local television stations covered the issue when something was particularly controversial. Pamphlets, flyers and petitions were distributed at some public schools for the children to take home to parents.

Very few public debates were held either at political gatherings or on television and radio. During the last few months of the net ban campaign, the Florida Conservation Association urged their members not to debate the commercial fishing leaders.[40]
 
See less See more
#4 ·
[q]species are also killed in nets, as well as turtles, porpoises, manatees and birds[/q]

The only birds I've seen caught in nets were cormorants. It wouldn't hurt to get rid of a few of them, as they flock by the thousands. Just think how many fish they eat. Just my two cents.

DP
"Harvey's Hookers"
222 Aquasport
 
#5 ·
The net ban has been in effect in Florida now for a number of years. It worked!!! Fish populations have rebounded to near record numbers. Commercial net fishermen are required to use cast nets only in inshore and near coastal waters. Surprisingly, the commercial cast netters have no problem meeting their catch quotas. MORE FISH FOR ALL is the result of enacting this legislation in Florida. It worked there, it could work here as well.
 
#7 ·
[Q]DP originally wrote:
[q]species are also killed in nets, as well as turtles, porpoises, manatees and birds[/q]

The only birds I've seen caught in nets were cormorants. It wouldn't hurt to get rid of a few of them, as they flock by the thousands. Just think how many fish they eat. Just my two cents.

DP
"Harvey's Hookers"
222 Aquasport
[/Q]

when I did the netting years ago I cuaght otters, beavers,blue herions and saw an eagle caught in a net against shore this was all in fyke nets and when we used gill nets when you were aloud to anchor I pulled a net one morning that had over 1000 blue bills and canvasbacks and golden eyes in it all dead so there is by catch you just don't see it like I have.
 
#8 ·
Candice, Angus, Bill are you listening.

The media was not only a huge part of the Save our Sealife campaign they were the leaders.

Brandon, maybe you can do a story on the harmful effects of netting in the Chesapeake watershed.

The one thing we cant do is get caught up in the scientific debates. Science isnt always correct nature is. This thing has to be won in the court of public opinion. I.E. "These evil netters are killing the baby turtles".
 
#9 ·
[q]when I did the netting years ago I cuaght otters, beavers,blue herions and saw an eagle caught in a net against shore this was all in fyke nets and when we used gill nets when you were aloud to anchor I pulled a net one morning that had over 1000 blue bills and canvasbacks and golden eyes in it all dead so there is by catch you just don't see it like I have. [/q]

Todd,
WOW you are good, if you can catch an eagle in a net. I agree with you I would much rather shoot a canvas back than find it dead in my nets. I was net fish with my little brother last month and we had every one of his nets slammed with cormorants. They eat every fish out of his nets and it sucked trying to get them out. We ended up pulling over 800 yards up, taking it back to land and spent over 12 hours pulling birds out. All I was saying is that it wouldn't hurt to get rid of a few cormorants, cause they eat alot of fish. We have them flying around by the thousands down on the OBX. Thats alot of manhadden.

DP
"Harvey's Hookers"
222 Aquasport
 
#10 ·
Pictures, we need pictures of the carnage. Dead animal pics can really get the Joneses riled up. Then we need to get a politician on board. I think since the Dems control the Maryland house we need a Dem. I'm going to design a SOS logo and come up with a catchphrase.

Who's with me on this?
 
#14 · (Edited)
A couple of observations. One, in Florida the net ban occured as a state referendum on the general election ballot. It did not go thru AMFSC or DNR or Florida Marine Patrol. It went to the people and was voted on. Both sides had strong lobbies and made their points but the ban passed with a 71% in favor number. Secondly Florida is a state with no income tax and heavily dependant on recreatonal dollars from vacationers, fishermen, and snowbirds (part time retired residents) So that concept led to the general agreement of the population. The other thing happening at the time of the net ban in Florida was the fact that many fish were being sold to foriegn market especially Asia. Also similar bans exist in Texas (a decade before FL), Georgia, and maybe Alabama and Mississippi if memory serves me right although I could be wrong. Texas and Florida have thousands on estuary miles like Md and VA and NC. But will the taxes generated from essentially vacationers overtake the tax money spent on commercial fishing and its regulation. The public in Florida made the decision. I dont know if the midAtlantic has the same insight. To me if you asked the people of NC they would see themselves as similar to Florida with a huge amount of vacation dollars being spent that ofset the losses of the commercial industry no matter how ensconced the commercial interests are in the pollitics. In MD and VA I am not as sure. Would be interesting to see. But that is the way to get things done. Take it to the people who tell the regulators what to regulate.

Jim
 
#15 ·
Good comments, Jim. If anyone really want's to dig into the Florida net ban, I'd suggest a thesis by S.R. Grimes. You can read it here. As Jim points out, it took a constitutional amendment after repeated failures by the legislature and the Marine Fisheries Commission to pass meaningful improvements. The same thing has happened in other states. Oregon is going through it right now.

It's not unusual for state lawmakers to ignore or misjudge popular opinion on this issue. What will happen in Maryland remains to be seen, but I can tell you it's been tried and failed before. I just wrote about it on my website, but there have been efforts as far back as 1953 that were soundly defeated by well-funded commercial interests.
 
#16 ·
The only birds I've seen caught in nets were cormorants. It wouldn't hurt to get rid of a few of them, as they flock by the thousands. Just think how many fish they eat. Just my two cents.
Isn't that the mentality we are trying to get away from by banning nets? Last check we are approaching on a human population of 7 billion. I know it wouldn't hurt to get rid of more than a few people especially poachers, but we can't do that can we?
 
#18 ·
Good points and i believe the only way things would really get changed. Ask the people. If they vote down a net ban then I guess the commercial interests and lobbies are still strong enough to support that industry, if they vote for a net ban that speaks for itself. Put it to the people.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top