TO CONTROL ILLEGAL GILLNETTING OF POMPANO

I.    COMMENTS

Commercial landings of pompano declined dramatically right after the net ban went into effect. This was expected because virtually all commercial take was done with gill & trammel nets in state waters. All around the state, fishing guides and recreational anglers began to see dramatic increases in abundance of pompano. However, the abundance did not last long, as reports of widespread illegal pompano netting and net ban violation arrests began to build. Commercial pompano landings, with huge increases supposedly caught in offshore federal waters, began coming in. Before long, commercial landings rose to a level equal to pre‑net ban landings. ₍₁₎

Pompano abundance has again declined dramatically, particularly in Southwest Florida .

Pompano stocks were in bad shape before the net ban went into effect.  A 1996 pompano stock assessment prepared by the Florida Marine Research Institute (FMRI) indicated, “spawning potential ratios are 1 – 2% on the Gulf Coast and 12 – 20% on the Atlantic Coast .” ₍₂₎

In the FMRI’s 1999 Fisheries Status and Trends Report, they indicated that: 

“it was anticipated that the elimination of nets from the fishery following passage of the “net ban” amendment in 1995 would likely enable the population to quickly recover.  The sharp increase in landings in 1997 came mostly in the commercial sector so the anticipated recovery may not occur.” ₍₃₎

In 1997, the commercial fishing industry reported landing 697,000 pounds of pompano, an amount equal to the average annual landings in the eight years prior to implementing the net ban.  The commercial fishers reported that 70% of those pompano were netted in offshore federal waters. ₍₁₎

Recently, the FMRI did an analysis of trip tickets on commercial pompano landings. ₍₄₎ The analysis indicates that:

·        97.5% of commercial hook and line gear trips for pompano landed less than 200 pounds; and

·        77% of the total statewide commercial landings for pompano came from trips landing more than 200 pounds (i.e. gillnet trips, not hook and line gear trips).

The FWC has discussed the pompano “caught in federal waters/poaching” issue and called upon those fishers who say they are catching pompano with gillnets in the federal waters to take FWC observers out to demonstrate it. 

If the landings data clearly demonstrates that 77% of the total commercial landings are coming from gillnets not hook and line gear, and gillnets can only be used in federal waters, then why have only two fishermen, out of the Marco Island area, been able to show observers that they can gillnet pompano in federal waters?

In our opinion, the landings data and other information clearly indicate the existence of a large and illegal pompano gillnet fishery in state waters.

·        These measures would allow the legitimate commercial hook & line fishery to continue while providing much greater control over illegal pompano netting activity.  Commercial trip ticket analysis shows that 97.5% of commercial hook and line trips land less than 200 pounds.  More than a year ago, the FWC publicly urged any commercial fishermen, who claimed to be gillnetting pompano in federal waters, to demonstrate such by taking FWC observers out fishing with them.  Only two commercial fishermen in the entire state have done it.  CCA Florida believes that it is much more important to close the poaching loopholes, stop the rampant poaching, and restore pompano stocks than to maintain the loopholes to accommodate only two fishermen.

Florida Law, Section 370.07 (4)(g) F.S. states as follows:

(g) Wholesale dealer’s license shall be issued only to applicants who furnish to the department satisfactory evidence of law‑abiding reputation and who pledge themselves to faithfully observe all of the laws and regulations of this state relating to the conservation of, dealing in, taking, selling, transporting, or possession of saltwater products and to cooperate in the enforcement of all such laws to every reasonable extent. This pledge may be included in the application for license. (Emphasis added)

In addition, Section 370.07 (5) F.S. further states as follows:

(5)               LICENSE DENIAL, SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION

(a)        A license issued to a wholesale or retail dealer is good only to the person to whom issued and named therein and is not transferable. The department may revoke, suspend, or deny the renewal of the license of any licensee:

1.  Upon the conviction of the licensee of any violation of the laws or regulations designed for the conservation of saltwater products;

2.  Upon conviction of the license of knowingly dealing in, buying, selling, transporting, possessing, or taking any saltwater product, at any time and from any waters, in violation of the laws of this state, or;

3.  Upon satisfactory evidence of any violation of the laws or any regulations of this state designed for the conservation of saltwater products or of any of the laws of this state relating to dealing in, buying, selling, transporting, possession, or taking of saltwater products.

·        There is no doubt that certain fish houses are well aware that they are buying illegally netted pompano and other finfish. Clear evidence of that fact includes the piles of unmarked gillnet on the premises and the repeated illegal netting violations by netters operating out of those fish houses. The continuing pattern of illegal activity in and around the fish house is sufficient to warrant action to revoke the wholesale seafood-operating license of the fish house owner/operators.

·        The poachers are making good money and are hiring experienced criminal lawyers. State Prosecutors generally assign “fish cases” to their newer, inexperienced attorneys who usually have very large caseloads and have no understanding of fishery rules and regulations. In a recent prosecution of a repeat offender in Citrus County , the netter testified to the jury that he was not violating the law because he caught the mullet by gillnet in federal waters not state waters. Had the prosecution known and provided evidence that gillnetting mullet in federal waters is also illegal the jury may have found the netter guilty. Unless the FWC takes specific action to assist in certain major netting violations and repeat offender cases, the prosecution advantage will remain with the poachers.

II.      REFERENCES

1.       Florida Marine Research Institute (1999) Commercial Fishery Landings Data for Pompano.

2.        Murphy, M.D., R.G. Miller, and Peter B. Hood. (1996) “A Stock Assessment of Florida Pompano”. Florida Marine Research Institute – St. Petersburg , FL.

3.        Florida Marine Research Institute (1999) “ Florida ’s Inshore and Near-shore Species: 1999 Status and Trends Report” FWC – FMRI, St. Petersburg , FL.

4.        Florida Marine Research Institute (2000) “Commercial Harvest by Trip Landing Category and Gear Type”. FMRI, St. Petersburg , FL.

Prepared by: Ted Forgsen
CCA Florida
905 E. Park Avenue
Tallahassee, FL 32301
(850) 224-3474