The First District Court of Appeal has affirmed and upheld a legal decision by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) which asserted that a "hybrid" commercial net was illegal.

"It is another well-reasoned ruling by the courts upholding the ban on gill and entangling nets," said Michael Kennedy, Chairman, Coastal Conservation Association of Florida (CCA Florida). CCA Florida intervened in the lawsuit to support the FWC's decision.

In 1994 an overwhelming 72% of Florida voters approved the constitutional amendment limiting marine net fishing, which includes both a prohibition on the use of gill and entangling nets in all state waters and a size limit on other nets. Although the restriction has been in place for nearly ten years, there are still factions within the commercial industry who refuse to accept the legal reality that the constitution prohibits gillnets.

Since 1994, there have been numerous lawsuits, attempts to create enforcement loopholes, and outright scams all designed to invalidate or circumvent provisions of the constitutional amendment.

"All have failed," said Ted Forsgren, CCA Florida Executive Director. "The Florida Legislature, Florida Courts, and state agencies have upheld the clear intent of Florida voters."

In this case, the commercial interests were attempting to circumvent a regulation which set a maximum mesh size of two inches for seine nets to establish a "bright line" distinction between illegal gillnets and legal seine nets. The commercial interests claimed that their net, which would have a mesh size larger than two inches, was legal because it was a "hybrid" net and not a gillnet or seine net.

Two similar lawsuits had been filed before to invalidate or circumvent the two-inch maximum mesh size rule. In a previous case the First District Court of Appeal ruled that the use of the two-inch mesh size to distinguish seine nets from gillnets was "historically based, rational and practical."

Last week, Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Glogau stated to the panel of judges that the commercial interests were arguing a case that the First District Court had already decided twice. The Court agreed and, in just one week, issued a brief decision affirming the FWC legal position.

Commenting on the decision FWC General Council Jim Antista said, "I think it's significant, because there has been a lot of discussion about "hybrid" nets and whether the constitution left room for the creation of a net that could get around the two-inch rule. I think the court put that issue to rest with this ruling."