Commercial fishing study (aka Gill nets)

[Catch & Release]

Just wanted to remind everyone to go to the TWRA website express their opinions and feelings about the proposed commercial fishing study on gill nets on currently unopen waters in Tennessee. This is a study that will cost either the TWRA (our fishing license dollars) or the tax payer around $800,000.00 to complete, not to mention killing countless numbers of fish. It would also be a good idea to contact your state representative who unanimously passed legislation trying to force the TWRA to do this study. But as it stands right now the TWRA commissioners sent the proposal back to the assembly asking for funding. The assembly can either fund this study, force the TWRA to fund the study, or not do the study. I don’t think it is right for us sport fisherman or taxpayer to fund this study that will kill countless #'s of fish. So whatever your opinions on the matter please contact the TWRA and your representative and let them know..... The clock is ticking........
Thank you for your time....

Catch and Release, Thanks for posting this on this forum.
I sent an email to TWRA comments a few days ago. Here are my concerns that I pointed out. I know some of you will disagree with me and that is ok. I really do not want our money to be spent on a study for commercial fishing. Let's improve the sport fishery. We all know TWRA is strapped for cash. Let TWRA know how you feel and the State Reps.

-----Original Message-----
From: Alan <alanrayg2@aol.com>
To: TWRA.comment <TWRA.comment@tn.gov>
Sent: Thu, Dec 22, 2011 11:39 am
Subject: paddlefish study

Hi,
I have to make a few comments concerning the paddlefish study and commercial fishing.

A) I am against funding the study with sportfishing funds. I would rather see the money spent on the improvement of the sauger fishery or trout hatcherys. Let the commercial fishermen get the money for the study else where.

B) I do not understand how a complete population study can be made by testing a small section of water for a year or two. It seems to me this population study would be an ongoing study. Do we not study game fish regulary?

C) Undoubltly there will be game fish caught in the nets. How will they be disposed? Will they be sold? Again sportfishermen are getting the short end of the stick.

D) If my understanding is correct, the commercial fisherman will be allowed 12 gill nets up 900 feet long. That is over 2 miles of net per fisherman. I do not know the height of the gill nets. Will they be surface to bottom? Will the commercial fisherman be liable for recovering lost nets or damage to watercraft caught in the nets?

E) Lost nets will continue killing fish for decades. There will be lost nets. There are trees floating around out there.

F) Several years ago on the Tennessee River near Mousetail State Park I ha a commercial fisherman drop 2 gill nets where I was fishing. Needless to say I had to stop fishing in that area. I have to drive 90 minutes and spend around $75 to $100 a trip. Needless to say I was and am pissed that my best hole was made unfishable.

G) Where does TWRA get most of it's funding? commercial fisherman? I think the sole reason you came into existence is to manage sport fishing and later non- not sport fish. I know you must be tight on funding the regular programs. Do not allow the General Assy force you to fund this program. $741,000 is a lot of money to benefit a few commercial fisherman.

H) EPA and environmental groups have been trying to ban lead from my tackle box. How much lead is on the bottom of a lost 900 foot gill net.


In summary,
I am not willing to use my license fees to pay one red cent for a study on a commercial fishery of any sort. That funding should come from else where. Let the buyers of the eggs pay for this study.
I have a real concern for lost nets. I have lost dozens of crankbaits to lost trot lines over the years. I do not need monofiliment nets all over the lakes and rivers either. I would like to see all gill nets eliminated from Tennessee waters.

Thanks for listening
Alan Gartin

I agree 100% with your evaluation. The TWRA is already cash-strapped and we do not need to spend funds on a survey that will only benefit a few.

I am 54 years old and have been amazed at how much hunting and fishing has improved since my younger days due to tighter limits and regulation.

Lets not take a step back.

JMHO...

I got a reply from Doug Markham on Face Book. The TWRA will be meeting on Jan 12 on this issue. Here is a link to get you to the TWRA news room. Scroll down until you find the article on the paddlefish study. In that article is the email address to make your comments.
http://news.tn.gov/taxonomy/term/41

I urge you to send your emails as soon as possible. Alan

[robhal11]

If we are going to spend the 800K, use it at the fish hatchery instead. I don't know all the in's and out's, cut through the crap.

[bd-]

Commenting to TWRA is good, but I don't think it will get us very far. This study wasn't something TWRA came up with in the first place. The General Assembly passed a law basically forcing TWRA to evaluate new areas for commercial fishing, whether TWRA wants to or not.

Call your elected representative and raise hell. Tell them to amend or repeal the stupid law that started this mess (Public Chapter 338, formerly HB0903 and SB1140). That would be a good start.

bd

bd, Here is the letter I sent via email to my state Rep and Senator. I hope and urge everyone to gets involves soon. I think we will see increases in license fees and boating registration fees in the coming few years. Here is the letter. I did put my name and address on the original letter.

It has been brought to my attention that Public Chapter 338 is mandating TWRA to fund this study. I am vigorously opposed to this mandate. The waters belong to everyone in the state, therefore, the state of Tennessee should be required to pay for this study. Removing $741,000 from the TWRA budget will affect the ability of TWRA to manage current projects that pertain to boaters, fishermen and hunters. The sportsmen in this state should not have to pay for this study. If the mandate for TWRA to fund this study stands, undoubtedly, license fees for hunting, fishing and boating will be increased. It is unfair to pass this burden on to only the sportsmen in the state since the waters belong to everyone.
I encourage you find and pass in the house alternate funding.

[bd-]

Yes, I think the Reps need to get lots of letters exactly like that. We need to let them know that we sportsmen do not support this.

In addition, I should clarify that it will help TWRA to send them comments too. I expect that they are going to be battling it out with the legislature over this. I'm sure it will help them if the sportsmen are on their side.

I heard through the grapevine that TWRA has only gotten a very small handful of comments so far. That's not good - it makes it look like sportsmen are not interested. We need to do better!

bd

Here is a link to find your state Rep and state Senator.
http://www.capitol.tn.gov/
Fill in your street address and your city in the " find your Legislator" search engine. The contact information will be provided. You can email or call them. Let them hear from you.
Contact TWRA also. That information is in an earlier post.
It only takes a few minutes. If you know anyone that would rather write TWRA a letter, let me know; I have the address around here somewhere.

Let's make this happen !!!! alan

I am posting in reply to several past comments about the Paddlefish Study soon to begin in Tn. Fortunately for all of us, Tn has historically taken a progressive attitude towards commercial fishing and has implemented fairly reasonable commercial fishing rules. This study will no doubt shed some positive light on commercial fishing when it revels the truth about fishing with gill nets. Among them are that net fishermen only want to catch the type of fish they are after. It isn't in their best interest to catch a number of fish that they will have to pick out of the nets and then throw back. So the will use nets that are very selective to the target species. I know its hard for some of you to believe but a gill net is not a magic wand. Commercial fishermen, like you, don't always catch fish. And when they do it is usually the fish they are after. I have been out with several commercial fishermen and caught only paddlefish, carp, and buffalo. I have never seen a sport fish in a gill net. The only exception to that would be an occassional large catfish and they just get thrown back. Fish mortality related to catch and release of sport fish by sport fishers on the other hand is well documented and signiifcant to sport fish populations.

A common thread in these debates is the idea that state fish and wildlife agencies are funded by the sale of sport licenses and that money should only be used to fund recreational activities. It never seems to occur to anyone to mention that the existance of lake you are probably fishing in is the result of a dam that was constructed and is maintained at public expense. That is expense to the general public, not the recreational fising public. We pay for the lake you are fishing in so it is entirely reasonable that we should have a say in what goes on there. I think the general public will agree that our lakes are for public use, both recreational and commercial.

Commercial fishing is a time honered and honest way to make a living. This study appears to be an attempt to determine if it is sustainable and whether or not it impacts sport fisheries. It deserves your support.

[Catch & Release]

Have you never been fishing for one species and catch another? I know I have many many times. Gill nets are not selective in what they catch, they will catch whatever swims in them. Commercial fisherman have alot of water avaliable to them, all we ask is that they leave what little water we have left alone. I am not saying it isnt a honest way to make a living, I respect all hard working individuals. But again I believe these waters should be free from gill nets.

Here is a question and reply that I found on another forum asking a question about gill nets:

Originally Posted by Jamey
Are gill nets even legal in Tennessee?! If so, there must've been some changes to the regs since I last checked them..

Some of the smaller shad and chubs I catch in my castnet end up getting 'gilled', but castnets and seines generally have mesh no larger than 3/8" or so. Gill-netted bait pretty much sucks, unless of course you like fishing with dead or dying bait.
I'm pretty sure they are legal, but only to commercial fisherman. This past fall I was fishing a local bass tourney and saw some guys pulling one in, it was full of dead bass and crappie, made me and my partner sick. I hope they do get outlawed cause they kill anything that swims into them.

[Travis C.]

Due to the way commercial guys have gone about getting this "new waters" deal into play I doubt we can get it stopped. The sport fishing and hunting community would have to be as organized as the commercial fishing community to do that.

I have no problem with a person trying to make a living but if they are going to open more water to the commercial guys then they need to fix this first:

http://www.fws.gov/le/PubBulletins/P...h8-29-2011.pdf

I am going to list some websites that concern paddlefish.

http://www.fws.gov/international/DMA...ne%202009).pdf

This is the study.

http://www.tn.gov/twra/pdfs/pfpopulations.pdf

Gfawkes, I am a little confused on your comment on funding.... I agree on your comment on multi-use for recreational and commercial. That is why I said the taxpayers in Tennessee should fund this study. We as fisherman have a stake in this study and we should pay a portion, but not all of the study. If all of the funding comes from the state, then we all are paying equally.
If you look at the second web link I placed here. You will see that the retail value of harvested paddlefish has decreased in Tennessee by $5.7 million.
This brings us to the first web link I have here. CITES will not allow export of paddlefish flesh or eggs from Tennessee waters. They site over exploitation as a possible cause.
There are some fish consumption advisories in some of the study areas. Have you ever seen a food product bought at any store with a warning label?
Such as do not eat more than 6 meals a year or do not consume if you are pregnant, or woman wanting to become pregnant, do not eat if you are an infant or child. I have not either. That is enough on the fish.
Gillnetters do have a place in our lakes and rivers. There have been a few successful studies done on netting asian carp. I think that was in Missouri.
Apparently CITES does not think that the rate of harvest in Tennessee waters are sustainable for paddlefish with current regulations. Perhaps we should reduce the allowable catch rate on current lakes.

Catch and Release,
I think CITES only covers international export of Paddlefish. It doesn't cover domestic sales. I could be wrong and probably am.
There has been a lot of discussion in the past on gill nets catching sport fish. Lake Guntersville in Alabama has been hot on this topic for years. I have seen photos of dozens of big female bass dead in nets in the spring. A friend of mine has seen nets across the mouths of creeks on the Tennesee River near Cuba Landing. He actually got his motor tangled in one while loading his boat on the trailer. The net was in the back of a creek in front of the ramp!!!
The only place I disagree with you is on the elimination of gill nets. They are the best way to control over population of rough fish and catfish.
I do want to say I respect everyone's opinion on this issue. I admit I do not know the answers and I do not posses all of the information. I am not against the study. I am against us fisherman and hunters and boaters funding this study. Our license fees for hunting , fishing and boating registration fund the management of our activities. This could also be called a " User Fee " Do we not pay to ramp at Army Corp. ramps. Don't some parks charge an entrance fee for using them? don't they exist at public expense?
In closing, The paddlefish fishery would not exist without the hatcheries in Tennesee. We have stocked the lakes and rivers with paddlefish and as far as I know we still stock them.
In closing, contact your state Rep and Senator and TRWA and let them know your position.

Travis C, Thanks for the link. I was unaware of the ban. I did a little digging and found that CITES has determined that the fishery is in decline and not sustainable. I am assuming the waters in Tennessee are over harvested. I wonder how opening 5 more lakes will help the over harvesting in current lakes being netted? I'll bet the netters will buy more nets and fish every where. Then all of the lakes and rivers will be over fished.

[Travis C.]

Originally Posted by ALANRAYG2

Travis C, Thanks for the link. I was unaware of the ban. I did a little digging and found that CITES has determined that the fishery is in decline and not sustainable. I am assuming the waters in Tennessee are over harvested. I wonder how opening 5 more lakes will help the over harvesting in current lakes being netted? I'll bet the netters will buy more nets and fish every where. Then all of the lakes and rivers will be over fished.

Another thing to consider on the "overharvesting" is not just opening more lakes. Part of the things looking to get passed is allowing someone to harvest without a license holder present on the boat.

" Make it legal for commercial fishing helpers to run gear without presence of commercial license holders."

bd said it best maybe here or on another forum, it would likely cause more "sub-contracting" out help to run nets in turn creating more people on the water.