New Regulation Puts Fishing Industry at Risk, Say Charter Captains
The fishing industry in Naples, Florida is expressing concerns over a new regulation that requires electronic tracking devices to be installed on fishing boats. Alan Walburn, a fishing charter captain, argues that this regulation not only compromises their privacy but also imposes unnecessary financial burdens.
The tracking devices, which ping the boats regularly and upload the information into the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) computer system, make the boat's location and fishing spots public. Walburn argues that this is an invasion of privacy, as the information was already provided to the government through a daily paper form. He contends that making this information available on NOAA's website exposes their secret fishing spots to anyone who accesses the data.
Another significant issue raised by Walburn is the financial burden placed on the fishermen. Not only are they required to purchase the tracking devices themselves, but they also have to pay a $75 monthly tracking fee for each boat. In Walburn's case, when this regulation was first introduced a few years ago, he had to buy devices for his four boats, resulting in a monthly cost of $300 and an initial expenditure of $12,000. This financial strain makes it challenging for fishing businesses to sustain their operations and turn a profit.
Moreover, if the tracking device malfunctions, the affected boat is prohibited from leaving the dock until the device is repaired. Unlike other equipment that can be quickly replaced, the unique nature of the tracking device makes it necessary for a technician to come in and install the device, uploading the satellite tracking data specific to each boat. This requirement further exacerbates the burdensome situation faced by fishermen.
These concerns about government overreach and excessive regulation in the fishing industry have been echoed by other fishermen, who argue that it becomes increasingly difficult to stay in business and make a profit. Some fishermen recall the challenges faced during the Obama administration, where excessive red tape was similarly cited as a hindrance to their industry.
Aware of these issues, some fishermen have taken the matter to court, seeking relief from what they perceive as government interference. Walburn points to a recent victory in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals where a similar case was ruled in favor of the fishermen, which he believes bodes well for the pending Supreme Court case.
Critics of the regulation, like Bill Bright, warn that the costs associated with complying with this new requirement could potentially cut profits in half. They argue that the mandated everyday fee for an onboard observer, regardless of whether a fishing trip is successful or not, is unsustainable for commercial fishermen.
The concerns raised by Walburn and other fishing industry members highlight the challenges faced by small businesses in the fishing sector. Their hope is that their voices will be heard, and regulations will be adjusted to create a more supportive and sustainable environment for their industry to thrive.
