Comment from Eric Isoda

Attention: NMFS (PIR) Administrator I am writing as an affected MHI Bottom fisherman and following are my thoughts: - I agree and support the Deep 7 Bottomfish annual catch limits / quotas provided that numbers used include those projected in the presently closed BRFAs to get a higher stock count. - I disagree on the seemingly duplication of efforts of the federal and state agencies that are in control of regulating our bottom fishing resources. If the main purpose to to perpetuate the Deep 7 species and to prevent overfishing, then why can't the agencies involved come up with a workable and agreeable solution. - Since we are not in a state of "overfishing", the BRFAs should be eliminated, especially since first established, its worth is still being questioned. There has been no conclusive evidence that the data so far collected is enough to justify its existence. - BOTcams is also another questionable project. For shallow applications this may be useful visual aid but for deep water usage with strobe and other lights and baiting, we may still not get a true picture of fish stock. The targeted Deep 7 species may be initially attracted by the "palu" or bait but once the predators such as amberjacks (kahalas) and sharks arrive, as most fishermen know, the "targeted" fish leaves the area. - Most accurate way is to actually open up all the BRFAs and study and analyze the "actual fish catch reports" in all areas. This would then show the true fish stock numbers. If you need to get more detailed information on catch locations, then the state / federal can modify the maps for reporting purposes. - Another option to help perpetuate the various Deep 7 species is to increase the "weight minimum for legal sale". It is unfortunate that for such an important issue, our state and federal governments cannot put politics on the side and do what needs to be done in the most cost affective and feasible way. Thank you for allowing me to present my testimony.