THOUSANDS OF COASTAL FISHERMEN TO RALLY IN WASHINGTON DC ON MARCH 21
In another historic show of solidarity, U.S. recreational and commercial fishermen will gather at Upper Senate Park in Washington DC on March 21, 2012 starting at noon in an organized demonstration supporting sensible reform of the Magnuson Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act.
This is a follow-up to a rally in February of 2010 that brought some 5,000 recreational, commercial and party/charter vessel owners, fishermen and people in fisheries dependent businesses from all over the country to Washington. Twenty plus Members of the Senate and House of Representatives spoke regarding efforts to reform Magnuson.
Signed into law in 1976, the 36-year-old law “most notably aided in the development of the domestic fishing industry by phasing out foreign fishing,” according to the National Marine Fisheries Service. In recent years however, the act has been transformed from its original intent into a weapon employed by a handful of mega-foundations and the so-called marine conservation organizations they subsidize aimed at reducing overall participation in our nation’s rich fisheries while driving both commercial and recreational fishermen off the water.
Rally organizers are asking legislators for help by amending the law to provide a better balance of marine conservation and coastal commerce, as it was originally intended to do.
The upcoming rally is being billed as Keep Fishermen Fishing, and once again unites the commercial and recreational sectors under one common message; “Fix Magnuson Now.” There were more than 40 chartered buses filled with rally participants in 2010, and efforts are once again underway in many coastal states to transport fishermen to the rally.
“Those who didn’t attend or perhaps chose not to support the original rally are mostly unaware of the strides we’ve taken since 2010,” said Jim Donofrio, executive director of the Recreational Fishing Alliance and one of the rally organizers. “With the support of the two dozen members of Congress who addressed us at Upper Senate Park, leaders from both sides of the aisle have pushed to make Magnuson reform a Congressional priority. As a result, the House Natural Resources Committee is now reviewing eight different pieces of fisheries reform legislation.”
“Our coastal fishermen represent the true spirit of Main Street America, as over-burdensome regulations supported only by organizations and individuals supported by a handful of mega foundations is forcing third and fourth generation fishermen off the water and away from sustainable public resources,” said Nils Stolpe, producer of FishNet USA, representing the interests of U.S. commercial fishermen. “The plight of our coastal fishermen is finally getting the media and legislative attention it deserves, and we hope to keep that momentum moving forward on March 21.”
Keep Fishermen Fishing organizers thus far include Recreational Fishing Alliance, Southeastern Fisheries Association, National Association of Charterboat Operators, Morro Bay Commercial Fishermen’s Association, Garden State Seafood Association, United Boatmen, Long Island Commercial Fishing Association, Panama City Boatmen, Viking Village Dock, Fishermen’s Dock, Hull’s Seafood Markets, Lund's Fisheries, Westport Charterboat Association, Southern Off Shore Fishing Association, Garibaldi Charters, Florida Keys Commercial Fishermen's Association, New York Fishing Tackle Trades Association, Save the Summer Flounder Fishery Fund, New York Sportfishing Federation, Monkfish Defense Fund, Atlantic Capes Seafood, North Carolina Watermen United, Big Game Fishing Journal, West Coast Seafood Processors Association and Bristol Bay Regional Seafood Development Association.
For more information including bus details, visit http://www.keepfishermenfishing.com.
Follow Keep Fishermen Fishing on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/pages/Keep-Fishermen-Fishing/282791548442919, through our blog at http://fixmagnusonnow.blogspot.com/, via our Twitter feed at https://twitter.com/#!/FishMarchDC2012 or search for Keep Fishermen Fishing on Google+.
Commercial sector contact: Nils Stolpe (386-409-0675)
Recreational sector contact: Jim Donofrio (888-564-6732)
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Friday, February 10, 2012
KFF Spotlight: National Association of Charterboat Operators
In our effort to keep you in the loop on which members
are participating in this year’s Keep Fishermen Fishing rally, we’re focusing
on the National Association of Charterboat Operators today.
NACO, based out of Orange Beach, Alabama, has been around
since 1991, representing marine charter companies. Many of these companies
provide fishing charters, but a good number also do sailing, diving and eco
tours or other excursions. That translates to hundreds or thousands of captains, crew and related businesses across the country who count on NACO for representation. Several of those
members likely will be at the rally.
But what does NACO do?
From its website at http://www.nacocharters.org/: “As the premiere Association that represents
charter boat interests, our objective is to improve the professional charter
boat operator's bottom line and to provide a strong voice in Washington, D.C.”
Board members come from all over as well – so NACO truly represents the
majority of charterboat businesses. NACO also helps to ensure its members
operate safely and professionally.
Indeed, we are lucky to have NACO folks attending the
rally in March!
Just as an aside, one of the best things I like about
NACO is the ability to search for and find local charterboat operators by using
the directory on its website. I live on the West Coast and the folks I’ve known
and respected for years and worked with on fisheries management issues are
members. I’m looking forward to meeting some of the other charterboat folks
from around the country.
Have questions about how adding flexibility to the
Magnuson-Stevens Act will affect NACO members? Drop them an email at info@nacocharters.org or leave us a question in the comments and we'll get back to you.
Thursday, February 9, 2012
We're rolling!
It’s
official! We have the site, we have the times, recreational and commercial
fishing groups have signed on and people are arranging buses and transportation
– the Keep Fishermen Fishing rally is rolling!
Here are the
details:
Who: Recreational and commercial
fishermen and related businesses from across the country
What: Keep Fishermen Fishing
rally
When: noon to 3 p.m., Wednesday,
March 21, 2012
Where: Upper Senate Park,
Washington, D.C.
Why: to support flexibility in
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
Links:
Keep Fishermen Fishing website: http://www.keepfishermenfishing.com/index.html
Twitter: https://twitter.com/fishmarchdc2012
Leading recreational and
commercial fishing groups have already signed on to go, so in the days ahead we
will highlight a few of them so you can get to know them better. These folks
are dedicated, serious, hard-working fishermen and women and seafood workers
who believe in the fishing and seafood industries. To us, fishing isn’t always
about money; it’s culture, it’s history, it’s camaraderie, it’s a way of life.
And it’s
vanishing.
The changes
to the Magnuson-Stevens Act we’re asking for are slight – just a little
flexibility so that we can keep our fleets on the water, anglers and their
families fishing and seafood being delivered to consumers. Fish stocks will not suffer; species that are in trouble
will still have legal protections in order to rebuild and become healthy again.
But at the same time, our nation’s rich history of fishing and processing will
be allowed to maintain its legacy.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Revisionism and Reform - a response to Crockett's and Hogarth's Putting Fish Over Politics
An Op-Ed Response From U.S. Fishermen
A recent national opinion piece jointly written by Lee Crockett of Pew Environment Group and Dr. Bill Hogarth of the Florida Institute of Oceanography is titled Putting Fish Over Politics - had news editors been aware of the history of fisheries management as it relates to these two former federal employees, we’re sure that editors would’ve agreed a better title might’ve been U.S. Revisionist History By Bureaucrats Turned Lobbyists.
First and foremost, it should be disclosed that both Crockett and Hogarth worked extensively in the federal public sector before taking their current posts as lonely friends of the fish; Crockett having spent seven years working inside a Congressional fisheries committee and another four-and-a-half at the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), while Hogarth himself is the former head NMFS.
While it’s common knowledge that the philanthropic endowments by Pew have given huge financial support to the Florida Institute of Oceanography over the years, what many media outlets probably aren’t aware of is the vast difference of opinion that Hogarth and Crockett once held when the NMFS chief was asking Congress to stop a law from being manipulated by Crockett’s group of anti-fishing, environmental lobbyists.
In an official 2007 memo NMFS director, Dr. Hogarth said of fishing regulations for a number of coastal species, "Based on the language included in the most recent reauthorization, 2010 will be a train wreck.” Call him prophet or genius, but Dr. Hogarth was absolutely correct; the rigid deadlines and statutory definitions included in the 2006 reauthorization of Magnuson have indeed greased the tracks to the point that the train barreled headlong into the heart of our coastal communities, leaving a wake of denied access and economic devastation for fishing communities including tackle shops, captains earning their livelihoods in the for-hire sector, commercial fishermen and many professionals in our marine communities who rely on sustainable coastal fisheries.
Fishermen of course tried warning legislators of this impending “train wreck” during the Magnuson reauthorization debate, bolstered by the scientific analysis of Dr. Hogarth himself. During this time, while Crockett’s group was putting heavy influence on the Senate to pass an extremely restrictive new federal fisheries law to the exclusion of coastal fishermen, Dr. Hogarth was giving contrary testimony in the House which warned of severe socioeconomic impacts given the inflexible nature of some of the newly authored statutory definitions.
In direct questioning from House Natural Resource Committee members in 2006, Hogarth was asked specifically if he thought it made sense to include rigid deadlines for rebuilding fish stocks, or if instead there should be some flexibility for the Secretary of Commerce to adjust timeframes in certain instances. “I think that there should be some flexibility, and I think we have utilized some flexibility,” Hogarth responded, adding “I think the key to this is do we rebuilt these stocks in a reasonable timeframe, and that is the key.”
Asked again if he believed there should be some management flexibility added into the new Magnuson reauthorization, Hogarth said “Yes, I think the Administration in its bill has talked about the rebuilding by the 10-year rebuilding timeframe we think is arbitrary, and there are better ways to deal with rebuilding.” He then added, “I think we need greater flexibility, I mean, so much for those stocks that can be rebuilt.”
Pressed to elaborate further on the statutory deadlines included in the legislation, Dr. Hogarth told Congress, “We think that 10-year is arbitrary. We think it should be based on the life history of the species, and we think we need that flexibility.”
House members continued to discuss various amendments to the Magnuson Stevens Act legislation in an effort to provide some of that limited management flexibility Hogarth favored, however, Pew Environment Group and its allies were ultimately successfully in fighting to keep the rigid and inflexible statutory language in place. In the end, whatever commonsense approach was being discussed, and indeed advocated by Hogarth and fisheries advocates in the House, was ultimately squashed when Pew and its political allies successfully worked over Senate leaders who steamrolled through a reauthorized version of the Magnuson Stevens Act by unanimous consent, summarily ignoring the debate taking place in the House Natural Resource Committee.
Today, we are experiencing a fisheries management “train wreck,” just as Dr. Bill Hogarth once predicted would happen with passage of the Magnuson Stevens Act in Congress. Fishermen have been virtually denied access to economically vital coastal fish stocks like cod, haddock, summer flounder, black sea bass, red snapper, gag grouper and others, even though in most cases these same fisheries have been statistically deemed healthier than in generations of management.
To the exclusion of the fishermen, these former fisheries opponents from the public sector have since buried the hatchet and have found mutual comfort beneath the blanket of Pew Charitable Trusts funding and together have been painting a misleading portrait of joy and contentment within our coastal communities. Nothing could be further from the truth of course, and while these former NMFS staffers are touting to media outlets by trumpeting the fruits of their bureaucratic labor, a coalition of real fishermen, most without the luxury of public sector pension benefits, continues fighting for meaningful fisheries reform at the legislative branch of government.
These fishermen from both the recreational and commercial sector recognize that heavy sacrifice in the name of conservation has been made during the past 36 years of fisheries management, ever since the Magnuson Stevens Act was first established specifically to create a robust and sustainable U.S. coastal fishery, which has led to more robust fish stocks from coast to coast. Regrettably, it’s those with the most to gain and lose, America’s coastal communities and private sector constituents, who are the ones asking Congress not just to “build upon the work of those who came before,” but to correct the inflexible provisions of Magnuson Stevens which has wreaked such damage to fishing families and their communities.
A plethora of lobbyists have helped manipulate the legislative system through the stealthy work of a few pensioned former bureaucrats who apparently don’t understand that Congressional testimony doesn’t actually disappear from public record. While Pew’s Lee Crockett – and probably by default the Florida Institute of Oceanography’s Bill Hogarth – don’t want to see flexibility instilled into the federal fisheries law that they each had a hand in seeing dismantled, a coalition of recreational and commercial fishermen will be in Washington DC on March 21, together in a rally against this type of hypocrisy and revisionist history.
Respectfully signed,
Keep Fishermen Fishing
A recent national opinion piece jointly written by Lee Crockett of Pew Environment Group and Dr. Bill Hogarth of the Florida Institute of Oceanography is titled Putting Fish Over Politics - had news editors been aware of the history of fisheries management as it relates to these two former federal employees, we’re sure that editors would’ve agreed a better title might’ve been U.S. Revisionist History By Bureaucrats Turned Lobbyists.
First and foremost, it should be disclosed that both Crockett and Hogarth worked extensively in the federal public sector before taking their current posts as lonely friends of the fish; Crockett having spent seven years working inside a Congressional fisheries committee and another four-and-a-half at the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), while Hogarth himself is the former head NMFS.
While it’s common knowledge that the philanthropic endowments by Pew have given huge financial support to the Florida Institute of Oceanography over the years, what many media outlets probably aren’t aware of is the vast difference of opinion that Hogarth and Crockett once held when the NMFS chief was asking Congress to stop a law from being manipulated by Crockett’s group of anti-fishing, environmental lobbyists.
In an official 2007 memo NMFS director, Dr. Hogarth said of fishing regulations for a number of coastal species, "Based on the language included in the most recent reauthorization, 2010 will be a train wreck.” Call him prophet or genius, but Dr. Hogarth was absolutely correct; the rigid deadlines and statutory definitions included in the 2006 reauthorization of Magnuson have indeed greased the tracks to the point that the train barreled headlong into the heart of our coastal communities, leaving a wake of denied access and economic devastation for fishing communities including tackle shops, captains earning their livelihoods in the for-hire sector, commercial fishermen and many professionals in our marine communities who rely on sustainable coastal fisheries.
Fishermen of course tried warning legislators of this impending “train wreck” during the Magnuson reauthorization debate, bolstered by the scientific analysis of Dr. Hogarth himself. During this time, while Crockett’s group was putting heavy influence on the Senate to pass an extremely restrictive new federal fisheries law to the exclusion of coastal fishermen, Dr. Hogarth was giving contrary testimony in the House which warned of severe socioeconomic impacts given the inflexible nature of some of the newly authored statutory definitions.
In direct questioning from House Natural Resource Committee members in 2006, Hogarth was asked specifically if he thought it made sense to include rigid deadlines for rebuilding fish stocks, or if instead there should be some flexibility for the Secretary of Commerce to adjust timeframes in certain instances. “I think that there should be some flexibility, and I think we have utilized some flexibility,” Hogarth responded, adding “I think the key to this is do we rebuilt these stocks in a reasonable timeframe, and that is the key.”
Asked again if he believed there should be some management flexibility added into the new Magnuson reauthorization, Hogarth said “Yes, I think the Administration in its bill has talked about the rebuilding by the 10-year rebuilding timeframe we think is arbitrary, and there are better ways to deal with rebuilding.” He then added, “I think we need greater flexibility, I mean, so much for those stocks that can be rebuilt.”
Pressed to elaborate further on the statutory deadlines included in the legislation, Dr. Hogarth told Congress, “We think that 10-year is arbitrary. We think it should be based on the life history of the species, and we think we need that flexibility.”
House members continued to discuss various amendments to the Magnuson Stevens Act legislation in an effort to provide some of that limited management flexibility Hogarth favored, however, Pew Environment Group and its allies were ultimately successfully in fighting to keep the rigid and inflexible statutory language in place. In the end, whatever commonsense approach was being discussed, and indeed advocated by Hogarth and fisheries advocates in the House, was ultimately squashed when Pew and its political allies successfully worked over Senate leaders who steamrolled through a reauthorized version of the Magnuson Stevens Act by unanimous consent, summarily ignoring the debate taking place in the House Natural Resource Committee.
Today, we are experiencing a fisheries management “train wreck,” just as Dr. Bill Hogarth once predicted would happen with passage of the Magnuson Stevens Act in Congress. Fishermen have been virtually denied access to economically vital coastal fish stocks like cod, haddock, summer flounder, black sea bass, red snapper, gag grouper and others, even though in most cases these same fisheries have been statistically deemed healthier than in generations of management.
To the exclusion of the fishermen, these former fisheries opponents from the public sector have since buried the hatchet and have found mutual comfort beneath the blanket of Pew Charitable Trusts funding and together have been painting a misleading portrait of joy and contentment within our coastal communities. Nothing could be further from the truth of course, and while these former NMFS staffers are touting to media outlets by trumpeting the fruits of their bureaucratic labor, a coalition of real fishermen, most without the luxury of public sector pension benefits, continues fighting for meaningful fisheries reform at the legislative branch of government.
These fishermen from both the recreational and commercial sector recognize that heavy sacrifice in the name of conservation has been made during the past 36 years of fisheries management, ever since the Magnuson Stevens Act was first established specifically to create a robust and sustainable U.S. coastal fishery, which has led to more robust fish stocks from coast to coast. Regrettably, it’s those with the most to gain and lose, America’s coastal communities and private sector constituents, who are the ones asking Congress not just to “build upon the work of those who came before,” but to correct the inflexible provisions of Magnuson Stevens which has wreaked such damage to fishing families and their communities.
A plethora of lobbyists have helped manipulate the legislative system through the stealthy work of a few pensioned former bureaucrats who apparently don’t understand that Congressional testimony doesn’t actually disappear from public record. While Pew’s Lee Crockett – and probably by default the Florida Institute of Oceanography’s Bill Hogarth – don’t want to see flexibility instilled into the federal fisheries law that they each had a hand in seeing dismantled, a coalition of recreational and commercial fishermen will be in Washington DC on March 21, together in a rally against this type of hypocrisy and revisionist history.
Respectfully signed,
Keep Fishermen Fishing
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
What do the antis really want?
With most of our fish stocks in better shape than ever - or at least since Magnuson became law in 1976 - the question "what do these people really want?" comes up more often. I put some information together in A Good Fisheries Crisis Is Hard To Find (http://www.fishnet-usa.com/A%20Good%20Crisis.pdf) that answers that question, and most simply written, it's all about the dollars. And it isn't their dollars, it's the dollars that they can charm out of a bunch of billionaires who don't know one end of a fish from the other by providing them with a bogus cause to fix (along, I'm sure, with a bunch of self-serving ulterior motives as well).
Nils
Nils
Rally in Washington - March 21, 2012
The people who organized the rally in 2010 are in the process of organizing a follow-up event on March 21. We're looking forward to more people in attendance, more media attention and more support from our federal legislators, but that's all up to you.
In the two years since the last rally fish stocks have continued to improve, and they've improved only because of the sacrifices that we all, whether recreational or commercial fishermen, have made. What's it gotten us? Thanks to the efforts of a handful of multi-billion dollar "charitable" foundations, the so-called marine conservation organizations, the so-called fishing organizations and the federal bureaucrats that are little more than puppets in their anti-fishing campaign, we've gotten lower TACs, shorter seasons, less access and more restrictions than we've ever had before. We have a head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration whose stated purpose is to get fish and fishermen off the water, and as a country we're now importing more than 80% of the seafood we consume.
You can stay up to date on the plans for the rally as they develop by visiting the Keep Fishermen Fishing website (http://www.keepfishermenfishing.com/), following Keep Fishermen Fishing on Facebook and subscribing to the Keep Fishermen Fishing Twitter feed (https://twitter.com/#!/FishMarchDC2012). And, of course, by subscribing to updates to this blog.
Thanks for your attention, and remember that it's up to you.
Nils Stolpe
In the two years since the last rally fish stocks have continued to improve, and they've improved only because of the sacrifices that we all, whether recreational or commercial fishermen, have made. What's it gotten us? Thanks to the efforts of a handful of multi-billion dollar "charitable" foundations, the so-called marine conservation organizations, the so-called fishing organizations and the federal bureaucrats that are little more than puppets in their anti-fishing campaign, we've gotten lower TACs, shorter seasons, less access and more restrictions than we've ever had before. We have a head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration whose stated purpose is to get fish and fishermen off the water, and as a country we're now importing more than 80% of the seafood we consume.
You can stay up to date on the plans for the rally as they develop by visiting the Keep Fishermen Fishing website (http://www.keepfishermenfishing.com/), following Keep Fishermen Fishing on Facebook and subscribing to the Keep Fishermen Fishing Twitter feed (https://twitter.com/#!/FishMarchDC2012). And, of course, by subscribing to updates to this blog.
Thanks for your attention, and remember that it's up to you.
Nils Stolpe
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Fish and Oil: NOAA’s attitude gap
“At the global scale, probably the one thing currently having the most impact (on the oceans) is overfishing and destructive fishing gear” (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration head Jane Lubchenco in an interview on the website Takepart.com on April 7, 2010.)
Jane Lubchenco was awarded a Marine Fellowship from the Pew Charitable Trusts in 1992. Since then she has been in the forefront of a handful of foundation-subsidized scientists supported by a frighteningly effective media machine that has trumpeted one and only one message: fishing is behind most of our ocean-related problems.
The Pew Trusts were established by the children of Sun Oil founder Joseph Pew and are directed by a Board of which Pew family members are in the majority.
Since Ms. Lubchenco was a Pew Marine Fellow, a small handful of ultra-rich foundations – led by Pew – have spent tens of millions of dollars on demonizing fishermen via ENGOs and academic institutions. Chief among the organiza-tions and academics has been the Environmental Defense Fund and Ms. Lubchenco (prior to becoming NOAA head, she was Vice Chair of the EDF Board). The mechanism to do this has been the creation and perpetuation of the belief that we’re in the midst of an ocean crisis caused by fishing.
These foundations have spent millions of dollars initiating and supporting legislative changes that have put fishermen’s boats, livelihoods and futures at risk for stepping afoul of any of a seemingly endless array of meaningless (in terms of conservation) regulations. They have spent millions of dollars on insuring through the courts and the federal bureauc-racy that the Secretary of Commerce zealously enforces every burdensome regulation inflicted on U.S. fishermen. And they have spent millions of dollars to convince the public, as Ms. Lubchenco stressed less than two weeks prior to the beginning of the Deepwater Horizon tragedy began in the Gulf of Mexico, that fishing is the major threat to the health of the oceans.
In the time frame over which this has been done, the fisheries in U.S. waters have been steadily improving. In fact, the latest NOAA/NMFS report on the status of our domestic fisheries charts the steady increase - in terms of that agency’s own Fish Stock Sustainability Index – over the last decade from 357 to 573, an increase in the sustainability of our fisheries of 60% (http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/statusoffisheries/sos_full28_press.pdf).
You can see the end results of these anti-fishing expenditures in fishing ports from Maine to Florida to Texas, from Southern California to Alaska, in Hawaii and in the U.S. offshore possessions: empty docks, abandoned vessels and shuttered businesses that used to depend in whole or in part on fishing for their existence. And for the last decade you could see them as well in the print and broadcast media’s treatment as headline-level gospel of every biased bit of fisheries “research” accomplished by foundation subsidized scientists and blaming virtually all of the oceans’ ills on fishing.
You can also see the results in the huge slick that is now floating in the Gulf of Mexico, in the closed fisheries, the lost tourism dollars, the threat to beaches and wildlife from Texas to Florida’s East coast and beyond, and in the weeks of futile efforts by the oil industry and the federal government to shut down the well. It’s sort of like the Keystone Cops, but with wide-ranging and tragic consequences.
The rest is available on the FishNet USA website by clicking on the link at the end of the "Current Edition" section.
Jane Lubchenco was awarded a Marine Fellowship from the Pew Charitable Trusts in 1992. Since then she has been in the forefront of a handful of foundation-subsidized scientists supported by a frighteningly effective media machine that has trumpeted one and only one message: fishing is behind most of our ocean-related problems.
The Pew Trusts were established by the children of Sun Oil founder Joseph Pew and are directed by a Board of which Pew family members are in the majority.
Since Ms. Lubchenco was a Pew Marine Fellow, a small handful of ultra-rich foundations – led by Pew – have spent tens of millions of dollars on demonizing fishermen via ENGOs and academic institutions. Chief among the organiza-tions and academics has been the Environmental Defense Fund and Ms. Lubchenco (prior to becoming NOAA head, she was Vice Chair of the EDF Board). The mechanism to do this has been the creation and perpetuation of the belief that we’re in the midst of an ocean crisis caused by fishing.
These foundations have spent millions of dollars initiating and supporting legislative changes that have put fishermen’s boats, livelihoods and futures at risk for stepping afoul of any of a seemingly endless array of meaningless (in terms of conservation) regulations. They have spent millions of dollars on insuring through the courts and the federal bureauc-racy that the Secretary of Commerce zealously enforces every burdensome regulation inflicted on U.S. fishermen. And they have spent millions of dollars to convince the public, as Ms. Lubchenco stressed less than two weeks prior to the beginning of the Deepwater Horizon tragedy began in the Gulf of Mexico, that fishing is the major threat to the health of the oceans.
In the time frame over which this has been done, the fisheries in U.S. waters have been steadily improving. In fact, the latest NOAA/NMFS report on the status of our domestic fisheries charts the steady increase - in terms of that agency’s own Fish Stock Sustainability Index – over the last decade from 357 to 573, an increase in the sustainability of our fisheries of 60% (http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/statusoffisheries/sos_full28_press.pdf).
You can see the end results of these anti-fishing expenditures in fishing ports from Maine to Florida to Texas, from Southern California to Alaska, in Hawaii and in the U.S. offshore possessions: empty docks, abandoned vessels and shuttered businesses that used to depend in whole or in part on fishing for their existence. And for the last decade you could see them as well in the print and broadcast media’s treatment as headline-level gospel of every biased bit of fisheries “research” accomplished by foundation subsidized scientists and blaming virtually all of the oceans’ ills on fishing.
You can also see the results in the huge slick that is now floating in the Gulf of Mexico, in the closed fisheries, the lost tourism dollars, the threat to beaches and wildlife from Texas to Florida’s East coast and beyond, and in the weeks of futile efforts by the oil industry and the federal government to shut down the well. It’s sort of like the Keystone Cops, but with wide-ranging and tragic consequences.
The rest is available on the FishNet USA website by clicking on the link at the end of the "Current Edition" section.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)