It’s coming downward to the wire for H.R. 200, the so-called “Strengthening Fishing Communities as well as Increasing Flexibility inwards Fisheries Management Act.”
Its supporters know that if they don’t larn the pecker signed into constabulary soon, as well as if command of the House of Representatives changes hands, equally it’s directly predicted to do, they volition lose their best run a endangerment inwards many years to substantially weaken the conservation as well as stock rebuilding provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation as well as Management Act.
Only ane barrier stands inwards their way, as well as that’s the lack of a companion pecker inwards the Senate.
So far, no Magnuson-Stevens reauthorization pecker has been introduced inwards the upper sleeping room of Congress, so H.R. 200 supporters involve a unlike form of vehicle to larn their pecker passed if they are to receive got whatever promise of emasculating the science-based federal fishery management scheme earlier the 115th Congress draws to a close. Thanks to members of the recreational fishing as well as boatbuilding community, who are to a greater extent than than willing to smasher a Devil’s cope with those who receive got long been trying to gut Magnuson-Stevens, H.R. 200 supporters soundless receive got ane feasible run a endangerment to succeed.
It takes the shape of a pecker numbered S. 1520, the “Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management Act,” improve known, cheers to a massive as well as well-funded world relations campaign, equally the “Modern Fish Act.”
S. 1520, along with its House companion, H.R. 2023, was originally crafted yesteryear recreational fishing as well as boatbuilding manufacture groups, as well as diverse anglers’ rights organizations, equally a agency to growth recreational landings of diverse species of fish, especially inwards the South Atlantic as well as Gulf of Mexico, as well as thus, at to the lowest degree inwards theory, convey greater economical gains to fishing tackle as well as boating manufacture businesses.
The Modern Fish Act didn’t seek to growth the recreational kill yesteryear rebuilding still-depleted stocks or maintaining the abundance of salubrious fish populations. Instead, it was built some a two-pronged strategy of impairing the commercial fishing industry.
Once prong sought to both shift resources allotment from the commercial sector to anglers, as well as impair fishery managers’ powerfulness to experiment with novel as well as innovative methods that mightiness allow them to do salubrious as well as sustainable commercial fisheries. The other prong would complimentary the recreational sector from much of the burden of conserving fish stocks, fifty-fifty when anglers are responsible for most of the landings, piece beingness to a greater extent than tolerant of overfishing as well as delays inwards rebuilding overfished stocks.
Many of the most objectionable provisions of S. 1520 were either watered downward or completely eliminated during the commission mark-up procedure that took house months ago. Now, at that spot are reports coming out of the Senate that the bill’s primary sponsor, Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi) is circulating some other version of the pecker that has been watered downward fifty-fifty further, to the signal that it has larn an almost niggling slice of legislation—except for its potential to opened upwardly the door to H.R. 200’s passage.
That potential exists because the House of Representatives failed to displace its Modern Fish Act, H.R. 2023, forward.
Instead, piece of cake final year, Modern Fish Act supporters made their Devil’s bargain, agreeing to back upwardly the conservation-hostile H.R. 200 if it was amended to include many of H.R. 2023’s provisions. In render for things such equally regular reviews of recreational/commercial allocations inwards the South Atlantic as well as Gulf of Mexico, eliminating annual select grip of limits inwards some or all recreational fisheries as well as halting the creation of catch-share programs that aid preclude overfishing, the recreational/boatbuilding cabal was willing to select provisions that could, for example, indefinitely delay the rebuilding of exactly well-nigh whatever managed fish stock.
Their ultimate goal is clearly to larn an effectively neutered S. 1520 passed inwards the Senate, as well as so post the 2 alleged “Modern Fish Act” bills to conference, where a handful of legislators, working largely out of Blue Planet oculus as well as without whatever meaningful world input or debate, tin arts and crafts a Magnuson-Stevens reauthorization pecker that could contain most of the worst parts of H.R. 200 into federal law, piece tossing the Modern Fish Act folks plenty crumbs, on resources allotment issues as well as such, to allow them to claim a “win.”
So the Modern Fish Act crowd is pushing difficult to larn everything done earlier also much fourth dimension passes as well as H.R. 200 goes to its well-deserved grave. In social club to select their pecker across the goal line, they are clearly willing do distort reality to fit their narrative, something that became rattling apparent inwards a recent op-ed that appeared inwards the (Mississippi) Clarion Ledger.
The distortions get at the rattling starting fourth dimension of the piece, which seems to advise that the job of Magnuson-Stevens is to promote the recreational fishing as well as boating industries. After a brief, one-sentence introductory paragraph that simply notes that eleven 1000000 anglers fish inwards tabular array salt water, the slice kicks off yesteryear saying
“In Mississippi, saltwater recreational fishing has a total sales behavior on of $656 1000000 annually as well as supports 9.511 jobs. As Congress considers updating our nation’s principal fishing law—the Magnuson-Stevens Act—it is of import to our nation to pay attending to the challenges facing marine recreational anglers as well as the marine recreational fishing industry…”
Later inwards the op-ed, Faulkner expands on the same theme, noting that
“…more than lxx pct are bought so owners tin fish from them. Confidence of having access to fisheries goes a long agency inwards the determination to buy a boat. Considering that the recreational boating manufacture supports to a greater extent than than 650,000 American jobs as well as annually contributes to a greater extent than than $121 billion to the U.S. economy, Congress should live on paying attention…
“The marine recreational fishing manufacture contributes $63 billion a yr to the U.S. economic scheme as well as generates 440,000 American jobs from coast to coast as well as every nation inwards between…”
The thrust of his declaration was clearly that the Modern Fish Act should live on adopted, as well as Magnuson-Stevens amended, for the skilful of the fishing as well as boatbuilding industries. The exclusively job is, Magnuson-Stevens isn’t a jobs bill. Its job is non to protect as well as construct upwardly the fishing as well as boatbuilding industries, but rather to protect as well as construct upwardly fish stocks, for the skilful of American fishermen.
And no, that’s non exactly my opinion. Magnuson-Stevens clearly states its “purposes” correct at the start of the bill, as well as firstly with them, job #1, is
“to select immediate activeness to conserve as well as handle the fishery resources found off the coasts of the United States, as well as the anadromous species as well as Continental Shelf fishery resources of the United States…”
The other vi stated purposes include
“(2) to back upwardly as well as encourage the implementation as well as enforcement of international fishery agreements for the conservation as well as management of highly migratory species…;
(3) to promote domestic commercial as well as recreational fishing nether audio conservation as well as management principles, including the advertisement of select grip of as well as liberate programs inwards recreational fishing;
(4) to render for the grooming as well as implementation, inwards accordance with national standards, of fishery management plans which volition accomplish as well as maintain, on a continuing basis, the optimum yield from each fishery;
(5) to flora Regional Fishery Management Councils to practice audio judgment inwards the stewardship of fishery resources…;
(6) to encourage the evolution yesteryear the U.S. fishing manufacture of fisheries that are currently underutilized or non utilized yesteryear U.S. fishermen…; and
(7) to promote the protection of essential fish habitat…”
You tin the constabulary for yourself, but I guarantee that you lot won’t give away a unmarried give-and-take inwards the constabulary well-nigh protecting, supporting or otherwise helping out the tackle as well as boatbuilding industries.
No, non ane word.
The closest it comes is inwards job #5, which notes that fishery management plans should
“take into concern human relationship the social as well as economical needs of the States,”
but it’s a long stretch to attempt to twist that into the proposition that the fishery management programs should live on designed to run into the needs as well as demands of the fishing as well as boatbuilding industries.
Given the context of all of the law’s stated purposes, taken together, it would live on to a greater extent than appropriate to advise such industries to scale their ambitions to correspond the needs of the resources as well as the demands of the management process.
Naturally, the manufacture sees things differently. According to Faulkner,
“federal fisheries management is limiting the truthful economical potential of the recreational fishing industry. With unreasonably curt seasons, abrupt fishing closures as well as inconsistency inwards setting seasons from yr to year, recreational anglers are non fully confident that they volition receive got access to America’s world marine resources nether the electrical flow system.”
But, again, Magnuson-Stevens isn’t well-nigh unlocking “the truthful economical potential of the recreational fishing industry.” It’s well-nigh “conserv[ing] as well as manag[ing] the fishery resources found off the United States,” as well as “promot[ing] domestic commercial as well as recreational fishing nether audio conservation as well as management principles.”
The same seasons that Faulkner deems “unreasonable” are, inwards the eyes of professional person fisheries scientists, needed to preclude overfishing as well as keep stocks at sustainable levels.
And when you lot cope with living resources, cipher stays the same from yr to year. Fish numbers are non consistent; they ascension as well as autumn inwards accord with whatever number of natural as well as man-made conditions. It is exclusively reasonable that fishing seasons also expand as well as contract to accord with such changing abundance.
It’s ever interesting to give away that, whatever fourth dimension managers attempt to trim back fishing days, manufacture voices volition passionately yell out for seasons that remain the same every year. However, when fish stocks growth as well as managers advise adding weeks, sometimes fifty-fifty months, to a season, at that spot is a resounding silence; for some curious reason, non a unmarried somebody who called for consistent seasons inwards the yesteryear volition ever ascension upwardly inwards protestation at the idea of making a flavor inconsistently longer…
But Faulkner leaves that truth unsaid.
He does, however, drag out the canard that
“anglers as well as boaters are the backbone of marine conservation. Through license sales as well as excise taxes paid on fishing equipment as well as boat motor fuel, anglers as well as boaters contribute $1.3 billion annually for sportfish conservation as well as management, boating security as well as infrastructure, as well as habitat restoration,”
ignoring the thruth that only a pocket-sized role of that $1.3 billion comes from tabular array salt H2O anglers, as well as never acknowledging that, piece a portion of the revenues attributable to tabular array salt H2O fishing gear does fund of import nation conservation as well as management efforts, much of it also goes toward things that don’t promote conservation at all, such equally tabular array salt H2O fish hatcheries as well as the aforementioned “boating security as well as infrastructure,” that benefits the manufacture piece doing cipher at all for the fish.
But the greatest distortion of all may live on the proposition that the Modern Fish Act is genuinely modern at all, as well as doesn't stand upwardly for several steps dorsum into the past. Faulkner complains that
“Retrograde management of recreational fishing guided yesteryear the woefully outdated Magnuson-Stevens Act has unnecessarily hamstrung an enormous economical driver.”
He alleges that
“The Modern Fish Act would promote world access for recreational anglers yesteryear updating federal regulations to fit recreational fishing. By improving information collection as well as allowing for proven recreational fishing management approaches, nosotros tin give away a improve residue of angler access as well as conservation of our natural marine resources.”
But what Faulkner, as well as the ease of the Modern Fish Act—and, to a greater extent than to the point, H.R. 200--supporters, are genuinely seeking to do is non to modernize federal fishery management, but to render it to the bad onetime days earlier the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 was enacted, as well as the 2006 reauthorization of Magnuson-Stevens took place.
Thanks to the Sustainable Fisheries Act, overfishing may non occur, as well as harvest is express to “optimum” yield, which is defined, inwards relevant part, as
“maximum sustainable yield from the fishery, equally reduced by whatever relevant economic, social, or ecological factor. [emphasis added]”
Pursuant to that definition, fishermen are already landing equally many fish equally biologists believe is prudent; thus, the exclusively agency to farther “promote world access for recreational anglers” is to substantially growth the endangerment of overfishing, as well as go dorsum to a fourth dimension when fully unleashing “an enormous economical driver” was seen equally to a greater extent than of import than conservation—at to the lowest degree until the fish disappeared.
In the same way, Faulkner’s reference to “allowing for proven recreational fishery management approaches” is, inwards effect, a euphemism for doing away with the annual select grip of limits as well as accountability measures that were role of the modernization of Magnuson-Stevens inwards 2006, as well as to go dorsum to a fourth dimension when anglers could overfish with impunity.
The results of such “proven recreational fishery management approaches” tin live on seen at the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, which employs such recreational management measures and, equally a result, has failed to rebuild a unmarried fish stock inwards the yesteryear 20 years.
The most extreme instance of where such economics-oriented management tin Pb is ASMFC’s tautog management plan, where the scientists of the Tautog Technical Committee figured out what was needed to goal overfishing inwards 1996, but failed to implement such needed measures on most of the coast until 2017—twenty-one years later. And fifty-fifty at that, ASMFC volition allow tautog inwards Long Island Sound to proceed to live on overfished until 2029—more than a decade from now—and isn’t fifty-fifty trying to predict when, or fifty-fifty if, that stock volition live on fully rebuilt.
That’s hardly a “modern” approach.
But if you lot consider the ground through the distorted mirror of the H.R. 200 supporters, who are using the Modern Fish Act to accomplish their goals, everything onetime should live on deemed novel again, as well as fishery managers should live on doomed to repeat the mistakes of their past.
Hopefully, the Senate volition receive got a much clearer vision than that, as well as H.R. 200 volition die.
Modern Fish Human Activity Supporters Even In Addition To Then Distorting Reality
4/
5
Oleh
Admin
