I’ve been writing this spider web log for to a greater extent than than 4 years, in addition to inward that fourth dimension penned well-nigh 450 dissever essays on fisheries management in addition to related matters. Sometimes, I worry that, at some point, I’m going to run out of topics.
Thus, today, I idea that it would endure appropriate to give thank you lot the Center for Sportfishing Policy, in addition to affiliated organizations such equally the American Sportfishing Association, Coastal Conservation Association, National Marine Manufacturers Association in addition to others, for running what may endure the longest continuous exertion to con Congress in addition to the American angler e'er attempted, in addition to thence giving me plenty of things to write about.
I’m speaking, of course, of the continuing exertion to weaken federal fishery conservation in addition to management laws, which has taken diverse forms over that time, but tin endure pretty good boiled downwardly into 3 words: Modern Fish Act.
And yes, I know that I write well-nigh the Modern Fish Act inward every other blog, in addition to you’re likely tired of reading well-nigh it past times now. But if it’s whatsoever solace at all, you lot tin endure pretty damned for certain that you’re non anywhere close equally tired of reading well-nigh that misbegotten slice of legislation equally I am of writing well-nigh it, but because this is such a long-running in addition to multi-layered con, alongside thence much invested inward its ultimate success, the minute nosotros allow our collective guard down, the folks promoting the constabulary are going to skid past times in addition to steal the time to come wellness of our saltwater fish stocks, thence it pays to maintain paying attention.
Today’s observations were inspired past times an op-ed inward The [Illinois] State Journal-Register, which was written past times Thom Dammrich, the president of the National Marine Manufacturers’ Association, a grouping which seems to endure making an end-of-session force to acquire S. 1520, the Senate version of the Modern Fish Act, in addition to past times another op-ed, penned past times John Pfeiffer, president of Mercury Marine, a potent NMMA supporter, which appeared late inward the Kenosha (WI) Journal.
Both op-eds are similar, non precisely inward the fact that they back upward the Modern Fish Act, but inward the fact that they target an inland audience, in addition to inland legislators, who are non all that familiar alongside what goes on inward coastal fisheries, in addition to inward the fact that inward making their case, they receive got engaged inward the form of deceptive linguistic communication that has been a hallmark of Modern Fish Act supporters from the beginning.
Dammrich’s begins alongside an interesting twist.
Freshwater fishermen, equally a group, receive got been land of study to size limits, pocketbook limits, seasons in addition to other regulations far longer than saltwater anglers. Most receive got long recognized that inward most areas, skilful regulations are a prerequisite to skilful fishing; without them, most waters would apace be, in addition to inward the past times oftentimes were, “fished out.” So they’re non probable to endure swayed past times the complaints well-nigh “annual grab limits [that] don’t fit” which appear inward some of NMMA’s other Modern Fish Act propaganda.
Instead, he makes a broader, to a greater extent than full general laid on on the regulatory process, writing
“With Lake Michigan to the north, the Wabash River to the east, the Ohio River to the south, in addition to the Mississippi River to the west, Illinois has access to fishing no affair where you lot turn. But next all the rules in addition to regulations tin apace plough a peaceful fishing trip into a major headache. [emphasis added]”
It’s a skilful gambit because, let’s confront it, no i likes to endure regulated. We complained well-nigh enforced bedtimes equally kids, in addition to well-nigh curfews inward high school. As adults, nosotros rails against cherry-red low-cal cameras, fifty-fifty though nosotros all know inward our hearts that not running a cherry-red low-cal is a really skilful agency t avoid both traffic fines in addition to a perchance fatal collision. But somewhere dorsum inward our minds, there’s this whole anti-Big Brother thing…
Thus, appealing to that rebellious instinct past times a wide laid on on fishing regulations is a for certain agency to win some grade of sympathy from anglers in addition to others, fifty-fifty though most of those anglers likely don’t receive got much of a quarrel alongside Illinois’ fishing rules, in addition to likely realize that without them, at that topographic point wouldn’t endure equally good many fish left inward the state’s waterways.
But in i lawsuit you lot receive got that sympathy, it’s piece of cake to transfer it to tabular array salt H2O anglers who, according to Dammrich, are suffering nether the electrical current version of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation in addition to Management Act. He tells the folks inward Illinois that piece their
“regulations may seem burdensome…they are genuinely far less constricting than those faced past times saltwater anglers.”
The fundamental to his declaration is to nowadays his allegations without whatsoever factual support.
If he tried to render facts to shore upward his position, it mightiness endure difficult to explicate why a regulation that allows a fisherman to retain xv bluefish on the Atlantic coast, alongside no minimum size or flavor at all, is to a greater extent than “constricting” than Illinois rules that allow an angler to receive got habitation 3 northern throughway of 24 inches or more, or 1 36-inch-plus muskellunge. Rules inward the Gulf of United Mexican States that allow anglers to maintain xv foot-long Castilian mackerel per day seem a lot less “constricting” than Illinois rules that permit anglers to maintain 6 14-inch walleye or five trout in addition to salmon.
Yes, some tabular array salt H2O regulations, for a few species, are to a greater extent than restrictive than that, but thence at that topographic point are plenty of places inward Illinois that receive got special regulations much to a greater extent than restrictive than the full general rules, too.
But those are facts, in addition to we’re talking well-nigh the Modern Fish Act, where facts are a threat to the con. That becomes especially truthful when Dammerich makes a misleading declaration that nosotros hear, inward diverse forms, fourth dimension in addition to fourth dimension in i lawsuit to a greater extent than inward Modern Fish Act debates:
“…[T]he Modern Fish Act…would also protect fish populations past times continuing the of import conservation function started past times the Magnuson-Stevens Act inward 1976.”
Really? Just what “important conservation work” would that be?
To commence alongside the Magnuson-Stevens Act, equally passed inward 1976, did precisely well-nigh no “conservation work,” of import or otherwise, at all. It pushed most unusual boats out of U.S. of A. waters, but simply replaced unusual overfishing alongside overfishing past times our domestic fleets, in addition to provided fiscal incentives for the domestic fleet to develop bigger, to a greater extent than modern vessels that solely made it easier for them to grab equally good many fish.
The meaningful conservation function didn’t commence until afterwards passage of the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996, which required federal fishery managers to promptly destination overfishing in addition to rebuild overfished stocks, in addition to the 2006 reauthorization of Magnuson-Stevens, which required that annual grab limits for almost all managed stocks in addition to held fishermen accountable if those annual grab limits are exceeded.
Given that the text of the Modern Fish Act (more technically, the Modernizing Recreational Fishery Management Act) equally originally introduced, clearly attempts to exempt recreational fishermen from the annual grab limits that preclude overfishing inward many fisheries, in addition to the associated accountability if they exercise overfish, in addition to creates wide exceptions to the rebuilding requirements for overfished stocks, the notion that the Act would proceed Magnuson-Stevens’ conservation function is to a greater extent than than a piffling difficult to believe.
Then at that topographic point are the truthful statements that appear inward both Dammrich’s in addition to Pfeiffer’s op-eds, which brand anglers experience skilful well-nigh themselves but shroud a deeper in addition to darker reality.
Dammrich says that
“Casual anglers are careful to leave of absence good for you lot fish populations because their favorite pastime depends on it—they desire to taste their sport in addition to sympathise the jeopardy of overfishing.”
Pfeiffer echoes that sentiment when he says that
“Anglers receive got an inherent vested involvement inward making for certain fish populations are good for you lot in addition to capable of sustaining themselves twelvemonth afterwards year.”
Fair enough. I may concord that such statements, especially Pfeiffer’s, are true.
But I also know that most tabular array salt H2O anglers don’t pass a lot of fourth dimension wondering whether regulations give fish stocks adequate protection; they receive got faith that their regulators won’t allow overfishing in addition to volition preclude stocks from falling into decline. So when rules are ultimately issued, anglers experience that they're doing the correct thing simply past times obeying the law.
And there’s a large deviation betwixt “anglers” wanting good for you lot fisheries, in addition to the form of to a greater extent than liberal harvest rules that diverse members of the tackle in addition to boatbuilding manufacture are seeking.
They're looking for rules that volition allow anglers kill to a greater extent than fish, in addition to thence hopefull generated to a greater extent than manufacture revenues. Pfeiffer admits that his goal is
“more need for boats in addition to marine accessories similar those nosotros manufacture in addition to sell at Mercury Marine,”
which he believes would endure generated past times the Modern Fish Act’s changes to electrical current law.
“Today’s scheme of fisheries management is outdated, in addition to hampering access for our nation’s recreational anglers. People won’t buy boats in addition to equipment if they run into no argue to leave of absence on the water.”
Again, it's all well-nigh generating revenues.
So piece anglers mightiness really good worry well-nigh overfishing in addition to maintaining sustainable fisheries, it seems that the folks writing op-eds in addition to appearing inward videos for the boatbuilding manufacture desire to run into a constabulary that allows
in fellowship to maximize recreational harvest and—at to the lowest degree inward their hopeful eyes—maximize the amount of production that they sell.
As is the representative inward every con, you lot ask to take heed really closely to what the folks say, in addition to non take heed to what they desire you lot to hear…
But the greatest Modern Fish Act con is that, the "Modern Fish Act" is what the folks who receive got been pushing the pecker are genuinely trying to pass.
Last year, ii bills were introduced inward Congress, H.R. 2023 inward the House in addition to S. 1520 inward the Senate. The House version was the worse of the two, although neither was much skilful in addition to both threatened managers’ powerfulness to contend fish stocks for sustainable abundance.
The Senate pecker was reported out of committee, where a potent bipartisan exertion stripped most of the bad linguistic communication out of the bill, in addition to seat some skilful linguistic communication in; what remains is somewhat spiteful in addition to petulant, but won’t preclude federal fishery managers from doing their jobs.
As S. 1520 stands today, it’s largely harmless.
However the House bill, H.R. 2023, is effectively dead. It never made it through committee, in addition to alongside precisely 6 months left inward the legislative session, in addition to elections inward November,it’s almost for certain that it never will.
Instead, the House is getting behind H.R. 200, a pecker formally titled the Strengthening Fishing Communities in addition to Increasing Flexibility inward Fisheries Management Act, which did move far out of committee.
H.R. 200 is essentially a retread of bills that receive got been rattling around Congress alongside piffling resultant since Magnuson-Stevens was reauthorized inward 2006. H.R. 200 includes some linguistic communication taken from the Modern Fish Act, but it also includes a lot of far worse (and yes, at that topographic point is far worse) linguistic communication that would create really wide exceptions to the fishery conservation in addition to management requirements of Magnuson-Stevens, in addition to threaten the sustainability of many fish stocks.
If the inoffensive S. 1520, which Modern Fish Act supporters tin signal to equally a seemingly benign bill, is passed past times the Senate, it volition endure sent to conference commission non alongside H.R. 2023, but alongside H.R. 200. The mating of those ii bills would hit a chimera, a misbegotten hybrid that would probable include all of the worst aspects of the master copy Modern Fish Act, along alongside fifty-fifty worse provisions from H.R. 200, in addition to exercise it piece avoiding most of Blue Planet struggle in addition to bipartisan negotiations that would otherwise receive got taken house if the pecker had to move through the normal lawmaking process.
That, then, is the ultimate goal of the Modern Fish Act con.
To sell anglers in addition to Senators on the mild S. 1520, the solely pure “Modern Fish Act” that has a run a jeopardy to hap inward either house, in addition to thence conference it alongside H.R. 200, inward fellowship to convey dorsum all of the bad—and more—removed past times the Senate’s bipartisan effort.
It’s a classic slight-of-hand, inward which i mitt distracts piece the other mitt steals.
But cons solely function if you lot autumn for the patter, in addition to don’t lookout what both hands are doing.
Once you lot know where the con human being is heading, it’s piece of cake to leave of absence of his way. And in i lawsuit nosotros exercise that, nosotros receive got an obligation to accomplish out to others, let on the con for what it is, in addition to run the con men out of town—or at to the lowest degree out of Congress.
For if they remain there, nosotros all stand upward to lose.
And The Con Goes On...
4/
5
Oleh
Admin
