Entries Tagged as 'Government Regulation'

Some Things Never Change

This post is a response to this article, published on the Huffington Post website by Julie Packard who is the Executive Director of The Monterey Bay Aquarium regarding the problems faced by bluefin tuna populations.

Ms. Packard,

You make some excellent points but you ignore and attempt to have your audience stay ignorant of, far too many of the factors at work here. I agree with what you put forth as the basic premise of your post, that “cuteness” should not be a determining factor in our efforts to protect all creatures from over infringement by man, be it by hunting and fishing, loss of habitat, or careless pollution.

That said, I bristle when I see your article once again advancing the oft repeated meme of the Monterey Aquarium and its financial supporters, The Pew Foundation, that fishermen’s greed has been the root cause of all the challenges sea life faces. This is simply not the case.

Also, by advancing only the argument that greed (or economic considerations, to use the euphemism adopted here) has caused the decimation of yet another marine species is to ignore both of the biggest factors responsible for the problem, pollution and bad regulation. By ignoring problems caused by years of pollution and over-development, you free your parent group, the Pew Trusts, from taking a large share of the blame for these problems based on the fact that they were begun and continue to be financed largely by oil industry money. By ignoring the problems caused by poor regulation, you are free to propose increased reliance on regulation to cure the problems that you have so conveniently laid at the feet of what is basically a small group of hardworking Americans that you continue to demonize.

It is no secret that the “Dead Zone” in the northwest Gulf of Mexico created by agricultural and industrial run-off from the Mississippi River has been steadily growing for years. Like much of man’s encroachment on our Oceans, the long term effects and ramifications of this are unknown. However, it simply can’t be good. It is not for nothing that it is known as “the dead zone”.

The migratory pattern of all tuna in the Gulf of Mexico takes them is a big loop around the northern Gulf that never comes closer to land than it does at the mouth of the Mississippi river and the top of the Mississippi and DeSoto Canyons in the northern Gulf. The tuna, and their food supply, can not help but be impacted by the increasing amount of toxic run-off entering the Gulf from the Mississippi. However, instead of taking steps to diminish that run-off, we are more likely increasing it as agricultural production (and run-off) all along the river basin relies increasingly on chemicals, fertilizers, antibiotics, and other agents whose impact on downstream ecosystems has not been fully understood.

As for regulations, for many years the Japanese fishing fleet, a well organized fleet of some of the best fishermen in the world, was allowed to bring their 110 foot steel longliners into the Gulf of Mexico in pursuit of bluefin tuna. In a perverse attempt at regulation, they were told that the ONLY fish they could keep was bluefin tuna and were further given an American observer for each vessel to ensure that all they kept were bluefin tuna. They were setting 30 to 50 miles of longline gear per boat every night (at a time when the American fishing fleet pursuing swordfish in the GOM was setting an average of 10 miles of gear per night) and they had an observer on board to make sure that they threw everything except bluefin tuna, dead or alive, marketable or not, back into the water. During this period American fishermen in the Gulf of Mexico often saw large, 200 – 300 lb swordfish bobbing away from the Japanese fleet, swollen and wasted. When the American fishing fleet realized the value these tuna had on the Eastern market (themselves the victim of greed, they had been previously told the bluefin and yellowfin tuna in the Gulf had no substantial value and were not paid enough for the fish to warrant targeting their gear to catch them. They eventually upgraded their gear and spent one season fishing alongside the Japanese fleet and were stunned by the amount of bluefin they were able to catch and saw their ex-vessel price for bluefin increase and a possible new market open up for them. The very next year the American fleet was hit with strict limits on bluefin tuna, while the Japanese were still allowed to come into the Gulf for a few more years to cull through the American resource, deplete the fish which should have been protected by our government as an American resource, and take home enough of the Gulf bluefin population to raise concern as to the future of the biomass.

For you, and your colleagues, to ignore these very real and major factors while being happy to blame the entire problem on the greed of the American seafood producers is disingenuous and downright insulting.

The prevailing attitude of The Pew Trusts, a group whose policies are increasingly influence, if not dictate, those of our country, since a Pew Fellow (Jane Lubchenco) is sitting as the head of the Federal Agency that oversees all fishing regulations (NOAA), is that all fishing is bad and man could survive quite well on farm raised seafood as a protein source without any wild caught fish being consumed at all.

Finally, replacing poor regulation with more regulation, replacing ineffective and harmful regulation with more stringent regulation, and using flawed and incomplete science put forth by a group with a bias and an agenda like Pew’s to do it, is a recipe for economic disaster for the American Seafood Industry as well as an ineffective way to protect our Oceans and the resources therein.

NOAA Announces Yet Another Closure–”The Edges”

In what is simply the rubber stamping of a rule we all knew was coming, NOAA has published the “Final Rule” implementing the new regulations closing the area apparently henceforth to be known as “The Edges” from January 1 to April 30th annually.

Touted as another way to protect “gag and other groupers” during spawning, the closure applies to all commercial and recreational fishing. The area, while a popular and productive area for many commercial fishermen targeting gags, is rarely fished by recreational fishermen, meaning the rule is mostly going to affect those commercial fishermen working in the northern end of the Gulf of Mexico who target the higher priced gag grouper.

In fairness, the rule is supported by a few commercial fishermen and in fact is a modification of a plan originally put forth and spoken for by a commercial fishing boat owner. However, in what is possibly coincidence, those fishermen who support the rule as well as the boat owner who proposed it, don’t seem to be fishermen who ever venture far enough offshore to fish the newly closed and historically extremely productive area. Imagine that.

Gag grouper catches have not dropped off and area closures have never been proven to actually work, making this another selective stab in the dark at trying to fix something that most likely is not even broken using unproven methodology that is going to be one more harmful blow to a segment of he commercial fishery NMFS already has on the ropes.

In other words: Business as usual.

Why is Bob Shipp still on the Gulf Council?

Why is Dr. Robert Shipp still a full voting member of the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council?

He is paid for his services by CCA, a group openly fighting to put all commercial grouper fishermen in the Gulf completely out of business.  Isn’t that enough reason for him to be asked to resign? [Read more →]

Let your feelings on the “Emergency Closure” be known.

Please show your support for the Commercial Fishermen or speak your mind about your own way of life being threatened by submitting a public comment regarding the summary closure of the longline fishery.  Follow the “read more” link for how to do this easily. [Read more →]

Why Salmon Fishermen But Not Shark Or Grouper Fishermen?

While I am very happy for the West Coast salmon fishermen, to whom the new Commerce Secretary, coincidentally a former West Coast governor, released some $53 million in disaster funds I can’t help but wonder why them and not others? [Read more →]

Why Do the “Environmentalists” Fear Honest Debate?

<The following represents the opinions of the poster, who is a commercial longline boat owner, not necessarily that of S.O.F.A. or the blog administrators.>

You have to wonder why an “environmentalist” like the guy who calls himself “Ted Williams” (he is NOT the baseball legend, nor does he have any apparent connection to the baseball legend other than using the name.) and apparently runs things on the Fly Rod + Reel Online site would fear honest debate and need to use lies and logical fallacy to rail against commercial fishermen.
[Read more →]

Flexibility In Rebuilding…what a concept!

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) and Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ) have introduced the 2009 version of the Flexibility In Rebuilding American Fisheries Act.  Now, before we all get too excited, bear in mind that essentially the same bill has been introduced and died in committee in both of the last two years.

That said, the bill is cause for some hope because it actually advocates using a bit of common sense and logic along with good science (as opposed to Pew Spew) in regulating our fisheries.

“We should be using sound biology and science when deciding how best to rebuild fish stocks,” Pallone said, adding “unfortunately, the current process of managing our nation’s fisheries is based on arbitrary deadlines set by Congress, which has continued to negatively impact fishing communities.”

[Read more →]

This Doesn’t Sound Very Good.

Janet Lubchenco has successfully been installed into the seat of power at NOAA by a unanimous Senate vote coming from a unanimous bunch of Senators who apparently either unanimously didn’t understand how her close association with a group like Pew who have no qualms about speaking out on their anti-fishing agendas could possibly constitute a conflict of interest or unanimously didn’t give a crap.

To quote Nils Stolpe writing for FishNet in the fall of 2007:

    Before foundations established with mega-corporation funds discovered that just about any “fishing is bad” issue could be turned into a cause célèbre, the regularly recurring articles predicting the destruction of various fisheries seemed to have minimal impact on the fishing industry in general. The anti-fishing flames were often fanned by the media through uninformed reporting, but only relative to a particular issue/area, and cooler heads and more fully informed opinions usually prevailed.

    Unfortunately, that is no longer the case. With tens of millions of foundation dollars at their disposal, the anti-fishing activists can afford to do a much better job of buying the scientists, spinning the facts and convincing the public and our elected officials that the manufactured fisheries crises that have been endemic in the public print and broadcast media for as long as those media have been in existence are actually real. The fishermen, the fish and the consuming public deserve a lot more than that.

Here’s hoping she remembers all the words she spoke about good science, the public do certainly deserve a lob more than a government agency controlled by these well financed groups with narrow anti-american worker agendas.   However,  it is hard to believe there is anything but bad going to come of it.

Lubchenco said she was eager to get started because of pressing burdens on the economy and the environment, including global warming, polluted coastal waters and severely depleted fish populations.
“We really don’t have a choice,” she said in an interview. “We have to move rapidly ahead because of chronic problems that need immediate solutions.”

Don’t have a choice?  Why not, are you a woman or a whelk?  Move rapidly ahead?  Since when did science move rapidly without making mistakes?  “chronic problems that need immediate solutions”?  There are no simple solutions to complex problems and there are no immediate solutions to chronic problems unless one considers pro-active closures of healthy fisheries just in case it will help an “immediate solution”.

S.S.D.D. Sounds like more justification for “emergency rules” and closures to me.

Information from the following was used in writing this post:

Fishnet article:  “Over a Century of Crises”

RFA article on Hijacking Fishery Management

Climate Science Watch Post

Pew Trusts’ Rapidly Expanding Power Base Is Worrisome

While the Pew approved and associated nominee to direct future fishery regulation moves steadily closer to confirmation and assuming the chair of power at NOAA, one of NMFS’ own Regional Chairmen accused the Pew Charitable Trusts of publishing “egregious misinformation and blatant nonsense” while preaching their Gospel of imminent fishery collapse by mid-century. [Read more →]

Blistering Editorial from Gloucester Daily Times

The Gloucester Times is running a blistering editorial on their front page taking NMFS to task for waging “out and out war” against the fishery.  The NMFS has been rebuffed in its most recent efforts to shut down New England’s fisheries in much the same manner as they need to be rebuffed in their ongoing efforts to shut down the Gulf of Mexico fisheries. [Read more →]