 |
 |
|
|
||
If You Missed the Last JCAA Meeting You Missed Two Very Informative Presentations(from Jersey Coast Anglers Association March 2006 Newsletter) Lee Crockett, Executive Director of The Marine Fish Conservation Network, discussed the reauthorization of the Magnuson/Stevens Act (MSA), parts of which were outlined in last month’s newsletter. There are many things in the current proposed bill that recreational anglers can support but there are also many things we cannot. There were lots of questions fired at Lee and I think he learned as much from those present as they learned from him. One of the items that helped keep everyone’s blood flowing was the discussion about the abundance of dogfish. According to the ASMFC dogfish are in a dire plight. According to the surveys there is a lack of female dogfish and if something is not done they could be severely depleted in the near future. That is where we got into the discussion of the science. One of the provisions of the MSA is that the councils must adhere to the scientific advice given to them. That sounds great but what happens when the science doesn’t reflect reality. That is where most recreational anglers have a problem. There just isn’t enough data to make the science that precise. On the plus side there is Freedom to Fish language in the bill which will help anglers. The other presentation was by Ken Hinman of the National Coalition for Marine Conservation. He talked about the ecosystem approach to fisheries management. There is no clear definition of ecosystem management but as a minimum it should consider predator-prey relationships and forage fish must be protected. We disagreed with him on the separation of science and allocation. He would have the socioeconomic data removed as part of the equation. We again had the discussion of good science vs. bad science. I believe that it is not good vs. bad but simply a lack of sufficient raw data to draw the conclusions that are made. A lot more data points are needed and all data needs to be included and given its proper weight. We pointed out all the problems with summer flounder management using science that gives entirely different results from one year to the next. We also had a copy of the proposed recreational weakfish catch that made a lot of us laugh. We should have really cried since no matter how crazy that data is it will be used as the catch figures in determining the stocks and what we caught. It further illustrated the problems with the MRSS. There are many other important issues which are included in the MSA Bill such as: (1) Training for new members of the regional councils and addressing conflicts of interest. (2) Mandates that the annual catch limits are set at or below optimum yield and requiring that any excess of the annual quota be paid back the following year. This is especially onerous to recreational anglers since there is no opportunity to make mid-season corrections if it looks like a species will be over fished. It does authorize a cooperative research program with federal and state managers, commercial and recreational participants and scientists, with support for stock and by-catch assessments, habitat protection and socioeconomic data. The provision for the registration of recreational anglers does not sit well with many as it is just considered another tax and there are no requirements that will insure that the information will help in fisheries management. Funding of $328 million is authorized and it establishes a Fisheries Conservation Management Fund and lays the groundwork for user fees..
|