 |
 |
|
|
||
|
A Busy Week in June
by Tom Siciliano
(from Jersey Coast Anglers Association July 2006 Newsletter)
The first week of June was a busy one on Capital Hill. Tom Fote and I spent the week in Washington, D.C. attending meetings of American Sports Fishing Association (ASA) and the Marine Fish Conservation Network (MFCN). Both organizations had their annual meetings and a good portion of the time was allocated to visiting Congressmen and Senators on Capital Hill. The subject of the visits was the reauthorization of the Magnuson/Stevens Act. There are good points in both the Senate Bill S.2012 and the House Bill H.R. 5018 but there are other ones that don’t help to improve the state of our nation’s fisheries or to improve the opportunities for recreational anglers.
It appears as though a saltwater fishing license will eventually be required but the debate is over if a fee will be required. The Senate bill requires angler registration. It appeared that the Senate bill would pass until Robert Menendez put a hold on the Senate bill on behalf of JCAA until the issue of a fee for registration could be worked out. Congressman Frank Pallone offered an amendment to the house bill that requires that no fee be charged if an angler registration is implemented. The current JCAA position is that we will continue to fight against a fee-based license. We wish to thank Senators Lautenberg and Menendez and Congressmen Pallone and Saxton for their assistance in working for the anglers of New Jersey to make these bills the best they can be.
Both bills require a better use of science. That is something that we can all support but the science must take all data into consideration and it must make sense. The chief scientist at NMFS spoke at the “Outdoor Caucus” on Capital Hill. The caucus is open to all Senators and Congressmen with an interest in the recreational use of the outdoors. According to the chief scientist the solution to the science question is - You guessed it! Angler registration. Why you may ask? And I asked him how it would improve some of the obvious flaws such as the weakfish data from last year. It will provide a database of people to call for the Marine Recreational Fisheries Survey (MRFS). That is true but the phone calls give only a small part of the information needed to accurately assess the success of recreational anglers and it does nothing to improve the stock assessments; stock assessments which show that spiny dogfish are a threatened species. How is that for credibility? Anyone who fishes the wrecks off New Jersey knows how accurate that is.
What is needed is more angler intercepts at the boats and a better use of the Party and Charter boat logbooks. More angler intercepts means more money is needed and there is nothing in the legislation which will assist in that area. More intercepts at more places and in all kinds of weather. Each day on the water is different and each area along the coast has different conditions and success ratios on a particular day. Therefore, the calculation of total fish caught by recreational anglers is not as simple as measuring a few fish and multiplying by some number to come up with total catch for the season. One does not have to look any further than the survey that the JCAA has done for the past three years at our fluke tournament. This survey gives a one-day snapshot of what is happening in New Jersey from Jersey City to Fortesque. The fishing was very tough this year so it will be very interesting to see these year’s results. I suspect it will be down considerably. If fact, two ports did not have ten fish weighed in for port prizes.
Some of the important things that are missing in the legislation is addressing the potential conflicts of interest on the fishery management councils which are dominated by the commercial fishing industry. Funding is the other big piece that is missing. It would be better if a fisheries trust fund were set up to address research of stock assessments and recreational catch data.
Many of the items in this reauthorization are already being used by many of the fishery management councils. One example is the use of quotas. As anglers in New Jersey we are very aware of how quotas have been used in our area. Yet in the New England council, which has the worst track record of all the councils in improving their fish populations, they still use days at sea in an attempt to control the commercial fishing. With the technology that is available today days at sea just forces the fishermen to be better and catch more fish when they are at sea. The Senate bill required the use of quotas but an amendment by a Senator from Maine exempts the New England council from having to use quotas. If passed with the amendment it will be business as usual for the New England fishermen and we all know how well they have done bringing back the cod. Cod are now 20% below the level they were five years ago when the controls were put in place to rebuild the stocks. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that days at sea are not working and quotas would help.
The bills cover Ecosystem-based management but do not go far enough in making its use a requirement. A lot of work needs to be done on predator/prey relationships and the effect of coastal development on our bays and estuaries.
While the Magnuson/Stevens bill is in need of reauthorization there should not be a rush to get something passed at any cost. Any bill must be an improvement over what is currently being used or it makes no sense. It must force the fisheries managers to rebuild fish stocks so there will be fish for future generations to catch and enjoy. We will continue to work with our legislators to make sure that what is passed will help the management of our nation’s fisheries and not be a step back.