 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
FISHERIES MANAGEMENT & LEGISLATIVE REPORT
by Tom Fote
FISHERIES MANAGEMENT & LEGISLATIVE REPORT
by Tom Fote
(from Jersey Coast Anglers Association October 2000 Newsletter)
I am adding a new heading so I have a
place to put the things that give me indigestion, the things that make me wonder if some
people or organizations have a clue. This
month’s winner is an article from a newsletter of New York recreational organization.
The New York recreational
organization is blaming New Jersey for holding up passage of Louisiana Senator John
Breaux’s longline bill. We were accused
of sabotaging this legislation in order to achieve more conservation and more restrictions
in supporting Congressman Saxton’s Bill, H.R. 4773.
It strikes me as odd that the only support for the Breaux legislation in New
Jersey comes from the commercial interests. I
know these commercial lobbyists well and respect their diligence and instinct for
self-preservation on this matter. If they are
in support of this legislation, I know they would get a great deal for longliners. Perhaps recreational groups from other states
ought to look at this bill again with a more critical eye.
If this letter appeared in a recreational publication from Florida or the
Gulf of Mexico, I would have understood their point of view. They would have achieved some conservation from
the Breaux legislation. But to see this
letter in a New York Recreational Publication strikes me as ignorant of the facts. The Breaux legislation does nothing to solve the
problems with the longlining in the Mid-Atlantic region.
It would only exacerbate existing problems in the New York/New Jersey area. It is good that JCAA cares about what happened in
the NY Bight and demands that legislation addresses important concerns about that area and
doesn’t just take pot shots at other organizations.
I hope these organizations will support the Saxton Bill and Conservation.
The reason we have a smaller quota on
summer flounder is because of the lawsuit filed by some of the national environmental
groups. What is truly upsetting is that there
are many fisheries that could benefit from their involvement and their willingness to fund
a lawsuit. Unfortunately, they chose to
involve themselves with summer flounder and only showed how little they know about the
fishery and about fishing in general. These
groups obviously know nothing about subsistence fishing or they don’t care. These changes will have the greatest impact on the
poor. The judge’s opinion was that the
NMFS needed to use the statistical preference that had a higher probability of producing
the quota required. We need to look at the
previous statistics and compare them in different ways.
We need to look at the decisions made based on those statistics and at the
outcomes generated by those decisions. Using
the lower percent probability consistently produced outcomes that were in line with
projected needs. If you make decisions based
on technicalities and points of law rather than on actual, practical outcomes, you often
come up with these outrageous and inappropriate plans.
The judge, the lawyers for the environmental groups and the plaintiffs had
absolutely no practical hands-on experience with fishing or with the management programs. They made decisions in the abstract that had no
connection with actual practice. The
environmental organizations involved in this lawsuit are the Environmental Defense Fund
(now called Environmental Defense), the National Resources Defense Council, National
Audubon and Center for Marine Conservation. Next
year, when you can’t catch summer flounder because we have had to raise the size
limit or decrease the bag limit or shorten the season or some combination, just remember
who is responsible. The good news on summer
flounder is that the stocks are rebuilding. The
biomass continues to increase. Without the
lawsuit we would be dividing a quota greater than the 2000 quota of 18.52 million pounds. This would have provided the first increase in
three years. In reality the commercial and
recreational anglers will be dividing a quota of 17.91 million pounds. The projection for 2002 is that the quota will
rise to 22 million pounds. This is similar to
the knee-jerk that the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission took on Striped Bass
for 2000. More on Striped Bass in next
month’s JCAA Newspaper.
Attorney
Environmental Defense
2500 Blue Ridge Road, Suite 330
Raleigh, NC 27607-6454
919/881-2601 (phone)
I asked Dusty Rhodes and Gary Caputi
to put together a response to his letter commenting on my original article. Gary and Dusty’s response is below. Sometimes it is hard for people after they think
they win to admit they were wrong.
While the Summer Flounder management
plan (FMP) has both good and bad features, it's astounding that in your e-mail you say it
has done nothing to rebuild summer flounder stocks.
Every assessment in the past five years has shown a steady growth of SSB and
overall biomass. The past three years, the growth in biomass has been near vertical on the
graph! The expansion of year classes, especially age 2 and 3 fish, has been remarkable.
The latest assessment, based on data
from 1982-1998, indicates the maximum sustainable yield (Bmsy) figure is 106,444 mt, or
235 million pounds. The level at which overfishing is no longer occurring is 53,222 mt, or
118 million pounds, or one-half Bmsy. Stock rebuilding to a level that is consistent with
us no longer overfishing the stock will occur late in 2000 or early in 2001 despite the
quotas set by Council/Commission recommendations in 1999 and 2000. Even more interesting
is the year 2000 biomass was assessed at 85% of the peak biomass that occurred in
1976-1977, the highest years of abundance in recent history, which adds even more credence
to the success of the plan in improving stock abundance.
According to the spring survey, there
is evidence of increasing abundance of age 3+ and even older fish because of evidence of
increased survival of the 1994 and subsequent year classes. In other words, fishing
mortality has dropped significantly. The autumn survey showed the 1998-1999 indices are
the highest in the 1982-1999 series. There is
more evidence that the summer flounder stocks are rebuilding. Finally, the winter survey,
launched in February 1999, also confirmed an increased abundance of age 3+ and older fish
due to the survival of the1995 year class and increased survival of subsequent year
classes. The year 2000 data is the highest in the 1992-2000 series. We’re getting the
job done, maybe not as quickly as you’d like to see, but we’re looking at a
success story while you’re looking for anything to challenge in court with all the
money the Pew Foundation provided for that purpose.
Furthermore, if you take the plan
apart, bit-by-bit, you’ll realize that the quotas have been only a small part of the
rebuilding of this fishery. Sometimes when you put all the scientific crap aside, you find
it’s the common sense moves that provide the most benefit.
You tried to make a point about
quotas meeting certain levels of certainty. The
Councils were well within their right to choose a probability level of only 18% knowing
the data they were using to estimate biomass levels was two years old and that we had a
rebuilding stock on our hands. If everything has to be done with a 50% probability, there
is no need for a Council process. Just let
the assessment scientists cook up their numbers, the monitoring committee make its
recommendations, and then sign them into law.
The U.S. ICCAT Advisory Committee will
hold four regional meetings this fall to discuss international and domestic management of
highly migratory species, such as tunas, swordfish, and billfish. The meetings will
include a brief presentation on the ICCAT process, the status of the highly migratory
species, and current ICCAT management recommendations. Time will be provided for public
comment. The Committee will hold its annual fall meeting in October, and there will be an
opportunity for public comment at that meeting as well. Your input at these meetings is
essential to the development of U.S. positions for the 2000 ICCAT meeting, so please make
every effort to attend.
Thursday,
October 5, 7-9:30pm - Cape May, NJ
The Inn of Cape May, 7 Ocean Street
Fall
Advisory Committee Meeting (public session):
Sunday,
October 29, 1-6pm - Silver Spring, MD
Building 3, NOAA Silver Spring Metro Center Complex
1315 East-West Highway
Sandcastle Condominiums, 800 Sand Castle Drive
Thursday, Sept. 14, 7-9:30pm - Miami, FL
Sheraton Biscayne
Bay Hotel, 495 Brickell Ave.
Here are some of the
many websites that list Congressional voting records and other information on the
upcoming 2000 Election. JCAA is just listing
these sites for your information. We do not
endorse their conclusions but want you to have access to information. You are the only one who can evaluate the data and
make an informed decision. If you know of
other sites please email their addresses to Tom Fote (tfote@jcaa.org ) so we can include them in the next
JCAA Newspaper.
Public Interest Research Group's (PIRG) Congressional scorecards (and state
scorecards) are on the web.
National at www.pirg.org and the
NJ State site is at www.njpirg.org
League of Conservation Voters works
to create a Congress more responsive to your environmental concerns. As the bipartisan
political voice for over nine million members of environmental and conservation groups, http://www.lcv.org/
Friends and Enemies of Fish in Congress
All 535 Members of Congress have now
been rated as "friends" or "enemies" of fish, of their supporting
habitats, and of the long-term interests of U.S. fishermen.
The rating can be found at www.geocities.com/Eureka/Vault/8020/CongressRating.html The evaluation is based on voting records, actions
taken and legislative initiatives. In all, a
series of 30 fish-related issues were used to rate every member of Congress. The purpose of this rating is to allow fishermen
and conservationists to recognize which members of Congress are working to conserve fish
and their ecosystems. Particularly inshore habitats such as rivers, wetlands, estuaries,
bays and coastal waters on which 75% of marine fish depend for their survival - and which
members are working hard to destroy fish, their environment and thus the future of fishing
in the United States.
http://www.sierraclub.org/voter_education/
Their voting records, campaign
finances, position statements, backgrounds, and the evaluations done on them by over 100
competing special interest groups. Research that will defend the people's right to
abundant, accurate, relevant information and enable them to check the credibility of the
often misleading claims candidates make. The kind of information that is essential to
prudent decision-making in the voting booth. Information that will ensure that tolerance
is no longer the only option available to the millions of us who are tormented by the
issueless personal attacks that have come to dominate our elections. Information that is
made easily available to every American free of charge by simply picking up a phone and
calling one of the hundreds of trained volunteers and student interns on our toll-free
Voter's Research Hotline, or through our Vote Smart Web site and publications.
Polling Report
publishes the results of the latest surveys (by respected polling organizations like
Gallup, Harris, Yankelovich, and Princeton Survey Research Associates) on health care,
taxation, welfare, education, environmental policy, and the other major issues of the day.
National Institute
offers searchable databases of campaign finance information for state legislative and
gubernatorial races - many as far back as 1990. Currently features 24 states; others being
added all the time
Common Cause is the
place to come for answers! This site, run by one of the oldest organizations advocating
campaign finance reform at the national level, is an excellent place to get up-to-date
news of the status of reform efforts in Washington. If you don't know your
representative's name, you can simply enter your zip code and learn who represents you and
how they are representing you on the issue of campaign finance reform.. And information on
how you can get involved in reform efforts at the national or state level.
Public Campaign is a
nonprofit, nonpartisan organization promoting reform that aims to dramatically reduce the
role of special interest money in the electoral process. If you believe public financing
of campaigns in exchange for strict spending limits is the right path to reform, this is
the site for you. Their web site offers timely information on the status of reform efforts
in Washington and in the states. The site also offers contact information (both phone and
web) for reform activities at the state level.
The Center for Public Integrity is a nonprofit, non-partisan
research organization that focuses on violations of the public trust. Employing the tools
of both political science and investigative journalism, the Center functions, in the words
of the National Journal, as "a watchdog in the corridors of power." Material
available on this site includes background information on Exec. Director Charles Lewis's
latest book - "The Buying of Congress" - an in-depth study of what the Center
describes as "the acts of grand larceny [that] are being committed on Capitol Hill
every day." There's also material from "The Buying of the President," a
report on the 1996 candidates for president.
http://www.publicintegrity.org/