 |
 |
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
||
By Tom Fote
Commissioner to Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission
Phone 732-270-9102 Fax 732-506-6409
tfote@jcaa.org
July 2002
The press release further states, Based on the current assessment, the stock
is nearly at the point where overfishing is no longer occurring. In fact, the
fishing mortality is estimated to be only 0.01 greater than the threshold F of
0.26. This mortality level is the lowest mortality observed in the 20-year
time series. The dramatic increase in stock biomass and significant decrease
in fishing mortality rates indicates that the restrictive management measures
put in place with the implementation of Amendment 2 regulations have worked to
rebuild the stock, stated Dr. Chris Moore, Deputy Director of the Mid-Atlantic
Fishery Management Council.
Given the information above, reasonable people would expect at least a minor
increase in the quota. Instead, the SARC recommended a 1,000,000-pound
reduction in quota. The monitoring committee rubber-stamped the SARCs
proposals. The public and the bureaucrats assume that members of the Atlantic
States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) and the MAFMC will once again roll
over and not do our jobs. I did not accept the volunteer job as Commission to
the ASMFC to rubber-stamp the proposals that are presented to us. These
proposals are based on science that is questionable. Everyone knows that the
data is more art than science. Everyone knows that the statistical errors are
so large that there is considerable room for interpretation. Due to recent
judicial decisions and the collusion between the National Marine Fisheries
Service and some environmental groups, the ASMFC and the MAFMC are expected to
simply accept that our hands are tied. They expect us to accept that we have
no choice but to go along with proposals from the scientists who work for the
National Marine Fisheries Service. They are expecting us to base all our
decisions on a model that has more holes in it than Swiss cheese. They also
expect us not to use our own extensive experience with fisheries management or
the input we get from the fishing public. They also expect us to put blind
trust in scientists who have been consistently in error for the last 30
years.
I served as the Governor's Appointee and Legislative Appointee Proxy to the
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission for over 11 years and recently I
was again appointed as the Governor's Appointee. I am not about to roll
over. I was there when they started these management plans and am well aware
of the faulty assumptions on which many of the plans rest. I also saw the
conservative assumptions that went into the models. I have also lived through
the mistakes scientists have made in the models and have been part of the
process that has tried to correct these mistakes. I have not been appointed
to be rubber-stamp for faulty science but to make informed decisions using all
the available data. We have seen a spawning stock biomass for summer flounder
that has grown considerably since the original plans were put in place in
1994. We have seen the benefits of the original plan by the tremendous stock
growth before any judicial action was taken. Just as the fishing community
was about to reap the benefits of strict management and low quotas, we are
being told that there are more fish than ever but we need to reduce our quota
for next year. Any fisherman, any angler, anyone who has been fishing or
observed the summer flounder understands how absurd this quota proposal is.
Anyone with second grade math skills can figure this out. But because of one
judge and one bureaucrat from the National Marine Fisheries Service, what we
know doesn't seem to count.
If you sense frustration, you are correct. This is small compared to the
frustration of the people who depend on summer flounder for their livelihood.
In the current proposals the economic impacts is completely ignored. The
people who wrote the current proposals obviously missed the legal requirement
to consider economic impact. Or perhaps they considered economic impact but
simply didn't care. When a scientist makes an error in the data used to
develop a plan, what penalty do they face? Just an opportunity to say,
"Oops!" No one gets fired or even demoted. Most of them get promoted or get
a raise. But when they use faulty data, people in the real world lose their
jobs or suffer huge economic hardship. Who apologizes to them and that makes
it right? I recently had a phone call from an angler who was completely
frustrated. I tried to discuss what I knew with him but his frustration got
the better of him and all he could do was yell at me. I understand his
frustration and can sympathize with his total disgust about how the system
operates.
There is a joint meeting of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission
and the Mid Atlantic Marine Fisheries Management Council in Philadelphia on
August 6th & 7th. I understand this is the worst time
for anglers to attend and that may be behind the scheduling. However,
everyone who has an interest in this issue really needs to be there. I am
willing to speak for all of you but I need your support. I am not going to
roll over on the recommendations of the monitoring committee. I will use all
the experience and the facts I have at my disposal to make an informed,
comprehensive management decision and I call on the other members of the
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission and the Mid Atlantic Council to
come to this meeting with the same commitment. Dont let the National Marine
Fisheries Service have the opportunity to ignore the recommendations of the
Council and the Commission and act on faulty science without our help.
Contact your governors, state directors, governor's appointees, legislative
appointees and your council members and let them know that you expect to
review all the information available and make their decision not on just on
one piece of the pie. This country is built on independence and now is the
time for us to put that independence into action!
