MOTHER JONES BY E-MAIL

The Catch

Page 6 of 6


TOOLS

EmailE-mail article
PrintPrint article




BACKTALK

E-mail the editor





Google


RELATED ARTICLES

RE:ACTION

Whether to separate conservation and allocation decisions is currently being debated within NOAA and on Capitol Hill. At the same March 2005 conference when agency administrator Lautenbacher denied the conflict-of-issue problem, a panel on fisheries governance also dismissed the idea of dividing conservation and allocation, calling it “illogical.”

But at the same conference, Lee Crockett of the Conservation Network presented a paper that detailed the potentially disastrous consequences of setting catch levels higher than scientific findings support. In the Pacific region, for instance, the Pacific rockfish had been so overfished for two decades that the secretary of commerce declared the fishery “a disaster” and ordered it closed down. Red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico are “severely depleted,” though so far, despite legal requirements, there’s no recovery plan in sight. And in New England, “year after year, cod landings have exceeded target catch levels by 100 to 300 percent,” Crockett said. “Despite ample scientific evidence showing that groundfish stocks are severely overfished and not rebuilding, the New England Council continues to base its management decisions on economic and political considerations.”


AFTER 10 YEARS without new fishing legislation, multiple bills are pending in the wake of the Pew and U.S. commission reports, with several directed at reauthorizing the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA). Both the White House and Senate have floated reauthorization bills, the latter by Senator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), coauthor of the original legislation, and Senator Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii). It’s likely that Stevens’ bill will effect some needed incremental changes, such as promoting greater use of science in councils’ management decisions, strengthening some conflict-of-interest rules, requiring every management plan to set catch limits below what the scientists conclude is sustainable (“the optimum yield” of the fishery), and setting national guidelines for management tools like limiting access to fisheries and establishing “individual fishing quotas.”

But these improvements are a long way from the systemic changes that many critics believe are needed. “We lack leadership on this issue,” says Rep. Sam Farr (D-Calif.), who represents the Monterey Bay area and is an originator of the House Oceans Caucus. “The councils are under terrific pressure, and until the laws make them more diverse, they are going to err on the side of the commercial interests. We do need a legislative fix, but Congress is not leading on the ocean issues.” Farr also does not see much help coming from the White House, pointing out that Bush’s plan to reauthorize the MSA is “a slight step backward, as its provisions weaken the existing act by allowing more overfishing.”

Congress is unlikely to dismantle the culture of conflicts in the councils, to divorce the conservation and allocation decision making, to improve accountability for the councils’ decisions, or to mandate the management tools like hard quotas that could stop overfishing and facilitate rebuilding the depleted fish stocks in as short a time as possible. Nor, for that matter, is it likely to address issues the fishermen themselves have with the ways the councils regulate their business—the pace, the perceived fairness, and the stability of the management decisions.

Another factor in the lack of political will is the relative low visibility of the issues. Americans love fish, but they’re not moved by fish conservation the way they are by, say, animal rights. Without a strong public constituency, there’s little political pressure to counterbalance fishing industry interests.

Some of those most concerned about conservation are the fishermen, who after all have a huge stake in the future of the oceans. With Isabel S. docked in her historic New Bedford home port for maintenance, longtime owner Lane sits in the pilothouse and considers the fisheries management conundrum. In yet another reflection of how tangled the regulatory issues can get, at times he sounds as much like an environmentalist as a businessman. “I’d reduce pressure on the fish stocks with a buyout of permits,” he says, adding that fishermen have gone so far as to suggest that the New England Council shut down some fisheries altogether until the stock recovers, only to see their suggestions ignored. Lane, like others, has grown cynical about the council system, saying he rarely goes to meetings and, like many New England fishermen, is considering getting out of the business. It’s a sentiment that says as much as any report, a sure sign that the system needs to change.

Michael E. Robbins is the former editor of Audubon and Oceans magazines. His most recent book, The Hiking Companion, combines travel advice with tales of his own experiences on the major trails of North America.



 

Post a Comment

Your Name: 

Your Comment: 
 
Please press "Submit" only once to avoid double-posting.
All HTML formatting is removed from comments.
Read the Mother Jones community rules here.

Comments:

The photo of the boat is a purse seine vessel--they don't use purse seine gear in any groundfish fishery I can think of and any of the fisheries mentioned in the article. Purse seine vessels typically fish pelagic fish e.g. herring, sardines, tuna. Some good info in the story, but a lot left out. Come to New England and talk to a variety of people. What fits in New Bedford doesn't fit elsewhere...take a look at the individual fishery including(inshore/offshore),gear types, geography, bottom (oceanography), water temp/depth--not every one in NE fishes on Georges. I'm sure fishermen in the Gulf of Mexico and Hawaii and the west coast would have similar comments...there is a lot more to the story is all.
Posted by:New EnglanderMay 31, 2007 7:56:09 PMRespond ^
nuk them all that will fix them
Posted by:billy bobOctober 3, 2007 9:08:18 PMRespond ^
don't kill
Posted by:juanOctober 15, 2007 5:07:22 AMRespond ^
The AP panels are all full of crybaby minions from the ocean conservancy pimping their crap they call science. We need more fish farming, when is the last time you heard somebody say "Lets go get a wild chicken"?

The tradition of recreational fishing is losing out to the nmfs, the commercial fishing interest and the far left whiners.

Let us not forget this much hated bill was the work of one Ted Stevens from Alaska.

Roy Crabtree at nmfs should be tried on criminal charges, of course there is a good chance we will see him in front of a federal judge soon.
Posted by:FishfighterNovember 3, 2008 8:02:35 PMRespond ^

Jail.org - Inmate Search
Criminal records, instant public records & people search & current court records. www.jail.org

U.S. Public Records Search
Search County & State Court Records, Criminal records, Vital and Adoption Records www.PublicRecordsInfo.com

Records.com - People Search
Public Records and Background Checks. Instantly Search Criminal Records, Addresses and Court Records www.Records.com

Court Records & County Records
Find Instant Public Records, Criminal Records as Well as County Property Records Search. www.PublicRecordsIndex.com

Real Viagra, Cialis Levitra Deal
Dare to compare our competitive prices. Free overnight delivery to new patients in the US. No catch 22!

Subscribe Now!
Don't lose sight of the facts. Every issue of Mother Jones is loaded with hard-hitting reporting you can't afford to miss.

Big Bang, Little Bucks
Mother Jones Text Links is a great way to get on the site for an affordable price. For more information please click this the headline

End the genocide in Darfur
Every day, Darfuris face rape, murder, and starvation. Be a Voice for Darfur: tell Obama to end the suffering.
















The Housing Market

Attention Spans

Pipeline Politics

Entitlements


More MoJo voices...



bookIN PRINT

CLICK HERE
for more great reading

headphones IN TUNE
New music every issue

CLICK TO LISTEN

Advertise Liberally

This article has been made possible by the Foundation for National Progress, the Investigative Fund of Mother Jones, and gifts from generous readers like you.

© 2006 The Foundation for National Progress

About Us   Support Us   Advertise   Ad Policy   Privacy Policy   Contact Us   Subscribe   RSS