OBAMA.. ONE BIG ASS MISTAKE AMERICA...

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

The same article says that the planning for this began in 2006. Should we blame the Bush Administration for getting it going?

What if it actually helps manage the fishery?

-spence

Planning is not the same as implementing it. The stocks are on the road to recovery as it is. I would be willing to bet Bush would not implement this without considering the economy and the families it will effect.

"What if it actually helps manage the fishery?" It won't help the fishery. It may help some fish though. No problem to roll the dice when your family has a check coming in.
Any other industries you don't care if they regulate into oblivion?

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

Planning is not the same as implementing it.

The OP seemed to assert that this was a liberal PETA inspired bill. Was it actually the idea of the Bush Administration?

The stocks are on the road to recovery as it is.

Are they?

I would be willing to bet Bush would not implement this without considering the economy and the families it will effect.
"What if it actually helps manage the fishery?" It won't help the fishery. It may help some fish though. No problem to roll the dice when your family has a check coming in.
Any other industries you don't care if they regulate into oblivion?

You seem to be advocating for the fisherman and ignoring the fish. I certainly appreciate the fact that this action might damage an historic industry, but it also might be the right thing to do. I haven't studied the issue to see what's really at stake, but this doesn't look like pure politics...a sustainable ground fishing industry has been a problem for some time.

The problem with the regulation argument is that if left unchecked most industries would burn themselves out. Hence why balance is nearly always the best approach.

So are there any rational arguments as to why these measures won't lead to a more sustainable long-term ground fishery?

-spence

[Islander77]

Originally Posted by spence

The OP seemed to assert that this was a liberal PETA inspired bill. Was it actually the idea of the Bush Administration?


Are they?


You seem to be advocating for the fisherman and ignoring the fish. I certainly appreciate the fact that this action might damage an historic industry, but it also might be the right thing to do. I haven't studied the issue to see what's really at stake, but this doesn't look like pure politics...a sustainable ground fishing industry has been a problem for some time.

The problem with the regulation argument is that if left unchecked most industries would burn themselves out. Hence why balance is nearly always the best approach.

So are there any rational arguments as to why these measures won't lead to a more sustainable long-term ground fishery?

-spence

Absolutely am advocating for fishermen.. The stocks are and have rebounded... The fact they want to cull 50-75 % of the fleet affects WAY more than you think. Sad fact the fishing idustry funds lots of economy for businesses no one even puts it with. As far as us fishing till nothing is left umm I am gonna assume you understand this funny thing called DEBT... If we caught all the fish no more income. More susatainable long-term ground fishery??? Fluke is at a RECORD HIGH bio mass... The bigger problem is the government sold us one thing and then delivered another, Sector quota is not what they said to the fact of reducing the quota even lower. Now I am and will be for CONSERVATION, not DEVASTATION.. I am a commercial fisherman yes yes I am. The PETA refference was because o fthe fact the new head of NOAA Jane Lubchenco former position was head of an enviromentalists group??? A lil conflict of intrest there wouldnt ya say?

Jane Lubchenco Headed PEW Ocean Comission.. they came out and said groundfish were being over fished.. I know its hard for people to understand all this at times but if your being told to do something how is it your fault?? The harder thing to understand is why the NMFS is the only regulatory office in the US gov that does not have a balance system, what they say goes end of story. There is a whole lot you dont realize or know I am sure and I could write a ten page rant on it... But if 80% of THE SEAFOOD IN THE US is imported, wouldnt thattell ya something? We have the resources but the farmer and fisherman are being forced out by our gov, And if the country keeps going the way it is yall are gonna need both for staple proteins...

[BaddJack]

.... big boat corporations obviously have donated the $$ to bury us all.

The heavy trawlers will rape the bottom clean, killing all bycatch to keep it legal.

[Islander77]

Fish allocations seen opening door to lawsuit - GloucesterTimes.com, Gloucester, MA

Here is more info for yall....

[likwid]

Originally Posted by buckman

The stocks are on the road to recovery as it is.

Show me Cod at the Gurnet then.

[Islander77]

Originally Posted by likwid

Show me Cod at the Gurnet then.

Show me what hey feed on is still there and the water temp has not shifted there like every were else??? Oh and dogfish are not there. There is more in the ocean to worry about then just hammering the commercial guys... Enviromental/ predadition/ competition for food... But hey what do I know, right?

[spence]

Ok, I've read up on the issue a bit. I am now an armchair expert

It doesn't appear that the new law is some radical liberal plot, it's been planned for some years and seems to have broad support from those leading the discussion. Chances are if McCain was President it would have become law all the same.

Some stocks are doing well but others are suffering.

Technology has advanced making individual boats more effective, and as a result the fleet is too large for the number of fish.

The introduction of sectors was meant to grease the skids for the bigger changes, not to be the final state. It does look like the new rules allow for more rapid action if stocks improve as well as increased measures to combat illegal fishing.

I do think the argument that this law moves too quickly and gives lesser fish too much influence has some merit.

I'm not sure how this is a gift to the bigger commercial boats, unless you mean that by putting the little guy out of business they will be the only one left standing.

Being from Iowa this reminds me a lot of the death of the family farmer. New technology improves production, the cost to operate goes through the roof and the little guy doesn't have the finances to cover expenses with a bad harvest.

It simply seems like we're in the middle of change which is unsettling.

-spence

[spence]

I'd also like to hear what the guys on the boats think should be done...what the alternate proposals out there really are.

It does seem that if left unchecked the stocks have a bad habit of collapsing.

-spence

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Islander77

Show me what hey feed on is still there and the water temp has not shifted there like every were else??? Oh and dogfish are not there. There is more in the ocean to worry about then just hammering the commercial guys... Enviromental/ predadition/ competition for food... But hey what do I know, right?

Very valid points islander. however, just because there are other negative impacts doesn't mean every other impact should go unchecked.
So there are a lot less herring, so a lot less food for cod, tuna etc... there are too many dogfish.... climate change, natural or anthropogenic has had an impact (it probably has already) so every boat should keep doing it's thing?

Spence asked a rare valid question: WHAT IS THE alternative solution.
1. Show me the science that stocks are recovering. Maybe the target for recovery is too high, but that's a separate issue
2. If they are 'recovered' what should be allowed, Status Quo?
3. So the economy is in the crapper, is there ever a good time to cut back and make more repos and foreclosures? Should they offer a buy out?

Search my posts here, especially regarding menhaden and you will find I have a long, non-anti commercial track record. but, seriously, offer an alternative, besides a rant that 'OBAMA' - NOAA/NMFS is screwing everyone twice till Sunday.


If I had my way, we'd go back to a lot of rod/reel, fish pots etc and limit dragging to certain areas and certain species. Sustainable fisheries. I realize dragging is an effective way of catching fish, but by catch is huge, and you can deny all you want, but the negative impact to the bottom, especially in cobble-gravel areas is significant.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by likwid

Show me Cod at the Gurnet then.

I can show you Cod there all summer long