[WaterAye]

Niles wrote:
It's not "science" anymore...

it's now "advocacy science," as institutionalized by the American Fisheries Society (Google "American fisheries society advocacy"). The days of objective science, at least in fisheries, are long gone and, as a quick review of any of the Pew-supported "research" readily demonstrates, subjectivity is what it's all about. That means that you can torque the research to further your agenda.

Comforting, isn't it?

I guess it is to someone.

 

[MakoMike]

If anyone Hijacked the MSa it was the greens, more specifically the Natural Resources Deferense Council, who refused to go along with the original MSA reauthorization bill and dragged all the other green groups into supporting the no flexibility in rebuilding timetables that we are stuck with today. All of the fishing groups at the table went along in order to get the three year extension on the fluke rebuiling, that was some great trade-off!

 

[NilsS]

Mike -

It goes back farther than that - to the Magnuson reauthorization in '96 and the first go-round of the Sustainable Fisheries Act.

Unfortunately, back then (and even in '06) fishermen were too fragmented and too self-interested to think about any coordinated, long-term strategy. As you correctly point out, the last time a lot of folks were only interested in fixing the looming fluke crisis. Some fix!

I hope by now everyone realizes that we aren't going to have any real solution as long as we have a fisheries-by-fisheries perspective, and as long as individuals and organizations are as much interested in one-upmanship as they are in making the system work for everyone who fishes, not just their own people.

 

[HungryJack]

NilsS wrote:
I hope by now everyone realizes that we aren't going to have any real solution as long as we have a fisheries-by-fisheries perspective,
and as long as individuals and organizations are as much interested in one-upmanship as they are in making the system work for everyone who fishes, not just their own people.
So you're essentially saying we're DOOMED ?

Since what you suggest will not happen ever,
or if it finally does, it will be too late to matter.

 

[twofinbluna]

wateraye

As Nils said, it goes back to the SFA.

This post edited by twofinbluna 04:19 PM 03/04/2008

 

[guest]

It wasn't the green groups that hi-jacked the MSA.

It was the commercial industry in NE who waged lawsuit after lawsuit to make the the DAS/zero mortality areas system "equitable" across gears and areas. Or who delayed the process by insisting for more and more complex analysis to show that their sacrifices would result in more fish in the stock, no matter how uncertain the results were.

Likewise a lot of rec and com industry reps attempted to hold the councils to their projections each time doing so allowed for an increase in catch. Yet fought every reduction tooth and nail when it was clear that the quotas were exceeded and the mortality was acceding Fmax routinely

Hence the repeated ignoring of the problems with the current fluke model, the increase and then drastic reduction in scup, a sea herring management action that took almost 2 generations of herring to get done, and river herring on a "species of concern" list for the feds, while still allowed to be harvested in Delaware and other places.

The green groups learned the trick of suing NMFS based on procedure from com lawyers in NE.

This post edited by guest 04:56 PM 03/04/2008

 

[MakoMike]

guest wrote:
It wasn't the green groups that hi-jacked the MSA.

It was the commercial industry in NE who waged lawsuit after lawsuit to make the the DAS/zero mortality areas system "equitable" across gears and areas. Or who delayed the process by insisting for more and more complex analysis to show that their sacrifices would result in more fish in the stock, no matter how uncertain the results were.

Likewise a lot of rec and com industry reps attempted to hold the councils to their projections each time doing so allowed for an increase in catch. Yet fought every reduction tooth and nail when it was clear that the quotas were exceeded and the mortality was acceding Fmax routinely

Hence the repeated ignoring of the problems with the current fluke model, the increase and then drastic reduction in scup, a sea herring management action that took almost 2 generations of herring to get done, and river herring on a "species of concern" list for the feds, while still allowed to be harvested in Delaware and other places.

The green groups learned the trick of suing NMFS based on procedure from com lawyers in NE.

A lot of truth to that, but I don't think it answers the question of who hijacked the act itself. If anything, the actions you outlined gave those that wanted severe restrictions written into the law the ammunition they needed to convince the lawmakers. In fact IMHO if it was up to those who had the most influence the last time around the councils would already be history.

 

[guest]

MakoMike wrote:

A lot of truth to that, but I don't think it answers the question of who hijacked the act itself. If anything, the actions you outlined gave those that wanted severe restrictions written into the law the ammunition they needed to convince the lawmakers. In fact IMHO if it was up to those who had the most influence the last time around the councils would already be history.


With the the scientists now making the exclusive decisions on allowable catch, and the councils only dealing with "allocation" ....

Aren't the councils really history. How much influence to you think public or the advisers are going to have when the SSC sets a "precautionary" quota? I'm guessing about ZERO

 

[flatts1b]

guest wrote:
It wasn't the green groups that hi-jacked the MSA.

It was the commercial industry in NE who waged lawsuit after lawsuit to make the the DAS/zero mortality areas system "equitable" across gears and areas. Or who delayed the process by insisting for more and more complex analysis to show that their sacrifices would result in more fish in the stock, no matter how uncertain the results were.

Likewise a lot of rec and com industry reps attempted to hold the councils to their projections each time doing so allowed for an increase in catch. Yet fought every reduction tooth and nail when it was clear that the quotas were exceeded and the mortality was acceding Fmax routinely

Hence the repeated ignoring of the problems with the current fluke model, the increase and then drastic reduction in scup, a sea herring management action that took almost 2 generations of herring to get done, and river herring on a "species of concern" list for the feds, while still allowed to be harvested in Delaware and other places.

The green groups learned the trick of suing NMFS based on procedure from com lawyers in NE.

Hall of fame worthy post there, Guest!