As almost as long as I’ve been a Florida fisherman, and it’s been a lifetime, I’ve heard oldtimers said things like, “Remember the way fishing use to be around here?” These types of statements were most often followed up with a summary of how great the fishing once was in Florida. This was until a few years ago, about the same time our nation experienced a major upswing in the polarization of politics. (Yes I realize politics are always polarized, however, they’ve now become hyper-polarized.)
About this same time, the USA’s recreational fishing world started tuning into the sad fact, that the folks managing our federal fisheries had been tied to the commercial fishing interest for far too long. For many of us it was the tightening of the fishing regulations for red snapper and grouper along the southeast USA’s Gulf and South Atlantic coast that bought this imbalance between commercial and recreational fishing management to light.
As a media member of the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council’s (www.safmc.net) Snapper Grouper Advisory Panel I’ve been educated on the importance of managing both the needs of people and the resources.
For this reason, I’ve followed the progress/regress of the reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (the policies and rules governing our federal fisheries) with great interest. Unfortunately politics have come into play, placing the overall rebuilding of our ocean fisheries into jeopardy.
February 4, 2014, the Committee on Natural Resources heard comments on Chairman Doc Hastings’s (R-Washington) Magunson-Stevens Act draft bill “Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act.” Hastings’s bill is the first draft bill in this round of MSA reauthorization.
Hasting’s draft bill suggest strong changes in the rebuilding timeline requirements.
This will give Councils the ability to revise the currently mandated 10-year rebuilding timelines, even those like red snapper with longer rebuilding timelines due to the species 50-year lifespans. Basically, Councils can terminate a rebuilding plan if within two years or the next stock assessment determines a stock was not overfished. This may be done if the Council deems the rebuilding requirement addresses a detrimental economic situation, yet does not define what is consider such.
In my limited opinion this change would not be prudent for either the fish or the recreational fishermen.
I’m telling you like I see it. It may or may not be inline with your opinion, but believe me I have you and the fish in mind… not politics.
~ Rodney Smith