February Fishermen's March on Washington planned

[jackdaniels]

.
February Fishermen's March on Washington planned

The following press release was issued by the Conservation Cooperative of Gulf Fishermen.
.
Recreational and commercial fishermen, support business owners, families, and community leaders will gather at the steps of our Nation’s Capitol on February 17, 2010 from noon to 3 PM to show congress a united front of the impacts caused by the unintended impacts of the Magnuson Stevens Conservation and Management Act as revised effective January, 2007 (RMSA). The overly restrictive management requirements created by the RMSA based on non scientific arbitrary deadlines are forcing anglers off the water, eliminating commercial fishing, preventing consumers from purchasing locally caught fresh seafood, destroying small family businesses, increasing unemployment, and adversely affecting coastal communities.

We fully support real science based management and the conservation of our marine resources while also being able to sustain recreational and commercial fishing activities, providing locally caught seafood, sustaining small family businesses, and supporting our coastal communities. Please stay tuned as the details are being developed and will be provided. Make your plans to join us for this historic event and work with us in a United effort from coast to coast.

CCGF urges all elected officials to work together and to join the efforts by the leaders of other coastal states for the best interests of our coastal communities and the Nation.

This effort is being coordinated by many organizations and individuals including but not limited to CCGF, RFA, FRA, United Boatmen of New York, United Boatmen of New Jersey, MSSA and more to be announced.

[jackdaniels]

Fishing activists talk strategy before heading to Washington for Feb. 24 protest
By Terry Weber/Correspondent
Cape Ann Beacon
Posted Feb 18, 2010 @ 07:51 PM
Last update Feb 19, 2010 @ 01:11 PM
Gloucester —

New England fishermen are preparing to speak out in Washington at a Feb. 24 protest on Capitol Hill. That preparation included a strategy meeting Wednesday to figure to make sure their voices are heard.

During the Wednesday evening meeting, local officials and concerned members of the fishing community brainstormed a message to deliver to Washington, D.C. at the “United We Fish” rally. Fishermen and related business leaders from the Gloucester area, New Bedford, Maine and Rhode Island voiced their suggestions and asked questions about the coming protest.

The meeting, hosted by state Sen. Bruce Tarr and state Rep. Ann-Margaret Ferrante, also included strategy suggestions from Mayor Carolyn Kirk and audience members. The United We Fish rally, scheduled for Wednesday, Feb. 24, is expected to draw thousands of people to the steps of the Capitol, and local officials do not want to waste the opportunity for Gloucester and New England’s voice to be heard.

“This is an important moment in history for the survival of the commercial fishing industry,” said Tarr. “We need to arrive in DC with a clear and simple message to be effective. The protest is also significant because it brings together many separate but related groups. All of them understand the need for healthy fisheries but feel that the current laws and regulations are not based on sound science, or are excessive and unnecessary.”

Although initially organized by the Recreational Fishing Alliance, commercial fishermen are expected to attend and the primary focus of the protest is the perceived negative impacts of the Magnuson Stevens Conservation and Management Act (MSA) of 2006. Fishing organizations, recreational and commercial fishermen, legislators and ordinary concerned citizens are uniting their efforts to protest the increasing closures of fishing grounds, and restrictions on types and amounts of fish to be caught.

Some attendees, however, are also inspired to attend the protest because of the alleged inappropriate law enforcement techniques practiced by NOAA. Kathy Hurlburt, 62, of West Gloucester said, “I don’t come from a fishing family. I just care about Gloucester and I think it’s a disgrace how law enforcement of the fishing industry has been handled around here. I am bringing my daughter and grandkids to the protest because I think it’s important for them to participate in their own government. I also don’t want any more restrictions on the fishermen. It’s hard enough for them to make a living.”

Another key area of the protest is the anticipated implementation of a “catch share” program in May which would only allow fishermen a specific percentage or share of the total allowable fishing catch. It includes Territorial Use Rights Fisheries (TURFs) that grant an exclusive privilege to fish in a geographically designated fishing ground. Many people encouraged Tarr and Ferrante to talk about the negative impacts of the catch program with legislators in DC.

In a rare opportunity, members of the audience were also told they could sign up for a planned group meeting with U.S. Sen. John Kerry on the day of the protest. Ferrante said, “During this meeting, we plan to deliver a concise message and a clear expectation of what we are looking for. When you only have a limited time with legislators, you’ve got to keep it short and simple.”

Message suggestions from the audience poured in and during his presentation Tarr repeatedly acknowledged the need to balance concerns about job losses and the need to protect the environment from overfishing. Tarr and Ferrante were advised to be prepared to address the counterarguments from environmental groups who will undoubtedly also make an appearance in Washington and support the Magnuson Act as it stands.

Under the Magnuson Act, when a fishery is described as overfished, a Regional Fishery Management Council has two years to implement a plan to end overfishing and with limited exceptions has 10 years to rebuild the stock. According to documents from the United We Fish organizers, “the 10 year deadline is arbitrary, has no basis in science, may require stocks to be rebuilt to unprecedented levels and must be met without regard to the impact on fishermen, related industries and communities whose economic future relies on harvesting the fish.”

Kirk gave a presentation of her strategy suggestions which originated from her own meeting with fishermen last week. Kirk listened to the fishermen’s concerns to ensure she represents their needs in Washington. Many fishermen cannot attend the protest due to financial constraints or work schedules.

“Flexibility” was one word Kirk and the fishermen deemed important to deliver. Flexibility is also in the title of new legislation proposed by Rep. Frank Pallone of New Jersey and Sen. Charles Schumer of New York. The bill, H.R. 1584, the “Flexibility in Rebuilding American Fisheries Act” would allow flexibility in the 10 year timeline that allows fishing stocks to recover without making fishermen and the related industries collapse.

Some audience members felt the protest was coming too late but were still hopeful for change.

“The catch share program will be the gun to the head of the fishing industry,” said Dave Marciano, 44, of Beverly, who has fished out of Gloucester for 30 years.

“We’ve already complied with so many regulations and gotten nowhere,” Marciano continued. “We will lose 50-70 percent of our fishermen if the catch share program is put in place. Many of these guys have their houses and boats tied up in the same mortgages, and for them to take another hit will be the end of them. There’s no coming back. I hope someone is listening in D.C.”

Travel by Bus to DC

If you would like more information about reserving a seat on a bus from Gloucester to DC, call the Northeast Seafood Coalition at 978-283-9992. Advance reservations required. Cost is expected to be $75.
http://www.wickedlocal.com/glouceste...Feb-24-protest

[jackdaniels]

I
111TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION H. R. 1584
To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
to extend the authorized time period for rebuilding of certain overfished
fisheries, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MARCH 18, 2009
Mr. PALLONE (for himself, Mr. LOBIONDO, Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, Mr.
JONES, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. ADLER of New Jersey, Ms. GINNY BROWNWAITE
of Florida, and Mr. MCINTYRE) introduced the following bill;
which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources
A BILL
To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act to extend the authorized time period
for rebuilding of certain overfished fisheries, and for
other purposes.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Flexibility in Rebuild5
ing American Fisheries Act of 2009’’.
VerDate Nov 24 2008 06:55 Mar 19, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1584.IH H1584 wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2
•HR 1584 IH
1 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF TIME PERIOD FOR REBUILDING
2 CERTAIN OVERFISHED FISHERIES.
3 Section 304(e) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
4 Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C.
5 1854(e)(4)) is amended—
6 (1) in paragraph (4)(A)—
7 (A) in clause (i) by striking ‘‘possible’’ and
8 inserting ‘‘practicable’’; and
9 (B) by amending clause (ii) to read as fol10
lows:
11 ‘‘(ii) not exceed 10 years, except in
12 cases where—
13 ‘‘(I) the biology of the stock of
14 fish, other environmental conditions,
15 or management measures under an
16 international agreement in which the
17 United States participates dictate oth18
erwise;
19 ‘‘(II) the Secretary determines
20 that such 10-year period should be ex21
tended because the cause of the fish22
ery decline is outside the jurisdiction
23 of the Council or the rebuilding pro24
gram cannot be effective only by lim25
iting fishing activities;
VerDate Nov 24 2008 06:55 Mar 19, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1584.IH H1584 wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
3
•HR 1584 IH
1 ‘‘(III) the Secretary determines
2 that such 10-year period should be ex3
tended to provide for the sustained
4 participation of fishing communities
5 or to minimize the economic impacts
6 on such communities, provided that
7 there is evidence that the stock of fish
8 is on a positive rebuilding trend;
9 ‘‘(IV) the Secretary determines
10 that such 10-year period should be ex11
tended for one or more stocks of fish
12 of a multi-species fishery, provided
13 that there is evidence that those
14 stocks are on a positive rebuilding
15 trend;
16 ‘‘(V) the Secretary determines
17 that such 10-year period should be ex18
tended because of a substantial
19 change to the biomass rebuilding tar20
get for the stock of fish concerned
21 after the rebuilding plan has taken ef22
fect; or
23 ‘‘(VI) the Secretary determines
24 that such 10-year period should be ex25
tended because the biomass rebuilding
VerDate Nov 24 2008 06:55 Mar 19, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1584.IH H1584 wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
4
•HR 1584 IH
1 target exceeds the highest abundance
2 of the stock of fish in the 25-year pe3
riod preceding and there is evidence
4 that the stock is on a positive rebuild5
ing trend;’’; or
6 (2) in paragraph (7), in the matter preceding
7 subparagraph (A), by inserting after the first sen8
tence the following: ‘‘In evaluating progress to end
9 overfishing and to rebuild overfished stocks of fish,
10 the Secretary shall review factors, other than com11
mercial fishing and recreational fishing, that may
12 contribute to a stock of fish’s overfished status, such
13 as commercial, residential, and industrial develop14
ment of, or agricultural activity in, coastal areas and
15 their impact on the marine environment, predator/
16 prey relationships of target and related species, and
17 other environmental and ecological changes to the
18 marine conditions.’’; and
19 (3) by adding at the end the following:
20 ‘‘(8) If the Secretary determines that extended
21 rebuilding time is warranted under subclause (III),
22 (IV), (V), or (VI) of paragraph (4)(A)(ii), the max23
imum time allowed for rebuilding the stock of fish
24 concerned may not exceed the sum of the following
25 time periods:
VerDate Nov 24 2008 06:55 Mar 19, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1584.IH H1584 wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
5
•HR 1584 IH
1 ‘‘(A) The initial 10-year rebuilding period.
2 ‘‘(B) The expected time to rebuild the
3 stock absent any fishing mortality and under
4 prevailing environmental conditions.
5 ‘‘(C) The mean generation time of the
6 stock.
7 ‘‘(9) In this subsection the term ‘on a positive
8 rebuilding trend’ means that the biomass of the
9 stock of fish has shown a substantial increase in
10 abundance since the implementation of the rebuild11
ing plan.’’.
Æ
VerDate Nov 24 2008 06:55 Mar 19, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6301 E:\BILLS\H1584.IH H1584 wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS