Recreational Fishermen Thrown Under Bus by ASA, CCA, IGFA, NMMA, TBF, others

[captadamnj]

Well, folks, you've seen some recent posts about which fishing groups are in the corner of recreational fishermen. The lines have now clearly been drawn.

A letter dated Oct. 22nd was sent to the Under Secretary of Commerce (Dr. Jane Lubchenco) that stated the following (bold added for emphasis) -

"The single most important element in generating this revenue is not the actual catching of fish, but the revenue from the fishing experience..."

"In short, much of the value of recreational fishing comes from the broader experience of "going fishing" rather than the actual catching of fish."

Here is the list of co-signatories -
American Sportfishing Association (ASA)
Center for Coastal Conservation (CCC)
Coastal Conservation Association (CCA)
Environmental Defense Fund (EDF)
International Game Fish Association (IGFA)
National Marine Manufacturers Association (NMMA)
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
Ocean Conservancy
Oceana
Pew Environment Group
The Billfish Foundation (TBF)

TALK ABOUT THROWING FISHERMEN UNDER THE BUS!!!!

ASA, CCA, IGFA, NMMA, TBF, all saying to government that THE VALUE OF FISHING IS NOT CATCHING FISH. Are these the groups representing you as a fisherman? Do you go fishing expecting to find value in not catching fish?

Lubchenco Letter (pdf)

[scattered_grass]

I might argue that the actual catching of fish is very important..not as important as keeping the fish..from a recreational standpoint.

[capt. jakeg]

I might argue that the actual catching of fish is very important..not as important as keeping the fish..from a recreational standpoint.

Well, Dr. Lubchenco does not want ANY fish to be kept and is trying like hell as director of NOAA (and therefore operator or NMFS) to get her way. Everyone should know that last month the entire east coast sea bass fishery was immediately closed, and there is a 35 year moratorium on the table pertaining to all east coast and gulf coast states to make it illegal to catch and keep ANY snappers or groupers. These are only the first steps and after snapper/ grouper is done, another major fishery will be her target. This woman has made a career of closing our waters to fishing. We have an enemy of fishing (recreationally and commercially) as president and rulemaker of our fisheries. People need to know about this and she needs to be removed from office.

[Deep C]

Imprecise language is what sets up nightmares down the road. I hate this shit...

None of the aforementioned groups have "earned" my support for a long time. I see infighting between chapters in a couple. I see another that has become an elitist "club" while another has moved one step short of becomming a blue water peta. I sued to shovel money their way til their directions got off the track I endorsed... Now renewal letters are tossed in the trash can unread as my personal protest...

Unless we all get on ONE same page and gang address all the little issues we are doomed. Right now the fluke guy fights his own battle and says screw the tuna guys problems who in turn ignores pleas for help from snapper or grouper fishermen who could care less about billfishermen. Bullshit! We are all recreational fishermen... Together, we can not only stop the little rules that get so irritating. we can close the agency who has a zero percent track record of success and is a financial burden (NMFS) on its parent agency (NOAA). Unless we head that direction we're screwed...

[SeaBiscuit]

I do not belong to any of the aforementioned organizations, but having read the letter: http://www.karenannii.com/Letterfrom...NGOsonMRIP.pdf
I do not share captadamnj's opinion that they have thrown recreational fishermen under the bus. The value to which the letter refers is economic value.
I think that the letter represents the interests of recreational fishermen well in advocating for a "real time" recreational catch reporting and management system in order to prevent the extreme regulations resulting from not having data until the quotas have already been exceeded.

Please read the letter for yourselves before agreeing or disagreeing with the poster.

SeaBiscuit

[Deep C]

Nick
I agree that the author of the post may have misread the intentions of the letter... Its my stance that it is however further cowtowing to the powers that be.... When did we lose sight that government and its officials are supposed to be working for us. Instead we get hammered with ludicris unfounded rules and regs based on bad science at best. Yes we need better data collection to make assess stocks and catches but we are missing the point. These organizations continually bend, bow and scrape to appease the powers that be instead of standing up and telling them to get off our backs.
The track record stands clear. Every time we make a small concession, they take a whole lot more. I say no more... Take back what is ours and shut the failed NMFS down or at least take it back to its original roots of commercial management.
That Magnusson Act that all kiss the ass of was written by them for them as a way to euserp ower they have not earned nor has "we the people" had a chance to weigh in on.

[captadamnj]

seabiscuit, this is the game, this is how the other side plays. They want some concessions that are "good" for rec. anglers - improve the idea of MRIP. But while "standing up for rec. anglers", in the same breath, the suggestion that fishermen should fish for the experience not the fish is made. There was no purpose to the first part of the letter other than to put it out there, to continue to fuel the fire for further restricting recreational opportunities to catch fish. And so people overlook this "fine print" because of the rest of the letter.

The organizations get to make their press release about "standing up to NOAA" for "recreational anglers". And those that want to believe that, choose to "overlook" the first part of the letter. The entire letter could have been written without those couple of lines, but they are in there, and make no mistake, they are in there for a very specific purpose, in black and white. You ask for information, here it is. Choose to overlook it if you so desire, but do so at the risk of your and future generations ability to "catch fish".

[Deep C]

Were I to write the exact same letter as far as content and intent goes would have indeed not have been the same. I would have said something to the effect of "not only" is the catch aspect of the $80B industry part of it but collateral activities "Such as" ...

I does indeed read poorly like catch is an afterthought... From a financial standpoint that is misleading. If we are not to "catch" or in many instances "keep" then most mon't "go for the experience" either.

[Glenn W]

Bar room lawyers that cannot read the English language for content, then try to read into, and make meaning of, something that isn't there--- never ceases to amase me.

Pretty good letter IMO

[N2theBlue]

reading comprehension is a lost skill in America. I think its really sad. not a bad letter imho.