Every so often, good things are challenged and the fishing community needs to step up and take action. I am here to tell you we are on the doorstep of something rather problematic that can have devastating negative effects on many of the fisheries that we all love to frequent. Most of you know me primarily as a freshwater flyfisherman, but I do spend several weeks a season chasing a variety of species in saltwater as well, and I know that many of you like me do the same.
There is currently a bill in congress that has the potential to negatively effect the fate of many of our marine fisheries in the United States, fisheries that are recognized globally as a result of the successes made through science based annual catch limits and accountability measures that have essentially paved the way for many of our nations great marine fisheries. There are several sections that are problematic, I will outline a few here with links on how to read more of the details as they are rather lengthy. Paraphrasing directly from the Marine Fish Conservation Network:
S. 1520 – Modernizing Recreational Fishing Management Act of 2017 “The Network disagrees with the underlying premise of S. 1520 that recreational fishing is essentially different than commercial fishing and that the Magnuson-Stevens Act was a law intended to manage commercial fisheries. Both recreational and commercial fisheries are activities that remove fish from wild populations and can harm fisheries if they are not adequately controlled. Given the recreational fishery’s significant impact on the health of many fish populations, S. 1520 could:
Delay the rebuilding of overfished stocks.
Unreasonably limit fishery managers’ ability to develop innovative means to manage commercial fisheries.
Lead to confusion regarding the use of certain management measures.”
2. H.R. 200: Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act
“H.R. 200 threatens to weaken science-based annual catch limits and accountability measures, which are crucial gains made during the last Magnuson-Stevens reauthorization. Many of the provisions of H.R. 200 will hinder federal fisheries managers’ ability to rebuild and maintain sustainable fish stocks and will threaten the scientific integrity of the stock assessment process. H.R. 200 contains provisions that would:
Inject too much flexibility and ambiguity into the rebuilding timeline for overfished
stocks.
Allow economics to factor into setting catch limits.
Extend state management into federal waters and exempt the Gulf of Mexico red snapper fishery from accountability when it exceeds catch limits.
Broaden the categories of data deemed to be “best available science” to include information provided by sources untrained in scientific survey methods and data gathering.”
3. Rep. Huffman Discussion Draft – Strengthening Fishing Communities Through Improving Science, Increasing Flexibility and Modernizing Fisheries Management Act
“The discussion draft represents a realistic effort to address needed improvements to the Magnuson-Stevens Act while maintaining the science-based management provisions that have made the law a success over the past twenty years. The Network strongly supports the discussion draft’s efforts to:
Improve the data collection and storage process.
Increase transparency and coordination in the regional fishery management council process.
Promote ecosystem-based management and the protection of important fish habitat and forage species.
The Network has some concerns about the language that eliminates the 10-year default rebuilding period for overfished stocks, places undue emphasis on the use of alternative management measures in recreational fisheries, and steers limited resources toward unnecessary reviews of MRIP and the development of state recreational data collection programs.”
4. S. 2991 (113TH Congress) – Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of 2014
“S. 2991 was a commendable effort to improve upon a few shortcomings of the Magnuson-Stevens Act through greater emphasis on managing for entire marine ecosystems, improving the council appointment process and updating penalties for fisheries law violations. However, the Network expressed concerns over provisions that:
Provided for the use of alternate management measures and an alternative to the 10-year default rebuilding period.
Threatened to dilute the quality of the science used in stock assessments and fishery surveys by including data provided by untrained observers employing untested methodologies.”
Created overly-broad exemptions to the annual catch limit requirement.
Removed important requirements for the management of red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico.”
You can read the full analysis HERE and the Executive Summary HERE. So what do I do next you might ask? You can tell congress that you oppose H.R. 200 simply by clicking on the link at the top of the Marine Fish Conservation Network Page, or go HERE. This link will have you fill out a form and send a letter to your respective congressional representative. I encourage you to read on and make a choice to oppose this bill that has the potential to impact our saltwater fisheries in a not so friendly manner. Several major entities in the flyfishing industry have already shown their support, Thomas & Thomas Fly rods, Winston, and Orvis to name a few; let your voice be heard and act now as time is of the essence.