FISHING NEWS PAGE
Since time immemorial they that go down to sea in ships have brought back a wonderful bounty that's fed generations of fish lovers a food unlike any available on land. Sadly, that product is increasingly unavailable at sea. Commercial fishing is fighting a losing battle for a way of life the planet can no longer sustain. We try to document that battle here and hopefully not sound too bias against what are fast becoming outmoded forms of fishing.
<')((((((((><~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Facts Lose In War of Words 02.15.10
We've got back-to-back headlines of politics outweighing science in two fishing communities on either side of an ocean that can ill-afford such indulgence: the Atlantic. First, New England's sea scallop fishermen marshalled plenty of political pull to kill a proposed 22 percent catch reduction for 2010. Is it safe to assume this reduction in the sea scallop catch was not originally proposed on a whim? The regulators, and the scientists behind them, gained nothing personally by proposing these cuts. On the contrary, the head of the agency seeking the scallop cut said the past few weeks have been the worst of his life. Yet, meetings with congressmen, governors and plenty of really angry fishermen got his regulatory agency to reconsider the reduction Not because science suggests otherwise, because "solid economic arguments" suggest otherwise. Here's a Boston Globe editorial that does a decent job discussing the issue.
Then, on the other side of the Atlantic, we have French president Nicolas Sarkozy seeking an 18 month postponement of a propose blue fin tuna ban. France has a huge blue fin tuna fleet. The US tuna fleet has been much more sensible protecting these fish, while the Europeans have gone hog wild. Accordingly, these fish stocks are dropping precipitously. Yet, the French president, like his New England colleagues, is letting political and economic expedience second guess precaution and science in hopes that something changes in the next 18 months. Such concern for fishermen who, at best make a very hard living, is understandable. But it's the lack of concern for the fish we all depend on that has caused fish stocks to plummet across the planet. If we don't take a stand now, when do we? Eighteen months from now?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~><((((((((()'>
Most Dangerous Job Pursuing Deadliest Catch 02.04.10
The already reviled National Marine Fisheries Service is hiring folks willing to head out to sea with fishermen angry over the rules these new hires will be asked to enforce. It has to do with the new fishing regulation called catch shares. Fishermen in New England hate the regulation and the federal government needs folks to enforce it. So, this school is starting classes.
Let's put this into perspective. You go out to sea often for days and weeks at a time and enforce a regulation the owner of the boat you're on hates. There are 100 job opening and the feds say it's not part -time or minimum wage. However, it's arguably the riskiest post in one of the riskiest industries around. What happens if you should meet with an accident while at sea?
The job requires training which is elaborated in the link above. Still, for Deadliest Catch fans it's got to sound pretty exciting. For those who don't mind being trapped on a boat full of men indifferent to death who hate you, its sounds like the perfect career.
<')((((((((><~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Paper Bias Pollutes Publication 01.21.10
Once again the Gloucester Times abandons objectively to attack the messenger and ignore the message. This diatribe is worse than most that the paper publishes in the guise of information. It goes straight after the credibility of an official through the quotes of a lot of fishermen angry over her statements over dwindling fish populations. All taking place in a town far from Gloucester. Everyone knows winter in Gloucester can get a little sluggish, news-wise. But wasn't there a church function or school board meeting this reporter could have been assigned to instead of doing this story. Why does the Gloucester Times continue to let this fellow continue to campaign for the fishermen in the guise of covering the commercial fishing beat objectively? Because it sells papers. Just look at all the comments. Keep 'em angry not informed.
So, how angry do you get when you see something like this. It's a video of dead striped bass off the coast of Cape Cod. No explanation how those animals got there, but it sure isn't natural causes. Commercial fishing is a much more likely suspect. Fishing regulations are such that many fish caught in boat nets have to be thrown back because they are protected by one regulation or another. Problem is, they are dead when they are thrown back. Commercial fishermen don't want to catch them, but present technology and marketing methods makes it impossible to make a living otherwise. Science and industry need to work together, yet this paper is doing its best to prevent that.
Sadly, there's no simple answer and people's lives are going to be affected. In many cases proud family fishing traditions are going to turned into landscaping businesses. The paper just wants to prevent this. But is it doing its job just telling one side of the story?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~><((((((((()'>
Best Fish are Bottom Feeders 12.15.09
The federal government wants to invite more input on how best to let US fishermen catch as many swordfish and giant tuna as possible without killing all sorts of other creatures that aren't quite as tasty, or valuable. These two fish, despite how much mercury may be dissolved into their muscles, can fetch over $10,000 a piece at dockside, even higher since sushi came on the scene. They are prized game, not to mention a ton of fun to catch. Not surprisingly stocks plummeted as European and US swordfish fishermen have gone after them with dollars bills blinding them to the turtles, dolphin and undersized fish killed in the process.
They didn't bring this up in Perfect Storm. Some 25,000 tons of sharks, rays and such are killed unintentionally by swordfishermen in Spain alone. The collateral damage got American federal fish folks passing laws to stop it and now US fishermen are taking in about half the number of fish those same regulators feels can be safely caught without sending stock plummeting again.
What to do? That turtle above looks awful sad, however do we attend a funeral when the thing dies of natural causes? This is where environmental zeal can get in the way sound fisheries management. It also presupposes that man rules the planet and is thus ordained to kill these beautiful animals in the name of really fine seafood. For me it brings up the pangs of conscious I experienced when opening scallops. The cute little buggers with all those imploring blue eye, their shells helplessly clapping together in my hands shortly before my knife settles the issue. There's a lot to be said for vegetarians.
Speaking of overfishing, the Pew research institute released a study recently saying voters in Maine and Massachusetts are strongly opposed to overfishing by boats targeting groundfish like cod and haddock. Missing from the Pew study is how those same voters feel about cod and haddock crusted with Ritz crackers and baked in butter. I know I've railed about the damage these bottom fishing boats can cause, what bothers me about the Pew folks is they only present one side of the story. FYI Obama's EPA head, Lisa Jackson, is a former Pew official, actually when she was there it was the National Environmental Trust. Needless to say commercial fishermen were not thrilled with the appointment. Perhaps the extra input the feds are seeking will solve this.
<')((((((((><~~~~~~~~~~~~~~