Quote:
Originally Posted by dales529
Some difference of opinion on the data between you and Capt Dan but well thought out discussions and data.
My question is what would you guys like to do with the data? Broad Bill / Capt Dan.we have discussed this many times but rather than keep posting here what are next steps??????
Arrange a meeting with Council members? Phone call? I could arrange with 1 council member but again it has to be both sides open to each other or call gets shut down.
You guys apply for the open council memberships (2) Open on NJMFC or MAMFC (not sure whats open) etc.
Yes I get that's a dead road to you and many others as NJMFC and last few Governors have been reluctant to appoint ANY applicants from recreational but this has to go farther than these posts to get anywhere.
Shame lack of recreational fishermen support defuncted many recreational known support groups and the Facebook groups that popped up also have accomplished nothing.
Always comes back to many opinions and minimal support by recs so it goes year after year with tons of data and many tons of opinion but in the end its just talk.
How do we move talk to legislation? Have to start in NJ IMHO
Please no one say "lobbyists" as we have had those and no one supported them to the $$ they needed.
|
Dave my humble opinion after many years of trying.
First I agree with all of Dan's post. What I learned from sending out material to 156 Members of ASMFC, MAMFC, NMFS, NEFSC and others is almost no one replied and the Council ended up censoring my analysis in their briefing materials for year end regulations. You were copied on many of those emails so you know. There was one individual from the Advisory Panel, name eludes me, who said if your trying to address this with the Commission or Council you're barking up the wrong tree as quotas and regulatory options are already decided at the federal level and the Council "ASMFC" and Commission "MAMFC" basically choose between options already determined or argue for alternate options within the guidelines of Conservation Equivalency.
Meaning the fight as Dan mentioned is at the federal level and NMFS. In the big picture pecking order, its the federal government "NMFS", MAMFC and ASMFC, commercials and a distant fourth the recreational sector.
For any change to occur, NMFS needs to first agree the fishery has a problem. That might be the biggest hurdle because it's not just agreeing to that, it's admitting it and they don't like the general public playing in their sand box nor do they like admitting their policy decisions have hurt certain stocks. As Dan eluded to, I've often wondered about litigation but that requires major funding, extensive amounts of time and resources which the recreational sector doesn't have. And organizations like ASA have done nothing beneficial for this fishery so expecting any assistance from them prospectively is I'm afraid wishful thinking.
The person who I had the most productive interaction with on all the emails and materials I emailed out was Jim Lovgren, Point Pleasant Cooperative. Jim is I believe a third or fourth generation commercial fisherman and held in high esteem in the commercial fishing industry. I think Jim has a membership on this site and if so I hope he's listening as he's a voice of reason and well respected among his constituents. I had more productive and intelligent interaction with Jim on my many email exchanges than all other members of the three agencies tasked with actual management of summer flounder combined who typically didn't reply at all. Another person I met in my journey is Greg DiDomenico, Executive Director Garden State Seafood Association "GSSA" which represents a substantial population of commercial boats in New Jersey. Link to their website is below:
https://www.gardenstateseafood.org/about-us
Basically how I feel after my time spent in these matters is in order for anything to change, it needs to happen from the bottom up because I don't believe it will happen from the top down even though that's exactly where it should start. We need the commercials more than the commercials need the recreational community but in my opinion that doesn't mean we don't have a common goal which is the sustainability of all these fisheries that drives both sectors in different ways. And if both sectors can have a united front towards NMFS, I think there's a possibility for change before we get to an inflection point with many stocks and they disappear or are irreparably damaged. If they are, which personally I believe is where this fishery is, the benefits shore communities have enjoyed built on the foundation of both a robust commercial and recreational fishing community will tragically disappear with them.
I'd be willing to be involved if a sit down round table discussion could be arranged with commercial leadership to discuss their thoughts and a path forward on how each sector can help the other and be stronger jointly as opposed to severally. Right now, in my opinion, the people who know the least about these fisheries and spend no actual on water time are the ones making decisions and largely responsible for mismanaging one fishery after another. The federal government holds all the cards but the commercial sector is very strong, well funded and very organized. If there's a way of having a joint coalition to fight Washington, maybe collectively working together to effectuate change as opposed to NMFS pitting the two sectors against each other would be a more effective way of securing the future of these stocks.
How we'd start that process is the million dollar question. Comments?
