Quote:
Originally Posted by pectoralfin
I believe that $150 billion number includes imported seafood. Several years ago NMFS decided to include imports to inflate the economic value of the commercial fishery. By the way, this was done despite the objection of the vast majority of responders to the proposed change. If 90% of the seafood is imported, it means that the value of the commercial fishery is really about $15 billion.
I learned more from the above posts than any other website or publication on this matter. Does anyone think to meet with the commercial groups to get a dialog going about this and see if we both can benefit from a unified front?
|
The $150 billion in my earlier post was to reflect the
worldwide value of the seafood market. I mentioned it to present scale of the industry and amount of money involved which in my opinion influences many things including legislation and behavior. Wasn't intended as a breakdown by country or effort to quantify the size of the US commercial fishery. Point is, demand has grown exponentially and will continue to do so. Just realized the number for '19 is ~$135 billion, still a very significant number and as you can see is expected and will continue to grow. Source is attached.
As far as part two of your post, I think the relationship between both parties is somewhat comparable to the Hatfield's and the McCoy's. Personally I don't believe "Unified Front" is a recognizable term between the recreational community and commercial industry unfortunately. Good idea but personally just don't see it happening, would love to be proven wrong.
02-07-2019, 09:43 PM
Re: Fluke Regs this year
Hybrid Mode
