Obama Fishing Ban, What is next.

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Status
Not open for further replies.
funny how the OP hasn't been back to the tread....???

It would be nice for some right wing advocates to be at least a little educated and objective...

Capitalism > Socialism...

In England in the mid to late 1800's there was no government intervention in business. Children worked 80 hour weeks in coal mines and cleaning chimneys and pollution was so bad that lakes caught on fire and could burn for days.

This is true capitalism and there's a reason it doesn't exist. What the ignorant don't understand is that in the free world no matter what their economy is called, it is FAR from true socialism or true capitalism meaning that 95% of policy is similar. Then they gripe over how our 5% of policy change is SOOO MUCH BETTER than their policy.

BTW... Denmark has the world's happiest people, they also have the highest taxes. Free Education and free health care. There are those that take advantage of the system, but VERY FEW do. Just like in this country.

Sorry for the off topic just trying to educate the OP.
 
Sorry for the off topic just trying to educate the OP.

Admins job is to keep the site clean and on topic. If a topic gets to cluttered with junk. Its better to wipe the slate, than to try and clean the mess.

I don't blame admins for deleting a thread that is derailed, and takes on a political persona. Or worse, gets into a screaming contest.

BTW, please do not reply to my post, or this thread might get wiped too for derailment.
 
Even ESPN does not believe it's own BS. Try the link-oops it's gone.

Fisherman have never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

Has ESPN retracted the story as false or is just the link gone?

Culled outPublic input period for federal fishery strategy has endedEmail Print Comments 432 By Robert Montgomery
ESPNOutdoors.com

This is a column from Robert Montgomery for ESPN Outdoors. As a Senior Writer for BASS Publications, Montgomery has written about conservation, environment, and access issues for more than two decades. It's part of a series of articles from Montgomery on the issue. See a response from editor Steve Bowman regarding concerns with this column.

The Obama administration has ended public input for a federal strategy that could prohibit U.S. citizens from fishing some of the nation's oceans, coastal areas, Great Lakes, and even inland waters.

AP/Luis M. Alvarez
One sign at the United We Fish rally at the Capital summed up the feelings of recreational and commercial fishermen. This announcement comes at the time when the situation supposedly still is "fluid" and the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force still hasn't issued its final report on zoning uses of these waters.

Fishing industry insiders, who have negotiated for months with officials at the Council on Environmental Quality and bureaucrats on the task force, had grown concerned that the public input would not be taken into account.

"When the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) completed their successful campaign to convince the Ontario government to end one of the best scientifically managed big-game hunts in North America (spring bear), the results of their agenda had severe economic impacts on small family businesses and the tourism economy of communities across northern and central Ontario," said Phil Morlock, director of environmental affairs for Shimano.

"Now we see NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) and the administration planning the future of recreational fishing access in America based on a similar agenda of these same groups and other Big Green anti-use organizations, through an Executive Order by the President. The current U.S. direction with fishing is a direct parallel to what happened in Canada with hunting: The negative economic impacts on hard-working American families and small businesses are being ignored.

"In spite of what we hear daily in the press about the President's concern for jobs and the economy and contrary to what he stated in the June order creating this process, we have seen no evidence from NOAA or the task force that recreational fishing and related jobs are receiving any priority."

Unless more anglers speak up to their Congressional representatives so their input will be considered, it appears the task force will issue a final report for "marine spatial planning" by late March. President Barack Obama then could possibly issue an Executive Order to implement its recommendations.

Led by NOAA's Jane Lubchenco, the task force has shown no overt dislike of recreational angling. As ESPN previously reported, WWF, Greenpeace, Defenders of Wildlife, Pew Environment Group and others produced a document entitled "Transition Green" shortly after Obama was elected in 2008.

What has happened since suggests that the task force has been in lockstep with that position paper, according to Morlock.

In late summer, just after the administration created the task force, these groups produced "Recommendations for the Adoption and Implementation of an Oceans, Coasts, and Great Lakes National Policy." This document makes repeated references to "overfishing," but doesn't reference recreational angling, its importance, and its benefits, both to participants and the resource.

Additionally, some of these same organizations have revealed their anti-fishing bias with their attempts to ban tackle containing lead in the United States and Canada.

Also, recreational angling and commercial fishing have been lumped together as harmful to the resource, despite protests by the angling industry.

Morlock's evidence of collusion -- the green groups began clamoring for an Executive Order to implement the task force's recommendations even before the public comment period ended in February.

On Feb. 12, the New York Times reported on that "President Obama and his team are preparing an array of actions using his executive power to advance energy, environmental, fiscal and other domestic policy priorities."

Click here for archiveMorlock fears that "what we're seeing coming at us is an attempted dismantling of the science-based fish and wildlife model that has served us so well. There's no basis in science for the agendas of these groups who are trying to push the public out of being able to fish and recreate.

"Conflicts (user) are overstated and problems are manufactured. It's all just an excuse to put us off the water."

In the wake of the task force's framework document, the Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation (CSF) and its partners in the U.S. Recreational Fishing & Boating Coalition again voiced their concerns to the administration.

"Some of the potential policy implications of this interim framework have the potential to be a real threat to recreational anglers who not only contribute billions of dollars to the economy and millions of dollars in tax revenues to support fisheries conservation, but who are also the backbone of the American fish and wildlife conservation ethic," said CSF President Jeff Crane.

Morlock, a member of the CSF board, added, "There are over one million jobs in America supported coast to coast by recreational fishing. The task force has not included any accountability requirements in their reports for evaluating or mitigating how the new policies they are drafting will impact the fishing industry or related economies.

"Given that the scope of this process appears to include a new set of policies for all coastal and inland waters of the United States, the omission of economic considerations is inexcusable."

This is not the only access issue threatening the public's right to fish, but it definitely is the most serious, according to Chris Horton, national conservation director for BASS.

"With what's being created, the same principles could apply inland as apply to the oceans," he said. "Under the guise of 'marine spatial planning' entire watersheds could be shut down, even 2,000 miles up a river drainage from the ocean.

"Every angler needs to be aware because if it's not happening in your backyard today or tomorrow, it will be eventually.

"We have one of the largest voting blocks in the country and we need to use it. We must not sit idly by."


The link seems to be working unless this is a different article.
 
Who is telling us the snapper are all gone? What are their credentials? Has any research by additional agencies been undertaken? Do we just "trust" these "studies"?
 
Biomass

Biomass refers to the amount of red snapper in the ocean. Scientists cannot collect and weigh every single fish to determine biomass, so they use models to estimate it instead. These biomass estimates can help determine if a stock is being fished too heavily or if it may be able to tolerate more fishing pressure. Managers can then make appropriate changes in the regulations of the fishery. South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico red snapper biomass is presented as spawning stock biomass (SSB), the amount of red snapper in the population at reproductive maturity. The most recent assessment of South Atlantic red snapper indicates the population has been overfished since 1970 and spawning biomass is well below the target level. Gulf red snapper was first declared overfished in 1988; a series of management measures has been implemented since then to rebuild the stock. Currently, Gulf red snapper biomass remains very low.
Landings

Landings refer to the amount of catch that is brought to land. Gulf snapper landings make up the majority of total commercial landings.

Note: U.S. commercial landings are presented in the graph.
Biomass and Landings

Biomass and landings data can sometimes be used to detect trends in a fishery. They may influence each other, and factors such as changes in management measures, fishing effort, market preferences, or environmental conditions may impact landings and biomass as well.

Note: Only South Atlantic biomass and landings are presented in the graph. Gulf of Mexico biomass and landings are not shown together because they are not measured in the same units.

Data sources:
Biomass from NOAA Fisheries Service Southeast Fisheries Science Center Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR) - Stock Assessment Report of SEDAR 7, Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper (2005), Stock Assessment Report for South Atlantic Red Snapper (2008)

NOAA data for the models comes from fishery cruises over many years where the same boats, tow the same design nets, at the same time of year, in the same place

Data from commercial fishing operations is also used in the models.

Collecting and analyzing data is what they do.
 
:sleeping:
 
ESPN editor Steve Bowman has issued an apology and has relabeled the piece an opinion piece, rather than an article.
Here is an excerpt from it:

Regrettably, we made several errors in the editing and presentation of this installment. Though our series has included numerous news stories on the topic, this was not one of them -- it was an opinion piece, and should have been clearly labeled as commentary.

And while our series overall has examined several sides of the topic, this particular column was not properly balanced and failed to represent contrary points of view. We have reached out to people on every side of the issue and reported their points of view -- if they chose to respond -- throughout the series, but failed to do so in this specific column.


And a link:

ESPNOutdoors.com: From the editor - ESPN

Also, here is a link to the original piece (which, as is pointed out, now has introductory clarification):

Public input period for federal fishery strategy has ended - ESPN

B.
 
Collecting and analyzing data is what they do.

Even "they" admitted that their data collection is flawed, and needs to be fixed.
That is one goal of the NMFS
One good example would be the Gulf. For years NOAA claimed that the red snapper is overfished. All of a sudden with new data collecting techniques the Red Snapper is not overfished :idk: in the Gulf.

But imho this is not the place to discuss the data or the inherent flaws of collecting it.

This is only an opinion, but I think that Obama will sign the executive order in June, and we will have the biggest closure in history of recreational fishing in USA.
 
How stupid do you have to be to think the President of the United States is trying to ban an industry that generates millions in revenu and is enjoyed by a huge section of the population?

Or, we could say this one and the one about the guns may not have been true... but all the rest of the republican hysteria over the last year has definitely been right on the mark.

Grow up people.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
https://www.shearwater.com/products/perdix-ai/

Back
Top Bottom