bertram31.com

The fisheries have taken a bad turn under NOAA head Jane Lubchenco , can't bring myself to include the prefix dr.

This is not intended to be a political view as Romney's past political stands and current claims don't always match. He's a politician and the plain truth is they lie, but the fisheries is important to many here some who have given up due to increased regulations started under Bush and the patriot act for licensing for example.

Taking the fisheries from the private citizens of this country just isn't kosher.

The Big Game Fishing Journal and the RFA conducted, "An interview with Governor Mitt Romney." His complete, to the point, answers to five questions regarding fishery management issues, can be found on pages 53 & 54 of the September-October issue of the Journal, a must read for all who are concerned about the directions our fishery is taking:

(1) What does recreational fishing & the sport fishing industry mean to you?
"$50 billion in sales were attributed to saltwater recreational fishing in 2010, and saltwater recreational fishing supported 326,000 jobs in fishing and across the broader economy. If elected, I will be a president who understands the importance of recreational and sport fishing and will be an advocate for you."

(2) "What would you do to help preserve our traditions and fishing heritage?"
A Romney Administration would consider the input of the fisherman. "Recreational angling can be an incredible economic engine for our costal states, but it is being shackled by misguided, over-reaching regulations that make little economic or conservation sense. I will turn back the regulatory tide of the Obama Administration that has created red tape first and ignored your (fishermen) input.":

(3) What about the National Ocean Policy (NOP)?
"There indeed my be a need for a comprehensive National Ocean Policy to address serious concerns in the nation's oceans. Sustainable recreational use should not only be supported within a national ocean policy, it should be actively promoted.

(4) How would President Romney improve NOAA's failure to commit to improved science, and the overall lack of support from the fishing community?
"I understand that there is a need to install a new vision of ethic into the management of our nation's marine fisheries. Coastal states have shown a far greater ability to successfully recover and manage marine fishery in their waters. NOAA Fisheries, meanwhile, lurch from crises to crises, with widely fluctuating seasons, limits, and confusing regulations. I believe recreational fishermen are the best stewards of our marine resources. A more responsive, transparent, science and economics-based system is needed to properly manage our marine fishery."
And now the big one:

(5) "Have you given any thoughts as to what type of person you would consider to fulfill the duties of Secretary of Commerce and NOAA Administration. ( Remember, it was the Secretary of Commerce who appointed Pam Dana, over the overwhelming vote of confidence from the peoples of Florida, and the Governor's # 1 choice , Bo, for the Gulf Council position of recreational representative.)
"A Romney Administration would focus on bringing a new philosophy into fishery management that will put the focus back on common sense regulations that can protect and rebuild fisheries when necessary, but will also allow anglers greater access to healthy marine resources. "

I was lucky enough to have several articles published in the Edge but I'm sure it was an accident.


I'm not sure they are still distributing on the west coast ?




The government profits from landing taxes and later sales taxes from every pound landed and a lot of revenue in between from banned destructive indiscriminate gear like long lines and gill nets.

This is much like alcohol, tobacco and cannabis taxes.

Gill nets are allowed to fish with in 3 miles of shore on the west coast in protected specis(white sharks) nursery that is essential fish habitat
and also a mako thresher salmon and blue shark nursery.

The banned long lines fishing out side the US EEZ 200 miles are allowed to bring their harvest to US ports when there is a lot of evidence they are over harvesting to unsustainable levels the very same fishery inside the US EEZ all for profits from taxes and revenue.

The governments from many countries are competing against each other.

The government seems to be keeping it quiet and out of sight.

Very bleak situation concerning the real problem is on a commercial level on the high seas out of sight strip mining is taking place with sport fishermen largely completely unaware missing the big picture just how the government wants it then the completely unaware none fishing public attacking the only visible target sport fishermen who use the most selective gear.

Again just they way the destructive gear and govement want it while sport fishermen continue to miss the big picture squabbling over the scabs left over.

Check out this video and you will clearly see large pelagic species in and outside the US EEZ on the west coast are one in the same so the long lines being forced to fish out side the 200 miles makes little if any difference especially south of the US boarder where they can fish with in 50 miles then land in Ensenada and truck to the US so many ways around the banned gear only disadvantage to the commercial guys in fuel and being out of sight keeps the public off their and the governments back and the profits keep rolling in while the public groups sport fishermen with destructive gear.


http://youtu.be/6qNSaK9-UjY







.

I've been saying for years that NOOA/NMFS (or whatever they choose to call themselves today) should be overseen by the Dept. of the Interior, and not by the Dept. of Finance.