Written by Adrianne Madden
Friday, 22 April 2011
Logical thinking has apparently outlived its usefulness. Consider the following.
Commercial fishing has long been known as the nation's most dangerous profession. And until recently, Massachusetts fishermen were thankful that they could rely on the Fishing Partnership Health Plan. The innovative, cost effective health care program for harvesters and their families was once hailed as a potential model for a national health care system.
Unfortunately, the program is being dissolved.
According to the Gloucester (Mass.) Times, rising medical costs, market forces, a troubled Bay State economy, state tax policies, an aging fishing community, and the stringent regulations shackling the region's groundfish harvesters all have made it too difficult to continue the program. Its members will transfer into other similar large quasi-public health care programs.
But it'll cost them more for health coverage. That runs contrary to the mission of the Fishing Partnership plan, which was to provide lower-cost health care to a segment of the population that insurance companies are reluctant to cover — you know, because they work in the nation's most dangerous profession.
Now consider that funding for the Commercial Fishing Safety Research Program at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health was targeted for elimination from the 2012 federal budget.
Well, of course. Why would we need to continue to improve safety in the nation's most dangerous profession?
The commercial fishing community has come a long ways from the days when they didn't carry survival suits, routinely check safety equipment, and perform safety drills that could make the difference when disaster strikes and you must act without thinking. But apparently our elected representatives believe fishing can't be made any safer, so they're not going to bother allocating precious federal dollars to the NIOSH program.
So let's recap. Folks who work in the nation's most perilous industry must pay more for health care (if they can get or even afford coverage). And our federal legislators want to nix funding to improve safety in that profession. That sure sounds logical doesn't it?
National Fisherman Live: 3/10/15
In this episode, Online Editor Leslie Taylor talks with Mike McLouglin, vice president of Dunlop Industrial and Protective Footwear.
National Fisherman Live: 2/24/15
In this episode:
March date set for disaster aid dispersal
Oregon LNG project could disrupt fishing
NOAA tweaks gear marking requirement
N.C. launches first commercial/recreational dock
Spiny lobster traps limits not well received
NMFS announced two changes in regulations that apply to federal fishing permit holders starting Aug. 26.
First, they have eliminated the requirement for vessel owners to submit “did not fish” reports for the months or weeks when their vessel was not fishing.
Some of the restrictions for upgrading vessels listed on federal fishing permits have also been removed.Read more...
Alaskans will meet with British Columbia’s Minister of Energy and Mines, Bill Bennett, when he visits Juneau next week and will ask him to support an international review of mine developments in northwest British Columbia, upstream from Southeast Alaska along the Taku, Stikine and Unuk transboundary rivers.
Some Alaska fishing and environmental groups believe an international review is the best way to develop specific, binding commitments to ensure clean water, salmon, jobs and traditional and customary practices are not harmed by British Columbia mines and that adequate financial assurances are in place up front to cover long-term monitoring and compensation for damages.Read more...