Written by Adrianne Madden
Friday, 23 October 2009
Fishery management "logic" can make you scratch your head so much that you consider buying stock in Head & Shoulders shampoo.
Consider, for example, European Union efforts to have spiny dogfish listed with the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. Alas, dogfish stocks are in poor shape on the other side of the Atlantic.
Not that the U.S. dogfish population hasn't seen hard times. NMFS encouraged Northeast groundfish harvesters to target dogs and other "trash fish" that were deemed "underutilized." There wasn't much of a domestic market for them, and their toxin-loaded spikes made them literally and figuratively a pain to deal with.
But by the 1990s, harvests ramped up substantially, thanks to European dogfish demand. However, the dogfish population quickly dwindled as the larger females were scooped up.
A dogfish management plan was eventually created. And over the last decade, the dogfish population has rebounded significantly. Now, fishermen say, dogfish are so prevalent that the predator species may be hindering the cod population's recovery, one of the biggest bugaboos in the Northeast groundfish stock-rebuilding plan.
So of course the reward American fishermen receive for not targeting dogfish is Europe's push for the CITES listing, which could scuttle U.S. dogfish exports.
Likewise, U.S. bluefin tuna harvesters have made many sacrifices in the name of protecting the waning population of the popular and highly profitable fish.
So of course U.S. tunamen's reward for those sacrifices is to see the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas continually cut the U.S. quota while other ICCAT member nations completely ignore their catch limits and calls for conservation.
Hence, the message seems to be that if you fish sustainably, you will be penalized for the sins of the folks who don't. What kind of Bizarro World logic is that?
Hey, we wouldn't want to actually penalize and place restrictions on the nations actually responsible for damaging fish populations, would we?
Yeah, I didn't think so. Why, that's just crazy talk, right? Say, could you toss me that bottle of Head & Shoulders?
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...