Re: 2010 Fluke Reg ??????
 

CaptainRon said it. Whatever e-mail you guys got was only part of the motion. Whomever sent it missed the very first sentences in the motion about conservation equivalency (state by state)

The council must always, if going for state by state, still give a non-preferred coastwide option and a default precautionary measure, whoich are the other two things listed.

However, the vote was overwhelmingly in favor of state by state. Now we wait to hear what NMFS approves. Let us not forget that the RA stated on the record she was in favor of coastwide and was one of the three votes against consv. equiv.

Re: 2010 Fluke Reg ??????
 

Tony,
I don't get it.. a 14 to 3 vote and yet NMFS can still change it!!!! What the hell is the sense in the vote in the first place!!!
More BS to worry about.

Re: 2010 Fluke Reg ??????
 

NMFS is not in Gloucester, its 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Re: 2010 Fluke Reg ??????
 

The council only makes a recommendation to NMFS, it does not have any authority to do anything more than that.

The original intent was to have a group of "experts" from various parts of the fishery (commercial, recreational, scientific, administrative) sit down and use their collective knowledge and expertise to give quality advice to the organization charged with managing the fisheries (in this case, NMFS) By having people from all corners of the fishery putting their heads together you would have the best advice possible and the service could then make its decision based on what it could comfortably feel would be the best available information.

We all know now how that system has been totally subverted.

Re: 2010 Fluke Reg ??????
 

Yes, originally everyone on the council was involved in FISHING or Science, some form of a vested interest, commercial fishing, rec fishing ....
They have now all been replaced by enviro's, and the head enviro is running the show...........WERE SCREWED!!! ANARCHY 2010.....

Re: 2010 Fluke Reg ??????
 

i'll take two patches! aaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrr me hardies!

Re: 2010 Fluke Reg ??????
 

So Captain am I correct to assume that this means that "we" as the rec group have to out lobby the commercial group (who has deep pockets), fight the "flawed" data group (with the ssfff) and out litigate the admin group to get a favorable outcome for the common angler?If this council is in charge of giving advice to the NMFS then where do we apply the pressure, at the council level or the NMFS level. And in your opinion where are we really getting screwed?, at which level.

Re: 2010 Fluke Reg ??????
 

You missed the environmental group. THEY are the ones with deep pockets. While we will always have fights over allocation and such with the commercial sector, they are the least of our problems in this arena and have pockets much shallower than you think.

The council level is where we fight for regulations, it is the place where we can get things on the public record and lay the groundwork for future actions.

NMFS can only be challenged (once they have made a decision) in court. You can certainly have the council vote to change something, but that is no guarantee that NMFS will do it (but NMFS will more often than not do what the councils recommended because the councils don't often stray from whatever NMFS wants anyway)

The battles are fought in Washington DC over the laws that govern fisheries management, they are fought at the council level for fair representation and sound management advice and they are fought in the federal register with comments on NMFS proposed rules and they are fought in court when NMFS takes actions like the closure of Sea Bass based on preliminary and flawed data and they are fought at the council level and assessment meeting level and elsewhere dealing with the scientific issue and they are fought in the media against the Pew Spew machine for public opinion and they are fought at all the other levels I just mentioned against PEW and the like.

These are all the places that groups like the RFA, United Boatmen and SSFFF are present in some shape or form (not every group is in every place every time)
We are getting our asses kicked in each of those arenas and there is little support from both industry and individuals when you look at the size of industry and the amount of individuals that exist. There is some awesome support from those who get involved, some through donations some through volunteerism and some through both. The problem is that all the recreational groups in the US combined have a membership at a level that is a fraction of a percent of the actual number of anglers that exist, and the same is true for industry.

Does that answer your question or did I simply confuse things even more?

Re: 2010 Fluke Reg ??????
 

A little bit of both Capt. Your knowledge of the issues and how the system works is certainly impressive. For me it seems that the task at hand, just to have a fair system, is daunting! :(

Re: 2010 Fluke Reg ??????
 

That's not bad for me!:D Usually I end up just confusing people the first time around since this crap is so complicated!

Just walked in the door from another fun 13hr day of drydock, I'm tired.

I promise I will spend more time getting into the nitty gritty of this weeks meeting and other issues after the weekend, assuming I get the boat back in the water on Saturday. Right now I'm in south Jersey every day and have no access to a computer and am beat by the time I get home.

Talk to you guys later.