Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Foul Hook
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.
|
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?
