Whats up with this NOAA Fisheries stuff? I cannot find anything official, but they have it plastered on everything!

This abandonment of NMFS and the increased use of “NOAA FISHERIES” prompted me to do some snooping around, but I can’t find anything about it! What the Hell is going on and who in the Hell are they to just change it? If you know anything about it, leave a comment. Lets get to the bottom of this, eh? BH

  • borehead

    Excue me for trivial suspicion, but WTF? These smarmy little dinks canjust change away the NMFS agency references to NOAA Fisheries? For some reason, I'm offended, but really, everything they do is offensive.

  • Dick Grachek

    When there's trouble just change a name or two. NMFS has a bad name now because of enforcement boondoggles, bogus science and stonewalling investigations etc., so it’s now called "NOAA Fisheries" with the hopes that the public will forget about NMFS.

    My favorite though is after the Dept. of Interior’s Minerals Management Service (responsible for "overseeing" Deepwater Horizon) was busted a few years back doin' coke parties with Shell "executives", they changed their name to BOEMRE (Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Research and Enforcement) then to BOEM (Bureau of Ocean Energy Management)—makes it all better!

  • Dick Grachek

    Also we don't any longer catch Loligo Squid now we catch Longfin Squid, Summer Flounder not Fluke etc.,etc.

    And have you noticed they're not catch shares anymore; our commodification atrocity is now known as "sector management"? You won’t hear the term catch shares. Apparently they want to get away from the word shares—too close to what they actually are, shares to be traded like all other shares on the commodities and equities markets. They’re not shares anymore now NOAA uses concoctions such as a potential sector contribution (PSC) and annual catch entitlement (ACE) that’s how through terminology “sleight of hand” they claim (and unfortunately the judicial branch doesn’t have the gumption to call them out with this scam) they’re not ITQ’s or LAPP’s and so they're not subject to fishing community protection Standards of the Magnuson Stevens Act.

    Word Games and ENGO money, that’s all they’ve got, but it’s working so far they’re accomplishing the theft of our industry.

  • borehead

    I guess if I'm forced to Dick, I can tarnish whatever Name of the Moment they choose to use. The more we post about it, the more notice in the search engines, more people will see it!

    I did a search with lawyers that fight NOAA/NMFS. The first iten was a fisherynation post, and down further there was some newsvine stuff.
    They can change the words but they stll who they are.
    Sneaky bastards.

    I like the way you described their wordsmith tactics. accurate.

  • Alaska Gal

    I felt the same way when suddenly there were no more FISHERMEN — just FISHERS! When I was given the 'gender neutral' argument, I called bullshit. If there are one or two femi nazi types in Alaska I never met them. FishERS, FarmERS, we'll all be lumped together as SharecroppERS.

  • Dick Grachek

    I totally agree that the the words men and women, the humans have to be put back and coupled with the term “fishers” (it’s not gender neutral; “fishers” is more a matter of the people-neutered and dehumanization posture and attitude of the anti-fishing elements). Fishing is an interaction between fish and people. It’s got nothing to do with gender. Fishermen and Fisherwomen are just fine to describe the people involved in this profession.

  • borehead

    There is men, and women.
    Do we just refer to women as wo?
    Alaska Gal, I'm so happy to see you here!