Don Young seeks to unwind ‘Alaska Model’ for fisheries in Magnuson-Stevens Act

Our lone congressman, Don Young, recently introduced legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives to reauthorize our federal fisheries management law, the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The law is the foundation of sustainable fisheries management, and bears the names and legacy of legendary Sen. Ted Stevens and Sen. Warren Magnuson. Young’s proposed legislation unwinds the important work the senators did to ensure the long-term sustainability of our fisheries. Read the rest here 07:29

3 Responses to Don Young seeks to unwind ‘Alaska Model’ for fisheries in Magnuson-Stevens Act

  1. DickyG says:

    “Under Young’s bill, annual catch limits, set to keep fish stocks healthy for the long run, would no longer be necessary for managers. Reasonable timelines put in place to replenish depleted fisheries could also be loosened or open-ended, delaying economic and recreational opportunities that come from healthy stocks.” (From the above article)

    “Reasonable timelines”? How about arbitrary and baseless?

    Even Jane Lubchenco, NOAA Fisheries Director admitted in a congressional hearing that there was no scientific basis for the rigid rebuilding timelines in the 2006 Reauthorization of Magnuson Act. Jane Lubchenco was one of the authors of the infamous “Oceans of Abundance” (this was an eco-political leaflet and primer sponsored by and filled with NGO lobbyist talking points aimed at the signers of the 2006 reauthorization)

    And “flexibility” and “transparency” as stated in the House Proposals does not mean the elimination or undermining the necessity of “catch limits based on science”.

    East Coast fishing communities have been devastated by the legislated rigidity in the timelines for rebuilding historically varying fish populations, coupled with the imposition of catch shares in 2010 (in violation of the existing MSA Reauthorization Act
    2006, MSA 303A (D) NEW ENGLAND AND GULF REFERENDUM and National Standard 5). This House Bill remedies some of those inequities.

    The proposals for flexibility, transparency, predictability, fishermen representation, and taking into account the environmental and socio-economic aspects of fishery management in this current reauthorization bill before Congress are long overdue. And actually most of these current reauthorization proposals are simply reinforcing and making more specific several existing—but
    mostly ignored by management—MSA Standards relating to “setting catch limits based on science” and insuring that it’s the “best available science” through utilizing cooperative surveys and assessments from “other sources” (National Standard 2). Current proposals also reinforce the National Standards 1, 4, and 8, which account for the survival of the fishing communities.

    The current House Bill proposals clearly do not reverse or “gut” any of the basic fish replenishing tenets of the Magnuson Stevens Act.

    From the House Natural Resources Committee website:

    “The draft proposal, while maintaining the key themes of the Act, would make the following improvements:
    – Provide flexibility for fishery managers when rebuilding depleted fisheries
    – Provide flexibility for fishery managers when setting annual catch levels
    – Provide more transparency for fishermen and others in both science and management
    – Provide more predictability and stability for fishermen and fishery-dependent communities
    – Allow fishery managers to take the economic impact of their decisions into account when setting harvest levels and developing rebuilding plans
    – Allow fishery managers to take environmental conditions into account when establishing harvest levels and developing rebuilding plans
    – Allow fishermen in regions where catch share programs have been controversial to have a say in whether a new catch share program will be implemented and to be provided better
    information when considering such a program
    – Provide a schedule for obtaining better fishery dependent and fishery independent data especially for data poor fisheries and provide greater protection for confidential information submitted to regulatory agencies
    – Authorize appropriations for an additional five fiscal years at current funding level”

    to learn more.

    Doc Hastings has done a good job of listening to some of the fishing communities that are being dismantled by incompetent and agenda-driven management.

    • StripedBassHole says:

      “Ocean of Abundance” hasn’t that Book been reclassified at the Library using the appropriate Huey, Dooey, and Dismal System? That can now be found in the FICTION SECTION after some of the Writers recanted their STATEMENTS…

  2. borehead says:

    I have to ask. What’s in this for Stosh Anderson, and who does he represent? The big Seattle fleet? The privatization scam pushed in MSA 2006 by Uncle Ted has gutted fishing communities, and the small businesses that support the industry on all three coasts! Does the 2/3 referendum vote in the House Bill stand in the way of the Stosher from arbitrarily acquiring more quota? Is he satisfied that only fishermen would bear the brunt of responsibility for depleted stocks when predator/prey, or ecological changes in an eco system prevent rebuilding, only to describe it as overfishing?
    What about the unregulated fishing community of continuously growing numbers of marine mammal?
    If you are aligned with the anti fishing conservation group, Pew, or have slid up nice ‘n cozy like to the EDF privatization whores, you’ll be satisfied to stay the course.
    If you really care about fairness, and transparency, you’ll support the House Bill.
    MSA is bigger than Alaska, It affects the nations fishery’s.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.