Dear readers, I was very disappointed yesterday to find out that NOAA cancelled a meeting in Gloucester to do with SKG money.

I had fishermen, and even invited my political delegation members, ready to attend and I wanted to ask NOAA these questions, only to find out that they did not have enough replicants to attend.

To me something stinks.

I would like a response from them with these three questions.

A – the Appropriations language from the US Senate and in this years budget ,states that 15%of the SK transfer from the USDA ,shall be used for SK competitive grant program and it stated the same thing in the last years budget. 15% is approximately $22M.

Why does NOAA continue to disregard this specific and direct language from Congress, and in practice use less than one half of the direct funding?

B –  The 1983 amendment to SK ACT, requires 60 of the transfer from USDA to be used in the SK Grant program, 713 2 and 2 d ).Since the SK Competitive Grant program receives at best, 7% of the transfer, what does NOAA with the other 53% of approximately $80 M .If NOAA is following the law and actually using the other $80,M in what must be the national Grant Program, who is receiving those funds and for what?

C – After NOAA picks those who applied for the S-K grant money does NOAA follow up to see if they used the money as they put in their application?

I do not know! However, I do know of a seafood company in Mass. not once, but twice got $350,000 two years in a row to process red fish instead selling it for bait.

I totally agree that this SKG money be taken out of NOAA hands and go back to an advisory panel of 1954, so in closing tell your senators to vote in favor of bill S132 by Congressman Young.

This will give our fishermen a better chance of seeing these funds.

Thank You Sam Parisi