Today I listened into the meeting, “Reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act: Oversight of Fisheries Management Successes and Challenges” and was disappointed. I was hoping that the issue of scientific data would be discussed. Instead there was a lot of talk about the recreation fishermen and how they are not treated as equal as the commercial fisherman. A lot was said as to how much money comes from the recreation fishing jobs,  tourism, etc, and that’s fine. One processor supply the USA with seventy per cent of seafood and how well Alaska fisherman are doing and how the fish stocks are rebounding, which is good news. But how problems here in my opinion were addressed although someone did bring up and question NOAA on summer flounder numbers. However our main problem is, unless something is added in the Magnusson  Act regarding scientific data, NOAA holds the cards of “best available science” and what ever they say the cod or other ground fish stocks are doing, their word is law. This is not right. Even as we speak, Vito Gigalone of the North East Seafood Coalition is raising money to hire an independent company to do a study and that is fine, also. The only problem again is NOAA does not have to take that into account and simply say their numbers are right and others are wrong. This is not right and needs to be corrected and the only way is to have wording to the effect that must accept other scientific data. That’s face there is a lot of fisherman that depend on that info. I think Alaska and senator Sullivan do a great job for their fisherman and frankly I am jealous. God Bess them. Sam Parisi Gloucester Mass.