Search Results for: HR-200

Reps. Poliquin and Pingree co-sponsor amendment to HR-200

In an effort to cut unnecessary federal fees for lobstermen, dealers and processors, Congressman Bruce Poliquin (R-2nd Dist.) and Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-1st Dist.) joined forces across the political aisle to amend a fisheries bill that is currently before the U.S. Senate. The bill, H.R. 200 – Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act, passed the U.S. House 222-193 on July 11. The amendment, offered by Poliquin and co-sponsored by Pingree, directs NOAA to conduct a study of all fees imposed on all sectors of the lobster industry. >click to read<14:03

Sam Parisi: HR-200 was passed in the House and will now move on to the Senate. Push Your Senators!

There has been a lot of those for and against the bill, and after reading the forty-nine pages of the bill and trying to consume it, I have come to the conclusion that over all it is a move in the right direction. The enactment of the 200 mile limit was needed because of foreign fisherman from other countries were destroying our Fisheries and our government at that time had no jurisdiction, Japanese and Russian Factory Ships were invading our waters using small mesh netting scooping up small fish like haddock, cod, flounder, and other bottom dwelling species. I say this because while fishing for whiting off the Canyons near Cape Cod I saw in front of me and fishing along side of me, those factory ships. >click to read<17:48

Sam Parisi: HR-200 was passed in the House and will now move on to the Senate.

07/19/2018

HR-200 was passed in the House,and will now move on to the Senate.

There has been a lot of those for and against the bill, and after reading the forty-nine pages of the bill and trying to consume it, I have come to the conclusion that over all it is a move in the right direction.

The enactment of the 200 mile limit was needed because of foreign fisherman from other countries were destroying our Fisheries and our government at that time had no jurisdiction,

Japanese and Russian Factory Ships were invading our waters using small mesh netting scooping up small fish like haddock, cod, flounder, and other bottom dwelling species. I say this because while fishing for whiting off the Canyons near Cape Cod I saw in front of me and fishing along side of me, those factory ships.

There ships were five times larger than ours and their nets were capable of catching five times more.

I saw what they were catching right in front of me, with my own eyes, and it was a crying shame to see so many of the small fish they were killing. I believe the damage they caused is still taking a toll on our fisheries.

The Magnuson–Stevens Act was originally enacted as the Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 January 14, 1975, and was introduced by Congressman Gerry Studds. It passed the Senate January 28, 1976, and was signed into law by President Ford  on April 13, 1976.

The last time it was amended as the Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of 2006, in 2006.

Moving ahead, HR-200 balances the playing field for Commercial fishermen, stopping the mandate of catch share plans, arbitrarily, requiring a 2/3 Majority referendum vote. I would like to see more clarification about who will be entitled to vote democratically.

Fishermen will have the ability to dispute the so called ‘best available science” which many fishermen would argue, is not always.

Fishermen in Alaska have the advantage of industry vessels being utilized in trawl surveys, while along the East coast are subjected to the only vessel in the Gulf of Maine that can’t catch a cod, the Bigelow. Fishermen in Alaska have an advantage. They have fishermen as sentries in the most critical part of any stock survey, the beginning.

In the Northeast, we have some of the best marine scientists in Academia involved with industry vessels doing cutting edge, innovative surveys that must be included in any discussions of importance when it comes to issues of loss of allocation because NOAA science says so.

This will only benefit the regional councils that make regional decisions, based on trusted and fishermen vetted science. They are the ones that suffer from those decisions. That must change.

The recreational fishing people are included in the bill, and some fishermen are annoyed that they are.

When fishermen rallied in DC from around the country to tell Congress to Fix MSA, twice, it was aligned commercial fishermen and recreational fishermen standing side by side against bad science, and even catch shares. They both recognized the issues that needed to be addressed, and that is finally going to happen.

When the Senate version of the Bill is filed, and if they don’t attempt to change these gains made, I will be asking my Senator to vote yes, and I ask you to do the same.

Thank You,

Sam Parisi,

proud to be a fisherman

Dear Congressman Moulton, about that Bill? HR-200?

I have been a supporter of yours from day one. I donated money, made your signs, found sign locations, even had my family and some of my friends support you. And they did! I was surprised and disappointed to find out through our, yours and my local newspaper, that you had voted against Congressman Don Youngs Bill, HR – 200. As you know Seth, I have informed you of the issues our fisherman are facing such as untrusted and sometimes disputed science used by NOAA, the North East Canyon and Seamounts National Marine Monument off Cape Cod that our fishing boats depended on for whiting fishing, as fishermen from other ports are also shut out from their fisheries. Congressman, it seems as though you are not actually listening to your constituents. Sam Parisi >click to read<16:57

Dear Congressman Moulton, about that Bill? HR-200?

07/15/2018

Dear Congressman Moulton,

I have been a supporter of yours from day one. I donated money, made your signs, found sign locations, even had my family and some of my friends support you. And they did!

I was surprised and disappointed to find out through our, yours and my local newspaper, that you had voted against Congressman Don Youngs Bill, HR – 200.

As you know Seth, I have informed you of the issues our fisherman are facing such as untrusted and sometimes disputed science used by NOAA, the North East Canyon and Seamounts National Marine Monument off Cape Cod that our fishing boats depended on for whiting fishing, as fishermen from other ports are also shut out from their fisheries.

Congressman, it seems as though you are not actually listening to your constituents.

Under HR-200 fisherman, universities and independent scientist will be allowed to conduct collaborative science and collect data and present it to NOAA as a fair comparison as to what the fish stocks really are, before the restrictions are placed that have, as you know, have ripped the heart out of Gloucester and New England.

Also under HR-200 the  NE Fishery Management Council more leverage before restrictions are placed to respond and adapt to our regional issues. These various regions have their own unique situations and a one size fits all approach has shown to not work for everybody.

I also agree with Congressman Young that recreational interests should have a place at the table.

In closing Congressman Molton, before you vote on important fisheries issues, please contact those it will effect the most, that being your local fisherman and your constituent’s.

Thank You,

Sam Parisi

Gloucester, Ma

HR-200 – Gloucester fishermen ‘desperate’ for federal bill to ease catch limits

A bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives earlier this week is being cheered by fishermen in Gloucester who are hoping for a lifeline for the struggling industry. “It’s desperate. We are in a desperate situation. We need a change,” said Angela Sanfilippo, president of the Gloucester Fishermen’s Wives Association. “It’s a good start.” The new law would allow more flexibility for fish populations to be rebuilt, and give more authority to the regional fishery management councils, which may be more in touch with the local industry.,,, Fishermen in Gloucester say the industry is in danger of disappearing without changes. “We’re down to about 60 fishermen, and every day it gets worse,” Sam Parisi said. >click to read<13:14

Supporting Stonington Fishermen, Courtney Stands Alone from Connecticut Delegation backing HR-200

Representative Joe Courtney was the lone member of the Connecticut delegation to vote in favor of a reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, a 1976 law that governs marine fisheries management in U.S. waters. The bill was opposed by all but a handful of Democrats,,,  The bill also includes a measure he sought to allow for commercial fishing boats to be used by the government when it surveys northeastern waters to establish what fish are prevalent. Currently, the trawling is done by a vessel owned by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration that is unreliable. >click to read<11:36

House of Representatives – Debate and Passage of HR-200

July 11, 2018 House Session The House meets with debate scheduled on a fisheries management bill sponsored by Rep. Don Young of Alaska. >click to watch<20:52

House votes to overhaul fishery management law – “I’m proud to say that my bill protects our commercial and recreational fisheries’ interests and allow councils to do their jobs in a more streamlined and effective manner,” Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), the bill’s sponsor, said on the House floor. >click to read<21:41

U.S. House set to vote on key fisheries bill, HR-200, Tuesday

It’s called the Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act, or H.R. 200. It’s also referred to as the Modern Fish Act. Its author, Rep. Don Young, says the bill would update and improve the Magnuson Stevens Act, the primary law that guides federal fisheries regulators. “Reauthorizing the MSA will ensure a proper balance between the biological needs of fish stocks and the economic needs of fishermen and coastal communities,” Young said after the House Natural Resources Committee approved his bill in December. “MSA has not been reauthorized since 2006. It is long past time for this Congress to act and support our nation’s fisheries.” >click to read< Read the HR-200 Bill->click here< 08:39

Proposed Magnuson Stevens changes are reasonable – Support HR-200

“Things bad begun make strong themselves by ill” Macbeth,Act III, Scene II I am wondering how much commercial fishermen know about acting? At a guess I’d say probably as much, or as little, as most actors know about commercial fishing, even award winning ones. This thought arose following the recent appearance in these pages of an opinion piece>click to read Rep Keating, defend the Magnuson Act< on fishery management by a member of the acting profession in an attempt to wield political influence. The thespian in question is also an Ocean board member, a well funded environmental group antithetical to America’s oldest industry. By Don Cuddy, >click to read< 19:35

Support HR-200 – Chinook Salmon ‘Overfished’? Not So Fast, Say Fishermen

For fishery regulators, it is official: The Sacramento River’s fall-run Chinook salmon are “overfished.”,,, “Are you kidding me? They aren’t overfished!” exclaimed Half Moon Bay commercial fisher Kirk Lombard, irate upon hearing about the designation. “Fishing isn’t the problem. They had a few terrible years with almost no water.”,,, The reason the term is used, then, is because of a federal law – the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976. This law, which sets the framework for managing sustainable fisheries, states that a population of fish that falls below a predetermined minimum population level is “overfished.” Support HR-200 >click to read< 10:24

Managing A Lucrative Resource In The Face Of Climate Change

Conservationists and commercial fishing industry leaders came together on the need to restructure the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to adequately consider climate impacts during a panel discussion in Honolulu. But that was about it for the common ground they found during the last stop on U.S. Rep. Jared Huffman’s nationwide “listening tour” on reforming the MSA. The panelists, which also included state and federal officials, had diverging views on the effectiveness of marine national monuments like Papahanaumokuakea and whether the eight regional councils that the law set up to manage fishery resources nationally should have designated seats to ensure representation from environmental, indigenous and scientific interests as well as the commercial fishing industry. >click to read< 10:38

What ever happened to HR-200? I have no interest in these people reauthorizing anything.

To Senator Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass

9/14/2018

Dear Senator Warren,

I am a lifelong Democrat, have been Party Chairman in Gloucester, Ma., and have supported you in the past.

I find myself very disappointed, Senator, as I continue my quest of supporting the remaining fishermen of Gloucester, the Gloucester Fishermens Wives Association, Captain Sam Novello, Mayor Sefatia Romeo Theken, and others in the industry.

In the last three months, I have sent numerous emails, called your Washington office, your Boston office, and left messages for you, and no one has bothered to call, or answer back!

I have become discouraged that I can’t count on you, so what am I supposed to do?

Last week, I met your opponent Geoff Diehl.

He wanted to know what our issues were regarding our fishing industry, and asked for some input.

I mentioned my concerns, and he agreed to look into them.

These are the issues I was contacting you about.

Two bills that were important, Senator Dan Sullivan Applauds Senate Passage of American Fisheries Advisory Committee Act, and Congressman Young bill HR-200 which he would support, and would support my efforts to create a Fish Bill.

He also asked me to inform him of issues in the future, and asked for my consideration in the fall election.

Needless to say I was impressed with his quick response

I will be exploring my options, Senator.

Sam Parisi,
Gloucester, Ma.

I was talking to a friend the other day, a 40 year fisherman, and we were shooting the breeze about the issues of the moment, catching up. Many of the issues are being discussed in wheelhouses, on the dock, in the bars, and hopefully being discussed doing gear work, which for many can be a social event all its own, depending on the crew. I asked, do you think fishermen are equal. You know like as in “all men are created equal”.

Dory men had a saying back in the day, “Share and share alike”, which to me sounds kinda like a proclamation of equality amongst the men. Certainly everyone knows their place in the hierarchy of the crew, meaning the skipper is the law, and respect amongst these fishermen is earned and paid to one another. For that one guy, the one we used to call the bad seed back in my old days, redemption is always but a gesture, or a good deed away.

I review articles looking for information that I hope are found interesting and informative. Obviously, all don’t make the cut, but I do see a lot of things that should be seen, and we do post them.

What I have noticed, leading up to the Magnuson Stevens Reauthorization is a huge number of letters to editors, editorials, press releases from the Chefs, the environmental groups, from some commercial fishermen, tweets from political parties and their positions on the HR-200, commonly referred to by many of these opinionates as “The Empty Oceans Act”.

For some reason, things start to drift apart as far as Fishermen being equal and that Dory man stuff, of days gone by.

When it comes to making a few tweaks to a law that is supposedly perfect according to these special interest groups that know damn well that it’s not working out for all fishermen, things start get contentious. HR-200 is divisive.

It shouldn’t be. There is no “one size fits all” in fishery management, and what works in Alaska, doesn’t work in other fisheries.

The benefits to East coast fisherme

 

Fishermen are always fighting something, and the battle is on to retain fishing grounds soon to be lost to ocean industrialization from offshore wind farms, ocean aquaculture that will be occupying space, and did I mention the wave motion machine test area off the coast of Oregon? They too will be occupying space that will be lost to fishermen, and in a perfect world, independent fishermen and special interest fishermen would unite and support each other to oppose this through one of those media blitzes with an informational campaign.

Thatsnot unreasonable, as I see comments made by special interest fishermen and independent fishermen in forum discussions that both oppose the hostile take over of industrial sprawl in the ocean. That is encouraging.

What is discouraging is this push by U.S. Senator Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi) to develop the aquaculture industry to its full potential, all the while ignoring, or at the very least being totally ignorant about what is actually happening in the fin fish aquaculture industry in Canada, and other parts of the world that is seeing a drive of sanity to get these feedlots into industrial parks, or in land based facilities with closed loop waste disposal, segregating medicated feeds and parasite treatment from wild fish.

AQUAA Act (Advancing the Quality and Understanding of American Aquaculture) This is a bi partisan supported bill. The Aquaculture industry is contacting your representatives to gain support, and looking at the names, you can count on them to not be in your corner. US politicians, the NOAA, and its push by the Commerce Department are a prime example of typical ocean issues with these people and their special interest lobbyists continue to operate behind the curve. I don’t see that changing, unless it is forced to change. For one of those groups, the election booth is a step towards change. Remember who do support you, and those that don’t. Perhaps they are unaware a Canadian fish farmer that is being chased from the waters of Washington State while the industry is on a slippery slope in British Columbia. Same in Atlantic Canada, where there are calls from many to remove them because of a long list of issues, including the affect on wild salmon, and bottom dwelling creatures. The evolution of this industry is upon them, and the future is not in the ocean. The future is land based with waste treatment.

 

 

 

 

Dear Senator Warren

Dear Senator Warren , As a retired commercial fisherman, and your constituent, I am trying to help those fishermen that still exist. I want to out line our problems, as I see them. A. The science used by NOAA decides our future. Under the current law NOAA does not have to compare or look at other scientific data. They “own” the term “best available science” exclusively, excluding better data collected by non government entities, including collaborative science between industry and academia! This is wrong. This needs to be changed, and the only way is to have some wording in The Magnusson Act to that effect. By supporting HR-200, you can right this wrong. B. Saltonstall-Kennedy Act,,, >click to read<18:57

Dear Senator Warren

6/9/2018

Dear Senator Warren , As a retired commercial fisherman, and your constituent, I am trying to help those fishermen that still exist.

I want to out line our problems, as I see them.

A. The science used by NOAA decides our future. Under the current law NOAA does not have to compare or look at other scientific data. They “own” the term “best available science” exclusively, excluding better data collected by non government entities, including collaborative science between industry and academia! This is wrong.

This needs to be changed, and the only way is to have some wording in The Magnusson Act to that effect. By supporting HR-200, you can right this wrong.

B. Saltonstall-Kennedy Act – S-K grant money is not going to our fisherman as intended, and needs to be taken out of NOAA and create an Advisory Board as was in 1954.

The objective of the S-K program is to address the needs of fishing communities in providing economic benefits for rebuilding and maintaining sustainable fisheries, and in dealing with the impacts of conservation and management measures.

Presently Senator Dan Sullivan of Alaska has a bill S132 on the floor to do just that. Please vote in favor of his bill.

C. Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument – Presently our fisherman can not fish in that area off Cape Cod, but the lobsterman can for seven years. This is a rich fishing ground for our fisherman and that ban needs to be lifted.

D. At Sea Monitoring – This is another problem, and thanks to Senator Shaheen we have a year that our boats do not have to pay for this regulatory burden. We need that to continue permanently, and not just for the short term.

Now even if we were to solve some of these issues, it will not be enough for our fleet to survive. This is why I am asking for your support and help to draft a long term plan, that being, a U.S. Fish Bill tailored to our endangered industry like the U.S Farm Bill is for the agriculture industry.

The bill would basically provide long term federal financial assistance by means of money paid to our fisherman that agree to not exceed what amount of fish that NOAA claims are depleted, and as those stocks come back less compensation to our fisherman.

I communicated these issues to you last year, regarding this subject.

So in closing, I am asking for your support and help to draft such a bill.

Thank You,

Sam Parisi

Gloucester, Massachusetts

tel 978 491 7722

[email protected]