By Jeff Angers
Recognizing that saltwater recreational fishing is a major component of coastal tourism throughout the country, including attracting customers for the restaurant industry, anglers are naturally puzzled why some chefs oppose improving federal management of recreational fishing.
The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) is our nation’s primary law governing saltwater fishing in federal waters. It was written in 1976 to end overfishing and last reauthorized in 2007, but MSA has never taken into account the fundamental differences between recreational and commercial fishing practices.
For years, recreational anglers and the recreational fishing industry have been asking Congress for a course correction. Healthy fish stocks benefit all Americans. Yet, as fisheries have rebounded over the years, anglers have seen unnecessarily restrictive regulations because the system was never designed to manage 11 million saltwater recreational anglers.
Through years of deliberation, the priorities of the recreational fishing and boating community were identified and presented to federal policy makers by the Commission on Saltwater Recreational Fisheries Management. This group is also referred to as the Morris-Deal Commission, named for co-chairs Johnny Morris, founder and CEO of Bass Pro Shops, and Scott Deal, president of Maverick Boat Group. In 2014, the Morris-Deal Commission released “A Vision for Managing America’s Saltwater Recreational Fisheries,” which included six key policy changes to expand saltwater recreational fishing’s social, economic and conservation benefits to the nation. Many recommendations of the Morris-Deal Commission are addressed by the Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management Act of 2017 (included in H.R. 200/S. 1520).
Send a message your members of Congress declaring your support the Modern Fish Act
This bipartisan legislation, more commonly known as the Modern Fish Act, is being considered in both chambers of Congress.
The Modern Fish Act is supported by a broad coalition of recreational fishing and boating organizations, conservation groups and industry stakeholders. Supporters of the Modern Fish Act are not looking to weaken conservation laws but rather add tools to the fisheries management toolbox.
Unfortunately, some commercial fishermen and chefs are being used by the powerful environmental lobby who prefer the status quo and seek to eliminate recreational opportunities on the water for millions of American families. These commercial fishermen and chefs fail to acknowledge that recreational fisheries management can be improved without harming the U.S. seafood industry, as is the case with the Modern Fish Act. In claiming – inaccurately – that the Modern Fish Act somehow threatens the U.S. seafood supply, they also fail to point out that 90 percent of all seafood consumed in the U.S. is imported anyway.
While the angling public enjoys catching a few fish for themselves each year, we are still friends, neighbors and customers of the commercial seafood industry and seafood restaurants. Instead of alienating a good portion of the public, we encourage chefs to read the commonsense provisions of the Modern Fish Act.
The Modern Fish Act adds to the suite of tools fisheries managers can use to more appropriately manage the recreational sector with accurate data and science-based annual catch limits. The recreational fishing community relies on healthy fish stocks for a vibrant future. Every user group wants healthy stocks.
America’s saltwater recreational anglers catch only 2 percent of the finfish taken from our oceans each year and yet account for billions of dollars of economic impact on that 2 percent. With the proper management tools, there can be a place at the table for anglers, as well as commercial harvesters and chefs.
The time is now to urge your Members of Congress to update America’s primary fishing law.
THE LATEST: The U.S. House of Representatives will vote on the Modern Fish Act (included in H.R. 200) on Tuesday, June 26, 2018. The U.S. Senate is currently considering the Modern Fish Act (S. 1520).
It is imperative that you contact your Members of Congress today and strongly urge them to support the Modern Fish Act.
The Modern Fish Act (included in H.R. 200/S. 1520) will make critically important changes to federal fishing regulations, including several key provisions contained in both bills that are supported by a broad coalition of recreational fishing and boating organizations:
- Allows for recreational fisheries to be managed using more appropriate management tools
- Modifies the annual catch limit requirement to allow for more adaptive approaches
- Requires managers in the southeastern U.S. to perform long-overdue examinations of fishery allocations, based on modern criteria
- Limits the spread of catch share programs that have negatively impacted anglers and fishing communities
- Promotes consideration of new data collection methods that could improve fisheries management and conservation
- Ensures exempted fishing permits help fisheries management and conservation — rather than the status quo which can hinder both
Use This Form To tell Your Members of Congress to Support the Modern Fish Act
Jeff Angers is president of the Center for Sportfishing Policy, a nonpartisan organization focused on maximizing opportunity for America’s saltwater recreational anglers.
Please do not support this bill until you have read the other side’s position. It’s not all about recreational vs commercial/chefs, even through this article makes it seem that way.
This is a loosening of regulations pushed by corporations looking to sell boats and tackle to us, recreational fishermen. Let’s face it folks, money talks when it comes to congress. We all know it’s the big money lobbyists writing this bill, pushing it through committees, and getting sympathetic articles like these written.
Recreational fisherman like you and me don’t have the clout necessary for congress to write laws that actually help us, but we can sure stop this one!
Don’t let them undo the progress of the past 40 years! OTW might be carrying water for the boat industry, but you don’t have to!
https://www.undercurrentnews.com/2018/02/28/senate-panel-advances-modern-fish-act-against-harvesters-wishes/
https://news.mongabay.com/2017/08/modern-fish-act-boon-to-recreational-fishing-or-risk-to-u-s-fishery/
http://fissues.org/modern-fish-act-not-so-modern/
“Jeff Angers is president of the Center for Sportfishing Policy, a nonpartisan organization focused on maximizing opportunity for America’s saltwater recreational anglers.”
Take a look at the political contributions of CSP used to grease this bill:
https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00435024
http://fissues.org/does-the-center-for-sportfishing-policy-really-represent-us/
Hi Everyone,
As you have probably noticed, On The Water has been publishing many lobbying/opinion pieces in support of the Modern Fish Act (and a related bill). Despite the attractive title of the bills, these efforts are attempts to sway your opinion into advocating for weakened fisheries management.
It was announced this week that the U.S. House of Representatives is set to vote on H.R. 200, a bill detrimental to sustainable fisheries, on July 11. I want to make sure you are aware of it, and ask you to consider weighing-in with your member in the next few days. Additionally, S. 1520 has been hotlined by its sponsor, Senator Roger Wicker. Both bills fundamentally undermine the Magnuson-Stevens Act, our often-imitated model for sustainable fisheries management. Your voice is needed in opposition to this threat, in fact, right now calls from concerned constituents is the only thing that will help keep these bills from moving. More information and messaging guidance is below. If you can only make one call, please call your Representative. While S. 1520 undermines science-based management nationally, H.R. 200 threatens the sustainability of fisheries more directly.
Background: The Magnuson-Stevens Act is successfully working to restore fish populations and the coastal communities that depend on them. H.R. 200 and S. 1520 threaten our successes by undermining current conservation tools. Efforts to rebuild depleted stocks – and ensure fishermen can access healthy fisheries in the future – would be hampered by reduced accountability and attacks on science-based sustainable limits. Both of these bills lack the broad bipartisan support that Magnuson-Stevens reauthorizations have typically enjoyed. Sustainable fisheries management has never been a partisan issue.
What you can do: Calls to your Representatives and Senators are the most effective tool to make a difference right now. Call your Representative to vote no on H.R. 200 next week, and your Senator to register opposition to S. 1520. The Capitol Switchboard can be reached at (202) 224-3121, where an operator can connect you directly to your Representative’s and Senator’s office.
Topline Messaging:
The Magnuson-Stevens Act, our nation’s foundational fishery conservation and management law, has enjoyed decades of bipartisan support for its goal of managing our nation’s public fishery resources to realize their full potential in such a way that ensures conservation.
There is still more work to be done, but the MSA already has many of the tools for success. That is why we have grave concerns about efforts in both chambers of Congress to dismantle parts of the law. Instead, we should work together to continue improving the law.
H.R. 200/S. 1520 would undermine sustainable fisheries and conservation laws, jeopardizing the health and sustainability of our oceans and the coastal communities that depend on them.
We call on Congress to reject proposals that would erase the progress that had been made in the last several decades and has allowed the United States to become a leader in sustainable fishery management.
Sample script for H.R. 200 call:
Good morning/afternoon. My name is _______, I live in (City/Town), and I am a constituent of Representative __________. I urge him/her to oppose H.R.200, which would increase the risk of overfishing off America’s coasts. Over the last 20 years, the U.S. has made great strides toward sustainable management of our public fisheries resources thanks to existing law. But H.R. 200 threatens to roll back the advances that got us where we are today. This has major implications for our nation’s fishing communities, the sustainable seafood Americans of all stripes enjoy, and for healthy oceans. Again, please ask Representative _____ to vote against H.R.200 when it comes up for a vote. Thank you.
Sample script for S. 1520 calls:
Good morning/afternoon. My name is _______, I live in (City/Town), and I am a constituent of Senator_________. I urge him/her to register opposition to S. 1520. This bill make it easier for recreational anglers to fish without limits at unsustainable levels at the expense of the commercial fishing sector and future generations. It would undermine the role science plays in the fisheries management process, and it seeks to chip away at the annual catch limit requirements and accountability measures that have been the hallmark of sound and sustainable fisheries management. Put simply, this bill would undermine the Magnuson Stevens Act and undo the remarkable progress that has been made over the last decade in restoring U.S. fisheries to healthy and sustainable levels. Again, please ask Senator ______ to register his/her opposition to S. 1520. Thank you.
Tancio, I know nothing about this but all you did was say Stevens was good and the proposed bill was bad repeatedly with no evidence. Either you were never taught how to persuade people or this act is needed but your just a butt hurt envirememtalist tha has never experienced the head shakes of a big striped bass as you reel it in or the sound when a fish attacks your bait. This is the first I am hearing about it and I know nothing of it, but what you said didn’t seem convincing.
Joseph – If you don’t know anything about the topic (which you said twice) and if this is the first time you have heard about either of these bills, then you have not been paying attention, and that is ok. We are all busy people.
What I have done is provide actionable information for readers to use after conducting their own research into the topic. The tools will help readers to voice their positions in a constructive way.
That being said, your response is rude and unconstructive. Grow up.
Do your research, learn something about this topic, and make a decision that is in the best interests of strong fisheries management.
The debate ends here.
If the Modern Fish Act is so concerned about conservation, why does it loosen the language that requires hard time limits to rebuild fish stocks. The current limit is 10 years. Do we really want the best management practices to allow an even longer recovery time?
It doesn’t make sense to allow catch limits to be liberalized for fish stocks, unless the goal is only for short term increase. Eventually, increasing or eliminating catch limits, will negatively impact the resource.
As for the accusation that only those weak minded chef’s in upscale restaurants are concerned about fish stocks, how do they explain a group of charter fisherman in Texas who recently advocated for dumping Yamaha motors due to their efforts to support the Modern Fish Act, see link, https://www.galvnews.com/news/article_e2e77f07-58c0-5ad8-be33-f4bd5361aa9c.html.
We can’t catch our way out of our responsibility and the limits needed to keep the fish around for the future.
I have read the OTW articles / posts about the MFA each time you have posted this. The language in your support and the language within the bill is nowhere near specific enough to improve anything. This bill is an open door to further reduce fish stocks in the name of making recreational fishers happy and saving the stocks for future generations. In fact it will achieve the direct opposite effects. Sounds to me loke OTW is “in the pocket” of it’s advertisers and not acting in the interest of the recreational subscriber or the resource.
These bills are bought and paid for by the big-money marine industry types. They don’t give a rip about fish or fishing, all they care about is selling boats and gear and next quarter’s sales bonus. Oh sure, they talk like they fish, but they’re just blowing smoke and spreading butter around. Don’t believe they hype.
They’re planning to take quota away from small-boat commercial and for-hire businesses and give those fish to private anglers – all so private anglers will buy more boats and gear. You could drive a million-dollar quad-motor center console thru the loopholes they wrote into this law.
Say what you want about the Feds – they sure ain’t popular when the limits are set. But without limits holding back the take, where would our Stripers have been after the crash in the 80s? And where are the Flounder now?
If these laws pass we’re gonna see less and less fish after the limits come off. And these bought-and-paid-for new laws will open the door sure as the Stripers come back in the Spring. Until they don’t.
Sure, it’ll be fun for a few years, and then what? Who’s going to bring them back when they’re gone again? I tell you what, it won’t be no Louisiana lobbyist working for the big money – it’ll be us, working for our fish.
You know what grinds my gears? Look at how little money it takes to buy a DC politicians vote. The “big money” donations are $5k. That’s $5k to sell our fishing future off to these salesmen. Look right here – https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?cycle=2018&strID=C00435024
If you give a damn about saving some fish for your grandkids to go catch, tell these salesmen to sit this one out. Call your rep and tell them NO on 200.
It seems simple to me. We have more and more people on the planet fishing for less and less fish. Why in the world would we ever lessen catch restrictions under these conditions. These changes are a contrived effort for the boating industry to sell more boats by enticing customers with the hopes of keeping more fish. In the trout world people pay big bucks for the experience of releasing trout back into the wild. For the sake of sustainability catch and release is THE policy that should be enacted. The Magnuson-Stevens Act does not need to be changed at all.
All recreational anglers should support thi modern fish act. It’s time commercial fishing regulations be in a category of its own. We need different rules for us weekend fisherman who wanna catch a fresh meal and not have to pay astronomical prices for restaurant fish and lobster. You know the same lobster that decimates bate fish numbers just to rot in a trap for outta staters to come eat lobster! It’s horrific how many millions of pounds of fish commercial fishing takes.