MyFishFinder Forum
MFF US Northeast => Massachusetts => Topic started by: SHaRPS on Jul 13, 2018, 12:14 PM
-
I just saw this -
https://www.nrdc.org/experts/molly-masterton/house-republicans-pass-another-contentious-empty-oceans-act
-
Not sure how RI voted but MA reps were against the bill. Middle america shouldn't even have a vote for something that has such a great effect on coastal communities.
-
Not sure how RI voted but MA reps were against the bill. Middle america shouldn't even have a vote for something that has such a great effect on coastal communities.
I did not see RI on the list so I guess they voted against as well. And I agree, not sure how middle america was able to add to this at all if it strictly revolves around the ocean.
-
I have been trying to find out specifically what changes are causing opposition, and have struggled to find anything.
It seems to me like it gives more control to the local states for regulation? It also seems as if it moves away from “science” based management, but doesn’t seem to specifically highlight how?
-
Here’s one where they kind of talk about some of the changes they want to make:
https://www.alaskapublic.org/2018/07/11/fisheries-why-young-wants-changes-to-beloved-law/
-
On The Water puts a positive spin on the bill. https://www.onthewater.com/news/2018/07/12/u-s-house-of-representatives-passes-magnuson-stevens-reauthorization-bill (https://www.onthewater.com/news/2018/07/12/u-s-house-of-representatives-passes-magnuson-stevens-reauthorization-bill)
However, look at the comments and there are some very great points made. They muddy the waters with so much junk in these bills its hard to tell who to believe.
-
On The Water puts a positive spin on the bill. https://www.onthewater.com/news/2018/07/12/u-s-house-of-representatives-passes-magnuson-stevens-reauthorization-bill (https://www.onthewater.com/news/2018/07/12/u-s-house-of-representatives-passes-magnuson-stevens-reauthorization-bill)
However, look at the comments and there are some very great points made. They muddy the waters with so much junk in these bills its hard to tell who to believe.
It’s interesting how vague every news outlet seems to be. Almost like they all have agenda.
From what I have gathered both sides have good points.
I see advantages in being able to amend regulations before the 10 year period has ended IF fish stocks warrant it. This seems like a common sense change. The update also seems to engage the rec/charter anglers more for the data they will use when creating these “ecosystem maps”. I’m all for this. A mid water trawl isn’t going to tell you if you have a healthy population of wolf fish for example.
On the other side it seems like it opens the door up private interests, and potentially “overfishing”. It also sounds like it will do away with forage analysis, and consideration for regulation, but I’m still unclear on this.
Need some more info.i do agree with you on the comments. The waters seemed muddied.
-
To much smoke to wade through to even begin to have an serious thoughts on the link.