RFA in congress working to repair Magnuson-Stevens Act

RFA in congress working to repair Magnuson-Stevens Act

On December 5, 2007, Jim Donofrio, Executive Director of the Recreational Fishing Alliance, testified before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Natural Resources about rebuilding fisheries under the current language contained in the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation & Management Act (MSA). The Committee invited the RFA to share its views on the challenges in meeting the newly enacted requirements of the MSA, which included arbitrary deadlines that are having serious negative consequences for recreational fishermen.

Donofrio started by sighting the current situation with summer flounder, a vitally important fishery along the East Coast, but by no means the only species that will be impacted. RFA testified that the current law has needlessly tied the hands of fishery managers when flexibility is most needed. The summer flounder stock has been rebuilt to a size not seen in 25 years, fishing mortality has decreased over 80-percent, total harvest has decreased over 96-percent, and both total stock biomass and spawning stock biomass have increased 251-percent and 280-percent, respectively. That should be great news to environmentalists and fishermen alike. However, despite what can only be considered remarkable progress, recreational fishermen are facing the most restrictive quotas in the history of the rebuilding process and a possible shut down of the fishery over the next three years!

While summer flounder might not be a major concern in Florida, it is only the first of a number of rebuilding fisheries facing this scenario. RFA noted that the red snapper fishery will be similarly impacted along with other southeastern and Gulf stocks as they run up against an unnecessary brick wall if MSA is not revisited and fixed. That is why the RFA is working diligently to build consensus among fishermen, the industry, and members of Congress to quickly correct the problems.

Many fisheries under federal management are of great social and economic importance to the recreational community. That is why recreational fishing groups have pushed so hard for stringent conservation measures when stocks proved to be seriously overfished. The pressure we exerted drove management to begin the process of rebuilding and the results have led to a growing number of success stories. Yet, recreational fishermen have experienced an unprecedented loss of access to some rebuilding stocks despite high levels of abundance. The reason for such overly restrictive measures is wording contained in the 2006 reauthorization of the MSA that was successfully championed by the environmental lobby, specifically provisions that impose arbitrary deadlines to meet rebuilding targets. In some cases, the looming deadlines are exacerbated by unrealistic targets that have little or no basis in science or reality. That is what is happening with flounder. Even though data clearly indicates stocks have been rebuilt to historic levels and have possibly reached the carrying capacity of the ecosystem in its current state, the rebuilding target is still out of reach. When questioned, scientists are hard-pressed to support the target they chose. As we move closer to the arbitrary deadline, the total allowable landings have continued to be reduced until they are approaching levels that can no longer support a recreational season. Even if a total moratorium was imposed with the socio-economic disruptions that would occur as a result, a suggestion made by one environmental group spokesman is that there is no guarantee the target will ever be reached! Similar scenarios are on the horizon for other species unless MSA is changed to permit a degree of flexibility in any management plan, especially when you consider the uncertainty associated with the management process.

One can understand the rational for reducing the flexibility managers had to set quotas in fisheries that are in serious trouble, but the problems are becoming most evident with fisheries that are responding well to management measures. This was something never envisioned by congress and it must be addressed before it is allowed to do even greater economic harm.

“Without flexibility in the statute, fishermen will continue to be held to unachievable standards,” said Donofrio, “It just doesn’t make any sense to shut down well-regulated fisheries that are growing at a rapid pace, but that is what the language in the MSA is forcing managers to do because they have no flexibility to weigh the socio-economic benefits of a reasonably controlled fishery against a few extra years of rebuilding time or rebuilding targets that are unattainable.”

Legislation to fix the problem is being introduced in the House, and companion legislation is under development in the Senate. RFA will not sit idly by and allow the current statutory wording to dictate biologically impractical standards when commonsense revisions can be enacted.”

Fishermen and industry leaders need to pull together to protect the sport while we continue to work toward rebuilding fisheries using a balanced approach. To learn more about this critical situation and other issues RFA is involved with, visit www.joinRFA.org. If you are not already a member, join today. Through unity there is strength.