Posted on 03/24/2013 5:25:53 PM PDT by george76
In May, New England's fishermen will again see a cut to the number of fish they can catch, this time so deeply that the historic industry's existence is threatened from Rhode Island to Maine. But as hard as the cuts are likely to hit fishing communities, local seafood eaters may not notice at all. In the region's markets, grocery stores and restaurants, imported fish dominate, and the cuts make that less likely to change.
The cuts will shrink the catch limit 77 percent for cod in the Gulf of Maine and 61 percent for cod in Georges Bank, off southeastern Massachusetts. That's the worst of a series of reductions to the catch of bottom-dwelling groundfish, such as haddock and flounder, that many fear could be fatal to the industry.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
I know a third generation tobacco farmer who is calling it quits this season. He’s sold all his barns and is going to plant grains.
Those guys all thought they were immune to the forces we contended with. Some of them saw what was coming, but were roundly dismissed by their peers as kooks and crazy cranks, and so ignored.
Some irony here, in that while many FRs support natural resource harvesting, too many haven't a clue what the actual upshot is, thinking it just some other poor b. and has no effect on their personal lives.
Wish you guys could have been there as we were labeled: “the last of the buffalo hunters”, “worse than child molesters” and roundly decried as evil from the pulpits of the very churches we attended.
I do wonder at times how our lives might have been different had we been able to win WA vs Passenger Vessel in SCOTUS or manage to make the public at large understand what was at stake for them in all that nastiness.
We tried the best we could, but the Federal Gov had more money, the media had the public ear, and, despite a few victories, we lost in the end.
You are right in seeing that they now have virtual control of the food supply. But that is only the beginning. They have the long view, and are willing to wait. Look closely and you can see were this is headed years from now and what will become of you and yours in those later years.
They care about small fishermen as much as they care about industrially produced food; only the money industry is willing to directly pay them for the privilege is their concern ...
bump
The science used to measure fish population is not accurate enough to determine the true picture. You could be doing fish sampling in one area and find the fish down in levels while they would be at normal levels somewhere else. Yet because of that sample, you think there was a reduction in fish levels. Funding to develop better tracking is being limited by the cash-strapped federal government. Even then fish levels naturally undergo a boom and bust cycle and much can be blamed on natural cycles in the aqua-environment rather than over fishing. Even with lower fish harvests through quotas, the levels have been found to go even lower. What is happening? The answer may be the true cause of the current drop in levels is not understood and it may be a matter of Chicken Little causing an over-reaction. Until the science is there to understand what is really happening, policy makers are really shooting in the dark.
What should we do? I proposed in another post about this situation, that one solution would be to create hatcheries to produce cod hatchlings that would boost the natural levels and level out the boom-bust phenomenon. Such hatcheries would be as close to the natural spawning places as technically possible to preserve the genetic diversity found in the wild species. Such would be located in places that would have all the natural conditions to insure the maximum production of hatchlings. Once the hatchlings have reached a size to be on their own, they can be released to the wild using controlled release techniques that would not stress out any one area where they are released.
The question would be how to pay for them. State taxes? Fishing cooperatives? License fees? Federal emergency funds?
Just 9 percent of the seafood eaten in the United States is domestically caught, the federal government estimates. In New England, locally caught cod was just a slightly larger fraction of all cod eaten, 12 percent, according to fisheries economist Jenny Sun of the Portland, Maine-based Gulf of Maine Research Institute. And she estimates that could drop to 4 percent after the coming cuts.
Much of the imported cod is caught and frozen in Norway and cut in China, and there’s plenty of it, Sun said. If the local cod catch dips to near nothing, fish processors “could easily fill in with imports,” Sun said. http://news.yahoo.com/fishings-decline-looms-fish-eaters-notice-155623383.html
What is the cause of these cuts exactly? Government regulation or the effects of overfishing?”
One of my very small commercial fishermen tax clients just went through a hearing with EPA who continues to reduce his red fish allocation every year. On one of the forms we had to prepare for the hearing he had to list all the kinds and number of fish caught during the last five years by month.
One of the women from EPA asked my client why he insisted on catching such a variety of fish in his nets when he was only supposed to be fishing for red fish. I had to get up and leave the room while he was thinking about how to explain to this dumbo that a net is a net and you catch what you catch. She also later asked why the number of fish caught was not more consistent from one month to another. She just didn’t have a clue but she was one of the ones who would decide whether or not my client would be able to catch enough fish so he could remain in business and support his family.
I’ve noticed the same thing. I went to pick up a bag of frozen crawfish meat the other day, and it was all from China. I passed, and found some domestically-raised shrimp instead. The etouffee was just as good, and I rested a bit easier that night.
Cod stocks have been dropping for a while now, so I’m not entirely surprised at the limits.
Still, one would think there’s a better way to manage the situation than draconian cuts that are going to destroy the livelihood and a way of life for a lot of NE fishermen. Anecdotally, I could point to market supply and demand.
A lot of the churches in my area have switched from cod to haddock for their fish fries because of the jump in cod prices stemming from the low stocks. As people substitute away from one good to another, demand will lessen, easing the pressure on the cod stocks. As supply naturally increases and prices once again fall, the balance is restored. It just seems to me that we have enough smart people in this country that we can figure out how to solve the problem without destroying an industry.
Assuming, of course, that isn’t the actual goal of the legislation...
A lot of processing is done in China, because it's cheaper to ship it there, have it cleaned and ship it back here. The round-trip shipping cost was about 20 cents a lb, port-to-port for refrigerated container-loads a few years back. I got this info second-hand, and have no idea if domestically-caught fish that are processed abroad have to be labeled as being of foreign origin.
I noticed this happening a few years ago and for whatever reason... Our side doesn’t touch it.
This a perfect opportunity to champion the little guy (probably Dems) and while doing the right thing.... Pick up sympathetic Dem votes for our side.
I've never understood the point of crawfish etouffee. Crawfish is more expensive than shrimp in terms of meat yield, and a lot more work. Is there something magical about crawfish as an ingredient that only gourmands can taste?
This is the great plan. Yes it’s stupid, but it will happen, the fishing industry in new England will die, and foreigners will soon be fishing our waters.
Do you ever get the feeling dems want to destroy the country? That they don't really care about the fish or tobacco or anything - they just 'get off' on making other people miserable?
The libs in the EPA are going to starve the american people to death, no fishing, no hunting, no cattle production, corn for fuel. soylent green is our future.
Well, in my case, I was just wanting to do something a little different. I like both shrimp and crawfish, but often have a hard time finding the latter.
The crawfish they were selling at the store had been cooked and cleaned already, too (kinda like lump crab meat, I guess), so a lot of the mess was already out of the way.
Thanks, PIF, I’m new to the food fight and kind of overwhelmed with all the info I’ve come across. I apprciate your incight into this area. tbp
Probably had a PhD in fisheries management or some such. Yet the same will assert those who have lived on and fished a body of water for 50 years know nothing because they don't have a degree...
Add to the list of reasons, the Progressive momentum to create Marine Preserves, void of any human interaction. See “Wilderness Areas” for terrestrial examples.
I believe some people get off on minding other people’s business.
They believe themselves superior in their intelligence, their morals, in practically everything, and they expect others to live by their superior standards. They have to stick their nose in other people’s business.
Just ime Obamacare for example. If someone decides they do not wish to buy health care insurance, what business is that of mine. It is their life they should live it and they should face it’s consequences.Why is it up to some do-gooder nosy bastard to tell these people how they should spend their funds.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.