Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    6:00 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Should new england fishermen be allowed to fish themselves out of a job? Back to Topics
michaelphoenix2

All-Star Author
Tucson

Posts:887
Points:12,080
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 3:03:06 PM

The fisheries near New England and off the coast of Canada are dangerously low and in constant danger of outright collapse. So the EPA did the only rational thing, they cut the amount of fish the NE fishermen are allowed to bring in. This of course brought about howls of government interference and how the EPA is stomping on the little man yet again. Though by many estimates there were many fisheries that had as little as 7% of a sustainable fish stock level. Some of the fisheries were in danger of collapse in as little as a decade.

What is more important here? The short term economic viability of NE fishermen, or the long term productivity of the entire region?
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:17,966
Points:782,965
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 6, 2013 2:31:58 PM

Wow! Lots of fishing experts on this site.

link to someone who has spent many hours over the years analyzing the data and looking at common sense sampling.

Start at the paragraph that says "Good stuff of life aside..."
Profile Pic
jayrad1957
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:22,940
Points:1,927,915
Joined:Nov 2008
Message Posted: Feb 4, 2013 10:35:14 AM

AC, yes, I read about them back in my college days. Probably about the time those animals were roaming the Channel Islands.....

[Edited by: jayrad1957 at 2/4/2013 10:35:43 AM EST]
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:29,014
Points:3,205,535
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Feb 4, 2013 10:28:01 AM

Jay - when the find bones, lots of bones at the bottoms of cliff formations, I would tend to think the giant bison were stampeded. But you are right, there probably were extinctions of larger mammals in N. America in the last two or three ice ages.

I was fascinated to learn that mammoths still walked the Earth even as late as when the Egyptians were buiding the pyramids. Apparently there were pygmy mammoths that lived on a remote Siberian island in the Arctic Sea. Did you also know of the Channel Islands Pygmy mammoth? Apparently a complete skeleton was found on Santa Rosa Is.
Profile Pic
jayrad1957
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:22,940
Points:1,927,915
Joined:Nov 2008
Message Posted: Feb 3, 2013 6:43:39 PM

AC, I have read many accounts of Union Soldiers out on the plains slaughtering bison for just that reason, to starve the Native Americans. As Cliff said below, there may have been a reason they drove the buffalo off the cliff.

The Natives may have hunted a species to extinction would. That species of bison you referred to, "Bison latifrons", along with many other big North American mammals disappeared 21,000-30,000 years ago. Was it the doing of humans, or failure to adapt to change during the last Ice Age?

[Edited by: jayrad1957 at 2/3/2013 6:44:16 PM EST]
Profile Pic
e_jeepin
Champion Author Michigan

Posts:4,489
Points:134,850
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Feb 3, 2013 5:59:10 PM

I have no problem balancing fishing, we have the same rules here in Michigan.

However if you are American Indian -- the Feds once said take all you want.

"Native American" fishing companies would Gill-net drag our lakes to near extinction, all other fisherman watching in disgust.

After nearly ruining our lakes supposedly "feeding their villages", They too must comply.

Bottom line, it doesn't matter who you are, most fishing companies will deplete the waters to extinction if not regulated.

However, what the EPA claims now days is far from trustworthy and should be checked for accuracy.

EPA is well on their way to ruining this Country to the point we can't compete globally.
Profile Pic
Cliffisher
Champion Author Wisconsin

Posts:28,757
Points:3,461,205
Joined:Sep 2003
Message Posted: Feb 3, 2013 3:13:17 PM

AC, what we don't know is how much of those herds were wasted.
To feed a village of several thousand for the winter it may have taken that method in order to feed them.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:29,014
Points:3,205,535
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Feb 3, 2013 1:53:47 PM

Jayrad - were you aware that there at one time was a species called American GIANT Bison? That one was driven to extinction by Native Americans centuries before Europeans got to America. And as to the Native Americans, they weren't so environmentally friendly with wildlife, either. To wit - the natives used to start stampedes, then stampede whole heards of buffalo (giant or regular) off of CLIFFS! How wasteful, wouldn't you say?
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:29,014
Points:3,205,535
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Feb 3, 2013 1:50:38 PM

Marty said: "Let's not, and while we're at it, let's stop paying farmers not to grow crops and let's stop subsidizing the lion's share of farmers' crop insurance premiums and let's stop paying insurance companies to administer the policies."

--You'll get no objection from THIS libertarian!
Profile Pic
jayrad1957
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:22,940
Points:1,927,915
Joined:Nov 2008
Message Posted: Feb 3, 2013 11:22:50 AM

Gocat, the slaughter of the buffalo was done to drive Native Americans off their territory. The main goal was to starve them into submission. It worked pretty well.

[Edited by: jayrad1957 at 2/3/2013 11:23:02 AM EST]
Profile Pic
gocatgo
Champion Author South Carolina

Posts:18,001
Points:2,860,005
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Feb 3, 2013 11:20:55 AM

The east coast of Va had the same problem with crabbing. Crabbers had just about put themselves out of business 10 years ago when I moved from Va. It is long past time for the govt to step in and save the crabbers from themselves. The same thing happened to the buffalo out west. Herds of hundred thousands were reduced to herds of hundreds.
Profile Pic
Cliffisher
Champion Author Wisconsin

Posts:28,757
Points:3,461,205
Joined:Sep 2003
Message Posted: Feb 3, 2013 11:02:03 AM

They only "Scaled" back.
Profile Pic
101Speedster
Champion Author Ventura

Posts:31,478
Points:2,825,055
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Feb 3, 2013 12:16:28 AM

Sounds fishy.
Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:14,446
Points:2,935,460
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 3, 2013 12:12:57 AM

"What is more important here? The short term economic viability of NE fishermen, or the long term productivity of the entire region?"

Clearly not the former. Seafood populations are a shared natural resource, not the private property of whoever chooses to go out and haul it out of the water at their own discretion. It's not merely a matter of regional productivity, for the seafood is an important source of nutrition to people living far beyond New England, not to mention an important part of the world's ecology.

[Edited by: KatmanDo at 2/3/2013 12:13:52 AM EST]
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:20,468
Points:303,180
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 9:19:58 PM

Let's not, and while we're at it, let's stop paying farmers not to grow crops and let's stop subsidizing the lion's share of farmers' crop insurance premiums and let's stop paying insurance companies to administer the policies.

Shallow Loss: The 2012 Farm Bill’s New Subsidy Program
Profile Pic
Bell30012
Champion Author Atlanta

Posts:4,496
Points:667,640
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 8:57:14 PM

I have an idea... Let's pay the fishermen not to fish. Yes, we can tax the rich a little more to fund it or we can borrow the funding from China.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:29,014
Points:3,205,535
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 8:37:53 PM

I think this isn't the EPA's problem. I actually think the USFWS and the Department of Commerce would be the ones to enforce this, also through the US Coast Guard.

But I thought they had strict quotas and could only fish in certain areas in order to allow the fisheries to repopulate? The Grand Banks off of Canada are already mostly fished out. And where does Europe get their fish? The North Atlantic, including off of the US coast.
Profile Pic
michaelphoenix2
All-Star Author Tucson

Posts:887
Points:12,080
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 6:31:50 PM

Where does Europe get their fish from?

the med, off the coast of spain, england france and germany. They have their own fish stocks to manage.

This problem is all ours. Its of our own making. There is no other country to blame other than the US and Canada. Canada has much stricter fishing policies that the US does because of their collapse.

If we dont want to see the same thing happen we have to temporally cut back on the amout of fish we harvest. It really is a simple issue.

If we overfish an area there are fewer fish to repopulate with.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,855
Points:1,259,605
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 6:16:28 PM

Where does Europe get their fish from?
Profile Pic
michaelphoenix2
All-Star Author Tucson

Posts:887
Points:12,080
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 5:48:59 PM

1. Its just the US and Canada in those waters. Canada learned their lesson when the Nova Scotian fish stocks completely collapsed in the mid 90s.

2. Historical doesnt have anything to do with it. Since more and more fishing boats were equipped with more powerful motors and larger nets, in conjunction with sonar, and larger fish hauls since the 70s the fish stocks have been plummetting.

3. Does the EPA have jurisdiction----yes
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,855
Points:1,259,605
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 5:41:34 PM

AZmike trying to make a simplistic answer out of a complex problem isnt going to work either.

Are NE fishermen the only ones who fish these stocks? Does the EPA have any juristiction on the others. Has this been a cause for action for hundreds of years? Does the EPA even have jurisdiction in international waters?
Profile Pic
michaelphoenix2
All-Star Author Tucson

Posts:887
Points:12,080
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 5:20:55 PM

Flyboy your own link (wikipedia) states that the region is at less than 1% of the fish stocks from where they were in 1977.

How is that even remotely acceptable?
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:20,468
Points:303,180
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 5:19:28 PM

"What is more important here? The short term economic viability of NE fishermen, or the long term productivity of the entire region?"

The latter, of course. If the area became unsustainable as a fishing area because of government inaction, we would all hear choruses of "Obama's fault."
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,855
Points:1,259,605
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 4:58:37 PM

If its Utah they for sure have been fishing here more than 200 years. But you didnt put all the fish on the list Cliffy.

They didnt need limits until 'them furriners' from back east forced there way in and started breaking all the laws and customs of the folks who were here before them.

Then illegals always do cause problems dont they.
Profile Pic
michaelphoenix2
All-Star Author Tucson

Posts:887
Points:12,080
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 4:52:10 PM

The smaller scale fishing of even 50 years ago pale in comparison to the larger scale commercial fishing we have today that can strip a fishery.
Profile Pic
Cliffisher
Champion Author Wisconsin

Posts:28,757
Points:3,461,205
Joined:Sep 2003
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 4:48:44 PM

I forgot.
That state is Utah.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,855
Points:1,259,605
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 4:46:20 PM

Cliffy I bet they have been fishing there a lot longer than that. Go find yourself a 'native american' and ask them.
Profile Pic
Cliffisher
Champion Author Wisconsin

Posts:28,757
Points:3,461,205
Joined:Sep 2003
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 4:43:47 PM

Found this on one states site.


Bluegill & Green Sunfish* (combined total) 50 fish
Bonneville Cisco 30 fish
Brook Trout bonus limit on specific waters See current fishing guide
Bullhead Catfish 24 fish
Burbot No limit (All Burbot must be kept and immediately killed.)
Channel Catfish* 8 fish
Crappie* 50 fish
Crayfish (Crawdads) No limit
Largemouth & Smallmouth Bass (combined total)* 6 fish
Nongame Species (Except prohibited species. See current proclamation.) No limit
Northern Pike* 6 fish
Tiger Muskellunge* (hybrid) 1 fish over 40 inches


Now why in the world is there state ordered bag limits?

They have been fishing in this state for a at least two hundred years.
Don't the people know how to regulate themselves?
Profile Pic
Cliffisher
Champion Author Wisconsin

Posts:28,757
Points:3,461,205
Joined:Sep 2003
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 4:33:17 PM

If they over fish an area and the fish do not make a come back, who will be at fault?

Obama of course.

Your ODS is showing.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,855
Points:1,259,605
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 3:48:22 PM

So this collapse of the fish stocks is something new?

It has been going on since before them folks from Europe 'found' North America.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:21,536
Points:2,707,940
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2013 3:33:06 PM

Republicans and their anti-government stance have no way of coping with the Tragedy of the Commons. So they just say "the tragedy is based on politics, not science."

See, e.g., global warming, hell, anything that involves limited resources of any sort.
Post a reply Back to Topics