Swamp Stomp
Volume 17, Issue 20
A bill has again been proposed in the House that, if approved, will change the nation’s top fisheries law. The bill specifically focuses on the need to make it easier for recreational fishermen to get access.
The bill is being referred to as the “Modern Fish Act.” It would allow fishery managers to consider different avenues than the annual catch limits and the current 10-year limit on rebuilding fish stocks. The bill was proposed on April 6, 2017 by Reps. Garret Graves (R-La.), Gene Green (D-Texas), Daniel Webster (R-Fla.) and Rob Wittman (R-Va.).
This new bill allows for an alternative option to the bill proposed by Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), which was not well received when it was introduced last year. Young’s bill, H.R. 1335, despite the controversy, did pass the House but did not make it to the Senate. In the hope of getting the bill to reach the Senate, Young proposed a revised version of the bill earlier this year.
If either bill makes its way through the necessary channels, they would change the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Recreational fishing groups are supporting the “Modern Fish Act.” They see the bill as a common-sense update to a law that was originally intended to regulate the commercial sector. Some of the groups supporting the “Modern Fish Act” are the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation, the Recreational Fishing Alliance, the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, and a few other recreational and sportsmen’s groups.
“For decades, the recreational fishing community has been subjected to antiquated federal policies not designed to manage recreational fishing,” said Jeff Angers, president of the Center for Sportfishing Policy. “The time is now to update these policies so families can fully enjoy our nation’s remarkable marine resources and continue a proud American tradition on the water.”
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration attempted to address the recreational industry’s concerns in recent years through administrative actions. An example of this occurred last August when the agency released new guidance to urge fishery managers to review catch allocations.
“Today’s bill would require a periodic review of allocations, which recreational groups say are “locked in place” and favor the commercial sector. It would also “clarify” that NOAA is allowed to implement “alternative management approaches” that are more suitable to anglers, according to a summary of the bill” (Yehle).
It is possible that environmental groups will oppose the “Modern Fish Act” like they did for Young’s bill. They opposed Young’s bill because they felt that it would weaken conservation measures.
Do you support or oppose the “Modern Fish Act?” Why? What changes, if any, do you think should be made to the “Modern Fish Act?” What concerns, if any, do you have with the possible changes to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act?
Source: Yehle, Emily. “Lawmakers Introduce Bill to Boost Recreational Fishing.” Greenwire. E&E News, 06 Apr. 2017. Web. 06 Apr. 2017.