Sector schmecter squeckter.
That may be a more accurate term for all the talk going on about creating a new hybrid category of recreational fishing.
But "sector separation" is the term proponents are promoting.
These infuential but inexperienced newcomers to fisheries management want to carve out the new category representing "for hire" charter fishing. The idea is that the charter fishing catches would be handled separately but still recreational--or sort of.
Next could be different seasons and limits for charter trips.
The notion raises a mountain of questions that show such a separation to be plain silly.
It's almost as silly as the "catch shares" talk pushed by the new NOAA fisheries leaders who, by the way, are as inexperienced as the sector-separation team. It's no coincidence that the advocates come from the anti-fishing world of the Environmental Defense Fund.
All the talk and workshops, usually staged during expensive stays at plush hotels and bars, would fit nicely into a bag we should label "meaningless babble."
That's the label I'll borrow from Alex Jernigan, one of the best-ever fisheries experts who knows our not-pretty federal system better than most anyone.
The sector separation ploy has no end of wrinkles in it and definitions vary. But basically recreational anglers fishing under recreational laws would be cast into a for-hire category different from their other fishing trips. Next, it is already hinted that the fish could be sold under captains' commercial licenses.
Would the for-hire category apply to skiff guides? Or to go-along guides who come on your boat? Could you be shut down at the dock while for-hires merrily go to sea?
Much of the motivation for the sector and catch-shares babble (good one, Alex) spring up from general agreement that existing fishing data is inadequate, wrong, or both.
This brings out brainstorming from well-meaning folks who don't understand that their brilliant ideas about counting fish populations have been around and found unworkable for more than a century.
Rather than devising new and cost-prohibitive systems, all we need to do is utilize proven methods such as carefully done catch-per-unit-of-effort studies, good samplings, and common sense, the latter being too often uncommon.
We also desperately need more good research on what is the best use of a fish. Take them by the ton and sell them? Or spread them non-commercially and equally among all citizens?
The second option, though proven better over and over, is a truth the managers refuse to hear, preferring the ...
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Date:||Dec 1, 2010|
|Previous Article:||Black drum holiday: making do and enjoying what nature brings.|
|Next Article:||Ouch! The writer as physician.|