|
June 10, 2002 |
"Maritime Transportation Anti-Terrorism Act Of 2002" Approved By U.S. House
|
or |
![]()
|
Congress, Scientists testify in Favor of Freedom to Fish House hearing debates marine protected areas Alexandria, VA - The efficacy of marine protected areas (MPAs) was debated late last month during testimony given before a subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives by a panel of respected marine scientists and top Federal agency administrators. The hearing was led off by Rep. Collin Peterson (Dem-MN) who stressed the need for clear guidelines on the use of MPAs so as to protect the public’s access to coastal waters. Peterson has sponsored legislation to this effect entitled the Freedom To Fish Act (H.R. 3547). The bill enjoys strong bipartisan support in the House and Senate where Senators John Breaux (D-LA) and Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) have introduced companion legislation (S. 1314). Representatives from the Department of Commerce and Department of Interior spoke next. These two federal agencies share jurisdiction for managing much of our marine resources. Both speakers testified that “ecologically sustainable use” should be protected and went on to say that conservation and sustainable use are not mutually exclusive concepts. Both officials stressed that MPAs are among their fishery management tools and that any decision to institute a closure must involve significant public involvement and support. Gordon Robertson, American Sportfishing Association VP, called these statements “reassuring” and “perfectly in line with what the recreational fishing community has been saying all along.” He noted that recreational anglers land only 2% of all marine fish taken and yet support much of the tab for fisheries management through the payment of excise taxes and license fees. |
The oversight hearing then turned to a panel of scientific experts. Dr. Edward Houde, Chair of the National Research Council’s Committee on Marine Protected Areas, told the subcommittee, “We’re not yet ready for large marine reserve networks.” He noted the need for more scientific research to be done before establishing these closed areas. Dr. Shipp, Marine Sciences Chair at U of South Alabama, released a report last month indicating that MPAs were unnecessary for the management of most recreational fish stocks. “I am not against the use of MPAs in certain cases,” began Shipp. “However, as a fishery management tool, no-take MPAs are not as efficient as traditional management measures as size limits, catch restrictions and temporary closed seasons,” Shipp told the subcommittee. When questioned, Dr. Houde remarked, “I agree with just about everything that Dr. Shipp has to say… marine fish have been managed effectively through traditional management measures.” Houde went on to express concern regarding implementation of these measures, an anxiety shared by the ASA and other organizations speaking on behalf of the Freedom To Fish Act and common-sense use of MPAs. “Regardless of whether a network of MPAs are ever put in place, the vast majority of ocean areas will remain subject to traditional management measures so we must work to improve the implementation of our existing tools,” said ASA’s Robertson. “Much good has been accomplished since the 1996 Sustainable Fisheries Act and we must maintain the resolve to ensure a vibrant ocean for the public use and enjoyment.” For more information on the Freedom To Fish Act, visit www.FreedomToFish.org |
|
Top Ten Tips for taking a youngster fishing
KETCHUM, OK - The
recipe for teaching a little person to fish includes one dash of angling
technique, two or three tablespoons of gear, and several cups of patience.
|
6. Sunscreen.
Bring it, and use it. On the water, the sun can do double the damage
because harmful rays not only come from above, they are also reflected
from the water. Young skin is prone to sunburn. 7. Insect repellent. This is almost as important as the sunscreen, and always a good thing to have on hand. Biting bugs can veto any fishing trip. Fight back. 8. Location. Fish close to home. That's the rule of thumb dictated by the generation whose favorite phrases include "Are we there yet?" and "When are we going home?" 9. Timing. Let the young angler decide when enough is enough. If anything, it's better to quit before alarm bells ring. That keeps desire in the bank for the next fishing trip. Time your fishing for the most comfortable time of the day, usually morning. 10. Patience. Three or more level cups of this vital ingredient are critical to a successful fishing trip and the creation of a new fishing partner. To find a Wal-Mart Kids All-American Derby closest to you go to www.kids-fishing.com and use the Derby Locator feature. Just enter your zip code and the Derby Locator will list the nearest events, location, the name of the contact person and his or her phone number. In addition to Wal-Mart, the derbies are sponsored by Berkley PowerBait, Dubble Bubble Bubble Gum, Eagle Claw, EverStart Batteries, FishingWorld.com., Frito-Lay, Fujifilm, Kellogg's, Laker by Jadico, Pepsi, Heddon and Rebel Lures, Southwest Airlines, Trilene, Zebco and Bar-S Foods Company, which makes the "official hot dog" of the Wal-Mart Kids All-American Fishing Derby program. |
![]()
![]()
|
EPA releases Bush Great Lakes renewal plans With no $$$ allotted, the exotics issue won’t just go away Christie Whitman, chief of the Environmental Protection Agency, announced a new administration plan to clean up and restore the Great Lakes, setting specific goals and calling for federal, state and local officials to work more closely together. Whitman said the plan addresses the serious problems facing the five lakes, including contaminated sediment, non-native species, habitat loss and the production of fish unsafe for eating. It includes monitoring contaminants in fish, requiring factories that discharge into the lakes to limit contaminants, enlisting cooperation from corporations and tracking cleanup efforts implemented by state and local agencies. |
Among the key goals, it included: Reduce the concentration of PCBs in lake trout and walleye by 25% by 2007; Restore or enhance 100,000 acres of wetlands by 2010; Substantially reduce by 2010 the further introduction of non-native species; and speed up sediment cleanup, finishing all contaminated sites by 2025. To some critics, all this appeared to be just so much political rhetoric. No new government monies has been set aside for the plan. Chicago Sun Times http://www.suntimes.com/output/otherviews/cst-edt-ref08.html |
![]()
|
By Dan Thomas June 8, 2002 In April, Christie Whitman, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, announced Great Lakes Strategy 2002, "a new plan to clean up and restore the Great Lakes." The plan sets specific goals and calls for federal, state and local officials to work more closely together "to advance Great Lakes protection and restoration efforts." Green groups did cartwheels, federal and state officials were cautiously optimistic and liberals complained it didn't go "far enough." Those of us familiar with government efforts to clean and protect the Great Lakes, though, see Strategy 2002 as just more political rhetoric. If the Great Lakes need a grand new restoration plan, why were no federal dollars allocated for a cleanup? What is the truth about all the contaminants that we read about in the press? The principal targets of past Great Lakes cleanup plans were PCBs and DDT. However, total PCB and DDT concentrations in Great Lakes sport fish have declined dramatically since monitoring began in the late 1970s. As PCB levels in Great Lakes sport fish fell, government regulators changed the definition of safe from 5.0 parts per million in the 1980s to 2.0 ppm by the mid-1990s. PCB levels in Great Lakes sport fish continued to decline, thanks to regulation and technological improvements. So in 2001, bureaucrats reduced PCB action levels in the Great Lakes to just .05 ppm, even though the 42 other states in the union are still at 2.0 ppm. Even so, Great Lakes sport fish are now coming close to the .05 ppm standard. PCBs were characterized as probable human carcinogens based in part on a 1975 study by Renate Kimbrough of rats fed large quantities of PCBs. Kimbrough's latest study, published in the March 1999 issue of a peer-reviewed medical journal, is the largest-ever human study of occupational exposure to PCBs. It found no association between PCBs and deaths from cancer and any other disease. Yet the nation's fish eaters and politicians have not been made aware of these findings. |
Just as PCB levels become vanishingly small and evidence of their adverse health effects is discredited, federal regulators decide to focus on a different theoretical health threat: mercury. At high levels of exposure, mercury can be toxic, but the same is true of every substance, even water. Mercury exists naturally in the environment, though it also can be released through industrial emissions. What matters is the dose. A study released in 2000 by the National Academy of Sciences, based on hair samples collected when mothers gave birth, found mercury concentrations ranging from 0.5 ppm to 27 ppm, with no adverse effects in their children. The academy found "little evidence" that low-dose pre-natal mercury exposure affects children. Academy scientists said that for most people, the nutritional and other benefits of eating fish outweigh the risk, particularly if people follow consumption advisories. Nevertheless, the EPA's "safe" level of mercury exposure is based on a maternal hair level of about 11 ppm, less than half the level determined to be safe in the NAS study. Even this level is well above what anyone is likely to accumulate by eating fish. As Great Lakes water quality has improved, Great Lakes states have increased the number of fish consumption advisories from 1,538 in 1996 to 1,964 last year--a 28 percent increase. Their 11 neighboring states during the same time reduced their fish consumption advisories from 439 to 233--a decline of 47 percent. Minnesota increased its advisories by 32 percent, while its three non-Great Lakes neighbors reduced theirs by 38 percent. What's wrong with this picture? The pointless pursuit of PCBs in the past and the new jihad against mercury are evidence of an environmental movement more interested in shutting down industries than protecting health. Our political and regulatory systems are filled with appeasers eager to "do something" to get on the right side of what they think is a popular movement, even if it means selling out small businesses and millions of recreationists. The Bush administration gave us a new EPA administrator, but the dynamic that drives environmental public policy in the Great Lakes hasn't changed. Fishermen, consumers, small business owners and taxpayers are still the losers, and a small cabal of professional agitators and bureaucrats are still winning. |
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Home | Great Lakes States | Membership | Exotics Update | Great Links
Pending Issues | Regional News | Great Lakes Basin Report | Weekly News / Archives