Boy, there’s been a lot of talk about these statewide “Freedom to Fish” Acts as of late. These various bills, most notably New Jersey’s, as well as the National Freedom to Fish Act, if passed, require that there be hard science for recreational fishing to be excluded from any area. Sounds logical right? But there are, in fact, many reputable environmental organizations and at least one angling club who oppose the bill. How could anyone possibly oppose something that seems so reasonable?
Editorials attacking the environmental community, regurgitating the versions we saw last season in all the magazines, claim that this behavior is part of a “conspiracy” by “radical environmental elitists” to take away the great American right to fish, comparing the lot of them to PETA. (I wish they would get it straight… PETA is not an environmental organization but an animal rights group that has no bearing in the argument!) I had the displeasure of reading one editorial today that made preposterous claim that the only reason environmental non-profits opposed the bill was to garner more Foundation support. Of course we all have a right to an opinion, however ludicrous it may be. But, every reputable journalist has a moral obligation to communicate the other side of the story. The fact that various editors are not, however, is not surprising. Unfortunately, none seem to be doing so. I’m going to do the best I can in the small space I have here let you in on the reason why most environmental organizations oppose the Freedom to Fish Act.
|

|
| A nice blue from Luyen Chou taken fishing with Island Charters |
It’s all about the burden of scientific proof. Marine life is extremely hard to track; therefore, getting flawless data is more or less impossible. Obviously fish are underwater, some spending most of their lives at great depths and cannot be observed in the same way that land dwelling wildlife can. Obtaining data on the health of various stocks is difficult to say the least. Inexact data collecting methods, specifically the practice of polling fishermen (notorious over exaggerators) about their catch is entirely unreliable. In short, most if not all marine science is inexact and its validity can be argued in almost every instance. The commercial fishing industry and their lobbyists, particularly the groundfish fleet in the Northeast, has been doing this successfully for the last 30-years while stocks plummeted, until finally the managers responsible for letting it go on were sued into doing their job by the very same environmental groups who are opposing the Freedom to Fish Act. If the Freedom to Fish Act (FFA) is passed the insurmountable hurdle of getting rock solid data providing that an MPA might indeed be beneficial in a certain area will make the whole concept null and void. The FFA, for all intensive purposes, kills any potential MPA anywhere.
 |
|
A pod of Dolphin off Breezy Point - Urban Fly Guides |
While some might consider this a good thing, I don’t. As I have said in previous columns here and elsewhere, the recreation community needs to keep an open mind about MPA’s as a useful and potentially valuable management tool. The years have proven that the conventional fisheries management system is not working. Most food and sportfish stocks continue to plummet amidst those willing to kill the last fish to make a buck. The human population continues to grow in size while the commercial and recreational fishermen are increasingly becoming better at killing large amounts of fish. Politicians and managers with the complete lack of a political backbone continue to stand by and let it happen. Now is the time to start investigation alternative conservation methods like MPA’s. It’s not the time to close the door on them as many believe the FFA will do.
Of course I’m not opposed to the FFA in theory… Who could be? However, today, because of extremists on the recreational side, bashing environmentalists, and the great environmental community’s blunder of introducing the infamous 20% closure idea, I believe those that wield a considerable amount of power in the angling community will do anything they can to keep any sort of MPA from being implemented, including arguing against and discrediting the best available science.
The truth is that, with the exception of a few "pristine" areas closed to any sort of invasive activity for scientific study, most proposed areas would be type 2 MPAs based on time and area closures and gear restrictions. Anglers need to keep an open mind about MPAs as an effective, and in these times, necessary management tool and not buy into the inflammatory rhetoric, that MPA's are simply an attempt by "radicals" to take away your "freedom" to fish... Those notions appeal to the uneducated masses and might have raised the membership number of some groups, but they have severally decreased the credibility of the recreational fishing community in the eyes of the foundations funding their work and those managers who now look at us as another self-interested user group.
 |
|
Joe with a nice blue- On the Bite Charters |
If and when we see closures of any sort, it's going to be a concerted effort from the non-paranoid and reputable recreational and commercial fishing interests, the environmental community and fisheries managers sitting down together and hammering the logistics... Nobody is going to randomly close large swaths of productive fishing areas tomorrow without a detailed process involving user input. Again, for the most part, we’re going to be looking at catch and release areas, gear restrictions, spawning closures etc... I think this effort to discredit environmental organizations is the worst thing the rec fishing community has ever tried and it's worrisome that so many people are buying into it... Flyfishermen used to be at the forefront of the conservation movement with organizations like Trout Unlimited, CCA etc... Today the focus seems to have moved from what’s best for the fish to access and the right to kill fish whenever and where ever. Disheartening to say the least. A lot of it has to do with nothing more than plain paranoia. The bottom line is that some anglers, for fear of loosing one inch of their fishing grounds, are willing to sacrifice the whole future of the resource by closing the door on MPAs... and that just sucks...
Enough already with that stuff. Let’s get on to the reports:
The East End really turned on this week with some very big fish showing up on the flats. Reportedly they are picky, but they are there nonetheless. The south side got a big push of bass this week and anglers scored well when the weather allowed. In central and western Long Island, both the North and South shore are seeing more striper action, but it’s very dependant on the weather. Jamaica Bay is totally hit or miss. A few good days can be had here and there, but compared to last year it’s been very tough. Some fish beginning to show up on the flats when the sun is out, but that hasn’t happened very often as of late. Over on the Raritan Bay side, flyrodders have been picking up some very nice fish on sinking lines and some big bass have been chasing bait on the surface. The weakfishing in New Jersey has slowed considerably, but there is still some very good bluefishing to be had and the bass fishing isn’t so bad either.
I don’t know about you guys, but I’ve had about enough of this rainy overcast weather. At some point it has to get warm right??? Doesn’t look like it this weekend, but you never know. Regardless, get out there and fish…