The point is............... -- Archive

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4 ]

Subject: The point is...............

Author:
John

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 941114704PDT
In reply to: Jim Day 's message, "Eco-terrorest spokespeople aside..." on 940900972PDT

I should preface this response to clarify that I am discussing a particular situation: the incidental catch of blue shark in the Western Pacific tuna and swordfish longline fisheries. This is the same issue which the Western Pacific Fisheries Council addressed last week.

I will agree with you that shark fining is not the most efficient use of a fish, but that is not the primary issue facing the Western Pacific Fisheries Council. The anti-shark finning groups decry "waste", yet "wasteful" is an interesting fisheries term: is the sea urchin roe fishery wasteful? is the Alosa (eg. Shad and herring) roe fishery of the East Coast wasteful? is the Sturgeon roe fishery wasteful? is the scallop fishery wasteful?? The answer is likely dependent upon the ethnic (or religious?) background of the person being asked and whether or not scallops/fish/sea urchin roe was that persons favorite seafood dish. Just because individuals (or organizations) may believe certain fisheries to be wasteful does not justify shutting down a sustainable fishery which supplies a food product to certain ethnic groups. Whether the anti-sharking finning group wants to admit it or not, according to the MS Act it is better to utilize part of a fish then to discard the entire fish overboard, especially if survival of the discarded fish can not be guaranteed.

I realize it may appear to be a minor point, but I would like to take issue with you about the buffalo/shark finning analogy you provided. It sounds similar to a story that the newest anti-shark fining spokesperson (ie., The BAYWATCH Babe) used in some speech she gave (I tried to find the original posting by J. Morris but it appears to have been deleted). Comparing the Western Pacific blue shark incidental catch with the demise of the buffalo is neither relevant nor a good example of what is presently occurring. The buffalo slaughter was conducted during a period in US history when wildlife management was unknown and the territorial governments had very little (read no) control over anything. Due to the historical abuse of animals such as the buffalo, we now have the government agencies controlling virtually every aspect of hunting (and fishing) activities.

Unlike the incidental (key word) blue shark catches associated with the tuna and swordfish longline fisheries in the western Pacific, the buffalo was actively sought out and therefore became a specific target for hunting activities. The correlation between these two fishing/hunting activities which you refer to is not even close. The first major difference is that the blue shark is not a target species for the long liners and no matter how you crunch the $$ figures, a boat owner or captain is not going to be interested in a shark that is worth $100 when compared with a tuna or swordfish that can fetch $ 800-1,000 or greater. I certainly can not speak for long liners, but I would bet that if the long liners could somehow decrease their shark catch (without too much added expense) they would.

The second problem with the buffalo/blue shark analogy is that the NMFS is requiring all long liners to submit catch data for analysis. These catch reporting forms can be easily modified to include collection of necessary data to examine the effects of fishing pressure on stocks. In fact, it is my understanding that NMFS data indicates that the blue shark population in the Pacific area is not overfished. If a particular fishery is healthy and sustainable, then the government regulators should allow the fishing to continue. In complete contrast to the existing blue shark situation, buffalo hunting was unregulated and unmanaged.

I'm sorry that you believe islanders have the attitude of exhausting local fishery resources with no concern for future needs (re your comment: "Thats our livelyhood, and it's our fish so we can do what we want"). This attitude is not limited to islanders, but is prevalent anywhere in the world whenever a fishers livelyhood is threatened by regulations or outside "feel good" organizations which come into an area and try to tell the people what to do. But that's not the issue -- the catch rate set by the Council will allow a sustainable "fishery" to continue which will serve a viable ethnic niche market. I certainly agree with you about the blue shark resource being a shared commodity, but if scientific data shows that the existing blue shark population can sustain a 50,000 sharks/YR catch rate, please let the Pacific fishers abide by that decision in peace. It is not courteous to force "mainland regulations" into our bureaucracy and shut down our fisheries (no matter how small) just because you believe the practice of shark finning is wasteful. Show some respect to the Council as they are serving the unique needs of the Pacific islands. Based on current fishery statistics I believe they have done an admiral job ..... at least our shark populations aren't depleted. Show support for the anti-shark finning cause by not buying shark fin soup at your local restaurants. I will show support for recognizing the importance of maintaining a sustainable incidental catch of blue shark by not watching BAYWATCH!

When the blue shark catch statistics indicate a problem, I fully expect the NMFS and Council to act swiftly and implement the appropriate management measures. This action will likely be spurred by the various anti-finning organizations who will be watching like hawks over the annual fishery reports which are prepared by the NMFS. This is good......I support this checks and balances approach as it (attempts to) keep the government honest (Please .... let's not discuss government honesty!)

I still believe the Council approached a sensitive fishery issue in a professional and non sensationalized manner which resulted in a viable management measure to protect the integrity of Western Pacific blue shark populations. I could support your cause if the scientific data justifies shutting down the "fishery", but not for the reasons you have discussed. Thank you for your comments.

John

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject	Author	Date
Re: The point is.........This is insane!!!!!!!	Bob Endreson	941159813PDT
Re: "insane", "stupid, "lie", "irresponsible" -- John, 941850534PST