Bruce Peters
- 13 comments
- 0 likes given
- 0 likes received
Bio not provided
@Wolfhound "on average bluefin fetches $100,000" ? Thats a falsehood and you know it. keep spewing your bs and anyone will real knowledge of this fishery wont bother to comment here.
also I have noticed that the real tuna fishers that used to post here, no longer participate ?????
Over to the right column under "Atlantic Bluefin Fast Facts", it seems the hype from the sky is falling crowd is still going strong. It still says bluefin are "endangered" under status, and they point out the advertising gimmick used by a couple Japanese restaurants to jack up the price, as a real estimate of what folks would really pay for bluefin ! Folks are trying to blow smoke up your @#$.
Me thinks the past crew/captain squabbling is taking this show down a notch.
@mightyj OK I see your point. You allege that rod and reel discards are "X" and more than the TAC but what do you base that on ? Evidence or opinion ? I can only assume you wish to shut down all fisheries, as I dont hear any particulars in your argument. You seem to favor big industrial vessels over smaller more sustainable fishing boats. But we and are arguments are "cute" ? I want sustainable bluefin fisheries. I want increased awareness and regulation enforcement as a result. I want other countries to be as conservative as the US. I want politics out of fishery management. I want sanctions against overfishing countries and individuals. I want discards eleminated or reduced and accounted for.
If you were king of the world what would YOU do to manage this fishery starting today ?
@mightyj You lump all methods together as one, as if all fishing is unsustainable. The dead discards from longline operations are huge and this wasteful practice is being ignored and the US govt via NOAA/NMFS and they would rather try to take them off the top of the entire TAC. That US quota is allotted to a range of methods, many of which are very much more sustainable methods. NMFS would rather punish all fishers equally for the high mortality of a few longline boats, than take the less politically correct approach of actually addressing a dirty fishery !
@Wolfhound they have not had the economic resources to police their fishing fleets. ICCAT has had a positive affect and with increased awareness and global observance and interest, they will be pressure to put more financial effort behind enforcement, resulting in improved stock status.
I like that this article covered differing points of view from all sides. I would liked to have seen more on the longline discards, as well as the reasons behind the lack of enforcement to the European over harvests and unreported catches. Bill Fox of NMFS claims he has not enough info to manage effectively yet, NMFS and NOAA cut funding for Dr Lutcavage's satellite tracking studies that clearly showed a commingling of stocks across the arbitrary east/west line proving that the stock is mixed. With the latest data showing huge improvements to the science why do we continue to hear words from NOAA/NMFS of "endangered" status ? The last paragraph perhaps explains this in that it says perhaps the only way to limit harvest is to scare people from eating so much of it. How about we start by telling the truth and NMFS can admit they (like most Govt) - know less than they would like to let on ! Lastly I feel that the US govt can drop the "chicken little - sky is falling rhetoric" when it comes to describing the status of Bluefin Tuna stocks. ICCAT can point the way but our US govt administration needs to hold Eastern Eurpean nations accountable via economic means to their harvest quota enforcement. Its always about money and they wont use their own funds to enforce their regulations until its economically viable to do so. We need to put pressure on them. If the Wicked Tuna show and all the conversations that happen as a result, help in that regard, its a good thing.
@Old Tuna Fisherman @Wolfhound @Old Tuna Fisherman WELL SAID, THANKS !
@Wolfhound which is it ? "Endangered" ? "In decline" ? or "threatened" ? the complaining you hear here is about the loose terms you seem to throw about so casually. After all the rhetoric it now seems that "endangered was not accurate ? The NGO's use these terms to generate sensationalism and a false sense of crisis to generate donations. (its false, or a "lie" and it does damage to a fishery and yet distracts from addressing a real problem of overfishing where it is actually happening) By painting the picture of all tuna fishing as unsustainable, no real problems are addressed. By quoting an old stock assessment, the real progresses are ignored. Do you understnd how the "broad brush" approach detracts from the addressing of individual problems ?
If the NGOs spent the kind of money on getting eastern european countries to enforce their quotas and fishing fleets, as they do trying to claim "endangered status" for ABT, we would not have a over harvest problem !
The US fisherman has for OVER 20 years been held to strict quotas and size limits, that eastern Euro countries have scoffed at. They have no enforcement of rules over there. Hopefully with sensationalism and increased awareness that "Wicked Tuna" provides, of the TRUE problems in the fishery, overharvest, unreported, and overfishing over there will be stopped.
@davidpaulfontes Nantucket whalers taught New Bedford all they knew about whaling. Due to British sea power, and local harbor shoaling all Nantucketers moved most whaling monies (and businesses) to NB.