in Eastern Canada would have the processors and big boat owners give the boot to all the small fishing operations. In the U.S. they call it "rationalization," which of course is only rational to the big processors and big boat owners.
"The trust agreement issue is just one skirmish in a more far-reaching conflict between two visions for the future of the fishery in Canada. One vision – the one currently set out in DFO policy – foresees an industry based on somewhat smaller but more economically self-sufficient fleets, owned and operated by highly skilled professional fish harvesters, and producing high-quality, high-value seafood products for world markets."
"Using oceanographic data, they created models to identify areas where the conditions were right for deep-water kelp forests. As reported in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, their model accurately identified known forests and predicted the existence of more than 9,000 square miles of additional ones." What are we waiting for in pinpointing the sea-whip and coral forests off Alaska's coasts where juvenile fish of all kinds find refuge to grow up?
2008 Request for Proposals: North Pacific Research Board
Just don't propose to sort out the massive by-catch of king salmon problem. Or the rock-fish, or the chum salmon, or the herring, or the squid, or the halibut, etc. The fishers aren't talking, not even if you sent them to Guantanamo Bay. Sometimes I think the odd grants they give out are smokescreens to the huge problems, like the massive baby halibut killing by the cod trawlers. Sustainable cod fishing? You must be joking.
It's estimated that if these baby halibut grew up, there would be another 80 to 120 million pounds of halibut for the catching. That's an economic hit to the U.S. of approximately $6.5 billion a year, every year, given a retail price of $12.95 a lb. At present the charter fleet gets about 9 million lbs and the commercial fleet maybe 55 million lbs., depending on the year. 13 million lbs a year are REPORTED being "dumped" by IPHC. Makes the destruction of 5 million lbs. of king salmon each year by the trawlers seem like chicken feed. You know that when there is dead silence on this subject, something big is going on. Who is on the International Pacific Halibut Commission anyway?
A first step would be for these guys to rule that trawlers "declare" all immature halibut caught and killed. Then of course they wouldn't declare anything, like the trawler in Maine who didn't declare any of his main catch, much less the bycatch. Then you put closed circuit TV cameras on board, like the 4.3 million CCTV cameras in Britain. Many of these are monitored and speakers boom out warnings on offenses like, "Pick up that trash you dropped."
I can see the same system in action on board a vessel, with the observers in an office in Anchorage, "No mooning of federal observers allowed, pull up your pants immediately." The point isn't the wording of that, but to just lighten up about the whole issue of video monitoring of the work deck of trawlers. Of course, as the power politics approach to fisheries management slowly gives way to scientific management, large volume live-capture pots will be used to selectively harvest target species and trawls will be relegated to the Holocaust Museum of Ecology, along with gold mining, dynamite and DDT.Check out the fisticuffs on the Highliner Blog:
There was a post by an attorney to silence one of the pariahs of fishermen's organizations that former Administrations listened to. The problem is that dollar-connected folk have made their way to Juneau and it way went to their heads. Especially as they can get quoted in the big newspapers. In papers that will put editorial notes like this after writer contributions: