What’s In A Name?

Posted on January 2, 2013 by Colles Stowell

To quote Led Zeppelin: “How many more times…?”

In this case, how many more times do we have to read about studies that seafood in a given region is mislabeled before we do something meaningful to solve the problem?

In the most recent exposé, a study by marine conservation group Oceana revealed that in New York, three in five retail outlets it visited, including 100 percent of sushi restaurants, were selling mislabeled fish. Pile that on top of recent studies showing high rates of mislabeled fish (48% in Massachusetts, 55% in Los Angeles and 31% in Miami), and we’ve got a systemic problem.

So the question is why?

The obvious reason is greed. If you can sell cheap farm-raised Atlantic salmon at the price of more expensive wild-caught Pacific salmon, you’re going to make a tidy profit over time. Same goes for tilapia (a fish often farm raised in unsanitary conditions) and red snapper. And if you see something called “white tuna” on a sushi menu, run the opposite direction. It is often escolar, a bottom-feeding white-fleshed fish that can leave your gastrointestinal system upside down.

Oceana studied the DNA of 142 fish samples earlier this year from 81 retail outlets, ranging from supermarkets to corner fish shops, high-end restaurants, and sushi bars. No less than 39 percent of the fish were labeled as other species. In one finding, tilefish (which the Food And Drug Administration has put on the Do Not Eat List because of high mercury levels) was sold as halibut.

Granted, some fish species are so similar in their filleted appearance that distributors might mistake them. More often, the deception is willful.

So does it happen at the distributor or retail level? Probably both, as both would profit from the bait and switch. Is it traceable? Sure, all you’d need is a menu or list of today’s catch, the supplier invoice and a DNA sample. If the sample doesn’t match what’s on the menu, you know it’s the retail outlet. If it matches the menu, but not the invoice, you know it’s the supplier.

But detection isn’t the real challenge. The real problem is how to address a systemic fraud that is spreading nationally. Different rating schemas such as the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) and FishWise aim to provide a “third-party” evaluation of the sustainability and sourcing of the seafood consumers buy. But there are flaws in these approaches, and a more comprehensive solution is necessary.

Massachusetts Congressman Ed Markey sponsored a bill this summer that would call for improved traceability of seafood and communication of that information to consumers. The bill would also establish better coordination between the Food and Drug Administration and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to better monitor the sourcing and practices used for imported and domestic seafood. This would include stronger regulation of the substances and methods used in aquaculture operations. The bill is in committee, and hopefully will move forward.

As always, knowledge is power. From a consumer standpoint, asking direct questions about where the seafood comes from, how it was raised or harvested, when it was caught, etc. is crucial. Also, ask your fishmonger or waiter if the seafood supplier is a member of the Better Seafood Board. A subsidiary of the National Fisheries Institute, the board was established in 2007 to self-police the industry against mislabeling, shorting of counts and weights and tariff evasion.

There is no absolute answer now, but a groundswell of consumer expectations fueled by education and coupled with legislative action could help minimize seafood mislabeling.

Here’s hoping.

 

By Colles Stowell

GreenFish – By Anglers | For Fish

 

 

Posted in Education, Sustainable Fishing, Sustainable Seafood | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Trouble in Paradise

Posted on January 2, 2013 by Colles Stowell

Snorkeling along the Tunnels on Kauai’s Hanalei Bay in 2010, my wife and I marveled at the spectacular array of marine life. That is, I marveled, my wife panicked, fretting over how to breathe, how to swim against the outgoing tide, and how not to get eaten by turtles.

We saw several crustaceans, a plethora of brightly painted reef fish darting around the coral and one small moray eel peering out of a hole. Miles upon miles of coral along the north shore serve as the base layer of an ecosystem bracketed by microscopic zooplankton all the way up to apex predators like reef sharks and monk seals.

Sadly, this beautiful ecosystem faces a menacing threat. A mysterious, fast-moving cyanobacteria has begun killing the coral in the past few months. Scientists are scrambling to figure out the cause, and many locals are pointing fingers at the recent development boom up the Hanalei River.

Terry Lilley is a marine biologist in Hanalei who has sounded the alarm, calling in marine biologists and microbiologists from the University of Hawaii, and the head of infectious diseases at the United States Geological Survey. Together, they have taken many coral and toxicology samples to determine why this strain of white coral disease has cropped up.

“I have documented the entire north shore of Kauai and have found the reefs infected everywhere,” said Lilley. “Some reefs have up to 40% of the corals infected and some only 5%. The problem is that it is spreading quickly.”

In fact, Dr. Thierry Work, the head of the Infectious Diseases Department at USGS wrote in a recent report “… this outbreak would have to qualify as an epidemic. This is the first time a cyanobacterial/fungal disease on this scale has been documented in Hawaiian corals.”

A team of marine biologists from the University of Hawaii recently applied a marine epoxy with an anti-bacterial resin as a barrier between a small sample of diseased and non-diseased coral – much like a fire break. Early results showed untreated coral succumbed to the cyanobacteria at a rate of 7-10 inches in 26 days. In the same time period, the treated coral either had no infection or a reduced rate of infection of 1-4 inches infected.

“The problem is that there are hundreds of thousands of infected corals now blanketing 30 miles or rugged coastline,” said Lilley. “No one could ever treat all the corals. It is too late for a cure for Kauai but we may find a cure to stop it in other places.”

That’s a grim forecast.

I spoke to Rob Arita, a fishing guide on the north shore. He said he has seen the number of consistent bonefish on the Anini flats near the mouth of the Hanalei River decline somewhat in the past few years. You can still catch a trophy, but they aren’t there every day during the season like they used to be.

“It could be from overpopulation and overdevelopment. There’s a lot going on here,” he said. He mentioned the taro paddies (similar to those used for rice) that flood in heavy rains and leach out whatever has been used to fertilize them.

Hopefully, Lilley and the other scientists can soon discover the source of the disease and what makes the coral so susceptible to the cyanobacteria. If it is indeed a result of overdevelopment, it will be one more sad reminder of man’s ability to upset Nature’s delicate balance.

My wife and I someday hope to take our daughter to Kauai, so that she too can experience the closest thing we’ve seen to paradise. We hope there’s still time for her to see the ecosystems at the Tunnels, Ke’e or Anini.

For updated information, check out Lilley’s blog.

By Colles Stowell

GreenFish – By Anglers | For Fish

Posted in Education, General news, Sustainable Fishing, Take action | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The Ocean’s SafetyNet

Posted on December 11, 2012 by Colles Stowell

Commercial fishing innovations designed to limit overall harvest (read: reduce bycatch) are refreshing indeed.

British inventor and multiple award recipient Dan Watson has developed a trawl net that allows non-targeted fish to escape. There have been several developments in the past few years, but his innovation stands out.

The SafetyNet uses hard plastic rings that are illuminated, showing smaller, non-targeted species how to exit. A turbine system built into the rings uses water flow to power the lights. Fish often can’t even see the netting. The rings hold their shape unlike standard mesh configurations, which contract when the net is dragged, making it harder for non-targeted species to escape.

There is also a panel that separates the net into a top and bottom half, capitalizing on targeted and non-targeted species’ stress patterns. For example, cod, which are listed as overfished and/or threatened globally, tend to swim down when stressed, while marketable whiting and haddock tend to swim up. All three species often inhabit the same ecosystem. When encircled by a SafetyNet, the cod swim down where they can escape, while the targeted haddock and whiting swim up and stay in the net. Juveniles escape through the rings.

Equally important, the net cruises about a meter off the ocean floor. Most trawlers use heavy bars or gates that drag the bottom in a wide swath (up to 100 feet), tearing up fragile ecosystems that may never fully recover.  The SafetyNet uses two or three low-profile counterweights that keep the net running low to the bottom, without the standard trawl’s path of destruction.

For his achievement, Watson has won multiple accolades, including the James Dyson Award, for which he received £10,000 (slightly more than $16,000). He has used that money toward growing his company, SafetyNet Technologies to bring the net to market. He expects to complete formal sea trials of the net in the next couple of months to pave the way for commercial availability.

Here’s hoping it delivers on its promise.

 

Colles Stowell

GreenFish – By Anglers | For Fish

Posted in Education, General news, Sustainable Fishing | 1 Comment

Life as a Baitfish…

Posted on November 26, 2012 by Colles Stowell

.… would be a pretty short autobiography.

Doubtless you’ve heard that old cliché before, particularly after watching blitzing bluefish tear up a ball of menhaden bolting out of the water into the beaks of diving seagulls.

Witnessing the mayhem is also a window on the delicate fabric of marine life. Forage fish such as menhaden, sardines, anchovies and herring are the primary food source for most commercially available fish species globally. Tuna, salmon, swordfish. You name it. Forage fish are also critically important to whales, seabirds, seals, penguins, etc.

Unfortunately, we’ve only recently begun to take steps to better understand just how fragile this equation is and the absolute need to better manage forage fish stocks. Nearly 90% of the global forage fish harvest goes toward livestock feed and fish food to support the massive aquaculture operations around the world. Humans consume the remaining 10%.

A global study by the Lenfest Forage Fish Task Force last spring states that forage fish are nearly twice as valuable as food for larger commercial predators than as harvest for fishmeal. A team of 13 scientists with disparate expertise determined that forage fish, which account for 37% of global commercial fish harvest, have a direct commercial value of $5.6 billion annually.

However, these scientists conservatively hypothesize that forage fish’s value as food for larger commercial species in the ocean would be $11.3 billion. And this estimate does NOT include how important forage fish are to sea birds, marine animals and other species.
Put bluntly: If we harvest forage fish to a near stock collapse, tuna, salmon, swordfish, sea bass and every other commercially important species dependent on forage fish would soon follow. Not to mention all of the other dependent species like penguins, pelicans, otters, etc. But if we allow them to swim in the ocean, they will feed the commercial species we depend on.

Or think of it another way. If we continue to harvest forage fish at these rates to support aquaculture globally, we take them away from the wild species that need them.

This month, the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) reviewed a first draft of its new Fisheries Ecosystem Plan that will evaluate the health of the forage fish population in the Pacific and determine how to manage the forage fish commercial harvest. The plan seeks to identify unfished and unmanaged forage fish species and set management goals that preserve the species but may allow some commercial take.

The PFMC has given itself a deadline of March 2013 to finalize a new Fisheries Ecosystem Plan.

On the East Coast, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) has taken steps to rein in the huge menhaden harvest, lowering the limit from 183,000 metric tons to 174,000 metric tons. Menhaden are crucial to the survival of such species as striped bass, osprey and bald eagles along the Atlantic coast.

Just how significant is the commercial interest? Omega Protein, a huge Virginia-based operation that sells fish oil and fish meal products around the world, harvested 160,000 metric tons of menhaden in 2010 off the coast of Virginia. That was 80% of the total harvest in the U.S.

The commission’s Atlantic Menhaden Board is set to meet on Dec. 14 to finalize a management plan aimed at setting sustainable catch quotas. The current limit is to leave at least 8% of adult menhaden in the ocean to spawn. Fisheries managers typically state that leaving 20% of a species’ adult population adequately supports population longevity. The ASMFC may set the limit somewhere between 15% and 30%.

The commission has stated that it may reduce total catch rates for menhaden from 0% to 50% when it finalizes the management plan.

If you’d like to comment on the draft Atlantic Menhaden Fishery Management Plan, click here.

If you’d like to comment on the PFMC’s Fisheries Ecosystem Plan, click here.

Think about it the next time you see a blitz.

 

By Colles Stowell

GreenFish – By Anglers | For Fish

 

Posted in Education, General news, Sustainable Fishing, Sustainable Seafood | Leave a comment

Global Fisheries Management Crawls Forward

Posted on November 25, 2012 by Colles Stowell

Baby steps.

Sometimes that’s all it takes to get momentum going in one direction. Sometimes that’s all you can get to maintain momentum, particularly when resistance is steady.

Such is the progress of global tuna fisheries management.

On Nov. 19, the 48-member nations of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT) voted to maintain quotas aimed at protecting the fragile rebuilding of Atlantic bluefin tuna stocks.

The commission could not ignore glaring science that shows the tuna population dropped some 60% between 1997 and 2007 due to global overfishing, lax regulation and widespread illegal activities.

And yet, commercial fishing interests claimed the science was misleading and that Atlantic tuna are actually on the rebound, so the quotas should be higher.

ICCAT voted to raise the quota modestly from 12,900 metric tons to 13,500 tons this year. That’s nearly 60% lower than the 32,000 metric ton limit of 2006.

Baby steps.

The ICCAT decision not to extend protections to mako and porbeagle sharks drew raspberries from conservation groups such as Oceana. Mako, porbeagle, hammerhead and other sharks have been increasingly targeted – not just for their meat, but also for their fins in a grim practice of cutting the fins off to let the fish drown because it can’t swim.

The commission said it would reevaluate mako and porbeagle populations next year.

No one said ICCAT’s mission was going to be easy. All too often money and influence blur the line between a regulatory body’s charter and temptation – ironically pushing threatened species closer to peril.

That the commission essentially held the line on Atlantic bluefin tuna quotas in the face of intense opposition is a positive sign that science-based fisheries management can survive special interest lobbying. That the commission did not extend special protection to makos and porbeagles is a sign that progress is slow.

Further research may prove to ICCAT that certain shark species need added protections. If so, global fisheries management bodies such as ICCAT need to take the necessary steps.

Here is some additional reading about tuna and shark populations:

http://www.fishbase.org/summary/Thunnus-thynnus.html

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/02/120208103226.htm

http://oceana.org/en/our-work/protect-marine-wildlife/sharks/overview

http://www.sharkwater.com/education.htm

 

By Colles Stowell

GreenFish – By Anglers | For Fish

 

Posted in Education, General news, Sustainable Fishing, Sustainable Seafood | Leave a comment

Drill, Baby, … Wait. What?

Posted on November 25, 2012 by Colles Stowell

The infamous statement uttered by then-Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin in the 2008 debate was actually a refrain from Maryland Lt. Governor Michael Steele at the Republican National Convention earlier that year. It has become a standard plank in the GOP platform.

The “theory” is that if the U.S. increases oil production, the country will become more competitive globally and therefore will not have to rely on foreign oil. Gas and oil prices would go down.

Don’t worry about the environmental impact. We’ll have safeguards in place.

Really? Hunters, fishers and other outdoor enthusiasts aren’t holding their breath. Just look at the promises made by the Pebble Mine operators: to contain up to 10 billion tons of highly toxic waste in a 10-square mile area in perpetuity.

But these threats of increased oil and gas production, including dangerous and questionable operations such as fracking and oil sands recovery are not the only problem here. The logic behind the “Drill, Baby, Drill” mindset is fundamentally flawed.

There is no statistical or historical evidence to prove that increasing oil production would affect gas prices, according to an Associated Press report. That’s because the world oil market is a very complex system, and the U.S. contribution to that market is about 11 percent. A group of statistical analysts from business and academia studied Energy Department figures since 1976, and concluded that upping U.S. oil production alone, even substantially, would barely budge domestic oil prices.

Here are some of the key findings:

  • Since Feb. of 2009, seasonally adjusted domestic oil production has increased 15%. Regular unleaded fuel prices jumped from $2.07 to $3.58, or nearly 73% in the same timeframe. If the “Drill here. Drill now.” theory were accurate, gas prices should have dropped.
  • Seasonally adjusted domestic oil production dropped by about a third from 1986 to 1999. Inflation-adjusted gas prices stayed below $2 a gallon for most of the same time period. Again, based on the theory, they should have soared.
  • Gas prices fluctuate regardless of White House political affiliation: Since 1976, Republican presidencies have seen an average monthly gas price of $2.34, adjusted for inflation. The same average prices were $2.25 during Democratic presidencies. President Obama has had the highest monthly average at $3.05, while President Clinton had the lowest at $1.68.

Christopher Knittel, a professor of energy economics at MIT, put the findings in stark terms: “There are not many markets where the United States can’t impose its will on market outcomes,” Knittel said. “This is one we can’t, and it’s hard for the average American to understand that, and it’s easy for politicians to feed off that.”

Witness former GOP Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney, who responded to a question about what he’d suggest for lowering current gas prices: “I can cut through the baloney … and just tell him, ‘Mr. President, open up drilling in the Gulf, open up drilling in ANWR [the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge]. Open up drilling in continental shelf, drill in North Dakota, drill in Oklahoma and Texas.”’

Just because the election is over doesn’t mean these issues are going away. There remain many questions about whether we should start drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR), build/expand a pipeline to move tar sands oil from Canada to Texas or start putting up more wells in the Gulf, the Midwest … much less in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.

The energy industry has spent billions of dollars to convince Congress that such intrusions on natural resources dear to sportsmen and women will have little or no impact.

Can you trust energy industry “experts” and their high-powered, deep-pocketed lobbyists to safeguard fish and wildlife in the country’s most priceless spaces? Especially when it comes to flawed logic?

I can’t either.

Colles Stowell

GreenFish – By Anglers | For Fish

 

 

Posted in Education, General news, Sustainable Fishing, Take action | Leave a comment

Ecolabeling Redux

Posted on October 24, 2012 by Colles Stowell

Sometimes a little time can provide a clearer perspective.

Such is the case with a blog I wrote several months ago regarding ecolabeling. The blog advocated the growing use of labels to identify species that were raised and/or harvested and distributed sustainably. The blog pointed to three programs (from a list of several), including FishWise, Friend of the Sea and Marine Stewardship Council (MSC).

A few weeks after I posted the blog, I became aware of a formal objection (scroll down to “Notice of objection,” Sept. 26, 2011) filed against one of the MSC’s proposed sustainable fisheries: North West Atlantic Canada Longline Swordfish. The objection filed by non-governmental (NGOs) agencies like the David Suzuki Foundation, the Nova Scotia Ecology Action Centre, Oceana and the Sea Turtle Conservancy, called out the several issues with the certification process.

Of particular note was the high bycatch rates stemming from longlines. Non-targeted species such as a variety of sharks and sea turtles chomp down on the baited hooks – some 1,500 of them attached to a longline extending up to 35+ miles – and end up dying in the struggle to escape. Some scientists estimate that nearly two sharks die for every one swordfish caught.

The NGOs also questioned the MSC guideline calling for fisheries to pay for and name the “third-party” certification experts. In essence, can you really trust a “third party” would deny certification to a fishery that has paid $70,000 to that party for the certification?

In the end, MSC ultimately denied the NGOs’ formal petition and listed the Canadian longline swordfishery as sustainable. Ironically, MSC also deemed the Canadian harpoon swordfishery as sustainable. Harpooning eliminates the bycatch, and therefore is much more sustainable. So the process and contradiction highlights the challenges consumers still face in seeking truthful answers about where their seafood comes from.

Is the concept and progress toward effective labeling a complete bust? No, I don’t think so. If anything, it has raised more awareness about how complex a task it is to accurately track and verify seafood origins.

I still think the basic concept of labeling seafood based on sustainable fishing and distribution practices has some merit. But consumers wishing to have a true picture of the sustainability of the fisheries their seafood comes from need to do some research beyond simply spotting a familiar label.

I applaud MSC and other programs whose efforts have elevated consumer awareness of sustainability issues. I hope that awareness raises more questions and eventually steers these certification programs toward a more credible and up front system for labeling seafood.

For now, ask direct questions at your seafood store. Hop online to see if local fishermen incorporate sustainable fishing practices. And check out some tips on the GreenFish Sustainable Seafood page.

Here is some additional reading:

Ecolabel Index

Halifax Media Co-op

Wikipedia

 

By Colles Stowell

GreenFish – By Anglers | For Fish

Posted in Sustainable Fishing, Sustainable Seafood | Leave a comment

Of Seals and Men

Posted on October 18, 2012 by Colles Stowell

The first fish my friend had ever fought on a fly rod was a chopper bluefish pounding mackerel in a cove north of Portland, Maine just a couple of weeks ago. It burned drag off the line and jumped three or four times.

My friend did well, letting the fish run and bearing down on him with a little coaching. He got the fish in close and the captain and I estimated its weight at 10 pounds or more. As I reached for the leader to land the fish, a six-foot brown flash bolted from under the boat and engulfed the fish.

“WHAT DO I DO? WHAT DO I DO?” my friend shouted, as the rod doubled over and the reel screamed.

“Hold on to the damn rod!” I said.

Game over in five seconds.

Seal:1  Bluefish:0.

It took a few moments to process what had just happened. The next fish we hooked came in as just the head. It was once a very large bluefish.

Every now and then, Nature reminds us of the order of things. It’s up to us to see the signs and interpret them.

Seals have populated the Northeast coast from Canada down through New England for millenia, with some rookeries recently cropping up as far south as New Jersey. In the early 1900s, they were hunted to near extinction because fishermen viewed them as pests that could wipe out their livelihoods. The 1972 Marine Mammal Protection Act made them federally protected, and set them on a course for massive recovery.

Now the populations of harbor and gray seals (larger, more aggressive animals and the likely culprit above) have grown to the point where fishermen are again complaining about seal interactions. Lobstermen say seals break into traps to steal bait, commercial fishermen say they tear up nets chasing fish, and charter boat captains and fishing guides say they wipe out entire schools of target species. Just ask a guide up in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia or Newfoundland what he thinks about seal impact on schools of salmon.

So what is Nature’s real order here? Seals have few natural predators: great white sharks and Greenland sharks. And then there is man.

Canada has become the battleground over sanctioned seal hunts, and vivid images of bloodied baby seals have been the knife’s edge of the anti-seal hunt campaign. While Canada is one of six countries that allow seal hunts, it is by far the largest. Those who annually chase seals say it is their livelihood, selling them for meat and for the pelts used in the fashion industry. Many fishermen see it as a form of pest control. Commercial interests have become involved and now represent the vast majority of license holders pursuing seals.

So it is a question of ethics and economics, which historically mix like oil and water. There will likely never be one solution that appeases everyone. Too many diametrically opposed opinions.

Personally, I’m not in favor of the hunt as it is now. The scale and methods seem extreme to me. That said, I’m not in favor of changing the way of life of the aboriginals whose descendants have relied on seals for food and warmth for thousands of years. Get the commercial aspect out of the equation. Greed should not be the primary reason for killing seals any more than it should be in killing deer, moose, carabou or whales.

For if greed does become the predominant motive, what does that say about man’s influence on the natural order of things? Where do we draw the line?

Here is some reading on both sides of the issue:

Fisheries and Oceans Canada

International Fund for Animal Welfare

By Colles Stowell

GreenFish – By Anglers | For Fish

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in General news, Sustainable Fishing, Sustainable Seafood | Leave a comment

A Bill for the Bills

Posted on October 2, 2012 by Colles Stowell

In the thick of political season (tired of the lawn signs and commercials yet?), I read with interest about some of the actual business that takes place at the federal level.

How anyone running for office finds time to perform some of the functions they were elected to perform is beyond me. What with the posturing, glad-handing and money spending, it’s a wonder they can think straight.

Oh wait …

So I took note of the latest move to protect billfish that passed the senate on Sept. 22 and is now on President Obama’s desk. In short, HR 2706 would ban the commercial harvest and sail of Pacific billfish in the U.S. except for traditional fisheries in Hawaii and the Pacific Insular area (Guam, American Samoa, Midway, etc.). The Billfish Conservation Act of 2012 would complement previous legislation that prohibits harvest and sale of Atlantic billfish.

So what’s the upshot? The U.S. is currently the world’s largest importer of billfish, including sailfish, marlin and spearfish. Banning harvest and sale of these species in the Pacific U.S. would reduce demand, and hopefully, the harvest of a critical apex predator and sought-after sportfish.

So at a time when bi-partisanship seems increasingly fleeting, overwhelming passage of this bill in both the House and Senate underscores its far-reaching importance.

If you’d like to vocalize support for this measure as it awaits Presidential review, click here. If you’d like to read more, check out the International Gamefish Association IGFA website.

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Education, Sustainable Fishing, Take action | Tagged , | Leave a comment

DC Politics as Usual

Posted on July 27, 2012 by Colles Stowell

Regardless of which side of the fence you sit on, politics is a pain in the butt. Especially in an election year when folks in DC are jockeying for position to get re-elected or further their party’s values.

The backdoor maneuvering and scheming is mind boggling. Passing a budget has enough intrigue to fill several Robert Ludlum novels.

This year is no exception as Republicans and Democrats wage all-out war to get pet projects paid for in special riders attached to different bills while cutting funding for more vital programs in the name of fiscal conservatism.

And so the U.S. House Appropriations Committee version of the Interior and Environment Appropriations bill for 2013 proposes many cuts that could dramatically affect sportsmen across the country. And not in a good way.

Here are some of the basics:

  • 17% cut in the federal EPA budget, cutting deep into several critical programs.
  • 80% cut in the fund used to purchase land, water and wetlands for public use. This fund comes from EPA fees charged to offshore drilling companies so federal, state and local governments can make vital lands publicly available.
  • 21% cut in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service funding.
  • 10% reduction in the National Wildlife Refuge System.
  • $13 million reduction in American Wetlands Conservation Act

Sure, EPA is a big, sprawling federal agency. But, it is the agency that manages and administers several key programs that safeguard the lands and waters sportsmen care most about. Chief among its responsibilities is enforcing the Clean Water Act, which may be the last administrative defense against the proposed Pebble Mine in Bristol Bay, Alaska.

Cutting U.S. Fish and Wildlife funding directly affects the number of conservation officers working to eliminate illegal hunting and fishing practices. There were also last-minute amendments attached to the bill that cut EPA funding for some regulatory oversight of certain mining and electric utilities regarding environmental impacts such as greenhouse gas emissions.

The House Appropriations Committee essentially voted along party lines to agree on these cuts and move the bill out of committee. Next, the entire House of Representatives will consider the bill. If it passes the House, it will go to the Senate, and if it passes the Senate, it will go to the President’s desk.

There is no question that politics is the third rail. You see people post about it on Facebook and almost immediately, they get blown up by a “friend.” No matter your political stripe, it’s important to stay informed about issues that affect you directly.

If you care about the waters you fish or the lands you hunt, you might want to dig in a bit to see what is happening in D.C. and make your own decision about whether you support the legislation or not. If not, let your elected officials know.  Silence does nothing to help sway someone else’s opinion.

Here is some background information:

House Appropriations Committee Website

Congressional Research Service Report: Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2013 Appropriations

 

Colles Stowell

GreenFish – By Anglers | For Fish

Posted in Education, General news, Take action | Tagged | Leave a comment