I recieved this from Patrick, President of the MSBA

Dear RFA Member and Massachusetts Angler:

As you know, recreational fishing is one of the most popular outdoor activities in Massachusetts. It adds to the quality of life and the economy in our state. Recreational fishermen have long demonstrated a commitment to conservation through abidance with minimum size requirements, bag limits, seasonal closures, and the use of non-lethal rod and reel fishing gear. Yet, some environmental groups are now pushing to keep us out of vast areas of our oceans by creating no fishing Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). The RFA is not willing to stand down and watch recreational fishermen get shut out of MPAs. Therefore, we have launched a national initiative to introduce "Freedom to Fish" legislation in our coastal states.

Rod and reel fishing is a highly selective, inherently inefficient method of catching fish that traditionally has not led to overfishing. Those pushing for no fishing MPAs are lumping rod and reel anglers into the same category as trawlers using huge nets. It's time for everyone who cares about marine fisheries to focus on specific fishing gear that's causing specific conservation problems. Right now, recreational and commercial fishermen in California are facing a closure of some of their state's best fishing grounds around the Channel Islands. Make no mistake about it; California is just the starting point. Many environmental groups have made it clear in their own literature and public statements that their goal is to permanently close vast areas of federal and state waters around the country to all types of fishing.

The RFA Massachusetts (here originally said state) "Freedom to Fish" bill prohibits closures to rod and reel fishing unless there is a clear indication that it is the cause of a specific conservation problem. Further, the bill requires periodic review of any closure and provisions to reopen areas to rod and reel fishing whenever the basis for a closure no longer exists.

We expect strong opposition to the bill from environmental extremists. RFA-MA is preparing to initiate a well-organized grassroots campaign. As in any political battle, we need the support of members like you. To learn more about the campaign and what you can do to help, RFA, Massachusetts Striped Bass Association (MSBA) and other RFA affiliated organizations will hold a campaign-organizing meeting on March 20th, at 7pm. The meeting will be held at the Viking Club, located at 410 Quincy Avenue, Route 53, in Braintree. For directions and to let us know if you will be attending, or if you cannot attend but would still like to be involved, Call Patrick Parquette at ###-#### or visit the MSBA website at http://www.msba.net.

From what I've seen so far, I fully support this and think this site should as well. While I'm not in favor of MPAs, I'm certainly not in favor of excluding people that have had virtually no impact on the environment and fisheries to warrant anything even close to this....

I realize there has been discussion on this with other states an am interested in any comments resulting from that. I am also curious to hear the Rhody version (if there is to be a RI version)


Thanks,

John

What are the locations they are trying to take away?
If it's a spot I've fished in the past, and its taken away, I forsee trespassing in the future.

Thanks for the heads up.

Stellwagen - how does that kick ya in the teeth?

That's a big kick in the teeth, like the guy whose head/mouth was crushed on the curb in the movie 'American History X'.

Specfically - that sucks. I've heard Stellwagen is being considered but not sure yet how true. I'm trying to find some more documentation now.

If anyone else has some links - let me know please...


Thanks....

John

John, according to the following email from the RISAA/SNESA email group (Steve Medeiros), the Freedom to Fish Act has been introduced in RI:

Freedom to Fish Act Introduced in the Ocean State

Representatives Peter G. Palumbo (D-16th), Bruce B. Long (R-74th), Robert B.
Jacquard (D-17), Steven F. Smith (D-13th), and John J. McCauley, Jr. (D-1st)
have introduced the Rhode Island Freedom to Fish Act.

“Recreational fishing is one of the most popular outdoor activities in this
state. It adds a lot to our quality of life here in Rhode Island,” said
Representative Palumbo.

“Nearly 200,000 anglers fish in Rhode Island waters each year making a major
contribution to the state and local economies,” added Representative Smith.
“This bill establishes standards that must be met before any of our marine
waters can be closed to rod and reel fishing.”

According to a 2002 report from two independent consulting firms, 178,765
anglers fished in Rhode Island waters a total of 2,047,000 fishing days, for a
total economic output of $173 million.

(The National Marine Fisheries Service data states that over 300,000 anglers
fished in Rhode Island during 2002)

“Our ocean, bays and estuaries are some of Rhode Island’s most important natural
resources and they must be managed effectively,” said Representative McCauley.
“The marine environment can be adequately protected without unnecessarily
closing off areas to rod and reel fishermen.”

Recreational fishermen have long demonstrated a commitment to conservation
through abidance with minimum size requirements, bag limits, seasonal closures,
and the use of non-lethal rod and reel fishing gear. Rod and reel fishing is a
highly selective, inherently inefficient method of catching fish that
traditionally has not led to overfishing.

“Rhode Island has a thriving recreational fishing industry which includes
anglers, boat builders, bait and tackle shops, party and charter boat
businesses, marinas, and many others,” said Al Conti of the Rhode Island Marine
Trades Association. “This bill establishes requirements that must be met before
any of the state’s marine waters can be closed off to rod and reel fishing.”

The Rhode Island Freedom to Fish Act prohibits closures to rod and reel
fishing unless there is a clear indication that this type of fishing is causing
a specific conservation problem and that less severe measures will not be
adequate. This bill would also require periodic review of any closures, a
scientific basis for the size of any closure, and provisions to reopen areas to
rod and reel fishing whenever the basis for the closure no longer exists.
“This initiative is in response to the radical environmental movement to close
off vast areas of our oceans by creating no fishing marine protected areas
(MPAs),” said Jim Donofrio, Executive Director of the RFA. “Right now,
recreational and commercial fishermen in California are facing a closure of some
of their state’s best fishing grounds.”

“We’re not out to ban MPAs,” states Steve Medeiros, President of the Rhode
Island Saltwater Anglers Association (RISAA). “We want to establish standards in
Rhode Island before any closures can be made.”

“Rhode Island fishermen are fortunate to have great friends in state House of
Representatives,” said Doug MacPherson, RISAA Legislative Chairman. “The Rhode
Island Freedom to Fish Act is a proactive bill that will enhance our ability to
go out and enjoy the great fishing opportunities we have here in Rhode Island.”
“The use of MPAs in one form or another is not new,” said Mr. Palumbo. “What is
new is the push to exclude recreational fishing with no rationale for doing so
and that is simply unacceptable.”

Matoonoc - what's the link to the SNESA e-mail group...

Thanks

hey john, they are hippies! they arent thinking straight because they keep bonging, toking, and choking themselves to death! i bloody hate the environmentalists. they have no reasons to do that. they are making things off balance. they are taking our right to fish and our 1st amendment. hey, when a government makes a mistake, we correct them and our future is bright. but they are taking things too far.

Originally posted by Notaro
hey john, they are hippies! they arent thinking straight because they keep bonging, toking, and choking themselves to death! i bloody hate the environmentalists. they have no reasons to do that. they are making things off balance. they are taking our right to fish and our 1st amendment. hey, when a government makes a mistake, we correct them and our future is bright. but they are taking things too far.

Did you come up with that all by yourself? That may apply to SOME of the Extremeists but I can guarrantee you there are a lot more than you think and you would have little chance seperating them from everyone else... As for "bloddy hating the environmentalist" then you "bloody hate" about half the people here. We are "environmentalist" more in many ways than some of these card-carrying people that call themselves environmentalists. A sizeable percentage sign up because they're bored stiff or want to belong to something "chic".

Now those that are not amongst our ranks and that of the Rec angler is the "Extremist" environmental person.

Notaro, it's too easy to fall into the trap of a "they are all a bunch of whackos" type mentality and then we would be doing a real disservice to our cause - in this case preventing MPAs from closing areas to people that have tried to improve the conditions and had no measurable part in the decline of those areas for the reasons they are in decline...

john, oops, i take that back, my apologies. so what kind of environmentalists are we talking about? i heard that some of southern california banned recreational saltwater fishing. so i am one of you guys too. but there are many different kind of environmentalists. so my bad. we care about our water and marine specie conversation. but dont let them ban the shore fishing spots and etc.

Notaro - I see it as a lot of more extreme environmentalist feel it necessary to shut down everything that may even tangentially impact "something". I can't say resource because they don't view it as a resource.

i heard that some of southern california banned recreational saltwater fishing They are talking about closing off a big area of the Cali coast to all angling - though I'm pretty sure that a sailboat could transit the area and allow people to sightsee the area :rollem:

A lot or Rec angler groups (and some comm) have teamed up with "Conservation" groups in the past and have gotten good results from those partnerships. Some groups want to go too far. Close the beaches to everyone - not just properly equipped vehicles, close to fishermen & woman - sure bird watching is OK. These are extreme groups.

OK - I'm rambling here :smash:

ah, i see, that's them. thanks, john

Guys,

Im cali, the Channel Islands had been a fishing hot spot for years...MPA has passed...no gone, no fishing of any kind.

In MA there is a move to start by closing an area of Stellwaggon called the sliver. Anyone ever hear of the BE Bouy. This is one corner of the Sliver. A check of a few Environmental web sites show literature stating that the goal is to close the complete Stellwagon Bank sanctuary to all fishing. The Sanctuary comes in as far as an area we call the Dumping Grounds off Scituate. As proof of this plan I will relay the following statement made at a joint meeting of the Habitat and Groundfish Subcommittees of the New england fisheries Management Commission....during a
Q & A where MPA's came up and the word Stellwagon was mentioned a committe member said (are you talking about closing the area to recreatioal fishing also)...answer was spoken in a firm tone...(Yes, Absolutely)

by the time the Official proposal is brought to committee it will be too late. The Extremeists have more money by far, more dedicated people to do the work, and more troops to show up at meetings.

If the recs don't move now. It will be ugly fast.

more from me in the next days....put the 20th on your agenda and show up at the meeting

This is just a reminder that the Massachusetts Freedom To Fish Act meeting is being held this Thursday, March 20th.

If you enjoy fishing as you currently know it then I urge all who can to attend.

Best,
Mike Flaherty

I seriously doubt I will be able to attend. I've got a lot happening at work and I need to get ready for this weekend's show. If any of you can make this and let the board know what you found it would be greatly appreciated :btu:

John,

I will be at the meeting and I will try to provide a report later on the MSBA Fishwire for those who can not attend. I understand that you are busy. We are all very busy. In fact, I am working toward a Master's degree and I am skipping my class that meets Thursday nights so that I can attend this meeting. In the past I NEVER skipped a class for ANYTHING - this is how serious I take school.

I'm not whining here. It is just that this is how important I feel this issue is.

It is just my opinion but I think this thread is "pin worthy".

Thanks,
Mike Flaherty

At the NJF2F Senate hearing on Tuesday, the following groups opposed the bill.

Sierra Club
Environmental Defense
The Ocean Conservancy (TOC)

TOC is obviously now tracking all state F2F bills. On Wednesday, TOC had a rep. testify against the bill at the MD House hearing.

Mike - we are all busy. I feel this issues is very important too, but my family (and now myself) are sick, working odd hours, and plenty of other stuff going on. Plus that little thing where I live 2 cities away... Wish I could make it. Look forward to hearing more from Patrick, you, and others ...

I am going after running a few errands, after working all day.

Mike:

What time ????