Quote:
Originally Posted by BasicPatrick
Since the current proposals only have a 50% chance of achieving the mortality reduction AND since the fact is that IF the new regulations do not achieve that reduction the next step would have to be closed seasons with some teeth, I have a pretty important suggestion for all those that are going to attend the upcoming hearings in MA & RI.
PLEASE MAKE SURE TO COMMENT THAT IF SPLIT REGULATIONS ARE PASSED SPLIT ACCOUNTABILITY MUST GO ALONG WITH THOSE REGULATIONS. IF THE MORTALITY REDUCTION IS NOT MET, THE NEXT ROUND OF ACCOUNTABILITY (AKA REDUCTIONS) SHOULD BE BASED ON DATA. IF 2 FISH OPTIONS FOR THE FOR HIRE FLEET DO NOT ACHEIVE THE REDUCTION BUT 1@28 FOR PRIVATE ANGLERS DOES, WHEN THE TIME COMES TO CLOSE PART OF MAY OR SEPTEMBER SHOULD ONLY APPLY TO THE FLEETS THAT DID NOT ACHEIVE THE REQUIRED REDUCTIONS.
SPLIT MEASURES SHOULD BE SPLIT ACROSS ALL ASPECTS OF MANAGEMENT.
|
Come on Pat, you know better than that. No one is going to track reductions in F by mode. Just like the separate measures for scup, sea bass, etc. Plus add into the equation that every state is likely to have at least slightly different measures. Just look at what Toby posted about NJ. To do what you suggest would require the ASMFC to track F by state, and you know that isn't going to happen.