[zimmy]

Wanted to share some info from a conversation I had with my former graduate adviser who is the science director for the ASMFC. We were just shooting the general bs about what is on the calender for asmfc and I learned a few tidbits of interest.

A. no decision on eels will be made until at least August of 2006. The plan has to be written and the public comment period opened prior to reconvening the board and initiation of the laws. Most striking is the fact the the eel data will be several years old until any action is taken. My adviser is rather concerned and disturbed by the time it takes for action particularly because the data indicates that the population is/was well below sustainability. Also, anyaction will not reflect the population of eels at the time measures are inacted.

B. Not really new news to me, but the scientific background of many of the decisionmakers involved is quite limited and even the science behind the decisions is rather archaic.

C. Most important to me: public comment is actually an important part of the process. It is statistically analyzed and presented at the meetings. Statistics do lie, but the power of a group like recreational fisherman can be influential if we speak up. The lack of input likely has at least as big of an impact.

d. There are only four meetings a year by the board in D.C. Call them annual quarterly meetings. Now think of all of the issues that must be addressed in 4 meetings on top of all of the other issues with fisheries and it becomes clear why fisheries are such a mess.

e. Nobody knows how to handle the by-catch problem.