Tackle and boating industry professionals around the country are being led to believe that a new bill in the House and Senate called the Fishery Science Improvement Act of 2011 (HR2309/S1916) would actually improve science and help keep anglers on the water in 2012.

However, Atlantic coastal fishermen specifically who've read the legislation agree the bills promoted by the national sporting media and their industry lobbyists do nothing to actually fix the science, nor will they truly keep important recreational fisheries open to coastal anglers.

"It doesn't do anything to improve the science," said Capt. Mark Brown of South Carolina. "It seems to lack any real direction and is very confusing to people who think there's some type of scientific requirement written in.

"These are very short bills to read, but they don't appear to have enough information in there to make a difference in terms of the actual assessments that have been compiled by NOAA," Brown added.

The two-page HR2304 is structured primarily to delay deadlines for annual catch limits (ACL) and accountability measures in those fisheries in which a peer-reviewed stock survey and stock assessment has not been performed within the past 5 years, and only if the Commerce Secretary determines that overfishing is not occurring, severely restricting the number of fisheries in which fishermen could apply for management relief.

"Species like haddock, cod, summer flounder, black sea bass, porgies, amberjack and even king mackerel, these have all been assessed within the past few years so none of them would qualify for statutory assistance under this particular legislation," said Jim Hutchinson, managing director of the Recreational Fishing Alliance (RFA). "East Coast fishermen especially who've spearheaded efforts to reform Magnuson, making national headlines through rallies and organized protests, they've suddenly found themselves boxed out of the process by Beltway insiders masquerading as reformers."

RFA believes if the House version of the bill were to pass as written, any stock not surveyed or accessed during the past 5 years could qualify for relief from ACL restrictions until 2014, but only if a regional council was able to push through an amendment in time to meet the December 31, 2013 deadline. Furthermore, any species which has been assessed in the past few years, even through use of questionable scientific models and methodologies, would not qualify for statutory assistance.

"Because it has science in its title and is being promoted by lobbyists at the boating and fishing trade groups, many industry members and sportswriters believe it can actually help anglers," Hutchinson said. "Sadly, fishermen on the water who would be directly impacted by the legislation who've actually read the bill seem to agree that it doesn't do anything to improve science nor will it have much positive impact on their ability to keep on fishing."

Hutchinson said a more comprehensive House bill sponsored by Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ), the Flexibility and Access in Rebuilding American Fisheries Act of 2011, would address ACL's and accountability measures in all coastal fisheries while also requiring the National Academy of Sciences to perform a detailed analysis of the data collection used by NOAA to enforce fisheries limits and restrictions. Regrettably, this all-inclusive piece of legislation introduced partly as response to the national fishermen's rally in Washington DC in February of 2010 has been openly opposed by the very same members of the recreational fishing community the bill is actually designed to protect.

In testifying on behalf of the Center for Coastal Conservation (CCC), American Sportfishing Association, National Marine Manufacturers Association, International Gamefish Association, and the Billfish Foundation before Congress on December 1, lobbyist and general counsel for the Coastal Conservation Association Bob Hayes publicly stated "With respect to the Flexibility Bill that Mr. Pallone has put in, I think our position has been pretty clear on that, we've been opposed to it from the beginning," while adding specifically that the organizations on behalf of whom he was speaking "all endorse my testimony today."

"It's finally out in the open, the same groups out there hyping the Fishery Science Improvement Act have been actively fighting against any real Magnuson reform since 2007, spending industry dollars to keep our broken federal fisheries law in place while distracting anglers and business owners from the real problems affecting coastal access," said Hutchinson.

Although known as the Fishery Science Improvement Act, language in the bill supported by CCC lobbyists does not actually address the science used for assessments and data collection, but instead pushes deadlines back 2 years for implementing ACL restrictions. Hardline conservation groups hope the stall tactic will give NOAA enough time to improve their scientific efforts, particularly in the recreational sector, to avoid any substantial fisheries reform.

During the House Resource Committee hearing on December 1 however, NOAA's Eric Schwaab admitted that his agency has already failed to meet their congressional mandate to replace the "fatally flawed" Marine Recreational Fishing Statistical Survey (MRFSS) as of 2009 as required by law, acknowledging that any new processes for scientific improvement won't be incorporated into the recreational sector until perhaps 2012 or 2013 at the earliest.

Pressed by Rep. Pallone about how ACLs and accountability measures could be mandated by NOAA Fisheries before meeting their own scientific improvement requirements under the law, Schwaab replied by saying "certainly it's suboptimal," while calling recreational data "a small portion of the assessment process."

"There are two different ways in which recreational data factor into the management process, one is as a component of the assessment process, and certainly recreational effort and landings are considered by the scientific teams that make assessment decisions," Schwaab said, adding "secondly is managing, once a quota is set, the recreational component of the fishery."

RFA's executive director, Jim Donofrio, called Schwaab's testimony "damning of the federal fisheries service" and the NOAA administration as a whole, while calling it a perfect example of where the Fishery Science Improvement Act doesn't do enough to protect anglers or facilitate improved science on behalf of commerce and conservation.

"Mr. Schwaab testified under oath that scientists are using fatally flawed angler data to develop stock assessments and decide whether or not anglers are going over or under an ACL, that's not suboptimal it's borderline criminal," Donofrio said. "We keep hearing that this is the best we can do, it's the best legislation we can pass right now, or that it's the best available science we've got given work schedules, but this is pure nonsense to working class Americans," Donofrio said.

For recreational fishermen, particularly those in the business of busing anglers to the fishing grounds, seeing Congress push through another feel-good piece of legislation without any sensible statutory reform equates to yet another free pass for bureaucratic neglect.

"The two fishery science improvement bills look like a joke to me," noted Capt. Steve Byrne of First Cast Charters out of Staten Island, NY. "I can only guess that the bills were written with the hope that no one would ever read any further than the title. I don't see anything in there that would improve the science."

Capt. Brown agreed noting that NOAA has essentially disregarded substantial statistical analysis gathered by Southeast fishermen over the years, essentially ignoring fisherman's input related to the overall status of many fisheries. "They end up taking the fishing information and throwing it out the door in place of their own incomplete models and assessments," Brown said.

Even more alarming to those who have read the legislation is the clear disconnect between the House bill and the new Senate companion piece sponsored by Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida, S1916. A list of species characterized by NOAA as not experiencing overfishing and not assessed within the past 6 years, which proponents of S1916 believe are those stocks that would qualify for relief should Congress pass this legislation, are defined as follows:

NEW ENGLAND
Atlantic Salmon

MID-ATLANTIC
Shortfin squid

SOUTH ATLANTIC
Scamp
Mahi Mahi
Wreckfish Yellowtail snapper
Gray Snapper
Lane Snapper
Nassau Grouper
Yellowedge Grouper

GULF OF MEXICO
Mahi Mahi
Red Drum
Black Grouper
Gray Triggerfish
White Grunt
Cobia
Little Tunny
Spanish Mackerel
Yellowtail Snapper
Brown Rock Shrimp

PACIFIC & ALASKA
Jack Mackerel
Northern Anchovy (PFMC)
Indo-Pacific Blue Marlin
CA Scorpion Fish
Longspine Thornyhead
Shortspine Thornyhead
Starry Flounder
Yellowtail Rockfish
Albacore (WPFMC)
Pacific cod (PFMC)
Silver Gray Rockfish
Northwestern HI Islands Crustacean Complex
Big Skate (Gulf of Alaska)
Longnose Skate (Gulf of Alaska)

"Congress has just been told by a high-ranking NOAA staffer that their entire assessment process is fatally flawed and that the agency itself has failed to meet their congressionally mandated deadline, yet fishermen who target species not included in the list above may not be going fishing in the next couple of years because no one wants to tick off the environmental zealots or demand too much of Congress," Donofrio said. "This is why Americans are losing faith in the system and why our anglers have grown tired of the regional council process."

"Magnuson was bad in 2006 because Senate passed it by unanimous consent, and now a few Beltway insiders are asking for more unanimous consent by the industry. We've been set-up, pure and simple, the industry and the anglers themselves are being asked to promote another bad bill in Congress, it's pretty tragic really," Donofrio said.

The Flexibility and Access in Rebuilding American Fisheries Act of 2011 introduced by Rep. Pallone is co-sponsored in the House by Rep. Rob Andrews (D-NJ), Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC), Rep. Ander Crenshaw (R-FL), Rep. Colleen Hanabusa (D-HI), Rep. Peter King (R-NY), Rep. Frank LoBiondo (R-NJ), , Rep. John Tierney (D-MA), and Rep. Bob Turner (R-NY).

In addition to addressing ACL's and accountability measures in all coastal fisheries while calling upon the National Research Council to review NOAA's recreational data collection methods, HR3061 would also extend timelines for rebuilding certain fisheries, something which would also help address the dire consequences coming down the road for cod, haddock, summer flounder and even black sea bass in the South Atlantic.

"Congressman Wittman is a dedicated sportsman who has supported the Flexibility Bill in the past, but he's been handed a phony bill of no good by some hired lobbyists who don't know enough about the complexities of saltwater fisheries, or perhaps just don't care," Donofrio said. "It's a bad spot for Mr. Wittman, unless he can help change the bill in Committee which is imperative if Congress plans to move forward with any meaningful fisheries reform."

Rep. Pallone's efforts to incorporate additional management flexibility in the federal fisheries law boasted support of 33 additional members of the 111th Congress, including Rep. Wittman. Similar legislation was also introduced in both the 111th and 112th Congress by Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, though most troubling to RFA members is the recent admission by the tackle and boating trades associations before the House Resource Committee that they had in fact opposed all efforts to fix the fisheries law during the past five years.

"The tackle and boating manufacturers of this country have been hoodwinked by their own well-paid lobbyists once again," Hutchinson said, adding "the industry's political contributions have been spent primarily on fighting RFA and in turn on supporting legislation that gives NOAA more time to do nothing all while allowing Congress the ability to kick the can down the road a few more years."

"I know our local anglers are looking forward to the 2012 elections, it's just a shame that the tackle and boating trade professionals aren't going to the polls in November to shake up their own administration, because there's clearly a need for reform across the board," he added.