2002 Update: Congress Hears Anglers’ Cry
by Forbes Darby
Alexandria, VA—It began as a great show of unity in June, when an unprecedented number of outdoor publications concurrently ran an editorial from American Sportfishing Association president, Mike Nussman, warning of extremist ocean wilderness policies from environmental activists. It resulted in more than 4,500 letters flooding Congressional mailboxes this summer urging support of pro-fishing legislation and recognition that anglers would not stand idly by while their record as conservationists and opportunity to fish was challenged.
In early 2002, the Freedom To Fish Act (S. 1314, H.R. 3547) was introduced in the U.S. Senate by Senators John Breaux (D-LA) Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX). A companion bill in the House of Representative was later introduced and Representative Colin Peterson (D-MN). In addition to the strong bipartisan support in Congress, the leading sport fishing, boating and wildlife conservation groups backed the bill.
At Congressional hearings held in July, Representative Peterson was joined by University of South Alabama scientist Dr. Bob Shipp in testifying on behalf of common-sense use of marine protected areas as outlined in the Freedom To Fish bill. "I am not against the use of MPAs in certain cases and in fact I voted in favor of the Dry Tortugas closure while chair of the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council," stated Dr. Shipp. "However, as a fishery management tool, no-take MPAs are not as efficient as traditional management measures such as size limits, catch restrictions and temporary closed seasons," Dr. Shipp told the subcommittee.
The positive attention garnered by the Freedom To Fish Act caused some environmental groups to lash out calling the bill "overkill". American Sportfishing Association president Mike Nussman responds saying, "To lock out the fishing public without any defined targets, guidelines, or solid evidence to support such an extreme decision is just bad policy. It’s these fanatical proposals that make common-sense bills like the Freedom to Fish Act necessary."
Neither the extensive media coverage, scientific evidence nor public outcry was enough to move the Freedom To Fish Act far in the 107th Congress as matters of homeland security took top billing (and rightly so). As this Congressional session comes to a close in early October, plans are already underway to mount a charge for passage of the Freedom To Fish bill in 2003.
