Here is an interesting article that has many similarities to the MLPA and its direction and effects on the fishing industry here in California.

Ben, if you are reading this feel free to remove it after awhile if it clogs the memory. I just thought it is an interesting read.

Gloucester Daily TimeFebruary 19, 2009By Richard Gaines The alliance of fishing interests and state officials that convinced a federal judge to strike down limits put on the industry by the National Marine Fishery Service has condemned an impending regulatory scheme as poor policy, based on poor science and a misread of Congress. The Massachusetts director of marine fisheries predicted Congress would issue a "clarification" to put NMFS back on track. From many quarters, NMFS was warned that the interim — or emergency rule — that it intends to implement by May 1, the start of the fishing year, would further weaken and destabilize the industry without leading to a healthier fishery. With the deadline for public input Tuesday, NMFS yesterday began posting online the 87 written comments it received about the "interim rule" it drafted last September. The proposed interim rule came on the heels of the release of a scientific report that certain stocks were lagging in the recovery program mandated by the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation & Management Act. But even after just a handful of posts — all critical of NMFS' plan to close the entire southern New England waters and cut in half fishing opportunities across nearly all the northeastern grounds — it was clear the agency was stuck in institutional isolation. The guts of NMFS' regulatory scheme in place since 2006 was suspended by a federal judge on Tuesday. Outside of NMFS, government, academic and industry analysts found the plan would do nothing to improve the fishery but would disrupt fishing patterns, affecting the New Bedford fleet most directly. Barred from the nearby southern waters, the fleet, including the biggest boats in the region, would be forced to venture far into the southeastern section of Georges Bank or steam north to fish the inshore grounds of Stellwagen Bank that are now the province of the Gloucester, New Hampshire and Maine boats. The interim rule "makes a mockery" of rules to direct fishing to healthier areas "and eliminates the strategic aspect of the management," said Vito Giacalone, an industry leader and officer of the Northeast Seafood Coalition. The leading academic, Brian Rothschild, a professor of marine science and technology at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, agreed with Giacalone. "Another way of looking at (the interim rule) is: What is the optimal pattern, where's the engineering of optimal distribution of fishing? There is none." Yet, Rothschild said the rule would result in a 30 percent loss in revenue. He said he believed NMFS was operating without compelling data from good science. The state director of marine fisheries, Paul Diodati, released a letter to NMFS' regional director Patricia Kurkul suggesting her policies reflected federal arrogance and found signs that NMFS was operating in ways not intended by Magnuson. Diodati argued it was both unwise and illegal to ignore the interests of the states' fishing industries as represented on the broad-based New England Fishery Management Council. At its winter meeting last week in Portsmouth, N.H., the council reiterated its previous 15-1 vote — Kurkul was alone in dissenting — against NMFS' interim rule. "We are not just advisory," Diodati wrote to Kurkul on Tuesday. Quoting from Magnuson, he noted that NMFS was required to "work in tandem" with the states "to exercise sound judgment in the stewardship of fishery resources ... which take into account the social and economic needs of the states." For NMFS to do otherwise," he said, "is to subvert the expressed purpose (of Magnuson) as declared by Congress." Last month, at a meeting of the advisory Massachusetts Fishery Recovery Commission in Gloucester, an aide to Sen. John Kerry suggested a "legislative solution" to the impasse with NMFS could be in the offing. James Odlin, a fisherman and council member from Maine, blamed NMFS for mismanaging the fishery in testimony last October before a U.S. Senate subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries and Coast Guard. He said the industry was concerned that NMFS "in the interest of 'administrative simplicity,' would impose inappropriate restrictions" that will "once again cause unnecessary economic harm to the industry without providing adequate protection" to the fish. The management council, which advises NMFS and makes policy for NMFS to vet, issued its own announcement that NMFS was out of step. In diplomatic language, the council summarized the Portsmouth meeting by noting the "members expressed grave concerns over the potential impact" of NMFS' interim rule. The battle of wills arose from conflicting views of Magnuson's intent, and come at a time of change in national leadership and a vacuum at the head of the NMFS' parent, the U.S. Department of Commerce. Joining the states of Massachusetts and New Hampshire in attacking Kurkul's view was U.S. District Judge Edward Harrington of Boston. He used unusually strong language on Tuesday to restore a days-at-sea leasing program essential for the Gloucester and New Hampshire fleets during the late winter fishing period. He also suspended the differential days-at-sea program that had halved the value of the permits' by making one day of fishing count as two against the reduced number allowed. Harrington has not yet ruled on the underlying suit by the states in 2006 which argued that Kurkul was misreading Magnuson in elevating the successful revival of the weakest species over the stability of the fishing industry. Kurkul has repeatedly insisted the law required her to subordinate social and economic interests to the recovery of the weakest link in the system. The Democratic Congressional delegation flexed its muscle in 2007 when it got Congress to approve a $13.3 million earmark for economic relief of the Massachusetts fishing community after the then-Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez refused to declare that his agency, NMFS had placed the fleet in an economic crisis. "We anticipate the council vote (in Portsmouth) will promote a clarification of Congressional intent," Diodati wrote. His critique of the interim rule closely followed the recent opinions of U.S. District Judge Edward Harrington who chastised NMFS for opting to regulate to the weakest link in the 19 species, a decision that kept the industry from optimum yield from stronger storks. Harrington Tuesday found that NMFS had not seriously considered the "mixed-stock exemption" that if employed would allow more fishing by granting that not all stocks need to be restored at the same pace. The public comment on the interim rule by Jeff Kaelin of Lund Fisheries of Cape May, N.J. was the first to be posted last yesterday. He wrote: "The proposed regulations go further than required by law in terms of preventing overfishing for winter flounder, in particular." "The proposal is similarly contrary to the law as it foregoes the maintenance of optimum yield from a variety of species that are not overfished and should be available for harvest by groundfishing vessels in Southern New England waters. "Finally," he wrote, "the proposal fails to balance the need to rebuild fish stocks with maintaining a viable groundfish fishery and infrastructure and will unnecessarily place additional fishing pressure on recovering Gulf of Maine fishery resources by displacing effort to the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank." In addition, the proposal creates an unsafe situation for small and mid-sized vessels forced to travel to distant offshore waters, beyond the areas that they can now safely fish. The second posting was that of fisherman Frank Mirachi of Scituate. "What is most distressing is the amount of agency time which has already been devoted to continuing what is now seen as a discredited policy." Mirachi wrote. "Input controls such as those this proposed action embraces, have failed to prevent overfishing, have increased regulatory discarding, have resulted in substantial foregone yield from stocks of opportunity and have corrupted the fishery dependent information necessary for accurate stock assessments." Richard Gaines can be reached at rgaines@gloucestertimes.com. http://www.gloucestertimes.com/punews/resources_etp