PEW Trust and other sneaky groups
A few buddies are comms, sent me an e-mail today quoting this article. Before anyone cries out about the commercial bias, remember that the PEW trust has the ultimate intention of creating MPAs in several places, which would hurt us guys as well.
All pew funded studies and talking heads are sneaky bastids.http://stripersandanglers.com/Forum/...ons/icon13.gif
http://www.fishingnj.org/netusa23.htm
(this information was originally printed in a column by N. Stolpe in Commercial Fisheries News available at http://www.fishingnj.org/netusa17.htm) Evidently the Pew myopia concerning what?€™s really going on in the oceans isn?€™t a recent development.
Who is the Pew Trust and why should we care?
Frankiesurf, thanks for the Jim Donofrio link. He mentioned the Pew Trust like 5 times, and it got my attention.Who the heck is this group that doesn't even fish, yet manages to intervene in all sorts of decisions affecting fishermen?
So I did some digging. Holy Toledo Batman, they are everywhere! They hire scientiests on fishing advisory committees. They have about 30 different names and organizations to hide their true agenda. All the little nerds that werre picked on in school, grew up to be angry pansies and joined the Pew Trust. :waaah:
Does anyone have any personal experience dealing with these azzhats?:2flip:
Pew exaggerates the facts
They manipulated the data when they claimed the seas would have no fish by the year 2048. What else did they manipulate?
HIJACKING FISHERIES MANAGEMENT
How Pew Charitable Trusts has co-opted the management process using paid-for science and a well-oiled media machine.
In late 2006, “Fisheries Face Collapse by 2048!” was the headline read and heard around the world – at least in the world of Washington, DC. It just so happens that Congress was debating the reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act at that precise moment.
The press stories sighted a study led by Dr. Boris Worm of Dalhousie University. While objective observers might question elements of the study, it was the media hype that the Pew Charitable Trusts (“Pew” or “the Trust”) wanted out there as part of a carefully orchestrated campaign to influence the Congressional debate on the Nation’s primary fisheries law.
Dr. Worm, a regular recipient of funding from Pew, working with SeaWeb, a Pew-funded public research group that specializes in media campaigns, worked on the message and the timing to get as much media coverage as possible. They were successful. Big media loves a crisis, and when you have the money and the manpower it’s easy to plant a good fish tale.
latest environmental whackos
This "WILD" group is actually advicing the gov't on fisheries policy. Wake up fishermen!
Updated: February 8, 2010, 11:58 AM ET
Wild connection
Radical preservationist group could have hand in management plan
http://sports.espn.go.com/outdoors/s...ory?id=4897071
Updated: February 8, 2010, 11:58 AM ET
Comment Email Print Share
By Robert Montgomery
ESPNOutdoors.com
Whether you're attending a magic show in Las Vegas or dealing with government, it's always a good idea to "watch the other hand" if you really want to know what's going on. Both magicians and politicians are masters of deception and misdirection.
That sad fact of life has become abundantly clear to the recreational fishing community, as its advocates intensify their efforts to keep public waters open and accessible to anglers. And as they push, they need anglers all across America to push with them.
http://a.espncdn.com/winnercomm/outd.../AFAN-LOGO.jpg Click here for archive
This is necessary because, as ESPN previously reported, environmental/preservationist groups are pressuring Obama to by-pass Congressional oversight and act unilaterally in approving a management strategy for our oceans, coastal waters, and Great Lakes.
This comes at a time when the recreational fishing community had been led to believe that a public and transparent process would follow the recommendations of his Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force and decisions would not be made without careful deliberation.
Because of administration ties to these groups and support for their agendas, issuance of an Executive Order almost certainly would mean closure of public waters to recreational fishing under the guise of a "spatial planning" strategy.
It also would mean that the administration successfully deceived the angling community that a fair and open process would be used to develop a management plan.
To speak out against issuance of an Executive Order, go to the Keep America Fishing web site and send a letter to Obama, your elected officials, and the task force.
"Clearly the environmental community is making a push on this," said Gordon Robertson of the American Sportfishing Association. "We can't let just their voices be heard. We must make them listen to the recreational fishing community as well."
In response to this concern, Andrew Winer, a spokesman for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, told angling advocates, "I want to assure all of you that the rumor remains incorrect and that there is no plan to issue an Executive Order before the public comment period is closed."
The big problem with that is deadline for public comments on the task force's management framework proposal is Feb. 12.
"If an Executive Order were to be issued — and we hope that it won't be — it shouldn't be for months," said Gary Kania of the Congressional Sportsmen Foundation. "A deliberative process is needed before decisions are made, with consideration given for all of the comments that have been made.
"We're meeting with the members of the Congressional Sportsmen Caucus to raise this issue. Enhancing Congressional oversight is what's needed. Let's get them involved in something of this scale."
And while anglers seem to have been deceived about the fairness of the process, they have been misdirected as well. While they have focused their energies solely on dealing with the task force, a federal agency has been conspiring with a low-profile, but radical preservationist group, The WILD Foundation, to create a "marine wilderness" management plan that very well could interconnect with the task force.
WILD's objective: "We believe that at least half of the Earth's surface (land and water) needs to be permanently protected in an essentially wild condition, in a manner that keeps all of life interconnected."
Its partner: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
If WILD has its way, anglers would be denied access by motorized boats to half of the nation's oceans, coastal waters, and Great Lakes, with the way opened via the task force for similar limitations on inland waters.
"You could have to paddle for two miles to fish in a marine wilderness area," Robertson said.
Here's what WILD says on its web site:
"WILD has teamed up with its U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) colleagues to work closely in seeking public input, with WILD spearheading the non-governmental community through the MWC (Marine Wilderness Collaborative, and the USFWS driving government agency participation through the Intergovernmental Working Group on Marine Wilderness."
The recreational fishing community didn't learn of this partnership until early February, although WILD posted information regarding the project on its web site on Dec. 18.
"It's standard procedure for the Fish and Wildlife Service to reach out to non-governmental organizations for partnerships," Kania said. "But this is a pretty radical agenda that the WILD Foundation is proposing.
"What we want to know now from Fish and Wildlife is how long we have to comment on this."
In trying to keep anglers out of vast areas, what WILD and other groups fail to grasp is "how conservation works," Robertson said. "It's paid for by the people most interested in it. If they can't be involved, they'll be less interested, and the end game would be much less investment in fisheries management."
Through license fees and excise taxes on fishing equipment, anglers contribute millions of dollars annually for fisheries research and habitat improvements, as well as coastal wetlands planning and restoration. Additionally, they assist resource agencies in numerous ways, including data collection to determine status and management strategies for sport species.
Denying access to the nation's 60 million anglers not only would collapse this life-support system for our fisheries, it would devastate the economies of communities dependent on recreational fishing. Just as importantly, it would do irreparable harm to a family-oriented pastime that keeps us in touch with and appreciative of the natural world.
As a Senior Writer for ESPN/BASS Publications, Robert Montgomery has written about conservation, environment, and access issues for more than two decades.
For more information
Find out more about the battle for public waters at KeepAmericaFishing.org, a Web site maintained by the American Sportfishing Association.
To learn more about the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force and its Interim Report, click here.
PEW is all over the place.
Here they are involved with the UK in helping to designate the worlds largest marine reserve.
Chagos: UK Poised To Designate World's Largest Marine Reserve; 'A Conservation Legacy Almost Unrivaled In Scale'
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Today, the Pew Environment Group praised the United Kingdom (U.K.) for taking one further step towards designating the world's largest marine reserve.
The proposed marine reserve would protect a group of 55 located in the middle of the Indian Ocean. Known as the Chagos Archipelago, the islands and their surrounding waters cover 210,000 square miles (544,000 square kilometers), an area larger than France. With some of the cleanest seas in the world, the islands are home to one of the most ecologically healthy systems on the planet.
http://www.underwatertimes.com/Opena...&cb=1f5d2bbb61
The Chagos Archipelago and its surrounding waters comprise the British Indian Ocean Territory, an overseas territory of the U.K. Following a three-month public consultation, the U.K. government is now considering the designation of a Chagos Protected Area, which would safeguard the area's rich diversity of marine life
by prohibiting extractive activities, such as fishing. More than 275,000 people from around the world have signed petitions supporting this designation. A final decision is expected sometime this spring.
"If designated, the Chagos Protected Area would establish a conservation legacy almost unrivalled in scale and significance anywhere in the world's oceans," said Joshua S. Reichert, Managing Director of the Pew Environment Group, which is a member of the Chagos Environment Network (CEN). The CEN is a group of leading conservation and scientific organizations seeking to protect the of the Chagos Islands and their surrounding waters.
In addition to the Pew Environment Group, CEN is comprised of a number of U.K.-based organizations and individuals: the Chagos Conservation Trust; the Linnean Society of London; the Marine Conservation Society; the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew; the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds; the Zoological Society of London and Professor Charles Sheppard of the University of Warwick.
If the marine protection proposal is accepted, the Chagos Islands would provide an important global reference site for research in crucial areas such as ocean acidification, coral reef resilience, sea level rise, fish stock decline and climate change.
The Chagos Islands provide a safe haven for dwindling populations of sea turtles and hundreds of thousands of breeding sea birds, as well as an exceptional diversity of deep water habitats, such as trenches reaching nearly 20,000 feet (6,000 meters) in depth. The waters around the islands contain the world's largest coral atoll and many thriving species of corals and reef fish. At least 60 species listed on the International Union for Conservation of Nature's (IUCN) Red List of live in these waters.
"The Zoological Society of London is proud and excited to be engaged in the initiative to protect the Chagos Islands, one of the most biodiverse marine ecosystems on Earth," said Dr. Heather Koldewey, Curator, Aquarium Projects. "Working with the Pew Environment Group has proved an effective partnership in working towards a common goal - the largest marine reserve of its kind in the world."
Through its Global Ocean Legacy initiative, the Pew Environment Group works in partnership with local citizens and governments, such as the CEN, to help establish world-class, highly protected marine reserves that will provide ecosystem-scale benefits and help conserve the world's marine heritage. The Pew Environment Group's efforts have played a pivotal role in the designation of marine reserves including the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National in the northwestern Hawaiian Islands in 2006 - now the world's largest no-take marine reserve - and the Mariana Trench Marine National Monument in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands in 2009.
"Designation of the Chagos Islands as the world's largest marine reserve would set a new benchmark for responsible ocean stewardship," said Reichert. "Overnight the U.K. government would be a world leader in the protection and conservation of marine resources."
Another example where the NOAA policies mirror the PEW agenda
