Here is something I wrote elsewhere the other day.
That thread is now closed.
I'm very sad that the website owner caved into pressure and closed that thread.
There were a few of us who had asked Mr Eidman some candid questions.
He was dancing around, and not really answering the questions that were being asked.


Here's what I wrote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptTB
One of my issues is his stance on certain issues, but also his lack of understanding of some issues yet his desire to publicly speak about things that he obviously does not fully comprehend. ......

Pay close attention to that last sentence...we will get back to that.


Now back to that last sentence: "In fact all of these species are a great example of just how well MSA has worked so far!"

That one sentence shows more clearly than anything else that Mr. Eidman does not have a handle on Mid-Atlantic species, rebuilding history, management, you name it.

.
Then, it took RECREATIONAL FISHERMEN like yourselves spending tens of thousands of their own dollars by donating to SSFFF to prove that the stock was EVEN LARGER than the science claimed, and was that much closer to the rebuilding target than the science claimed it was. (it also showed the target was too high)

It took the generous donations of fishermen around the country to allow SSFFF to prove the science was wrong and improve the science of Summer Flounder to a point where the stock was shown to be rebuilt "on time."

And these are the fisheries Mr. Eidman thinks show how well the current MSA is working?
Mr. Eidman, perhaps you should read up on your history before making such comments. How can someone who has so little knowledge of our Mid-Atlantic fisheries expect to represent the fish and the fishermen of the Mid-Atlantic???



Capt Bogan has been involved in fisheries management for decades.

There are those who say his involvement is because of a financial self-interest of his family in fishing.
There are those who discount what he says for other reasons.

I don't know about you folks reading this, but every time he puts up a post, you can see the thought that went into it. The vast array of knowledge he has gained about the processes (which may be boring to most of us) over the years, is apparent.

I would hope that Capt Bogan doesn't get discouraged in this particular fight. If the majority of fishermen put half the energy he did into seeking the truth, we would have better fisheries management, because politicians would take notice.











Quote:
Originally Posted by HutchJr
>>

Folks, I hope you realize that this is a complete lie.

Mr. Eidman is clearly listed by the Marine Fish Conservation Network as an “individual who as acted or is expected to act as a lobbyist for the client identified on line 7” (which is the Marine Fish Conservation Network.) A "lobbyist" is someone paid to work the political system!

This form shows that Mr. Eidman and fellow lobbyists of record for the Marine Fish Conservation Network met with legislators in 2009 specifically on issues related to the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act and the National Ocean Policy.

Knowing this information, it’s simply mind-boggling that Anthony Mauro would promote Mr. Eidman as “someone untainted by the politics of all this” when he's been paid to lobby for a political cause related to fisheries.

This is not personal folks, this is all about truth and transparency!










I hope these gentlemen don't mind my shortening their posts to just the highlights. These are important points in this discussion. On other boards I have questioned Mr Matalonis and Mr Eidman about their involvement with PEW trust and their connections. Until it was reported here that he was a paid lobbyist for the MCN, Mr Eidman has not come out on these fishing boards and admitted it.





Why, I ask you readers here, would he feel it not a valid point to disclose unless he had something to hide?
Food for thought, people.