The supposedly "landmark" study doesn’t appear to include a lot of new science at all — it is essentially an extensive compilation of data that indicates what fishermen in Gloucester and elsewhere have been saying for some time: that many fish stocks are recovering nicely.
The data is based, in part, on trawling studies. And a joint independent/academic study this past spring — one of the few true independent studies in the works, given that it’s not being funded by the oil-funded Pew Environmental Trust and other agenda-driven, big-bucks giants — has already found issues with recent trawling projects.
That study, which focused on the status of winter flounder, was led by North Carolina fisherman Jim Ruhle, and raised severe questions about how NMFS arrived at its winter flounder assessment. Remember also that Ruhle’s late brother, Rhode Island’s Phil Ruhle, uncovered the infamous "Trawlgate" fiasco, when even the researchers and federal regulators had to concede their trawling nets were the wrong size for gathering the needed information — yet they still gave the admittedly flawed data a stamp of approval and used it as the basis for regulatory policy. Indeed, at least one fishing scientist who spoke to the Times last week noted that the latest figures, too, seem to present contradictory and inconclusive data for the Northeast, particularly for New England.
Read the complete story at The Gloucester Daily Times.