Last week marked the first formal hearing of the Congressional Committee on Natural Resources as it navigates issues being associated with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), the primary statute governing fishing activities in Federal waters.

Coming before the Committee: Eight bills that seek to address perceived limitations or loopholes in the MSA. In his opening statement, Chairman Hastings voiced “hope” that witnesses testimony could “help the Committee identify where the Act could be amended to resolve the major problems that are currently facing fishermen and fishing communities.”

That’s indeed a “hopeful” statement for a Committee that failed to include even one commercial fisherman in public testimony. Among the 13 witnesses who were invited:  Six members of congress, two non-industry fishery council members, one registered lobbyist, and three — count them, three — recreational fishermen. With the exception of one well informed for-hire witness, testimony was clearly stacked in favor of recreational fishing’s issues and concerns.

Despite landing more than 8 billion pounds of fish valued at $4.5 billion dollars nationwide last year, not a single commercial fisherman was called to testify. Not one.

It’s no secret even at this early stage of MSA deliberations: Catch shares is emerging as the lightning rod topic. Commercial fishermen who work in the nation’s healthiest fisheries support the resource-first principles and responsible, sustainable practices of catch share models. Calling for testimony from fishermen who understand catch shares would have provided the honest and helpful committee insights for which Chairman Hastings had originally “hoped.”

Rest assured, the Full Committee Legislative Hearing is not the final word, only the first. We vow to ensure the commercial fisherman’s voice is heard on all issues related to the MSA moving forward. And we vow to be part of public testimony henceforth, lest someone can explain to this sector why the commercial fisherman’s voice should not be heard.

Below I’ve posted links to the discussed bills. While the titles look promising at face value, it is important to note the descriptions are creatively packaged by the bill’s authors. Having read them (as I encourage you to do, too), I am not at all convinced they do what the descriptions indicate:

H.R. 594 (Pallone), To promote jobs creation, promote sustainable fisheries and fishing communities, revitalize waterfronts, and for other purposes. “Coastal Jobs Creation Act of 2011″

H.R. 1013 (Keating), To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to provide the New England Fishery Management Council additional resources to address research and monitoring priorities established by the Council. “Strengthen Fisheries Management in New England Act of 2011″

H.R. 1646 (Runyan), To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to preserve jobs and coastal communities through transparency and accountability in fishery management, and for other purposes. “American Angler Preservation Act”

H.R. 2304 (Wittman), To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of 2006 to provide the necessary scientific information to properly implement annual catch limits, and for other purposes. “Fishery Science Improvement Act of 2011″

H.R. 2610 (Frank), To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to reform procedures for the payment of funds from the asset forfeiture fund, and for other purposes. “Asset Forfeiture Fund Reform and Distribution Act of 2011″

H.R. 2753 (Jones), To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to provide Internet access to Regional Fishery Management Council meetings and meeting records, and for other purposes. “Fishery Management Transparency and Accountability Act”

H.R. 2772 (Runyan), To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to permit eligible fishermen to approve certain limited access privilege programs, and for other purposes. “Saving Fishing Jobs Act of 2011″

H.R. 3061 (Pallone), To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to extend the authorized time period for rebuilding of certain overfished fisheries, and for other purposes. “Flexibility and Access in Rebuilding American Fisheries Act of 2011″