More good news for mariners.
“It allows U.S.-flagged vessels to fish commercially within 50 to 200 nautical miles of the PRIMNM’s boundaries.”
Aren’t they already allowed to fish right up to but not within the 200 nautical mile boundary?
Does that mean closer to the center of the existing 200 mile limit, i.e. less than 200 miles from the beach or does it mean as close as 50 miles outside the existing 200 mile circle? That reads as if it were written to enable instant backpedaling when the outrage gets too loud for the misadministration to ignore.
If it opens the area to virtually unlimited fishing, it will lead to even greater loss of fish stocks and increased environmental damage. After all who is going to patrol that large an area now that NOAA and the NMFS have been depopulated in the interest of “efficiency”? It will just mean another huge swath of overfished water filled with Chinese and Russian fishing boats and dead coral.
3 Likes
I don’t think this is necessarily the great idea that you do based on how that particular industry operates:
2 Likes
But when can we start whaling and sealing again? It’s in my DNA to do it.
4 Likes
You got Norwegian DNA?
Trump Opens Up Nation’s Aquariums To Commercial Fishing - The Onion
Published:
April 23, 2025
WASHINGTON—Claiming that preservation efforts had impeded U.S. seafood production for far too long, President Donald Trump announced Wednesday that he had opened up the nation’s aquariums to commercial fishing. “Starting today, fishermen will finally be allowed to sail into America’s protected aquariums, drop a net in any marine exhibit they please, and begin trawling,” Trump said at a press conference, adding that commercial fishing would now be permitted in all glass-enclosed fish tanks, coastal mammal habitats, and interactive tide pools at the more than 150 aquariums across the United States, regardless of whether spectators were currently enjoying them or not. “How can Democrats stand by and watch hardworking fishermen suffer when the Monterey Bay Aquarium has an entire kelp forest filled with sharks, jellyfish, and an absolutely enormous sunfish just sitting there, going to waste. That’s why I’ve decided to waive the entrance fees nationwide and open every exhibit to fishing, even the ones with penguins, dolphins, and otters.” At press time, Trump announced an additional executive order allowing commercial seafood vessels to fish in exotic pet stores, home aquariums, and private backyard koi ponds.
6 Likes
And so shall it be …
No form of sea life will be safe until the orange SMOAT is just a bad memory.
1 Like
Yes, fishermen are hardly mariners at all? Lowlifes, smelly, rule breakers, and tiny wee boats that always get in the way with a flick on of the fishing lights?
Who cares about their jobs? Nobody here, that’s for sure.
Hey, I love fish. Yum!
3 Likes
Then you should love rules that protect the spawning areas from being fished by these tiny wee boats:
Manned by smelly fishermen that breaks rules and anoy law abaiding mariners doing their best to stay awake on watch.
Limiting the catches to ensure that there will be something to make Filet.o-Fish Burgers from in the future is a really stupid idea:
Don’t feed the troll.
2 Likes
Oh, I do, I do.
It seems on this subject, ANY fishing boat is an enemy.
Your English is ok, ombugge, but you haven’t quite mastered sarcasm yet, have you?
Did I say that. Noooooooooo. Nothing of the sort.
Simply banning fishing from vast areas of ocean is more stupid though. We do it in Australia too, so I’m criticising my own stupid pollies for shutting off so much of our EEZ that we are compelled to import fish from smelly fish farms in Thailand and Vietnam.
How much for a good whale steak in Norway?
2 Likes
unless you want to see thread closed as things devolve quickly. Example; why were certain areas closed to fishing in the first place has not been asked, just an immediate defense of anything the mango Mussolini does.
OK, why? Block-off Biden?
1 Like
Well yes, that too, but more recently due to relation to the Palmer family of Stonington, CT
Thank you!!
Ahh now I understand. You have been fooling us all this time.
You have been writing Aussie style sarcasm so cleverly that we thought you actually meant this BS!!!
The meaning and intent of all my comments are obvious to everyone … who can read English.
So why don’t you answer questions about overly restrictive fishing regulations and blanket closing of entire zones which were previously harvested, denying fishermen and the community access on spurious grounds.
Do you really think it’s impossible to sustainably harvest natural fish stocks?
Why is opening fishing zones to commercial fishing always and everywhere an unmitigated evil?
We all know you hate Trump but what have you got against fishing?
2 Likes
Allowing commercial fishing in the PRIMNM ( established by G.W. Bush and expanded under Obama) will open the area to habitat destroying commercial fishing operations and reduce fish populations in the Pacific Ocean as the PRIMNM is a major nursery for the entire ocean.
An Australian complaining about any objection to removing these restrictions while not spending more time convincing the Australian government to greatly reduce protections in the Great Barrier Reef and other protected marine areas controlled by Australia is disingenuous at best. Australia should also consider reducing the national parks which could be developed for commercial uses. Every waking hour should be spent where their influence could make a difference in their own country by removing these idiotic no fishing no mining or developent regulations. Make Australia more like America which is best explained by this scene.
1 Like
And what’s your scientific justification for that broad and all-encompassing declaration?
It’s amazing to me that you know so much about my activities that you can unilaterally declare I lack action on those subjects in Australia. How do you know my activities in that area? Details please.
I absolutely agree, but our feckless pollies are just like yours and beholden to the environazis. In fact, the Lefty, socialist (almost communist) Labor state government of Victoria deliberately declared an area of the Gippsland Basin to the east of Melbourne containing vast amounts of natural gas and water suitable for agriculture to be a new National Park in order to prevent extraction of gas or water from underground. Think about that.
The result is that along with the staged closure of Victoria’s brown coal fired power stations (the cheapest electricity in Australia) and a government directive to go to unreliable, so-called renewable electricity (solar and wind) with gas peaking plants for the regular occasions when um, the sun goes down or the wind stops, that Victoria is constructing a gas import terminal so that it can import gas (which is sitting ready underground near an existing gas processing plant). Naturally the government prohibits installing warm, cosy gas heating and hot water to new housing to save gas.
This is not a case of unintended consequences. It’s deliberate destruction of Victoria;s once huge industries to impoverish the state and drive up electricity prices to unaffordable levels.
I therefore fully support removing such national parks for the benefit of the citizens of Victoria.
That’s just one example.
I absolutely agree. I’ll buy you a beer when you’re next over this way. We sound like soulmates.
P.S. Still waiting for your response to my question. Perhaps you forgot.
Careful there. Some will believe that. Snopes gets inquiries constantly about an article in the Babylon Bee wanting to know if what they just read is true.
1 Like
Yes, but with only the present guy in office.
1 Like