Skip to content

Obama to Ban Recreational Fishing?

March 10, 2010
Mark Whittington
Source …..

The Obama administration is considering new environmental rules that would, in effect ban recreational fishing in the United States, according to ESPN. This move is apparently being contemplated under pressure from environmental groups.

“The Obama administration will accept no more public input for a federal strategy that could prohibit U.S. citizens from fishing the nation’s oceans, coastal areas, Great Lakes, and even inland waters.

“This announcement comes at the time when the situation supposedly still is “fluid” and the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force still hasn’t issued its final report on zoning uses of these waters.

“That’s a disappointment, but not really a surprise for fishing industry insiders who have negotiated for months with officials at the Council on Environmental Quality and bureaucrats on the task force. These angling advocates have come to suspect that public input into the process was a charade from the beginning.”

The excuse for this contemplated ban is the notion that recreational fishing as well as commercial fishing is depleting the stock of fish in American waters. This notion is disputed by fishing groups, which fear not only that a ban would prohibit Americans from pursuing a traditional form of recreation, but also devastate the industry that supports recreational fishing. Angling groups maintain that there is no basis in science for an attempt to ban recreational fishing.

If the ban is ordered, it would likely come via executive order rather than an attempt to have Congress pass legislation. Various environmental groups are demanding that such an executive order be issued as soon as possible.

The idea that any president would contemplate arbitrarily banning a sport that millions of Americans enjoy, from young boys dropping lines at the local fishing hole, to adults struggling with Marlins on the high seas, is just mind boggling. A potential ban on recreational fishing suggests that this administration is possessed by a myopic version of environmental ideology that transcends common sense. It also feels empowered to tell Americans what they can or cannot do at a whim.

If a ban on recreational fishing were to take hold, one would suspect that a ban on recreational hunting would not be far behind. Environmental groups have been trying to stop hunting for decades and now seem to have an administration willing to do their bidding.

There will almost certainly be a pushback against these plans. To paraphrase the president himself, Americans have traditionally clung to their fishing rods as much as they do their guns and their God. The writer Norman Mclean wrote a story, ‘A River Runs Through It’, that explored the spiritual aspects of fly fishing. The story was made into a film by Robert Redford.

Incidentally, one of the most famous anglers in the United States is a former vice president named Dick Cheney. So far Cheney has not commented on the proposed ban on recreational fishing. When he does, the effects should be interesting to behold.

Sources: Culled out: Obama administration will accept no more public input for federal fishery strategy, Robert Montgomery, ESPN Outdoors, March 8th, 2010

A River Runs Through It and Other Stories, Norman Mclean, University of Chicago Press, 2001

4 Comments leave one →
  1. David permalink
    March 18, 2010 1:28 pm

    I would like to say this is ludicrais. Banning fishing that is. As far back as I can remember fishing along side many other things have been an American past time. My ansestors rangeing back threw history as the American, Cherokee, Itlain, and Irish decenets have all fished. How can they deside that fishing is depleting or supplys of fish in our waters when we dilagently stock our waters out of fisheres. I have become confussed by our goverment.

  2. Richard permalink
    March 12, 2010 6:02 pm

    The article suggests that Obama could end fishingm ake it unlawful, merely by issuing an Executive Order (EO(; not true. he may try such an underhanded move, but it would have NO lawful, much less Constitutional “force and effect of law”. Why? Because an EO only has legal effect, force, WITHIN the Executive branch of governement; such an order exists only to direct, or otherwise command action(s) within the various agencies of the executive branch.

    If such an order were issued, with the intent to make it a “law of the land”, it would in fact be legislation by fiat. Furthermore if the issuance of an EO, with the intent to make it a lw within the states it violates every tenet of the Consitution; it would, in fact and effect give the president the power to create law(s); a power granted, constitutionally, ONLY to Congress.

    Furthermore even if a federal law is passed against fishing, that law applies only to such lands/territories as the federal government has jurisdiction over; and that jurisdiction does NOT exist within the boundaries of each state who is responsible for fishing laws withIN their state/Republic.

    Having said that however, and considering the action(s) of the current administration in the District of Criminals, aka D.C., their logic is, Consitution, WHAT Constitution….we don’t obey no steenk’n Constitution.

  3. March 12, 2010 9:27 am

    nice is information in your site.. thanks

  4. Terry permalink
    March 11, 2010 5:41 pm

    I love fishing. I didn’t vote for him. I believe in American and I am a American. Those That want to live under the UN can find many other Communist countries to live in. Senators and Congressman should remember we don’t have a Dictatorship.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: