Efforts to improve the health of Biscayne National Park's fisheries could be derailed by Florida politicians/Jameson Clifton

A challenge to Biscayne National Park's efforts to improve the health of their fisheries has been mounted by three of Florida's congressional representatives, including one who has drafted legislation to require state approval before the National Park Service moves to restrict commercial or recreational fishing access in areas of the Great Lakes or U.S. marine waters that it oversees.

In asking the House Natural Resources Committee to intervene by holding an oversight hearing into the park's fisheries plan, GOP Reps. Carlos Curbelo, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Mario Diaz-Balart claim the proposal, which would create a no-fishing zone across 10,500 acres of the park's waters, would have a harsh impact on Florida's recreational fishing industry.

"Florida is the top recreational fishing and boating state in the nation, earning the state the title of 'Fishing Capital of the World.' Biscayne National Park is an active, urban park with visitors enjoying a host of recreational activities, including fishing and boating -- resulting in nearly 10 million angling trips each year," they wrote in a letter (attached) to the committee chairs. "The (park's Fisheries Management Plan) and (General Management Plan), as written, would have immediate, extensive, and negative socio-economic impacts in the affected area with an estimated loss of more than 500 boat-related jobs and over $40 million in product revenue with turn-over.

"Additionally, the impacts this closure could have on recreational anglers, charter-for-hire operations, commercial fishermen, fish houses, restaurants, marinas, and other small businesses should be taken into account before this GMP and FMP can be implemented."

Requests to discuss with the three representatives the park's fisheries plan and review their economic projections were met with no response. National Parks Conservation Association managers, meanwhile, were quick to criticize the politicians.

“We feel that both of these measures are ridiculous and entirely unnecessary," Caroline McLaughlin, NPCA's Biscayne program analyst, said Friday. 

Park Service scientists at Biscayne, she said, “are telling us that Biscayne’s ecosystem is dying. We need to take immediate measures to protect the park.”

“We’re extremely disappointed that members of our congressional delegation are obviously catering to special interests," Ms. McLaughlin said a bit later. "It’s Congress' responsibility to protect these special places and not be beholden to special interests.”

Biscayne's watery underworld has historically featured a wondrous and bountiful array of species, from bonefish, tarpon and oysters to groupers, barracuda, spiny lobster, and lustrous parrotfish. However, of the few hundred species that inhabit the park'€™s waters, 150 have faced population pressures from recreational and commercial fishing, according to the National Park Service.

For the past 15 years officials, environmentalists, anglers, and boaters have struggled to agree on an appropriate strategy, leaving the future of America's largest marine park, and part of the only tropical coral reef system in the continental United States, unresolved.

But last month the Park Service presented a new general management plan for the park that sets aside a no-fishing marine reserve zone to improve the declining reef's condition. A final Record of Decision instituting that plan is expected by month's end.

"A marine reserve is one of the most effective ways for us to encourage restoration of the park's coral reef ecosystem and it received strong support from the public during development of the plan," Superintendent Brian Carlstrom said last month. "In addition to producing larger fish and more fish for snorkelers and divers to enjoy, the marine reserve is expected to have a spillover effect, improving the fishing experience outside the zone."

The no-fishing marine reserve zone will set aside 10,502 acres (about 6 percent) of the 172,924-acre park's waters. An expanded slow speed zone along the mainland shoreline will improve manatee protection and an idle speed zone (no-wake) at Elliott Key will enhance boater and swimmer safety.

“If we can’t protect only 6 percent of Biscayne National Park, we’re really failing to preserve the resources for the America’s public," said Ms. McLaughlin.

While the three Republicans implied in their letter seeking an oversight hearing that the Park Service didn't take stakeholders' interests into consideration in formulating the plan, the park received tens of thousands of unique public comments over the years as the GMP took shape, and spent time keeping the representatives' staff up-to-date on progress of the plan.

"There were 43,000 unique comments, over 100,000 comments in total, 22 public meetings with over 1,000 people in attendance over the 15 years of plan development," Superintendent Carlstom said Friday during a phone call. 

The superintendent, when asked about the efforts by Reps. Curbelo, Ros-Lehtinen and Diaz-Balart to derail the fisheries plan, said "nothing related to Congress surprises me anymore. It disappoints me, but it does not surprise me."

Aside from the request for a hearing and the proposed legislation, implementation of the fisheries plan is up in the air. It will be gradually implemented depending on available funding and staffing. And before the marine reserve zone can be formally established, a special park regulation will have to be issued, a process that would run into 2016. That regulation would define the various aspects and requirements of visitor access within the zone.

The proposed legislation that would restrict the Park Service's authority to manage its waters was developed by Rep. Ros-Lehtinen's staff. It reads, The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce shall not restrict recreational or commercial fishing access to any State or territorial marine waters or Great Lakes waters within the jurisdiction of the National Park Service or the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, respectively, unless those restrictions are developed in coordination with, and approved by, the fish and wildlife management agency of the State or territory that has fisheries management authority over those waters.