Conservation & Environment

July 31, 2013 — The effort to get Alaska’s commercially caught salmon recertified under the Marine Stewardship Council’s label of sustainability took a major step forward Wednesday with the release of a draft report. KDLG’s Mike Mason has the story.

Listen to the story from KDLG

August 1, 2013 — NOAA Fisheries announces national grant awards through its Species Recovery Grants Program.

Authorized under Section 6 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, the Species Recovery Grants Program supports management, research and outreach efforts designed to bring listed species to the point where ESA protections are no longer necessary. Two awards for Northeast Region to 1) the state of Maine to help restore Atlantic salmon, Atlantic sturgeon, shortnose sturgeon and other species on the Penobscot River through the removal of the Veazie Dam and 2) to the states of Virginia and Maryland to improve understanding of habitat use by both sub-adult and juvenile Atlantic sturgeon within the Chesapeake Bay. Click here to read more.

 

July 29, 2013 — Seals have a tendency to hang around boats and snatch fish from nets, and for centuries people fishing off New England would kill any seal they saw. Between the late 19th century and the early 1960s, the state of Massachusetts offered a bounty of up to $5 for every pinniped slaughtered. By 1972, harbor seals, once common on Cape Cod, were becoming rarer, and gray seals were all but wiped out. But that year Congress passed the Marine Mammal Protection Act, a law that forbids the killing, capture, or harassment of whales, dolphins, polar bears, manatees, seals, and similar animals—creatures that commercial hunting and other human activity had taken, in some cases, to the brink of extinction.

The act has been a tremendous success. In March 2011, a one-day count of gray seals in Massachusetts waters found 15,756 of them, compared to 5,611 in 1999. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration estimates that the gray seal population in the Western Atlantic grew annually between 6 and 9 percent during the past three decades.

Seals are taking the blame for luring sharks, and at the same time the old resentment is flaring up among some fishermen, who say seals are harming the cape’s struggling fishing industry. Gordon Waring, a seal specialist at the NOAA, cautions that marine biologists don’t actually know how seals interact with fisheries, and so far there is no sign that they are eating more than their habitat can support. But it is clear that seals are attracted to fishing boats and piers, and fishermen who watch seals stealing fish from their nets justifiably resent the greedy creatures, which the Marine Mammal Protection Act says can’t even be shooed away (that would be “harassment”). Fish stocks, particularly of cod, are down, and while that’s mostly due to other factors such as decades of overfishing, seals are a visible target for blame. There has even been talk of a seal cull, and a Nantucket-based group calling itself the Seal Abatement Coalition is lobbying Congress to remove gray seals from the list of species covered by the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Seal culls are already a regular occurrence in Canada, which has historically had much larger seal populations.

When a tourist from Colorado was bitten by a great white shark last summer while swimming off Cape Cod, an excited media made predictable comparisons to the 1975 blockbuster Jaws. The 50-year-old man, who was fortunate to survive with bites to his legs but with all his limbs still attached, was the first human to be attacked by a shark in Massachusetts waters since 1936. As more sighting reports poured in, 2012 became Cape Cod’s “Summer of the Shark.”

We all love a good shark scare, but in this case the coverage wasn’t completely exaggerated. In 1974, when Jaws was filmed just off the cape on Martha’s Vineyard, great white sharks—known to marine biologists simply as white sharks—were rare, with one or two spotted in New England waters each year. In 2012, there were more than 20 confirmed sightings at Cape Cod beaches, and so far this summer two beaches have been closed temporarily after the sharks’ telltale dorsal fins were seen just offshore. Scientists have now tagged 34 great whites off of Cape Cod, and the data show the minivan-size fish sticking to a clear migration pattern—down south or out to sea in the winter and, like the Kennedys, back to the cape every summer.

Jaws aside, these sharks are not hunting unsuspecting vacationers. They’re after seals, which have soared in population in recent years thanks to a national conservation effort that has proven enormously successful—some might say too successful. The shark resurgence comes down to simple food chain economics, but it also shows how wildlife conservation can sometimes have weird and unpredictable consequences.

Read the full story at Slate

 

July 17, 2013 — In accordance with the statutory requirements of the Endangered Species Act, NOAA Fisheries today released for public comment a draft proposal to designate critical habitat for threatened loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta caretta) in the northwestern Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico.  Critical habitat designations identify the habitat that is essential to endangered and threatened species.

Once finalized, critical habitat designation would not necessarily result in any restrictions on human activities. Only if an activity required federal actions, funding or permitting would the agency in question need to work with NOAA to avoid, reduce or mitigate potential impacts to the species or its habitat.

Members of the public can now submit comments on the agency’s draft proposal to aid in the recovery of this species. Last year, the President directed that any potential future designations of critical habitat carefully consider all public comments on relevant science and economic impact, including those that suggest methods for minimizing regulatory burdens. Any critical habitat designation will include a full analysis of economic impact, including impact on jobs, and will strive, to the extent permitted by law, to avoid unnecessary burdens and costs on states, tribes, localities, and the private sector.

“Loggerhead sea turtles are vulnerable to a variety of hazards that could threaten them,” said Sam Rauch, acting NOAA assistant administrator for fisheries.  “When developing this proposal, NOAA Fisheries carefully examined a number of factors, including the unique biology and life history needs of the species as well as economic impacts.  With assistance from the public, we can identify the right habitat these animals need to survive for decades to come.”

In 2007, NOAA and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service received legal petitions from the Center for Biological Diversity, the Turtle Island Restoration Network and Oceana, requesting that loggerhead turtles in the North Pacific and the Northwest Atlantic be reclassified as endangered distinct population segments, and that critical habitat be designated.  These petitions prompted a formal review of the status of the turtles under the requirements of the Endangered Species Act.

Following detailed reviews by scientific experts, in 2011, NOAA Fisheries changed the listing of loggerhead sea turtles under the Endangered Species Act from a single threatened species to nine distinct population segments Two of these segments occur in United States’ waters, in the northwest Atlantic Ocean, where the turtles are threatened, and the north Pacific Ocean, where they are endangered.

The critical habitat proposed today for designation includes some nearshore reproductive habitat (areas directly off of nesting/hatching beaches from North Carolina through Mississippi), winter habitat (North Carolina), breeding habitat (Florida), and constricted migratory corridors (North Carolina and Florida).

No critical habitat is proposed for designation within the north Pacific Ocean segment. Areas under U.S. jurisdiction around Hawaii and along the U.S. west coast represent a very small percentage of suitable loggerhead habitat and do not meet the definition of critical habitat.

Written comments on the proposed regulations filed today must be sent to NOAA Fisheries no later than September 16, 2013.

NOAA’s Fisheries Service will consider public comments and any new information submitted during this period as it develops a final rule.

The public may submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at: www.regulations.gov or by visiting the comment page on the Office of Protected Resources website.

NOAA’s Fisheries Service will also accept written comments mailed to: Office of Protected Resources, NOAA Fisheries, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910; or faxed to: 301-713-4060.

Background

Loggerhead sea turtles were listed as threatened throughout their range in 1978. In 2008, a biological review team of scientists identified nine biologically discrete and significant DPSs. In 2011, NOAA Fisheries issued a final rule changing the listing of loggerhead sea turtles under the Endangered Species Act from a single threatened species to nine distinct population segments.

Under the ESA, an “endangered” species is “in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.” A ‘threatened” species is “likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.”

Read the release from NOAA

July 22, 2013 — Today, contractors will begin to remove the Veazie Dam from Maine’s Penobscot River. This removal will reconnect the river to the Gulf of Maine for the first time in nearly two centuries.

Breaching this dam—the dam closest to the sea—is the next step in a larger effort to improve access to nearly 1,000 miles of river habitat on the river.

Last summer, we removed the Great Works Dam; additional fish passage improvements at dams in the upper watershed could start as early as next year.  These removals will greatly improve access to spawning, rearing, and nursery habitat for endangered Atlantic salmon, American shad, and river herring.

Read the full story from the NOAA Fisheries Office of Habitat Conservation

June 24, 2013 — Using data obtained during six years of regular aerial surveys and genetics data collected by a consortium of research groups, scientists have strengthened evidence pointing to the central Gulf of Maine as a mating ground for North Atlantic right whales, according to a study recently published online in the journal Endangered Species Research.

The North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis) is one of the most endangered marine mammal species in the world and has been intensively studied for decades. Much has been learned about its habitat, behavior, and population demographics. But until now, there was little to indicate where these whales mated, a big missing piece in the puzzle of their life history.

"A high proportion of potential mates aggregated in the central Gulf of Maine between November and January, and these same individuals produced a calf a year later. We concluded that this is a pretty strong indication of a mating ground if the gestation period is 12 months," said Tim Cole, lead author and a biologist at the Woods Hole Laboratory of NOAA’s Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC).

Through aerial surveys, the researchers documented not only how many but also which right whales were present in the study area during 2002-2008. Individual animals were identified using a photo identification catalog maintained at the New England Aquarium that includes most of the adults in the population. Using genetic data gathered in other field work, known fathers seen in the surveys were identified, as were known mothers, who were identified by association with a calf.

The resulting analyses showed that the animals seen included a higher proportion of reproductively successful animals than were present in other areas that these whales used seasonally. The researchers further assumed a 12-month gestation period for North Atlantic right whales, similar to that estimated for the closely-related southern right whale (Eubalaena australis) by the South African whale biologist Dr. Peter Best.

How definitive is the study? Cole says that while it's a strong indicator, there could well be other mating areas, and its not clear how fixed the areas might be. In fact, since the study ended, fewer right whales have been observed in the area during what would be the mating period. The study also found a similar, if less dramatic, indication that Roseway Basin – an area south of Nova Scotia – may also serve as a mating ground.

"We are still seeing right whales in the central Gulf of Maine, just not in the same numbers. They are still out there, but where they all are is the big question. The decline is significant, so something appears to have changed," Cole said. "The good news is that calf production has been fairly good, with 22 calves born in 2011, 7 in 2012, and 20 this past winter. It will be interesting to see how many calves are born next year."

Most of the North Atlantic right whale population spends the spring and summer on feeding grounds off the northeastern U.S. and the Canadian Maritimes. In late fall and early winter, pregnant females migrate to waters off the southeastern U.S. to give birth. Mothers and calves are detected during intensive aerial surveys conducted from December through March off the coasts of Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina. Mothers and calves return to the northeast feeding grounds in the early spring, and the calves stay with their mothers for a year following birth.

Recovery of this endangered species depends on successful reproduction, but current reproductive rates for North Atlantic right whales are much lower than those for the recovering populations of southern right whales. The reasons for this are unknown, but may include a low level of genetic variability and /or inbreeding, disease, biotoxins, pollutants, food supply limitations, and habitat loss. Increased ocean noise from coastal development could also impact the species by triggering behavioral changes that negatively impact reproduction. Determining the right whale's conception period and mating grounds are important steps in learning about the factors that may be impairing reproduction.

In addition to Cole, study authors included Allison Glass Henry, Peter Duley and Richard Pace from NOAA's Northeast Fisheries Science Center; Philip Hamilton from the New England Aquarium; Bradley White from Trent University in Ontario, Canada; and Tim Frasier from St. Mary’s University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.

Read the release from NOAA

July 23, 2013 — Sea life in the Atlantic could be in for a very unpleasant surprise, according to the group Oceana. They say seismic air gun blasts, which are a precursor to deep-water oil drilling, could be shot over and over again for months on end in a wide area of the sea off the southeastern coast of the U.S.

Matthew Huelsenbeck, a marine scientist with Oceana, said the underwater blasts are so loud they could be damaging to dolphins, whales, fish and the fishing industry as a whole. The air guns are towed behind ships and emit loud blasts for seismic probing of the sea floor in search of oil and gas.

"So imagine dynamite going off in your living room every ten seconds for days to weeks on end," Huelsenbeck said. "Similar impacts would happen to you as they would happen to marine life. You could get injured, or at the very least you're going to have to leave your home."

Huelsenbeck stated that, according to a government study, the action could injure more than 130,000 whales and dolphins in the area where the seismic exploration is being proposed, in the Atlantic from Delaware to Florida. He said that especially troubling is potential harm to the critically-endangered North Atlantic right whales. There are only about 500 of the species left alive, and they are very susceptible to sound.

According to Huelsenbeck, this technology has been used in the past, and has been detrimental to the fishing industry. Some 222,000 jobs in the coastal fishing and seafood industries could be disrupted.

Read the full story at Public News Service

EDDINGTON, Maine — July 23, 2013 — Two yellow bulldozers clamped down on the face of the hulking Veazie Dam on Monday, cracking open the concrete buttress that has separated Maine’s Penobscot River from the Atlantic Ocean for nearly 200 years.

The breach, the culmination of an innovative $62 million public-private partnership, is a critical step toward revitalizing the river by restoring endangered wild Atlantic salmon and other sea-running fish to the upstream waters where they were born.

But it is more than that. The destruction of the dam, Maine’s outermost gate to the sea, is about repair and revival of relationships between tribal people, conservationists, power companies, and sportsmen for whom the river is a lifeline, too.

“We are talking of breaching a dam, but . . . instead I think we are talking about repairing a breach,” said John Bullard, Northeast regional administrator for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries.

That is especially true for members of the Penobscot Indian Nation.

For them, the removal of the hydroelectric dam and the return of the salmon underscore a much larger dream for preserving the river.

Read the full story at The Boston Globe 

July 22, 2013 — The following is an excerpt from "The Bottom Line: For New England’s Fishing Fleet it’s Déjà vu All Over Again," a National Geographic News Watch editorial by The Pew Charitable Trusts' Lee Crockett and Peter Baker, originally published June 11.

As an editorial in the Boston Globe observed, things did not look good for the coming fishing season. Fishermen were “returning from three or four days’ hauling on Georges Bank with near-empty holds.” And while other regions of the country were successfully managing their fisheries “New England’s council has been unable to do so.”

The year was 1993.

Twenty years later, the sense of déjà vu is unshakeable. A new season brings a troubling scenario of depleted fish populations and deficient management. Fourteen of the region’s 20 groundfish—or bottom dwelling—species are currently overexploited. Cod stocks are at the lowest levels ever recorded. New England’s best captains could not find enough cod in the past year to meet more than a third of their allotted quota on Georges Bank. It is, officially, an economic disaster, as the U.S. Department of Commerce declared last fall.

In short, here we are, with our storied fishing grounds in even worse shape than they were two decades ago.

The tools to rein in overfishing and rebuild healthy populations have been there all along — in the form of science-based catch limits required by the nation’s top fishing law, the Magnuson-Stevens Act. For much of the country, the law has worked: Over the past 11 years, rebuilding plans have restored 32 previously severely depleted fisheries.

Yet New England stands apart as a place where treasured species are chronically subjected to overfishing. The waste from accidental catch is not adequately controlled, or even monitored. And important protections for marine habitat could soon be dismantled.

As in 1993, the nation’s top fishing law is again due for reauthorization by Congress. Last month, leaders from the public, private, and nonprofit sectors gathered in Washington, D.C. for a special summit to discuss the future of our nation’s fisheries and how the law should change to meet current challenges. Some regional critics pointed to the ongoing difficulties in New England as an excuse to weaken the law’s requirements to set strong catch limits and rebuild depleted species.

Read the full story at National Geographic

Analysis: Addressing the New England cod fishery in an online National Geographic op-ed (“The Bottom Line: For New England’s Fishing Fleet it’s Déjà vu All Over Again,” 6/11), Lee Crockett and Peter Baker, of the Pew Charitable Trusts, make several misstatements of fact and overstate the challenges facing the resource.

Assessments of cod stocks in New England have clearly been low. But writing that, “cod stocks are at the lowest level ever recorded,” and that fishing grounds are “in even worse shape than they were two decades ago” overstates their current challenges. Both stocks in question, Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank, are actually up from recently recorded lows. According to estimates from NOAA’s January Northeast Regional Stock Assessment Workshop (SAW), the spawning stock biomass for Gulf of Maine cod was last estimated at 9,900 metric tons, an increase from the 6,300 metric tons estimated in the late 1990s. The assessment also estimated biomass for Georges Bank cod at 13,200 metric tons, up from its mid-2000s low of 10,100 metric tons. Put simply, and contrary to the authors’ assertions, neither species is at its lowest level.

The authors further claim, “New England’s best captains could not find enough cod in the past year to meet more than a third of their allotted quota on Georges Bank.” Meeting yearly allocations is important economically for the fishery, but it is not a very reliable way to gauge a stock’s health. It is true that, based on statistics compiled by NOAA, fishermen only caught 35 percent of their 2012 allocation of Georges Bank cod. But fishermen also faced difficulties meeting quota for healthy species. Georges Bank haddock, for example, is not overfished, according to NOAA, and is generally regarded as a recent success story in fisheries management. Nonetheless, fishermen caught only four percent of their allocation in 2012.

Neither fact tells much about the condition of either stock, other than to show that many variables are responsible for whether or not fishermen are able to catch their quota. Factors such as climate and restrictions on things like gear type and catch size all play a role, as do limitations caused by “choke species” bycatch. Groundfish habitats overlap, and regardless of which fish are targeted, fishermen will inevitably catch other groundfish species as bycatch.  If the available quota for any species is too low, it can prevent fishermen from pursuing the fish for which quota is still available, turning the low-quota fish into a “choke species.”

The problem currently facing the industry is bigger than fishermen simply not being able to catch cod. Should the cod return in numbers before the next round of allocations, the currently low for cod quota may also prevent them from catching other, healthier species.

The article holds in esteem the Magnuson-Stevens Act’s “science-based catch limits,” but glosses over the fact that the science behind the catch limits on cod and other stocks has been subject to dramatic reversals in the recent past. As recently as 2008, NOAA stock assessments showed Gulf of Maine cod to be relatively healthy, and on the way to being rebuilt by 2014. This outlook suddenly shifted with a series of assessments beginning in 2011, ultimately leading to 2013’s steep reduction in catch limits. In contrast, the catch limits for pollock were increased by 600 percent in 2010, after new information revealed that the species was much more abundant than previously thought. The catch limits are “science-based,” but that science has often been less than certain.

With the available science on cod shifting so dramatically in the span of three years, it is inappropriate to fault the fishing industry, which has followed the catch limits set by NOAA, for stocks that have yet to fully rebound. The fishery needs catch limits that not only allow stocks to rebuild, but also allow the fishing industry to survive.

July 17, 2013 — A huge and sometimes controversial global project to label certain fish as ‘sustainable’ has produced the first comprehensive assessment of the impact of its own work.

The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) — which has been praised by some scientists and damned by others — says that it has identified nearly 400 separate improvements in fisheries that have received its stamp of approval, which brings consumer cachet and higher prices.

However, critics say that the in-house report does not address many of their concerns about the MSC, which they say can potentially mislead consumers by certifying fish stocks that are not harvested sustainably or should not be fished at all.

David Agnew, an environmental scientist and standards director at the MSC, which is based in London, rejects those criticisms. He says that the report shows improvements in multiple fisheries as a result of the certification programme. “The thing that is really startling is practically every fishery that is entering the programme is making improvements that can be tracked,” he told Nature.

Read the full story from Nature.com