This is the first installment of a six-part video series on the fisheries, courtesy of the Environmental Defense Fund.
This is the first installment of a six-part video series on the fisheries, courtesy of the Environmental Defense Fund.
Northeast commercial fishermen and industry observers have expressed concern that recent limit increases in skate, and possible increases in pollock may not be enough to help the fleet, and underscore failed scientific understanding on the part of regulators. Emotions range from angst to gratitude.
To try to understand these concerns, Saving Seafood spoke with fishermen from Maine to Rhode Island, NOAA industry leaders from New Bedford, and the Cape Cod Commercial Hook Fishermen's Association.
by JONATHAN HEMMERDINGER
Special to Saving Seafood
WASHINGTON – July 14, 2010 – Northeast commercial fishermen and industry observers had mixed reactions to recent skate trip limit changes and indications that regulators may soon increase catch limits for pollock, a critical New England groundfish.
In mid-June, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced revised annual catch limits for skate and cut the skate wing possession limit to 5,000 pounds per trip. The new regulations, which result from new stock information and take effect July 16, altered an earlier proposal to cut the daily trip limit to just 1,900 pounds.
And when 80 percent of the total quota is caught, the daily limit will drop to just 500 pounds if NOAA predicts the quota will be exceeded, said NOAA spokesperson Maggie Mooney-Seus.
But until July 16, boats continue fishing under the old limits, which allow day-boat fishermen—those leaving and departing port on the same day—to keep up to 10,000 pounds of skate wings per trip. Vessels fishing on trips lasting more than 24 hours are allowed 20,000 pounds of skate wings under the old rules.
The fishing community's reaction to the 5,000-pound cap has been mixed.
Many boats in the New England fleet, particularly larger boats targeting groundfish on multi-day trips, land skate as bycatch. The boats keep and sell skate, but at prices far below target species.
But skate are unavoidable, some fishermen say, and the new daily trip limit restricts how much skate can be kept, not how much can be caught.
Some of these fishermen say a skate limit of 5,000 pounds—let alone 1,900 pounds, as originally proposed—will only result in more skate being dumped, often dead, overboard.
"We are going to kill them and throw them over the side," said Carlos Rafael, who owns one of the largest groundfish fleets in New England.
NOAA's quota is "not reducing the catch. All they are doing is make us kill them and not profit from them," he added, predicting millions of dollars in lost skate revenue.
Mooney-Seus told SavingSeafood the agency’s Scientific and Statistical Committee estimates a 50 percent survival rate for discarded skate.
The new regulations also concern the day-boat skate fishery, which includes smaller boats out of ports such as Chatham and New Bedford, Mass., and Point Judith, R.I.
Tom Dempsey, a policy analyst at Cape Cod Commercial Hook Fishermen’s Association, said this year’s regulations—a mix between old and new rules—may spell an early end to the skate season.
The problem is timing, Dempsey said.
For the first few months of the season, fishermen have fished under the old, higher-trip limits. As a result, the skate quota is filling up fast, Dempsey said.
As of June 24, less than eight weeks into the season, the fleet had landed 39 percent of the 2010 season quota. At that rate, Dempsey estimates 60 percent of the quota will be filled by July 16, when the trip limit drops to 5,000 pounds.
Not long after than, Dempsey estimates, the quota may hit 80 percent—at which point daily skate limits could drop to 500 pounds if officials predict the quota will exceed 100 percent by the end of the fishing year.
If that happens, skate fishing will be economically unviable for smaller day-boat operators.
Skate fishermen, Dempsey said, are “staring down the face of this problem.”
Mooney-Seus of NOAA said a drop to 500 pounds is possible, but the agency expects "the fishery will be able to land 100 percent of its quota under the 5,000-pound" limit.
Tobey Curtis, NOAA fishery policy analysis, said if the fishery reaches 80 percent of quota "with only a few days left in the year, and [is] not expected to land 100 percent of the quota, NOAA could choose not to change the trip limit."
Skate limits concern monkfishermen
Dempsey fears the new skate quota will impact another critical fishery—monkfish.
Although skate is bycatch to monk fishermen, ancillary skate revenue makes monkfish trips profitable to small boats, Dempsey said. And because “70 percent of monkfish work is [spent] handling and cutting skate," a 500-pound limit means the "same work" with significantly less revenue. The trips, he said, will no longer be worthwhile.
The bottom line, Dempsey said: if skate limits drop to 500 pounds, fishermen “directly reliant” on skate are, in effect, “eliminated” from the fishery.
Insiders fear skate quota will go unfilled
Richard Canastra, co-owner of the Whaling City Seafood Display Auction in New Bedford and the Boston Seafood Display Auction, says the new skate rules, combined with the sector management system implemented May 1, may mean the 2010 skate quota is never reached.
In addition to the trip limit cut—which is 75 percent for boats on multi-day trips—the new sector system has led to a fleet consolidation. Under the sector plan, many boat owners have chosen to sell quota to others rather than fish. As a result, Canastra said only some 35 percent of the roughly 200 groundfish boats in the New England fleet are fishing.
But unlike groundfish quota, fishermen cannot trade skate catch limits. Fewer boats fishing mean fewer skate landed.
“We will never reach total allowable catch for skate because less effort,” said Canastra.
Mooney-Seus of NOAA disagreed. “2010 skate landings are already approaching their quotas. We do not expect the skate fisheries will have trouble attaining their quotas,” she said.
Canastra is not so sure. Answers will come in time, he said. “We have to take a look at the second quarter landing when the trip limit of 5,000 lbs come into effect.”
NOAA predicts revised pollock catch limits
In addition new skate regulations, NOAA may soon announce a significant boost to the annual catch limit of pollock, a key Northeast groundfish.
Pollock have been called a "choke stock" by fishermen because low pollock quotas threaten to trigger automatic sector closures. (In the Northeast sector system, all sector fishing ceases once the sector's quota is reached on any groundfish species.)
The current 2010 annual catch limit for pollock is 3,148 metric tons, 2,748 metric tons of which is allotted to the groundfish fleet.
But in a June 16 groundfish committee meeting NOAA staffers said they “hope to be able to increase the Pollock annual catch limit to 16 thousand [metric tons.],” according to a NOAA statement.
NOAA cautioned, however, that a change to the catch limit is not finalized. "This information is preliminary until the final stock assessment report is complete," said the agency.
NOAA's Mooney-Seus told SavingSeafood, the “pollock stock assessment workshop was held and the preliminary results indicate that the stock is rebuilt.”
She added that the new information comes from a "much more sophisticated model" incorporating improved age and growth information, two additional years of trawl information and catch and discard data from the recreational and commercial fisheries.
Mooney-Seus said NOAA is "working on an emergency action to increase the pollock catch limits for the year."
She added that the agency is "not sure what the final numbers are yet," but that the agency hopes to announce an increase in mid-July.
In a statement, NOAA's Northeast administrator Patricia Kurkul said the agency hopes "these actions demonstrate that we are dedicated to rebuilding the resource and enabling fishermen to continue fishing."
She added, "We made a commitment to the fishing industry to be as flexible as possible when new science is made available that affects management decisions."
Fishing industry reacts with praise, criticism
Though a pollock catch increase will help the industry, some insiders were quick to fault the agency for inconsistent data.
Canastra said the scale of the increase makes him question NOAA scientific credibility.
"The cat is out of the bag that they [were] 500 percent [off]," said Canastra. "If it's 500 percent off, how good was science?"
Rafael said that although the pollock increase "helps a lot," the new data shows NOAA's numbers are "screwed up." He fears similar errors in assessments of other species.
But some read NOAA's revision different.
David Goethel, a New Hampshire groundfisherman, is pleased the new "science tends to show what we see on the water."
But he urged caution. "Theses are new models [and there is] a certain degree of uncertainty with new models. We don't want to turn everyone loose and find in a couple years we are in a real mess."
Dempsey of CCCHFA called the revision "the best news anyone has heard out here in a long while." "Most sector fishermen say, 'This is going to allow me to stay on the water this year,'" Dempsey said.
And he said to give credit where credit is due.
"The way you get what you are looking for is to thank people," he said. "This is a legitimate win. NMFS clearly got the message and it got done."
A trio of representatives from the New England Fishery Management Council presided over a hearing at the Seaport Inn that drew a crowd of about 150, but after a routine introduction, the tone turned hostile.
After state Rep. William Straus, D-Mattapoisett, politely broached the possibility of a "doing nothing" option rather than pursing a system that would "pick winners and losers" without doing anything for the fishery, New Bedford Mayor Scott W. Lang took off the gloves.
"I think we need to throw out the baby with the bathwater, and along with that the washcloth, the soap and the rubber ducky," he said to the three representatives of the council.
He decried the proposed Amendment 15 regulations as "social engineering," backed by no studies, that will deliberately kill off a way of life in fishing communities all along the seaboard.
And he told the representatives that the system "is broken on your end, not ours."
Following a lengthy Powerpoint presentation about the outlines of the 360-page amendment, Lang and others zeroed in on two elements: the government's estimate of the job losses and the fleet shrinkage, and the consolidation of the fleet toward newer, bigger, more efficient boats.
Those elements are at the heart of NOAA administrator Jane Lubchenco's stated desire to shrink the fishing fleet nationwide through a system called "sector management" and "catch shares."
Fishing industry attorney Stephen Ouellette is seeking bar association and congressional inquiries into the ethics of enforcement and litigation lawyers who, according to a U.S. Inspector General's report, have covered virtually their entire operating expenses — almost $1 million a year — on inflated fines they levy against fishing boats and shoreside businesses.
Those who set the level of penalties should not benefit from those penalties, Ouellette has asserted in a lengthy letter to Lois Schiffer, chief counsel for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Citing the ongoing, 13-month investigation into NOAA law enforcement practices by the Commerce Department Inspector General's office, Ouellette said the probe "now reveals for the first time that the NOAA Office of General Counsel for Enforcement and Litigation not only sets the fines, but budgets for them as revenue, apparently drawing 99 percent of its non-salary operating expense from the Asset Forfeiture Fund."
He wrote to Schiffer on Sunday, informing her that he was "requesting an ethical opinion from our (Massachusetts) Board of Bar Overseers as to the propriety of agency counsel acting in the dual role of prosecutor and initial agency fact finder, including the setting of fines, while deriving economic benefit from the fines they assess and collect, as well as the practice of resisting disclosure of the basis for setting those fines."
Also on Sunday, Ouellette summarized his lengthy letter to four congressional offices at the forefront of the policy and ethics' battles with NOAA — Sen. John Kerry and Reps. Barney Frank and John Tierney, all Massachusetts Democrats, and Rep. Walter Jones, a North Carolina Republican.
The letter also openly challenges Schiffer's written plan not to look back at any miscarriages of justice by NOAA lawyers and agents. Due to Internet transmission problems, Schiffer's office could not be presented with questions about today's story until nearly deadline, so no responses were available.
Ouellette was the first lawyer to begin documenting the same catalogue of violations that Inspector General Todd Zinser has been bringing forward since March.
A 2001 Ouellette letter to the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy complained of "adoption of penalty schedules without public input and prevention of inquiry into the basis of levies for fines … in apparent violation of the due process clause of the U.S. Constitution," and creating "an air of distrust in the industry to further its enforcement actions, which threatens to undermine the industry…."
With political attention on fisheries issues at a high point, Gov. Deval Patrick arrives in Gloucester tomorrow to meet with city fishermen and community leaders about the future of the seafood industry in Massachusetts.
The governor’s appearance, scheduled to begin at the Jodrey State Fish Pier at 3:30, is being described as a roundtable discussion with fishermen, community leaders and industry stakeholders. It comes at the invitation of the Northeast Seafood Coalition, the Gloucester-based trade group at the forefront of a push for relief from the latest suite of federal fishing regulations.
“He is here to meet with fishermen and business interests and see how he can help,” Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs Ian Bowles, speaking for Patrick, told the Times this afternoon. “It is a time of uncertainty in the industry. We have been working to get some better science and are here to get some feedback.”
Read the complete story from the Gloucester Daily Times.
Where are these people going to go to work once they have lost their jobs and there are catch shares? There is nothing, there is nothing. A boat owner will sell his permit, will lease his permit, he will get a little bit of money but what happened to crew members whose been on the deck, worked boats for 30 years, they get nothing. Those issues have never been addressed.
Actually, one time I asked Allen Peterson who used to be the divisional director and he said, “Well, my job is to save fish. Your job is to save fishermen.” So that’s what’s happening. And now they are admitting there are going to be lost jobs, but nothing has been done for them. And yet, under this economy, President Obama every day preaches about creating jobs. And in an industry with a rebuilt fishery, we are losing jobs.
The fact that I have always been concerned about all through the years, you know it – it’s about the people. Magnuson does allow for people, the effects of the regulation has on the people, the effect on their lives and the economic effect on the people.
IIn 1994, we opened the Fishermen’s Assistance Centers in Massachusetts and then there was one in Maine and we were open for 12 years. I knew this because I ran the Gloucester Fishing Assistance Center and I was committed to the one in New Bedford and the one in Hyannis.
Never once in all these years did anybody came to me or to my superior and ask who are these people that have been affected, how have they been affected.
During those twelve years we wrote Amendment 5, Amendment 7, Amendment 9, Amendment 13 and now we’re in Amendment 16 (2009) because we closed the center in 2006.
Because the consolidation that took place after 1995 to 2003-2004, it’s immense. We had the 50 percent consolidation of the New England and Massachusetts Fishing Fleet.
When you talk about a community like Gloucester or New Bedford, they have nothing else but fishing. These people, today, are on welfare and nobody has looked at these people. And in the ’90s the economy was great, we couldn’t train people fast enough to get jobs and in the 2000, there are no jobs.
Read the complete story from Fishermen's Voice.
Last year, Matthews lost his scallop permit when the National Marine Fisheries Service scaled back permits to reduce the harvest.
"They did it based on history. They look at who’s been scalloping the longest. Back in 1994, I didn’t land anything (scallops), so I lost my permit," he said, pawing the fish schmutz out of his gray beard. "I can survive on fluke, but that’s about all. I can’t make any money. So I won’t be able to pull my boat this year."
A trawler should come out of the water every two years to have its hull scraped, repaired, and repainted. Matthews’ boat is due, but it will have to wait.
"If I still had scallops, I’d be all right," he said. "The scallop guys do all right."
Read the complete story from New Jersey On-Line.
The U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization defines sustainable fisheries as resources that can be harvested to meet the needs of today’s generation without compromising the ability of future generations to harvest fish for their needs. A sustainable fishery requires the conservation of fish stocks and the preservation of the marine environment but still allows the fishing industry to remain economically viable and fishing communities to maintain their social and cultural heritage.
The Threat of Overfishing
During the second half of the 20th century, the fishing industry developed a range of technological advances. Smaller boats were equipped with better engines, mechanical fishing equipment and sonar units that allowed crews to spot schools of fish swimming below the water's surface. At the other end of the spectrum, factory trawlers, which are massive vessels able to catch, clean, process and refrigerate huge amounts of fish, began operating in oceans throughout the world. As more and more fish were caught, populations of many species began a serious spiral of decline.
The Sustainable Fisheries Act
Congress passed the Sustainable Fisheries Act in 1996 to stop overfishing and ensure the future of U.S. fisheries. The National Marine Fisheries Service, a federal regulatory agency that oversees commercial and recreational fishing, was required to define overfishing for each species based on historical catch records and current landing data. Fisheries service officials then developed management plans to conserve species that were defined as over-fished. The Sustainable Fisheries Act also required federal regulators to develop measures to protect essential marine habitats.
Read the complete story from eHow.
Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) has issued the following release, and letter to Dr. Lubchenco
SCHUMER CALLS FOR NOAA TO IMMEDIATELY SELL UNAUTHORIZED BOATS, CARS AND OTHER ASSETS AND USE PROCEEDS TO HELP FUND NORTHEASTERN FISHERMEN WHO WERE EXCESSIVELY FINED AND WHOSE FISHING SEASONS WERE SHORTENED
Audit of Federal Fisheries Shows Fines in Northeast Region Substantially Higher Than Elsewhere; Forfeiture Funds Were Used for Unauthorized Purchases Such as Cars, Boats, and International Travel
Schumer Calls On NOAA Sell Unauthorized Assets, Return Proceeds to Fund, and Return Arbitrary and Excessive Fines to Northeast Fishermen Who Committed No Wrong Doing or Were Excessively Fined
Schumer: NOAA Already Goes Overboard and Makes It Hard for Fishermen to Make a Livelihood with Catch Restrictions; Funds Could be Used to Help Them Through Hard Times Until Fishing Stocks are Replenished
United States Senator Charles E. Schumer called on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration today to immediately begin selling off unauthorized purchases it made with Asset Forfeiture Fund (AFF) money and return the proceeds to the fund and fishermen who committed no wrong or were excessively fined. A bombshell report issued by the Commerce Department’s inspector general’s office revealed that over the course of the last four years, forfeiture funds, obtained through fines levied against fishermen and through selling seized property, were used against the law, to purchase vehicles, boats, and international travel for employees of the Northeast Region of the Marine Fisheries Agency. The Inspector General’s report stated that regional offices of the Marine Fisheries Agency were acting autonomously and fines for the Northeast Region were way out of line and more than two times those levied in other regions throughout the country.
“It appears that we had a out-of-control regional Fisheries office that used excess fines and forfeitures as a slush fund for excess,” said Schumer. “The fact that the very people charged with enforcing the rules related to fishing have done so in an arbitrary and capricious way throws NOAA’s entire enforcement program into doubt. I am calling on NOAA to hold people responsible, sell off the cars, boats and other unauthorized purchases and fund fishermen who were unjustly or excessively fined and whose fishing seasons have been shortened.”
In his letter to Administrator, Dr. Jane Lubchenco, Schumer called on NOAA to immediately halt use of AFF funds until NOAA is able to enforce appropriate use of these funds and implements a system of oversight that is accountable and transparent. Additionally, he called on NOAA to refund the AFF monies for any wrongly-spent funds, including staff travel, and sell any assets, such as boats or cars, that were inappropriately purchased with AFF money. Schumer called on NOAA to immediately analyze individual excess fines, re-calculate an appropriate fine, and return the excess to northeast fishermen. Moreover, Schumer said that monies not needed to reimburse excess fines be used as economic aid or re-training programs for displaced fishermen burdened by catch restrictions.
An earlier Inspector General report found that NOAA’s process for determining civil penalties is characterized by, “(S)ignificant discretion on the part of individual enforcement attorneys,” making it, “difficult to argue with those who view the process as arbitrary and in need of reform.” Further, the report points out that fines in the northeast region were significantly higher than any other region, suggesting that the northeast region was a rouge local entity. Schumer today was joined by commercial fishermen and fish dealers with first-hand knowledge of such abuses.
“I am gravely concerned with the ability of a regional Fisheries Agency to so wantonly circumvent the law without notice for so long,” continued Schumer. “NOAA has a lot of work to do to rectify this situation and we will be watching with a close eye to determine if even more significant steps are necessary to clean up this mess.”
July 12, 2010
Dr. Jane Lubchenco
Administrator
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
1401 Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20230
Dear Dr. Lubchenco,
I write today to express my grave concern over a recent audit finding gross mismanagement of Asset Forfeiture Fund (AFF) money at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). This abuse of funding is even more troubling given an earlier report raising concerns that funds may have been raised inappropriately. I urge you to immediately freeze spending of AFF money and conduct a thorough investigation to determine if this money was collected appropriately and if any should be returned to fishermen.
The Inspector General’s (IG) audit of July 1st details a pattern of mismanagement of the AFF, money NOAA collects from fishermen as fines and penalties. As stated in the audit “NOAA has administered the AFF in a manner that is neither transparent nor conducive to accountability, thus rendering it susceptible to both error and abuse.” Management of the AFF was so lax that the auditors were not able to determine how much money was in the account but could only estimate that the “current balance likely falls within a broader range.” Even more troubling are findings that NOAA staff was using AFF funds for purchases such as a luxury boat and international travel. Given the extreme nature of these findings, I urge you to immediately halt use of AFF funds until NOAA is able to enforce appropriate use of these funds and implements a system of oversight that is accountable and transparent. In addition, NOAA must refund the AFF for any wrongly-spent funds, including staff travel, and sell any assets, such as boats or cars, that were inappropriately purchased with AFF money.
This most recent audit is particularity troubling in light of a January report on NOAA enforcement operations. That IG report found that NOAA’s process for determining civil penalties is characterized by “significant discretion on the part of individual enforcement attorneys” making it “difficult to argue with those who view the process as arbitrary and in need of reform.” Further, the IG points out that fines in the Northeast region were significantly higher than any other region. I urge NOAA to immediately conduct an analysis of the Northeast region’s fines to determine why fines in Northeast were substantially higher than the rest of the country and what actions should be taken to rectify this problem. It is encouraging that the IG committed in his testimony before the Senate Commerce Committee in March to examine individual complaints from fisherman who believe they were treated unfairly or subject to overzealous enforcement. If it is determined that fishermen in the Northeast were over-fined, NOAA must return the excess money to the fishermen in order to serve justice and regain public trust. Moreover, monies not needed for law enforcement purposes or to reimburse excess fines should be used as economic aid or re-training programs for displaced fishermen burdened by catch restrictions.
NOAA has taken initial steps to correct some of the issues raised by the IG but much work remains to be done. It is imperative that you work expeditiously to overhaul the AFF, investigate and resolve cases of abuse, and regain the public trust. Thank you for your attention to this urgent request.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Schumer
###
Four days after the head of NOAA issued a sweeping order to overhaul and repair the Asset Forfeiture Fund, a New York senator demanded on Monday that NOAA cease using the fund and start making plans to return money to aggrieved fishermen.
Meanwhile, it was revealed Monday that NOAA has been using the fund for years to pay 60 percent of the costs of the administrative law judges it hires from the Coast Guard, a payment that has been ended.
U.S. Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., held a press conference Monday calling on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to sell off the things it bought without authorization and prepare to return that money to fishermen who were unjustly prosecuted. Those items include hundreds of cars and a $300,000 boat. Fifteen NOAA staffers also used the forfeiture fund to travel to Norway for a conference, the Commerce Department's inspector general disclosed in a scathing report last week.
"It appears that we had an out-of-control regional (Northeast) fisheries office that used excess fines and forfeitures as a slush fund for excess," Schumer said. "The fact that the very people charged with enforcing the rules related to fishing have done so in an arbitrary and capricious way throws NOAA's entire enforcement program into doubt. I am calling on NOAA to hold people responsible, sell off the cars, boats and other unauthorized purchases and fund fishermen who were unjustly or excessively fined and whose fishing seasons have been shortened."
In a letter to NOAA administrator Dr. Jane Lubchenco, Schumer also demanded that NOAA stop using the fund until it can be reorganized and is within the law. Lubchenco has moved the fund to the control of the comptroller of her agency, but the fund can still be used by the law enforcement office as long as it gets a sign-off on purchases over $1,000.
Schumer called on NOAA to do something it has resisted since the inspector general's preliminary report in January: revisit past cases and make restitution where called for.
He said NOAA should immediately analyze individual excess fines, recalculate an appropriate fine, and return the excess to Northeast fishermen. Schumer said that money not needed to reimburse excess fines be used as economic aid or re-training programs for displaced fishermen burdened by catch restrictions.
Read the complete story at The South Coast Today [subscription site]
NOTE: The Standard-Times is a subscription site. Unregistered visitors are able to read three stories per month, and registered visitors may view ten. For unlimited access, please follow the subscription instructions on the site.
