Saving Seafood

Opinion

NY fishermen say horseshoe crab management is working

October 14, 2025 — Some ideas sound noble in theory but collapse under the weight of the facts. That’s the case with New York State Assembly Bill 4997 and Senate Bill 4289, legislation that would ban the harvest and sale of horseshoe crabs by New York’s licensed commercial fishermen

Proponents call it “protection.” In reality, it’s an unnecessary ban that would wipe out livelihoods, damage sustainable local fisheries, and ignore the very science-based efforts that state and federal regulators have built together.

Gov. Kathy Hochul understood that last year when she vetoed the same bill. At a time when some were pushing hard for an outright ban, she stood instead with science, with regulators, and with the men and women who make their living on the water. For that, New York’s fishing families are deeply grateful, and hopeful that she will again make the tough but right decision.

Read the full article at the National Fisherman

DO WE REALLY WANT POLITICIANS TO MANAGE OUR FISHERIES?

September 26, 2025 — Many years ago, all fish were managed by politicians.  The basic rule was that you could catch whatever you wanted, in whatever numbers that you wanted, of whatever size that you wanted, and you could do what you wanted with the fish—eat them, sell them, give them away, feed them to the tomatoes, or dump them back in the bay—because no law said otherwise.

Sometimes, someone would start to worry that a stock of fish wasn’t doing too well, or decided that some sort of net was killing too many fish (or, perhaps, interfering with another sort of net), or maybe one group of people decided that another group of people were killing fish that the first group wanted for themselves.  Whatever the issue, and whoever the concerned group might be, the only way to change the status quo was to go to the state (or very, very rarely federal) legislature, and convince the politicians to pass a law imposing a bag limit and/or a minimum size, or outlawing a particular gear, or to have a species declared a “gamefish” so that commercial fishermen couldn’t kill any of them anymore, and anglers could kill all of them instead.

It was a difficult, time-consuming process, and the results often weren’t very good, because laws were too often passed based on emotion, or because a particular group of fishermen wanted all of the fish for themselves, rather than being based on sound science and a coherent fisheries management policy.

Even the legislators eventually recognized that, although they held the ultimate management authority, they generally didn’t know all that much about fish, and both the public and the resource were usually better off if they delegated management authority to fisheries professionals who had the expertise needed to conserve and manage fish stocks.

That didn’t mean that the politicians were completely out of the picture—they still could legislate management measures if they wanted to—but it did mean that fisheries management measures were generally based on something more than largely uninformed opinion, and that any regulations that were put in place had to be based on facts, and were not merely “arbitrary and capricious” actions based on some people’s whim.

For the most part, and for most people, the administrative approach to fisheries management works a lot better than the legislative one, but for those who are trying to do something that’s a little outside the mainstream, and maybe unsupported by any sort of data or objective facts, management by politician rather than by professional fisheries experts is still the preferred way to go.

One of the latest examples of that is a proposed executiveorder that’s being shopped around the White House, largely by a coalition of anglingorganizations which want to shut down the menhaden reduction fishery but,perhaps due to the input of some environmental organizations, is also seekingto sharply restrict that harvest of some forage fish, and so, in one broadaction, would harshly regulate, and in some cases shut down, fisheries foreverything from menhaden off Louisiana to squid off New England.

Read the full article at ONE ANGLER’S VOYAGE

Op-ed: From docks to dinner plates, Sea Grant delivers real value for working waterfronts

September 22, 2025 — Curt Brown is a commercial lobsterman and marine biologist with Bold Coast Seafood in Maine. Leann Cyr is the executive director of the Alaska Marine Safety Education Association (AMSEA) and a health and safety researcher. Bob Rheault is the executive director of the East Coast Shellfish Growers Association and a long-time shellfish farmer in Rhode Island. Scott Hickman is a Texas-based charter and commercial fisherman who chairs the Texas Sea Grant Advisory Board.

The U.S. maritime economy is growing faster than the economy as a whole, supporting over 2.6 million jobs and contributing USD 511 billion (EUR 434 billion) to the nation’s GDP.

Read the full article at SeafoodSource

Op-ed: Monitoring progress in small pelagic fisheries used for marine ingredients production key to aquaculture sustainability

September 17, 2025 — Robert Lefebure is the fisheries manager at MarinTrust, a program dedicated to the responsible sourcing, production, and traceability of marine ingredients.

Ensuring responsible management of the fisheries providing raw materials to the marine ingredients sector is critical to the FAO’s Blue Transformation Roadmap and the responsible development of the global aquaculture sector.

Small pelagic fisheries in particular are known for their dynamic stock status. They respond rapidly to changes in their environment and are both critical to the healthy functioning of ecosystems and supporting livelihoods. It is, therefore, important to recognize progress in driving responsible management of these fisheries. Such efforts require collaboration among a wide range of stakeholders: governments, local communities, industry, and NGOs.

Read the full article at SeafoodSource

Opinion: Embarking on an America-first seafood strategy in Alaska

September 16, 2025 — In 1787, Alexander Hamilton stressed the need for a united national effort to protect America’s ocean resources from stagnation and unfair foreign trade practices. Absent vigorous federal action to free our fisheries from barriers to growth and trade, “that unequalled spirit of enterprise, which signalises the genius of the American Merchants and Navigators, and which is in itself an inexhaustible mine of national wealth, would be stifled and lost.”

Since Hamilton wrote those words, Alaska became first a territory, then the 49th state in the Union, cementing itself as a linchpin of the nation’s food supply, economy and national security.

Alaska has the largest federal fisheries in the nation—roughly 60% of America’s harvest by volume. The Alaska seafood industry produces roughly $6 billion in economic output for the state and employs 48,000 Alaskans.

In addition to feeding our own citizens, fisheries products are among the top three U.S. food, agriculture and related product export categories, and there is soaring global demand for these high-quality, high-value commodities.

Read the full article at Anchorage Daily News

LETTER TO THE EDITOR: WHY FISHING FAMILIES MATTER MORE THAN EVER

August 29. 2025 — Dear Editor:

The Florida Keys are known for their turquoise waters, coral reefs and laid-back charm — but beneath the surface lies a deeper story. It’s the story of the men and women who built this place with salt on their skin and generations of knowledge in their bones: our commercial fishing families.

For over a century, these families have been the heartbeat of our islands. The historic commercial fishing families didn’t just fish — they shaped our economy, our culture and our identity. They taught us how to live with the sea, not just beside it. From the spongers of Key West to the crawfishers of Marathon, their legacy is woven into the fabric of our communities.

But today, that legacy is slipping away.

The truth is hard to ignore: commercial fishing in the Keys is disappearing. Not because we lack demand or dedication, but because the very conditions that allow us to exist are vanishing. Working waterfronts are being replaced by luxury developments. Affordable housing is out of reach for the next generation of fishermen. Gentrification is pushing out the families who’ve sustained this region for decades.

We’re not asking to expand our industry. We’re not seeking to increase our environmental footprint. What we want is simple: to preserve the generational families who continue this tradition with care, skill and respect for the ocean.

We understand the need for balance. We support conservation. We believe in responsible harvesting and gear innovation. But we also believe that the cultural heritage of the Keys must include those who’ve lived by the sea — not just those who vacation beside it.

If we lose our fishing families, we lose more than jobs. We lose the stories, the stewardship and the soul of the Florida Keys.

So we ask our neighbors, our policymakers and our visitors:

Support working waterfront protections.

Demand and choose local seafood.

Teach your children about the people behind the catch.

The future of the Keys should include the voices of those who’ve weathered its storms, hauled its traps and kept its traditions alive.

The tide is changing — but our story isn’t over yet.

Sincerely,
Jerome Young
commercial fisherman & executive director of the Florida Keys Commercial Fishermen’s Association

Op-ed: Reopening US Pacific marine monuments does not threaten pelagic ecosystems

August 27, 2025 — Ray Hilborn is a professor at the University of Washington’s School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, a member of the Science and Statistics Committee of the Western Fisheries Management Council, and a fellow of the Royal Society of Canada, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the Washington State Academy of Sciences. He has been awarded the Volvo Environmental Prize and the International Fisheries Science Prize and has published over 300 papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

In 2006, President George W. Bush used the Antiquities Act of 1906 to create the nation’s first marine national monument – an area from 0 to 50 nautical miles around the uninhabited Northwestern Hawaiian Islands encompassing 139,797 square miles.

Then, in the last few days of his term in January 2009, Bush established three other national marine monuments in the Pacific: Rose Atoll Monument off American Samoa; Marianas Trench Monument adjacent to Guam and Northern Mariana Islands, and the Pacific Remote Islands (PRIMNM) monument around the uninhabited islands of Wake, Johnston, Palmyra, Howland, Baker, and Jarvis.

Read the full article at SeafoodSource

Salmon and steelhead extinction threshold science, and the ocean fish of northeast Oregon

August 21, 2025 — The Nez Perce Tribe and its collaborators will try to eke out a few more years’ survival for Tucannon River Chinook.

“But,” Jay Hesse says, “we also had to ask: What about all the other populations? So in 2021, we started modeling quasi-extinction for all the Snake River spring/summer Chinook and steelhead populations listed under the Endangered Species Act. The results are giving us a better picture of real conditions, and a stronger case for the urgency of action.”

Mr. Hesse is the director of Biological Services for the Nez Perce Department of Fisheries Resources Management.

Some years ago, federal scientists at National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries developed the “quasi-extinction threshold,” which the NOAA uses in planning.

For Snake River Chinook salmon and steelhead, the threshold is fewer than 50 adult fish in a population returning from the ocean for four consecutive years. Below that floor, the population’s continued existence can no longer be scientifically assumed or predicted. It is an emergency signal, flashing red and near black.

The Nez Perce Tribe is applying this science to management of populations below or near the extinction threshold, as well as to public education and long-term science.

Nez Perce Fisheries provided me two maps from its upcoming extinction threshold report for Snake River spring/summer Chinook, and steelhead, updated through 2024 fish returns. These maps show some of the findings, but much else in it will deserve attention.

Read the full article at the Alaska Beacon

Deep-sea mining is a false solution to our challenges (commentary)

August 20, 2025 — The deep sea, the planet’s most expansive and least understood ecosystem, remains largely unexplored. Yet while the deep sea may seem a dark and distant space, events underwater directly impact our lives, from essential services like climate regulation to fisheries and the marine food web. While scientific understanding of this realm is nascent, a new industry is rapidly emerging driven by the demand for rare metals essential for batteries, microchips and AI: deep-sea mining.

In the past three years, more than 38 nations have voiced support for a moratorium on deep-sea mining, a rapid pace by the standards of multilateral lawmaking, and the equivalent of one new country signing on per month. This progress marks a major shift from just a few years ago, when states were either supportive of mining, reluctant to take a position, or were simply uninformed.

The triggering of a treaty provision known as the “two-year rule” by the nation of Nauru in 2021, intended to accelerate deep-sea mining in areas beyond national jurisdiction, brought increased attention and scrutiny to the activity. Nevertheless, some private actors are pushing for the granting of applications for commercial deep-sea mining of minerals like copper, nickel and cobalt, despite significant concerns from global leaders, the scientific community and the public at large.

This divergence between scientific understanding and prevailing narratives came into sharp focus at the recent annual meeting of the International Seabed Authority (ISA). There, nations gathered to discuss matters profoundly consequential for the future of the deep ocean. However, there also seemed to be a broad understanding that a strong regulatory framework based on science, equity and precaution must be in place before an informed decision can be taken, and that no mining activities should commence in the meantime.

Moving forward, it’s imperative that we actively counter misinformation, significantly invest in scientific research, and, in the interim, take concrete measures to ensure that deep-sea mining activities do not commence in the absence of clear science, robust regulations, sufficient safeguards, and equity.

Read the full article at Mongabay

‘Offshore Wind Gets a Pass’ When It Comes to Environmental Concerns

August 19, 2025 —  In 2024, I penned an op-ed here at ecoRI News entitled Commonsense Environmentalism is Being Destroyed by a Wind-Less Revolution, opening with a statement that, “the Ocean State has become ground zero for the most important environmental battle in modern times.” Indeed, this battle persists — that is, whether to preserve and protect nature, versus to concede nature for the fantastical ideology of a greenwashed industrial panacea.

This rift was exposed through recent reporting that summarizes the outcome of a recent Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) meeting in Portsmouth, R.I. The meeting aimed to productively discuss the plans for South Coast Wind to run a power cable from 60 miles offshore extending up through the Sakonnet River, beneath Portsmouth, and then up through Mount Hope Bay to Brayton Point. The meeting was well attended, with equal numbers of public comments presented by both opponents and supporters of the project. Despite these equal voices, the ecoRI News article emphasized that those opposed were the minority opinion, even denigrating such opinions as parroted views of those under the thumb of fossil fuel lobbyists.

This is nothing further from the truth, and a significant disservice to those seeking balanced environmental reporting from which their own opinions may be formulated.

While it would take multiple volumes of literature to collate the plethora of very valid concerns for harms that both onshore and offshore industrial activities inflict, it is worth dispelling the mythology promulgated in the follow-up to the EFSB meeting. I will do so here through several exemplary issues that are very real and should resonate for all — regardless of your personal opinions on the windless revolution.

First, the ecoRI News reporting claimed South Coast Wind is “expected to generate 2,400 megawatts (MW) of electricity, powering around a million homes by the end of the decade.” On Jan. 17, 2025, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) announced approval of a Construction and Operations Plan with the potential to generate up to 2,400 megawatts of which could power 840,000 homes. These facts matter when separating marketing propaganda from reality. For visual perspective, the project is slated to span 127,388 acres of the continental shelf — more than 10 TIMES the land area of Providence. Would you advocate that an equivalent farmland area be mowed for a solar farm? Unlikely.

Read the full article at EcoRI