Opinion

April 25, 2012 – Andy Sharpless CEO, Oceana puts forth a compelling story on feeding the exploding planetary population and saving the Oceans, and how we can't bring the same conservation mindset to the sea that we did to the land.

Watch the video here.

 

May 1, 2012 – There are many issues on which I disagree with President Obama. When someone is right on something, however, it is important to give credit where it’s due. Earlier this year, the president asked Congress to grant him authority to reorganize federal agencies. He said his first move would be to consolidate federal agencies that focus on economic development and move the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) from the Department of Commerce to the Department of the Interior.

As a state with tremendous ocean resources, conversations about the future of NOAA demand our full attention, and caution is warranted to ensure the best interests of Alaskans are protected. But after reviewing the president’s plan for NOAA over the past few months, I’ve concluded it makes sense on a number of levels.

From a basic structural perspective, NOAA is increasingly out of place at Commerce — like a fish out of water. Its stated mission is to provide the scientific data necessary to protect lives and property, as well as to conserve and help manage our nation’s fisheries, oceans and coastlines. Now consider the two departments it could be located in. Commerce is primarily focused on the promotion of economic growth and international trade, dealing with patents and other commercial issues. Interior, meanwhile, manages natural resources, public lands, and fish and wildlife. Based on that alone, it’s easy to see why Interior is a more natural fit.

NOAA’s work is actually far more critical to Interior agencies than any at Commerce, and its research and monitoring efforts could be greatly improved by reducing the organizational and bureaucratic barriers that currently undercut cooperation with Interior.  At the end of the day, the question to ask is not whether these agencies should remain separate, but instead, why they were separated in the first place.  According to many, NOAA is currently located at Commerce simply because President Nixon was upset with one of Alaska’s great statesmen, Wally Hickel, who was serving as Interior Secretary at the time.

The fact is, NOAA and Interior have a lot in common. Both focus on offshore mapping and charting. Both manage marine mammals, fish stocks, and habitats under many of the same environmental statutes. Both monitor climate issues affecting conservation and direct adaption efforts. Both coordinate and advance foundational science. NOAA’s marine sanctuary, estuary research reserve system, and marine protected area programs parallel programs at Interior.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar testified that he sees “synergies” resulting from NOAA’s move to his department. Secretary of Commerce John Bryson agrees. He recently said that it makes sense from a business efficiency perspective and “could enhance productivity.” If we do this right, moving NOAA to Interior could also save taxpayer dollars and streamline some of the notoriously slow-moving bureaucracy Alaskans face. A merger would allow our atmospheric, terrestrial and marine scientists in both agencies to fulfill their responsibilities in a more productive manner.

Read the full story at the Alaska Dispatch.

 

 

Whole Foods is buying fish based on the on often-biased and frequently out-of-date rankings from Monterey Bay Aquarium and the Blue Ocean Institute. That ignores information from credible universities and institutions, as well as the latest government statistics.

NEW BEDFORD, Mass. — May 02, 2012 — Much has been written about Whole Foods Market's decision to stop selling "red-rated" seafood. And the opposition of many New England fishermen to this decision has been widely reported. But the problem is not Whole Foods' decision to sell sustainable seafood, which is commendable. The problem is that Whole Foods is buying fish based on the often-biased and frequently out-of-date rankings from Monterey Bay Aquarium and the Blue Ocean Institute. That ignores information from credible universities and institutions, as well as the latest government statistics.

By law, all American-caught seafood must be managed so that it is sustainable. We have the most stringent laws in the world. The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires that all American fisheries must be returned to a state of "not overfished," where "overfishing is not occurring." At the same time, we import 85 percent of our seafood, including product from nations with less-stringent regulations. We have seen product imported under unsanitary conditions. And, as the Boston Globe reported in its award-winning series, mislabeling remains a widespread problem among some imports.

Since the United States has the most stringent fishing laws in the world, those who support sustainability should encourage the purchase and consumption of American product. A correctly implemented plan would achieve that end. But Whole Foods has chosen to use the rankings of just one organization; an organization that purports to uphold high standards of accuracy, but often doesn't.

For example, thanks to years of cooperation between the industry, scientists and regulators, the Atlantic sea scallop has recovered and is widely regarded as the poster child for sustainability. A well-designed rating system would reflect that. But the Blue Ocean Institute rates Atlantic sea scallops as "yellow," the mid-range of their rating system. They rate farmed Chinese and Mexican scallops as "green," their highest rating. However, the information they use to determine this rating is not comprehensive, and ignores important facts.

Blue Ocean gives scallops the lowest rating for fishing gear impacts because they say ,"The main adverse environmental effects from dredging and trawling are degradation of the seafloor, sediment suspension, change in chemical makeup of sediments and overlying water, and alteration of benthic communities." But they ignore how quickly the habitats recover. A study by the UMass School for Marine Science and Technology in New Bedford (Stokesbury and Harris, 2006) found the highest concentrations of scallops on sea floors made up of sand and granule pebbles. These habitats routinely endure a great deal of natural disturbance from currents and storms, and naturally recover quickly.

Several studies indicate that recovery rates are quickest (several days to several weeks) on sand. Georges Bank is 62 percent sand and 38 percent gravel. The Mid-Atlantic is 95 percent sand. So, the majority of fishing effort occurs on sandy sea floors, where impacts on the habitat are less and recovery is rapid. But you wouldn't learn this from the Blue Ocean Institute.

Blue Ocean subtracts points on management, stating, "Scallop dredges can remove up to 80 percent of benthic organisms in one pass (Collie et al., 2000). The impacts of this on benthic food webs has not been considered, nor mitigated, by the New England Fishery Management Council's scallop fishery management plan." In fact, some fishing grounds have been closed for 17 years, since 1994. The total area closed on Georges Bank (over 12,500 square kilometers) represents 23 percent of the total scallop fishing grounds. Adding in the Gulf of Maine closed areas, a total of 28 percent of the scallop fishing grounds is permanently closed to scalloping.

Blue Ocean also mentions "unintended catch of endangered sea turtles" but doesn't mention a multi-year effort in which the industry partnered with scientists, gear developers and the federal government to develop required turtle excluders, which have been praised by the environmental community. "It does a great job of pushing the turtle up and out of harm's way," said Gib Brogan of Oceana, an environmental group that for years has pushed to reduce accidental turtle deaths and injuries from fishing gear. "This is a great example of the fishing industry stepping up and doing the right thing for the turtles and for themselves." ("Turtle-safe scallops coming to the plate," by Kirk Moore, Asbury Park Press, April 16, 2012).

Richard Canastra is co-owner of BASE-New England, which operates fish auctions in New Bedford, Boston and Gloucester.  He is chairman of the Saving Seafood board.

Read the op-ed at the New Bedford Standard-Times.

 

 

May 1, 2012 – So, less than 24 hours before today's dawn of the of the new groundfishing season, the benevolent National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration boldly announced Monday it would try to ease fishermen's pain by allow mid-sized vessels to use new gear designed to limit the bycatch of yellowtail flounder.

That might sound like a good thing, as fishermen out of Gloucester and other New England ports confront what truly looms as a crisis year.

Yet let's never forget that NOAA and its parent U.S. Department of Commerce have not only refused to grant the very realistic economic disaster declaration sought by Gov. Deval Patrick and backed by U.S. Sen John Kerry and others. Commerce officials, following true to the form of NOAA administrator Jane Lubchenco, haven't even shown the respect or decency to respond to the requests.

And let's especially not forget the most shameless slap in the face to fishermen and their backers, inside and outside Congress and state houses around New England and beyond. That's the fact that this fishery "crisis" — supposedly in cod, yellowtail and now even sturgeon, a fish that's suddenly been declared an endangered species without NOAA undertaking a single trawl study or other stock assessment — is an economic disaster that's been created by NOAA from the start.

That's right, folks. Our own federal government — led, of course, by a president who continues to stress his purported push for "jobs, jobs, jobs" — is the single driving force in the absolute decimation of fishermen's and other waterfront jobs, and the hits those policies have wreaked on fishing communities such as Gloucester, New Bedford and so many others.

Read the full editorial at the Gloucester Times.

 

 

April 30, 2012 – It seems like there are few issues that can weather the current political storms to bring together a large bipartisan consensus in Congress. Yet, the U.S. Senate – in a vote last month hailed by members on both sides of the aisle – overwhelmingly passed a two-year, $109 billion transportation and infrastructure authorization bill by a bipartisan vote of 74-22. Included in the measure were vital provisions to fund environmental restoration projects in the Gulf of Mexico in the wake of the 2010 oil spill and an ambitious program to support conservation projects in coastal communities around the country.

House and Senate leaders are negotiating a final transportation package. However, the fate of these crucial proposals to address the health of one of our nation's most valuable natural resources, our oceans, is far from certain.

By the numbers alone, the impact of the Deepwater Horizon tragedy is sobering. During the 87-day disaster in 2010, nearly 5 million barrels of oil spilled into the Gulf. It's also been estimated that the potential three-year loss of tourism revenue to Gulf coastal communities could surpass $22 billion, and scientists still are uncertain what the long-term ecological damage will be.

The Pew Environment Group commissioned a task force of 18 scientists to examine the issue of Gulf restoration. In a report published last September, the investigators found that the Deepwater Horizon blowout was just the most visible, recent problem. Chronic overfishing, poorly planned coastal development, and pollution – according to the researchers' final report – had already seriously degraded the area's ecological resilience. Consequently, to move toward effective long-term recovery, federal and state managers must apply a holistic approach to restoration across the region. A dedicated funding source and associated management mechanism are needed, though, to facilitate this change.

In March, the Senate did just that. The measure it passed – known as the Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourism Opportunities, and Revived Economy Act – would ensure that 80 percent of the Clean Water Act fines associated with the Deepwater Horizon spill are used to address the economic and ecological damage to the Gulf region. This proposal was added to the overall Senate transportation and infrastructure authorization bill by an overwhelming vote of 76-22.

Gulf communities aren't the only ones watching the outcome of the debate over the transportation measure. Also at stake is another bipartisan provision, the National Endowment for the Oceans. Co-sponsored by Sens. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, and Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., it would fund regional coastal improvement projects by using some of the interest derived from investment of Clean Water Act fines from the spill.

Read the full story at the Miami Herald.

 

 

Measured by any meaningful criteria the Keep Fishermen Fishing rally held on the steps of the Capitol on March 21 was a stunning success. It was attended by thousands of fishermen from as far away as Alaska, twenty one Senators and Members of the House of Representatives, and at least a half a dozen other VIPs made room in their busy schedules to come out and address the people who attended.

From the most conservative of the conservatives to the most liberal of the liberals, these politically divergent speakers had one message; fix the Magnuson Act and bring back the balance between conservation and harvest.

For the second time at the national level recreational and commercial fishermen – no matter what fisheries they participated in, no matter what their disagreements on allocation or lesser issues were, and no matter where they were from – were standing together and demanding a return to the original intent of the Magnuson Act; that independent fishermen regain the significant role they once played in Magnuson management which has been pre-empted by environmental extremists, the bureaucrats who seem to be at their beck and call, and their pet “fishermen.”

But, and this will come as no surprise to anyone with a knowledge of the hundreds of millions of dollars that a handful of charitable foundations have been shoveling into the coffers of what can only be described as anti-fishing ENGOs (for an idea of their contributions, visit The Big Green Money Machine at http://www.fishtruth.net), there were isolated voices raised both pre- and post-rally distorting the purpose of the rally and the single unifying message of Keep Fishermen Fishing. There was also a paucity of coverage in the main stream media, which might be understandable considering there were no crises involved (other than the manufactured world crisis in fishing), no angry confrontations and no civil or uncivil disobedience.

Just a bunch of hard working people who invested their own time and money into trekking to Washington to voice their dissatisfaction with job-killing federal fisheries policies and their elected officials who have taken their dissatisfaction seriously and intend to do something about it.

Who were these people who objected to the rally?

Read the full article here.

 

 

Capt. Ford owns and operates a trawler that can no longer sell to Whole Foods Market. He wrote this letter to Whole Foods last November upon learning that they decided to implement their new purchasing policy this year instead of in 2013.  Captain Ford views the ratings of Monterey Bay Aquarium and Blue Ocean Institute as inconsistent, noting that gill nets, which are considered acceptable in the ratings, have issues with marine mammal captures.

November 27, 2011

Dear Whole Foods,

I am the owner and operator of the F/V Lisa Ann II out of Newburyport, MA.   Before your company bought out Bread and Circus, I had been a supplier of fish to them for a number of years.  After Pigeon Cove took over Bread and Circus I continued to be a supplier and I am currently the largest supplier of cod in the northeast for your company.

Whole Foods was founded on building a lasting relationship with local farmers, local producers, and local vendors.  I am a local family owned and operated business that has always strived to provide fresh quality fish.  More importantly, I have always thought of myself as part of the team at Whole Foods because of the relationship between our two businesses.  Because I felt our business relationship was strong and because I believed in the vision of Whole Foods I have been basing my business decisions knowing that I was working with Whole Foods for the long haul. I have always been treated fairly by Whole Foods and have always worked with them in a positive way so that all parties involved would be successful not just in the moment but for future growth too.  I have believed so much in Whole Foods, that every month I put money back into the company by buying stock in the company.

I understand the reasoning behind Whole Foods following the guidelines Blue Ocean Institute has set down, because I do firmly believe that it is important to protect our environment so that our industry is sustainable. I feel like, however, that Whole Foods is basing decisions on what Blue Ocean Institute is telling them to follow, not what they see is happening locally.  Blue Ocean Institute bases their decisions on outdated science and lumps ALL trawl boats into one category.  It is not taking the time to make exceptions for those fishing boats trying to change and make a difference and nor does it seem to be taking into consideration the recent local and regional changes in the Northeast.

Trawl caught fish has historically been seen as not being environmentally friendly because the fishing gear used drags along and tears up the bottom of the ocean.   To address this issue, I chose to switch over to new environmentally friendly trawl doors from Denmark.  These doors do not drag along the ocean floor tearing it up, instead they remain off the floor of the ocean.  In fact, 2 out of the 5 boats in the fleet that supplies Whole Foods have these doors.  I feel that it would be easy to persuade the 3 remaining boats to also switch over to this new technology that Blue Ocean Institute has not yet taken into consideration.

In addition to switching over my fishing gear, I have also made other modifications to my boat that reduces my reliance on fossil fuels.  I am currently running a hydrogen fuel cell on my main engine of my boat to reduce emissions and fuel consumption.  Wind generators on the boat also help to reduce fuel costs because it reduces power consumption on my generator.  Lastly, I have added trawl sensors to my nets that let me know when my nets are full of fish.  This technology has reduced the amount of time that I need to fish because I no longer need to guess when my net is full.  In the past I might drag my nets for 4 hours before checking them, and now there are days where my new technology lets me know only after 15 minutes that my net is full.

Blue Ocean Institute’s decision does not seem to be taking into consideration that the entire fishing management system in the Northeast changed drastically a year ago.  I may be wrong, but I do not think that Blue Ocean Institute has based their current Red List for Gulf of Maine fish on any NEW data collected after a year of this new management system.

All fisheries have a good and bad side to them, but yet I am working hard to minimize the negative impact that my fishing has on the environment.  I am trying to become a more environmentally friendly business so that I could continue to have a partnership with Whole Foods and provide fish to the public that I can stand behind.  Unfortunately, I feel like Whole Foods is no longer trying to stand behind my environmentally friendly and local business.

I can only wonder what the lasting impact will be on the local fishing economy and that of the entire Northeast if Whole Foods does continue to follow the guidelines set down by Blue Ocean Institute.  If Whole Foods does choose to blindly follow the guidelines rather than make decisions based on what is happening locally, I cringe to think of the domino effect that will occur.  Other businesses look to Whole Foods to see what they do and if they too choose to turn their back on the local fisherman, who will buy the cod?  If there are no local buyers for cod, fisherman will do the only thing they can and target a new species.  If all fishermen target a new species, it too would soon become Red Listed.

It seems that if Whole Food truly wants to support the local fishermen that they would work with them and not just drop them.  Whole Foods could continue to be at the forefront of positive change simply by supporting and encouraging the local fishermen to change to fishing systems that are more environmentally friendly.  I am sure that the press associated with supporting the local fishermen would be more welcome than the press associated with Whole Foods choosing to no longer work with the local businessman.

I truly hope that I can continue to work with and for Whole Foods because I do believe in the direction that the company is going.  I feel, however, that the only way that it will happen is if Whole Foods makes decisions based on what is happening locally rather than what an outsider is telling them is happening in general.

Sincerely,

Jim Ford
Captain & Owner  F/V Lisa Ann II

Anger between New England fishermen and their federal regulators at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration would be far worse if a major headquarters of NOAA’s fishing management division weren’t in Gloucester, a location where local fishermen and federal officials can at least talk directly to each other.

But Maryland Senator Barbara Mikulski, chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations Committee’s subcommittee on commerce and science, is pushing to close the Northeast regional fisheries office in Gloucester. The committee has approved her plan to move the regional headquarters, which services the waters from Maine to North Carolina, from Gloucester to Silver Spring, Md. Mikulski’s main criticism about NOAA seems to be that her constituency does not “get calls back” from an office so far away.

There is no evidence that the proposal would save money, or that it would change federal policies in any meaningful way. But the new building in Gloucester is the agency’s largest regional facility; it is not easily replaced. Massachusetts’s fishing industry is six times larger than Maryland’s, and Mikulski’s proposal would merely shift the pain of dealing with absent regulators from her state to those in New England: Maryland, after all, is hardly a central location between North Carolina and Maine. Jobs would be lost here in the process.

Read the complete editorial by The Boston Globe.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The second memorial of the nation’s worst oil catastrophe has come and gone, forever linked to Earth Day and seared into the psyches of millions of Gulf residents and fishermen. In recent weeks, the media has unleashed a torrent of stories about the devastating impacts of the nation’s worst oil spill disaster; deaths, disease and deformities in the fisheries; a two-year record-setting die off in dolphin populations; medical emergencies and family health crises in coastal communities; and ongoing Congressional wrangling over tens of millions of dollars in fines needed to save and rebuild the rapidly disappearing Gulf coast.

But it won’t be long before these stories fade from the consciousness of a nation once riveted by the volcanic well spewing out Louisiana crude a mile below the sea. Instead we will see more stories like this one BP published in the Alabama Press-Register last week: "After Two Years, The Grandeur of the Gulf Is Returning."

"These days, we don’t see oily sheens and miles of orange containment boom; we see sparkling water and clean sand, dotted with deck chairs and beach towels. On the horizon, we don’t see an armada of ships skimming oil; we see fishing vessels at work gathering the day’s catch. And, in the skies and on the ground, we don’t see planes and large cleanup crews; we see birds and other wildlife at play.

"But one thing is clear: Many of the dire predictions for the Gulf, made in the days and weeks after the accident, have not turned out to be true. Indeed, after two years of hard work alongside local, state and federal officials, the scientific community and the people of the region, substantial progress has been made. And the grandeur of the Gulf is steadily returning."

You can expect the media and the airwaves to be clogged with happy talk about the Gulf in the months ahead. We all wish it were true, but the facts — and perceptions of those toiling in the fisheries — just don't support it. After reading BP’s latest polemic, veteran Alaska marine toxicologist and author Riki Ott remembered Exxon's tactics after the Valdez disaster in an email this week; 

Read the complete opinion piece at The Huffington Post

 

 

 

 

 

The fishing and seafood processing industries got great news yesterday when a federal district court judge in Florida handed down a decision to delay implementation of new H-2B guest worker program rules.

The new Labor Department rules threatened to shut down processing facilities from Alaska to the Chesapeake Bay by complicating the process that allows seafood processors to bring in foreign workers for jobs that are no longer appealing to American workers.

“The new rules force us to spend more time and money on recruitment initiatives that have proven almost worthless. They greatly complicate efforts to bring in employees who have demonstrated their willingness to do what American workers simply won’t do,” said Jack Brooks, president of the Coalition to Save America’s Seafood Industry, in a press release.

The coalition is committed to continuing to work with Sens. Mark Warner (D-VA) and Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) to improve labor regulations as well as communication between the federal government and the industry that relies on a staggered influx of foreign workers based on varying needs as fishing seasons progress.

While I think it's unfortunate that millions of American college students would rather pile on student loan debt than work in seafood plants for the summer, we must recognize that the system has changed. Students are often expected to further their career credentials by working for nothing (or next to it) in summer internships.

As a nation, we have veered away from understanding what a day's work really means. I hope to teach my own child the value of true labor. In the meantime, I'm happy to know the processing and picking houses will be humming along as usual.