Saving Seafood

A sea of choices confronts Biden admin in ocean protection

October 5, 2021 — When it comes to meeting its aggressive conservation pledge, the Biden administration appears to have a head start on protecting the United States’ oceans — after all, on paper, the nation is already more than two-thirds of the way to the goal.

But as the administration puts together a tracking mechanism for its pledge to conserve 30 percent of the nation’s lands and waters by 2030, environmental activists warn that frequently cited statistics provide a misleading picture of ocean conservation.

At the same time, advocates for the fishing industry question counter the nation is much closer to the final objective — if not already there. They argue that conservation shouldn’t always mean activities like fishing are banned and say their industry has shown itself willing to help protect vulnerable species.

Managed waters

Opponents of new marine monuments, however, argue that managed waters are sufficient to meet the conservation goals.

“If it’s not conserved unless it’s in a marine sanctuary that excludes fishing — which is a fairly radical and extreme point of view — then I think you get into a very different set of calculations about how you get to 30 percent,” said Roger Mann, a marine sciences professor at the College of William & Mary’s Virginia Institute of Marine Science.

Mann pointed to language in the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the nation’s primary fisheries law, that calls for “conservation and management” of the oceans.

“If you’re conserving sustainable resources … then all of the area that is managed under Magnuson is already a conservation area,” argued Mann, who previously served on the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council.

“The councils can all sit there and scratch their heads and say, ‘We’re not 30×30. We’re 100 percent by 2021. What’s the problem?’” he said.

Former Garden State Seafood Association Executive Director Greg DiDomenico said he is optimistic that the Biden administration will adhere to its vow for scientific integrity, but remains staunchly opposed to the idea of new monuments.

“What we expect from 30×30, ultimately, is that it be conducted under rigorous science and an open, transparent policy,” said DiDomenico, who is now with Lund’s Fisheries.

DiDomenico pointed to the creation of the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument during former President Obama’s tenure, which closed the area to commercial fishing.

Former President Trump reversed that closure in 2020, and the New England Fishery Management Council subsequently implemented protections for deep-sea corals in more than 80 percent of the monument (E&E News PM, June 5, 2020).

“The proof is in the pudding,” DiDomenico said, pointing to what is formally known as the Omnibus Deep-Sea Coral Amendment.

He added that: “No one is running from this. We’ve been here before.”

Read the full story at E&E News

 

Close Quarters: Ocean zoning pushes fisheries to the brink

September 23, 2021 — The following is an excerpt from an article published in National Fisherman by Dr. Roger Mann, professor of Marine Science at the College of William and Mary’s Virginia Institute of Marine Science. It is based on an article published by the Journal of Shellfish Research. That paper, “An Ecosystem is Not a Monument, and Other Challenges to Fishing in the 21st Century,” is based on a talk given by Dr. Mann at the annual meeting of the National Shellfisheries Association.

Managing fisheries is no longer simply about [the Magnuson Stevens Act’s] directives to “conserve and manage” a sustainable resource to serve the “social and economic needs of the States.” It is about managing fisheries in a changing landscape of competition for ocean resources, where the environment is changing faster than in living history, and species footprints are on the move.

Part of this changing landscape is the creation of large, no-take MPAs, like the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Monument off the coast of Cape Cod. Designated by President Obama with the sweep of a pen using the Antiquities Act of 1906, the 4,913 square miles of the monument are now managed by multiple federal agencies under a bewildering patchwork of legislation, including Magnuson, the Endangered Species Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act, the Refuge Recreation Act, Public Law 98-532, and Executive Order 6166. Then there is the National Marine Sanctuaries Act, through which the government can designate and protect marine areas of national significance.

This plethora of confusing legislation lacks uniform definitions. It is not clear on how — or even if — MPA designations are required to be revisited, even when species move. In addition, it does not state who has precedent over whom in the management hierarchy.

Even as questions remain over existing MPAs, activists are pushing for more with a “30×30” campaign to protect 30 percent of our nation’s land, inland waters and oceans as conservation areas by 2030. But what is “protected” in this context? Is a region protected only by excluding fishermen through a no-take MPA? Or does the Magnuson Act directive to “conserve and manage the fishery resources” and “exercise sound judgment in [their] stewardship” rise to the level of protection? If so, then is not the entire exclusive economic zone already protected?

MPAs are far from the only competition fishermen are facing in the ocean. Environmental advocacy, communications corridors, mining, national defense, and shipping all threaten fishermen’s access to ocean resources. Perhaps the biggest incursion of all is offshore wind development: the U.S. East Coast continental shelf already has 1.7 million acres of federal bottom under lease for offshore wind, with the Biden administration seemingly poised to expand such efforts along the Atlantic, Pacific and Gulf coasts. Offshore wind projects have a projected lifespan of 50 years, with turbine spacing restricting access for both commercial fishing vessels towing mobile gear and federal survey vessels. Stock assessment surveys will be compromised, resulting in reduced quotas for fishermen.

With so many competitors muscling their way into the ocean, who will be the winners and losers? Over what time frames will winners emerge? Where does preservation of the fishing industry sit in the pecking order? At the bottom?

The “space” for fisheries is shrinking. Commercial fishing won’t be the largest economic player as development of our oceans continues, but it is historically an important part of the economic and social structure of coastal communities. Fisheries are based on moving species distributions that do not function well within fixed boundaries, like those being zoned for MPAs and offshore wind.

Read the full article at National Fisherman

Biden’s 30×30 plan gives hope, but also uncertainy

June 16, 2021 — On May 6th, the Biden administration released the “Conserving and Restoring America the Beautiful” report that instructed NOAA to expand the National Marine Sanctuaries System, the National Estuarine Research Reserve System, to “help restore fish populations and better protect threatened and endangered species.” This report is considered the administration’s plan to meet the 30% of land and water protected by 2030 or “30 by 30” initiative put forth by executive order (E.O. 14008) in January 2021.

Before getting into the specifics of this report, it is worth reviewing the history of the “30×30” planning process and some of the initial responses from stakeholders:

  • October 2015 – Jane Lubchenco and Kirsten Grorud-Colvert publish a paper in Science Magazine titled: “Making waves: The science and politics of ocean protection”. This paper is credited for introducing the 30% global marine protected area (MPA) target.
  • September 2016 – The World Conservation Congress voted to support increasing the portion of the ocean that is highly protected to at least 30% to help effectively conserve biodiversity.
  • November 2020 – U.S. Representative Raul Grijalva introduced the Ocean-Based Climate Solutions Act. Title II of this act called for expanding marine protected areas (MPAs) in U.S. waters to equal 30% of the exclusive economic zone (EEZ).
  • November 2020 – Immediately after this introduction, more than 830 seafood industry stakeholders sent a letter to Rep. Grijalva expressing their concern about the proposals under Title II.
  • December 2020 – 28 prominent marine scientists sent a similar letter of opposition to Congress, questioning the justification for 30% MPAs described in Title II.

When the Biden administration introduced the 30×30 initiative in January 2021, various fishing industry stakeholders were upset for similar reasons described in the letters of opposition towards Title II of the Ocean-Based Climate Solutions Act.

Read the full story at Sustainable Fisheries UW

Ray Hilborn: MPAs aren’t the answer to ocean biodiversity, sustainability efforts

June 1, 2021 — A global movement to create additional marine protected areas (MPAs) has been steadily gaining traction in recent years, with the initiative picking up milestone victories in the past few months.

In January, newly inaugurated U.S. President Joe Biden signed an executive order committing to a “30 by 30” goal, whereby the United States would designated 30 percent of its land and territorial waters to conservation by the year 2030. The move heightened the potential that MPAs will be used as a tool to tackle climate change.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

Biden administration sets framework for 30×30

May 7, 2021 — On Thursday, May 6, the Biden administration submitted a preliminary report on a national conservation initiative, widely known as 30×30, to the National Climate Task Force.

The 24-page document, “Conserving and Restoring America the Beautiful,” sets the stage for the conservation of “at least 30 percent of our lands and waters by 2030,” which was initiated by the president’s Jan. 27 executive order, “Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad.”

Since that EO was issued, the departments of Interior, Agriculture and Commerce, and the Council on Environmental Quality have collected stakeholder input to shape this report, which clearly attempts to expand the definition and application of the term “conservation” to include working lands and waters that may be used sustainably while still being allocated to the program’s 30 percent goal.

“Notably,” the report says, “the president’s challenge specifically emphasizes the notion of ‘conservation’ of the nation’s natural resources (rather than the related but different concept of ‘protection’ or ‘preservation’) recognizing that many uses of our lands and waters, including of working lands, can be consistent with the long-term health and sustainability of natural systems.”

Read the full story at National Fisherman

JERRY FRASER: Don’t look up: 30×30 dusts off an old scapegoat

March 24, 2021 — It’s nice to know that among some in the science community, the threat of covid-19 is viewed as being on the wane.

Last week, the journal Nature postulated that “after a year of pandemic-induced delays, 2021 is set to be a big year for biodiversity, climate and the ocean.”

While I look forward to bidding good riddance to the pandemic, it’s hard to image that a “big year” for Nature’s editorial writers will be anything but a pain in the butt for commercial fisherman.

One reason for the excitement at Nature and elsewhere is the expectation that the advance of the 30×30 agenda, which calls for protecting 30 percent of the ocean by 2030, will resume.

In the words of the Pew Charitable Trusts, “The call for 30 percent marine protection is part of securing a healthy ocean where marine parks enhance fisheries and sound fisheries management enhances biodiversity conservation.”

If you’re wondering what a marine park is going to look like, it’s a stretch of ocean that will host recreational and indigenous fishermen, wind farms, ecotourism, and in some cases, oil wells. In rare instances, there could be a token commercial fishing vessel, its permits held by an NGO.

Read the full opinion piece at National Fisherman

LINDA BEHNKEN & MIKE CONROY: Setting Biden’s seafood policy table

February 16, 2021 — Fishermen have been invited to be partners with the Biden administration on ocean policy and we are prepared to engage. Hard work, honest dialog and commitments to justice and equity will ensure that we remain at the table and not on the menu.

January’s executive order tackling climate change includes ambitious provisions that set agencies on a course to climate mitigation. Most importantly for America’s commercial fishing families, the order established two parallel processes to secure direct input from fishermen on, respectively the appropriate ways to conserve 30 percent of U.S. lands and waters by 2030, an initiative known as 30×30, and ways to make our fisheries more resilient to climate change.

Fishing communities are precisely where policymakers should look for durable ocean-based climate solutions. Here are some starting points.

Today’s ocean is increasingly industrialized and our coasts are more densely occupied than ever. The historic pattern of ocean and coastal development exacerbated by climate change has resulted in reduced protections for fish habitat and serial declines of functional working waterfront. The administration has the ability to reverse both trends.

The U.S. should strengthen existing fisheries habitat protection processes by requiring federal agencies to avoid, minimize and mitigate impacts to Essential Fish Habitat (EFH). EFH consultations are regularly conducted by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), yet NOAA’s recommendations are routinely ignored by other agencies. Executive action requiring permitting agencies to incorporate NOAA’s EFH conservation recommendations into their decisions would significantly benefit fish habitat, fisheries and biodiversity.

Read the full opinion piece at The Hill

Commercial fishing associations demand voice in Biden’s conservation planning

February 1, 2021 — Groups representing a variety of fishing sectors and environmental causes have issued responses to U.S. President Joe Biden’s climate plan, which includes a plan to commit 30 percent of U.S. lands and waters to conservation by 2030.

The Seafood Harvesters of America, an association that represents commercial fishing organizations from Alaska to the Gulf of Mexico to New England, said it welcomed the Biden administration’s effort to tackle climate change.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

JESSICA HATHAWAY: What you need to know about 30×30

January 29, 2021 — As the Biden administration takes over, I’ve seen quite a bit of hand-wringing among stakeholders in the fishing industry.

Depending on what policies you’re watching closely, that anticipation is coupled with anxiety about what may or may *not* happen next.

While I would never hold my breath for 100 percent buy-in on any policy, I hope we can get a majority speaking in a unified voice around some of the critical pieces of the 30×30 mandates. So here’s my rundown on the key points.

The goal

To commit 30 percent of the nation’s lands and oceans to conservation by 2030, as part of President Biden’s executive order on addressing climate change.

The origin

The way-back machine takes us to a United Nations 2015 Sustainable Development Goal to “conserve at least 10 percent of coastal and marine areas, consistent with national and international law and based on the best available scientific information.”

The 30×30 language got a jump in 2020 as legislation conceived in California, where it failed to pass. It was dusted off, reformatted and expanded to become part of a suite of sweeping Magnuson-Stevens Act reauthorization proposals and introduced in the House last fall, titled the Oceans-Based Climate Solutions Act of 2020.

Now it has become part of the Biden administration’s new climate proposals issued as executive orders. If you haven’t heard, the new administration is prioritizing environmental justice. (Before you roll your eyes, note this can and is designed to work out for everyone. Read on.)

What this could mean for the fishing industry is exactly what so many stakeholders have been asking for — a seat at the table. The primary strategy for implementation of this policy is community engagement.

Read the full opinion piece at National Fisherman