Saving Seafood

  • Home
  • News
    • Alerts
    • Conservation & Environment
    • Council Actions
    • Economic Impact
    • Enforcement
    • International & Trade
    • Law
    • Management & Regulation
    • Regulations
    • Nutrition
    • Opinion
    • Other News
    • Safety
    • Science
    • State and Local
  • News by Region
    • New England
    • Mid-Atlantic
    • South Atlantic
    • Gulf of Mexico
    • Pacific
    • North Pacific
    • Western Pacific
  • About
    • Contact Us
    • Fishing Terms Glossary

CHRIS BROWN & BOB DOOLEY: Electronic Monitoring — Straight talk about New England’s fisheries

April 28, 2016 — In any relationship, uncertainty and mistrust tend to circle back and magnify themselves over time. In the case of New England fishermen and federal regulators, the result is what we see today. These two parties — who can and should be working together to ensure the economic and environmental health of our fisheries — are deadlocked in mistrust while the fishing industry lurches between federal bailouts and major criminal busts.

As fishing industry leaders with a combined seven-plus decades on the water, we know it doesn’t have to be this way.

A far more promising fisheries future is unfolding today in Alaska and, increasingly, on the West Coast. Its watchword is “accountability.” It is based on the straightforward idea that fishermen need to keep track of their catch, both the fish they bring to the dock and any unwanted “bycatch” they may discard at sea.

Why? Because in the absence of comprehensive catch monitoring, there is no basis upon which fishermen and scientists can establish a productive level of trust and cooperation. This means that fishery managers often assume the worst when they estimate fish stocks and are required, under federal law, to take very conservative approaches in order to account for that uncertainty when they set catch limits and allocations. Completing the negative feedback loop, fishermen interpret low allocations as bad science and the cycle of mistrust rolls on.

Read the full editorial at the New Bedford Standard-Times

Ruling coming on monitors for beleaguered cod fishery

April 27, 2016 –PORTLAND, Maine — Federal regulators will soon release new rules for New England’s beleaguered cod fishery, including the role at-sea monitors will play.

At-sea monitoring is a controversial subject in the fishery because the government has shifted the cost of paying for monitors to fishermen. The monitors collect data that informs fishing regulations.

The new cod fishing season starts May 1, and the rules governing it are expected this week.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at Fosters

Monitoring The Catch Aboard Groundfishing Vessels

April 22, 2016 — While the feds used to pay for [at-sea] monitors, as of March 1st, fishermen have had to start footing the roughly $700-per-day cost.

John Bullard is Regional Administrator for NOAA’s Greater Atlantic Regional Fishery Office in Gloucester. His agency uses input from fishermen and scientists to set quotas and other regulations for the industry.

“It’s not that we wanted the industry to pay,” Bullard said. “We understand the hardship that the groundfish industry is under, believe me.”

Bullard explained that NOAA covered the costs of at-sea monitors for as long as it could. But that money is now gone. And he said the industry has had plenty of warning.

“We’ve been saying to industry, ‘You guys are gonna have to pay for this…not because we want you to, but because the money’s gonna run out.’ So this hasn’t been a sudden thing,” said Bullard.

Most groundfishermen now must scramble to come up with ways to pay for at-sea monitors. Meanwhile, others are trying another option: electronic monitoring with video cameras.

Read and listen to the full story at WCAI

Fishing advocates praise allocation of funds for electronic monitoring

April 22, 2016 — SEA BROOK, NH — Advocates for electronic monitoring technology in the commercial fishing industry are pleased that the Senate Appropriations Committee has secured federal resources to help defray costs associated with regulating catch sizes.

On Thursday, U.S. Senators Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) and Jeanne Shaheen (D- NH) announced that $3 million has been set aside for the development and installation of this technology. Fishermen hope it will replace the current model of in-person monitoring, which costs them approximately $700 per day every time they bring a person out.

Josh Wiersma of the Environmental Defense Fund said appropriating the money is a step in the right direction.

“I think this is a big step forward,” Wiersma said.

Wiersma testified on the subject before the Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee in Washington, D.C., this March. He has worked to make electronic monitoring programs a reality for some time, saying that the current in-person monitoring mandated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration leads to inaccurate results, and fishermen don’t have room for monitors on their boats.

Read the full story at the New Hampshire Union Leader

MARK PHILLIPS: Who will pay for electronic monitoring?

April 21, 2016 — The Nature Conservancy a 6.5 BILLION dollar ENGO (2014 IRS 990) has put forward a paper seeking Electronic Monitoring on groundfish boats by May 1, 2017. If people recall The Nature Conservancy said very little about the BP oil spill.

NOAA and it’s environmental partners are bound and determined to force paid monitoring and eventually EMS on the fishermen. The last EMS study was delayed and delayed so that NOAA’s partners could put out misinformation about costs. And when the report did come out it substantially underestimates costs by assuming the average groundfish trip is 1.5 days when in reality my sector’s average trip is 6-10 days which is 4 to 7 times greater in duration.

The report also underestimates the number of hauls, claiming the average trip has five haul backs when in fact we are looking at between 40 to 60 hauls per trip, an underestimation by a factor of 10.

Read the full opinion piece at the Center for Sustainable Fisheries

RHODE ISLAND: Fishermen-heavy crowd shows frustration with catch rules, monitoring costs at RI forum

April 14, 2016 — PROVIDENCE, RI — A forum on the sustainability of the commercial fishing industry revealed significant frustration in a fisherman-heavy crowd and a few suggestions for future changes, but little tangible optimism, Thursday night at Rhode Island College.

“Right now, there are more fish in the Atlantic Ocean than there was 20 or 30 years ago — we are just not allowed to catch them anymore,” said fisherman Mark Phillips, a New York native who has fished out of New Bedford for several decades.

Phillips and New Hampshire fisherman David Goethel, who sued the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in December over catch monitoring costs, were the two fishermen on the forum’s six-person panel.

They drew, by far, the most applause from the crowd throughout the event, as both reiterated industry-wide complaints about a regulatory environment that fishermen say is choking their viability.

The forum was titled, “Is Commercial Fishing Sustainable?” But Phillips said the real question, in his view, is whether fishermen and fishing communities are sustainable.

See the full story at the New Bedford Standard-Times

Fishermen look to replace human monitors with cameras

April 4, 2016 — The program, slated to begin next month, will include about 20 boats, roughly 10 percent of the region’s active groundfishing fleet, and will require fishermen to use sophisticated software, maintain cameras through the harsh conditions at sea, and submit to constant electronic scrutiny.

That has made some fishermen, who say their boats are like homes, uneasy.

They worry about losing their privacy and whether the footage could become public.

“Our bathrooms are buckets out on deck. I do not want some person counting how much toilet paper I use when I go to the head,” said David Goethel, who fishes cod out of Hampton, N.H.

Goethel sued NOAA last year for requiring fishermen to assume the costs of the observer program, which he said were too expensive and would put many of his colleagues out of business. The agency had previously covered the costs, but officials said they could no longer afford to subsidize the $3 million program.

See the full story at the Boston Globe

At-sea monitoring fees are the latest threat to New Hampshire’s dwindling fishing industry

April 1, 2016 — Working as both a biologist and a fisherman, David Goethel brings a unique perspective to the state and federal fishery management boards he’s an adviser on. 

“I’ve spent all my life acting as a translator because they speak all different languages,” says Goethel, who worked as a research biologist at the New England Aquarium before he became the owner and operator of the Ellen Diane, a 44-foot fishing trawler based out of Hampton. 

But the most recent disconnect between the factions has resulted in Goethel and other groundfishermen filing a federal lawsuit. 

After delaying the regulation for years, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is now requiring groundfishermen to pay for the at-sea monitoring program — at a cost of an average $710 per trip, conducted at random. The monitoring is done to ensure that the fishermen adhere to groundfish catch quotas set in May 2010 by the New England Fishery Management Council, under NOAA. (Groundfish include cod, haddock and other common bottom-dwelling species.) 

Read the full story at the New Hampshire Business Review

N.H. Fishermen Say Burden of At-Sea Monitoring Fees Could Break Industry

April 1, 2016 — New rules that took effect last month shift the costs of at-sea monitoring to local fisherman.

Critics say these new fees threaten the very existence of New Hampshire’s dwindling fishing industry and will put people out of business. There’s now a lawsuit pending on the issue.

Jeff Feingold, editor of the New Hampshire Business Review, joined NHPR’s Morning Edition to talk about the issue.

Let’s start with some background – what are these fees all about?

Back in 2010, they put these new rules together that limited the amount of ground fish that could be caught; that’s cod, haddock, and other fish, a lot of what commercial fishermen are looking for.

See the full story at NHPR

Proposed fishing framework: Something for everyone to hate

March 23, 2016 — NOAA Fisheries has opened the public comment period for the proposed management rule that includes withering cuts to several groundfish species and reductions in the overall level of at-sea monitoring (ASM) coverage for the beleaguered groundfish fleet.

It seems the proposed rule, also known as Framework 55, has a little bit of something for everyone to hate. They have until close of business on April 5 to submit their comments to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Environmental groups, such as Oceana, are bitterly criticizing the projected reduction in ASM for groundfish boats to about 14 percent from about 24 percent, saying the rule will “weaken the chances of recovery for this historic fishery.”

Fishermen point to the further reductions in what they already consider minuscule catch quotas and say those reductions — combined with the absorption of the costs for ASM — could finally be the management initiative that shutters the Northeast multispecies groundfish fishery for good.

Savage quota cuts

The catch limits, set by the NOAA Fisheries for the 2016 fishing season that begins May 1, include savage cuts to the annual catch limits for gray sole (55 percent), Georges Bank cod (66 percent), northern windowpane flounder (33 percent) and Gulf of Maine yellowtail flounder (26 percent).

“We will not have a fishery as we know it anymore,” Vito Giacalone, policy director for the Northeast Seafood Coalition, said on Tuesday. “In fact, I think you can already make the case that we don’t have a fishery you can recognize now compared to any period in the past.”

Read the full story at The Gloucester Times

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • …
  • 32
  • Next Page »

Recent Headlines

  • Scientists did not recommend a 54 percent cut to the menhaden TAC
  • Broad coalition promotes Senate aquaculture bill
  • Chesapeake Bay region leaders approve revised agreement, commit to cleanup through 2040
  • ALASKA: Contamination safeguards of transboundary mining questioned
  • Federal government decides it won’t list American eel as species at risk
  • US Congress holds hearing on sea lion removals and salmon predation
  • MASSACHUSETTS: Seventeen months on, Vineyard Wind blade break investigation isn’t done
  • Sea lions keep gorging on endangered salmon despite 2018 law

Most Popular Topics

Alaska Aquaculture ASMFC Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission BOEM California China Climate change Coronavirus COVID-19 Donald Trump groundfish Gulf of Maine Gulf of Mexico Illegal fishing IUU fishing Lobster Maine Massachusetts Mid-Atlantic National Marine Fisheries Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NEFMC New Bedford New England New England Fishery Management Council New Jersey New York NMFS NOAA NOAA Fisheries North Atlantic right whales North Carolina North Pacific offshore energy Offshore wind Pacific right whales Salmon South Atlantic Virginia Western Pacific Whales wind energy Wind Farms

Daily Updates & Alerts

Enter your email address to receive daily updates and alerts:
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Tweets by @savingseafood

Copyright © 2025 Saving Seafood · WordPress Web Design by Jessee Productions