Saving Seafood

New Hampshire Sen. Ayotte Questions NOAA on At-Sea Monitoring and National Standard Eight

February 24, 2016 — The following was released by the Office of Senator Kelly Ayotte:

This week during a Senate Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard Subcommittee hearing, U.S. Senator Kelly Ayotte questioned National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs Samuel Rauch on the administration’s recent announcement that it would require New England fishermen to pay for its at-sea monitoring (ASM) program beginning March 1, 2016.

“I look at your budget: $5.4 billion for 2015, and you can’t find $3.78 million to fund at-sea monitoring, which is consistent with what many of us have written in the 2015 appropriations bill for NOAA,” asked Ayotte. “I can’t believe that we have a system where we’re going to put iconic fishermen out of business. The large folks – they’re going to be fine. The small fishermen – they’re done.”

Ayotte has long been a strong and consistent voice for New Hampshire’s small boat fishermen in fighting against onerous federal regulations. In September, she introduced legislation to terminate NOAA’s independent third-party ASM program unless NOAA fully funds the program using dollars within the its existing budget. Ayotte and Senator Jeanne Shaheen also previously called for a full investigation into NOAA’s ASM program for the Northeast Multispecies Fishery, which includes New Hampshire’s coastal region.

Also in September, Ayotte hosted a roundtable discussion in Portsmouth with NOAA officials, fishermen, and business leaders to discuss concerns regarding fishing regulations, federal catch-share limits, NOAA’s process for determining fish stocks, the implementation of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and the imposition of fees for at-sea monitors on commercial fishing vessels.

Read the release from the office of Senator Kelly Ayotte

Feds Say Money For Fishing Monitors Will Run Out by March 1

February 23, 2016 — PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — Federal fishing regulators say they have notified some New England fishermen that they will have to pay the cost of at-sea monitors starting March 1.

Monitors collect data to help determine future fishing quotas and their services can cost more than $700 per day. Fishermen of important commercial species such as cod and haddock will have to start paying the cost of the monitors under new rules.

The rule change has prompted criticism from fishermen who say they can’t afford more costs. The cost shift comes as New England cod fishermen are already struggling with a declining fish population and tough quotas.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at WCSH

NEFMC Releases Newsletter for January 2016 Meeting, Portsmouth, NH

February 5, 2016 — The following was released by the New England Fishery Management Council:

At its Jan. 26-28 meeting in Portsmouth, NH, the Council approved actions related to the development of several fishery management plans. The issues involved:

  • A witch flounder ABC
  • At-Sea Monitoring
  • Small Mesh Multispecies
  • The Omnibus Industry-Funded Monitoring Amendment
  • Amendment 8 to the Atlantic Herring FMP

View a PDF of the Newsletter

Fishermen await trial on NOAA monitors mandate

February 2, 2016 — HAMPTON — Local fisherman David Goethel said he hopes a court ruling comes soon to determine the legality of a new federal mandate, as he and other fishermen are fearful they will go under before the trial begins.

Goethel said he may sell his fishing boat after this summer if the trial isn’t resolved by then. He filed the lawsuit causing the trial, challenging the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s plan to make fishermen pay for their own policing. He filed it in conjunction with a fishing sector based in Massachusetts.

Industry members estimate the observers would cost a given fisherman $700 for each day the observer joined them at sea. Observers are mandated to go with fishermen on 24 percent of their fishing days. Fishermen say their industry was already being devastated by strict restrictions on catch limits.

“I will not be able to pay for this,” Goethel said. “I keep saying over and over: This is the straw that will break the camel’s back.”

Read the full story at the Portsmouth Herald

Massachusetts sector managers detail fishing costs

January 29, 2016 — NEW BEDFORD — Managers of area fishery sectors on Friday said many local groundfish boats could face daily charges of $125 or less-frequent charges of about $500, to pay for government-mandated monitoring of their catches.

Sector 9 manager Stephanie Rafael-DeMello and Sector 13 manager John Haran both said they negotiated with East West Technical Services, which has an office in Narragansett, R.I., for catch-monitoring services for which fishermen expect to begin paying around March 1.

Rafael-DeMello said the negotiated price was “just under $500 a day,” per boat. But because regulators randomly select boats for monitoring, she said, Sector 9 will spread the cost evenly, charging boats a flat rate of $125 per sea day in order to foot the overall costs of monitoring, which will apply only to about 20 percent of trips.

“We figured it will kind of ease the blow,” Rafael-DeMello said. “It will be a fair way for all of the vessels to share that cost.”

Sector 9 has about 21 groundfishing boats, nearly all of which operate out of New Bedford.

“We’re looking to see if we can afford to keep them all fishing, with the (quota) cuts and the costs that are coming next year,” Rafael-DeMello said. “It’s definitely going to be a struggle, to say the least.”

Read the full story at New Bedford Standard Times

 

Fishing industry fighting cost of at-sea monitors

NEW BEDFORD, Mass. — January 28, 2016 — Fishermen are opposing new catch-monitoring costs that could take effect March 1, as a judge’s ruling this week gave the industry a setback in efforts to block the transition from government funding.

John Haran of Dartmouth, manager of a local fishery sector, said in December that transferring the regulatory costs to the fishing industry could put more than 40 local groundfishing boats out of business. Local fishing industry tycoon Carlos Rafael said the costs — potentially about $700 per monitored trip — could mean repeated expenses of $14,000 across 20 groundfishing boats in his fleet.

“If they force that down our throats, the party is over,” Rafael said Thursday, before citing a vintage song. “Good night, Irene – it’s over for everybody.”

Regulators say the per-trip costs for monitoring – when private service providers put people on commercial fishing boats to count catches of cod, haddock, and some flounder, to track quotas – could be less than $700, given industry negotiations with private contractors.

Teri Frady, spokesman at the Northeast Fisheries Science Center in Woods Hole, said Thursday that March 1 was the latest estimate for when fishermen, not the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), would begin paying the cost of at-sea monitoring.

“What we paid, as the government, the total package for a sea day was around $700 — but we don’t know what that figure is going to be when the sectors do their own contracting,” Frady said. “Recognizing the economic issues in the industry, the agency has picked up the (at-sea) cost, but now we don’t have allocation to do that.”
A group representing East Coast fishermen sued the federal government in December, in U.S. District Court in Concord, N.H., seeking to block the  transfer of payments.

Read the full story from the New Bedford Standard-Times

Federal judge denies fisherman’s motion to block shift of monitoring costs to fishermen

January 28, 2016 —  A federal judge has denied a New Hampshire fisherman’s motion for a preliminary injunction that would have halted NOAA Fisheries’ plan to shift the cost of the at-sea monitoring program to fishermen.

U.S. District Judge Joseph J. Laplante, sitting in Concord, New Hampshire, ruled Wednesday that New Hampshire fisherman David Goethel’s claims for injunctive relief in his suit against the U.S. Department of Commerce and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are barred by the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

“Accordingly, plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction is denied,” Laplante wrote in his ruling.

Goethel, owner of the 44-foot fishing trawler Ellen Diane out of Hampton, and Northeast Fishing Sector 13 are suing the federal agencies and administrators, claiming NOAA’s plans to shift the cost of at-sea monitoring (ASM) to permit holders is illegal and will put fishermen out of business.

Saving Seafood Editor’s Note: The following clarification was provided by David Goethel, a primary plaintiff in the lawsuit:

The Judge gave a narrow preliminary ruling that denied the availability of a particular kind of preliminary injunctive relief. He ruled that he could not issue an injunction to stop the National Marine Fisheries Service from charging the fishermen for At-Sea-monitoring until the merits of the case were decided. The court said nothing about the merits of the case — specifically, nothing at all about the legality of industry funding for ASM — and we are working to get the merits decision as quickly as possible. Meanwhile the Court denied the government’s motion to transfer the case to Boston, Massachusetts, so we can hope that he will want to reach the merits soon.  We are still fighting to prevent industry funding from kicking in. A court date has not been set for a hearing on the merits of our case, but the Judge did set a date for the government to provide the administrative record and honor a Freedom of Information request for all documents and emails written in regards to at-sea monitoring.

Read the full story at Gloucester Daily Times

 

 

DON CUDDY: Fishermen fight back against government overreach

January 28, 2016 — The commercial fishermen suing the federal government over the cost of at-sea monitors had their day in federal court in Concord, New Hampshire, last Thursday. At issue is the notice to fishermen that they will henceforth be required by the National Marine Fisheries Service to pay out of pocket for the at-sea monitors that accompany them on fishing trips, an expense previously absorbed within the annual budget of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. That agency contends that it no longer has the money to fund the program, although these monitors act as agents for the government, and it insists that the boats must now assume payment. Fishermen believe that the high cost of monitors, as much as $710 daily, is excessive, will force many to tie up their boats and result in “irreparable harm.” They also believe that, irrespective of the cost, having at-sea monitors on their boats is a government mandate and consequently should be funded by the government.

I attended the hearing with John Haran of Dartmouth, manager of Northeast Fisheries Sector XIII which includes 32 fishermen. Sector XIII is a plaintiff in the case along with New Hampshire commercial fisherman Dave Goethel.

The all-day hearing concluded without a ruling. Federal District Judge Joseph Laplante will issue a decision in his own time after deliberating on a legal case with potential ramifications not only for the fishing industry but with respect to any government agency’s attempt to increase its own power.

Steve Schwartz, an attorney with Cause of Action, a nonprofit based in Washington, D.C., that focuses on government overreach, represents the fishermen. He told the court that the scope of an agency’s power is determined exclusively by Congress and that NOAA lacks the statutory authority to require fishermen to pay for monitors. If NOAA can force fishermen to start writing checks, “it would open the door to a whole panoply of ways that agencies can expand their powers,” he said.

Read the full opinion piece at New Bedford Standard Times

 

Fishermen await court’s decision about at-sea monitoring lawsuit

January 22, 2016 (AP) — CONCORD, N.H. — East Coast fishermen are awaiting a judge’s decision about their contention that the federal government’s plan to hand them the cost of at-sea monitoring is illegal.

Fishermen of important New England food species such as cod and haddock will have to start paying the cost of at-sea monitors soon under new rules. Monitors collect data to help determine future fishing quotas and can cost about $800 per day.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at the Boston Herald

Questions schooling around at-sea fishing monitors

January 16, 2016 — The battle over the cost and scope of at-sea monitoring of Northeast groundfish vessels, now being played out on various regulatory and legal platforms, promises a hectic end to the current fishing season and a complex start to the next.

There are no shortage of questions.

  • When will the federal government run out of money and shift the responsibility for paying for observers to the permit holders?
  • How will NOAA Fisheries respond to the recommendations from the New England Fishery Management Council that would significantly alter the at-sea monitoring program in the 2016 fishing season, which begins May 1?
  • How do the fishing sectors, once they are handed the responsibility of paying for observer coverage, negotiate new contracts with monitoring contractors when they don’t know what rules will be in place for the remainder of this fishing season and the beginning of the next?
  • Finally, what affect will the federal lawsuit, filed by New Hampshire fisherman David Goethel seeking the elimination of the monitoring program, have on the process in the short and long terms?
  • “Knowing what the numbers are going to be and what the process is going to be is really important,” Northeast Seafood Coalition Executive Director Jackie Odell told the Gloucester Fishing Commission on Thursday night. “That kind of certainty is really essential.”

Presently, that certainty is nowhere to be found.

Proposed rule changes

Odell was before the board seeking its commitment to support the proposed rule changes for at-sea monitoring approved by the council in December. Those measures are designed to alter the methodology and cost of providing observer coverage to make the program more efficient and ease the ultimate burden of assuming the responsibility for paying for the coverage.

Read the full story at the Gloucester Daily Times