Saving Seafood

New England council adds ASM relief measures to Framework 55

October 29, 2015 — PLYMOUTH, MA – At its Sept. 29-Oct. 1 meeting here, the New England Fisheries Management Council added alternatives to Framework Adjustment 55 to the Northeast Multispecies (Groundfish) Fishery Management Plan (FMP) to include enforcement, adding a new sector, and to make the at-sea monitoring program more efficient and cost effective.

Changes in federal policy on observer funding in early 2015 made it apparent that the fishing industry would be required to fund some or all of the at-sea monitoring (ASM) required under AMD 16 and Framework 48 to the groundfish FMP.

Read the full story at Commercial Fisheries News

New England fishermen fear looming costs for at-sea monitors

October 21, 2015 — PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — New England fishermen, running out of time before the federal government hands them the cost of monitoring the industry at sea, say emergency intervention is needed or many of them will be out of business.

The monitors are trained workers who collect data on commercial fishing trips that help fishery managers with things like setting quotas on catches in future years. Officials with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said the money it had been using to pay for monitors who work in New England fisheries such as cod, pollock and haddock is going to run out around Dec. 1.

Fishermen will have to pay for the monitors, which can cost more than $700 per trip. The new cost is almost certain to put people out of work in a struggling fishery that is already challenged by declining fish stocks and tough quotas, said Ben Martens, executive director of the Maine Coast Fishermen’s Association.

“It’s really scary. At the same time, we have problems with our resources right now,” Martens said. “We need to make sure we have better and stronger business not just next year, but three and five years down the line.”

Read the full story from the Associated Press at the San Francisco Chronicle

 

Reps. Moulton, Keating, Pingree Press NOAA on Monitors

The following is a excerpt from a story originally published on Friday, October 9, in the Gloucester Daily Times: 

GLOUCESTER, Mass. (Gloucester Daily Times) — October 9, 2015 — U.S. Rep. Seth Moulton was among a trio of congressional members who met Friday with officials from NOAA Fisheries on at-sea monitoring, telling the regulators to their face what they’ve been saying all along in official correspondence and verbal declarations.

“We made it very clear that we don’t support the costs of at-sea monitoring being shifted to the fishermen,” Moulton said after the meeting.

Moulton, along with fellow representatives William Keating, D-Mass., and Chellie Pingree, D-Maine, organized the meeting to help find an alternative to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s plan to stop paying for at-sea monitors on groundfish boats and shift the costs — estimated at $710 per day per covered vessel — to the federal permit holders.

“It was contentious at times, but I think we came out with some positive steps forward to address this issue,” Moulton said. “They’re not stonewalling us, but it’s clear we don’t see eye-to-eye.”

Moulton said the congressional members met, among others, with William Karp, NOAA’s science and research director at the Northeast Fisheries Science Center, and came away with three areas that could provide the fishermen some relief moving forward:

— A Keating proposal on behalf of hook-and-line fishermen on Cape Cod to reduce the level of at-sea monitoring coverage because of their low levels of bycatch;

— A more thorough examination of the potential cost savings afforded by electronic monitoring; and

— Exploring the possibility of Congress making NOAA’s funding of at-sea monitoring a mandatory cost rather than a discretionary cost.

Read the full story at the Gloucester Daily Times

 

Rep. Frank Guinta calls for NOAA to stop at-sea monitoring or pay for it

October 8, 2015 — A New Hampshire congressman is turning up the heat on the at-sea monitoring issue, filing a bill that would terminate the current at-sea monitoring program for fishing sectors in the Northeast multispecies groundfish fishery until NOAA agrees to fully fund it.

U.S. Rep. Frank Guinta’s bill would exempt fishermen from having to “comply with the independent, third-party monitoring program” required by the NOAA unless the federal fisheries regulator “fully funds the program with funds appropriated from the administration.”

The goal of the legislation, Guinta said, is to preclude the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration from shifting the cost of at-sea monitoring — estimated at $710 per day per trip — from its budget to the federal permit holders — of which, he said, there remain only nine active groundfish sector boats working out of New Hampshire ports.

“I really question why the federal government would force their financial obligation onto the boats,” said Guinta, who represents New Hampshire’s 1st Congressional District and is a member of the House Financial Services Committee. “It’s unfortunate what the federal government is doing. If they require it, they should at the very least pay for it.”

Guinta also questioned why the at-sea monitoring is so expensive and why NOAA contracts the services out to third-party operators rather than performing the tasks with its own staff.

Read the full story at the Gloucester Daily Times

 

 

PORTSMOUTH HERALD: NOAA monitoring fee will kill local fishing industry

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) — October 6, 2015 — The following editorial appeared yesterday in the Portsmouth Herald in Portsmouth, New Hampshire:

Local fishermen say the looming cost of paying $700 per day, for at-sea monitors, could put them out of business by the end of the year.

It’s a threat that everyone should take seriously.

“The day I really have to pay for this is the day I stop going fishing,” says David Goethel, a commercial fisherman from Hampton.

Stringent federal catch limits have already crippled the 400-year-old fishing industry in New Hampshire to the point where there are now only nine active groundfishing boat operators.

This additional expense, to make sure fishermen are following regulations put forward by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), could be the final nail in the coffin.

That’s why we were pleased that last week NOAA delayed the downshifting of the costs to fishermen until Dec. 1. We urge NOAA and our congressional leaders to do what they can to ensure that the delay is permanent because it’s the right thing to do.

NOAA has been footing the bill for the at-sea monitoring program for several years, and rightly so as it’s the federal agency’s responsibility to ensure that annual catch limits are not exceeded.

At-sea monitors keep track of how vessels are meeting their groundfishing allocations set by NOAA to keep groundfish stocks like cod, haddock and flounder from being destroyed.

NOAA’s current rules state that at-sea monitoring costs were to be instituted in 2012. However, they have delayed implementation because of the “continuing economic problems” in the industry, according to Teri Frady, spokesperson for NOAA’s Northeast Fisheries Science Center.

While the fishing industry is still in crisis, NOAA is now claiming it can’t afford to foot the bill for the monitors.

We find it hard, however, to believe that an agency with a billion dollar budget can’t afford it.

The real people who can’t afford it are the fishermen, who are already struggling to stay afloat due to the heavy regulations.

The cost for at-sea monitors will likely be near $700 per day for each vessel, a figure based on what NOAA paid in fiscal year 2015.

In an email to congressional staff, NOAA regulators admit the change would be “economically challenging” for many.

Studies by NOAA show that as many as 60 percent of affected boats could be pushed out of profitability if they have to pay those fees.

Sen. Kelly Ayotte was right to question whether this decision to downshift costs violates the law.

By law, according to the National Standards of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NOAA is directed to sustain both fish stocks and fishing communities.

Forcing fishermen to pay for at-sea monitors may support sustainable fisheries but it will kill the local groundfishing industry.

Read the full editorial from the Portsmouth Herald

“New England Fishermen Preservation Act” From Rep. Guinta to Cancel Federal Fees

October 1, 2015 — WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) — The following was released from the Office of Congressman Frank Guinta (NH):

With his New England Fishermen Preservation Act (H.R. 3661) today, Congressman Frank Guinta continued his effort to stop federal fees that could extinguish New Hampshire’s fishing industry. Just nine Granite State operators still fish the Gulf of Maine, where National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) regulations have reduced their catch by 95 percent, report members of Seabrook’s Yankee Fishermen’s Co-op.  

New fees, averaging over $700 per vessel every few days, could cost fishermen in the region thousands of dollars monthly. “These are small, family businesses,” said Rep. Guinta (NH01), a member of the House Financial Services Committee. “Many are struggling to stay afloat, due to heavy regulations that seem to change from week to week. Fishermen up and down the Northeast could be sunk, when NOAA finally makes good on its threat.”

Rep. Guinta explained that under his bill “NOAA will continue to pay the costs of monitoring fishermen at sea, as the agency has for years.” Currently, NOAA pays contractors to accompany crews but has proposed shifting payment to fishermen themselves. The agency has shifted deadlines several times, recently from the end of October to December. In an email to congressional staff, NOAA regulators admit the change would be “economically challenging” for many.

“It’s economically challenging that an agency with a several-billon dollar budget is demanding fishermen pay its operating costs,” responded Rep. Guinta.

The New England Fishermen Preservation Act exempts Northeast fishermen from compliance with monitoring rules, until NOAA funds the program. Earlier this Congress, Rep. Guinta introduced the bipartisan Fisheries Investment and Regulatory Relief Act, which would re-direct existing federal money to U.S. fisheries and strengthen local control.

Read Rep. Guinta’s New England Fishermen Preservation Act here

NOAA delays new fees that fishermen say will kill industry

October 1, 2015 — HAMPTON, N.H. — New costs New Hampshire fishermen say will end their industry for good have been delayed by one month, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration officials announced this week.

NOAA said this summer fishermen would have to begin paying roughly $700 per day for 24 percent of their fishing days starting Nov. 1, covering the cost of at-sea monitors to observe fishermen’s compliance with regulations. That November deadline is now pushed to Dec. 1, NOAA spokesperson Jennifer Goebel said. NOAA currently pays for the at-sea monitoring.

Fishermen have said the costs are too much for them to bear, as they don’t gross $700 in a single day. The costs also come as fishing regulations on cod have diminished the commercial fleet to just nine active vessels, many having left the business completely.

Hampton fisherman David Goethel said the delay is good news, but not good enough to remove the threat of ending the New Hampshire fishery. He said he believes NOAA will eventually force the fishermen to pay for the monitors.

NOAA Greater Atlantic Regional Administrator John Bullard said his agency has delayed shifting the payment to the industry because the budget has allowed it to do so, but that it would eventually need to stop funding the at-sea monitoring program.

Read the full story at the Portsmouth Herald

Fisheries observer program spawns more questions

September 29, 2015 — PLYMOUTH, Mass. — The fisheries observer program that looms over the industry in the Northeast won’t go out for public comment until at least December, the New England Fisheries Management Council decided Tuesday.

Years in the making, the preliminary draft of the measure numbers about 500 pages, testimony to the complexity of the effort.

Then there is the cost, which the council staff researched and broke down. It detailed the costs of what the industry will have to pay, and what it will cost the government.

Monitoring estimates by at-sea monitors, who will record bycatch, or fish that are thrown back, stands at $710 per day from the boat and $530 in costs to the government.

But a distinction has crept into the discussion, the difference between the observer program and the monitoring program. Observers are better educated, do more, and will cost boats $818 a day and the government $479.

Read the full story at New Bedford Standard -Times

Weekly Update: 9/21/15 North Carolina Fisheries Association

September 21, 2015 — The following was released by the North Carolina Fisheries Association:

INTERESTED CANDIDATES FOR SAFMC SEAT EXPIRING IN 2016
Members interested in serving in the obligatory seat for the South Atlantic Marine Fishery Commission, please let Lauren know. You can email or give her a call at 252-725-2468.

NEW ANALYSIS COMPARES COSTS OF ELECTRONIC MONITORING AND AT–SEA OBSERVERS
Earlier this year, NOAA Fisheries issued regional electronic technology implementation plans that lay out our vision for the implementation of this technology in U.S. fisheries. One key element missing from those plans and ongoing Council discussions regarding the use of electronic monitoring was cost information. To better inform the Council decision-making process with regard to fishery-dependent data collection, NMFS is issuing two reports comparing the projected costs of two different operational electronic monitoring programs with the costs of more traditional observer/at-sea monitoring programs, as well as an independent review of the groundfish electronic monitoring report. The costs in both reports are estimated for hypothetical programs and costs are based on agency spending and cost estimates provided by three electronic monitoring service
providers in the fall of 2014. Access the reports below:

Cost Comparison for Hypothetical Groundfish Sector
Independent Review of the Groundfish Cost Comparison
Cost Comparison for Hypothetical Herring/Mackerel Fishery

Read the full update from the North Carolina Fisheries Association

NEW HAMPSHIRE: Congressional delegation stands with fishermen

September 20, 2015 — PORTSMOUTH, N.H. – Fishermen have said this month that the U.S. Congress is their last hope in preventing federal regulations from destroying their industry.

So it was a boost of confidence this week when three New Hampshire congressional legislators took a stand for the fishing industry. They filed legislation, sent letters requesting action and held a roundtable that placed themselves, fishermen and federal officials in the same room to discuss the fate of the fishing industry.

“I think they’re all believable,” said Peter Kendall, a former New Hampshire commercial fisherman. “I think they’re all behind us.”

On Friday, Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., held the roundtable meeting at Pease International Tradeport that put fishermen across the table from officials from the federal agency imposing what fishermen say are back-breaking regulations and costs, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. At the meeting, Ayotte spoke in support of the fishermen, saying those fees and regulations fly in the face of federal law.

Ayotte and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., on Thursday wrote a letter asking the U.S. inspector general to investigate an at-sea monitoring program that fishermen are expected to pay for as soon as Nov. 1. The program will require observers go to sea with fishermen for 24 percent of their fishing days, monitoring their compliance with groundfishing regulations. Cost is expected to be roughly $700 a day, more than fishermen gross in a day’s work, they say.

Ayotte also filed legislation to terminate the observer program unless it was funded by NOAA, which currently covers the cost.

This past Monday, U.S. Rep. Frank Guinta, R-N.H., met with commercial fishermen at Yankee Fisherman’s Cooperative in Seabrook to promise them he’d file a bill to delay the Nov. 1 deadline, if not kill the program altogether.

Read the full story at New Bedford Standard-Times