Saving Seafood

Environmental Advocates, Fishermen At Odds Over Turning Cashes Ledge Into National Monument

February 2, 2016 — It’s clear from listening to fishermen that they’re ambivalent about the fisheries management process and the rules it produces. They feel like the rules are stacked against them, but they abide by the council’s decisions, because that is the process they have signed onto. The presidential order would fall outside that process.

Jackie Odell advocates for New England groundfishermen with the Northeast Seafood Coalition. She said the fisheries management process is public and transparent, and decisions are data-driven, goal-specific and reached through compromise.

“You know, there’s legislation that’s out there to protect this process,” she said. “And if we don’t want to use that process what are we doing and why? Why are all stakeholders — states, fishermen, NGOs, scientific community — all engaging in a process that in the end we are going to say, it doesn’t matter.”

But, she added, the fishing industry and environmental groups don’t have to be adversaries: Fishermen are also concerned about mining and natural gas exploration.

Witman, the longtime Cashes Ledge researcher, agrees.

“In the long run, I think we want the same thing. We both value a healthy resilient ocean that can support fisheries,” he said.

But the sticking point might be one of perspective.

Many fishermen, including Testaverde, entered this profession because it’s what their family had been doing for generations. They take immense pride in their work and their heritage. They fear a future in which their descendants won’t experience that.

Skerry, the photographer, fears a future in which one of Earth’s beautiful places is irrevocably damaged.

Read the full story at WBUR News

North Carolina Fisheries Association Weekly Update for Feb 1, 2016

February 2, 2016 — The following was released by the North Carolina Fisheries Association:

CARTERET COUNTY FISHERMEN’S ASSOCIATION TO MEET

The Carteret County Fishermen’s Association has scheduled a meeting for Saturday, February 6, 2016 at the Marshallberg Community Center at 6:30pm.

SOUTHERN SHRIMP ALLIANCE & SHRIMP IMPORTS:

The Southern Shrimp Alliance (SSA) is an organization of shrimp fishermen, shrimp processors, and other members of the domestic industry in the eight warmwater shrimp producing states of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Texas.

Founded in 2002, the SSA works to ensure the continued vitality and existence of the U.S. shrimp industry.  The livelihoods of U.S. shrimpers are threatened by cheap, unfairly traded imported shrimp.  The U.S market has become a dumping ground for shrimp that are turned away from other major seafood importing countries.  Proposed restrictions on shrimp fishing and rapidly increasing costs of doing business also loom over the industry.   The SSA is committed to preserving the long term viability of one of our nation’s most valuable fisheries, which for decades has been a foundation of the economy and social structure of countless coastal communities throughout the Gulf and Southeast regions. 

SSA is currently conducting a sunset review, which is required to determine if antidumping duties should remain for imported shrimp from certain countries. John distributed surveys for shrimpers and processors. It is very important for shrimpers and shrimp processors to participate in this survey! If not, the antidumping duties could be lifted.

We have copies at the office, so call if you want us to send you one or more. Or you can contact John Williams of the Southern Shrimp Alliance directly: john@shrimpalliance.com or call: 727-934-5090.

PROPOSED BOUNDARY EXPANSION TO MONITOR NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY

After several years of scientific and archaeological assessment and in coordination with the public, NOAA is proposing to expand Monitor National Marine Sanctuary off North Carolina’s Outer Banks to include additional maritime heritage resources. The proposed expansion would protect a nationally significant collection of shipwrecks that currently have little or no legal protection, including one of America’s only World War II battlefields.

 For more details and maps see http://monitor.noaa.gov/management/expansion.html.  

This expansion could have significant impacts on fishermen off the Outer Banks.  Please plan to attend one of the following public meetings:

 

Raleigh, NC

Tues., Feb. 9 from 6-9 p.m.

North Carolina Museum of History

5 East Edenton Street

919-807-7900

Beaufort, NC

Wednesday, Feb. 10 from 6-9 p.m.

North Carolina Maritime Museum

315 Front Street

252-728-7317

Hatteras, NC

Thurs., Feb. 11 from 6-9 p.m.

Graveyard of the Atlantic Museum

9200 Museum Dr.

252-986-2995

Washington, D.C.

Tues., Feb. 16 from 6-9 p.m.

US Navy Memorial – Main Auditorium

701 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

202-380-0710

Nags Head, NC

Wed., Feb. 17 from 6-9 p.m.

Jennette’s Pier – Oceanview Hall

7223 S. Virginia Dare Trail

252-255-1501

 

JERRY’S COMMENTS

Last fall WRAL aired a documentary that was not at all complimentary to our state’s commercial fishermen. I was interviewed for it and offered some suggestions for other interviews to the producer, Clay Johnson. After I watched it, I sent him a note and said it was the most subjective piece of fisheries journalism I’ve experienced. He didn’t agree with that statement, but I maintain that it’s a fact.

Since then, there are some fishermen who wonder why I would even consent to an interview. At the same time, we all seem to agree that we “need to get the word out”, and quit preaching to the choir. How do we do that by saying no to a request for an interview, when the question is, “would you be interested in being interviewed for a documentary about commercial fishing”? Before saying yes, I did some research on the producer. I watched several of his documentaries with one being about commercial fishing in 2008. The others were not about commercial fishing but all of them, in my opinion, were fair and objectively done.S

Below is the link to the video, “Net Loss”, produced by Clay Johnson in 2008. If you haven’t watched the other one that aired last year, let me know and I’ll forward to you.

http://www.wral.com/wral-tv/video/3599816/

CALENDAR

Feb 2-4     ASMFC Winter meeting; Alexandria VA

Feb 6        Carteret County Fishermen’s Association; 6:30pm;

Feb 9         Monitor National Marine Sanctuary hearing; 6-9pm; Raleigh

Feb 10     Monitor National Marine Sanctuary hearing; 6-9pm; Beaufort

Feb 11       Monitor National Marine Sanctuary hearing; 6-9pm; Hatteras

Feb 9-11   MAFMC meeting in New Bern NC

Feb 17     Monitor National Marine Sanctuary hearing; 6-9pm; Nags Head

Feb 17-19 NC MFC meeting in Wrightsville Beach, NC

Mar 7-11   SAFMC meeting in Jekyll Island, GA

View a PDF of the Weekly Update

Enviros Push for “National Monuments” Off Northeast Coast that Could Ban Recreational Fishing

November, 2015 — A coalition of environmental groups including the Pew Charitable Trusts, the Conservation Law Foundation, and the National Resources Defense Council, is pushing hard to create a half-dozen “marine national monuments” in the Atlantic Ocean that would prohibit commercial fishing and could ban recreational fishing as well.

The coalition is encouraging President Obama to use his authority to designate the monuments through the Antiquities Act of 1906, which was created to “protect the objects of historic and scientific interest” and is supposed to be limited to “the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected.” Through the Act, a president can unilaterally create these areas without any public or congressional oversight or input. A number of presidents have exercised this privilege in the past, yet most monuments have been designated on land or in the Western Pacific Ocean.

At the time of this writing the areas under consideration are not completely clear, but appear to include at least three canyons – Lydonia, Gilbert, and Oceanographer – along with four seamounts to the south, as well as Cashes Ledge some 50 miles offshore in the Gulf of Maine. Other canyons and seamounts are also reportedly under consideration.

It is clear to many of us, however, that the coalition’s intent in creating these monuments has little to do with historical or cultural preservation. As Maine’s Gov. Paul LePage put it, the monuments designations “would serve only one purpose – excluding commercial fishing from certain segments of the ocean.”

The recreational sector, however, needs to be very careful – and skeptical as well. At least one attorney for the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) has suggested that recreational fishing would likely be allowed in the monuments, in order to garner support from sport fishermen, and indicated that it would be a real “win” for the recreational sector if just the commercials were prohibited in these areas.

But the rec sector isn’t taking the bait. “Just because a couple of environmental groups claim they wouldn’t oppose recreational fishing in the monuments doesn’t mean that sport fishing would be allowed once the final regulations are drafted in D.C.,” explained Frank Blount, chairman of the New England Fishery Management Council’s (NEFMC) Groundfish Committee and a party boat fleet owner in RI. “There’s no way to predict what the language in any monument designation will entail. We need to oppose the whole idea, right from the get-go.”

One of the biggest problems with the Antiquities Act of 1906 is that it strips away the open, democratic processes that protect these areas yet can allow sustainable and appropriate fishing activity. The open federal Fishery Management Council system is the vehicle by which this is best accomplished, and in fact the NEFMC has already implemented strong protections for Cashes Ledge, where most commercial fishing is already now prohibited. And in June, the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council voted to protect 38,000 square miles of marine habitat in order to protect deep-sea corals.

A marine monuments designation, in contrast, would nullify these existing management actions, and deny the public any input into what new restrictions might, or should, be enacted. “Instead, it all becomes purely political,” says Jim Donofrio, the RFA’s Executive Director. “Whoever has the most influence on the administration and the president will get what they want in the way of restrictions in these areas. This is no way to manage our publicly-owned marine resources. We already have a transparent process via the Magnuson-Stevens Act. It’s certainly not perfect, to be sure, but it at least allows for public participation.”

Read the full story at Making Waves, the official publication of the Recreational Fishing Alliance

JON WILLIAMS: Not So Fast On Atlantic Marine Monument

WASHINGTON — November 4, 2015 — The following is an excerpt from an opinion piece written by Jon Williams, President of the Atlantic Red Crab Company of New Bedford, Massachusetts. It was originally published today by The Hill, a Washington-based publication covering Congressional policy and politics: 

An ongoing campaign led by large, well-funded environmental organizations is urging President Obama to use the 1906 Antiquities Act to designate parts of the Atlantic Ocean-such as Cashes Ledge in the Gulf of Maine and the New England Canyons and Seamounts-as marine National Monuments. In September, I had the privilege of testifying before House Natural Resources Committee Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans about the aspect of this proposal that seeks to exclude historic fisheries from the designated area.

The Antiquities Act, originally enacted to give Teddy Roosevelt authority to protect vulnerable Native American archeological sites, allows the president to act quickly, unilaterally, and without Congressional oversight to preserve sites in danger of destruction. The act, while undoubtedly created in good faith, has been misused in the case of marine monuments to a frightening extent.

In my case, the red crab fishing business I’ve been operating for twenty years is active in some of the areas under the proposal. Not only has our fishery complied with every regulation, but we have expended significant resources and time to ensure the health of the resource we fish.  We were the first U.S. Atlantic Coast fishery certified as sustainable by the Marine Stewardship Council, demonstrating we have minimal impact on the health of the species and its environment. Additionally, we are listed as “Ocean-Friendly” by the New England Aquarium Seafood Guide program. 

Although these processes took years of effort and hundreds of thousands of dollars-a significant cost for a fishery of our size-it was important that we understood how the red crab fishery impacted the environment and demonstrated that our practices were indeed sustainable. 

These efforts to both understand and minimize our impact on the environment have been so successful that after forty years of red crab fishing, our fishing grounds are described as “pristine” by the same environmental groups who seek the monument designation. If these habitats are still “pristine” after forty years of fishing, how can a serious argument be made that the area is in imminent danger and in need of immediate, unilateral protection by presidential fiat? By labeling our fishery as an imminent threat despite our ability to keep the area pristine, these environmental groups have both ignored the facts and devalued our successful efforts to operate a sustainable fishery.

In addition, those of us who have fished sustainably and responsibly in the area for decades have had our voices almost completely shut out of this process. A prime example was the September 15 “town hall” meeting held by NOAA in Providence, Rhode Island. Hastily arranged, many fishermen who would be affected by the proposals were not even aware that it took place. Those in attendance were provided no firm details on the scope of the proposal, preventing them from commenting substantively about something that could dramatically affect or even eliminate their livelihoods. There’s no guarantee that there will be any future opportunity for those affected to voice their concerns. The Antiquities Act does not require such input, and a designation could come at any time.

Read the full opinion piece at The Hill 

NOAA encourages continued engagement on possible marine protected areas in New England

October 29, 2015 — The following was released by NOAA:

We would like to thank those of you who have taken the time to engage with NOAA on possible protections for some of the most ecologically important areas in the Atlantic Ocean, including several deep sea canyons and seamounts. We are committed to evaluating opportunities to protect important marine resources and habitat, while limiting impacts to those people and businesses whose livelihoods depend on these waters.

We received a lot of valuable input at the town hall meeting and have received many helpful comments and questions submitted electronically.

Many of you have requested more details and additional opportunities for public comment, and in the coming months we intend to release additional information about the area under consideration and solicit feedback.

In the meantime, if you have more thoughts that you would like to share, please continue to send them to:  atlanticconservation@noaa.gov.

 

NPR: Conservationists Push for a National Undersea Monument

October 22, 2015 — WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) — October 22, 2015 — The following is an excerpt from a story by Heather Goldstone, originally published October 19 on NPR affiliate WCAI. It also appeared on NPR’s Weekend Edition Sunday.

Editor’s Note: In the article, the Conservation Law Foundation’s Priscilla Brooks comments that the Antiquities Act is “how we’ve gotten many of our incredible national parks – the Grand Canyon, Yellowstone.” However, Yellowstone National Park predates the Antiquities Act of 1906 by 34 years, having been established in 1872 by an act of Congress. 

The ocean off New England’s coast is known for lobster and cod, but there are also lush kelp forests and rare deep-sea corals. Environmentalists want President Obama to declare those natural riches a marine national monument – the first of its kind in the Atlantic. Fishermen say the plan not only threatens their business, it silences their voices. 

…

Environmentalists are pushing President Obama to declare a marine national monument covering Cashes Ledge, the canyons, and everything in between – six thousand square miles in all. Shank agrees that some protection is needed, but he’s not convinced a monument is the way to go.

“Maybe I’m too much of a nerd scientist,” he jokes. “I just want to see us be informed about what we’re doing.”

By law, fishery managers are required to involve scientists, fishermen, and the public in crafting regulations. Fishermen don’t always like the result, but they have a say, and decisions can usually be revisited. The president, on the other hand, can declare a monument and permanently shut down fishing without any public process at all. Steve Welch of Scituate, MA, helped shape the current rules for Cashes Ledge. Standing outside a recent fishery management meeting, he says the president shouldn’t have that power.

“This is not what America is about,” Welch says. “We might as well have a dictator in the White House.”

Fishermen from twenty six states have signed a petition opposing a presidential proclamation, and the House is considering a bill that would require state and congressional approval for ocean monuments. But monument supporters point to our national parks as living proof that executive action is warranted.

“We learned a century ago that giving the President the authority to protect special areas has been a huge boon for the public,” says Priscilla Brooks, Vice President and Director of Ocean Conservation for Conservation Law Foundation. “That’s how we’ve gotten many of our incredible national parks – the Grand Canyon, Yellowstone.”

Read the full story and listen to the audio at WCAI

Mass. Senators and Congressmen Call on Obama Administration for More Public Input on Marine Monuments

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) — October 13, 2015 — Both Massachusetts Senators and three Massachusetts Congressmen have written to President Obama calling on him to further engage regional industry stakeholders before advancing any plans to use his Executive Authority to designate a marine National Monument off the coast of New England. The Monument would potentially include Cashes Ledge in the Gulf of Maine and several of the New England Canyons and Seamounts.

In the letter, Sens. Warren and Markey, and Reps. Lynch, Keating, and Moulton urge the President to “include additional opportunities for our Massachusetts constituents to express their views on the potential designations in the context of ongoing conservation efforts,” as well as “provide more information on the potential designations, especially the objectives, geographic scope, and possible limits to activities, to help inform these additional discussions.” To date there has only been one opportunity for public input, a “town hall” meeting held last month in Providence, Rhode Island.

Their letter also notes that many of the areas under consideration for a monument designation already enjoy substantial protections. Specifically, the New England Fishery Management Council “has had in place protections for Cashes Ledge for more than a decade,” and “is currently considering management actions to protect Deep Sea corals in the region.”

The text of the letter is reproduced below:

Dear Mr. President:

For centuries, the ocean has been critical to the economy and culture of Massachusetts. As Members of Congress representing Massachusetts, we are working to ensure our coastal communities continue to thrive in the 21st century. A healthy ocean is critical for healthy coastal economies. The ocean economy of Massachusetts is worth more than $6 billion, according to the most recent economic data available. Given the unprecedented challenges our fishing industry, and the shore-side businesses that depend on it, have faced in recent years, we are acutely aware of the need for collaboration with our communities, the fishing industry, and other businesses that rely on the ocean and its resources.

We understand you are considering using your authority to make national marine monument designations of a number of submarine habitats–five coral canyons, four submarine seamounts, and an underwater mountain range known as Cashes Ledge–in the New England region of the Atlantic Ocean.

As the Chairman of the New England Fisheries Management Council discussed in his statement at NOAA’ s September 15111 public listening session in Rhode Island, the Council has long recognized the unique habitats of the deep canyons, seamounts and Cashes Ledge. The Council has had in place protections for Cashes Ledge for more than a decade and ultimately supported the continuation of protections for it in the Essential Fish Habitat amendment they adopted earlier this year. The Council is also currently considering management actions to protect Deep Sea corals in the region. Stakeholders not represented on the Council also conveyed their recognition of the conservation values of these areas.

While you have clear authority under the Antiquities Act to designate national monuments, we ask that you engage stakeholders further before making a final decision. We ask you to build on last month’s listening session in Rhode Island by expanding your stakeholder engagement efforts to include additional opportunities for our Massachusetts constituents to express their views on the potential designations in the context of ongoing conservation efforts. We also ask that you provide more information on the potential designations, especially the objectives, geographic scope, and possible limits to activities, to help inform these additional discussions.

Thank you for your attention to these requests. We look forward to further discussions with you and your administration about these designations and other actions important to support the economies of our Massachusetts’s coastal communities.

Sincerely,

Edward J. Markey

United States Senator

Elizabeth Warren

United States Senator

Stephen Lynch

Member of Congress

William Keating

Member of Congress

Seth Moulton

Member of Congress

Read the letter here

 

Providence Journal: Balance of Interests Needed on Proposed Atlantic Monument

October 12, 2015 — There is no escaping the tension that exists between protecting our environment and using our natural resources for the benefit of humankind.

Sometimes, the right steps are obvious, such as when we protect endangered species, or designate a stretch of majestic mountains as national forest or parklands. At other times, there can be strong opinions and interests on both sides, with some favoring protections and others favoring a hands-off approach.

Always, it is important to strike a balance — one that protects and preserves our resources without overlooking the need for humans to use those resources and provide for themselves. Indeed, establishing wise protections can improve our quality of life while preserving the resources that provide so many benefits.

Read the full editorial at Providence Journal 

 

RON SMOLOWITZ: Marine Monument Plan Subverts Public Input

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) — October 8, 2015 — The following letter from Ron Smolowitz, of the Coonamessett Farm Foundation, was published today in the Cape Cod Times.

Your recent editorial endorsing a new Atlantic marine national monument (“A fitting tribute,” Sept. 27) misses the main reason a large and growing number of fishermen, coastal residents and public officials are so opposed to the proposal: It undermines the democratic process and threatens the future of public input in the management of public resources.

For many fishermen, this is not primarily an economic issue. Parts of the areas under consideration, particularly Cashes Ledge in the Gulf of Maine, have been closed to most forms of fishing for over a decade, and will remain closed under Omnibus Habitat Amendment 2, recently approved by the New England Fishery Management Council. Fishermen recognize the value of reasonable protections for these areas.

Rather, there is broad opposition to a marine monument because this proposal – and the precedent it sets – threatens the open and public process that has so far successfully preserved these areas. A national monument designation would mean that unilateral, one-time executive action will replace public input from a diverse variety of interests – including scientists, fishermen, regulators, and environmentalists – that has played an essential role in promoting conservation and successful management. This process works and needs to be respected.

Read the letter from Ron Smolowitz to the Cape Cod Times here