Saving Seafood

Otter fans float plan to bring sea otters back to Oregon coast

November 16, 2018 — It’s been more than a century since sea otters were hunted to near extinction along the U.S. West Coast. The cute animals were successfully reintroduced along the Washington, British Columbia and California coasts, but an attempt to bring them back to Oregon in the early 1970s failed.

Now a new nonprofit has formed to try again.

“For about 110 years now, there’s been a big hole in our environment,” said Peter Hatch, a Siletz tribal member living in Corvallis. “The sea otter has been is missing from the Oregon coast.”

Hatch recently joined the board of a new nonprofit dedicated to bringing the sea otter back to Oregon waters. The group is named the Elakha Alliance — “elakha” is the Clatsop-Chinookan word for sea otter.

Read the full story at Jefferson Public Radio

Tentative deal reached on renewal of Pacific Salmon Treaty

September 21, 2018 — American and Canadian negotiators have successfully brokered a deal to renew the Pacific Salmon Treaty. The compromise agreement has now been sent to Ottawa and Washington, D.C., to be approved and ratified by their respective national governments.

The Pacific Salmon Treaty is renegotiated every decade between the two countries to govern salmon catch, research, and enhancement in Alaska, Oregon, Washington and British Columbia. The treaty expires on its own terms on Dec. 31, 2018. The current negotiations have taken place over the course of two years by two teams seeking to renew the treaty for the next decade, from Jan. 1, 2019, through Dec. 31, 2028.

Aspects of the expiring plan will carry over. Among them, the use of an abundance-based management regime for king salmon, as opposed to hard caps. This should result in harvest rate indices and quotas that will rise and fall depending on abundance of the fish.

Pacific Salmon Commission Executive Secretary John Field praised the negotiators for working out amendments to the treaty, including harvest rate reductions of king salmon when it comes to mixed-stock ocean fisheries.

Read the full story at National Fisherman

 

For Marine Life, New Threats from a Fast-Tracked Canadian Pipeline

August 2, 2018 — Nearly everyone involved in the controversy over Canada’s troubled Trans Mountain Pipeline was surprised when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced in May that his government would take over the construction from a private company to ensure that additional tar sands crude oil can move from northern Alberta to a port in British Columbia.

The 715-mile Trans Mountain pipeline expansion would add a parallel pipeline to an existing one, increasing the route’s capacity from 300,000 to 890,000 barrels per day and helping producers sell crude and refined oil to Asian markets. Trudeau’s action means that a pipeline many thought might never be built is now on a fast track to completion by 2020. Construction is scheduled to begin this month.

The expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline poses a range of environmental impacts and risks — from the possibility of leaks as the new line crosses hundreds of streams, rivers, and lakes across the breadth of the British Columbia wilderness, to the fact that it will allow Alberta’s massive tar sands reserves to be further exploited and contribute large amounts of CO2 to the atmosphere. But the most immediate and serious impacts may be to the marine environment along the coast of British Columbia, where the pipeline would terminate at the Westridge Marine Terminal at Burnaby near Vancouver.

The pipeline is expected to lead to a sharp increase in oil tanker traffic in the Salish Sea — a network of inland ocean waterways shared by British Columbia and Washington State — from four tankers a month to 34, along with associated construction and other ship  traffic. Marine biologists are especially concerned about the impact of increased ship noise on a highly endangered population of 75 killer whales, known as the “southern residents,” shared by the two countries.

Read the full story at Yale Environment 360

ALASKA: Transboundary mine meeting includes State Department, B.C. reps

May 25, 2018 — Alaskans concerned about possible impacts of British Columbia mines on cross-border rivers will get an update during a June 1 meeting in Juneau.

Lt. Gov. Byron Mallott will host the third annual transboundary mining meeting.

Mallott aide Albert Kookesh said officials from the federal, state and British Columbia governments will attend. So will tribal, industrial, environmental, fisheries and other leaders.

Kookesh said this year’s meeting will allow more time for discussion than previous gatherings.

“This is a chance for stakeholders, people who are interested in those types of transboundary issues, to come and talk to the powers that be, if you want to say it that way,” Kookesh said.

Read and listen to the full story at Alaska Public Media

 

British Columbia minister will push to move salmon farming onshore

March 13, 2018 — The minister of forest, land and natural resource operations, and rural development in British Columbia, Canada has called for moving open-net fish farms from the ocean to land-based operations.

Doug Donaldson stated publicly that though the option to ban Atlantic salmon farming is not currently available to him, as it’s regulated by the federal government, he is in favor of phasing out ocean-based salmon farming in favor of closed containment.

“We’re very concerned as a government about protecting wild salmon and the migratory routes that they use and we’re very interested in moving to closed containment where feasible,” he said in an interview with CBC News.

Read the full story at SeafoodSource

 

Could migrating squid help Alaska predict climate change?

October 17, 2017 — Juneau, Alaska — Chasing warmer waters, the market squid might be here to stay

Attracted to warming ocean temperatures, small, iridescent squid have been moving into Southeast Alaska waters. They could be a cipher to understanding how sea life reacts to climate change, said University of Alaska Southeast associate professor Dr. Michael Navarro at an Evening at Egan talk Friday at UAS.

Navarro, an assistant professor of marine fisheries, has been studying what are called market squid in partnership with researchers at Stanford University. With the help of undergraduate students, he opened his lab at UAS last month.

He’s trying to understand if market squid are setting up shop here or only visiting. The squid don’t historically range north of British Columbia. Alaska researchers, however, have encountered them in waters in the Gulf of Alaska and Southeast for more than a decade.

Read the full story at Juneau Empire

Nils E. Stolpe/FishNet USA: “Fish Wars” or a Regime Shift in Ocean Governance?

October 2, 2017 — The reasons for Big Oil’s (now more accurately Big Energy’s) focus on fisheries – and on demonizing fishing and fishermen – has been fairly obvious since a coalition of fishermen and environmentalists successfully stopped energy exploration on Georges Bank in the early 80s. Using a handful of ocean oriented ENGOs as their agents, the Pew Charitable Trusts and other “charitable” trusts funded a hugely expensive campaign that the domestic fishing industry is still suffering from, but that campaign has paid off handsomely to the entities that participated in or funded it.

However, the entry of Philadelphia’s Lenfest Foundation into the fray, particularly considering that operational control was delegated to Pew, appeared to put the participation of other foundations with roots in the high tech area in a different light. Packard, Moore and Lenfest all working together with Pew et al to scuttle the public image and “revolutionize” the financial and social underpinnings of an entire industry in an apparently coordinated way started to make some sense (read more here).

But my thinking on this was further crystallized after reading a recent article in the New York Times. From the February 22, 2016 Fishnet:

“The authors (of the most recent Daniel Pauly assault on commercial fishing) acknowledge, and it will probably come as no surprise to most readers, “that The Pew Charitable Trusts, Philadelphia, funded the Sea Around Us from 1999 to 2014, during which the bulk of the catch reconstruction work was performed.” However, it might be news that “since mid-2014, the Sea Around Us has been funded mainly by The Paul G. Allen Family Foundation.” If anyone wonders why one of the founders of Microsoft might be interested in supporting research by Daniel Pauly, from an article in the NY Times last week  – Microsoft Plumbs Ocean’s Depths to Test Underwater Data Center)

“REDMOND, Wash. — Taking a page from Jules Verne, researchers at Microsoft believe the future of data centers may be under the sea. Microsoft has tested a prototype of a self-contained data center that can operate hundreds of feet below the surface of the ocean, eliminating one of the technology industry’s most expensive problems: the air-conditioning bill. Today’s data centers, which power everything from streaming video to social networking and email, contain thousands of computer servers generating lots of heat. When there is too much heat, the servers crash. Putting the gear under cold ocean water could fix the problem. It may also answer the exponentially growing energy demands of the computing world be-cause Microsoft is considering pairing the system either with a turbine or a tidal energy system to generate electricity. The effort, code-named Project Natick, might lead to strands of giant steel tubes linked by fiber optic cables placed on the seafloor. Another possibility would suspend containers shaped like jelly beans beneath the surface to capture the ocean current with turbines that generate electricity.”

Of course this needs to be coupled with Microsoft’s commitment to the future of “cloud computing” (for those readers who have successfully avoided advanced nerdhood up until now, the “cloud” is just a lot of web-connected servers housed in what are called server farms. Server farms are becoming increasingly expensive to operate shoreside – see the NY Times article linked above) and do a Google search on “Microsoft cloud future” to see where the tech industry thinks Microsoft is heading vis a vis cloud computing.

Is it possible that in the near future we’ll be reading foundation-funded research reports from our neighbors in British Columbia “proving” that submerged server farms put in place by the well-known Redmond conservationists provide much needed shelter for a myriad of marine creatures that are threatened by those rapacious fisher-men? Or that Marine Protected Areas are a really logical place to put those submerged servers?”

If you haven’t fully embraced the high-tech, internet-based wonders that are now easily and affordably available to virtually all of us – how about a Brita water purifier that will automatically order another filter before the old one needs replacing? – the major impetus for this seems to be to get folks to spend money without consciously deciding to do so. Propping this all up, making it possible, is “cloud computing” enabling you to receive a Brita filter and to get Amazon and Brita handsomely paid for getting it to you without you being involved.

With the increase in web-connected, web-enabled, web-anythinged appliances, processes, monitors, alarms, lighting and who knows what else in the future, and in hi-definition video and music streaming, a rapid growth in the capacity of the so-called cloud, which is going to become increasingly crowded, is guaranteed. That means that the demand for server farms will be increasing as well – and the closer those server farms are to the demand (population centers), the more efficient they will be.

As the Microsoft interest clearly demonstrates, alternatives to land based server farms in close proximity to population centers are going to become a high priority, and the only alternative is going to be siting them in the ocean – which offers the additional benefit of significantly reducing, or perhaps eliminating, cooling costs.

These sub-surface server farms will be as compatible with fishing as offshore power generation or the petroleum industry are. Would there be a more rational solution to what has already become a significant problem, given hundreds of billions of dollars in the bank, than for these high tech industries that are committed to a future in the oceans, than to marginalize fishermen.

Read the full opinion piece at FishNet USA

Shark fin bans might not help sharks, scientists say

September 25, 2017 — PORTLAND, Maine — As lawmakers propose banning the sale of shark fins in the U.S., a pair of scientists is pushing back, saying the effort might actually harm attempts to conserve the marine predators.

Democratic Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey introduced a bill this year designed to prevent people from possessing or selling shark fins in America, much to the delight of conservation groups such as Oceana. But marine scientists David Shiffman and Robert Hueter said this approach could be wrongheaded.

Shiffman and Hueter authored a study that appears in the November issue of the journal Marine Policy, saying the U.S. has long been a leader in shark fisheries management and that shutting down the U.S. fin trade entirely would remove a model for sustainability for the rest of the world.

The U.S. also is a minor contributor to the worldwide shark fin trade, and countries with less regulated fisheries would likely step in to fill the void if America left the business altogether, Shiffman said.

“Removing that from the marketplace removes a template of a well-managed fishery,” Shiffman, a shark researcher with Simon Fraser University in British Columbia, said. “It’s much easier for us to say, here’s a way you can do this.”

Shark fins are most often used in a soup considered a delicacy in Asia. Shark fins that American fishermen harvest are often shipped to Asia for processing.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at the Bangor Daily News

After Atlantic salmon spill, fish farms’ future under attack on both sides of border

September 13, 2017 — Cooke Aquaculture Pacific knew it had problems at its Cypress Island fish farm before the catastrophic failure that spilled tens of thousands of Atlantic salmon into Puget Sound.

“The farm site No. 2 was identified as the first priority for upgrades. We knew it was at the end of its life cycle and it needed upgrades right away, and we were in the process of doing that,” company spokesman Chuck Brown said this week.

But the company never got the chance.

Instead, the farm capsized the weekend of Aug. 19, with 305,000 Atlantic salmon inside. The company collected 142,176 in all from its nets. The rest escaped.

Though evidence of damage to native fish runs is sparse, the accident has sparked an outcry to shut down the Atlantic salmon fish-farming industry in Washington. The state already has said it won’t allow new or expanded farms until further review, and 20 Western Washington tribes with treaty-protected fisheries say they want Puget Sound farms shut down entirely.

It also comes as the industry is under intense scrutiny across the border in British Columbia. First Nations people on Aug. 25 began an occupation of a net pen farm at Swanson Island near Alert Bay, demanding permits be revoked for the farms in their local waters because of concern about disease, fish waste and parasites harming wild stocks.

Read the full story at the Bellingham Herald

Lobstermen question the need for camera surveillance aboard vessels in Nova Scotia

June 26, 2017 — Several Nova Scotia lobster fishermen voiced doubt over their support of the possible implementation of vessel video surveillance during a workshop held last week in Lockport, Nova Scotia.

Camera surveillance aboard fishing boats was the primary topic of discussion during the 22 June information session hosted by Canada’s Department of Fisheries and Oceans and organized by the Ecology Action Center. The session was attended by more than a hundred southwest Nova Scotia fishermen, many of whom were concerned that the technology posed a threat to their privacy, CBC News reported.

Speakers including a fisherman from British Columbia and a program manager from the Gulf of Maine Research Institute. Discussion focused on the use of camera surveillance as a means to monitor catch and to cut down on bycatch, in particular regional endangered species such as Atlantic cod and cusk. However, many fishermen claimed practices are already in place that do enough to provide proper catch assurances.

Port La Tour fisherman Wilford Smith noted that the industry is already self-reporting its bycatch in logbooks, and throwing at-risk species back.

Regarding the prospect of camera surveillance on boats, Smith said: “What for? We’ve got nothing to hide…We’re not keeping nothing secret,” according to CBC News.

Spurred by insistence from main lobster-buying markets – including the United States, Europe and Asia – requiring evidence of the sustainability of imported seafood, the Nova Scotia lobster fishery obtained certification from the Marine Stewardship Council in 2015. As standards continue to evolve, though, the elements needed to prove the sustainability of catch is changing as well, and there aren’t a lot of options beyond camera surveillance that are cost-effective, according to Susanna Fuller, senior marine co-ordinator at the Ecology Action Center. While video surveillance isn’t being imposed upon Nova Scotia lobster fishermen, alternatives including at-sea observers will cost more, Fuller told CBC News.

Read the full story at Seafood Source