Saving Seafood

GOP aims to change Endangered Species Act

January 17, 2017 — BILLINGS, Mont. — In control of Congress and soon the White House, Republicans are readying plans to roll back the influence of the Endangered Species Act, one of the government’s most powerful conservation tools, after decades of complaints that it hinders drilling, logging and other activities.

Over the past eight years, GOP lawmakers sponsored dozens of measures aimed at curtailing the landmark law or putting species such as gray wolves and sage grouse out of its reach. Almost all were blocked by Democrats and the White House or lawsuits from environmentalists.

Now, with the ascension of President-elect Donald Trump, Republicans see an opportunity to advance broad changes to a law they contend has been exploited by wildlife advocates to block economic development.

“It has never been used for the rehabilitation of species. It’s been used for control of the land,” said House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rob Bishop. “We’ve missed the entire purpose of the Endangered Species Act. It has been hijacked.”

Bishop said he “would love to invalidate” the law and would need other lawmakers’ cooperation.

The 1973 act was ushered though Congress nearly unanimously, in part to stave off extinction of the national symbol, the bald eagle. Eagle populations have since rebounded, and the birds were taken off the threatened and endangered list in 2007.

In the eagles’ place, another emblematic species — the wolf — has emerged as a prime example of what critics say is wrong with the current law: seemingly endless litigation that offers federal protection for species long after government biologists conclude that they have recovered.

Wolf attacks on livestock have provoked hostility against the law, which keeps the animals off-limits to hunting in most states. Other species have attracted similar ire — Canada lynx for halting logging projects, the lesser prairie chicken for impeding oil and gas development and salmon for blocking efforts to reallocate water in California.

Reforms proposed by Republicans include placing limits on lawsuits that have been used to maintain protections for some species and force decisions on others, as well as adopting a cap on how many species can be protected and giving states a greater say in the process.

Wildlife advocates are bracing for changes that could make it harder to add species to the protected list and to usher them through to recovery. Dozens are due for decisions this year, including the Pacific walrus and the North American wolverine, two victims of potential habitat loss due to climate change.

“Any species that gets in the way of a congressional initiative or some kind of development will be clearly at risk,” said Jamie Rappaport Clark, president of Defenders of Wildlife and a former Fish and Wildlife Service director under President Bill Clinton. “The political lineup is as unfavorable to the Endangered Species Act as I can remember.”

More than 1,600 plants and animals in the U.S. are now shielded by the law. Hundreds more are under consideration for protections. Republicans complain that fewer than 70 have recovered and had protections lifted.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at the Post Register 

NOAA Fisheries Updates U.S. Congress on Deep Sea Coral Research

July 13, 2016 — SEAFOOD NEWS — A report to Congress submitted last month describes the 2014 and 2015 research activities on the nation’s deep-sea coral areas. The report also briefly describes progress during this period in MSA-related management actions that contribute to protecting deep-sea coral areas.

Feldwork in two regions was done during 2014-15. A survey of 31 submarine canyons between Maine and Virginia and the discovery of coral gardens just 25 miles off the coast of Maine was done by the Northeast Fieldwork Initiative.

In Alaska, images of the seafloor at more than 200 stations throughout the 1,200-mile Aleutian Islands chain were taken, confirming widespread corals and commercially important fish using the coral areas.

These initiatives tell researchers about many deep-sea coral communities that no humans had seen before. The involved scientists shared their findings and enabled the respective  management councils to act on the newest data.

NOAA’s Deep Sea Coral Research Program is a central partner for new research in the Pacific Islands region that began in 2015 and will continue until 2017. This research is also discovering deep-sea coral communities, and likely new species, in places never before surveyed.

Deep-sea corals can live for hundreds or thousands of years, creating remarkably complex communities in the depths of the oceans. Their habitat in the deep sea ranges from 150-foot depth to more than 10,000 feet.

Deep-sea coral habitats have been discovered in all U.S. regions on continental shelves and slopes, canyons, and seamounts. Their full geographic extent is still unknown, because most areas have yet to be adequately surveyed.

A few deep-sea coral species form reefs that, over millennia, can grow more than 100 meters (300 feet) tall. Many other coral species are shaped like bushes or trees and can form assemblages similar to groves or forests on the seafloor.

Nationwide, these complex structures provide habitat for many fish and invertebrate species, including certain commercially important ones such as grouper, snapper, sea bass, rockfish, shrimp, and crab.

This story originally appeared on Seafoodnews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.

Red snapper management would cost Louisiana $10 million-plus in first year, LDWF says

July 8, 2016 — If red snapper management is ultimately turned over to the individual Gulf states through Garret Graves’ bill currently moving through Congress, the program would come with a $10,039,000 price tag for the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries in its first year, according to the state’s head fisheries biologist.

The cost estimate was unveiled in Baton Rouge by LDWF Assistant Secretary of the Office of Fisheries Patrick Banks at Thursday’s four-hour meeting of the Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission, where charter fishermen spoke out against the legislation and members of Coastal Conservation Association Louisiana voiced their support for the bill.

The commission took no action on the red snapper presentation or the cost analysis.

“We had a Gulf Council meeting break out,” David Cresson, executive director for CCA Louisiana, said after the meeting. “It was a bit surprising to see representatives from Texas and Florida — representatives of historically anti-recreational groups — show up to give their opinions.

“So it felt a lot like a Gulf Council meeting today. And all the arguments they made sounded just like at the Gulf Council every time.”

Read the full story at the Louisiana Sportsman

Canada’s fish stocks poorly tracked — report

June 30, 2016 — As the federal government prepares to make major decisions about whether or not to expand access to clam and shrimp stocks in Atlantic Canada, a group of marine researchers are urging better tracking and more accountability for one of the country’s most valuable resources.

The Canadian chapter of international ocean conservation organization Oceana recently completed the most comprehensive public study ever conducted on the state of Canada’s fish stocks. But, according to Halifax-based marine biologist and report co-author Susanna Fuller, it wasn’t easy.

“It should not be that hard to find management decisions, whether or not something has a management plan, and the state of a stock, and it is hard right now,” she said.

Compiling the report often came down to calling individual scientists to get the data required, Fuller said, and some data wasn’t available at all — they were only able to get information on 125 of the 165 stocks they looked at.

“It’s shocking that in Canada you can’t find anywhere a list of all the fisheries in Canada that is publicly available” she said.

“When you compare that to the U.S., all that information is online. You can find it, it’s easy, and there’s an obligation in the U.S. that they actually have to report to Congress on how the fish stocks are doing.”

Read the full story at the Herald News

The Future of Seafood Security: The Fight Against Illegal Fishing and Seafood Fraud

June 8, 2016 — In December 2006, the U.S. Congress passed a comprehensive reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, which governs America’s fisheries. In the decade since, this law has been lauded around the globe as a model for both ending overfishing and allowing science to drive management of the world’s last major commercial hunting industry. As a result, regulators are required to set catch limits at the most sustainable levels possible. It has been so effective that the European Union used it as a model for revising its comparable law, the Common Fisheries Policy, in 2014. The upshot of the 2006 Magnuson-Stevens Act reauthorization is that overfishing has effectively been ended in U.S. waters. And yet, despite this fact, Americans are still consuming millions of tons of unsustainably caught seafood every year.

According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, more than 90 percent of the seafood consumed in the United States is imported. This means it is harvested, farmed, or processed in nations that, in almost all cases, lack the high standards that the United States has mandated for domestic producers. Making matters more difficult, it is exceedingly hard for buyers who seek sustainable seafood to identify its provenance with any degree of confidence; mislabeling—either accidental or purposeful—is rampant. So the combination in many countries of low enforcement capacity on the water and in processing facilities and substantial short-term economic incentives for unscrupulous fishermen and dealers means that those who would seek to exploit or circumvent national and international standards and regulations have all but unlimited capacity to do so.

Therefore, while American fisheries approach the 10th anniversary of the enactment of some of the world’s strongest seafood sustainability standards, much work remains in the fight to maintain global fish populations, the industry that relies on them, and, ultimately, the primary source of protein for more than one billion people worldwide. President Barack Obama’s administration, with assistance from leaders in Congress, has begun to take significant steps toward addressing the two-track problems of combating illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing activity—also known as IUU fishing—and enhancing the traceability of seafood in order to combat trade in fraudulent fish. NOAA recently ended the public comment period on a new proposed rule that would boost efforts on both fronts, and last fall, the U.S. Senate acted to ratify a treaty requiring countries where fishermen land their products—known as port states—to take additional measures to block vessels engaged in illegal fishing activity from entering their harbors.

Read the full story at the Center for American Progress

‘Wasteful’ catfish inspection program costing taxpayers millions, tough to kill

May 31, 2016 — The way Congress’ chief watchdog describes it, the government’s plan to set up a new catfish inspection process is one of the clearest examples of wasteful spending in the federal budget.

Yet killing the catfish inspection program is proving to be tremendously difficult for all the usual Washington reasons: a powerful patron in Congress, a weak administration controlling the agencies and a pliant Congress happy to limp into the next election on autopilot.

The cost-cutters did win a round last week when deficit-hawk Republicans linked arms with Democrats who were eager to find places to trim the budget. Combined, they voted 55-43 to stop the duplicate catfish inspection by the Food Safety and Inspection Service and shift it back to the Food and Drug Administration, which had been handling it for years.

But victory for the cost-cutters is anything but assured. The House must still vote, and then the change must survive President Obama’s veto pen.

Read the full story from The Washington Times 

Long Island Sound is a fight worth the engagement

May 4, 2016 — U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., has launched a dramatic — if quixotic — drive in Congress for an $860 million-a-year program to protect Long Island Sound.

May his effort be successful. But even in pushing the issue into the news, Murphy does a service in keeping awareness of the Sound’s fragility in the public conversation.

The Sound, as noted here often, is a multi-million dollar economic asset and a major component in the state’s quality of life. It is never to be underestimated as an economic driver.

A Hearst Connecticut Media investigation last year of federal Environmental Protection Agency documents uncovered unsettling data on the threat to marine life from pollutants that continue to flow into the Sound.

Read the full story at Greenwich Time

Reps. Moulton, Keating, Lynch Lead Delegation to Protect Massachusetts Lobster Industry

May 2, 2016 — The following was released by the office of Congressman Seth Moulton:

WASHINGTON – Today, Congressmen Seth Moulton (D-MA), Stephen Lynch (D-MA), and Bill Keating (D-MA) led an effort to protect the Massachusetts lobster industry in response to the Swedish government’s petition to classify the American lobster as an invasive species. The petition ultimately seeks to ban the import of live American lobsters from the United States to the European Union (EU).

Moulton, Keating, and Lynch were joined by the entire state delegation in sending a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry, Ambassador Michael Froman, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrator, Kathryn Sullivan. The letter notes that the EU’s alien species regulations must offer robust scientific evidence in support of any species ban, and argues that this is not the case for the American lobster. The letter can be viewed here.

“The Sixth District is home to the largest and most active lobster fleet in Massachusetts, and the lobster industry is a critical part of our history and local economy,” said Congressman Seth Moulton. “This effort to ban U.S. exports of American lobster is not based in science. In fact, studies conducted by leading marine scientists refute Sweden’s assertions that American lobster meet the criteria to be banned by the European Union. This ban would not only have a detrimental impact on the livelihoods of hardworking men and women in the lobster industry, but it would also hurt the entire Massachusetts economy. I’m grateful that our entire delegation stands united to ensure our lobster industry continues to thrive, and I am committed to working with my colleagues in Congress and the Administration to advance a collaborative and transparent dialogue on this issue.”

“The lobster industry is as important to our local economy as it is to our history,” said Congressman Bill Keating, who represents Massachusetts’s South Shore, South Coast, and Cape and Islands. “I will continue working with my Massachusetts colleagues to oppose efforts to list the North American lobster as an invasive species, including by working directly with our European counterparts in my role as Ranking Member of the Trade Subcommittee on the Foreign Affairs Committee.”

“I respect Sweden’s commitment to protecting the environment from invasive species, but their proposal to halt imports of North American lobsters is not based on sound scientific reasoning,” said Congressman Stephen F. Lynch. “The evidence they have presented is inconsistent with E.U. standards and I hope the State Department, the United States Trade Representative, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration will continue to work together to advocate for the continued trade of live American lobsters with the E.U. A ban could have serious effects on our hardworking Massachusetts lobstermen and their families.”

“From the decks of Massachusetts lobster boats to the plates of European diners, we need to ensure American lobster continues to benefit families and businesses on both side of the Atlantic,” said Senator Edward J. Markey. “The current effort by Swedish authorities to reclassify American lobsters an invasive species and ban their importation into the European Union would undermine a centuries-old relationship and have enormously negative impacts on the Massachusetts lobster industry. Any decision by the EU Commission on the American lobster should be informed by scientific principles and current standards. American lobster is one of our most delectable exports, and we should ensure that Europeans can continue to enjoy it for years to come.”

“Lobsters are a big part of the Massachusetts economy, and I’m very concerned about any attempt to block imports of American lobsters. A ban on live lobster imports is not in line with the EU’s standards or with the research conducted by New England’s leading marine scientists on how best to protect the environment,” Senator Elizabeth Warren said. “I’ll keep working with the congressional delegation to support our local lobstermen and to keep the markets open for Massachusetts’ lobsters.”

“The European Union markets are extremely important to our commercial Lobstermen here in the Commonwealth,” said Beth Casoni, Executive Director of the Massachusetts Lobstermen’s Association. “We are appreciative and encouraged by the efforts being put forth by Congressmen Moulton, Keating, Lynch, and the entire Massachusetts Delegation to bring a resolve to this matter.”

ALASKA: Gulf fishermen wary of Congressional intrusion into council process

April 7, 2016 — Gulf of Alaska fishermen suspect that Washington, D.C., politics might come into play for fisheries regulations they want left to the North Pacific Fishery Management Council.

A letter circulated by the Alaska Marine Conservation Council and signed by 250 Gulf of Alaska fishermen and residents was sent to each of Alaska’s three congressional delegation members.

The letter asks that the Alaska’s representatives in the nation’s capital oppose any legislation intended to press Gulf of Alaska fisheries regulations.

“Specifically, we request our Alaska delegation to support development of a Gulf of Alaska Trawl Bycatch Management Program (aka catch share) in the Council process so all stakeholders may contribute to a transparent process,” the letter asks.

“Please do not support any attempt to circumvent the council process through legislation in Washington, D.C., as that would effectively preclude Alaskan coastal communities and stakeholders from having a direct voice in the process.”

During ComFish, an annual Kodiak commercial fisheries booster event, Stephen Taufen of Groundswell Fisheries Movement acknowledged writing the letter and said that the Congresswoman in question is Rep. Jaime Hererra Beutler, R-Wash.

Beutler, a representative of southwest Washington, sits on the House Appropriations Committee. Much of the Gulf trawl industry is based in Seattle.

Read the full story at the Alaska Journal of Commerce

CALIFORNIA: State lawmakers push for crab fishing industry emergency relief

March 4, 2016 — The loss of this year’s crab season has cost the industry more than $100 million and has driven many of the captains and crews to the brink of financial insolvency. On Friday, three Bay Area members of Congress announced their pushing for emergency relief for these farmers of the sea.

Peninsula Congresswoman Jackie Speier and North Bay Congressman Jared Huffman announced they have proposed that Congress pass the Crab Disaster Emergency Assistance Act. It’s a direct response to the massive losses suffered by California crabbers and crew due to toxic algae that killed their season.

“This bill would provide $138 million to crab fishermen along our coast to help them through this horrific season,” says Representative Jackie Speier, (D) San Mateo.

Read the full story at KTVU