Saving Seafood

  • Home
  • News
    • Alerts
    • Conservation & Environment
    • Council Actions
    • Economic Impact
    • Enforcement
    • International & Trade
    • Law
    • Management & Regulation
    • Regulations
    • Nutrition
    • Opinion
    • Other News
    • Safety
    • Science
    • State and Local
  • News by Region
    • New England
    • Mid-Atlantic
    • South Atlantic
    • Gulf of Mexico
    • Pacific
    • North Pacific
    • Western Pacific
  • About
    • Contact Us
    • Fishing Terms Glossary

DO WE REALLY WANT POLITICIANS TO MANAGE OUR FISHERIES?

September 26, 2025 — Many years ago, all fish were managed by politicians.  The basic rule was that you could catch whatever you wanted, in whatever numbers that you wanted, of whatever size that you wanted, and you could do what you wanted with the fish—eat them, sell them, give them away, feed them to the tomatoes, or dump them back in the bay—because no law said otherwise.

Sometimes, someone would start to worry that a stock of fish wasn’t doing too well, or decided that some sort of net was killing too many fish (or, perhaps, interfering with another sort of net), or maybe one group of people decided that another group of people were killing fish that the first group wanted for themselves.  Whatever the issue, and whoever the concerned group might be, the only way to change the status quo was to go to the state (or very, very rarely federal) legislature, and convince the politicians to pass a law imposing a bag limit and/or a minimum size, or outlawing a particular gear, or to have a species declared a “gamefish” so that commercial fishermen couldn’t kill any of them anymore, and anglers could kill all of them instead.

It was a difficult, time-consuming process, and the results often weren’t very good, because laws were too often passed based on emotion, or because a particular group of fishermen wanted all of the fish for themselves, rather than being based on sound science and a coherent fisheries management policy.

Even the legislators eventually recognized that, although they held the ultimate management authority, they generally didn’t know all that much about fish, and both the public and the resource were usually better off if they delegated management authority to fisheries professionals who had the expertise needed to conserve and manage fish stocks.

That didn’t mean that the politicians were completely out of the picture—they still could legislate management measures if they wanted to—but it did mean that fisheries management measures were generally based on something more than largely uninformed opinion, and that any regulations that were put in place had to be based on facts, and were not merely “arbitrary and capricious” actions based on some people’s whim.

For the most part, and for most people, the administrative approach to fisheries management works a lot better than the legislative one, but for those who are trying to do something that’s a little outside the mainstream, and maybe unsupported by any sort of data or objective facts, management by politician rather than by professional fisheries experts is still the preferred way to go.

One of the latest examples of that is a proposed executiveorder that’s being shopped around the White House, largely by a coalition of anglingorganizations which want to shut down the menhaden reduction fishery but,perhaps due to the input of some environmental organizations, is also seekingto sharply restrict that harvest of some forage fish, and so, in one broadaction, would harshly regulate, and in some cases shut down, fisheries foreverything from menhaden off Louisiana to squid off New England.

Read the full article at ONE ANGLER’S VOYAGE

Responsible Fishery Management is a Powerful Tool to Conserve Our Ocean

June 16, 2025 — The following commentary was released by the At-sea Processors Association:

The new Ocean documentary provides a remarkable portrait of life beneath the waves. This World Ocean Day, it’s appropriate to follow the film’s gaze on climate change and destructive fishing – two major threats to the marine environment globally. Unfortunately, our most powerful and achievable tool to ensure fisheries are healthy for future generations—responsible fishery management—is entirely absent from the film’s narrative. Acknowledging and scaling up the implementation of responsible fishery management globally is an urgent priority we should unite to advance.

Fishing has provided people with food and jobs for millennia. Yet in the modern age, technological advancement has given humanity the tools to fish to excess. In the decades after World War II, numerous global fish stocks collapsed, and high-value marine habitat was degraded. In response, fishery scientists and managers joined with policymakers to develop solutions. The United Nations Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, finalized in 1995 by global experts, provides a clear roadmap for all who wish to ensure that fishing takes place sustainably.

The United States – and especially the Alaska Region – has led the world in demonstrating how responsible fishery management can be implemented. For almost five decades since passage of the U.S. Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) in 1976, Eastern Bering Sea groundfish stocks—including Alaska pollock, sablefish, Pacific cod and Alaska flatfish—have been carefully managed and harvested using highly precautionary science-based catch limits. Fish stocks have consistently remained healthy; tens of thousands of American families, many in remote communities, have been sustained by jobs in fish harvesting, processing, and support businesses; and billions of nutritious and affordable seafood meals have been provided to people around the world every single year.

Maintaining healthy target stocks is one half of the responsible fishery management challenge. The parallel task is to minimize harm to the broader marine ecosystem. The accidental harvest of non-target species (bycatch) and the disturbance of benthic habitat both take center stage in Ocean, and it’s absolutely true that both must be carefully regulated to prevent unacceptable impacts on the ocean environment.

In this area too, U.S. North Pacific fishery management leads the world. An evocative scene in the documentary shows 75% of a trawl tow being discarded. North Pacific trawl nets look profoundly different from this, thanks to the most effective bycatch avoidance techniques in the world. For example, APA’s Eastern Bering Sea Alaska pollock fleet discards less than 0.5% of the fish we catch, and we continue to improve our bycatch performance through the use of excluder technology on nets, the sharing of real-time bycatch data across the fleet, and the establishment of rolling “bycatch hotspot” area closures.

The Eastern Bering Sea’s ocean-bottom habitat, meanwhile, is conserved through extensive area-based closures, and is carefully monitored by scientists and managers for fishery impacts. Approximately 200 science-based conservation areas have been established throughout the U.S. North Pacific, usually through cooperation between scientists, managers and industry. Sixty-one percent of the region’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) has been closed year-round to bottom trawling. Further, the Essential Fish Habitat provisions of the MSA require extensive review of fishing’s habitat impacts every five years. Scientists and managers in the U.S. North Pacific have consistently confirmed through these exhaustive reviews that habitat impacts from fishing in the region are both temporary and minimal.

Remembering the broader context is also important. As we strive to sustainably feed the world’s eight billion people, there is simply no comparison between the environmental impact of responsibly managed fisheries and the terrestrial farming of animal protein. Natural habitat has been clear felled across the United States and around the world to create vast areas for intensive terrestrial food production. In Iowa, to take just one example, more than 85% of the natural habitat has been replaced by farmland. In the U.S. North Pacific, by contrast, the marine habitat remains overwhelmingly intact, with just 3.9% of the region’s benthic habitat estimated to be in a disturbed state as a result of fishing, which has occurred in the region over many decades and continues to provide food to the world and vital economic and community benefits to the region.

When it comes to climate change – the most acute long-term threat to marine ecosystem health – wild-capture seafood is by far the most climate-friendly choice of any animal protein. Put simply, in wild-capture fisheries the ocean ecosystem does the hard work of growing food without the carbon-intensive inputs that farms and aquaculture facilities require. Further, the size and scale of large fisheries like Eastern Bering Sea Alaska pollock lead to unmatched catch efficiency, further reducing the climate and habitat impacts that occur per meal produced. As a result, Alaska pollock has a carbon footprint of 3.77 kg CO2-eq per kg protein, compared with 12.5 for chicken, 20.83 for plant-based meat, and 115.75 for beef. Ocean referenced recent research suggesting that some fishing activity may lead to the release of carbon from the ocean floor into the atmosphere. While many scientific questions remain about this new theory, in the Eastern Bering Sea, where storms constantly churn the benthic habitat, it is clear that fishing is not responsible for meaningful benthic carbon releases.

As we take stock of Sir David Attenborough’s latest work, let’s focus on reforming poorly managed fisheries and ending destructive fishing practices globally. The United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) estimates that 23% of global fish landings come from a fishery operating at biologically unsustainable levels. This is unacceptable. Illegal and unregulated fishing in some countries and on the high seas are harming the marine environment. Serious work to sustain the marine life profiled in Ocean involves acting with urgency to address climate change, and redoubling our efforts to improve the management of more fisheries globally.

The experience of Alaska and many other regions proves that responsible fishery management works. The task before us is not to secure MPAs in locations and at a scale that would lead to massive displacement of fishers around the world from their historical fishing grounds, as the advocates who funded and produced Ocean have long argued. Rather, the scaling up of responsible fishery management globally is the clear opportunity we have in front of us for durable change.

Together, through serious action on climate and more effective fishery management globally, we can secure the benefits of productive fisheries and a healthy marine environment for generations to come.

NEFMC: Public Hearings Scheduled for Amendment 18 to the Groundfish Plan August 3-18

July 17, 2015 — The following was released by the New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC):

Dear Interested Parties:

The New England Fishery Management Council will hold five public hearings and one webinar to solicit comments on draft Amendment 18 to the Northeast Multispecies (Groundfish) Fishery Management Plan.

Any interested party is encouraged to comment on the range of proposed alternatives that would impose limits on the amount of groundfish fishery permits and/or Potential Sector Contribution (PSC) that individuals or groups may hold, as well as other measures that could promote fleet diversity or enhance sector management.

Public hearings will be held at the following locations: Portland, ME; Portsmouth, NH; New Bedford, MA; Mystic, CT; and Gloucester, MA from August 3 through August 18. A webinar for the same purpose is scheduled for August 20. The details are provided here Am.18. Public Hearing Schedule.pdf.

To help with the development of comments, you also will find a summary of all the proposals and the rationale behind them here Groundfish Amend 18. Public Hearing doc.pdf, including details about how to comment. Note, the cover page repeats the hearing schedule. You are in the right place to access the summary document, just scroll down.

Recent Headlines

  • Chesapeake Bay region leaders approve revised agreement, commit to cleanup through 2040
  • ALASKA: Contamination safeguards of transboundary mining questioned
  • Federal government decides it won’t list American eel as species at risk
  • US Congress holds hearing on sea lion removals and salmon predation
  • New analysis: No, scientists didn’t “recommend” a 54% menhaden cut
  • The Wild Fish Conservancy’s never-ending lawsuits
  • Afraid your fish is too fishy? Smart sensors might save your nose
  • USD 12 million awarded for restoring fish habitats, growing oysters in Long Island Sound

Most Popular Topics

Alaska Aquaculture ASMFC Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission BOEM California China Climate change Coronavirus COVID-19 Donald Trump groundfish Gulf of Maine Gulf of Mexico Illegal fishing IUU fishing Lobster Maine Massachusetts Mid-Atlantic National Marine Fisheries Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NEFMC New Bedford New England New England Fishery Management Council New Jersey New York NMFS NOAA NOAA Fisheries North Atlantic right whales North Carolina North Pacific offshore energy Offshore wind Pacific right whales Salmon South Atlantic Virginia Western Pacific Whales wind energy Wind Farms

Daily Updates & Alerts

Enter your email address to receive daily updates and alerts:
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Tweets by @savingseafood

Copyright © 2025 Saving Seafood · WordPress Web Design by Jessee Productions